miles. State Routes 405, 22 and 1 reside within the projec t area and are owned and operated by Caltrans. Therefore, Caltrans is a responsible agency on this project, and has the following comments:
1. Caltrans supports opportunities for affordable housing, and the state mandates that cities must plan for housing needs of future residents of a ll incomes. Please provide an analysis and discussion that would assist in accommodating the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) alloc ation per the California Department of Housing & Community Development (HCD).
2. Caltrans recognizes our responsibility to assist communities of color and underserved communities by removing barriers to provide a more equitable transportation system for all. The Department firmly embraces racial equity, inclusion, and diversity. These values are foundational to achieving our vision of a cleaner, safer, and more accessible a nd more connected transportation system. Please consider including a discussion on equity in the Environmental Impact Report (EIR).
3. Caltrans supports projects which provide a diversity of housing choices and destinations accessible by Active Transportation (i.e. bicycle and pedestrian) a nd transit users. Please consider improving multimodal connections to housing which will encourage future residents, visitors, and workers in the city to utilize all modes of transportation. Increasing multimodal transportation will lead to a reduction to congestion, Vehicle Miles Traveled, and improve air quality.
4. Caltrans seeks to promote safe, accessible, multimodal transportation. Please consider methods to reduce pedestrian and bicyclist exposure to vehicles by lessening the time that the user is in the likely path of a motor vehicle . o On pdf page 100, stating "Develop citywide standards for construction and maintenance of bikeways and pedestrian walkways.", please consider Caltrans guidelines on building separated cycle tracks infrastructure (DIB 89) - - https://dot .ca.gov /-/media/dot-media/programs/design/documents/dib89-02-final-a 11 y.pdf. o On the same page, it is noted that "[developing] a planned bikeway 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" -- please review OCT A's regional bikeways strategy to ensure alignment with existing plans, found here: https://www.octa.net/getting-around/active/oc-bike/bikewaysplanning/overview / "Provide a safe and reliable transportation network that serves all people and respects the environment" City of Seal Beach
December 15, 2023
5. Caltrans enc ourages the design of Complete Streets that include high-quality pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities that are safe and comfortable for users of all ages and abilities. This may include safety measures such as physically separated sidewalks and bike lanes, pedestria n-oriented LED lighting, highvisibility continental crosswalk striping, raised crosswalks, refuge islands, wayfinding signage, and safe connections to existing and proposed bicycle facilities. Complete Streets improvements promote regional connectivity, improve air quality, reduce congestion, and increase safety for all modes of transportation. (see Caltrans' Director's Policy on Complete Streets here https://dot.ca.qov/-/media/dot-media/proqrams/esta/documents/dp-37- complete-streets-a l 1 y.pdf)
6. For guidance on providing functional bike parking, see the attached "Essentials of Bike Parking" guidance created by the Associa tion of Pedestrian and Bicycle Professionals (link to online PDF: https://www.apbp.org/Publications).
7. During future construction, please ensure appropriate detours, signage, and safety measures are planned that prioritize and ensure the safety and mobility of pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit users.
8. Ensure that truck parking, ingress a nd egress, and staging will not interfere with vehicle parking, pedestrian paths, or bicycle lanes/bicycle parking. Work with community representatives to mitigate a ny truck traffic routing onto residential streets or conflicting with other road users, including and especially bicyclists and pedestrians.
9. Please id entify the existing transit services for local and regional bus services including the connectivity to rail services from the nearest train stations provided by Metrolink and/or Amtrak Pacific Surfliner. Also, please provide adequate wayfinding signage to transit stops within all the project vicinity and local roadways.
l 0. Consider how many individual packages will be delivered daily to individual residenc es within the areas identified for increased housing production. Shared drop-off locations c an help reduce the amount of driving done by delivery trucks and can increase the efficienc y of deliveries in densely developed areas. Similarly, high-density residential developments should consider automated parcel systems (i.e ., Amazon Lockers) so that deliveries can be made with one truck stop instead of multiple stops to individual residences. "Provide a safe and reliable transportation network that serves all people and respects the environment" City of Seal Beach
December 15, 2023
l l. Consider accounting for off-street truck parking to help free up onstreet space for other modes, such as city traffic, walking, and bicycling. Similarly, utilize alley space or similar areas, if available, to reduce the need for on-street parking which may conflict with highway/street flows.
12. If truck parking (i.e., for home deliveries) is to be on-street, ensure the width of the parking lane is wide enough for freight trucks without encroaching on bicycle lanes or street lanes.
13. Please consider designated on-street freight-only parking and delivery time windows to reduce the need for double parking. This strategy also helps prevent street traffic congestion.
14. Please note that this project should not present adverse impacts to the overall transportation system including: traffic circulation and the local State Highway Systems (SHS). Caltrans is requesting a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) that focuses on the State facilities that would be impacted by future developments.
15. The TIA will also need to assess and address new developments, the City's rezoning requirements, and multi-modal impacts. The results of these impacts will need to include an investigation and discussion of signal timing upgrades in order to accommodate the increase of both vehicular and pedestrian traffic. 1 6. A section of the TIA will also need to focus on how future developments could impact the Senior population as well as local pedestrian facilities that cater to this population.
17. When analyzing the proposed projects potential short- and long-term traffic impacts with respect to regional vehicle miles traveled (VMT's), please use the Governor's Office of Planning and Research Guidance to identify VMT related impacts and add the analysis results to the TIA.
18. Any project work proposed in the vicinity of the State Right-of-Way (ROW) would require an encroachment permit and all environmental concerns must be adequately addressed. If the environmental documentation for the project does not meet Caltrans's requirements for work done within State ROW, additional documentation would be required before approval of the encroachment permit. Please coordinate with Caltrans to meet requirements for any work within or near State ROW. For specific details for Encroachment Permits procedure, please refer to the Caltrans's Encroachment Permits Manual at:
http://www.dot.ca .gov /hg/traffops/developserv /permits/ "Provide a safe and reliable transportation network that serves all people and respects the environment" City of Seal Beach
December 15, 2023
19. Additional information regarding encroachment permits may be obtained by contacting the Caltrans Permits Office at (657) 328-6553 or D [email protected]. Early coordination with Caltrans is strongly advised for all encroachment Permits. For specific details on Caltrans Encroachment Permits procedure and any future updates regarding the application process and permit rates, please visit the Caltrans Encroachment Permits homepage at https ://dot.ca .gov/programs/traffic-operations/ ep.
Caltrans' mission is to provide a safe, sustainable, equitable, integrated, and efficient transportation system to enhance California's economy and livability. Please continue to coordinate with Caltrans for any future developments that could potentially impact State transportation facilities. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact Julie Lugaro at [email protected].
Sincerely,
Scott Shelley
Branch Chief,
LOR-Climate Change-Transit Planning
Caltrans, District 12
"Provide a safe and reliable transportation network that serves all people and respects the environment" Megan Coats
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Follow Up Flag:
Flag Status:
ANNE CALVO <[email protected]>
Friday, December 8, 2023 12:34 PM
Alexa Smittle
Comments - Seal Beach Housing Element Environmental Impact Report Follow up
Flagged
To: Alexa Smittle [email protected]
From: Anne Calvo [email protected]
Subject: Comments - Seal Beach Housing Element Environmental Impact Report I am a Leisure World resident and watched the recent Environmental Quality Control Board Meeting of December 6, 2023. I am encouraged that the Board is critically evaluating the various 13 "opportunity sites." My comments concern site #2 Leisure World 5.5 acre site, now currently an RV storage area. I believe this site should be no longer considered on the Seal Beach Housing Element opportunity site list for the following reasons.
General Reasons
Leisure World is a unique, over 55 senior community that was founded to serve low to medium fixed income and residents. The site is "built out" and is currently struggling to meet challenges in utility infrastructure (water, electric, sewer, drainage, etc.), maintenance and repairs. An additional block of development would require severe infrastructure upgrades and would necessarily cause an avalanche of related unintentional adverse impacts.
The RV storage site is reserved for the residents of Leisure World and if taken away would deprive the residents of a long-standing amenity. Please note that another site in Seal Beach used for RV storage is also on the Opportunity Site list. If both were converted to housing, it would cause a crisis to many RV owners in Seal Beach.
Environmental Impact Reasons
Aesthetics - The 5.5-acre site is located on the edge of the tidal/ drainage ditch adjacent to the Los Angeles Steam Plant. A multi-story building would look out and down on industrial and existing residents and amenities. It would also block sunlight on several residential buildings.
Air Quality-Air quality in the area is known to be a concern. Additional vehicles would certainly have adverse impact to residents.
Energy Use and Demand - Leisure World is comprised of all-electric residences and there have been numerous spot outages due to failures of the 60+ year old system structures. Vehicle charging stations in carports are currently being considered and their impact is yet unknown. The addition of a large multi-story building would significantly multiply those concerns.
Land Use and Planning - Another multi-storied residential building with associated parking requirements was never anticipated. The added residents, utilities, vehicles, recreation needs, etc. will stress the ability of the current systems to deliver services and reduce the quality of life by limiting access to existing amenities.
Noise - Leisure World is surrounded on all sides by either high volume/ noisy traffic or the power plant. In addition, the airplane landing pattern zone is directly overhead. The added multi-story building would amplify sound levels to nearby residents and subject residents of the new building to unacceptable noise levels without expensive noise attenuation measures.
Population and Housing Constraints - The RV site is 5.5 acres. Using the assumed 150 units in the proposed multi stored building x 1.83 residents per unit assumes at least 275 more residents in Leisure World in addition to the 9,600 or so existing residents confined in a walled environment. Leisure World is already considered a high-density environment and any such development would be an additional burden. The quality of life for all residents would suffer in a very significant way. Traffic, use of amenities, recreation, congestion, the list of impacted services is endless. It is also assumed that the influx of non-resident traffic and people would increase existing levels of crime within our walls.
Public Services - Leisure World is blessed to having a fire station outside of the North gate. It gives an assurance of a timely response in an emergency. It is used for resident response on a daily basis. However, since that fire station also responds to other cities in the area, it cannot be relied upon for a timely response. An additional multi-story 150-unit residential building in an already congested area would severely increase the risks to response time, as well as to response time for the police and Leisure World security. Emergency planning would need to consider the availability of fire trucks with ladders and labor intense demands when evacuating hundreds of elderly residents.
Recreation - There is already limited greenspace and recreation opportunities within the walls. Removing the RV storage would immediately stress and eliminate access to an aged population access to their RV's and cause unknown adverse impacts to their timely access to recreational opportunities.
Transportation - Traffic congestion, parking in carports, off-street parking near carports, and street parking already are a significant issue. There are only two streets with four lanes in Leisure World. The increased parking on the 2-laned streets will greatly narrow the space for the through traffic to pass. Additionally, traffic of other types of vehicles (golfcarts, bicycles, electric bikes, standup scooters, seated scooters, electric and regular wheelchairs, etc.) already happens on a regular basis due to the age of residents. These existing problems would increase in severity and frequency.
Utilities and Service Systems - As mentioned previously, demand and maintenance needs to all utilities and associated service systems in Leisure World are at maximum capacity. An additional 150-unit multi-storied residential building is foolish and would have significant adverse consequences that can easily be predicted.
In summary, I believe that the Housing Element "opportunity site" targeting the 5.5-acre site in Leisure World is not an "underutilized" site. It is a long standing and important amenity used by residents. Development of the site is also inconsistent with the Seal Beach Safety Plan. It would cause both anticipated and unanticipated adverse impacts to the quality of life to residents of Leisure World.
Thank you,
Anne S. Calvo
Leisure World Resident
2 Megan Coats
From:
Sent:
To:
Subjed:
Attachments:
My comments are attached.
Thank you.
Schelly Sustarsic
4288 Candleberry Ave.
Seal Beach
{562) 431-3466
Schelly Sustarsic
Friday, December 15, 2023 4:58 PM
Alexa Smittle
Comments for Zoning Code Scoping Period
IMG_20231215_0001.pdf
1 December 15, 2023
To: Alexa Smittle, Director of Seal Beach Community Development Comments for Zoning Code Update Scoping Period: Regarding Programmatic EIR for Housing Element Aesthetics:
Public views will be blocked, and Open Space removed.
Glare can be a problem. Since housing sites 5, 6, and 10 are very near to a military runway and base, there should be a conversation with the JFTB to make sure that glare and lighting from the placement of housing units would not cause interference with their flight operations. Also, views of the adjacent base from the housing units may be considered a security issue for the JFTB.
Biological Resources:
There is a plan being developed to restore the former wetlands area now owned by the Los Cerritos Wetlands Authority (former Hellman property) to wetlands. The Authority has recently received a large grant from the California Coastal Conservancy to begin the project.
There is a tree preservation policy in Seal Beach - especially for Eucalyptus trees and groves.
Energy Resources:
Is the supply of energy adequate for all these housing units? Is adequate electrical infrastructure being planned and built to supply future electrically powered vehicles? Geology and Soils: This is very important to consider as a fault crosses the City of Seal Beach, and the surrounding area is mostly a liquefaction zone.
Hazards and Hazardous Materials:
A 34" high-pressure gas line runs along the north side of Lampson Avenue. This places a safety issue adjacent to site 10, in the event there is a leak or rupture of the gas line and the risks associated.
Hydrology and Water Quality:
Seal Beach has problems with flooding in both the Old Town area and part of College Park East. College Park East (CPE) drains onto the Old Ranch Country Club (ORCC), which is a county flood control basin.
The addition of housing projects and hardscape in the area surrounding must be carefully studied to not add to, block or compete with CPE's drainage to the ORCC.
Land Use and Planning:
A stated goal in the Seal Beach General Plan Land Use Element for Planning Area 4 (LU-43) is to "Discourage further encroachment onto the Los Alamitos JFTB flight path," This was written in 2003 after a development project by Bixby developed most of the open space north of 1-405. This included the Old Town Ranch Center, the Ayers Hotel and the adjacent shopping center, the Sunrise senior care facility, 78 housing units to the north and behind Target, and a remodel of the Old Ranch Country Club golf course. As part of the latter, a public driving range was built. As part of the Bixby development agreement, a development restriction was put in place to restrict zoning in Area C to recreation/golf/open space for 30 years, until 2029.
I have included diagrams of the flight paths at the JFTB, taken from an "Environmental Assessment Stationing a U.S. Army Reserve Black Hawk Helicopter Company at Joint Forces Training Base Los Alamitos, California" (March 2011). The EA was performed when additional Blackhawk helicopters were being added to some that were already on base. Flight paths are shown for both rotary and fixed wing aircraft. Aircraft at the JFTB are predominately helicopters, but there are fixed wing present, Including 4 Cessnas which have been added since 2011 and planes that fly daily as part of the Medfly Preventative Release Program. The departure path from the JFTB is curved, with aircraft departing from the military runways southwesterly over the Old Ranch golf course, turning to fly over the Seal Beach Naval Weapons Station to the ocean. Approximately 8% of the time, this path is used as an approach during reverse conditions. Pilots are instructed not to overfly any residential area.
The JFTB serves as an Emergency Operation center in times of natural disaster such as earthquakes, or riots, or an event such as a terrorist attack (both Federal and state emergencies). It is the only active military airport remaining in Los Angeles and Orange Counties. As such, a variety of other aircraft visit and/or train at the facility. Large, fully loaded aircraft, such as C-5 cargo planes, cannot make this turn in the flight path but must fly straight out from the runway on departure. I have attached a diagram of safety zones that were present when the base was known as the Armed Forces Reserve Center. The runway protection zones (APZ-1 and APZ-2) can be seen on the golf course. The safety zones were pulled onto base before Bixby developed its property, using Air Force criteria in the 1980s, apparently based on the airfield's accident history, or number of flights. The number of flights has increased since that time and when the AELUP was being updated by the Airport Land Use Commission in 2016-17, Caltrans Aeronautics urged the base to update its safety zones to agree with how the base was currently operating. This was not done, apparently due to a lack of funding to perform a needed AICUZ study, and the AELUP for the JFTB remained mostly unchanged. I was told that as of 2018, policy now requires that a military airfield follow the regulations of its own service - Army regulations for the JFTB, Los Alamitos.
A military airport is adjacent to sites 5, 6, and 10. While most of the noise from the JFTB base is due to helicopter traffic, other aircraft fly in and out of the base. The noise contours in the AELUP are based on noise over a 24-hour period (CNEL) and the airfield generally does not operate at night. However, when jets depart the airfield, they produce noise of up to 140 decibels. Cargo planes are loud as well but contribute to annoyance, not necessarily inside the noise contours. Helicopters also push noise down, to the right, as they fly past.
JUI ..,JI I W !_VJ /,lc...tlllll~J I\.JUIIU lll /~J,,Jt,JVl • UIA '-' : F n{ed \Nin9 Route
Figure 3°3. JFTB Los Alamitos Flight Paths
3.2 2 Environmental Cunsequences
Attachment# 2
EA for Stationing a USAR Black Hawk Company at JFTB
Los Alamitos. California
March 2011
In 1973. the DoD implemented the Air Installation Compatible Use Zone {AICUZ) program to protect the health. safety. and welfare of those living or working on or near military air installations by promoting compatible land use development on and off air installations The current AICUZ study was prepared by the CMRNG In 1994 to address aircraft operations at the Installation and provides land use guidance for the Installation The AICUZ program Is discussed In more detail 111 Section 3.14. Health and Human Safety
Los Alamitos Army Airfield (LAAAF) Is one of tr,e busiest DoD aviation operations 111 the continental United States. Located 1n one of the most congested and heavily flown airspace systems m the U S. the JFTB's control tower Is one of the most active in Southern Cal1forn1a (CAARNG 2007b). The JFTB Regulation 95-1 sets forth the rules. regulation, and instruction for operations at the airfield (CAARNG. 2006). The Control Tower is open for operations 15 hours daily Tuesday through Friday. 7·00am-10·00pm PST and eight hours daily Saturday through Monday 8 0Oam-4 ·00pm PST Aircraft will not be cleared for flight unless a flight plan has been completed and filed at LAAAF Operations Rotary wing traffic patterns and procedures are determined by several factors . i.e . the weather. the landing runway used by fixed wing aircraft. traffic. and noise abatement procedures (CMRNG. 2006) Established flight paths for rotary and fixed wing aircraft are shown 111 Figure 3-3 and 111 greater detail in the Helicopter Procedure Guide for JFTB Los Alamitos found 111 Appendix D
Rotary Wing Route
Fixed Wing Route
Figure 3-3. JFTB Los Alamitos Flight Paths
3. 2. 2 Environmental Consequences
Alternative One
Implementation of the Proposed Action would have no direct impact to land use on or surrounding the Installation The overall use of the Installation Is compatible with the unit's mission. JFTB Los USACE0910-03-00-0234 14 Vernadero Group Inc
~ ~• ABA TEMENl
Los Alam,tos Army A,rt,eld (AAF) ,s located 111 extreme prox ,m,ty to several highly concentrated res1dent1al areas Los Alam,los AAF 111sututes a Noise Abatement Program which incorporates unique traffic patterns and arrival/departure pro- ' cedures The program focuses on pilot education and coop- , erat,on which also benefits the unmed,ote surround1119 res, dent,al communities of I os Alamitos Seal Beach Garden
Grove and Cypress l>y IcctucIng the adverse impact of
' noise dunny avIaII011 opr:r c1 t,ons Hel,copte, aircrews part1cI pat1119 111 aviation operations at Los Ala111,tos MF- are ex , peeled to know and acJhe,e to the 110,se abaten,ent flight p,o , cedures Compliance with flight procedures ,s mandatory , unless dev1atIons are made necessary by weather ATC ,n : structIons an ,n-fligh t emergency or other safety cons,dera ' t,ons Repeat violators of noise abatement flight procedures may be res tricted or suspended from using the a,rf,eld The , goal of Joint Forces T1a1111ng Base ,s to maInta111 posn,ve re latronsh1ps with surrounding cornmu111IIes so It ,s 1111perative partIc1p,1tI11g helir:opte:, ;11Iuf>ws pers(Jnally dltP.rnpt lo ,educe the adverse Impa<.1 ol llt->licopte, no,se f ollow1119 the proce 1 clu,es 011t11ned 111 th,s I lelicopte, P1 ot.e<11111:1s l,11I<.le acco,11 phshe~ th1!:i goal r or questions ,egard,ng the t us Alamitos AA/ Nu,se Abate111ent Program contact tl11= I os Alaml!os ' AAF Ope,auons at t56?) 7% 2511
1-10!,!R~ OPERATION
ATC Tower · Sat-Mon 0800- 1600 I rue-Fn 0700-2200
GCA • Mon 0800-1600 Tue Thu 0700-2200 Fn 1400 2200
Meld Operations Sat Mon 0730-1600 TL!e-Fn 0600
2200
Airfield WX Sat Mon 0730- 1600 I Tue-Fri 0600-2200
Airfield Services (JP 8) Sat-Mon 0800 1530 Tue-Fn 0700
-2130
h ~lie 1pter Traffic Patt~rn
700 ft MSL
-Trame pattern Is
Helicopters will normally operate from runways 22L 1
South;,. •v / D parture vr-R
; • ARRIVAL: The South A11 1val procedu,e begins at A I heIm Bay a l the boundary of KSLI Class D airspace
22R based on predominate winds and use traffic pal- ' • From Anaheim Bay at 1000 ft MSL proceed direct, term; as depicted on the above a1rf,eld diagram dep,ctecJ Naval Weapons Station Seal Beach (N\IVSSB) to O 111 this Helicopter Procedures Gu,cle
P1loIs will operate aircraft ,n surh fl manner that no,se 111 ' Ranch Country Club 19olf course) Descend to 700
MSL and enter left downwind fo, RWYs 22L / 22R c
th~ vrrI111Iy of 1es1dt!nt1al ,11 eas th.-1I s111rou11d the au f1eld ceed direcl to RWYs 04R/04L will be 1111111111,zecl
Helicopters w,11 avo,<J over flight of noise sens,!lve a11~as wh1c.h ,nclucle all 1es1dent1al areas and a,e shaded ,n ,ed By operating well Ins1de mstallauon bounda11es
clunng traffic partern opera11ons as much as possible
part,c,pat,ng hehcopters will a,d ,n mm,m,2I119 the adverse noise impact upon res1dent1al areas 00 NOT OVERFLY ANY RESIDENTAL AREAS
Dl=PAR I URE: I he South Departure procedu1e beg
the departure ends of RWYs 22L 22R tor downwu
of RWYs 04R I 04L)
: • At departure end of RWYs 22L / 22R turn left towan
Ranch Country Club (golf course) cllmbIng to 700 ft
Do not overfly res1dent1al areas ,mmed,ately S / SW
a,rf,eld boundary Proceed over golf course then o·
NWSSB direct to Anaheim Bay Avoid ove, flight o
dent,al areas Im111ed1ately west of NWSSB
,
Frequencies
LOCATION
KSII
VHF
li<P"
.1.095
1?J 8',
K::,l I ,NO
r-Sl I !WI<
AA FOP$
K<;[ I r.cA
126 200
1 ;,4 7'i0
()( Al A~o
le;,< !111
L • Ba,in Helo
t
Name
AAAf Ops
AAAF rAA
I AAAF (Jury Otflf ,.,
LAAAF POL
• ,i4 65
123 l'
tAJ,/lf- Weatoe1 Otise,ver
25 OWS 1[)[)175 I,
ARNG AASf OP::,
jUSAR .A.Sf OPS
t
UHF
-; '
1r7 gr(
2'">1 1',(
237 20G
;.>CJO f,0()
+
!H 12'
Number
N 84 £f'2 < ,s, t,,11r
5b2 l!;l', 2.',71
562 7<t';i 28 8
5u2 /9~ 21!hll
5H2 7{15 2149
56;! 7ll'i•25fi9
5:>0 228 t' 5\>8
562 79$ 20UG
Sti2 795 ;/2:J:?
562 7£15 21 OtJ
111
FM
65050
1Uf'1be1SJ
Norlh Arnv,11 /l)eparture VFR
Arrlval-1500 ft MSL Ocparture-1500 ft MSL
AR RIV Al sattne 6 5 ,., fr
Ji;,n ,, p, eed outh ~ ng tile 605
ffel'!wdy' ta KJ:lh-:llrt 60~ 111lt"'fSt
Or'h.:1 l
F-- cr. 1 ,.. at la ~ r tcriu t1 n p ,<,: os A arnrt Re ~ Cou".e rt1fl\:1•' g O'J{:-:' f'ldu~tr131 arr.:'I be ... ,..et K.HOl 3 1 '1 Cet t !::i A ~ tonyJ b\'IOfc h..111111,9 rTu ... 1111ht!cJ hd~t- imd rnt1rt·iny 1~!.c.trnl lflf-oll out~Hlt ,10' our5., por :, for 22 :> ,.; o 1noo1• ea ""..,..w,nd !or 4 04R ;OT ov, , " mtJs mm._'11 ,:e!'; ,rt' r o ,~e.ist 0111<ff1et0 DEPARTURE Tt>c No !h L.'<!Pil'IL!f p,cx ,r1 •. , bc:11ns "'1 • wrt 1d 0< •ion of ~wv~ 'U 12R °' depa<1ur em of RV.."ts 4R 04l,
"rorn at>;,mn •PP''Hch end ot 22, , .2,R pr(l ,,.,<J 11,J<th tow.i,o Cus1m sr.cc,.ng area DO NOT ,0,11, home, ""' (XJ 11e , n0<•rt nort'least rt. a ••·e d no c, ss,ng 1<c11e1~-. Awn, proceed ..... s1 efT\d rnng o.er nu stnifl a, .. a C!e:V,,e.-n K,11.-11., and Cerni , Av,mues to K i'eJla -,OS c,er "'''o hmDmg to •5\1011 MSL Proceea r>Of1 otc,,o 6C~ fu,•~~ay tu 605 91 mtH,c;.hdnge: r,:.•111d11 mg on~t of 1rflt-NHf
DO NOT OVERFLY ANY RESIDENTIAL AREAS
Kutt:lh1 ArrivaVOepartu, VFR
Arrtval-1500 ft MSL Arrival 1500 ft MSL
ARRI Jill Hie l(;;i1et1a ,\rn~a! ('l'0C<!dllft'. begins VIClflllV ot D,s nt,vlanIf P,Hk dt lhe t O!Ul<l,H) 111 u,e KSI I C.li!55 0 n11Spd <:P ;,ruu:eo Wf•!,I I0llll ~ ,llPlla Avenue Al 15011 ft,el MSL to Knott Avenue tlllln uc~ctnu to 1000 lr•et MSL t V,1lk!f View Srrct!I Oes(.t!rtd l0 hl'li apr,rc,,1ct1 Jl111tlllP as l>::4u11e,, tol,tnd C,r P/\fHURf !he I': 11c11a Dtµ t ,.,,.., p, :cctu11· begms on downwino po111on of HWYs ,21
RV-ff~ 04f? 04 )
2R wr <.h,-pamrre entl nl
Prr>C'et,l to Va,'"lla Avellllt v~""> Vii,w 511eel llllt'fSt,(ltUn <,lIn1tnng to 150 te,!I MSI rti..,r, f•,,~t ,1Ior1y , ateil<l Ave• 1110 ,.,,, mg KSl I Cl,1<..s D a11sp,1 .-
UO NOT overtly r;;s11I nllal nr~,,s 11ont1 ,md south nf ;;ippr1>,, end uf l21 22
DO NOT OVERFLY ANY RESIDENTIAL AREAS
Recreation: While the Housing Element proposes to add housing units, there is no requirement for additional recreation to be added. What can result is increased competition for the currently available recreation amenities, or possible loss of recreation for residents (Will the current Public Driving Range (golf) on Lampson be lost to the public as proposed housing is built?) Transportation:
Development of housing units would likely interfere with circulation of traffic. Wherever new residents to Seal Beach would come from to live in new housing units, traffic and therefore VMT would increase on our local streets. Seal Beach has one north-south arterial and that is Seal Beach Blvd. Development of housing projects in our Housing Element, as well as from proposed developments in immediate adjacent cities (Long Beach, Los Alamitos) will add traffic to Pacific Coast Highway, Westminster Avenue and Lampson Avenue. These all intersect with Seal Beach Blvd and will add to its congestion.
Lampson Avenue was not mentioned specifically in the Initial Study. It is a secondary arterial that is increasingly used as a bypass to the 1-405 freeway. The only ingress/egress for the residents of the College Park East neighborhood is via Lampson Avenue.
The issues of access for emergency vehicles via Lampson Avenue as well as access as an evacuation route are extremely important to residents of College Park East as there is only one way in and out.
Tribal Cultural: Tribal artifacts and remains have been found in Seal Beach and nearby, so great care should be exercised in any future developments
Mandatory Findings of Significance:
Consideration of the cumulative effects of many of these issues are extremely important, as development across surrounding communities will act to compound these issues. In the Seal Beach Housing Element, 866 of the housing opportunity sites are in sites 5, 6, and 10. This amounts to 47% of the total submitted to HCD concentrated north of the 1-405 freeway. It is a substantial number to be proposed within a few hundred feet of the intersection of Seal Beach Blvd and Lampson Avenue. If you also consider a proposed development in the City of Los Alamitos which would add 246 housing sites at 4665 Lampson, 1.5 miles east of Seal Beach Blvd, that totals 1,112 housing sites very near the same intersection. There is also housing development in the City of Long Beach, just across the Seal Beach city limit which could add a substantial amount of traffic to Pacific Coast Highway in Seal Beach. All these cumulative effects must be considered regarding traffic circulation, public safety, public services, air quality,
Sincerely,
Schelly Sustarsic
4288 Candleberry Avenue, Seal Beach
Megan Coats
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Hello Alexa,
Theresa Miller <[email protected]>
Friday, December 15, 2023 4:45 PM
Alexa Smittle
Comments on the Umbrella EIR
Thank you for holding the meeting last week- it was interesting and quite a bit of information to digest in one night. I am so happy that we have a competent Environmental Commission, which has pointed out several areas of concern.
I agree with all of the concerns discussed in that meeting, brought up by the Environmental Commission. I look forward to seeing the revised EIR and, hopefully, the walk-through with the consultants.
Thank you again,
Theresa Miller
1 Megan Coats
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Good Morning Alexa,
CEQAReview <[email protected]>
Thursday, December 14, 2023 7:02 AM
Alexa Smittle; Office of Planning and Research - State Clearinghouse Kereazis, Dave@DTSC; Wiley, Scott@DTSC
DTSC Comments - City of Seal Beach Housing Element and Zoning Code Updates Project
DTSC Comments - City of Seal Beach Housing Element.pdf
Thank you for the opportunity for the Department of Toxic Substances Control to review and comment on the City of Seal Beach Housing Element and Zoning Code Updates Project. Attached you will find DTSC's comments for consideration. If you have any questions or comments, please reply to this email for guidance.
Thank you,
Tamara Purvis
Associate Environmental Planner
CEQA Unit-Permitting/HWMP
916 255-3857
[email protected] .gov
Department of Toxic Substances Control
California Environmental Protection Agency
~ DTSC D•P• ••m•nt of Toxic
~ Substances Control
~ CalEPA l ""'""-~ Ga!ilornia Environmental
,..., Protection Agency
Department of Toxic Substances Control
Yana Garcia
Secretary for
Environmental Protection
Meredith Williams, Ph.D. , Director
8800 Cal Center Drive
Sacramento, California 95826-3200
SENT VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL
December 14, 2023
Alexa Smittle
Community Development Director
City of Seal Beach
211 Eighth Street
Seal Beach, CA 90740
[email protected]
Gavin Newsom
Governor
RE: NOTICE OF PREPARATION (NOP) OF A DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT (DEIR) FOR THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES PROJECT, DATED NOVEMBER 16, 2023 STATE CLEARINGHOUSE# 2023110425
Dear Alexa Smittle,
The Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) received a NOP of a DEIR for the City of Seal Beach Housing Element and Zoning Code Updates Project. The Initial Study was prepared to analyze potential impacts related to implementation of the City's Housing Element and Zoning Code Update. The Housing Element identifies 13 Housing Opportunity Sites throughout the City that have the potential for providing additional housing to meet the City's Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) allocation. The sites are broken into two categories: (a) underutilized sites that do not require zoning code changes and (b) sites where zoning modifications are proposed.
Of the 13 Housing Opportunity Sites, six would require rezoning, one would be rezoned through a proposed Specific Plan, and one would require an amendment to the Main Alexa Smittle
December 14, 2023
Page2
Street Specific Plan. The rezoning effort would also include the establishment of a new zoning designation, Mixed Commercial/Residential High Density (MC/RHO), which would apply to five of the Housing Opportunity Sites. This new zone district would facilitate housing for lower-income households as required by the state's RHNA allocation for the City and facilitate the inclusion of affordable units. Implementation of the Housing Element and Zoning Code Update would result in the City being able to accommodate 1,833 additional housing units pursuant to the City's RHNA allocation.
DTSC has identified that this project may affect multiple sites within the project boundaries therefore, based on our project review, we request the consideration of the following comments:
1. The proposed project encompasses multiple active and nonactive mitigation and clean-up sites where DTSC has conducted oversight that may be impacted as a result of this project. This may restrict what construction activities are permissible in the proposed project areas in order to avoid any impacts to human health and the environment.
2. Due to the broad scope of the project, DTSC is unable to determine all of the locations of the proposed project site, whether they are listed as having documented contamination, land use restrictions, or whether there is the potential for the project site to be included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. DTSC recommends providing further information on the project site and areas that may fall under DTSC's oversight within the project area. Please review the City of Seal Beach project area in EnviroStor; DTSC's public-facing database.
DTSC believes the City of Seal Beach must address these comments to determine if any significant impacts under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) will occur and, if necessary, avoid significant impacts under CEQA. DTSC recommends the department connect with our unit if any hazardous waste projects managed or overseen by DTSC are discovered.
Alexa Smittle
December 14, 2023
Page3
DTSC appreciates the opportunity to comment on the City of Seal Beach Housing Element and Zoning Code Updates Project. Thank you for your assistance in protecting California's people and environment from the harmful effects of toxic substances. If you have any questions or would like any clarification on DTSC's comments, please respond to this letter or via email for additional guidance.
Sincerely,
Tamara Purvis
Associate Environmental Planner
HWMP - Permitting Division - CEQA Unit
Department of Toxic Substances Control
[email protected]
Alexa Smittle
December 14, 2023
Page4
cc: (via email)
Governor's Office of Planning and
Research State Clearinghouse
[email protected]
Dave Kereazis
Associate Environmental Planner
HWMP - Permitting Division - CEQA Unit
Department of Toxic Substances Control
Dave. [email protected]. gov
Scott Wiley
Associate Governmental Program Analyst
HWMP - Permitting Division - CEQA Unit
Department of Toxic Substances Control
[email protected]
Megan Coats
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Kurt Bourhenne < [email protected]>
Monday, December 11, 2023 3:25 PM
Alexa Smittle
HOUSING TO REPLLACE THE LEISURE WORLD RV LOT
1 The above picture shows what appears to be a city employee taking pictures at Knollwood Rd. & El Dorado@ 1 :41 p.m., as evidenced by the picture below.
2 The shadows shown at 1 :41 p.m. represents indisputable prove that if a multi-story building were to be built on the RV Lot in Seal Beach Leisure World, the dwelling units on the East side would be permanently deprived of late afternoon sunlight and completely devoid of evening sunlight. Sunlight = Vitamin "D"
3 FACT: All building structures, including Club Houses, Medical buildings, Security buildings, Postal building, the Globe and Amphitheater were specifically constructed so they would not deprive residents of sunlight.
Knowing this factual information and purposely building a structure that would permanently deprive human beings of their afternoon and evening sunlight are more than likely blood relatives of the commanders at Auschwitz and the like.
This is my opinion on the subject!
Kurt Bourhenne
Leisure World, Mutual 14
Seal Beach, California 90740
NOTHING IN THIS EMAIL IS PRIVATE OR
CONFIDENTIAL. PLEASE FEEL FREE TO COPY, FORWARD
OR DISTRIBUTE AS YOU FEEL THE NEED ARISES!
4 Megan Coats
From:
Sent:
To:
Subjed:
Alexa Smittle
Aaron Groseclose< [email protected]>
Thursday, December 14, 2023 8:54 PM
Alexa Smittle
Leisure World RV Club
Community Development Director
City of Seal Beach
Dear Ms. Smittle,
We are writing to you following the request for comments on the proposed development of low-income housing on the RV Club site in Leisure World.
We are second generation Leisure World owners and have enjoyed the RV Club as our parents did starting in 1974. This Club is a major reason we can afford to own an RV. So, we are concerned this key amenity for living in Seal Beach will be taken from us.
Not only does it provide community life, but it is a source of income for the Golden Rain Foundation. So, we are opposed to losing the facility for additional housing in our densely populated community. We understand the State of California is looking to provide new housing, but it is unfortunately putting this burden on local communities. However, under Article 34 of the State Constitution we as residents of Leisure World should be allowed a public vote - not a committee to decide this issue.
We believe Leisure World is already a low-income community based on surrounding housing costs. If the City of Seal Beach is so concerned about providing low-income housing why was the old Edison property not developed as lowincome housing rather than as a park? Thank you for the opportunity to express our concerns. We look forward to your reply.
Sincerely,
Aaron & Barbara Groseclose
Mutual 4-87C
1 Megan Coats
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
12/12/2023
[email protected]
Alan Hunter <[email protected]>
Tuesday, December 12, 2023 5:26 PM
Alexa Smittle
Leisure World RV Lot
Please do not change anything regarding the Leisure World RV Lot. Including any rezoning or other reclassifications. have lived in Leisure World for 10 years and always parked my RV in the lot. If I am forced to move my RV to a commercial lot, which will be many times more expensive, I will be forced to lose my beloved recreation vehicle because I am on a fixed income and cannot afford extra expenses.
Alan Hunter 1422 Merion Way Apt 59G Seal Beach CA 90740 l
Megan Coats
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Dear Alexa Smittle,
Bert van der Veer <[email protected]>
Thursday, December 14, 2023 2:01 AM
Alexa Smittle
Leisure World RV lot
As a resident of Leisure World Mutual 8 unit 190F
My parents in Mutual 15 both 91 and my mother now in Hospice Care I am 68 own and have a RV in the Leisure World RV lot.
That's one of the reasons a lot of people buy here because of the promised ementaties. Then you spend over $100K to remodel your home which they should maintain since they keep telling us we don't own the unit but yet your paying to rebuild the whole unit.
Then over the years you learn about all the policies and now after years you have no other choices being old and are now being told that you may lose your RV parking spot.
This to seniors who came here and bought big motorhomes at high prices is not right to now be told that the RV lot may be sold off to build houses there. I am sure out of the 270 or more residents that have a RV there that there will be people talking to their lawyers if this happens.
I believe there are plenty of empty fields in Seal Beach 5 acres or more where they can build nice homes. Leisure World is pretty packed as it is traffic parking is already pretty full.
So please do us a favor and re-think any notion if possible of taking away our RV lot. These are the things that made Leisure World attractive. Most residents could not afford to store the RV's outside at a storage location plus to far away in most cases.
Thank you kindly for taking the time to read my email, hope you and your department have a great holiday may next year be better in our beautiful little Seal Beach California City.
Sincerely Bert van der Veer
1 Megan Coats
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Alexa Smittle
Lori Gray <[email protected]>
Wednesday, December 13, 2023 4:39 PM
Alexa Smittle
Leisure World Rv Lot
I want to acfirm the notion that LW Shareholders do not want this property sold. It was promised as an amenity. It would cause a total disruption here for the Shareholders if new housing occurred of this volume. There are many other city spots for you to declare. The GRF Board can sell it without our authorization for more housing. It would take a vote by all of the shareholders to change our current GRF bylaws .
This idea is not realistic. GRF can't handle the maintenance for the units they already have. We have huge pipping problems here now. Nathan Steele and Nick Massetti do not represent the Shareholders in this planning element.
Massetti has a conflict of interest here as a voting GRF Member and should not be on this planning committee.
Thank you
Lori Gray
NOTICE: This E-mail (including attachments) is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510- 2521, and is confidential and is legally privileged.
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The information contained in this e-mail and attached document(s) may contain confidential information that is intended only for the addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby advised that any disclosure, copying, distribution or the taking of any action in reliance upon the information is prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify the sender and delete it from your system.
Megan Coats
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Importance:
Follow Up Flag:
Flag Status:
Dear Alexa:
Catherine Showalter <[email protected]>
Thursday, December 7, 2023 10:49 PM
Alexa Smittle
Jill Ingram; Schelly Sustarsic; Shaun Temple
PLEASE USE THIS VERSION FW: Comments on Initial Study for Draft EIR: Housing Element and Zoning Code Updates
Comments on Initial Study_Housing Element and Zoning Code Updates Initial Study_ Dec 6 2023.docx
High
Follow up
Flagged
Attached you will find my comments on the Initial Study for the Draft EIR: Housing Element and Zoning Code Updates. 1 realize this is the first step in a very long process and I look forward to participating as it moves forward.
At last night's EQCB Meeting and Public Workshop, I shared most of the comments that are listed on the first page of the attached. However, I did not mention Policy 4A in regards to the City performance standard of an average total response time for fires. Please be sure to take note of it as I believe "reflect time" is an error and should be corrected in the City's Policy documents. Policy 4E and Policy 4F also have grammatical errors. You will find them all mentioned on page 7 of the attached material.
Even though a comment was made at the end of last night's meeting about how well the Initial Study was written by the consultant team, I do not agree. 1 found at least 45 grammatical and spelling errors as I read the report in detail and examined the tables. Technically, the report included all of the categories that will be further addressed but I hope the mistakes and oversights are corrected before we see the next version. Someone at Stantec needs to take responsibility for proof reading the document before submitting it to City staff for public review. Errors are distracting for the reader and time consuming for staff to edit and revise before public meetings take place.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide input. I appreciate all you do for our community of Seal Beach and hope you will enjoy the holiday season with loved ones in ways that mean the most to you.
Respectfully,
Catherine Showalter
EQCB Member, District Four
City of Sea I Beach
1 COMMENTS ON INITIAL STUDY
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Environmental Quality Control Board Special Meeting
Catherine Showalter, EQCB Member, District Four
December 6, 2023
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the Initial Study.
I appreciate the Glossary of Terms
Add RWQCB: Regional Water Quality Control Board
Add GWP: Global Warming Potential
In describing Site 10 - Old Ranch Club (pg. 2-15)
It states that "A new development agreement between the developer and the property owner is expected to be a part of the development application that will ultimately be considered by the City."
Explain why. Include that the current development agreement specifies no development through 2029.
San Bernardino is misspelled throughout the document. (pg. 3-10, 3-37, 3-63)
3.3.1 Air Quality, Environmental Setting (pg. 3-10)
Why is the 2016 AQMP being used as a resource?
AQMD adopted the 2022 AQMP on December 2, 2022.
This is an important section; very little is included at this point; needs to be expanded.
3.15.1 Other Public Facilities, Environmental Setting Libraries (pg. 3-54)
3.20.1 Wildfire, Environmental Setting (pg. 3-70)
Policy 4A: Ensure that adequate facilities and fire service personnel are maintained based on population, fire hazards in and around the City and a performance standard of an average total reflect time of seven minutes or less.
I believe it should be response time, not reflect time.
3.21.1 Mandatory Findings of Significance, Environmental Impact Analysis (pg. 3-75) Will the "cumulative considerable" list of related projects or growth projections developed for the EIR include the West Ed development site on Lampson Avenue across from College Park East and down the road from Old Ranch? 1 SUGGESTED CORRECTIONS FOR GRAMMATICAL ERRORS
Offered by Catherine Showalter
Notice of Preparation and Scoping Meeting Cover Page
Project Location, second sentence: "The City~ located ... " Add the word "is."
PROJECT OVERVIEW, Second page, Background bullet point: "Address and, where appropriate and legally possible; possible, remove governmental constraints ... " Replace semi colon with comma after word "possible."
Initial Study
REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
First paragraph, first sentence: "SCAG has allocated ... through the adopted +t-s 6th cycle ... " Delete word "its."
First paragraph, second sentence: "The RHNA represents ... must accommodate fef in its ... " Delete word "for."
Page. 2-16
2.3.3 Housing Opportunity Site Descriptions (pg. 2-16)
Site 13 Location: "The Main Street Specific Plan area covers +s the traditional downtown ... " Delete word "is".
Site 13 Assumed Development Capacity: Mid paragraph, "A physical inventory ... standard of ... " The word "of" should not be in bold.
Site 13 Assumed Development Capacity: Last sentence, "At these small sizes, ... therefore, A-a-ve income levels have been categorized ... " Delete "have."
2.3.4 Housing Opportunity Sites
Paragraph under table, last sentence, "the Housing Element Update include includes sufficient sites ... "
Replace word "include" with "includes."
AESTHETICS
Table item c), last sentence: "If the Project is in an urbanized area, is there th€ potential sf for the project to conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality?" Replace with, "is there potential for the project to conflict ... " and delete "the."
3.1.2 Environmental Impact Analysis
Paragraph a) second sentence: "nor are there any specific policies related to preservation ... " 2 Catherine Showalter
Add word "to."
Paragraph cl, last sentence, "If the project is in an urbanized area, is there t-Re potential of the project to conflict with applicable zoning ... "
Add "is there" and delete "the."
First paragraph, second sentence " ... infrastructure which may have the have the potential. .. " Delete "the have."
d) first paragraph, second sentence " ... on structures and even off e.f vehicle windshields, ... " Delete word "of."
d) second paragraph, first sentence " ... would be required to comply with City guidelines ... " Add word "with."
AGRICULTURAL AND FORESTRY RESOURCES
3.2.2 Environmental Impact Analysis
b) second paragraph, fifth sentence "Additionally, none of the identified Housing Opportunity Sites that +s are not proposed ... "
Replace "is" with "are."
AIR QUALITY
3.3.1 Environmental Setting
First paragraph," ... and San Bernadina Bernardino Counties." Replace Bernadina with Bernardino.
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
3.4.2 Environmental Impact Analysis
a) First paragraph under Finding, second sentence, "Certification of the Project itself would not lead to alteration or modification of biological resources ... " Add word "of."
3.4.2 Environmental Impact Analysis
f) Paragraph under Finding, second sentence, "Certification of the Project itself would not lead to alteration or modification of biological resources ... " Add word "of."
3 Catherine Showalter
ENERGY RESOURCES
3.6.2 Environmental Impact Analysis
b) Second paragraph under Finding, first sentence, " ... comply with the current and future iterations of the Building Energy Efficiency Standards ... " Add word "of."
GREENHOUSE GASES
3.8.1 Environmental Setting
First paragraph, third sentence, "Each GHG differs in its ability to absorb heart in the atmosphere~ GHG emissions are presented in carbon dioxide equivalent, which weight weigh each gas by its global warming potential."
Add period to end run-on sentence.
Replace word "weight" with "weigh."
First paragraph, last sentence, "Additional GHGs with high Global Warming Potential (GWP) include ... "
Add "Global Warming Potential" since this is the first time the term has been used in the report.
3.8.2 Environmental Impact Analysis
a) paragraph under Finding, third sentence, "As such, greenhouse gas emissions resulting from future Project implementation~ may have a significant impact on the environment." Delete "that."
b) paragraph under Finding, first sentence, "The project identifies Housing Opportunity Sites that have the potential for providing additional housing to meet the City's RHNA allocation0 " Add a period to end sentence.
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Policy 2B: "Implement the measure~ outline outlined in the City's Household Hazardous Waste Plan."
Replace word "outline" with "outlined."
3.9.2 Environmental Impact Analysis
a) first paragraph under Finding, first sentence, "Construction activities associated with future residential development resulting from Project implementation i-5 are anticipated to involve ... " Delete word "is" and add "are."
4 Catherine Showalter
a) second paragraph under Finding, second sentence, "Upon completion of constructionL hazardous materials associated with Project operations would include ... " Add comma.
g) paragraph under Finding, first sentence, "The Housing Opportunity Sites are located on different parcels located throughout the City and are not located in ... " Delete "located" as redundant.
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
3.10.1 Environmental Setting
First paragraph, first sentence, San Bernadina Bernardino.
Replace "Bernadino" with correct spelling of "Bernardino."
Policy 25, last line, " ... maximize the percentage of permeable surfaces to aUews allow more percolation of storm water into the ground."
Replace word "allows" with "allow."
First paragraph, last sentence," ... construction activities associated With future residential development ... "
Add word "with."
ii., paragraph under Finding, second sentence, Though the Project may not result in substantial increased increases in impervious surfaces ... "
Replace word "increased" with "increases."
iii, "Create or contribute runoff water would exceed the capacity of ... runoff7 0 ef11 Replace semi colon with period; delete word "or."
iv. paragraph under Finding, first sentence, " ... produced by storms av at sea ... " Replace "ay" with "at."
iv. paragraph under Finding, sixth sentence, " ... the Project may be located in areas susceptible to floodingL and implementation of the Project could impede or redirect flood flows." Add comma for clarity.
LAND USE AND PLANNING
b), paragraph under Finding, second to the last sentence, " ... regulation adopted for the purpose 5 Catherine Showalter
of avoiding or mitigation mitigating an environmental effect." Replace word "mitigation" with "mitigating."
MINERAL RESOURCES
3.12.2 Environmental Impact Analysis
Paragraph under a-b) Finding, second to the last sentence," ... impacts associated with the loss of availability ... "
Add word "of."
NOISE
3.13.2 Environmental Impact Analysis
b) "Would the project result in exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?"
Add words "result in."
POPULATION AND HOUSING
3.14.2 Environmental Impact Analysis
a), last paragraph, last sentence, "Therefore, this topic will be further evaluation evaluated in the EIR."
Replace word "evaluation" with "evaluated."
PUBLIC SERVICES
Policy 4A: "Ensure that adequate facilities and fire service personnel are maintained based on population, fire hazards in and around the City and a performance standard of an average total reflect response time of seven minutes or less."
Replace word "reflect" with "response."
TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
3.18.1 Environmental Setting
Third sentence, "The Gabrielinos were in an area that expended from Ventura County to the north and San Bernadina Bernardino County to the east." Replace "Bernadina" with "Bernardino."
a) ii, last sentence, " ... the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American mbe-?- tribe."
Replace question mark with a period.
6
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
3.19 Environmental Setting
Water
First paragraph, "The City ~ a retail water supplier ... " Add the word "is."
Wastewater
Catherine Showalter
Second paragraph, last sentence, "In 2020, 2,520 AF of wastewater was collect collected from the City {City of Seal Beach 2021)."
Replace word "collect" with "collected."
3.19.2 Environmental Impact Analysis
c) Would the project result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that ¼5 l! has adequate capacity ... " Replace word "is" with "it."
WILDFIRE
3.20.1 Environmental Setting
First paragraph, first sentence, "The City and Project area arc surrounding surrounded by urban and developed lands."
Replace word "surrounding" with "surrounded."
Second paragraph, second sentence, " ... much of the City has been identified as Ra-Ye having a low risk for wildfire."
Replace word "have" with "having."
Policy 4A: "Ensure that adequate facilities and fire service personnel are maintained based on population, fire hazards in and around the City and a performance standard of an average total reflect response time of seven minutes or less."
Replace word "reflect" with "response."
Policy 4E: "Develop aflG an early warning system of Santa Ana wind fire danger ... " Replace word "and" with "an."
Policy 4F: " ... require private responsibility for development and maintenance necessary of new fire flow water lines ... "
Add word "of."
7 Megan Coats
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Adrianne Rosenfeld <arosenfeld1 @verizon.net>
Monday, December 11, 2023 3:50 PM
Kurt Bourhenne; Alexa Smittle
Re: HOUSING TO REPLLACE THE LEISURE WORLD RV LOT
You're wrong and offensive No one is going to build housing in Leisure World. This is a 55 and older community. If they build housing, they wanted for families not for seniors and that a remark about Auschwitz was way out of line especially from a person that is going to vote for a fascist.
Sent from the all new AOL app for iOS
On Monday, December 11, 2023, 3:24 PM, Kurt Bourhenne <[email protected]> wrote:
The above picture shows what appears to be a city
employee taking pictures at Knollwood Rd. & El Dorado @ 1 :41 p.m., as evidenced by the picture below.
2 The shadows shown at 1 :41 p.m. represents indisputable prove that if a multi-story building were to be built on the RV Lot in Seal Beach Leisure World, the dwelling units on the East side would be permanently deprived of late
3 afternoon sunlight and completely devoid of evening
sunlight. Sunlight = Vitamin "D"
FACT: All building structures, including Club Houses,
Medical buildings, Security buildings, Postal building, the Globe and Amphitheater were specifically constructed so they would not deprive residents of sunlight.
Knowing this factual information and purposely building a structure that would permanently deprive human beings of their afternoon and evening sunlight are more than likely blood relatives of the commanders at Auschwitz and the
like.
This is my opinion on the subject!
Kurt Bourhenne
Leisure World, Mutual 14
Seal Beach, California 90740
NOTHING IN THIS EMAIL IS PRIVATE OR
CONFIDENTIAL. PLEASE FEEL FREE TO COPY,
FORWARD OR DISTRIBUTE AS YOU FEEL THE NEED
ARISES!
4 Megan Coats
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subjed:
Attachments:
Hi Alexa,
Susan Perrell <[email protected]>
Thursday, December 7, 2023 6:27 PM
Alexa Smittle
Shaun Temple
Comments on the scope and content of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) Initial Study and EIR Scope Comments_Susan Perrell Comments.docx Thank you and Shawn for putting together a very cordial and successful meeting last night, and for guiding us newbie EQCB members through the meeting process. Attached are my comments on the EIR scope ... some of which I talked through last night. I am hoping my comments will be helpful, and that this written version will be more coherent and easier to address than my oral comments last night I I apologize in advance that I am a terrible speller and I could not get Word to spell check the "Comments" in the document. Perhaps my typos and mis-spellings will come out on the wash I Please don't hesitate to call if you have any questions or if I can help in any way.
I am looking forward to working with you and Shawn throughout this process.
Best,
Susan
Susan Perrell
562 2331574
1 CITY OF SEAL BEACH
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY CONTROL BOARD AGENDA
SPECIAL MEETING
Wednesday, 06 December 2023 - 6:00 PM
City Council Chambers
21 1 Eighth Street
Seal Beach, CA 90740
District 1 - Gary Allen
District 2 - Benjamin Wong
District 3 - Susan M. Perrell
District 4 - Catherine Showalter
District 5 - Donald Horning
Department of Community Development
Alexa Smittle, Director
Shaun Temple, Planning Manager
• City Hall office hours are 8:00 a. m. to 5:00 p. m. Monday through Friday. Closed noon to 1 :00 p.m.
■ The City of Seal Beach complies with the Americans with Disabilities Act. If you need assistance to attend this meeting please telephone the City Clerk' s Office at least 48 hours in advance of the meeting at (562) 431-2527.
• Copies of staff reports and/or written materials on each agenda item are available for public inspection in City libraries or on the City website at:
http://sealbeachca.suiteonemedia.com/web/home.aspx
CALL TO ORDER
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
At this time, members of the public may address the Environmental Quality Control Board regarding any items within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Environmental Quality Control Board. Pursuant to the Brown Act, the Board cannot discuss or take action on any items not on the agenda unless authorized by law. Those members of the public wishing to speak are asked to come foiward to the microphone and state their name for the record. All speakers will be limited to a period of 5 minutes.
APPROVALOFAGENDA
By Motion of the Environmental Quality Control Board, this is the time to notify the public of any changes to the agenda, re- arrange the order of the agenda, and provide an opportunity for any member of the Environmental Quality Control Board or staff to request an item be removed from the Consent Calendar for separate action.
SCHEDULED MATTERS
A. Environmental Impact Report (EIR) Scoping Meeting for the Housing Element Update and Zoning Code Update
Recommendation: Staff to receive input and comments from the public to help identify the range of actions, alternatives, mitigation measures, and potentially significant effects to be analyzed in depth in the EIR for the Housing Element Update and Zoning Code Update.
STAFF CONCERNS
BOARD CONCERNS
ADJOURNMENT
TO:
FROM:
MEETING DATE:
SUBJECT:
LOCATION:
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
CONTROL BOARD
STAFF REPORT
Environmental Quality Control Board
Alexa Smittle, Community Development Director
December 6, 2023
Scoping Meeting to solicit comments and suggestions
regarding the scope and content of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and the environmental issues and alternatives to be addressed in the EIR for the proposed Housing Element Update and Zoning Code Update (Project).
Citywide
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Environmental Quality Control Board conduct a public meeting, receive public comments and provide comments to Staff for preparation of the EIR.
BACKGROUND
Pursuant to State Law, the City of Seal Beach (City) must update its Housing Element every eight years. A key component of the Housing Element is the identification of sites that are suitable to accommodate new housing units. Under State law, jurisdictions must maintain an inventory of potential housing sites commensurate with their Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) allocation. For the 2021 -2029 cycle, the City of Seal Beach (City) has been assigned a total of 1,243 units. Within the City's Housing Element Update, several sites are identified as housing opportunity sites, but not all of them are currently zoned to accommodate housing. As a part of the Housing Element work program, the Zoning Code must be updated to allow for housing development at the identified sites. As such, the City is preparing a Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Housing Element Update and Zoning Code Update (Project).
Based on the Initial Study performed for the Project, staff has determined that an EIR inclusive of all environmental topics except for Agriculture & Forestry, Mineral Resources, and Wildfire must be completed under the California Environmental Quality Control Act (CEQA). As a part of that process, a month-long scoping period is provided to allow the f'Zomment ed [SP1 ]: I agree with the seleC1ion of 7 I .;;tegories to be eliminated from study in the EIR.
However, for some of the categories that will be
induded In the EIR, the justification for induding them I
was too narrow, and I am concerned that, as a resull,
the EIR studies may be focused too narrowly. Potential
impacts to environmental. historical, and cultural
resources and publlc services should be more deeply
and more broadly studied in the EIR than this initial
study suggests.
Environmental Quality Control Board
December 6, 2023
community and interested parties time to review initial information about the Project and provide feedback on the scope and content of the EIR. Comments may be submitted via delivery, mail, or email to the City anytime during the scoping period, in this case, from November 16, 2023 to December 15, 2023.
Pursuant to Section 21083.9 of the Public Resources Code, in preparation of an EIR, a scoping meeting will be held for the general public and responsible and trustee public agencies. Tonight's meeting, hosted by the Environmental Quality Control Board (EQCB), provides opportunity for public participation using an in-person setting that will be recorded for reference and incorporation into the scoping process. Those attending will learn about the Project, review the anticipated scope of the EIR, and assist the City in identifying the range of actions, alternatives, mitigation measures, and potentially significant effects to be analyzed in depth in the EIR. It is important to note that no decision or recommendation is being made by the EQCB at this meeting.
The Initial Study/Notice of Preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Report and the Notice of Scoping Meeting are available for public review at https://www.sealbeachca.gov/Departments/Community-Development/PlanningDevelopment/Environmental-Documents-Under-Review and are also attached to this staff report. Written comments must be submitted prior to 5:00 P.M. Friday, December 15, 2023 to:
Alexa Smittle, Community Development Director
City of Seal Beach, Community Development
211 Eighth Street
Seal Beach, California 90740
[email protected]
562.431 .2527 ext. 1313
Following the close of the scoping period, research, analysis, and technical studies will be performed, and the Program EIR drafted for public review, ideally by late Spring 2024.
A 45-day public review period of the Draft EIR will be provided, after which responses to comments received will be prepared. The EIR will be reviewed by the Environmental Quality Control Board as well as the Planning Commission, and ultimately brought to the City Council for consideration.
AL,e,,w.,SW'vi,,ffu,
Alexa Smittle
Community Development Director
Attachments:
1. Initial Study/Notice of Preparation (IS/NOP)
2. Notice of Scoping Meeting
Commented [SP2J: While the EIR Is currenUy intended
to be programmatic rather than project-specific, each of the 10 sites to be rezoned are very different; different settings, different environmental. historical, and
recreational resources. and different environmental
issues and challenges. Therefore. in order to make the
EIR a adequately complele and meaningful
assessment that can serve to support sound decisions
for EIR certification and subsequent discretionary
decisions. the resources. impacts, mitigation, and
Issues at each site will need to be assessed sitespecifically. Even if the individual development sites will later go through a CEQA process prior to receiving entitlements, the zoning changes for those project sites will already have been decided and made, based on
the ea~ier Programmatic EIR. Furthermore, those
environmental resources and issues that were never
identified or studied in the high level Programmatic EIR I may never be identified or studied later but, instead.
administratively dismissed with a negative declaration
or a mitigated negative dedaration. To prevent that
potential study gap. the sites should be studied in
depth. preferably via separate EIRs or possibly through robust site-specific studies rolled up into the
Programmatic EIR. Following that process, a
consistency review and/or update or each specific EIR
should occur when an actual project is proposed for
that site. -----
PUBLIC NOTICE
CITY OF SEAL BEACH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
NOTICE OF AVAILABILITY OF AN INITIAL STUDY/NOTICE OF
PREPARATION OF A DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR)
FOR THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING
CODE UPDATES
Notice is hereby given by the Community Development Department of the City of Seal Beach that a Notice of Preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has been prepared for the Housing Element and Zoning Code Updates Project. The Initial Study/Notice of Preparation (IS/NOP) will be available for public review and comment for 30 days commencing Thursday, November 16, 2023, and ending Friday, December 15, 2023. The NOP includes a description of the Project, and the IS includes a discussion of the environmental topics. The City of Seal Beach is the lead agency for the preparation of this EIR.
Project Location: City of Seal Beach, including 13 opportunity sites throughout the city totaling approximately 278 acres.
Project Description: The Project is the City's Housing Element Update and its resulting zoning code update and rezoning program. The Housing Element Update identifies Housing Opportunity Sites throughout the city that have the potential for providing additional housing to meet the City's Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). The sites are broken into two categories: (a) undenutilized sites that do not require zoning code changes and (b) sites where zoning modifications are proposed because the current capacity of these underutilized sites is not sufficient to fully accommodate the RHNA in all income categories.
Public Review and Comment Period: A 30-day public review period for comments on the scope of the EIR starts on Thursday, November 16, 2023, and ends on Friday, December 15, 2023 at 5:00 P.M. Please send your comment, with your name and address, to: Alexa Smittle, Community Development Director, City of Seal Beach, Community Development Department, 211 Eighth Street, Seal Beach, CA 90740 or via e- mail to:
[email protected]. To further facilitate public participation, a public meeting will be held on December 6, 2023 at 6 p.m. in City Council Chambers located at 211 Eighth Street, Seal Beach, CA.
A copy of the IS/NOP describing the Project and potential environmental effects is available at the following locations:
• Orange County Public Library, Seal Beach Branch, 707 Electric Avenue, Seal Beach, CA 90740
• Orange County Public Library, Los Alamitos-Rossmoor Branch, 12700 Montecito, Seal Beach, CA 907 40
• The City's website: https://www.sealbeachca.gov/Departments/CommunityDevelopmenUPlanning-DevelopmenUEnvironmental-Documents-Under-Review.
PUBLIC NOTICE
CITY OF SEAL BEACH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
NOTICE OF A PUBLIC SCOPING MEETING
OF A DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR) FOR
THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE
UPDATES
Scoping Meeting: Pursuant to Section 21083.9 of the Public Resources Code, a scoping meeting will be held for the general public and responsible and trustee public agencies. The purpose of the scoping meeting is to learn about the Project, review the anticipated scope of the EIR, and assist the City in identifying the range of actions, alternatives, mitigation measures, and potentially significant effects to be analyzed in depth in the EIR.
Scoping Meeting Date
Wednesday, December 6,
2023
Scoping Meeting Time
6:00 P.M.
Scoping Meeting
Location
City Council Chambers
211 Eighth Street
Seal Beach, California
90740
Project Location: City of Seal Beach, including 13 opportunity sites throughout the city totaling approximately 278 acres.
Project Description: The Project is the City's Housing Element Update and its resulting zoning code update and rezoning program. The Housing Element Update identifies Housing Opportunity Sites throughout the city that have the potential for providing additional housing to meet the City's Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). The sites are broken into two categories: (a) underutilized sites that do not require zoning code changes and (b) sites where zoning modifications are proposed because the current capacity of these underutilized sites is not sufficient to fully accommodate the RHNA in all income categories.
Public Review and Comment Period: A Separate Notice of Availability of an Initial Study/Notice of Preparation (IS/NOP) of a Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the City of Seal Beach Housing Element was published on November 16, 2023 announcing a 30- day public review period for comments on the scope of the EIR starting on Thursday, November 16, 2023, and ending on Friday, December 15, 2023 at 5:00 P.M. The NOP includes a description of the Project, and the IS includes a discussion of the environmental topics. The City of Seal Beach is the lead agency for the preparation of this EIR. Please send your comment, with your name and address, to: Alexa Smittle, Community Development Director, City of Seal Beach, Community Development Department, 211 Eighth Street, Seal Beach, CA 907 40 or via e-mail to: [email protected].
A copy of the IS/NOP describing the Project and potential environmental effects is available at the following locations:
• Orange County Public Library, Seal Beach Branch, 707 Electric Avenue, Seal Beach, CA 90740
• Orange County Public Library, Los Alamitos-Rossmoor Branch, 12700 Montecito, Seal Beach, CA 90740
PUBLIC NOTICE
CITY OF SEAL BEACH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
• The City's website: https://www.sealbeachca.gov/Departments/CommunityDevelopmenUPlanning-DevelopmenUEnvironmental-Documents-Under-Review.
Notice of Preparation And Scoping Meeting for the City of Seal Beach Housing Element and Zoning Code Updates Project Environmental Impact Report DATE: November 16, 2023
TO: Reviewing Agencies and Other Interested Parties
FROM: City of Seal Beach, Community Development Department, 211 Eighth Street Seal Beach, California 90740
PROJECT TITLE/SUBJECT: City of Seal Beach Housing Element and Zoning Code Updates Project- Notice of Preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and Notice of Public Scoping Meeting PROJECT APPLICANT: City of Seal Beach
NOTICE OF PREPARATION REVIEW PERIOD: November 16, 2023- December 15, 2023 SCOPING MEETING: December 6, 2023
The purpose of this Notice of Preparation (NOP) is to notify potential Responsible Agencies (Agencies) that the Lead Agency, the City of Seal Beach (City), will prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the proposed City of Seal Beach Housing Element and Zoning Code Updates Project (Project) and to solicit comments and suggestions regarding (1) the scope and content of the EIR and (2) the environmental issues and alternatives to be addressed in the EIR (California Environmental Quality Act [CEQAJ Guidelines Section 15082). This NOP also provides notice to interested parties, organizations, and individuals of the preparation of the EIR and requests comments on the scope and contents of the environmental document.
Project Location: The Project site is currently comprised of 13 Housing Opportunity Sites dispersed throughout the City totaling approximately 278 acres. The City located at the northwestern edge of Orange County (County), California. It borders the City of Long Beach and Los Angeles County to the northwest, the Orange County Cities of Los Alamitos to the north, Westminster to the east, Huntington Beach to the southeast, and the Pacific Ocean to the west. The City has a land area of approximately 13 square miles.
PROJECT OVERVIEW
In accordance with California Government Code Section 65584, projected housing needs for each city and county in the Southern California region are prepared by Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) under a process known as the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA). The RHNA allocates regional housing needs by income-level among member jurisdictions. California law established the planning period for the current RHNA from June 30, 2021 , to October 15, 2029.
The Housing Element is one of the seven state-mandated elements of a local General Plan and is required to be updated every eight years. The City is preparing the Housing Element Update to comply with the legal mandate requiring each local government to identify adequate sites for housing to meet the existing and projected housing needs for varying income-levels in the community. It is intended to provide the City with a comprehensive strategy for promoting the production of safe, decent and affordable housing and affirmatively furthering fair housing during the housing cycle.
Background: An Initial Study was prepared for the City to evaluate potential environmental impacts resulting from the implementation of the City's recent Housing Element Update, which was adopted by the Seal Beach City Council on February 7, 2022, but updated on August 24, 2023 in response to HCD comments, and identifies the City's housing conditions and needs and establishes the policies and programs that comprise the City's strategy to accommodate projected housing needs, including the provision of adequate housing for lower-income households and for special-needs populations (i.e., unhoused people, seniors, single-parent households, large families, and persons with disabilities). The City is continuing to work with HCD to have the Housing Element Update certified and obtain compliance, as the Housing Element is one of the state-mandated elements of the General Plan. The Housing Element Update would bring the element into compliance with state legislation and the current SCAG RHNA.
The Housing Element Update includes the following components, as required by state law:
• An analysis of the City's demographic and housing characteristics and trends; • An evaluation of land, financial, and administrative resources available to address the City's housing goals; • A review of potential constraints, both governmental and non-governmental, to meet the City's housing needs; and
• A Housing Action Plan for the 2021-2029 planning period, including goals policies and programs.
The Housing Element Update identifies the following strategies and programs that focus on the following major goals:
• Facilitate the development of a variety of housing types for all income-levels to meet the existing and future needs of residents;
• Assist in the development of adequate housing to meet the needs of low- and moderate-income households; • Address and, where appropriate and legally possible; remove governmental constraints to the maintenance, improvement and development of housing;
• Maintain and enhance the existing quality of residential neighborhoods in Seal Beach; and • Affirmatively further fair housing opportunities for all persons regardless of race, color, national origin, ancestry, religion, sex, marital status, income, or familial status.
Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA): In March 2021, SCAG adopted its 6th cycle RHNA allocation plan, covering the planning period of October 2021 through October 2029. During this cycle, SCAG received a need of 1,341,827 new housing units, which was distributed to all 197 SCAG jurisdictions (SCAG 2023). HCD compliance requires a demonstration by the City that it can meet its "fair share' of the RHNA allocation of 1,243 new housing units.
The City's latest RHNA allocation calls for 1,243 new housing units, including 459 new units for residents in the low- and very low-income categories. The City must demonstrate to HCD that the Housing Element Update has adequate land capacity and implementing policies to accommodate its RHNA allocation. In addition, HCD recommends that cities identify a 'buffer' of 15 to 30 percent above the stated RHNA allocation for lower- and moderate-income categories to account for "No Net Loss· provisions of Senate Bill (SB) 166, which requires that the land inventory and site identification programs in the Housing Element Update always include sufficient sites to accommodate the unmet RHNA.
Project Description: The Project analyzes potential impacts resulting from implementation of the City's Housing Element Update and its resulting zoning code update and rezoning program. The Housing Element Update identifies Housing Opportunity Sites throughout the City that have the potential for providing additional housing to meet the City's RHNA allocation. The sites are broken into two categories: (a) underutilized sites that do not require zoning code changes and (b) sites where zoning modifications are proposed.
The Housing Opportunity Sites inventory consists of three underutilized sites with a realistic potential for residential development and potential ADUs, as summarized in Table 1 below.
Table 1: Underutilized Sites Inventory (Rezoning Not Required) Assume Above d Lower- Moderat Moderat
Site Address/ General Appr Existing Density Income e- e- Total No. APN Plan/ ox. Onsite (Dweiiln Dweliin income Income Units Zoning Acres Use(s) g Units g Units Dwelling Dwelling per Units Acre) Units
1 1780 Pacific Limiled 0.25 Older 20 - 5 - 5
Coasl Hwy Commer convenie
(APN 199- -ciaU nceslore;
061-01) RM0-18 zoning
allows
mixeduse - 2 Leisure Resident 5.5 RV 30 74 38 38 150
Wo~d ial High Slorage
(APN 095- Density
691-04) -
Planned
Commun
ity
3 Accessory I All N/A Residenti N/A 36 14 - 50
Dwelling Resident al and
Units ial and MixedMixed- Use
Use Zones
Zones
TOTAL 110 57 38 205
Sounce: City of Seal Beach 2021-2029 Housing Element Updale. Redline August 24, 2023 Version.
The City's RHNA allocation for the current cycle calls for accommodating 1,243 new housing units at low-, moderate-, and above moderate-income levels. Of this total allocation, there are eight planned or recently approved ADUs that are anticipated for development, as well as B5 units currently planned or recently approved on underutilized sites, which can be counted towards the City's overall unit requirement.
Because the current capacity of these underutilized sites is not sufficient to fully accommodate the RHNA allocation in all income categories, due to zoning and other limitations, proposed rezone sites have been identified, as shown in Table 2, below.
Table 2: Proposed Rezone Sites (Unless Military)
Assessor's Existing Estimated Site Parcel Approximate Current Proposed No. Site Name Number Onsite Acres Developable Zoning Zoning (APN) Use(s) Acres
4 Accurate 095-791 -18 Vehide and 4 1.8 RHD-20 MC/RHO
Storage boal storage
5 The Shops al 086-492-51 Retail, office, 27 10 GC MC/RHO Rossmoor fast food,
grocery and
pharmacy
1 6
Old Ranch 130-861- Existing 26 5 GC MC/RHO
Town Center 14, -15, - commercial
16, -17, • center with
ta, -19, - bank,
Assessor's Existing Estimated Sit& Site Name Parcel Onslte Approximate Developable Current Proposed No. Number Use(s) Acres Acres Zoning Zoning
(APN)
20. -21 . - surface
22. -23. - parking, I 24, -25, - restaurants,
26, -27 department
stores, retail.
services,
Ralph's
supermarl<et,
and CVS
Phannacy
7 Seal Beach 095-641- Existing 7 2.5 CS-SC MC/RHO
Plaza 44, -49, - commercial
55, -56, -57 center with
Chase Bank,
retail,
market, drive
through
restaurant,
and medical
and
professional
offices
8 Seal Beach 043-260- Existing 9 4 SC MCIRHD
Center 02, -05 commercial
center with
CVS
Phannacy,
retail,
services,
restaurant,
and marl<et
9 99 Marina Drive 199-011-10 Former oil 4.3 4.3 OE RHD-33 separation
facility with
abandoned
handball
court
10 Old Ranch 130-012-55 Portion of 155 4 RG SP
Country Club existing golf
- course
11 Naval Weapons 043-150-23 Portion of 22 4 M NIA
Station PCH & Naval
Seal Beach Weapons
Blvd. •• Station Seal
Beach
12 Water Storage - Water and 2.75 2 M NIA Site (City Equipment Property Navy Storage
Base)··
13 Main Street - 043-112- Existing 15 NIA MSSP MSSP
21 , -22. - Main Street
23, -28, - Specific Plan
29, -34, - commercial
35, -36, - district,
41 ; induding
I relail, services,
Site
No.
I
Site Name
Assessor's
Parcel
Number
(APN)
043-113-
04. -08. 14.
-15. -36. -
37. -42, -
46, -48, 51 ;
199-053-
18, -19. -
20, -21 , -
22. -23, -
24. -25. -
26, -28, -
29, -30, -
31;
199-043-
10; -11. -
12, -13, -
14, -15, -
16, -17, -
18, -19, -
20;
199-033-
02;
199-034-
01 , -02, 03.
-04, -05. -
06, -07, -
08, -09, -
10, -11 , -
12, -13, -
14, -15, -
16, -17, -
36;
199-044-
19, -20, -
21 , -22, -
23, -24. -
25. -26, -
27. -28, -
29, -30, -
31 , -32, -
33, -34
Existing
Onsite
Use(s)
offices,
par1<.ing
areas,
restaurants
and bars,
theater,
medical
offices, plant
nursery and
other shops
and retailers
Approximate
Acres
I
Estimated
Developable
Acres
Source: City of Seal Beach 2021-2029 Housing Element Update, August 2023.
Current
Zo ning
Proposed
Zo ning
Notes:· The City will create a new Mixed Commercial/Residential High Density (MC/RHO). The new mixed-use zoning designation would need to be created to facilitate a density equivalent to Residential High Density (RHD)-46, with a minimum density of 40 units per acre.
•· Zoning Not Applicable
••• Specific Plan Amendment Required
•••• Land Use Change I Rezoning Required
GC = Commercial General
OSG = Open Space Golf
OE = Oil Extraction
RG = Recreation Goff
CS = Commercial Service
SC = Service Commercial
MC/RHO= Mixed Commercial/Residential High
-------------------------- --~
Assessor's Existing Estimated Site Site Name Parcel Onsite Approximate Developable Current Proposed No. Number Use(s) Acres Acres Zoning Zoning
(APN)
M = Military
MSSP = Main Street Specific Plan
Of the 13 Housing Opportunity Sites, six would require rezoning, one would be rezoned through a proposed Specific Plan, and one would require an amendment to the Main Street Specific Plan. The rezoning effort would also include the establishment of a new zoning designation, 'Mixed Commercial/Residential High Density' (MC/RHO), which would apply to five of the Housing Opportunity Sites. The new MC/RHO mixed-use zoning designation is needed in order to facilitate a density equivalent to Residential High Density (RHD)-46 (up to 46 units per acre) but with a minimum density of 40 units per acre.
Redevelopment of underutilized sites and ADUs could accommodate a total of approximately 205 new housing units, and potential rezone parcels could accommodate a total of approximately 1,628 new housing units. Based on this, by implementing the Project, the City would be able to provide 1,833 additional housing units, thereby accommodating the 2021-2029 RHNA allocation (1,243 new housing units) and a substantive buffer to demonstrate capacity for all income levels.
As these Housing Opportunity Sites are intended to be redeveloped or rezoned, an increased densification and intensification of low- and moderate-income residential uses would result. The proposed Project is ultimately implementing the Housing Element Update; therefore, preparation of an evaluation pursuant to CEQA is required in order to consider the potential environmental impacts caused by Project implementation, including an evaluation of the new zoning and the new zoning designation resulting from Project implementation which would result in increased densification and intensification of residential uses.
Required Approvals
The Housing Element is a component of the City of Seal Beach General Plan. Additionally, the HCD will review the Housing Element for compliance with applicable statutory provisions.
A focused EIR will provide the necessary environmental determination required by CEQA. The focused EIR would be adopted by Resolution of the City Council.
Implementation of the Project would require the following approvals:
• Certification of the CEQA document;
• Adoption of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program; • Adoption of the Findings of Facts and Statement of Overriding Consideration (if applicable); • Change of Zone/Specific Plan Amendment; and
• Seal Beach Municipal Code, Zoning Code Amendment.
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES TO BE EVALUATED IN THE EIR
The City of Seal Beach, the lead agency for the proposed 61h Cycle Housing Element Update and focused EIR, is subject to environmental review under CEQA. As defined by Section 15063 of the CEQA Guidelines, an Initial Study is prepared primarily to provide the Lead Agency with information to use as the basis for determining whether an EIR, Negative Declaration, or Mitigated Negative Declaration would be appropriate for providing the necessary environmental documentation and clearance for any proposed project. The Initial Study prepared for the proposed Project has detenmined that the proposed applications will result in potentially significant environmental impacts and therefore, an EIR is deemed as the appropriate document to provide necessary environmental evaluations and clearance for the proposed Project.
Pursuant to CEQA, the discussion of potential effects on the physical environment is focused on those impacts that may be significant or potentially significant. CEQA allows a lead agency to limit the detail of discussion of the environmental effects that are not considered potentially significant (Public Resource Codes (PRC) Section 21100, CCR Sections 15126.2[a] and 15128). CEQA requires that the discussion of any significant effect on the environment be limited to substantial, or potentially substantial, adverse changes in physical conditions that exist within the affected area, as defined in PRC Section 21060.5 (statutory definition of 'environment').
Environmental effects identified in the Initial Study prepared for the proposed project that are dismissed as less than significant and unlikely to occur need not be discussed further in the EIR, unless the lead agency subsequently receives information inconsistent with the finding in the Initial Study (CCR Section 15143).
Environmental issue areas scoped out of the focused EIR will include an explanation of why these issues would not result in significant environmental effects and are not required to be evaluated further. The following environmental topics will be evaluated in the EIR:
• Aesthetics • Land Use and Planning
• Air Quality • Noise
• Biological Resources • Population and Housing
• Cultural Resources • Public Services
• Energy • Recreation
• Geology and Soils • Transportation
• Greenhouse Gas Emissions • Tribal Cultural Resources
• Hazards and Hazardous Materials • Utilities and Service Systems • Hydrology and Water Quality • Mandatory Findings of Significance The EIR will address the short-term and long-term effects of the Project on the environment. It will also evaluate the potential for the Project to cause direct and indirect growth-inducing impacts, as well as cumulative impacts.
Alternatives to the proposed Project will be evaluated that may reduce impacts that are determined to be significant in the EIR. Mitigation may be proposed for those impacts that are determined to be significant. A mitigation monitoring and reporting program (MMRP) will also be developed as required by Section 15097 of the CEQA Guidelines. The environmental determination in this Notice of Preparation {NOP) is subject to a 30-day public review period per Public Resources Section 21080.4 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15082. Public agencies, interested organizations, and individuals have the opportunity to comment on the proposed Project, to identify those environmental issues, potentially affected by the Project which should be addressed further by the City in the EIR.
Scoping Meeting: Pursuant to Section 21083.9 of the Public Resources Code, a scoping meeting will be held for the general public and responsible and trustee public agencies, as indicated below. The purpose of the scoping meeting is to learn about the Project, review the anticipated scope of the EIR, and assist the City in identifying the range of actions, alternatives, mitigation measures, and potentially significant effects to be analyzed in depth in the EIR.
Scoping Meeting Date
December 6, 2023
Scoping Meeting Time
6:00 PM
Scoping Meeting Location
City Council Chambers
211 Eighth Street
Seal Beach, California 90740
Public Review and Comment Period: A 30-day public review period for comments on the scope of the EIR starts on Thursday November 16, 2023, and ends on Friday December 15, 2023 at 5:00 P.M. Please send your comment, with your name and address, to: Alexa Smittle, Community Development Director, City of Seal Beach, Community Development Department, 211 Eighth Street, Seal Beach, CA 907 40 or via e-mail to:
A copy of the Initial Study/NOP describing the Project and potential environmental effects is available at the following locations:
• Orange County Public Library, Seal Beach Branch, 707 Electric Avenue, Seal Beach, CA 90740 • Orange County Public library, Los Alamitos-Rossmoor Branch, 12700 Montecito, Seal Beach, CA 907 40 • The City's website: https://www.sealbeachca.gov/Departments/Community-Development/PlanningDevelopment/Environmental-Documents-Under-Review. () Stantec
CITY·OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING
ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE
UPDATES
Initial Study
November 16, 2023
Prepared for:
City of Seal Beach
Community Development Department
211 Eighth Street
Seal Beach, CA 90740
Prepared by:
Stantec Consulting Services Inc.
1340 Treat Blvd, Suite 300
Walnut Creek, CA 94597
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Table of Contents
Table of Contents
ACRONYMS/ ABBREVIATIONS ................................................................................................ IV
1.0 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................... 1-1
1.1 PROJECTTITLE .......................................................................................................... 1-1
1.2 LEAD AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS ...................................................................... 1-1
1.3 CONTACT PERSON AND PHONE NUMBER .............................................................. 1-1
1.4 PROJECT SPONSOR'S NAME AND ADDRESS ......................................................... 1-1
1.5 PROJECT LOCATION ................................................................................................. 1-1
1.6 SURROUNDING LAND USES ..................................................................................... 1-2
1.7 PROJECT PURPOSE .................................................................................................. 1-2
1.8 INTENDED USE OF THE INITIAL STUDY ................................................................... 1-3
2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ........................................................................................... 2-1
2.1 PROJECT OVERVIEW ................................................................................................ 2-1
2.2 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE .................................................................................... 2-1
2.2.1 Rezoning and Creating of New Zoning Designation ..................................... 2-2
2.3 REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT ........................................................... 2-3
2.3.1 Existing Site Conditions ............................................................................... 2-4
2.3.2 Housing Opportunity Sites categories ......................................................... 2-5
2.3.3 Housing Opportunity Site Descriptions ........................................................ 2-9
2.3.4 Housing Opportunity Sites Residential Development Potential .................. 2-17
2.4 SCHEDULE ................................................................................................................ 2-18
2.5 DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS ..................................................................................... 2-18
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING, ANALYSIS, AND MITIGATION MEASURES .............. 3-1 INTRODUCTION TO ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS .............................................................. 3-1 Intended Uses of Initial Study and Notice of Preparation ............................................... 3-2 Environmental Assessment Methodology ..................................................................... 3-2
3.1 AESTHETICS ............................................................................................................... 3-4
3.1.1 Environmental Setting ................................................................................. 3-4
3.1.2 Environmental Impact Analysis .................................................................... 3-4
3.2 AG RI CULTURAL AND FORESTRY RESOURCES ...................................................... 3-7
3.2.1 Environmental Setting ................................................................................. 3-7
3.2.2 Environmental Impact Analysis .................................................................... 3-8
3.3 AIR QUALITY ............................................................................................................. 3-10
3.3.1 Environmental Setting ............................................................................... 3-10
3.3.2 Environmental Impact Analysis .................................................................. 3-1 O
3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ...................................................................................... 3-12
3.4.1 Environmental Setting ............................................................................... 3-12
3.4.2 Environmental Impact Analysis .................................................................. 3-13
3.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES ......................................................................................... 3-16
3.5.1 Environmental Setting ............................................................................... 3-16
3.5.2 Environmental Impact Analysis .................................................................. 3-17 II
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Table of Contents
3.6 ENERGY RESOURCES ............................................................................................. 3-20
3.6.1 Environmental Setting ............................................................................... 3-20
3.6.2 Environmental Impact Analysis .................................................................. 3-20
3.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS .............................................................................................. 3-22
3. 7 .1 Environmental Setting ............................................................................... 3-22
3. 7 .2 Environmental Impact Analysis .................................................................. 3-23
3.8 GREENHOUSE GASES ............................................................................................. 3-29
3.8.1 Environmental Setting ............................................................................... 3-29
3.8.2 Environmental Impact Analysis .................................................................. 3-30
3.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS .............................................................. 3-31
3.9.1 Environmental Setting ............................................................................... 3-31
3.9.2 Environmental Impact Analysis .................................................................. 3-33
3.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY ...................................................................... 3-37
3.10.1 Environmental Setting ............................................................................... 3-37
3.10.2 Environmental Impact Analysis .................................................................. 3-38
3.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING ...................................................................................... 3-44
3.11.1 Environmental Setting ............................................................................... 3-44
3.11.2 Environmental Impact Analysis .................................................................. 3-44
3.12 MINERAL RESOURCES ............................................................................................ 3-46
3.12.1 Environmental Setting ............................................................................... 3-46
3.12.2 Environmental Impact Analysis .................................................................. 3-46
3.13 NOISE ........................................................................................................................ 3-47
3.13.1 Environmental Setting ............................................................................... 3-47
3.13.2 Environmental Impact Analysis .................................................................. 3-48
3.14 POPULATION AND HOUSING .................................................................................. 3-50
3.14.1 Environmental Setting ............................................................................... 3-50
3.14.2 Environmental Impact Analysis .................................................................. 3-51
3.15 PUBLIC SERVICES ................................................................................................... 3-53
3.15.1 Environmental Setting ............................................................................... 3-53
3.15.2 Environmental Impact Analysis .................................................................. 3-54
3.16 RECREATION ............................................................................................................ 3-57
3.16.1 Environmental Setting ............................................................................... 3-57
3.16.2 Environmental Impact Analysis .................................................................. 3-57
3.17 TRANSPORTATION .................................................................................................. 3-59
3.17 .1 Environmental Setting ............................................................................... 3-59
3.17.2 Environmental Impact Analysis ................................................................. 3-61
3.18 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES ............................................................................ 3-63
3.18.1 Environmental Setting ............................................................................... 3-63
3.18.2 Environmental Impact Analysis ................................................................. 3-63
3.19 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS ........................................................................ 3-65
3.19.1 Environmental Setting ............................................................................... 3-65
3.19.2 Environmental Impact Analysis ................................................................. 3-67
3.20 WILDFIRE .................................................................................................................. 3-70
3.20.1 Environmental Setting ............................................................................... 3-70
3.20.2 Environmental Impact Analysis ................................................................. 3-72
3.21 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE ........................................................... 3-74 IJ
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Table of Contents
3.21.1 Environmental lmpad Analysis .................................................................. 3-74
4.0 REPORT PREPARATION ............................................................................................ 4-1
4.1 LIST OF PREPARERS ................................................................................................. 4-1
5.0 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................. 5-1
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Current Zoning and General Plan Land Use Designations .......................................... 2-4 Table 2: Underutilized Sites Inventory (Rezoning Not Required) .............................................. 2-6 Table 3: Proposed Rezone Sites (Unless Military) .................................................................... 2-7 Table 4: Housing Opportunity Sites Residential Development Potential... ............................... 2-17 Table 5: Agency Permits and Environmental Review Requirements ....................................... 2-18 Table 6: City Interior and Exterior Noise Standards ................................................................ 3-47
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 - Regional Map .......................................................................................................... 1-4 Figure 2 - City of Seal Beach Map ........................................................................................... 1-5 Figure 3 - Housing Opportunity Sites Map ............................................................................... 1-6 iii
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Acronyms/ Abbreviations
Acronyms / Abbreviations
AAQS
AB
ADU
AF
amsl
APN
AQMP
BMP
Cal EPA
CAL FIRE
Caltrans
CARB
CBC
CCC
CEQA
CHc
City
CNEL
County
CO2
DAMP
dB
DOC
DOF
DTSC
EIR
EOP
EPA
ESA
FEMA
FIRM
FMMP
FRA
General Plan
GHG
Ambient Air Quality Standard
Assembly Bill
accessory dwelling unit
acre-feet
above mean sea level
Assessor's Parcel Number
Air Quality Management Plan
best management practices
California Environmental Protection Agency
California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection
California Department of Transportation
California Air Resources Board
California Building Code
California Coastal Commission
California Environmental Quality Act
methane
City of Seal Beach
community noise equivalent level
Orange County
carbon dioxide
Drainage Area Management Plan
decibel
California Department of Conservation
Department of Finance
Department of Toxic Substances Control
Environmental Impact Report
Emergency Operations Plan
Environmental Protection Agency
environmental site assessment
Federal Emergency Management Agency
Flood Insurance Rate Map
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program
Federal Responsibility Area
City of Seal Beach 2003 General Plan
greenhouse gas
iv
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Acronyms/ Abbreviations
GVVh
GWRS
HCD
HCP
HFC
Housing Element Update
ISMND
1/lratio
LCP
LHMP
LosAI USD
MG
MGD
MRZ
MWDOC
NCCP
NPDES
NOP
NOx
NWR
N2'>
OCSan
OCFA
OCTA
OCTAM
OC\ND
OE
OPR
03 PFC
PM2.s
PM,o
PRC
Project; proposed Project
RHD-20
RHNA
RPS
SB
II
gigawatt-hours
Groundwater Replenishment System
California Department of Housing and Community Development Habitat Conservation Plan
hydrofluorocarbons
2021-2029 Housing Element Update
Initial Study Mitigation Negative Declaration
ratio of improvement value to land value
Local Coastal Program
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan
Los Alamitos Unified School District
million gallons
million gallons per day
Mineral Resource Zone
Municipal Water District of Orange County
Natural Community Conservation Plan
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
Notice of Preparation
oxides of nitrogen
National Wildlife Refuge
nitrous oxide
Orange County Sanitation District
Orange County Fire Authority
Orange County Transportation Authority
Orange County Transportation Analysis Model
Orange County water District
Oil Extraction
Governor's Office of Planning and Research
ozone
perfluorocarbons
fine inhalable particulate matter
coarse inhalable particulate matter
Public Resources Code
City of Seal Beach General Plan Zoning Code Updates Project residential high density
Regional Housing Needs Assessment
Renewables Portfolio Standards
Senate Bill
V
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Acronyms/ Abbreviations
SBPD
SCAG
SCAQMD
SCE
SFs
SoCAB
SoCalGas
SR
SRA
SWPPP
TAC
USEPA
UVVMP
VHFHSZ
VMT
Seal Beach Police Department
Southern California Association of Governments
South Coast Air Quality Management Distrid
Southern California Edison
sulfur hexafluoride
South Coast Air Basin
Southern California Gas Company
State Route
State Responsibility Area
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
toxic air contaminant
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Urban Water Management Plan
Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone
vehide miles traveled
vi
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Introduction
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 PROJECTTITLE
City of Seal Beach Housing Element and Zoning Code Updates Project (Project, proposed Project)
1.2 LEAD AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
City of Seal Beach
Community Development Department
211 Eighth Street
Seal Beach, CA 90740
1.3 CONTACT PERSON AND PHONE NUMBER
Alexa Smittle, Community Development Director
Community Development Department
211 Eighth Street
Seal Beach, CA 90740
(562) 431-2527 x1313
1.4 PROJECT SPONSOR'S NAME AND ADDRESS
City of Seal Beach
211 Eighth Street
Seal Beach, CA 90740
1.5 PROJECT LOCATION
The Project site is currently comprised of 13 identified sites' dispersed throughout the City of Seal Beach, California (City; Seal Beach) and totaling approximately 278 acres. The City is located at the northwestern edge of Orange County (County), California. It borders the City of Long Beach and Los Angeles County to the northwest, the Orange County Cities of Los Alamitos to the north, Westminster to the east, Huntington Beach to the southeast, and the Pacific Ocean to the southwest, as shown in Figure
1. The City has a land area of approximately 13 square miles, as shown in Figure 2. ' The Housing Element proposes an increase in accessory dwelling units (ADUs) that may be located in any residential or mixed-use area by right. Though ADUs are exempt from CEQA, and their respective locations are unknown at this time, the Housing Element collectively refers to them as a ·site· (Opportunity Site 3) in order to reoognize the contribution they make to housing production as required by the Housing Element. Therefore, the potential ADU sites are identified as one collective Housing Opportunity Site resulting in a total of 13 identified Housing Opportunity Sites. 1-1
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Introduction
1.6 SURROUNDING LAND USES
As the existing land uses are comprised of a variety of land uses across the city, the surrounding land uses are similarly varied in character. They consist of residential development, vacant land, commercial and retail uses, parking lots, mobile home parks, institutional and industrial uses, and military uses as well as other urban and suburban land uses throughout the City.
1.7 PROJECT PURPOSE
In accordance with California Government Code Section 65584, projected housing needs for each dty and county in the Southern California region are prepared by Southern Cslifomia Association of Governments (SCAG) under a process known as the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA). The RHNA allocates regional housing needs by income-level among member jurisdictions. California law established the planning period for the current RHNA from June 30, 2021, to October 15, 2029.
The Housing Element is one of the seven state-mandated elements of a local General Plan and is required to be updated every eight years. The City is preparing the Housing Element Update to comply with the legal mandate requiring each local government to identify adequate sites for housing to meet the existing and projected housing needs for varying income-levels in the community. It is intended to provide the City with a comprehensive strategy for promoting the production of safe, decent and affordable housing and affirmatively furthering fair housing during the housing cycle.
In addition to induding goals, policies, and implementation programs regarding housing issues, housing elements must indude an inventory or list of housing sites at sufficient densities to accommodate a specific number of units at various levels of affordability assigned to the City by SCAG. The City's latest RHNA allocation calls for 1,243 new housing units, including 459 new units for residents in the low- and very low-income categories.
The Housing Element Update identifies Housing Opportunity Sites throughout the City, as shown on Figure 3, that have the potential for providing additional housing to meet the City's RHNA allocation. The sites are broken into two categories: (a) underutilized sites that do not require zoning code changes and (b) sites where zoning modifications are proposed. In Seal Beach, the Housing Opportunity Sites uniquely include two sites located on the Seal Beach Naval Weapons Station, where the City has no zoning authority, but housing development would present a change of use. Of the 13 Housing Opportunity Sites, six would require rezoning, the two Seal Beach Naval Weapons Station sites would require a change of use, one is proposed for a Specific Plan, and one would require an amendment to the Main Street Specific Plan (MSSP). The rezoning effort would also indude the establishment of a new zoning designation, "Mixed Commercial/Residential High Density" (MC/RHO), which would apply to five of the Housing Opportunity Sites. The new MC/RHO mixed-use zoning designation is needed in order to facilitate a density equivalent to Residential High Density (RHD)-46 (up to 46 units per acre) but with a minimum density of 40 units per acre.
As these Housing Opportunity Sites are intended to be redeveloped or rezoned, an increased densification and intensification of low- and moderate-income residential uses would result. 1-2
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Introduction
1.8 INTENDED USE OF THE INITIAL STUDY
This Initial Study is an informational document intended to inform the lead agency, other responsible or interested agencies, and the general public of potential environmental effects of the proposed Project.
The environmental review process has been established to enable public agencies to evaluate potential environmental consequences and to examine and implement methods of eliminating or reducing any potentially significant adverse impacts. This document is intended to aid the City in detennining the appropriate Califomia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) document needed to support agency discretionary approvals, pennits, and consultations.
The proposed Project is ultimately implementing the Housing Element Update; therefore, preparation of an evaluation pursuant to CEQA is required in order to consider the potential environmental impacts caused by Project implementation, including an evaluation of the new zoning and the new zoning designation resulting from Project implementation which would result in increased densification and intensification of residential uses. The Housing Element Update includes an inventory of Housing Opportunity Sites located throughout the City, some of which are intended to be rezoned to accommodate the RHNA allocation of new housing units that would also be suitable for low- and moderate-income units. 1-3
, ..... . _,,,,,.
ftl": o1 t • ..J ,. .......
,, .:.n , 1• • j c'.~o:.~~,:,' Buch
l • • 11 ,11
" ' .-. ,. ' '"·
-
1 caou ■,.,__.. '-lo01em~.--.
Ca>lll:lrw>ll'C>S~"-
L O.U -
.. , ,~,,', .. - .. _ l o\·Atl~I~ EI" IL
1..... ~,,,, ..
::~4.
~
p L•~ .. e,.,,h ~:. •
IIroillJ'
. ,,
Legend
CII
CltY of Seal Beach Boundary
I• • , r .. ,
r.u r
',.)lll.i A,11.1
CrtyofSu -· l BHCfl
,..... "- _...,,
.. _""',v.,.;,o'JJ '1,_
<11 .. _ ,,. it,,11 ... ~11 1'
'n•-..o ___,_.,011,-o OEIICC 1-SCS l'AO .....S -.RCA>;
0.S.N <l,H «--'-l
~S.,,,,,.,, f r ...a;,a,, \4Tt C.,, 0-....
{l<orl; o(o,,;) Ct l °"9f'Jlt,«1o'.-c, ---. -
~- ... _,,,...,. ... , DNiiii'a:araa m- O'I rlc,,.,ao, ~ - ~ - · H .:lld .,!!'• '-"...,_ Sta/"'«: NI• ,'GI ... ,. ■ - KY - ca,,,~- (111'1■, f'IOlff l- -1nul ■-- IO" .,, =• c, --• - .. .,. ~ .-co•ee ,,.,., ., • • -.111 s,,.,._, ....,..a --o _ IW', 'O' "" ~ l'I e-=i•,::,,nt 1:111"'\II. ' "" i:... ,.,i,,o,1 ..r.:,1.s Ml ,_t,,or, io,; ....tv'"O ,.,. .:c..ac:y - COl"'pi,P._ 111 :,,e HouslngElomentandZosw,gCode
_ Updatn ... Initial SM!y
!
...
RegJcnal Location
O.:--T,__.,.. _ .. ___ ___ .. _______ OOllfClflll--llJ--U- 00,_, .. llllt---- ....... _ .. __ ... -11111_,..,.,__dt.__,._ ..., ... , __ ,._,_,.,..,,,.... ... __ _,.., ..,,__r.,..., __ .,.,,. -
i:
.....
11 ... 1
0 1. 0:.0,<1.-iat S1'111'""" NAO •~ Stl:t~-
C. 'er"'a II F PS O~ Fft{
1. c.!;ii ~
Legend
Cl
1/
i Roumoor
,..
,,,:.
' t ,
·,. ~t· ~ -----7 ,/ ~ ::- · ,,,.,. "I!!.~
Ii / ·•.>- ..
..
.... :oi,• •• ~,- ..._,, ,. ----"-' ......
I ""~ ~~ j'' ,
j l l ....
l
~
1 .. ,. t .... '•~ ·' j
•'l ..... '111"
--- .. , .. 1
1,, •~•S
, ....... "''''·' "'
Cily of Seal Beach boundary
... _ .. oy ,(,Hl"r.;>)-1•••
ot .. -o.,AA""' :zon." I•
l'Ulf"tl-P.""ttet"'f"ll?Co,t) Cf.8CO U$G$ l'-.0 11:P'S I',,~ c.oe.n., IG'(.C.e,tQ!'!'.l..
Oror.r.:>t Sur-,ty E.,, J.e.N~ \/Ell £_,, OlN
(Hori; ~ ) (C) O~'ff!Mn 07ltl¢;,lQB, ro
O M:1&.r-• • ~..- , ' 71:,a,'..i HO o,, r'a-aa. :,,,,..c:,e<1 try dl'Hlrs H cu,:t n :r,., Notn MCbO'I S11 1'11:ee "" fCI -.e,-1 ,e,i trw ,,:,c.,o,cy • f'dlllt o:o,,oo,ei- ~ - .,...om-11!01'1 a,,c ,~., l'ICt M ,._ ._:,re ta • "'I ::• 01 0"> ... 0"1-,, .-w, :,,. ,-w.-c,,: ~-"" ;jlll a -~ !b'11!C: .-LJr"el -o ,_.t,,illly .... Cl~• -::,,1,eO "' l edrO-"IC •o,..,a,_ - U'III ,ec,o,.,-,: 1- ::(1 11111 •-• b«.tl 10, ....,.,ryt,; t"tl .:e,.taey • ...., OCl""i>t'!I- OI :Ill Houting Element and Zons,g Coclo
Updaln lnilialSlucly
z
--
City· of Seal Beach Map
Doo<;iaffler. "· "°"""""' nn-. c:reporlCI- on·-- "'""'cd br-•·· CIOO••t,. Ntetl ....... a ..... ,,.. not_,,,,_..., - ~ .. ell ... domllliona~ wlnot bl.......- r.,.,., ....,..,...,_,_ ...,1:11,,__a111or..,.,,.....-•....,..,.,~,.,,--.,-rorffll!.an:l!Ntr--•rus~tc,w,fr,n;t11e-,acyao:1-.i:,1e1.,,...c1u,o -
'A•r-,... "-t
',I f,l flfl
1 l I.)
C:lllfo mn
StJI•.• U111. •Jt• h
LOO) 0•."lr.h
VA L<'n<.l
~ , ch
t-k.-1llhc 11"J"
& tW!
Housing Opportunity Sites
1 1780 Paofic Coast Hwy
2. Leisure VVond
3. Accessory Dwelling Units"
4. Accu,010 Ston:,ge
5 The Shops at Rossmoor
6 Old Ranch Town Center
7 Seal Beach Plaza
8 Seal Beach Center
9, 99 Marina Onve
10. Old Ranch Country Club
11 . Naval Woapons Station PCH & Seal Beach Blvd
12. Waler S1orago Sile (City P1operty Navy Base)
13. Main Street
• s,.3 lor A«:•uorr Dw.ar,g, UtW• .,. not CW,xt•d ori th•m•p Tbe situ "°'-'kl 0. ~rwd •nd lout~ ,n _,, ,.-.n,.., or ,,...~.,..0,191:
Legend
! Housing Oppoe1unily Site
Q Crtyof SoalBeachboundary
Rossm oor Joml FolC~
ro,nm Conl'3!r
I 13v:ll t' ♦., lp)n
Su1un
Sunse,I Be-.:ich
IJ~_..,c~11
r..;0111;:<9
I.I F, Id• A,,
~ Stantec
S..e-:•e,,
-
Crty of Sul Beadl
tb:ttJ. !"'Ol'lg<oroJ (C) ~ V,~C0/11111UIO'l, r,:I
I.Coo-c;,,111Sv11..-, "14011iltlStlf:..,_,,,
Cldor"'IIV<'?SOtl»r ..
·~-
1. ~ so.re.. [_.,._ "'91£. c.-... - -• "'O't!"'..C~Oc,o CEICO USG5 JCAO .... ~, i,l!f' .... ~ C,-.,..0'1:,,QV4'0~W'!rl H:Ca::l f'i-...-..MOJan $ta~""'"«...,,_, l"'e«:CII#~ ~ ---~--~t""""°"""-0,«lll ....... ,,O tiot •-t/CNfO'•..., ::· Of ,,.. - """"OI" ..... tie "CICl'DOl'«.eG .... WI ... ~,A_ StlU"lllt _ .... _ P'IO rn:or••--, ,er a.,,. klOCll'N .,., r'«l"IIIIC "°"" .. ,-.o ..,. ,eQ1>9"'1 -Ill• M •1!5COr!- "I fO' ..,yt,g rs. ,ca,acw - -IM!ff,e,• {I ,.,.
Houang !:klmolltand Zona,g Codo Updlta• lnital S11.idr ,.,_,.. . ~
Housing Opportunity Sites
Map
C)am...,.r,.._,,,...,.,_,P __ Oft.,_P'O'tdmlll-nC1C1C1inll>e-.-a..cc ... ..,....- ... ___,_,,,_r1• .. _,.•.,.,•""-""11e-ror.,,, errcnr,_...__11e_....,_••-·--'°-""""..,."°"'•oct,.,.._...i11>e,__.,...~,.,vcrtp,g""_,...., __ ..,...r11 .. -
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Project Description
2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
2.1 PROJECT OVERVIEW
The Seal Beach City Council adopted the City of Seal Beach's Housing Element Update on February 7, 2022. In response to California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) comment, the City updated the Housing Element Update on August 24, 2023. The City is preparing the Housing Element Update to comply with the legal mandate requiring each local government to identify adequate sites for housing to meet the existing and projected housing needs for varying income-levels in the community. 11 is intended to provide the City with a comprehensive strategy for promoting the production of safe, decent and affordable housing and affirmatively furthering fair housing during the housing cycle.
The City's latest RHNA allocation calls for 1,243 new housing units, including 459 new units for residents in the low• and very low-income categories.
The Housing Element Update identifies an inventory of Housing Opportunity Sites throughout the City that have the potential for providing additional housing to meet the City's RHNA allocation. The sites are broken into two categories: (a) underutilized sites that do not require zoning code changes and (b) sites where zoning modifications are proposed. Of the 13 Housing Opportunity Sites, six would require rezoning, the two Seal Beach Naval Weapons Station sites would require a change of use, one is proposed for a Specific Plan, and one would require an amendment to the MSSP. The City's rezoning effort would also include the establishment of a new zoning designation, MC/RHO, which would apply to five of the Housing Opportunity Sites. The new MC/RHO mixed-use zoning designation is needed in order to facilitate a density equivalent to RHD-46 (up to 46 units per acre) but with a minimum density of 40 units per acre. This new zone district would facilitate housing for lower-income households as required by the state's RHNA allocation for the City and facilitate the inclusion of affordable units.
2.2 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
This Initial Study is prepared for the City lo evaluate potential environmental impacts resulting from the implementation of the City's recent Housing Element Update, which was adopted by the Seal Beach City Council on February 7, 2022, and updated on August 24, 2023 in response to HCD comments. II identifies the City's housing conditions and needs and establishes the policies and programs that comprise the City's strategy to a=mmodate projected housing needs, including the provision of adequate housing for lower-income households and for special-needs populations (i.e., unhoused people, seniors, single-parent households, large families, and persons with disabilities). The City is continuing to work with HCD to certify the Housing Element Update. The Housing Element Update would bring the element into compliance with state legislation and the City's current RHNA allocation.
In March 2021 , SCAG adopted its 6th cycle RHNA allocation plan, covering the planning period of October 2021 through October 2029. During this cycle, SCAG received a need of 1,341,827 new housing units, which was distributed to all 197 SCAG jurisdictions (SCAG 2023). HCD compliance requires a demonstration by the City that it can meet its "fair share· of the RHNA allocation of 1,243 new housing units.
m 2-1
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT A ND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Project Description
The Housing Element Update includes the following ccmponents, as required by state law (City of Seal Beach 2022):
An analysis of the City's demographic and housing characteristics and trends; An evaluation of land, financial. and administrative resources available to address the City's housing goals;
A review of potential ccnstraints, both governmental and non-governmental, to meet the City's housing needs; and
A Housing Action Plan for the 2021-2029 planning period, including goals policies and programs The Housing Element Update identifies the following strategies and programs that focus on the following major goals:
Facilitate the development of a variety of housing types for all inccme-levels to meet the existing and future needs of residents;
Assist in the development of adequate housing to meet the needs of low- and moderate-inccme households;
Address and, where appropriate and legally possible; remove governmental ccnstraints to the maintenance, improvement and development of housing;
Maintain and enhance the existing quality of residential neighborhoods in Seal Beach; and Affirmatively further fair housing opportunities for all persons regardless of race, cclor, national origin, ancestry, religion, sex, marital status, income, or familial status.
The City's latest RHNA allocation calls for 1,243 new housing units, including 459 new units for residents in the low- and very low-income categories. The City must demonstrate to HCD that the Housing Element Update has adequate land capacity and implementing policies to accommodate its RHNA allocation. In addition, HCD reccmmends that cities identify a "buffer" of 15 to 30 percent above the stated RHNA allocation to account for "No Net Loss· provisions of Senate Bill (SB) 166, which requires that the land inventory and site identification programs in the Housing Element Update always include sufficient sites to accommodate the unmet RHNA. Based upon HCD's buffer policy, Seal Beach must plan for a minimum of 1,430 new housing units. In its current iteration, the August 2023 Housing Element plans for 1,833 new housing units to be ccnservative in its approach to the RHNA and anticipating additional modifications may be required by HCD.
2.2 1 Rezoning and Creating of New Zoning Designation
Program 1 B of the Housing Element Update commits to a rezoning program that facilitates housing for lower-income households as required by the state's RHNA allocation for the City. As described, in order to implement housing development at some of the proposed Housing Opportunity Sites and address constraints on the development of housing for a variety of income-levels, the City must establish a new m 2-2
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Project Description
zoning designation, MC/RHO, which would apply to five of the Housing Opportunity Sites, facilitating residential development at what are generally commercial sites currently. The new MC/RHO mixed-use zoning designation would facilitate a residential density of RHD-46 (up to 46 units per acre) with a minimum density of 40 units per acre to better facilitate development of housing affordable to lower income levels in accordance with HCD policy. Other changes to zoning designations include implementation of a proposed Specific Plan which includes proposed housing and for which an independent Environmental Impact Report is being prepared: revisions to the existing MSSP to allow for second-story residential use: and rezoning a former oil extraction property to residential use, The actions described above would result in a change to the permitted uses and development standards on eight of the Housing Opportunity Sites to align with the densities identified in the Housing Opportunity Sites Residential Development Potential list (Table 4, below). In addition, the City has a unique circumstance with the two sites located on Seal Beach Naval Weapons Station, where the Housing Element proposes a change in use, but the City has no zoning authority, therefore these sites will not be rezoned through the City's Zoning Code but growth is nonetheless planned for in the Housing Element.
Housing Element Update Program 1 B
The proposed new zoning designation of MC/RHO will consider how to accommodate State requirements and policies to allaw for: a minimum residential density of 40 units per acre and maximum residential density of 46 units per acre on larger, developed sites large enough size to permit: at least 16 units; exclusively residential uses: at least 50 percent of the building floor area of a mixed-use development to be dedicated to residential uses; and housing by-right with at least 20 percent of the units affordable to lower-income households. The definitions of "persons and families of low- and moderate-income,• "lowerincome households,· and •very law-income households• as set forth in Health and Safety Code Sections 50079.5, 50093, and 50150 shall apply. The City shall engage with affected property awners, the Building Industry Association, affordable housing developers, and other stakeholders during the zoning process to ensure the development standards can result in the development of the maximum number of units allowed and facilitate the inclusion of affordable units.
2.3 REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
SCAG has allocated the region's 1,341,827 housing unit growth needs among the 197 jurisdictions in the region, including cities and counties, through the adopted its S'h cycle RHNA allocation plan, covering the planning period of October 2021 through October 2029. The RHNA represents the minimum number of housing units that the City's sites inventory must accommodate for in its Housing Element Update, through its General Plan and Zoning. The City's RHNA allocation is 1,243 new housing units, which is distributed among four income categories, consisting of 258 very low-, 201 low-, 239 moderate-, and 545 above moderate-income units (SCAG 2021 ).
II 2-3
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Project Description
2.3.1 Existing Site Conditions
The City has identified an inventory of sites across all areas of the city to implement programs to meet its RHNA. The City's current base zoning, induding the General Plan land use designation implemented by zoning designation, are provided in Table 1, below.
Table 1: Current Zoning and General Plan Land Use Designations Zoning Abbreviation General Plan Designation
Implemented by Zoning
Base Residential Zoning Districts
Residential Low Density - 9' RLD-9 Residential Low Density - Residential Low Density - 15' RLD-15 Residential Low Density Residential Medium Density - 10• RMD-18 Residential Medium Density Residential High Density - 20' RHD-20 Residential High Density Residential High Density - 33' RHD-33 Residential High Density Residential High Density - 46' RHD-46 Residential High Density Base Mixed-Use, Commercial, and Industrial Districts
Limited Commercial/Residential Medium Density<' L-C/RMD Mixed Use Main Street Specific Plan MSSP Main Street Specific Plan Professional Office PO Professional Office
Service Commercial CS/SC Service Commercial
General Commercial GC General Commercial
light Manufacturing LM Light Manufacturing
Oil Ex1raction OE Oil Extraction
Base Public and Semi-Public Park Districts
Public and Semi-Public Facilities PS Community Facility and School Recreation/Golf RG Open Space - Golf
Base Military, Open Space, and Park Districts
Military M Military
Beach BEA Beach
Open Space Natural OS-N Open Space
Open Space Parks and Recreation OS-PR Park
Overlay District and Specific Plan Zone Regulations
Residential Conservation Overlay RC-0 All
Planned Unit Development Overlay PUD/PD All
Commercial/Park C/P All
Coastal Zone CZ All
Specific Plan Regulation SPR All
Source. City of Seal Beach, General Plan Zonmg Map, 2013; City of Seal Beach Municipal Code and Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 11 1 05.030, 2021
2-4
I
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Project Description
Zoning I Notes:
Abbreviation I General Plan Designation
Implemented by Zoning
• Typical single-unit, and small, zero-lot line neighbomoods at a base density up to 9 or 15 dwelling units per net acre respectively.
11 Duplexes, townhouse proiecls, apartments. and small-lot, single-unit res1dent1al uses, at a density of 15 to 18 dwelling units per net acre Add1tJonal density may be achieved through density bonuses c Mutt1-unit res1dent1al developments at a base density of 20 to 46 dwelling units per net acre. Add1t1onal denSlty may be actueved through density bonuses.
a Limited commercial and office uses in conJunction with residential uses.
2.3.2 Housing Opportunity Sites Categories
An important component of the City's Housing Element Update is the identification of sites for future housing development, including an evaluation of the adequacy of those sites in fulfilling the City's share of regional housing needs. Seal Beach is nearly built-out with almost no vacant developable land remaining.
Therefore, the site inventory must rely primarily on non-vacant sites.
The inventory of Housing Opportunity Sites addresses fair housing objectives by providing opportunities for affordable housing throughout the city. Potential underutilized sites and ADUs also create opportunities for affordable housing dispersed throughout the city in low-density residential neighborhoods, thereby expanding affordable housing choices. The Housing Opportunity Sites are not concentrated in low-resource areas. The sites are broken into two categories: (a) underutilized sites that do not require zoning code changes and (b) sites where zoning modifications are proposed.
Underutilized Sites
The Housing Opportunity Sites inventory consists of three underutilized sites with realistic potential for residential development and potential ADUs, as summarized in Table 2. The Housing Element proposes an increase in AD Us that may be located in any residential or mixed-use area by right. Though ADUs are exempt from CEQA, and their respective locations are unknown at this time, the Housing Element collectively refers to them as a "site· (Opportunity Site 3) in order to recognize the contribution they make to housing production as required by the Housing Element. Therefore, the potential ADU sites are identified as one collective Housing Opportunity Site resulting in a total of 13 identified Housing Opportunity Sites.
The City's RHNA allocation for the current cycle calls for a=mmodating 1,243 new housing units at low-. moderate-, and above moderate-income levels. Of this total allocation, there are eight planned or recently approved ADUs that are anticipated for development, as well as currently planned or recently approved on underutilized sites, which can be counted towards the City's overall unit requirement.
Because the current capacity of these underutilized sites is not sufficient to fully a=mmodate the RHNA allocation in all income categories, due to zoning and other limitations. proposed rezone sites have been identified, as shown in Table 2, below.
2-5
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Project Description
Table 2: Underutilized Sites Inventory (Rezoning Not Required) Asaum
eel Lower- Mocf•
Site General Appro Exfs1fng aenstty rncom &-
No. Addre5SIAPN Planf X. Onslte (DWelll 9 rncome
Zoning Acras Use(s) .ng Dwelll . ,0we11in UnHs ng ,gl.inHs per Units •Acre)
1 1780Pacific Limited 0.25 Older 20 - 5
Coast Hwy Commer- convenienc
(APN 199-061- cial/ e store;
01) RMD-18 zoning
allows
mixed-use
2 Leisure World Residential 5.5 RV 30 74 38
(APN 095-691- High Storage
04) DensityPlanned
Community
3 Accessory All N/A Residential NIA 36 14
Dwelling Units Residential and Mixedand Mixed- Use Zones Use Zones
TOTAL 110 57
Above
Mocfera
ta- Total
Income .. UnHs
Dwellln
g Units
- 5
38 150
- 50
38 205
Source: City of Seal Beach 2021-2029 Housing Element Update, Redline August 24, 2023 (City of Seal Beaeh 2023a).
Proposed Rezone Sites
To accommodate the balance of the RHNA allocation and provide the required unit buffer, the City conducted an evaluation of potential properties where land use regulations could be amended to create additional opportunities for housing or mixed-use development, and 1 o sites have been identified for further evaluation to determine the most appropriate parcels to be rezoned. Due to the lack of vacant and underutilized sites in the city. the sites were identified and analyzed in light of the development standards for their proposed zoning designation.
Initially, all parcels in the city were evaluated through a process of elimination based on criteria set by HCD. Where housing units could not be located at sites under present zoning, the City examined nonresidential areas where zoning amendments could facilitate residential development. A Housing Element Ad Hoc Committee was established and held two meetings to assist in identifying and evaluating potential sites for housing development. In addition, City staff contacted several property owners to assess interest in multi-family or mixed-use redevelopment. With the exception of the City-owned parcel on the Seal Beach Naval Weapons Station which was an addition to the draft Housing Element following the withdrawal of a site owned by the County of Orange, the sites listed in Table 3 were also reviewed by the Planning Commission and City Council at public hearings, and property owners and other interested stakeholders had the opportunity to provide comments on sites that should be considered for additional residential development.
IJ 2-6
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Project Description
The City analyzed the most current parcel-level data to determine which sites were most appropriate for inclusion into the site inventory and to estimate the number of additional units that are likely to be developed. Bearing in mind that most of the developable land within the City consists of established residential uses, most of these areas were eliminated from consideration, as land assembly in a singlefamily neighborhood was considered infeasible. To ensure sites selected for the site inventory do not have existing uses that are impediments to housing development, an analysis was conducted to select sites that are most likely to develop during the planning period. Development likelihood and feasibility was determined by a number of different variables, including the improvement-to-land value ratio (Ill ratio), existing lot coverage, lot size, Mure development potential, and existing uses. As the 1/L ratio serves as an indicator of the likelihood of redevelopment, according to the Housing Element Update, a 1/L ratio or less than 1.0 for commercial and multi-family residential properties indicates that the parcels are underutilized, with a higher potential for residential infill redevelopment.
Table 3: Proposed Rezone Sites (Unless Military)
Assessor's Eicfatfng Estimated Site Parcel Approximate Current Proposed No. Site Name Number Onalte ACIUS Deveropable Zonfng Zoning (APN) Use(s) Acres
4 Aca.lrate 095-791-18 Vehicle and 4 1.8 RHD-20 MC/RHD
Storage boat storage
5 The Shops at 086-492-51 Retail, office, 27 10 GC MC/RHD Rossmoor fast food,
grocery and
pharmacy
6 Old Ranch 130-861- Existing 26 5 GC MC/RHD
Town Center 14, -15, - commercial
16, -17, - center with
18, -19, - bank,
20,-21,- surface
22, -23, - parking,
24, -25, - restaurants,
26, -27 department
stores, retail,
services,
Ralph's
supermarket,
and CVS
Phannacy
7 Seal Beach 095-641- Existing 7 2.5 CS-SC MC/RHD
Plaza 44, -49, • commercial
55, -56, -57 center with
Chase Bank,
retail,
market, drive
through
restaurant,
and medical
and
professional
offices
It 2-7
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Project Description
Assessor's Existing Ea1fmatad . Site Parcel Approximate No. Site Name Number -Onslte - Acres Developable
(APN) Use(s) Aci'as' •
8 Seal Beach 043-260- Existing 9 4
Center 02, -05 commercial
centerwith
CVS
Pharmacy,
retail,
services,
restaurant,
and market
9 99 Marina Drive 199-011-10 Former oil 4.3 4.3
separation
facility with
abandoned
handball
court
10 Old Ranch 130-012-55 Portion of 155 4
Country Club existing golf
course
11 Naval Weapons 043-150-23 Portion of 22 4
Station PCH& Naval
Seal Beach Weapons
Blvd ... Station Seal
Beach
12 water Storage - Water and 2.75 2
Sile (City Equipment
Property Navy Storage
Base)"
13 Main Street - 043-112- Existing 15 NIA
21, -22, - Main Street
23, -28, - Specific Plan
29, -34, - commercial
35, -36, - district,
41; indudlng
043-113- retail,
04, -08, 14, services,
-15, -36, - offices,
37, -42, - parking
46, -48, 51; areas,
199-053- restaurants
and bars, 18, -19, - theater, 20, -21, - medical 22, -23, - offices, plant 24, -25, - nursery and 26, -28, - other shops 29, -30, - and retallers 31; 199-043-
10; -11, -
12, -13, - 14, -15, -
Currant -Proposed
.Zoning ,zonlng
SC MC/RHO
OE RHD-33
RG SP
M NIA
M NIA
MSSP MSSP
2-8
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Project Description
Site
No. Site Name
Assessor's
Parcel
Number
(APN)
16. -17. -
18. - 19. -
20;
199-033-
02;
199-034-
01 , -02, 03,
-04, -05, -
06, -07, -
08, -09, •
10, -1 1, •
12, -13, .
14, -15, •
16, -17, •
36;
199-044-
19, -20, -
21 , -22, •
23, -24, -
25, -26, -
27, -28, -
29, -30, -
31 , -32, -
33, -34
Existlng
Onslte
Use(s)
Approximate
Acres
Estimated
Oevelopable
Acres
Source: City of Seal Beach 2021-2029 Housing Element Update. August 2023.
Current
Zoning
Proposed
Zoning
-
Notes:· The City will create a new Mixed Commercial/Residential High Density (MC/RHO). The new mixed-use zoning designation would need to be created to facilitate a density equivalent to Residential High Density (RHD)-46, with a minimum density of 40 units per acre.
•• Zoning Not Applicable
··• Specific Plan Amendment Required
•••• Land Use Change I Rezoning Required
GC = Commercial General
OSG = Open Space Golf
OE = Oil Extraction
RG = Recreation Go~
CS = Commercial Service
SC = Service Commercial
MC/RHO= Mixed Commercial/Residential High
M = Military
MSSP = Main Street Specific Plan
2.3.3 Housing Opportunity Site 0escripflons
The Housing Element Update currently includes descriptions for the Housing Opportunity Sites, with an explanation of the methodology for the sites that are currently developed with various uses. With respect to existing utility infrastructure, such as water. wastewater, drainage systems, and dry utilities, there are no known limitations that would preclude the potential development and increased intensification of uses 2-9
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Project Description
at each of the Housing Opportunity Sites. A description of the Housing Opportunity Sites is provided below, as taken from the August 24, 2023 Housing Element Update (City of Seal Beach 2023a).
Site 1 - 1780 Pacific Coast Highway (No Rezoning)
Location: 1780 Pacific Coast Highway (PCH; Pacific Coast Highway), at the eastern comer of the intersection of Pacific Coast Highway and Seal Beach Boulevard. The site has housing to the rear of it, and retail to the north. Across the street to the south is the Naval Weapons Station, and to the west are single family residential uses.
Size: 0.25 aae
Current Use: retail, specifically a small liquor store and a bait shop.
Current Zoning: Limited Commercial/Residential Medium Density (LC/RMD) Reason For Selection: This parcel is developed with an older commercial building currently occupied by a liquor/convenience store. The site is immediately adjacent to housing, with access to goods and services.
Assumed Development Capacity: This zoning designation allows residential use at up to 20 units per acre. The site can reasonably accommodate a ground floor commercial use and parking, with five second-story housing units. Because of its small size, this parcel has been listed in the moderate-income site inventory, as shown in Table 4, below.
Site 2 - Leisure World (No Rezoning)
Location: Leisure World is a large, high-density residential senior community generally bound by Westminster Boulevard, Seal Beach Boulevard, Interstate (1)-405, and the Los Alamitos Flood Control Channel. The community currently has 6,608 units. The opportunity site within the development is located along the eastern border, about 0.33 mile from the southwestern comer of the community.
Size: 5.5 acres
Current Use: Recreational vehicle storage
Current Zoning: Residential High Density-Planned Development (RHO-PD) Reason For Selection: The underutilized site is located in a community that, while not income-restrided, offers a variety of affordable housing options with more than 75 percent of the population in Leisure World consisting of low- to moderate-income households. The existing site zoning allows for residential highdensity development.
Assumed Development Capacity: An additional 150 units can be accommodated at a density of 30 units per acre on approximately 5 acres presently devoted to recreational vehicle storage. As 75 percent of the population in Leisure World currently consists of low- to moderate-income households, Table 4, II 2-10
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Sludy
Project Description
below, projects half of the units as lower-income, one quarter at moderate, and the balance at market to be conservative.
Site 3 -Accessory Dwellfng Units (No Rezoning)
Location: Throughout the City, in all residential and mixed-use zones.
Current zoning: All Residential and Mixed-Use Zones
Reason For Selection: ADUs represent a significant opportunity for affordable housing, particularly for single persons or small households including the elder1y, college students, young adults, and caregivers.
Assumed Development Capacity: While interest in ADUs has not historically been high in Seal Beach, recent changes to state law have increased awareness and interest. It has conservatively been assumed that 50 ADUs will be built during this planning cyde. Given that ADUs can introduce low-income units in high resource areas, the City would undertake a number of steps to promote the development of ADUs and consider development of incentives to make ADUs affordable to very low-income households. The City would monitor the effectiveness of its efforts twice a year and make adjustments as necessary.
SCAG conducted a regional survey and reported the results in August 2020. SCAG's research supports an assumption that 73 percent of ADUs could be affordable to lower-income households in the County (even assuming a 50/50 mix of one- and two-person households). Evidence from other jurisdictions throughout California indicates that between 17 and 50 percent of ADUs may be rent-free as the property owners provide housing for their adult children and/or aging parents. The inventory in Table 4, below, implements SCAG's assumption of 73 percent of units at lower-income, and the balance at moderate. income.
Site 4 - Accurate Storage (Rezoning Required)
Location: 1011 Seal Beach Boulevard. This site is bordered by office, commercial and light industrial uses to the north and west, by the City Police Station across Adolfo Lopez Drive to the south, and by the Seal Beach Naval Weapons Station across Seal Beach Boulevard to the east.
Size: 4.4 acres
Current Use: Self storage facility
Current Zoning: High Density Residential (RHD-20)
Reason For Selection: This site has been selected as a candidate housing site due to underutilized parking onsite, its proximity to services, and interest from the property owner. There are no known environmental constraints on this property, and the site has access to employment and transit routes.
Assumed Development Capacity: As the current zoning did not result in redevelopment of this site with residential uses, the development assumptions have been revised. The 1/L ratio is less than 1.0 (0.54), indicating a likelihood for redevelopment, with conversion of the outdoor storage being the most likely to intensify in value. The indoor storage could remain in place and not be an impediment to development 2-11
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Project Description
due to the site plan and overall quality of development and maintenance of the site. Therefore, it is assumed that only 1.8 acres of the site will redevelop to housing, instead of the entire 4.4 acres. This site is proposed for rezoning to MC/RHD, allowing a density of 46 units per acre, yielding up to 83 units, or more if a density bonus is employed. However, given the existing onsite buildings and the resulting limitations to development design, the projected number of units has been reduced to 59. Because the presumed developable area is less than two acres, Table 4, below, projects a conservative estimate of only 1 O percent at lower-income and 1 O percent at moderate-income, despite a proposed density of 46 units per acre.
Site 5 - The Shops at Rossmoor (Rezoning Required)
Location: This multi-address retail center is located on the west side of Seal Beach Boulevard between St. Cloud Drive and Rossmoor Center Way.
Size: 27 acres
Current Use: Retail center, with uses including Marshalls, Kohl's, Ulla. Sprouts Farmers Market, and Burlington
Current Zoning: General Commercial (CG)
Reason For Selection: This site was selected due to an abundance of underutilized parking accompanied by owner interest in development of housing units. The site's 1/L ratio is less than 1.0 (0.85), meaning the site is economically underutilized, despite being a generally successful retail center. A new mixed-use zone would allow for greater flexibility to utilize the land. High-density residential uses are located adjacent to the property to the west, as such the site's proposed high-density use would be consistent with surrounding uses.
Assumed Development Capacity: The site is 27 acres, and surface parking occupies approximately 19 acres. It is assumed that 1 O of the acres could be developed with housing. This site is proposed for rezoning to MC/RHO, allowing a density of 46 units per acre, yielding up to 460 units, exclusive of a density bonus. Because of the ample development potential, Table 4, below, projects 25 percent of units at lower-income, 25 percent at moderate-income, and the balance at market rate.
Sile 6 - Old Ranch Town Center (Rezoning Required)
Location: This multi-address retail center is on the east side of Seal Beach Boulevard, between the Old Ranch Country Club golf course and Plymouth Drive.
Size: 26 acres
Current Us e: Retail center including stores such as Target and Ralph's supermarket.
Current Zoning: General Commercial (GC)
Reason For Selection: Similar to the Shops at Rossmoor, the Old Ranch Town center has a significant amount of underutilized parking, and primarily big box uses. The addition of housing to this site is feasible 2-12
Commented [SP3J: This is a very successful shopping
center, much valued by the community for it's
accessible location, accessible parking, and attactive
and welcoming street facing design that invites us in to socialize, eat, rest, and shop. The EIR needs to assess if and exactly where there is an excess of parking,
because that is not completely evident. If existing
parking needs to be replaced with a multi-story parking garage in order to accommodate new residences, the
inviting street-facing aesthetics could be ruined, hidden I
by an ugly concrete parking garage. We shouldn't have
to tum Seal Beach's successful suburban shopping
centers into an over-shadowing urban concrete blight
like the Santa Monica Promenade. This potential
impact on commerce and aesthetics needs to be
studied in the EIR. _ ___ _j
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Project Description
as it is immediately adjacent to goods and services, has access along a major thoroughfare, and can integrate with the scale of the existing development. The 1/L ratio ranges by parcel, with the largest parcel at 0.95 and the second largest parcel at 0.07.
Assumed Development Capacity: It is assumed 20 percent of the center could be developed or redeveloped with housing uses. This site is proposed for rezoning to MC/RHO, allowing a density of 46 units per acre, yielding up to 239 units. Because of the development potential, Table 4, below, projects 25 percent of units at lower-income, 25 percent at moderate-income, and the balance at market.
Site 7 - Seal Beach Plaza (Rezoning Required)
Location: This multi-address retail center is at the northwest comer of Seal Beach Boulevard and Westminster Boulevard. Two churches and Leisure World are to the north and west, and generally the Naval Weapons Station surrounds the other sides.
Size: 7 acres
Current Use: Retail and office/service uses.
Current Zoning: Service Commercial (SC)
Reason For Selection: This site's Ill ratio is less than 1.0 (0.72). Similar to other retail plazas, the site is underutilized with large parking areas. The site offers access to goods and services. The site is located adjacent to Leisure World where existing development is high-density.
Assumed Development Capacity: This site can be redeveloped entirely or partially as a mixed-use project; however, it is assumed that residential uses would be developed on 2.5 acres of the site. This site is proposed for rezoning to MC/RHO, allowing a density of 46 units per acre, yielding up to 115 units.
However. due to the smaller developable area, Table 4, below, conservatively estimates 10 percent of units at lower-income, 10 percent at moderate-income, and BO percent at market rate.
Site 8 - Seal Beach Center (Rezoning Required)
Location: This retail plaza is located on Pacific Coast Highway, between Balboa Drive and Bolsa Avenue. It is directly across Pacific Coast Highway from Main Street.
Size: 9 acres
Current Use: The center consists of two anchor stores, a Pavilions supermarket and a CVS Pharmacy, along with several smaller retail and restaurant tenant spaces.
Current Zoning: Service Commercial (SC)
Reason For Selection: This site has an I/L ratio less than 1.0 (0.72), indicating it is underutilized and could perform to a higher capacity. Its location provides walkability and access to goods and services, induding an elementary school. A small mixed-use project could be undertaken using available parking m 2-13
l
Commented (SP4J: Please see previous comment on
within existing commercial parking areas. "'
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Project Description
and redeveloping portions of the site with housing above retail. The property representatives have expressed an interest in mixed-use development as a future possibility to increase site utility.
Assumed Development Capacity: It is assumed that residential uses would be developed on 4.5 acres of the site. This site is proposed for rezoning to MC/RHO, allowing a density of 46 units per acre, yielding up 207 units, without using a density bonus. However, because the site is adjacent to low-density singlefamily use, and greater setbaeks or step-backs may be appropriate in the revised zoning code, a lower development threshold of 120 units and 4 acres of developable area is assumed. While four acres is ample development capacity, because this opportunity site is directly across the street from single-family homes, Table 4, below, conservatively estimates 15 percent of the units at lower-income levels. 15 percent at moderate-income, and the balance at market despite being zoned at 46 units per acre.
Site 9 - 99 Marina (Rezoning Required)
Location: 99 Marina Drive, northeast of Marina Drive and First Street intersection.
Size: 4.3 acres
Current Use: Vacant. A handball court is located on the western edge of the property and the City maintains a small section of the property around the court as the court is located adjacent to a public park.
Current Zoning: Oil Extraction (OE)
Reason For Selection: Oil extraction activities at the site no longer occur and the current property owners (Exxon and Chevron) are actively marketing the property. City staff has received inquiries on the property from potential buyers and support or residential development at the site, from the community.
Additionally, the site is surrounded by existing residential uses.
Assumed Development Capacity: A density of 33 units per acre is proposed at this site to meet the default density thresholds established under Government Code Section 65583.2(c)(3)(B)). However, this location may have additional development standards imposed by the California Coastal Commission, similar to the adjacent development, where a portion of the site was left as open space. Thus, the total housing production anticipated at the site is 90 units, all or which are conservatively assumed to be above moderate-income.
Site 1 O - Old Ranch Country Club (Rezoning/land Use Change Required; Specific Plan Required)
Location: The entire facility, approximately 155 acres in size. is located north of Lampson Avenue, and south or the Joint Forces Training Base and Old Ranch Town Center, just east or Seal Beach Boulevard.
The proposed housing sites are located along the western edge or the property, one near the intersection of Lampson Avenue and Seal Beach Boulevard, and the other further south, across Lampson Avenue from the Ivy Park assisted living facility.
Size: 155 acres
2-14
Commented [SPSJ: Please see comment on page 2-12 1
regarding potential parking. commercial. and aesthetic
impacts of new residential developments in existing
retail shopping centers __ . __ _
--- ------,
l Commented [SP6]: This area appears to be listed on
the Geo Tracker as being in need of remedial action. II is not clear that a site assessment has been completed I I
to determine the level of cleanup that will be required. II may not be feasible to clean the site up to residential standards within an appropriate lime frame, or ever.
Proposing new low income housing on a former waste
site could create environmental justice issues. The EIR needs to study these issues and potential constraints.
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT ANO ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Project Description
Current Use: Golf course and supporting amenities.
Current Zoning: Recreation Golf (RG)
Reason For Selection: At this time, the landowner has a development application in process with the City for the development of 116 family units and 51 senior units.
Assumed Development Capacity: As this is an active development application, the numbers proposed by the property owner are now the assumed development, for a total of 167 units. All units have been assumed at above moderate-income levels. The existing development application is for a specific plan, which would guide development of the housing as well as a hotel and modifications to the existing clubhouse and golf facilities. An EIR is being prepared for the proposed development. Approval of a specific plan is a discretionary action by the City Council. A new development agreement between the developer and the property owner is expected to be a part of the development application that will ultimately be considered by the City.
Site 11 - Naval Weapons Station PCH & Seal Beach Boulevard (Zoning Nol Applicable) Location: Within the Seal Beach Naval Weapons Station, fronting Pacific Coast Highway and Seal Beach Boulevard.
Size: 22 acres
Current Use: Military use; the site is mostly vacant except for a concrete training pad and a 960 square foot prefabricated metal building used as a classroom.
Current Zoning: Military (M)
Reason For Selection: This site was selected in collaboration with the U.S. Navy (Navy), which successfully requested letters of interest to develop this site. The Navy's vision includes uses that would serve military personnel, including the potential for housing. The Navy has already initiated environmental review under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). This site is generally undeveloped and is under singular ownership. The site is located in proximity to goods and services, including an elementary school. A mixed-use development, including housing, is generally anticipated, and assumes 150 residential units in a vertical and/or horizontal mixed-use development. These assumptions were arrived at in cooperation with Navy representatives. Because census data shows lower-income levels at the Seal Beach Naval Weapons Station currently, Table 4, below, assumes one-third of the units at lower-income, one-third at moderate-income, and one-third at above moderate-income. Despite being within the City, this is federal property; therefore, the City has no zoning authority over this area.
Site 12 - Water Storage Site (City Properly Navy Base) (Zoning Not Applicable) Location: Within the Seal Beach Naval Weapons Station, approximately 1,000 feet east of Seal Beach Boulevard, near the housing community off Anchor Way.
Size: 2. 75 acres
2-15
I
Commented [SP7]: This area seems to be prone to
persistent historical flooding and other drainage
problems. which need to be studied In the EIR.
Additional development could exacerbate the
problems, and/or widen the impacts to the additional
homeowners. The potential high cost of flood
insurance may make this area unfit for low or middle
~ me housing.
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Project Description
Current Use: Water and equipment storage
Current Zoning: Military (M)
Reason For Selection: This parcel is owned by the City of Seal Beach. While the water storage facility is in active use and needs to remain in use, the balance of the site has comparably minimal utility. As a part of the Housing Element process, the City looked for opportunities to leverage property it owns. This parcel has capacity for greater utilization. Potential development of the site has been presented to Navy staff. Presently, the Navy is amenable to considering a project that could benefit both the Navy and the City, such as affordable housing for veterans.
Assumed Development Capacity: Depending on the exact size and configuration of the parcel, at least 65 units could be a=mmodated on a parcel of approximately two acres. Presumed to be an affordable housing development, 50 of the units are assumed to be at lower-income levels and 15 of the units at moderate-income, as shown in Table 4, below.
Site 13 - Main Street Specific Plan Area (Specific Plan Amendment Required) Location: The Main Street Specific Plan area covers is the traditional downtown commercial core of Old Town, primarily defined by Main Street.
Size: 21 acres
Current Use: Mixed-use, including retail, offices, micro-scale manufacturing, and residential.
Current Zoning: Main Street Specific Plan (MSSP)
Reason For Selection: The area provides for a pedestrian-oriented mix of offices and retail uses with some residential units, which were built prior to adoption of the MSSP. Because Main Street is already developed as a pedestrian friendly area surrounded by residential neighborhoods, existing uses would not be an impediment to the expansion or residential units in this area.
Assumed Development Capacity: Although the area could accommodate a sizable number of residential units if the area is redeveloped, it is recognized that such redevelopment is very unlikely to occur during this planning period. Consolidation of lots under fragmented ownership would be challenging. A two-story height limit has been imposed in this area by voters, further affecting redevelopment opportunities. However, some parcels could accommodate one or more units towards the rear of the lot and/or above an existing single-story retail building. Space exists on some sites to develop units over open parking areas, as well. A physical inventory of the area revealed potential to a=mmodate 163 units if the City allows a minimum unit size standard of approximately 400 square feet.
The proposed MSSP amendment would allow for residential uses on second stories or fronting rear alleys, such that Main Street itself remains a retail environment. At these small sizes, these uses would be ancillary, most akin to accessory dwelling units and, therefore, have income-levels have been categorized the same way, with 73 percent at lower-income levels and the balance at moderate-income, as shown in Table 4, below.
2-16
Commented [SPBJ: The two-story limit. which was
I
approved by a significant majority of voters through
Measure Z, has yet to be codified in the City Zoning
Code. even though that code modification was
specifically stipulated in the language of Measure Z. It would be helpful to point this out in the EIR so that j questions regarding this Issue can be clarified and c~ through zoning code changes.
Commented [SP9J: The EIR should address potential
parking shortages and related impacts created if
residential units are placed in existing parking areas
I
located •towards the rear of the lot" of existing retail.
The EIR should address. and suggest mitigation for,
the potential loss of historic, and aesthetically pleasing architecture and facades of the existing one story
commercial buildings. Those building may need to be
demolished or significantly altered in order to place a new second story residential unit on top. How will the
successful commerce of Main Street, which relies on
the historic character and charm of Main street building facades be preserved and not destroyed? We need to
enhance and preserve Main Street, not ruin it. We've
I
seen recent new Main Street construction that
diminishes, rather than enhances. the unique treasure
that is Main Street. That is why this issue needs to be addressed in the EIR and given the higher level of
pubic review Iha! an EIR receives.
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Project Description
2.3.4 Housing Opportunity Sites Resldentlal Development Potential As shown in Table 4, below, redevelopment of underutilized sites and addition of ADUs could result in a total of approximately 205 new housing units, and potential rezone parcels could accommodate a total of approximately 1,628 new housing units. Based on this, by implementing the Project, the City would be able to provide 1,833 additional housing units, thereby a=mmodating the 2021-2029 RHNA allocation (1,243 new housing units) and a substantive buffer to demonstrate capacity for all income levels. The residential site development potential is shown in Table 4.
Table 4: Housing Opportunity Sites Residential Development Potential Potential Moderate- Above
Density Lower-Income Income ModerateSite No. Site Name (Dwelling Dwelling Units Dwelling Income Total Units Units per Units Dwelling Units
Acre)
Underutilized Sites
1 1780 Pacific 20 - 5 .. 5
Coast
Highway
2 Leisure 30 74 38 38 150
Wo~d
3 Accessory NIA 36
I
14 .. 50
Dwelling
Units
Total Unrls from Underutilized - 110 I 57 38 205
Sites
Rezoned Sites (Unless MIiitary)
4 Accurate 46 6 6 47 59
Storage
5 The Shops 46 115 115 230 460
at
Rossmoor
6 Old Ranch 46 59 59 121 239
Town
Center I
7 Seal Beach 46 12 I 12 91 115
Plaza
8 Seal Beach 46 15 I 15 90 120
Center
9 99Marina 33 - - 90 90
Drive
10 Old Ranch - - - 167 167
Country
Club
11 Naval 30 50 50 50 150
Weapons
Station PCH
m 2-17
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Project Description
Potential Madenffe- ·A.bov., pens11y income Modenrte,. Lower-Income Site No. Slte~ame (Dwelfing DwellfrigUnHs DweOing Income Total UnHs UnHs.per UnHs Dwelllng UnHs
Acre)
& Seal
Beach Blvd.
12 water 33 50 15 - 65
Storage Site
(City
Property
Navy Base)
13 Main Street NIA 117 46 - 163
Total Units from Proposed - 424 318 886 1,628
Rezoning
Total Units including 534 375 924 1,833
Underutilized Sites, ADUs,
and Rezone
Source: City of Seal Beach 2021-2029 Housing Element Update, August 2023.
Notes: The current MU is only associated with LC/RMD. A new mixed-use zoning designation would need to be created to facilitate a density equivalent to RHD-46.
Potential units based on estimated development area.
The City's latest RHNA allocation calls for 1,243 new housing units, including 459 new units for residents in the low- and very low-income categories. In accordance with the "No Net Loss" provisions of SB 166, Housing Opportunity Sites inventory and site identification programs in the Housing Element Update indudes sufficient sites to accommodate the City's RHNA allocation.
2.4 SCHEDULE
Future residential development resulting from Project implementation would generally occur during the same time frame of the Housing Element Update, which is from 2021 through 2029.
2.5 DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS
Anticipated permits, approvals, and consultations include, but are not limited to, the adions described in Table 5 below.
Table 5: Agency Permits and Environmental Review Requirements Agency PennHs and Other Approvals
City of Seal Beach • Certification of CEQA do0.1ment
• Adoption of Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program
• Adoption of the Findings of Fact and Statement of
Overriding Considerations (if applicable)
• Change of Zone I Specific Plan Amendment
II 2-18
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Project Description
II
• Seal Beach Municipal Code, Zoning Code
Amendment
2-19
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING, ANALYSIS, AND MITIGATION
MEASURES
INTRODUCTION TO ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
As defined by Section 15063 of the CEQA Guidelines, an Initial Study is prepared primarily to provide the Lead Agency with information to use as the basis for determining whether an EIR, Negative Declaration, or Mitigated Negative Declaration would be appropriale for providing the necessary environmental documentation and clearance for any proposed Project.
A=rding to Section 15065, an EIR is deemed appropriate for a particular proposal if the following conditions occur:
The proposal has the potential to substantially degrade quality or the environment.
The proposal has the potential to achieve short-term environmental goals lo lhe disadvantage of long-term environmental goals.
• The proposal has possible environmental effects that are individually limited but cumulatively considerable.
The proposal could cause direct or indirect adverse effects on human beings.
According to Section 15070(a), a Negative Declaration is deemed appropriate if the proposal would not result in any significant effect on the environment.
A=rding to Section 15070(b), a Mitigated Negative Declaration is deemed appropriate if it is determined that though a proposal could result in a significant effect, mitigation measures are available to reduce these significant effects to insignificant levels.
This Initial Study has determined that the proposed applications will result in potentially significant environmental impacts and therefore, an EIR is deemed as the appropriate document to provide necessary environmental evaluations and clearance for the proposed Project.
This Initial Study and Notice of Preparation (NOP) are prepared in conformance with the CEQA of 1970, as amended (Public Resources Code [PRC], Section 21000 et. seq.); Section 15070 of the State Guidelines for Implementation of the CEQA of 1970, as amended (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, Section 15000, et. seq.); applicable requirements of the County; and the regulations, requirements, and procedures of any other responsible public agency or an agency with jurisdiction by law.
The City is the Lead Agency, in a=rdance with Section 15050 of the CEQA Guidelines. The Lead Agency is the public agency which has the principal responsibility for approving the necessary environmental clearances and analyses for any project in the City. 3-1
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures Intended Uses of Initial Study and Notice of Preparation This Initial Study and NOP are informational documents intended to inform decision makers, other responsible or interested agencies, and the general public of potential environmental effects of the proposed changes. The environmental review process has been established to enable public agencies to evaluate environmental consequences and to examine and implement methods of eliminating or reducing any potentially adverse impacts. While CEQA requires that consideration be given to avoiding environmental damage, the Lead Agency and other responsible public agencies must balance adverse environmental effects against other public objectives, including economic and social goals. The Initial Study and NOP prepared for the Project will be circulated for a period of 30 days for public and agency review and comments, to facilitate preparation of the EIR.
Environmental Assessment Methodology
The environmental factors checked below would potentially be affected by this Project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact," as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. i8! Aeslhetics i8! Greenhouse Gases i8! Public Services :J Agricultural and Forestry ~ Hazards and Hazardous E Recreation Resources Materials
E Air Quality E Hydrology and Water i8! Transportation
Quality
X Biological Resources X Land Use and Planning i8! Tribal Cultural Resources :& Cultural Resources 0 Mineral Resources X Utilities and Service Systems i8i Energy Resources i8! Noise D \1\/ildfires
i8! Geology and Soils i8! Population and Housing ~ Mandatory Findings of Significance Determination
Based on this initial evaluation:
D I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
D I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
IZJ I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
D I find that the proposed project MAY have a "Potentially significant impact· or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An 3-2
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but ii must analyze only the effects that rema,n to be a ci ci/1/ /
Signature
Alexa Smittle, Community Development Director
City of Seal Beach
!fl(L{/.)&3
Date
3.3 CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures
3.1 AESTHETICS
Potentially
Less Than
AESTHETICS Significant with
Would the project: Significant Mitigation Impact Incorporation Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section 20199:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? □ □ b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including,
but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and □ ·" historic buildings within a State scenic highway? c) In non-urbanized areas, would the project
substantially degrade the existing visual character
or quality of public views of the site and its
surroundings. (Public Views are those that are
experienced from a publicly accessible vantage ~ □ point). If the Project is in an urbanized area, the potential of the project to conflict with applicable
zoning and other regulations governing scenic
~ty?
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the □ □ area? 3 1. 'I Envl ·onmental Setting
Less Than No Significant Impact Impact
0 D
D 0
□ D
0 D
As described in the City of Seal Beach 2003 General Plan (General Plan). visual resources in the City include the Pacific Ocean coastal waterfront, including beaches, the shoreline. wetlands and marshlands.
There are approximately two miles of beachfront shoreline in the City, which is considered to be of regional significance for passive and active recreational activities. As the Project implementation would result in future development and more dense residential uses in the vicinity of the coastal waterfront, potential impacts to aesthetics are evaluated below.
3.1 2 Environmental Impact Analysis
a) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? Finding: Less than Significant Impact
Scenic vistas generally include extensive panoramic views of natural features, unusual terrain, or unique urban or historic features, for which the field of view can be wide and ex1end into the distance, and focal views that focus on a particular object, scene or feature of interest. The General Plan does not identify or designate specific scenic resources: nor are there any specific policies related preservation of scenic resources. However, several of the Housing Opportunity Sites are in proximity to the Pacific Ocean and open space areas, which can be considered scenic vistas. A substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista would occur where the majority of an existing view would be blocked or substantially interrupted. 3-4
-
r Commented [SP10]: Item a) should be characterized l as a potentially significant Impact. Adverse effects on a scenic vista could occur. Views of historic Main street with the Pier and the Pacific Ocean in the background
could be allered irreparably and forever by
removing/replacing historic facades and materials wilh
modem. inferior. ugly or characterless facades. This
would impact the recreational and commercial
resources and services that Main Street has historically provided. It could significantly diminish what the
community and visitors values most about Main Street.
These impacts will also be difficult to successfully avoid and mitigate ... just as it would be diff1CUII to
successfully recreate or preserve the character value J ~
of any historic building undergoing structural
enlargment.
Commented [SP11]: Item b should be categonzed as
fess than significant with mi6gation incorpora6on. Main Street is part of the scenic highway corridor. providing views of the Pacific Ocean and the historic Pier within the frame of historic sunny Main Street sidewalks.
[
trees. and building facades. _ .,
Commented [SP12J: Item d) light or glare ... should be
characterized as fess than significant impact with
mitigation. II is infeasible to assess this potential
impact until the materials, heights, and facades and
views of the proposed buildings are known. Therefore,
lhe programmatic EIR needs lo be revisited and
updated on this topic when a specific project is later
proposed. or a separate project EIR needs to be
undertaken.
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures Individual developments that would be developed on the identified Housing Opportunity Sites under the Housing Element Update would be dispersed throughout the City and would be located in areas that are highly urbanized with surrounding existing developments that already limit potential views to scenic resources. Individual developments developed under the Housing Element Update would be required to be designed and constructed in accordance with the development standards of the applicable zoning district, including building heights, setbacks, and appropriate placement of buildings. Adherence to the City's design guidelines and standards would minimize and reduce potential impacts to existing views and scenic resources. Implementation of the Project would not result in substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista and impacts would be less than significant. As such, this topic does not require further evaluation in the EIR.
b) Would the project substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? Finding: No Impact
According to the California State Scenic Highway Project, which is administered by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) (Caltrans 2022), there are no state-designated scenic highways located in the City; nor are there any City-designated scenic highways or roadways identified by the City in its General Plan. The closest state-designated scenic highway is State Route (SR) 91 , between the city limits of Anaheim and SR 55 to the south, and it is the only state-designated scenic highway within the entire County. The closest Housing Opportunity Site is approximately 14 miles southwest of this portion of SR 91. Implementation of the Project would not occur within the vicinity of state scenic highways and would not substantially damage scenic resources, such as trees, rock outcroppings or historic buildings, within a state scenic highway, and there would be no impact in this regard. As such this topic does not require further evaluation in the EIR.
c) In non-urbanized areas, would the project substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings. (Public Views are those that are experienced from a publicly accessible vantage point). If the Project is in an urbanized area, the potential of the project to conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality?
Finding: Potentially Significant Impact
Implementation of the Housing Element Update would result in the identification of parcels located within the City that have the potential to be developed or redeveloped to accommodate new housing developments and help the City meet its RHNA allocation. Additionally, implementation of the Housing Element Update would result in the creation of a new zoning district that would be applied to five of the identified Housing Opportunity Sites and one site identified as a Housing Opportunity Site would be rezoned to an existing zoning district to accommodate housing. As such, future residential development associated with Project implementation would occur within urbanized areas of the City. Although future Project implementation would not include development on previously undeveloped areas that are not surrounded by urbanization, some of the Housing Opportunity Sites proposed for future residential
3.5 Commented [SP13): Measure Z needs 10 be codified
as required to limit 2-stories in Old Town.
"Old Town" needs to be defined and its location shown
on a map.
"adherence to the City's design guidelines and
standards ... would minimize and reduce potential
impacts" This has not recently been the case: witness
the recent large commercial development on comer of
PCH and Main Street. This is why an EIR and the
public transparency and review of the EIR are needed
for such developments.
Some or the development sites have potential for
significant visual impacts. Therefore, this topic DOES
require further analysis in the EIR.
Commented (SP14): CA HWY 1 is designated as an
All-American Road by US DOT.
The Seal Beach portion of CA HWY 1 is eligible for
designation as a Scenic Highway. II could be
designated as such at some future time. The view of
historic Main Street, and the Pacific Ocean from CA
HWY 1, makes this portion of the CA HWY1 drive
beautiful, inviting, nostalgic and unique. The EIR
should recognize this resource and assure that it is
protected from development impacts. ____ _
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures development could affect areas that are along the City's interface with coastal or open space areas.
Additionally, future Project implementation could include the development of new infrastructure which may have the have the potential to alter the existing visual character of the area. Therefore, this potentially significant impact will be further analyzed in the EIR. d) Would the project create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
Finding: Less Than Significant Impact
Typical current sources of light and glare throughout the City include interior and exterior building lighting, illuminated signage, ballfield lighting, lighting from vehicles along existing roadways, and other ambient lighting present in urbanized settings. Sources of glare include glass or metallic surfaces or finishes, on structures and even off of vehide windshields, that could cause glare effects. Some of the more suburban, lower density, or open space areas of the City have less sources of illumination, lighting and glare. Implementation of the proposed Project would occur in areas designated for redevelopment and would allow for development of currently underutilized parcels in the City. Many of the Housing Opportunity Sites are located within currently illuminated areas. \Nhile the increased residential density assoa ated with Project implementation would likely introduce new sources of light and glare in their immediate surroundings, all new development would be required to comply City guidelines and Municipal Code requirements, including Chapter 11.4.10.020, related to exterior security lighting, exterior fixture compatibility, outdoor illumination levels, minimization of light spillover and glare, and light standard heights (City of Seal Beach 2021 ).
As future residential development resulting from Project implementation would adhere to the provisions of the Municipal Code and all other applicable regulations related to light and glare, the increased residential density proposed by the Project would not create substantial new sources of light or glare which would adversely affect views in the area. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant, and this topic does not require further evaluation in the EIR.
3-6
Commented [SP15J: This cannot be adequately
assessed al all of the proposed development siles until more details of the future developments are known.
Therefore, the EIR should slipulale lhat these impacts
needs to be thoroughly assessed and avoided or
mitigated on a project-specific basis through a publicly reviewed EIR conformance study, or an update or
amendment to the programmatic EtR, or through sitespecific EIRS, at the time the development projed is proposed.
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures
3.2 AGRICULTURAL AND FORESTRY RESOURCES
Potentially Less Than AGRICULTURAL AND FORESTRY RESOURCES Significant with Would the project: Significant Mitigation Impact Incorporation a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or
Farmland of Statewide Importance {Farmland),
as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of □ □
the California Resources Agency, to non.
agricultural use?
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use,
or a Vll1lliamson Act contract? □ □
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, lorest land {as defined in Public Resources
Code section 12220(9)), timbertand {as defined
by Public Resources Code section 4526), or □ □ timbertand zoned Timbertand Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))?
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of
forest land to non-forest use? □ □
e) Involve other changes in the existing
environment which, due to their location or
nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, lo □ □ non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
3.2 1 Environmental Setting
Less Than No Significant Impact Impact
□ ~
□ ~
□ ~
□ ~
□ ~
As outlined in the Open Space/Recreation/Conservation Element of the General Plan, open space land is defined as any parcel of land or water that is essentially unimproved and is devoted to open space use.
Land which is used as managed production of resources is protected under the Element. Within the City, certain parcels of land principally within the Seal Beach Naval Weapons Station are being used for agricultural production. Approximately 2,000 acres of the Seal Beach Naval Weapons Station are currently used for the production of staple vegetable crops, such as beets, carrots, and com (City of Seat Beach 2003). Additionally, according to the Department of Conservation's (DOC's) Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP), prime and unique farmland are identified within the City's boundaries specifically within the Seal Beach Naval Weapons Station. The other portions of the City are mapped as Urban and Built-Up Land or Other (DOC 2023a). FMMP defines Other Lands as Land not included in any other mapping category. Common examples include low density rural developments; brush, timber, wetland, and riparian areas not suitable for livestock grazing; confined livestock, poultry or aquaculture facilities; strip mines, borrow pits; and water bodies smaller than forty acres. Vacant and nonagricultural land surrounded on all sides by urban development and greater than 40 acres is mapped as Other Land (DOC 2023a). According to the California Department of Forestry and Fire Production (CAL FIRE), there are no Timber Production Zones designations or Timber Harvesting Plans within the City (CAL FIRE 2023b).
3.7 CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures
3.2.2 Environmental Impact Analysls
a) Would the project Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? Finding: No Impact
As mentioned above, the Prime and Unique Farmland categories are mapped in areas of the City; however, these mapped areas are limited to the Seal Beach Naval Weapons Station property. Housing Opportunity Sites 11 and 12 are located within the Seal Beach Naval Weapons Station; however, the portions of the Seal Beach Naval Weapons Station property where Sites 11 and 12 are located are mapped as Urban and Built-Up Land and Other Land on the FMMP. No other proposed Housing Opportunity Sites were identified on the FMMP as being located on Prime, Unique, or Farmland of Statewide Importance. Implementation of the Project does not have the potential to cause significant impacts to Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance, nor does it have the potential to convert Prime Farmland. Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance to nonagricultural use. Therefore, there would be no impact, and this topic does not require further evaluation in the EIR.
b) Would the project conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract?
Finding: No Impact
A=rding to the City's Zoning Map Index and Orange County's Public Works Land Records Map, none of the proposed Housing Opportunity Sites are under a Williamson Contract and therefore, there would be no impact related to conflicting with a Williamson Act contract. (City of Seal Beach 2013; Orange County 2023).
The City's Zoning Code does not include any agricultural land use designations. However, some of the City's commercial, industrial, and open space zoning designation allow agricultural uses onsite. Agricultral uses allowed in the City are mostly limited to nursery uses, with crop raising allowed under one open space zoning designation. As the City does not have any zoning designations that are specifically for agricultural uses, implementation of the Project would not result in conflicts with existing zoning for agricultural use. Additionally, none of the identified Housing Opportunity Sites that is not proposed for rezoning are under existing zoning designation that allow agricultural uses onsite. The identified Housing Opportunity Sites that are proposed for rezoning would be rezoned to residential zoning districts to allow for additional housing opportunities in the City and would not conflict with any agricultural zoned parcels.
Implementation of the Project does not have the potential conflict with any existing zoning for agricultural use. As such, there would be no impact, and this topic does not require further evaluation in the El R. m 3-8
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures c) Would the project conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(9)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))?
Finding: No Impact
As discussed above, there are no designated Timber Production Zones or agriculturally designated parcels within the Housing Opportunity Sites. Implementation of the Project does not have the potential to conflict with existing zoning for forest land or timberland zoned for Timberland Production. As such, there would be no impact, and this topic does not require further evaluation in the EIR. d) Would the project result In the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
Finding: No Impact
As discussed above, the parcels proposed for rezoning have various designations, and there are no forest lands located on or near the Project area. Therefore, development of the Project would not result in the toss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest uses, and there would be no impact. As such, this topic does not require further evaluation in the EIR. e) Would the project Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result In conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
Finding: No Impact
Development of the Project would require rezoning of the Project area to accommodate low- and moderate-income residential uses in areas throughout the City. As discussed above, none of the Housing Opportunity Sites are zoned for agricultural use, and important farmland was not identified amongst the proposed Housing Opportunity Sites. Although the Project involves rezoning to accommodate additional housing needs, the Project would not involve rezoning from agricultural to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use. As such, there would be no impact, and this topic does not require further evaluation in the EIR.
3-9
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures
3.3 AIR QUALITY
Potentially
Less Than
AIR QUALITY Significant Less Than No Significant Significant Would the Project: Impact with Mitigation Impact Impact Incorporation
a) Conflict with or obstruct implemenlation of lhe
applicable air quality plan? 0 □ D □
b) Result in a cumulalively considerable net increase of any ctileria pollulant for which lhe Project region is
non-attainment under an applicable federal or slale ~ □ □ □ ambient air qualily standard?
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollulanl
concentrations? 0 □ □ □
d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading lo
odors) adversely affecting a substanlial number or 0 □ D D people?
3.3.1 Environmental Setting
The City is within the South Coast Air Basin (SoCAB), which includes all of Orange County and the nondesert portions of Los Angeles, Riverside, and San Bernadino Counties. SoCAB is designated nonattainment for ozone (O,) and fine inhalable particulale matter (PM2 s) under the California and National Ambient Air Quality Standards (AAQS), nonattainment for lead (Los Angeles County only) under the National AAQS, and nonattainment for coarse inhalable particulate matter (PM,o) under the California AAQS (City of Corona 2019).
The South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) is responsible for preparing the air quality management plan (AQMP) for the SoCAB in coordination with SCAG to attain the National AAQS. In March 2017, SCAQMD adopted the 2016 AQMP which is composed of stationary and mobile-source emission reductions from regulatory control measures, incentive-based programs, co-benefits from climate programs, mobile-source strategies, and reductions from federal sources such as aircrafts, locomotives, and ocean-going vessels. Strategies outlined in the 2016 AQMP would be implemented in collaboration between California Air Resources Board (CARB) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). SCAQMD's 2016 AQMP forecasts that the SoCAB will need to increase oxides of nitrogen (NOx) reductions by 45 percent additional reductions above existing regulations for the 2023 ozone standard and 55 percent additional reductions above existing regulations to meet the 2031 ozone standard. 3 3.2 Environmental Impact Analysis
a) Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? Finding: Potentially Significant Impact
As result of increased development and densification associated with future Project implementalion, emissions would be generated during both construction and operation of individual developments. Project 3-10
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures implementation has the potential to cause significant environmental effects through conflict or obstruction of the applicable air quality plans. Therefore, these impacts will be analyzed further in the EIR. b) Would the project result In a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the Project region is non-attainment under an applicable Federal or State ambient air quality standard?
Finding: Potentially Significant Impact
The proposed Housing Opportunity Sites are located in a non-attainment area for National AAQS and California AAQS. As such, Project implementation has the potential to cause significant environmental effects through a potential cumulatively considerable net increase of particulate matter during construction. Therefore, this potentially significant impact will be further analyzed in the EIR. c) Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Finding: Potentially Significant Impact
While it is unlikely that sensitive receptors could be exposed to substantial pollutant concentrations, due to construction or operation associated with Mure Project implementation, there is the potential to cause significant environmental effects if such exposure were to occur. Implementation of the proposed Project would include the development and operation of new and more intense land uses that could generate new sources of toxic air contaminants (TACs) in the City, from both stationary and mobile sources. As such, this potentially significant impact will be further analyzed in the EIR. d) Would the project result in other emissions (such as those lead Ing to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
Finding: Potentially Significant Impact
Project implementation could cause the generation of new sources of odors or other emissions.
Generally, residential land uses do not generate odors that could affect a substantial number of people, because they are not considered a typical odor-producing source, such as a waste treatment facility or an industrial operation. While it is unlikely that substantial numbers of people could be adversely affected by odors due to future construction or implementation of the proposed Project, there is the potential for the Project to result in other emissions. Therefore, these potentially significant impacts will be further analyzed in the EIR.
3-11
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT A ND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures
3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Less Than
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Potentially Significant
Would the project
Significant with
Impact Mitigation
Incorporation
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate. sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or 18) □
regulations, or regulated by the California Department
of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wldlife Service?
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian
habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by ~ □ the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S.
Fish and Wldlife Service?
C) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to,
marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct [8] □ removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
d) Interfere substantially with the movement or any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with
established nalive resident or migratory wildlife [8] □ corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
e) Conflict with any focal policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation D □ policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions or an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation 18) D Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
3.4.1 Environmental Setting
Less Than No Significant Impact Impact
□ □
□ □
□ □
□ □
~ □
D □
The western edge of the City includes shoreline, beaches and marinas which support areas of biological diversity. The Seal Beach National WIidiife Refuge (NWR), established in 1972, is a protected wetland and marsh area located at the Seal Beach Naval Weapons Station. It includes habitats that are essential to migratory birds of the Pacific Flyway, including federal- and state-listed endangered species. The Seal Beach NWR is under a Management Plan to 1) preserve habitat necessary for the perpetuation of two endangered species, the light-footed Ridgway's rail and the California least tern, and 2) preservation of habitat used by migratory waterfowl, shorebirds and other waterbirds (USFWS 2023a). Other species of concern found in the Seal Beach NWR include the Eastern Pacific green sea turtle, Belding's savannah sparrow, and other year-round species including ospreys, peregrine falcons, red-tailed hawks, great blue herons, great egrets, snowy egrets, brown pelicans, crabs, and snails. There are a number of winter migration species as well, including Canada, snow and Ross' geese, various duck species, black-necked stilt, American avocet, black-bellied plover, and least and western sandpipers. Additionally, many m 3-12
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures California native wildflowers and shrubs occur in this area. Within the aquatic reaches of the wetlands, there can be small rays and sharks along the protected waters of the Seal Beach NWR (USFWS 2023b).
In addition to the Seal Beach NWR, another area with potential sensitivity for biological resources is approximately 1 DO-acres of the Hellman Ranch Specific Plan area, which has been deed-restricted for future sale to a public agency for purposes of wetlands restoration, open space, and environmental education purposes. An adjacent approximately 50-acre oil production property has been similarly restricted (City of Seal Beach 2003). Numerous other parks, golf courses, greenbelts and open space corridors provide potential habitat areas for various plant, insect, bird, reptile and animal species.
Due to its location along the shore of the Pacific Ocean, development and certain land use policies within the Coastal Zone (all areas south of Westminster Boulevard) are also subject to review by the California Coastal Commission (CCC) for consistency with the California Coastal Act of 1976. The City is in the process of developing a Local Coastal Program (LCP) which will implement the Coastal Act at the local level, and reduce the need for direct project review from the Coastal Commission.
3.4.2 Environmental Impact Analysis
a) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or regulated by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
Finding: Potentially Significant Impact
The Project sets the framework for future growth and development in the City by providing additional opportunities for development of low- and moderate-income housing and therefore, does not directly result in development. Certification of the Project itself would not lead to alteration or modification biological resources or habitats, and before any development or redevelopment activities could occur on Housing Opportunity Sites, they would be required to be analyzed for conformance with the requirements of CEQA. While some of the Project's identified Housing Opportunity Sites are located within highly urbanized areas, such as parking lots of existing commercial centers, other Housing Opportunity Sites are located in proximity to or within areas that are not developed or near areas of potential sensitivity for biological resources, such as Housing Opportunity Sites 1, 9, 1 o, 11 and 12. As such, future implementation of the Project may have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or indirectly, on special-status species. Therefore, these potentially significant impacts will be further analyzed in the EIR. b) Would the project 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? Finding: Potentially Significant Impact
As discussed above, portions of the City are located within the jurisdiction of the CCC. Housing Opportunity Sites 1, 4, 8, 9, 11 , 12, and 13 are located within CCC jurisdiction, while Housing Opportunity m 3-13
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures Sites 2 and 7 border the CCC jurisdictional boundaries (City of Seal Beach 2023b). Housing Opportunity Site 11 borders the Seal Beach NWR. As such, future implementation of the Project may have a substantial adverse effect on a riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations. Therefore, these potentially significant impacts will be further analyzed in the EIR.
c) Would the project 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?
Finding: Potentially Significant Impact
As discussed above, the City has identified areas where wetlands and other sensitive marsh and coastal features are present, including within the Hellman Ranch Specific Plan area, the Seal Beach NWR, and the beaches and shorelines along the western border of the City. Future residential development resulting from Project implementation would be required to minimize effects to wetlands, marshes and coastal areas, in compliance with the CCC and all other applicable requirements; however, several Housing Opportunity Sites may be located within proximity or within such areas and may have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands. Therefore, these potentially significant impacts will be further analyzed in the EIR.
d) Would the project 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? Finding: Potentially Significant Impact
As described above, the City and County have identified areas where native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species regularly occur, including the Seal Beach NWR. Housing Opportunity Sites 11 and 12 are in the vicinity of the Seal Beach NWR, an important stop for migratory species along the Pacific Flyway, and Housing Opportunity Site 1 o is located on a golf course which may be used by migratory species.
Half of the Housing Opportunity Sites are located within the CCC jurisdiction and/or in proximity to the shoreline and beaches. As future residential development resulting from Project implementation would occur in proximity of areas, potential impacts to migratory species may occur. Therefore, these potentially significant impacts will be further analyzed in the EIR. e) Would the project conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? Finding: Less Than Significant Impact
Future residential development on identified Housing Opportunity Sites resulting from Project implementation may require the removal of trees, including street trees. All resulting development would be required to comply with the City Municipal Code Section 9.40, Trees, which includes limitations and permit requirements related to the removal of trees, particularly eucalyptus trees (City of Seal Beach 3-14
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures 2023e). Future residential development resulting from Project implementation would be required to abide by this regulation and ensure the Project does not lead to removal of designated landmark trees.
Therefore, future residential development resulting from Project implementation would not conflict with local policies and ordinances protecting biological resources, and there would be no impact. As such, this topic does not require further evaluation in the EIR.
f) Would the project conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
Finding: Potentially Significant Impact
This Project sets the framework for future growth and development in the City by providing additional opportunities for development of low- and moderate-income housing and therefore, it does not directly result in development. Certification of the Project itself would not lead to alteration or modification biological resources or habitats. and before any development or redevelopment activities could occur on Housing Opportunity Sites, they would be required to be analyzed for conformance with the requirements of CEQA. In addition to being located under CCC jurisdiction. the City is also induded in the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCCP)/Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) (CDFW 2023). Protected natural communities under the OCTA NCCP/HCP include California walnut woodland, canyon live oak ravine forest, Riversidean alluvial fan scrub, southern coast live oak riparian forest. southern cottonwood willow riparian forest. southern mixed riparian forest. southern will scrub and valley needlegrass grassland (CDFW 2013). Further evaluation is required to confirm that there would be no conflicts with these or other plans. Therefore, these potentially significant impacts will be further analyzed in the EIR.
IJ 3-15
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures
3.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES
Less Than
CULTURAL and TRIBAL RESOURCES Potentially Significant
Significant with
Would the project: Impact Mitigation
Incorporation
a) Cause a substantial adverse change In the significance of a historical resource pursuant to Section 15064.5? ~ □ b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5? ~ □ c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred
outside of formal cemeteries? □ □
3.5.1 Environmental Setting
Less Than No Significant Impact Impact
□ □
□ □
~ □
For over 10,000 years, the Seal Beach area, including Anaheim Bay and the San Gabriel estuary, have supported Native American people and their cultures, with evidence of the City's past found in the archaeological record and remaining historical sites; however, few archaeological sites remain in the City, primarily due to development along the coastline. As provided in the City's General Plan Cultural Resources Element, prehistoric occupation of the Seal Beach area was associated with the Gabrielino Native Americans, with the city on the southern end of the extensive tribal territory which extended into Ventura County to the north and San Bernardino County to the east (City of Seal Beach 2003). It is also understood that the Juanerio Native Americans were also present in the Seal Beach area, as the neighboring tribe to the south.
More specifically, the Gabrielino community of Motuuchey was located in today's Old Town area, and archaeological resources were primarily located on the Seal Beach Naval Weapons Station, Hellman Ranch and potentially on a Boeing property. In the 1780s, the historic settlement of the city began with the assignment of a 300,000-acre land grant of Rancho Los Alamitos, which supported agriculture and cattle grazing due to proximity to the Santa Ana River. The Mexican Warof 1846 to 1848 marked the end of the Rancho era and Mexican governance, and in 1864, Rancho Los Alamitos was purchased by Jotham Bixby and German immigrants who formed the Anaheim agricultural colony. Anaheim Landing was the port created to facilitate goods movement in and out of the region and was the first port in Orange County.
The area transitioned into the resort community of "Bay City," in 1903, and was connected to Los Angeles with the "Red Cars• of the Pacific Electric Railroad. Today, an historic Red Car can be found on the old Pacific Electric right-of-way. In 1906, the longest pier south of San Francisco was constructed, and it included a bath house, dancing pavilion, roller coaster and more. With a population of 250, Bay City was incorporated in 1915, becoming known as Seal Beach, and the town was a successful resort community by the 1920s. A flurry of growth and development ended with the Great Depression, and in 1939, hurricane winds cut the pier in half. World War II brought a second boom of construction to the City, as military facilities were placed throughout the City and the Seal Beach Naval Weapons Station was built.
ID 3-16
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT A ND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures The development of Leisure World began in the late 1950s. With a current population of over 24,000, the City remains a tourist destination.
Historic resources in the City include the Old City Hall, which is on the National Register of Historic Places. The early port of Anaheim Landing is recognized for its historical significance by the State of California.
The City's General Plan Cultural Resources Element includes the following goal and policies related to cultural resources (City of Seal Beach 2003):
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, a nd protect sites and buildings of historic importance.
Policy 3: Coordinate cultural resource programs and development project review with affected resource agencies and Native American representatives.
Policy 4: Identify funding programs to assist private and public property owners in the preservation of buildings and sites of historic importance.
Policy 5: Assess development proposals for potential impacts to significant archaeological resources pursuant to §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 to cultural resources.
3.5.2 Environmental Impact Analysis
a) Would the p roject cause a substant ial adverse change in t he s ignificance of a historical resource as identified in Section 15064.5?
Finding: Potentially Significant Impact
This Project sets the framework for future growth and development in the City by providing additional opportunities for development of low- and moderate-income housing, and therefore, it does not directly result in development. Certification of the Project itself would not lead to demolition or alteration of any historic resources. Furthermore, future development Projects would be required to comply with the City's General Plan Cultural Resources policies related to preservation of resources. As it is unknown if Housing Opportunity Sites may contain historical resources, surveys will be conducted to determine and assess potential impacts to such resources. Therefore, this potentially significant impact will be analyzed in the EIR.
3-17
Commented [SP1 6): I agree with the finding that this isl a potentially significant impact. However, not all the
right reasons for that finding are included here. And
those omissions may result in an inadequately scoped
EIR. The EIR studies need to be broader and
consullive of the state's expert preservationists and
methodologies.
There are 360 Seal Beach sites curranlly listed in the
BERO (The Calffomia State Built Inventory Resource
Directory), managed by the California Office of Historic Preservation (OHP). Some of these may be eligible for
inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, or as California Historical Landmar1<s. More importantly,
EIR studies may reveal additional buildings, building
remains, artifacts, or other resources in Old Town and
other parts of the City that are historically significant.
Those should be identified and registered. Each of the
I
sites should be researched and evaluated (sitespecifically) by a qualified archaeologist/historian. incorporating pedestrian surveys as well as desktop
surveys. We should not limit studies 10 areas already
known to be sensitive to cullural resources. Toe EIR
f
should study, in a site-specific manner, and idenlify all potentially historic resources all areas proposed for
develop~ ____ )
Commented [SP17): We need to be adequately
thoughtful and broad in our EIR scope. We are not only
worried about digging into /destroying buried unknown
historical resources; we are also ooncemed about
destroying the historical value of the resources that are in plain site. Main Street's historic, quaint bright
storefronts, sunny , tree-lined sidewalks, under open
skies and without oppressive urban shadows. That is
an invaluable, rare, and treasured resource in Southern California.
The history, development, success. and preservation of
Main Street should be studied, and measures should
be identified to avoid or mitigate Impacts. We should
consull with the SHPO and CA office of historic
preservation, utilizing its "Main Street" preservation
program and guidelines and the Eight Guiding
Principles for preserving and restoring 'Main Streets'. !lllJls://ohp.par1<s.ca.govnpage id=23484
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures b) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change In the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5?
Finding: Potentially Significant Impact
As discussed above, approval of the proposed Project itself would not directly affect archaeological resources as the Project sets the framework for future growth and development in the City by providing additional opportunities for development of low- and moderate-income housing and therefore, does not directly result in development. However, Project implementation could indirectly affect archaeological resources, as it would allow for Mure development of the sites. Grading and construction activities of parcels identified for the Project could require earth moving activities that could potentially unearth previously unrecorded resources.
According to the General Plan Cultural Resources Element, there are very few archaeological sites in the City. Archaeological sites are protected by a wide variety of state policies and regulations under the California Public Resources Code, and cultural resources receive protection under both the California Public Resources Code and CEQA. Long term implementation of the Project could allow development induding construction activities and grading in areas with undiscovered archaeological resources.
Therefore, the Project could result in potential unearthing of previously unknown and unrecorded archaeological resources and result in significant impacts. iThe Project would be required to implement General Plan Cultural Resources Element policies related to reducing impacts of potential development on cultural resources and would be required to comply with existing laws and regulations pertaining to archaeological and cultural resources.[As it is unkn~ if Housing Opportunity Sites may.contain unknown archaeological resources, surveys will be conducted to determine and assess potential impacts to such resources. Therefore, this potentially significant impact will be analyzed in the EIR. c) Would the project disturb any human remains, Including those Interred outside of formal cemeteries?
Finding: Less Than Significant Impact
Although unlikely, future Project construction activities could result in unknown human remains being unearthed during earth moving activities. California Health and Safety Code, Section 7050.5; CEQA Section 15064.5; and PRC Section 5097.98, mandate the process to be followed in the event of an accidental discovery of any human remains in a location other than a dedicated cemetery. California Health and Safety Code, Section 7050.5, requires that if human remains are discovered on a project site, disturbance of the site shall remain halted until the coroner has conducted an investigation into the circumstances, manner, and cause of any death, and the recommendations concerning the treatment and disposition of the human remains have been made to the person responsible for the excavation, or to his or her authorized representative, in the manner provided in Section 5097.98 of the PRC. If the coroner determines that the remains are not subject to his or her authority and if the coroner recognizes or has reason to believe the human remains to be those of a Native American, he or she shall contact, by telephone within 24 hours, the Native American Heritage Commission. Although construction activities associated with development of the Project could result in the discovery of human remains, compliance 3-18
Commented [SP18]: VI/hen development is proposed,
the proposed project needs to undergo a review of
conformance to lhe programmatic EIR. V\lhen
conformance cannot be adequately detennined, due to
a lack of adequate site-specific data, or because data
does not adequately reflect current knowledge,
conditions or study protocols, the projects should be
required to perform additional studies to infill, update or otherwise aeate a complete and publicly reviewable
characterization of resources and potential impacts.
We should develop the Avoidance, Mitigation, and
Monitoring Plan to specifically govem the potential
future development projects. The Plan should also
specify administrative mechanisms to assure that
avoidance, mitigation, and monitoring measures will be
Implemented and enforced, even If projects are not
Initiated for many years.
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures with existing laws would ensure that significant impacts to human remains would not occur. Therefore, compliance with existing laws and regulations would ensure that future residential development resulting from Project implementation does not disturb any human remains, and impacts would be less than significant. As such, this topic does not require further evaluation in the EIR.
IJ 3-19
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures
3.6 ENERGY RESOURCES
Less Than
ENERGY RESOURCES Potentially Significant
Significant with Would the project Impact Mitigation
Incorporation
a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasleful, inefficienl, or unnecessary
consumption of energy resources, during project ~ □
conslruction or operation?
b) Conmct with or obslruct a stale or local plan for
renewable energy or energy efficiency? □ □
3.6.1 Environmental Setting
Less Than No Significant Impact Impact
□ □
[8] □
-
Southern California Edison (SCE) is the provider of electrical services to most of the City. Total electricity consumption in SCE's service area, which spans much of southern California from Orange and Riverside Counties on the south to Santa Barbara County on the west to Mono County to the north, in gigawatthours (GWh) was approximately 81 ,128 GWh in 2021 (SCE 2019; CEC 2023a). Sources of electricity sold by SCE in 2018 were:
36 percent renewable, consisting mostly of solar and wind 4 percent large hydroelectric
17 percent natural gas
6 percent nuclear
37 percent unspecified sources (CEC 2019)
Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas) provides natural gas services to the City and maintains transmission and distribution lines through the City. The service area of SoCalGas spans much of the southern half of California, from Imperial County in the southeast, to San Luis Obispo County In the northwest, to part of Fresno County in the north, and to Riverside County and most of San Bernardino County in the east (SoCalGas 2023). Total natural gas consumption in Orange County in 2018 was 575.1 million therms, with 339 million therms used by residential uses (CEC 2023b).
3.6.2 Environmental Impact Analysis
a) Wo uld the project result in potentially s ignificant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during Project construction or operation?
Finding: Potentially Significant Impact
Construction and operation of the proposed Project would result in an increased intensity of uses and more residential units. These additional uses would consume more energy which could result in a potentially significant environmental impact. Therefore, this potentially significant impact will be further analyzed in the EIR.
m 3-20
Commented [SP19): A potential inefficient use of
energy would include an inadequate energy supply or
delivery capacily available to meet the increased
demand caused by additional development. This could
result in brownouls, blackouts, and many related
safety issues. This polenlial impact needs to be studied on a Project basis but, more importanlly, on a
cumulative basis since that energy Is a shared
resource across many cities in California that are
similarly increasing power demand through new
residential development projects. The cumulative
impacts may be potentially unmitigable within the
Project timeframe.
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures b) Would the project conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency?
Finding: Less Than Significant Impact
California's electricity grid is transitioning to renewable energy under the California Renewables Portfolio Standards (RPS) Program. In general, the state has RPS requirements of 33 percent renewable energy by 2020, 40 percent by 2024, 50 percent by 2026, 60 percent by 2030, and 100 percent by 2045 (California Public Utilities Commission). The statewide RPS requirements do not directly apply to individual development projects, but to utilities and energy providers such as SCE and SoCalGas. As SCE and SoCalGas are required to meet the RPS goals for 2030 to provide at least 60 percent clean energy to its customers, future residential development resulting from Project implementation would be consistent with statewide goals.
The Project is intended to be consistent with the implementing General Plan Housing Element Update, and individual development projects constructed as a result of Project implementation would be required to comply with the current and future iterations the Building Energy Efficiency Standards and the California Green Building Standards Code. Additionally, future residential development resulting from Project implementation would be required to implement Housing Element Update policies which support energy conservation opportunities, including Title 24 energy efficiency standards and the statewide goal of transitioning the electricity grid to renewable sources. Furthermore, the Housing Element Update includes the following goal and policies related to energy efficiency that would be applicable to the proposed Project:
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.
Therefore, with implementation of Housing Element Update policies and compliance with existing standards and regulations related to renewable energy, future residential development resulting from Project implementation would not conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency, and impacts would be less than significant. As such, this topic does not require further evaluation in the EIR.
m 3-21
1 Commented [SP20]: The increased cumulative
demand for energy is already conflicting with and
obstructing eartier stale and local plans to dose
nuclear plants, causing the expansion, rather than the
reduction, of fossil fuel energy plants. and causing
greater demand, not less, for transportation fossil fuels and imports of foreign oil. Renewables are not
providing adequate supply to meet demand.
Renewables are more costly and raise the cost of
housing in California. The State's energy policies and
the housing policies are at odds with each other.
Additional development proposed here will only worsen
these problems. These potential significant impacts of
the Project needs to be studied both from a project anj a cumulative perspective and made transparent in the
EIR.
( Commented [SP21 ]: The EIR should require open
space and tree planting and maintenance as part of
each development project. in order lo mitigale lhe
increases In almospheric carbon and provide cooling
shade.
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures
3.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Less Than
GEOLOGY AND SOILS Potentially Significant
Would the project:
Significant with
Impact Mitigation
Incorporation
a) Directly or indirectly cause substantial adverse
effects, inctuding the risk of loss, injury, or death
involving:
i. Rupture of a known earthquake rault, as
delineated on the most recent AlquistPriolo Earthquake Faull Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area □ □ or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division or Mines
and Geology Special Publication 42.
ii. Strong seismic ground shaking? □ □
iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction? □ □
iv. Landslides? □ □
b) Resull in substantial soil erosion or the loss or
topsoil? □ □
c) Be located on strata or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result or the project,
and potentially resull in on- or off-site landslide, □ □ lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse?
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18- 1-8 or the Uniform Building Code (1994 ), creating
substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property? □ □ e) Have soils incapable or adequately supporting the use or septic tanks or allemative wastewater disposal
systems where sewers are not available for the □ □
disposal or wastewater?
fJ Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geological feature? (8) □
3.7.1 Environmental Setting
Less Than No Significant Impact Impact
(8) □
(8) □
~ □
lSJ □
(8) □
- (8) □
(8) □
□ (8)
□ □
The City is located in the Los Angeles coastal plain in the Peninsular Ranges of Southern California.
These Ranges are made up of hills and ranges with intervening, long, and narrow valleys that trend northwest. The City is in a zone of deformation extending from the root of the Santa Monica Mountains as far southeasterly as Newport Beach, called the Newport-Inglewood belt. The Newport-Inglewood belt is a surface expression of the Newport-Inglewood Faull zone (City of Seal Beach 2003). 3-22
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures The majority of the City is located within an alluvial plan that extends southward from the convergence of Coyote Creek and San Gabriel River. The two channels drain from the northeast and north, and the combined fiow reaches the sea at Alamitos Gap. Elevations within the City vary from approximately sea level to 60 feet above mean sea level (amsl) at Landing Hill (City of Seal Beach 2003). 3 7.2 Environmental Impact Analysis
a) Would the project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i. Rupture of a known earthq uake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map Issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42?
Finding : Less Than Significant Impact
The entire City, including the Housing Opportunity Sites, are located in the seismically active Southern California region. An active fault is defined by the State Mining and Geology Board as one that has had surface displacement within Holocene time (about the last 11 ,000 years). The currently designated Newport-Inglewood Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone traverses through the City. Within this fault zone is the Seal Beach Fault (CGS 2023). All except one of the Housing Opportunity Sites are located to the north and south or this zone and not within it. Housing Opportunity Site 12 is traversed by an earthquake fault and therefore, is located within an earthquake fault zone.
Mandatory compliance with existing regulations, including preparation and submittal of geotechnical studies and reports prior to approval of grading and redevelopment plans, would ensure that potential surface fault rupture impacts would be less than significant. Additionally, the future residential development resulting from Project implementation would be required to comply with the following General Plan policies related to geology and geologic hazards (City of Seal Beach 2003):
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.
Policy 3b: Require geological surveys to be prepared after onsite borings or subsurface explorations at the time subdivisions are submitted to the City for approval.
Policy 3c: Require supervision by a state licensed soils engineer for grading operations which require a grading permit.
Policy 3d: Maintain and enforce protection measures which address control of runoff and erosion by vegetation management, control of access, and site planning for new development and major remodels, including directing runoff to the street and compliance with setbacks. 3-23
f Commented (SP22J: Flooding in some of the proposed1
project areas is already a significant problem that has not been avoided or adequately mitigated by these
proposed administrative Policy controls. This shows
that the Issues of flooding, grading. soil drainage.
liquification, runoff and vegetation management do
need to be studied and addressed on a site-specific
basis in the EIR.
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures • Policy 3e: Restrict development projects that will cause hazardous geologic conditions or that will expose existing developments to an unacceptable level of risk until the causative factors are mitigated.
• Policy 3f: Require independent review of the geologic and soils reports as appropriate. • Policy 3g: File and reference copies of pertinent site-specific geologic information and index the information in the City's Geographic Information System. • Policy 3h: Provide ongoing maintenance and inspection of all public drainage facilities and eliminate or mitigate uncontrolled storm drain flow on hillsides or bluffs. • Policy 3i: Require the use of drought-resistant vegetation with deep root systems where appropriate for safety reasons in new development projects to reduce the potential for overirrigation. Encourage the use of drought-resistant vegetation throughout the City through public education efforts.
• Policy 3j: Maintain the present City practice of adopting the latest edition of the Uniform Building Code (as amended and published by the International Conference of Building Officials at approximate three-year intervals) because it incorporates the latest accepted standards for seismic design that reflect advances in technology and understanding of hazards. • Policy 3k: Prohibit the location of new essential facilities such as hospitals, fire and police stations, emergency centers and water tanks in geologically hazardous areas unless it is determined that there is no feasible alternative and the hazard is adequately mitigated. • Policy 31: Require that earthquake survival and efficient post-disaster functioning be a primary concern in the siting, design and construction standards for new essential facilities. • Policy 3m: Evaluate the long-term risks and their associated costs versus the costs of relocation when major improvements to existing essential facilities are proposed and the facilities are located in known hazardous areas. Relocate the facility if the analysis indicates this is more cost effective in the long term.
• Policy 3n: Determine the liquefaction potential of a site prior to development and require that specific measures be taken, as necessary, to reduce damage in an earthquake. • Policy 3o: Promote the collection of relevant studies on fault location and history of fault displacement and liquefaction for future refinement of the geological information within and around the City.
• Policy 3p: Identify the effects of the most probable seismic event (Modified Mercalli intensity value VIII or more) on the infrastructure within the City.
• Policy 3q: Incorporate information on the probable seismic event impacts on infrastructure into the development of capital improvement programs so as to upgrade the survivability of the infrastructure.
3-24
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures • Policy 3r: Work with governmental agencies (i.e., Caltrans and Water Districts) and the public utility companies to identify and promote effective mitigation of the effects of the most probable seismic event on the infrastructure which supports the City of Seal Beach • Policy 3s: Prepare a Geological Hazards Map based on a study of the geological formations and hazards of the entire City, employing a format compatible with the City's GIS mapping system. • Policy 3t: Integrate the latest information about earthquake survivability into the City's public safety education program. Encourage the retrofitting of every home within Seal Beach for earthquake survival, especially in the area of adequate anchoring (tie-down) of the homes to their foundations.
As there are no known active faults crossing the majority of the proposed Housing Opportunity Sites and majority of the sites are not located within an Earthquake Fault Zone, ground rupture is unlikely. However, Housing Opportunity Site 12 is located within an Earthquake Fault Zone and, as such, there is some potential for ground rupture to occur. Potential impacts to new developments facilitated by implementation of the Project would be subject to individual CECA analysis on a project level to analyze potential impacts related to seismic hazards. All future housing developments facilitated by the Project would be required to demonstrate conformance with federal, state, and local seismic design guidelines and requirements.
Individual developments would be required to prepare and submit geotechnical studies and reports prior to approval of grading and redevelopment plans and would be required to implement project-specific mitigation measures to reduce any potential impacts. Therefore, compliance with existing regulations and preparation of seismicity reports would ensure that future residential development resulting from Project implementation would have a less than significant impact related to rupture of a known earthquake fault.
As such, this impact does not require further evaluation in the ElR.
Ii. Strong seismic ground shaking?
Finding: Less Than Significant lmpad
As with most of California, there is a significant potential for seismic ground shaking to occur. The Seal Beach Fault is considered capable of causing significant ground shaking in the City, but the recurrence interval is believed longer than for more distant, strike-slip faults. Other large earthquakes have historically occurred in the Los Angeles and Long Beach areas, and many earthquakes of low magnitude occur every year.
An earthquake of moderate- to high-magnitude generated within the Los Angeles or Long Beach area could cause considerable ground shaking at the Housing Opportunity Sites, similar to that which has occurred in the past. To mitigate the effects of strong seismic ground shaking, structures should be designed using sound engineering judgment and the 2022 California Building Code (CBC) requirements, at a minimum.
While there is no way to avoid ground shaking and earthquake hazards, compliance with CBC requirements, including specific provisions for seismic design, would mitigate and minimize the effects of earthquakes on new future construction. The Project would require that future residential development be II 3-25
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures designed in accordance with the CBC requirements and statewide regulations to minimize the effects of ground shaking to the greatest degree feasible. Therefore, future residential development resulting from Project implementation would have a less than significant impact related to seismic ground shaking. As such, this impact does not require further evaluation in the EIR. iii. Seismic-related ground failure, Including liquefaction? Finding: Less Than Significant Impact
Liquefaction generally occurs as a result of strong ground shaking in areas where granular sediment or fill material either contains, or is located immediately above, high moisture content. The ground shaking transforms the material from a solid state to a temporarily liquid state and can result in settlement. flow failure, and lateral spreading. Liquefaction is a serious hazard because buildings in areas that experience liquefaction may sink or suffer major structural damage. These geological and groundwater conditions are prevalent in the City and surrounding areas. Housing Opportunity Sites 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 9, 1 o, and 11 are within a liquefaction zone, while Housing Opportunity Sites 1, 4, 8, 12 and 13 do not appear to be within a liquefaction zone (DOC 2023). Although a majority of the Housing Opportunity Sites are within a liquefaction zone, the Project area is developed with existing commercial, residential, and industrial uses, all of which required proper soil compaction and grading prior to construction, consistent with mandatory regulations and requirements. The Project would comply with the General Plan policies mentioned above and would be constructed in accordance with CBC requirements and all applicable regulations pertaining to safety and stability related to seismic activity. Therefore, future residential development resulting from Project implementation would have a less than significant impact from seismic related ground failure. As such, this impact does not require further evaluation in the EIR. iv. Landslides?
Finding: Less Than Significant Impact
Landslides are the downward and outward movements of slope-forming materials including rock, soil, artificial fill, or combinations of such materials under the direct influence of gravity. The Housing Opportunity Sites are at sea level, and there are no hills or mountains adjacent to them. There are no known landslides near the Housing Opportunity Sites, nor are they located in an identified landslide zone (DOC 2023). Future residential development resulting from Project implementation would involve grading and earthwork: however. mandatory compliance with existing regulations, including the preparation and submission of soil engineering studies, geotechnical evaluations. and seismicity reports for new developments would ensure that potential landslide impacts would remain less than significant.
Additionally, the Project would be required to comply with applicable policies and CBC design standards related to seismic and geologic hazards. Therefore, future residential development resulting from Project implementation would not cause substantial adverse effects related to landslides, and impacts would be less than significant. As such, this topic does not require further evaluation in the EIR.
II 3-26
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures b) Would the project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Finding: Less Than Significant Impact
During Project implementation and construction, onsite soils can be prone to erosion during construction activities, such as site grading. To reduce the potential for erosion during construction activities, a Storm water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), which specifies best management practices (BMPs) for temporary erosion control measures, would be required. Standard erosion control measures would be implemented as part of the SWPPP to minimize the risk of erosion or sedimentation during construction.
Additionally, the SWPPP is required to include an erosion control plan that describes measures such as phased grading. limiting areas of disturbance, and diverting runoff from disturbed areas. Construction of future residential development resulting from Project implementation would require the preparation and implementation of a SWPPP and erosion control plans to minimize soil erosion impacts that could result.
Therefore, the Project would not result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil, and impacts would be less than significant. As such, this topic does not require further evaluation in the EIR. c) Would the project be located on 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?
Finding: Less Than Significant Impact
The General Plan identifies that the City's Grading and Stormwater Pollution Prevention Implementation Manual and Chapter 9.50.020 of the City's Municipal Code require a geotechnical report to be prepared and filed for all projects in which a grading permit is required. Compliance with this requirement would minimize impact resulting from unstable geologic or soil conditions. The recommendations included in the geotechnical reports are required to be included in the grading plans and implemented during future Project implementation and development. Furthermore, compliance with CBC design requirements and additional review and approval of grading plans would minimize impacts resulting from unstable geologic or soil conditions. Compliance with existing regulations. including the preparation and implementation of site-specific soil engineering and geotechnical evaluations. would reduce potential impacts to less than significant levels. Therefore, future residential development resulting from Project implementation would not be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable or that would become unstable, and impacts would be less than significant. As such, this topic does not require further evaluation in the EIR. d) Would the project 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? Finding: Less Than Significant Impact
Future residential development resulting from Project implementation would be required to prepare and submit a soil engineering report, and geotechnical evaluations as required under Chapter 9.50.020 of the Municipal Code. Recommendations in the geotechnical reports are required to be implemented into grading plans and during construction activities related to future residential development resulting from Project implementations. Additionally, future residential development resulting from Project IJ 3-27
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures implementation would be required to comply with CBC and grading regulations that would minimize the risks associated with development proposed in areas containing expansive soils. With implementation of recommendations included in geotechnical reports and adherence to existing regulations related to development in areas with expansive soils, impacts would be less than significant. As such, this topic does not require further evaluation in the EIR.
e) Would the project have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use o f septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater?
Finding: No Impact
The General Plan identifies the City as completely ' built out" and necessary infrastructure such as water, wastewater, and drainage systems are fully constructed to withstand City system demands. Therefore, future residential development resulting from Project implementation would not require the use of septic tanks or alternative waste disposal systems, and there would be no impact. As such, this topic does not require further evaluation in the EIR.
f) Would the project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geological feature?
Finding: Potentially Significant Impact
As discussed above, approval of the proposed Project by itself would not directly affect paleontological resources, as the Project sets the framework for future growth and development in the City by providing additional opportunities for development of low- and moderate-income housing and, therefore, does not directly result in development. However, future residential development resulting from Project implementation could indirectly affect paleontological resources, as it would allow for future development of the sites. Grading and construction activities on Housing Opportunity Sites identified for future residential development could require earth moving activities that could potentially unearth previously unrecorded resources and result in significant impacts. Future residential development resulting from Project implementation would be required to implement General Plan Cultural Resources Element policies related to reducing impacts of potential development on cultural resources and would be required to comply with existing laws and regulations pertaining to historical, archaeological and paleontological resources. As it is unknown if Housing Opportunity Sites may contain unknown paleontological resources, surveys will be conducted to determine and assess potential impacts to such resources. Therefore, this potentially significant impact will be analyzed in the EIR.
IJ 3-28
Commented (SP23]: The EIR needs to address the
adequacy of the existing wastewater disposal systems
to meet the additional capacity required for the
Project's developments.
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures
3.8 GREENHOUSE GASES
Potentially Less Than
GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS Significant Significant
Would the project: Impact with Mitigation
Incorporation
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the ~ □ environment? b) Conmct with an applicable plan, policy or regulalion adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of ~ □ greenhouse gases?
3.8.1 Environmental Setting
Less Than
Significant No
Impact Impact
□ □
□ □
Various gases in the earth's atmosphere, classified as atmospheric Greenhouse Gases (GHGs), play a critical role in determining the earth's surface temperature. Among the prominent GHGs contributing to the greenhouse effect are carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH,), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SFo). Each GHG differs in its ability to absorb heat in the atmosphere of GHG emissions are presented in carbon dioxide equivalent, which weight each gas by its global wanming potential. 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 lime 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 NF,, SFo, PFCs, and black carbon.
Emissions from future residential development resulting from Project could be generated by the following sources:
m
Transportation: Emissions from vehicle trips beginning and ending in the City boundaries and from external/internal vehicle trips (i.e., trips that either begin or end in the City).
Energy: Emissions generated from purchased electricity and natural gas consumption used for cooking and heating in the City.
Solid Waste Disposal: Indirect emissions from waste generated in the City.
Water/Wastewater: Emissions from electricity used to supply, treat, and distribute water based on the overall water demand and wastewater generation in the City.
Area Sources: Emissions generated from light commercial equipment, agricultural, and construction equipment use m the City.
3-29
l Commented (SP24]: Please add emissions from
~ cling", "lighting", appliances, etc. l
Commented (SP2S]: Including also backup
generators, portable equipment.
--,
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures
3.8.2 Environmental Impact Analysis
a) Would the project generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
Finding: Potentially Significant Impact
This Project sets the framework for future growth and development in the City by providing additional opportunities for development of low- and moderate-income housing and therefore, does not directly result in development. Certification of the Project itself would not lead to direct greenhouse gas emissions; however, future residential development associated with Project implementation would result in greenhouse gas emissions. As such, greenhouse gas emissions resulting from future Project implementation that may have a significant impact on the environment. Therefore, this potentially significant impact will be further analyzed in the EIR. b) Would the project conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
Finding: Potentially Significant Impact
The Project identifies Housing Opportunity Sites that have the potential for providing additional housing to meet the City's RHNA allocation Development of the Housing Opportunity Sites would require activities that would result in increased greenhouse gas emissions. Therefore, future residential development resulting from Project implementation may conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing emissions and greenhouse gases, and this potentially significant impact will be further analyzed in the EIR.
3-30
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures
3.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Less Than
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Potentially Significant Would the project: Significant with
Impact MIUgatlon
Incorporation
a} Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or D D
disposal of hazardous materials?
b} Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset D D and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste D D within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
d} Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, D D
would it create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment?
e} For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within
two miles of a public airport or public use airport,
would the project result in a safety hazard or (8) □
excessive noise for people residing orwor1<ing in the
project area?
f} Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency D D evacuation plan? g} Expose people or structures, either directly or
indirectly. to a significant risk of loss, injury or death D D involving wildland fires?
3.9.1 Environmental Setting
Less Than No Significant Impact Impact
[8] D
[8] □
[8] D
[81 D
□ D
[2] □
[2] □
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 California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) is a division of Cal EPA and works in conjunction with the United States Environmental Protection Agency (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 1-405 and 1- 3-31
Commented [SP26]: Item d} should be characterized j as a Potentially Significant Impact. The Marina site (an historic oil transportation site} and other sites where oil production , transportation, and processing took place
should be assessed at least at a site-specific Phase I
level in the EIR. Other sites with potential hazardous
waste should be assessed to identify the responsible
party and the timing and cost of potential cleanup to
residential standards. Some of these sites may not be
able to remediated to residential levels within the
development timeframe specilled in the Housing
Element, if ever.
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures 605 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 deanup sites within the City that are listed on several databases, including the State Water Resources Control Board Geotracker website (SWRCB 2023).
The City's General Plan Safety Element includes the following goals and policies related to hazards and hazardous materials (City of Seal Beach 2003):
• 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 28: 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 Newsletter, neighborhood posters, and at least annual presentations at neighborhood association meetings. • Policy 2H: Support the combination of the OCFA's hazardous materials disdosure 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 21: 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 1-405 freeway as the primary designated route. 3-32
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures
3.9 2 Environmental Impact Analysis
a) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? Finding: Less Than Significant Impact
Construction activities associated with future residential development resulting from Project implementation is anticipated to involve demolition, grading, and construction of new structures and buildings. Hazardous materials, such as paints, sealants, solvents, diesel fuels, and other typical hazardous materials for construction would be used. With the use of these materials, there is potential for spills to create hazardous conditions. Future residential development resulting from Project implementation would be required to comply with all applicable regulations, Orange County Hazardous Waste Management Plan, and General Plan policies that would minimize risks associated with the use or hazardous materials during construction activities, and they would be required to adhere to all emergency response plan requirements set forth by the Orange County Fire Authority (OCFA) throughout Project implementation.
The Project is proposing rezoning and establishment or additional residential and housing zones for Housing Opportunity Sites throughout the City. Upon completion of construction hazardous materials associated with Project operations would include materials used during typical household cleaning and maintenance activities. Although these potentially hazardous materials would vary, they would generally include household cleaning products, paints, fertilizers, and herbicides and pesticides. Many of these materials are considered household hazardous waste, common wastes, and/or universal wastes by the USE PA, which considers these types or wastes to be common to businesses and households and to pose a lower risk to people and the environment than other hazardous wastes when property handled, transported, used, and disposed of (USEPA 2020). Federal, state, and local regulations typically allow these types of wastes to be handled and disposed or with less stringent standards than other hazardous wastes, and many of these wastes do not have to be managed as hazardous waste.
Therefore, by complying with existing laws, regulations, and General Plan policies, future residential development resulting from Project implementation would not create a significant hazard through routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials, and impacts would be less than significant. As such, this topic does not require further evaluation in the EIR. b) Would the project 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?
Finding: Less Than Significant Impact
During construction activities, the transport, use, storage, and disposal of hazardous materials could result in accidental releases into the environment. However, compliance with applicable laws and regulations would minimize the potential for hazardous materials releases that could pose harm to the public or environment.
3-33
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures Future Project implementation would establish additional residential housing opportunities throughout the City. As mentioned above, common materials associated with residential uses indude small quantity hazardous material, such as cleaners and pesticides. Future residential development resulting from Project implementation would not pose a substantial hazard to the public or environment through accidental releases. Therefore, by complying with existing laws, regulations, and General Plan policies, future residential development resulting from Project implementation would not create a significant hazard through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions, and impacts would be less than significant. As such, this topic does not require further evaluation in the EIR. c) Would the project emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? Finding: Less Than Significant Impact
The proposed Housing Opportunity Sites are distributed throughout the City. Housing Opportunity Sites 8 and 11 are located within one-quarter mile of McGaugh Elementary School, which is currently surrounded by existing residential development, Seal Beach Boulevard and the Seal Beach Naval Weapons Station.
As stated under Impact a), construction activities required for future residential development resulting from Project implementation would be required to comply with all applicable regulations, Orange County Hazardous Waste Management Plan, and General Plan policies that would minimize risks associated with the use of hazardous materials during construction activities. The same regulations that would protect onsite construction workers from potential risks related to the use of hazardous materials would also protect any nearby sensitive receptors, including schools. Future residential development resulting from Project implementation would be required to comply with existing laws and regulations regarding hazardous materials, waste, and emissions to minimize the potential for hazardous emissions to occur.
Adherence to federal, state, and local regulations and requirements would reduce potential impacts associated with the accidental release of hazardous materials. Therefore, future residential development resulting from Project implementation would not emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school, and impacts would be less than significant. As such, this topic does not require further evaluation in the EIR.
d) Would the project 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 c reate a significant hazard to the public or the environment?
Finding: Less Than Significant Impact
The Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites List (Cortese List) is a planning document providing information about the location of hazardous materials release sites. California Government Code Section 65962.5 requires Cal EPA to develop, at least annually, an updated Cortese List. The DTSC is responsible for a portion of the information contained in the Cortese List. Other state and local government agencies are required to provide additional hazardous materials release information for the 3-34
,--------
Commented [SP27]: See comment below, regarding
the Geo Tracker hazardous waste site list and the
I
inclusion of the Marina site on it. The EIR should look at each of the proposed sites more closely from a
waste site/risk perspective. It may not be feasible to
locate residences on contaminated sites, or do so in a
timely fashion. The Marina site may not be suitable for residential development.
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures Cortese List. Several hazardous material sites are identified within the City; however, none of the Housing Opportunity Sites are identified on the Cortese List.
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. Future residential development resulting from Project implementation would be required to prepare and submit a Phase I ESA, as appropriate. If Phase I identifies a recognized environmental condition, it would recommend preparation or a Phase 11 ESA, which would consist or sampling and testing of soil, soil vapor, and groundwater for hazardous materials and human health risks assessments based on concentrations of the hazardous materials identified. Future residential development resulting from Project implementation would be required to implement the recommendations induded in the ESAs to remediate hazardous materials before the City would issue building permits. If a new development that is developed under the Project is located on a property contaminated by hazardous substances, compliance with laws and regulations for investigations and remediation regulated at the local, state, and federal level would be required. Additionally, future residential development resulting from Project implementation would be required to implement General Plan policies that would minimize risks from hazardous materials sites. As future residential development resulting from Project implementation would require adherence to General Plan policies, compliance with applicable laws and regulations regarding hazardous materials sites, and preparation of environmental site assessments, impacts would be less than significant. As such, this topic does not require further evaluation in the EIR. e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public or private airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area? Finding: Potentially Significant Impact
The closest public airport to the Housing Opportunity Sites is Long Beach Airport, located approximately
5.2 miles to the northwest of the City. The City is not located within the Long Beach Airport's Airport Influence Area and therefore, Long Beach Airport operations would not result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working on the identified Housing Opportunity Sites (Los Angeles County 2004). The Los Alamitos Joint Forces Training Base is not a public airport: however, it is located approximately 600 feet to the east of Housing Opportunity Sites 5, 6, and 10.). As identified in the Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) for Joint Forces Training Base Los Alamitos, the City is located within the airport's notification area and the identified Housing Opportunity Sites are dispersed throughout the airport's different height restriction zones and impact zones. Therefore, there is potential for development or the Housing Opportunity Sites to result in safety hazards. As discussed in Section 3. 13, Noise, below, none of the Housing Opportunity Sites are located within the 65 decibel (dB) noise contour areas for the Los Alamitos Joint Forces Training Base, under both existing and future scenarios, as identified by the General Plan Noise Element (City of Seal Beach 2003). However. some sites are located adjacent to the noise contour areas and would require noise control measures to minimize potential impacts. Therefore, due to the proximity of the Housing Opportunity Sites to the Los Alamitos Joint Forces Training Base, 3-35
f Commented [SP28): Please refer to the Geotracker for
a more complete and up-to-date listing of hazardous
waste sites and their current status in and around the
proposed project site areas. The Manna site seems to
require assessment and remedial action. Other sites
may also require assessment and remediation or be J
very close to areas requiring remedial action.
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures implementation of the Project could result in a safety or noise hazard for people residing or working in the area and result in a potentially significant impact. This potentially significant impact will be further analyzed in the EIR.
f) Would the project impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Finding: Less Than Significant Impact
The City has prepared an Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) and a Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP) to ensure protection of City residents in times of emergency and to identify local hazards and provide measures to address these hazards (City of Seal Beach 2017). All future residential development resulting from Project implementation would be required to comply with applicable fire and building codes and would be required to be reviewed by the OCFA's Community Risk Reduction Division prior to approval. Additionally, Project implementation would be required to comply with policies identified in the General Plan to ensure effective emergency response. Compliance with General Plan policies, applicable fire and building codes, and the City's EOP and LHMP would ensure that Project implementation would not substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or evacuation plan, and there would be no impact. As such, this topic does not require further evaluation in the EIR. g) Would the project expose people or structures, either directly or Indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wlldland fires?
Finding: Less Than Significant Impact
The Housing Opportunity Sites are located on different parcels located throughout the City and are not located in hillside areas or areas with urban-wildland interfaces. Project implementation would not occur within a State Responsibility Area (SRA) or Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ). Future residential developments resulting from Project implementation would be required to adhere to a wide range of state and local codes pertaining to fire protection and would be required to abide by the City's EOP and LHMP. Adherence to the measures in these plans would minimize impacts to the extent possible and would ensure that new developments would not expose people or structures to significant risks associated with wildland fires. Additionally, future residential development resulting from Project implementation would be required to implement General Plan policies identified to minimize risk from wildfire hazards. Therefore, with implementation of applicable state and local codes, future residential development resulting from Project implementation would not expose people or structures to significant wildland fire risks, and impacts would be less than significant. As such, this topic does not require further evaluation in the EIR.
II 3-36
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures
3.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Less Than
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Potentially Significant Less Than No Would the project: Slgnlflcant with Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation
a) Violate water quality standards or waste discharge
requirements or otherwise substantially degrade D □ ~ surface or groundwater quality? b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater recharge 0 □ D such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin?
C) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river or through the addition or
impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
i. Result in substantial erosion or siltation on- D D 0 or off-sile; ii. Substantially inccease the rate or amount of
surface runoff in a manner which would 0 D □ result in flooding on- or off-site; iii. Create or contribute rvnoffwaterwhich would
exceed the capacity of existing or planned
stormwater drainage syslems or provide 0 D □ substantial additional sources of polluted runoff; or
iv, Impede or redirect flood flows. ~ D □
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk
release of pollutants due to project inundation? ~ □ □
e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water
quality control plan or sustainable groundwater 0 □ □ management plan?
3.10 1 Environmental Setting
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 Bernadine Mountains to its outlet in the Pacific Ocean (Orange County 2013). The Santa Ana River Watershed encompasses approximately 2,700 square miles.
□
□
□
□
□
□
D
D
The City is located near multiple hydrologic features which indude rivers. the Pacific ocean and wetlands.
Within the City limits is the mouth of the San Gabriel River, draining an area of approximately 700 square miles within Los Angeles and Orange Counties, the Pacific Ocean, and various wetland areas that are subject to various sources of pollution within lhe community. 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 I
m 3-37
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures within the City. The river is 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).
The City's General Plan Safety Element includes the following goals and policies related to hydrology and water quality (City of Seal Beach 2003):
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 now of sewage into the City storm drains.
Policy 20: 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.
Policy 2U: Encourage the use of water quality weUands, biofittration 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.
3 10.2 Environmental Impact Analysis
a) Would the project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality? Finding: Less Than Significant Impact
Construction activities related to Project implementation could impact water quality due to erosion and other pollutants entering construction site runoff, resulting in polluted runoff entering the City's stormwater system. Construction activities such as grading could accelerate the rate of erosion and cause substantial impacts to water quality. The City's General Plan Open Space, Recreation, and Conservation Element encourages reducing urban pollutant runoff through implementation of National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) programs (City of Seal Beach 2003). Additionally, Chapter 9.30 Storm Water Management Program of the City's Municipal Code includes requirements for stormwater drainage systems, polluted runoff, control of water quality management, and enforcement and permit requirements. 3-38
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures 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 to ensure that potential for soil erosion is minimized. 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 controls necessary to mitigate potential pollutant sources. The Project would also be required to implement General Plan policies that would ensure that new development minimizes potential water quality impacts. Therefore, with the implementation of General Plan policies, adherence to NPDES and Construction General Permit requirements, such as the preparation of a SWPPP, and adherence to all relevant state and local regulations, construction activities associated future residential development resulting from Project implementation would not violate water quality standards or waste discharge requirements, and impacts would be less than significant.
Operation of future residential development resulting from Project implementation could potentially create new sources of polluted runoff and increase post-construction pollutants. However, as identified in the Housing Element Update, all of the identified Housing Opportunity Sites are already developed with existing uses; therefore, development of the Housing Opportunity Site with residential uses would not result in a substantial increase in polluted runoff and impervious surfaces. To prevent long-term impacts related to Project operation, new residential development 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 residential development 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), 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. Additionally, future residential development resulting from Project implementation would be required to incorporate General Plan policies which ensure that new development minimizes potential water quality impacts. With the adherence to federal, state, and local regulations and requirements and relevant General Plan policies, runoff associated with both construction and operation of future residential development resulting from Project implementation would not violate any water quality standards or discharge requirements, and impacts would be less than significant. As such, this topic does not require further evaluation in the EIR.
b) 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~
Finding: Potentially Significant Impact
The Project is proposing implementation of the City's new Housing Element Update and Zoning Code Update which would result in the provision of Housing Opportunity Sites throughout the City that have the potential to accommodate new housing developments to help the City meet its RHNA allocation. As IJ 3-39
Commented [SP29]: The EIR should establish the
City's cunentwater supply and demand and compare
that to the post-project (Increased) supply and demand.
The EIR should then establish those same pre-and
post data sets for all of the reasonably anticipated
future projects which rely on the same water supply sources. That Q.lmulative project list would include all of the reasonably anticipated development projects in
other cities being proposed to comply with the same state housing mandates. This cumulative supply/demand analysis will establish whether there
will be enough water to supply our City's post-project
population without having to aeate new water supply
sources, such as highly costly desalination plants.
Essentially, If every City that depends on MWDOC and
OCWD sources expands their demand over the next 10
years, demand may likely exceed supply and lead to
rationing or desalination. These Q.lmulatlve impacts
need to be studied now and made completely
transparent in the EIR.
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures identified in the Housing Element Update, all of the identified Housing Opportunity Sites are already developed; therefore, they do not provide substantial areas for groundwater recharge. As identified in the City's 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP), the City provides water to its residents and other customers using the imported potable water supply obtained from its regional wholesaler, Municipal Water District of Orange County (MWDOC) and local groundwater from the Orange County Groundwater Basin, which is managed by the Orange County Water District (OCWD). According to the 2020 UWMP, the City relied on 65 percent groundwater and 35 percent imported water during its Fiscal Year 2019- 2020 and by 2045, it is projected that the water supply portfolio would change to approximately 85 percent groundwater and 15 percent imported water (City of Seal Beach 2021). Future residential developments resulting from implementation of the Project would result in an increased demand of potable water in the City through increased development and resulting in indirect population growth; therefore, an increased demand to groundwater supplies would result. Therefore, implementation of the Project oould result in decreased groundwater supplies resulting from increased demand, and this potentially significant impact will be further analyzed in the EIR. c) Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, Including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of Impervious surfaces, In a manner which would;
I. Result In substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site; Finding: Less Than Significant Impact
Implementation of the Project would result in changes to land uses which may result in an increase of impervious surfaces. However, the Housing Opportunity Sites identified for rezoning under the Project are already developed with existing uses and located in areas surrounded by existing developments. Future residential developments resulting from implementation of the Project would utilize the existing drainage facilities in the existing surrounding areas. Additionally, Project implementation would require construction activities that oould result in increased potential for erosion and siltation to occur. As identified above, under Impact a), the Project would be required to oomply with City Municipal Code Chapter 9.20 Storm Water Management Program. City 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 DAMP. Additionally, the future residential development resulting from Project implementation would be required to oomply with development requirements and standards for storm drainage and stormwater runoff identified under City Municipal Code Section 11.4.10.020(H), induding 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 development projects would be required to prepare and implement a SWPPP, including standard erosion control measures and BMPs to minimize the risk of polluted runoff resulting from increased erosion and sedimentation. The SWPPP would indude an erosion control plan that identifies measures, such as diverting runoff from disturbed areas and treatment measures to trap sediment, to ensure there is no polluted runoff. Additionally, future residential development resulting from Project implementation m 3-40
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures would be required to incorporate General Plan policies which ensure that new development minimizes potential water quality impacts resulting from erosion and siltation. With the adherence to federal, state, and local regulations and requirements and relevant General Plan policies, runoff associated with both construction and operation of future residential development resulting from implementation of the Project would not result in increased erosion or siltation on or offsite, and impacts would be less than significant As such, this topic does not require further evaluation in the EIR.
Ii. Substantially Increase the rate or amount of surface runoff In a manner which would result In flooding on- or off-site;
Finding: Potentially Significant Impact
Future residential development resulting from Project implementation could result in an increase of impervious surfaces within the City; however, implementation of the Project would not result in substantial increases in impervious surfaces as the Housing Opportunity Sites identified for rezoning are already developed with existing uses and located in highly urbanized areas with substantial impervious surfaces.
Though the Project may not result in substantial increased in impervious surfaces resulting in increased rate and amount of surface runoff, there are existing stonn drainage capacity issues within portions of the City. Therefore, Project implementation and development of some of the identified Housing Opportunity Sites may result in flooding impacts related to stonnwater runoff. As such, this potentially significant impact will be further analyzed in the EIR.
Ill. 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
Finding: Potentially Significant Impact
As identified above under Impact c.i, the Project would be required to comply with City Municipal Code Chapter 9.20, Stenn Water Management Program. City 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 DAMP. Additionally, the Project would be required to comply with development requirements and standards for stonn drainage and stormwater runoff identified under City Municipal Code Section 11.4.10.020(H), 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 pennit requirements. Compliance with these requirements would ensure both construction and operation of future residential development resulting from Project implementation would not result in increased polluted runoff.
However, as identified above under Impact c.ii, there are existing stonn drainage capacity issues within portions of the City. Therefore, Project implementation and development of some of the identified Housing Opportunity Sites may result in creation or contribution of runoff water that would exceed the capacity of the storm drainage system. As such, this potentially significant impact will be further analyzed in the EIR. 341
Commented (SP30J: Thank you for including the study
of storm water volume and capacity impacts In EIR
Study. Please also consider Impacts to the capacity of
cunent stonn water pumping systems, and the
potential need to upgrade or augment those systems.
Please include an analysis of future Impacts to any
other stonnwater Infrastructure and drainage, taking
Into account sea level rise, and rising groundwater
table in tidal influenced areas. Please also consider the potential impacts on storm water ~from the
Project, including addltlonal pet waste, trash, Irrigation runoff, dissolved contamlnants. suspended solids, and
ffoatables. Mitigation could lndude requiring
development areas and areas Impacted by
development (such as parks, etc) to be equipped with
managed pet waste and trash disposal facilities.
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures iv. Impede or redirect flood flows.
Finding: Potentially Significant Impact
As identified in the City's General Plan Safety Element. portions or the City are subject to flooding due to wave run-up which is typically caused by large swells produced by storms ay sea occurring at high tide (City of Seal Beach 2003). Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) prepares Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) to identify potential flood areas across the United States. A majority of the Housing Opportunity Sites identified for the Project are located within areas identified as Zone X, or an area with minimal flood hazard and is identified as an area with reduced flood risk due to levees (FEMA 2023).
However, as identified by FEMA, Housing Opportunity Sites 11 and 12 are located within Zone D, an area with possible but undetermined flood hazards. Additionally. Housing Opportunity Site 1 O and a portion or Housing Opportunity Site 6 are located within areas identified by FEMA as Zone AE (EL 14). or a special flood hazard area with a flood elevation of 14 feet. As some of the Housing Opportunity Sites are located within flood risk areas, future residential developments resulting from implementation of the Project may be located in areas susceptible to flooding and implementation of the Project could impede or redirect flood flows. Therefore, this potentially significant impact will be further analyzed in the EIR. d) Would the project in flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation?
Finding: Potentially Significant Impact
As identified above under Impact 3.iv, a majority or the Housing Opportunity Sites identified for the Project are located within areas identified as Zone X, or an area with minimal flood hazard and is identified as an area with reduced flood risk due to levees (FEMA 2023). However, Housing Opportunity Sites 11 and 12 are located within Zone D, an area with possible but undetermined flood hazards and Housing Opportunity Site 1 O and a portion or Housing Opportunity Site 6 are located within areas identified by FEMA as Zone AE (EL 14), or a special flood hazard area with a flood elevation of 14 feet. Due to the City's proximity to the Pacific Ocean, the City is at risk or 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 2003a). As such, implementation of the Project could result in risk of release of pollutants due to project inundation resulting from flooding, tsunamis, and seiches and therefore, this potentially significant impact will be further analyzed in the EIR. e) Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
Finding: Potentially Significant Impact
Measures identified above to ensure lhat developments have a less than significant impact on surface and groundwater quality would also ensure that future development does not obstruct or conflict with implementation or a water quality control plan. However, as identified above under Impact b). the Project may result in potentially significant impacts related to groundwater supplies such that the Project may m 3-42
Commented [SP31]: Please also analyze the
requirements for flood insurance in the project areas j and consider whether areas with high flood insurance I costs can realistically and justly serve middle or lower me residents.
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin. [Therefore, future residential development resulting from Project implementation could conflict with or obstruct Implementation of a sustainable groundwater management plan, and this potentially significant impact will be further analyzed in the EIR.i II
Commented [SP32J: Cumulative impacts must be
assessed from all reasonably anticipated projects
served by the same water supply resources. This
Includes all reasonably anticipated projects in other
cities.
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures
3.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING
Less Than
LAND USE AND PLANNING Potentially Significant
Would the project Significant with
Impact Mitigation
Incorporation
a) Physically divide an established community? □ □
b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to a
conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation
adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating 18] □ an environmental effect?
3.11 .1 EnvrronmentalSetting
Less Than No Significant Impact Impact
18] □
□ □
The proposed Project is located in the City of Seal Beach, California, located at the northwestern edge of Orange County, California. II borders the City of Long Beach (Los Angeles County) to the north, the Orange County Cities of Huntington Beach and Westminster to the east, Huntington Beach to the south, and the Pacific Ocean to the west. The Project is interspersed throughout the City, which has a land area of approximately 13 square miles. The Project proposes to rezone six Housing Opportunity Srtes, proposes a new Specific Plan for one site, and proposed a Specific Plan Amendment for another site, in order to allow increased residential densification which would result from implementation of the Housing Element Update. Additionally, the Project identified three underutilized sites and two military sites as Housing Opportunity Sites that could be redeveloped with residential uses to help the City meet its RHNA allocation.
3.11 2 Environmental Impact Analysis
a) Would the project physically divide an established community? Finding: Less Than Significant Impact
The Project identified Housing Opportunity Sites within the City to allow for densified residential development, including low- and moderate-income housing units to help the City meet its RHNA allocation. Future residential development resulting from Project implementation would occur within areas that are already developed and would not occur within any existing residential communities that could be divided. The identified Housing Opportunity Sites are dispersed throughout the City rather than concentrated in a single area of the City and therefore, development of these sites would not result in division of established communities. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant, and this topic does not require further evaluation in the EIR.
I
3-44
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures b) Would the project cause a significant environmental Impact due to a conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
Finding: Potentially Significant Impact
The Project is proposing to redevelop, or rezone identified Housing Opportunity Sites in various locations throughout the City. The Housing Element Update identifies 13 Housing Opportunity Sites throughout the City that have the potential for providing additional housing. The sites are broken into two categories:
underutilized sites that do not require zoning code changes and sites where zoning modification are proposed. Of the 13 Housing Opportunity Sites, six require rezoning, two on the Seal Beach Naval Weapons Station require a change of use, one is proposed for a Specific Plan, and one would require an amendment to the Main Street Specific Plan. Housing Opportunity Site 10 is going through its own rezoning and specific plan process with the current property owner. The rezoning effort would also indude the establishment of a new zoning designation, MC/RHO, which would apply to five of the Housing Opportunity Sites (Sites 4, 5, 6, 7, and B). The new MC/RHO mixed-use zoning designation is needed in order to facilitate a density equivalent to RHO-46 (up to 46 units per acre) but with a minimum density of 40 units per acre. Future residential development resulting from Project implementation may cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with applicable land use plan, policy. or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigation an environmental effect. Therefore, this impact will be further analyzed in the EIR.
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT ANO ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures
3.12 MINERAL RESOURCES
Less Than
MINERAL RESOURCES Potentially Significant Less Than No
Would the project: Significant with Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporation
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and □ D □ [SJ the residents of the state?
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally- important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a □ D D (8) local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan?
3 12.1 Environmental Setting
Mineral resources in the City include an oil extraction at Esther Island within the tidelands, oil extraction along the Newport-Inglewood Fault on the Hellman Ranch property, and an oil lease site in the Seal Beach NWR (City of Seal Beach 2003). The California Surface Mining and Reclamation Act of 1975 sets forth requirement for the state to classify all land into Mineral Resource Zones (MRZs) that indicate the potential for mineral resources regardless of existing land use or ownership. However, there are no known or identified mineral resources identified within the Housing Opportunity Sites (DOC 2023b).
3.12.2 Environmental Impact Analysis
a) Would the project result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state?
b) Would the project result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan? a-b) Finding: No Impact
The General Plan does not indicate that any Housing Opportunity Sites are located within an area of locally important mineral resources (City of Seal Beach 2003). Housing Opportunity Site 9 is zoned OE; however, it is a vacant lot with no oil extraction or production activities present. The Project area does not encompass the City's identified resource areas: Hellman Ranch, Esther Island, and the Seal Beach NWR.
The proposed Housing Opportunity Sites are residential, commercial, and other underutilized areas.
Housing Opportunity Site 4 is the nearest site to one of the identified resources, Hellman Ranch, and is located approximately 0.3-mile to the northeast. Additionally, the Housing Opportunity Sites are not currently used for mineral extraction and do not contain any known or designated mineral resources.
Future residential development resulting from Project implementation would not result in the loss of availability of any known mineral resources, nor would it have potential impacts associated with the loss availability of a locally mineral resource recovery site. As such, there would be no impact, and this impact does not require further evaluation in the EIR.
3-46
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures
3.13 NOISE
Less Than
NOISE Potentially Significant
Would the project result in: Significant with
Impact Mitigation
Incorporation
a) Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent
increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of
the project in excess of standards established in
the local general plan or noise ordinance, or ~ □
applicable standards of other agencies?
b) Generation of excessive groundbome vibration or
groundbome noise levels. ~ □
c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan, or where such
a plan has not been adopted within two miles of a
public airport or public use airport, would the ~ □
project expose people residing or working in the
project area to excessive noise levels?
3.13.1 Environmental Settlng
Less Than No Significant Impact Impact
□ □
□ □ -
□ □
The City has set noise and vibration performance standards for noise sources in the City, which are adopted by reference from Orange County Code Section 4-6.1. City Municipal Code Chapter 7.15, Noise, defines the qualitative standards used in determining a potential violation and provides performance standards for interior and exterior noise by zone, based on land use (City of Seal Beach 2023e). Table 6 shows the acceptable interior and exterior noise limits by zone. Exterior noise limits in the table are based on the noise contours and compatibility guidelines provided in the General Plan Noise Element (City of Seal Beach 2003).
Table 6: City Interior and Exterior Noise Standards
Noise Zone Interior Exterior (dBA Ldn) Time Period
(dBA Ldn)'
Noise Zone 1 - Residential Properties 55 55 7:00 am to 10:00 pm Noise Zone 1 - Residential Properties 50 50 10:00 pm to 7:00 am Noise Zone 2 - Commercial Properties 65 At any time
Noise Zone 3 - Industrial, 70 At any time
Manufacturing and Oil Properties
Source: City of Seal Beach Municipal Code, 2023.
Notes: dB (decibels) at the A-weighted scale over a 24-hour, lime-weighted annual average noise level.
The City's Municipal Code indicates that noise associated with construction, repair, remodeling or grading of real property are exempt from the noise standards if performed between 7:00 am and 8:00 pm on weekdays and 8:00 am and 8:00 pm on Saturday (City of Seal Beach 2023e). 3-47
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures According to the General Plan Noise Element, the predominant noise source in the City is caused by automobiles and some overflights from military aircrafts. Noise sensitive receptors in the City include, but are not limited to, residences, schools, hospitals, elder care facilities, or any other land use areas deemed as sensitive by the City. As part of the General Plan Noise Element, in 2002, 10 sites were selected for measurement of the existing noise environment, which proved to be highly variable, depending on the location (City of Seal Beach 2003). The time-averaged sound level in the City was in the range of approximately 59.8 to 70.3 dBA Leq.
3.13 2 Environmental Impact Analysis
a) Would the project result in generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vic inity of the project in excess of standards established in the local g eneral plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? Finding: Potentially Significant Impact
Construction and operation resulting from future residential development resulting from Project implementation could result in the generation of temporary and permanent increases in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of future development projects. Future residential development resulting from Project implementation may result in a substantial increase in ambient noise in excess of City standards.
Therefore, this potentially significant impact will be further analyzed in the EIR. b) Would the project exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundbome vibration or groundborne noise levels?
Finding: Potentially Significant Impact
Construction activities associated with development of the identified Housing Opportunity Sites would generate varying degrees of groundbome vibration and noise levels, depending on construction procedures and equipment. Construction and operation of the future residential development resulting from Proiect implementation may result in exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels. Therefore, this potentially significant impact will be further analyzed in the EIR.
c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan, or where such a plan has not been adopted within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing o r working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
Finding: Potentially Significant Impact
The closest public use airport to the City boundaries is Long Beach Airport, which is located approximately 5.2 miles to the northwest, and its airport land use plan boundaries are approximately three miles from the City boundaries. The Los Alamitos Joint Forces Training Base conducts flights over the City and noise sensitive land uses throughout the week. The Los Alamitos Joint Forces Training Base is 3-48
Commented [SPBJ: Significant noise sources are
motorcycles and automobiles exceeding lawful noise
standards through modifications, and through
Insufficient noise enforcement from the City. These
noise impacts are already known to hanm humans
(hearing loss, sleep loss, etc) and animals and birds
(nesting, breeding and feeding habits) in our
environment. Additional residents and traffic will add to car and motorcycle noise. This needs to be studied in
the EIR and mitigated with accountability. Mitigation
should be monitored and adjusted if needed to achieve
noise mitigation goals.
I Commented [SP34J: Please include transportation!
noise and HVAC noise. HVAC noise may be especially I
important to assess and mitigate in multi-use
residential development. ___,
Commented [SP3SJ: The EIR should ensure that
potential noise sources at the Los Alamitos Training
Base are assessed using the types of aircraft and
equipment that will be used there, as well as the flying protocols that will be used !here. Commercial aircraft
have far more restrictive noise controls, implemented
through aircraft and engine design and through
administrative controls • such as curfews and highly
restrictive flight paths. Those noise controls are
typically not required for the military. _J
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures not a public airport; however, it is located approximately 600 feet to the east of Housing Opportunity Sites 5, 6, and 1 o. The General Plan Noise Element provides noise contours prepared by the Califomia National Guard, and several noise sensitive areas north of 1-405 were experiencing aircraft-generated noise levels greater than 65 dB at the community noise equivalent level (CNEL). General Plan Noise Element Figure N-5 depicts the existing noise contours of the Los Alamitos Joint Forces Training Base, and Figure N-6 depicts the future noise contours. None of the Housing Opportunity Sites are located within the 65 dB CNEL noise contour, both in the existing and future scenarios, as identified by the General Plan Noise Element (City of Seal Beach 2003). However, some sites are located adjacent to the noise contour areas and would require noise control measures to minimize potential impacts. Therefore, due to the proximity of the Housing Opportunity Sites to the Los Alamitos Joint Forces Training Base, implementation of the Project could result in excessive noise levels for people residing or working in the area and result in a potentially significant impact. This potentially significant impact will be further analyzed in the EIR.
IJ 3-49
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures
3.14 POPULATION AND HOUSING
Potentially Less Than
POPULATION AND HOUSING Significant with
Would the project: Significant Mitigation Impact Incorporation a) Induce substantial unplanned population
growth in an area, either directly (for example,
by proposing new homes and businesses) or 181 □ indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing
people or housing, necessitaling the
construction of replacement housing □ □
elsewhere?
3.1'4.1 Environment.al Setting
Less Than No Significant Impact Impact
I
D □
~ □
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 lhe U.S. Navy acquired half of the city to construct the Seal Beach Naval Weapons Station bringing new residents to the City. The population increased to more than 7,000 people by 1954. In 1962, the Leisure World retirement community was established in the City with 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. During the 20-year period from 2000 to 2020, the City had an annual grow1h rate of
0.2 percent compared to o. 7 percent for the region as a whole. 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 2022).
Additionally, as of January 1, 2023, the Department of Finance (DOF) population estimates identifies the City's population to be approximately 24,647 residents (DOF 2023).
The housing stock in the City consists of a mix of single-family and multi-family units with one mobile home park. The City's Housing Element Update identified that the most commonly occurring household size in the City is one person ( 45. 1 percent) and the second-most occurring household is of two people (35.4 percent} (City of Seal Beach 2022). As of January 1, 2023, the City is estimated to have 14,675 total housing units with a vacancy rate of 9.3 percent (DOF 2023).
3.50 CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures
3.14.2 Environmental Impact Analysis
a) 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)?
Finding: Potentially Significant Impact
The City is proposing a rezoning program to accommodate the planning of low- and moderate-income households. The City's 2021 - 2029 Housing Element Update was adopted by City Council on February 7, 2022. Pursuant to the state's RHNA allocation, the City is required to plan for 1,243 new housing units. with 258 units allocated for very low-income households, 201 units allocated for low-income households, 239 units allocated for moderate-income households, and 545 units allocated for above moderate-income households. The City's RHNA allocation was 1,243 new housing units, and the Housing Element Update requires the City to demonstrate that ii can accommodate the RHNA allocation, as well as an additional buffer and, therefore, the City proposes a rezoning program to accommodate the planning of low- and moderate-income households, as required by the state's RHNA allocation for the City.
Certification of the proposed Project itself would not result in direct unplanned population growth as the Project is proposing the rezoning and identification Housing Opportunity Sites within the City to allow for more residential development potential and not the actual development of these sites. However, certification of the Project would lead to more parcels in the City being available for residential developments and could result in indirect impacts to population growth.
According to the DOF, as of January 2023, the City is estimated to have a persons per household rate of
1.83 persons per household (DOF 2023). The identified Housing Opportunity Sites could accommodate a total of 1,833 housing units at maximum buildout of each individual site. If all Housing Opportunity Sites are developed to the maximum allowable density with residential uses to provide an additional 1,833 housing units, it would result in a population growth of approximately 3,354 residents. According to the DOF's population estimates, the City had an estimated population of 24,647 as of January 2023 (DOF 2023). Therefore, the 3,354 residents that would be generated by maximum buildout of the Project would result in a 12 percent increase in population over current conditions.
The SCAG identifies growth forecast projections for each county and city under jurisdiction of the SCAG.
The SCAG's 2020-2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy adopted on September 3, 2020, included a demographics and growth forecast technical report that identifies the projected growth for each county and city under the jurisdiction of the SCAG. The SCAG's growth forecast identifies the anticipated population for Seal Beach by the year 2045 to be 25,400 residents (SCAG 2020). As the City's current population is identified at 24,647 residents and implementation of the Project would result in an increase of 3,354 residents, the projected increase in residents resulting from implementation of the Project would be greater than the projected growth for the City.
Project implementation would be in compliance with General Plan and Housing Element Update policies to provide for balanced housing types and affordability levels and provide access to affordable housing to lower-income households. Additionally, the Project would ensure that the City is in compliance with the 3-51
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures state's RHNA allocation for the City. However, as the Project would result in an increase in the number of residents above the projected future residential population for the City, future residential development resulting from Project implementation could result in potentially significant impacts related to population growth. Therefore, this topic will be further evaluation in the EIR. b) Would the project displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
Finding: Less Than Significant Impact
The Housing Opportunity Sites that are proposed for rezoning and the identified underutilized sites include a variety of uses, including commercial, retail, industrial, storage, residential, and military. The Project sets the framework for future growth and development in the City by providing additional opportunities for development of housing and therefore, does not directly result in development.
Certification of the Project itself would not lead to construction of new residential developments in the City but would result in changes to the existing zoning designations and proposed use of the site. Project implementation would not require relocation of existing developments, as it would not directly lead to development of the identified Housing Opportunity Sites. However, if the Housing Opportunity Sites are identified for new development or redevelopment on an individual basis, displacement of existing people or housing could occur. Individual development and redevelopment of the sites may result in displacement of existing people or housing if the identified Housing Opportunity Sites are currently developed with existing residential uses.
However, the Housing Opportunity Sites would likely be developed or redeveloped with a higher density residential development and provide for more residential units, as compared to existing conditions.
Therefore, any existing housing that would be demolished as a result of future residential development resulting from Project implementation could be replaced at a higher ratio of residential units. Therefore, future residential development resulting from Project implementation would not displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere, and impacts would be less than significant. As such, this topic does not require further evaluation in the EIR.
11 3-52
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures
3.15 PUBLIC SERVICES
Less Than
PUBLIC SERVICES Potentially Significant
Significant with
Would the project: impact Mitigation
Incorpo ration
Less Than No Significant Impact Impact
a) Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered gove(Tlmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the public services i) Fire protection?
ii) Police protection?
iii) Schools?
iv) Parks?
v) Other Public Facilities?
3 15.1 Environmental Setting
Fire Protection
~ □
~ □
□ □
~ □
□ □
□
□
~
□
~
□
□
□
□
□
OCFA provides fire protection and emergency medical services in the City. OCFA also serves 23 cities within the County and all unincorporated areas. The OCFA protects over 1,984,758 residents from its 77 fire stations located throughout the County. OCFA Reserve Firefighters work 1 o stations throughout Orange County (OCFA 2023). The OCFA 2022 Statistical Annual Report identified that the department employed a total of 1,556 staff for various positions throughout the OCFA. In 2022, OCFA responded to 175,457 incidents. The Housing Opportunity Sites are located within the fire response zones for OCFA Fire Stations 63 and 64.
Police Protection
Police services for the Project would be provided by the Seal Beach Police Department (SBPD). SBPD is responsible for updating the Emergency Services Plan, incorporating a model citizen response model, 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).
Schools
The City is part of the Los Alamitos Unified School District (Los Al USO) which includes K-12 education.
Within Los Al USD, there are nine school campuses serving more than 9,500 students in its jurisdiction.
There is only one Los Al USO school within the City, McGaugh Elementary School.
3.53 ~ mented (SP36J: This should be characterized as l I :C~~ Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation·.
Other public facilities should include: public
bathrooms/restrooms, public drinking water fountains,
bike paths, parking, surfing areas, fishing areas, _j l walkways.
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures Parks
The City offers built and natural trails, developed parks, beaches, and golf courses as some of the recreational opportunities in the City. The public park system in the City includes mini, neighborhood, community, and major/regional parks that are differentiated by scale, population served, and amenities.
The City's Park standard is based on guidance provided by California Government Code Section 666477, referred to as the Quimby Act, and the City has a park standard of three acres per 1,000 residents. In addition to various parks, the shoreline of Seal Beach is considered to be of regional significance.
Othe r Public Facilities - Libraries
The Orange County Library operates 33 libraries within the County. There are two libraries within the City, including Orange County library Seal Beach Branch, located approximately 0.15 mile south of the Housing Opportunity Site 8, and Leisure World Library, located in proximity to Housing Opportunity Site 2.
The City's General Plan Safety Element includes the following goals and policies related to public services (City of Seal Beach 2003):
Policy 1 C: Continue to maintain the Emergency Operations Center (EOG) and provide for its adequate support and staffing, including the acquisition and maintenance of a mobile Incident Command Support vehicle for emergency response.
Policy 1 L: Evaluate the location of all public facilities necessary for emergency response in relation to the City's current Hazard Maps and the level of risk associated with their locations, and move facilities located in high or extreme hazard areas to areas less subject to hazards, if feasible.
Policy 1 M: Ensure that any new public facilities are designed and located in such a manner as to eliminate potential hazard impacts that may reduce the utility of the facility following a disaster.
Policy 4A: Ensure that adequate facilities and fire service personnel are maintained based on population, fire hazards in and around the City and a performance standard of an average total reflect time of seven minutes or less.
315.2 Environmental Impact Analysis
a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision o f new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the public services:
i. Fire Protection?
Finding: Potentially Significant Impact
3-54
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures The Project sets the framework for future growth and development in the City by providing additional opportunities for development of housing and therefore, does not directly result in development.
Certification of the Project itself would not lead to construction of new residential developments in the City. However. implementation of the Project would result in facilitation of up to 1,833 new housing units being developments in the City and would result in population growth that would incrementally increase in demand for fire protection and emergency services. The increase in demand for fire protection and emergency services could result in impacts to fire services and facilities, including response times or the need for new or physically altered fire protection facilities. Therefore. this impact is potentially significant and will be further analyzed in the EIR.
ii. Police Protection?
Finding: Potentially Significant Impact
The Project sets the framework for future growth and development in the City by providing additional opportunities for development of housing and therefore, does not directly result in development.
Certification of the Project itself would not lead to construction of new residential developments in the City. However, implementation of the Project would result in facilitation of up to 1,833 new hOusing units being developments in the City and would result in population growth that would incrementally increase in demand for police services. The increase in demand for police services could result in impacts to police services and facilities. including response times or the need for new or physically altered police protection facilities. Therefore, this impact is potentially significant and will be further analyzed in the EIR. iii. Schools?
Finding: Less Than Significant Impact
Project implementation would identify various Housing Opportunity Sites throughout the City to provide additional residential housing opportunities for low- and moderate-income households. As stated in the Housing Element Update:
Stale law limits fees charged for development permit processing to the reasonable cost of providing the service for which the fee is charged. Various fees and assessments are charged by the City and other public agencies to cover the costs of processing permit applications and providing services and facilities such as schools. parks and infrastructure. Almost all of these fees are assessed through a pro rata share system, based on the magnitude of the project's impact or on the extent of the benefit that will be derived. Development fees will vary from project-to-project depending on the specific characteristics. Table IV-8 summarizes the development fees for typical residential projects.
Currently, a majority of the City's K-12 student population needs to travel outside the City to attend school. and Los Alamitos USO is anticipated to have adequate capacity to serve potential new students generated from Project implementation. Los Alamitos USO schools generally have small class sizes and low student to teacher ratios (Los Alamitos Unified School District 2023). Pursuant to Government Code Section 65996, payment of school fees is deemed to provide full and complete school facilities mitigation.
Future residential development resulting from Project implementation would also be required to comply 3-55
r Commented [SP37J: The EIR should analyze potential
impacts to response times and evacuation times. due
to increased demand and increased traffic-related
travel constraints. It should also analyze any resulting potential impacts to public health and safety.
Cumulative analysis also needs to be considered for all reasonably anticipated project utilizing the same fire
protection and emergency services or utilizing the
same traffic-constrained travel access. The EIR also
needs to identify avoidance and mitigation measures
for those impacts.
Commented [SP38J: Please analyze impacts to
response times and evacuation times and the resulting
potential impacts to pubic safety. and mitigation.
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures with policies in the General Plan pertaining to ensuring adequate school services. Therefore, with the payment or required rees and incorporation or General Plan policies, the Project would not result in the need ror new or physically altered school facilities, and impacts would be less than significant. As such, this topic does not require further evaluation in the EIR. iv. Parks?
Finding: Potentially Significant Impact
Certification or the Project itself would not lead to construction or new residential developments in the City. Future housing developments facilitated by the Project would be subject to individual environmental review and would occur incrementally as market conditions allow and at the discretion or the individual property owner. None of the Housing Opportunity Sites are currently zoned for park facilities nor are they developed with existing park facilities. Future housing development racilitated by the Project and the resulting population growth would result in an incremental increase in demand for parks throughout the City. Though the increase in demand ror park facilities would not be concentrated in one part of the City as the Housing Opportunity Sites are dispersed throughout the City, the City does not have the land capacity to increase parkland and therefore could result in the City not meeting its parkland standard of three acres per 1,000 residents. As such, this impact is potentially significant and will be further analyzed in the EIR.
v . Other Public Facilities - Libraries?
Finding: Less Than Significant Impact
Project implementation would create additional residential housing opportunities within the City to provide housing units to help the City meet its RHNA allocation. These additional units are not anticipated to result in an increase in demand on public facilities. The Leisure World Library located in proximity to Housing Opportunity Site 2 is outside of the proposed rezone portion of this site; therefore, no libraries would be removed as a result or future Project implementation. Additionally, future residential development resulting from Project implementation would be required to comply with General Plan policies that would ensure adequate library services are provided. Therefore, Project implementation would not result in the need ror new or physically altered public facilities , and impacts would be less than significant. As such, this topic does not require further evaluation in the EIR. 3-56
Commented [SP39J: Mitigation should be required--;;;;:-1 developers to prevent the current level of recreation •• I from being significantly diminished. Mitigation could be aimed at avoiding degradation of existing recreation
resources, creating additional shareable recreation
resources (such as parks, parklets, trails, bike lanes. shared bike/car lanes). improving existing recreation
resources. and improving access to existing recreation. such as through bike paths and walkways. Connecting j existing and new public open space and recreational areas should be a goal or mitigation. The potential for the Project's increasing population density to impact
the availability and safety of surfing resources should also be studied.
Commented [SP40J: The finding should be "Potentially
Significant• or "Less than Significant with Mitigation
Applied", in part because "other public facilities·
should not be limited to "libraries·. "Other public
facilities" should Include restrooms. public water j fountains. walkways. bikeways and bike paths. surfing areas. fishing areas, where potentially significant
impacts seem likely.
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures
3.16 RECREATION
Less Than
RECREATION Potentially Significant
Significant with
Would the project Impact Mitigation
Incorporation
a) Increase the use of existing neighbomood and
regional parks or other recreational facilities 0 D such that substantial physical detertoration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
b) Include recreational facilities or require the
construction or expansion of recreational 0 D facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?
3.16.1 Environmental Setting
Less Than No Significant Impact Impact
D D
□ D
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). Sunset Marina Park and the shoreline of Seal Beach are some of the recreational areas located within the City that provide various types of recreational activities for the City's residents and adjacent cities residents can utilize. The City offers approximately 77.3 acres or parks and open space for various recreational activities (Seal Beach 2003).
3.16.2 Environmental Impact Analysis
a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
b) Would the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? a-bl Finding: Potentially Significant Impact
Certification of the Project itself would not lead to construction of new residential developments in the City. None of the Housing Opportunity Sites are currently zoned for park facilities nor are they developed with existing park facilities and therefore, individual developments proposed on the Housing Opportunity Sites would not result in conversion of parks or recreational facilities to residential uses. Future housing development facilitated by the Project and the resulting population growth would result in an incremental increase in demand for parks throughout the City. Though the increase in demand for park facilities would not be concentrated in one part of the City as the Housing Opportunity Sites are dispersed throughout the City, the City does not have the land capacity to increase parkland and therefore could result in the City not meeting its parkland standard of three acres per 1,000 residents. The Project could increase the use of existing parks and recreational cities such that substantial physical deterioration would occur or be I
3-57
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures accelerated and may require the construction or expansion of existing facilities. As such, this impact is potentially significant and will be further analyzed in the EIR.
II 3-58
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures
3.17 TRANSPORTATION
Less Than
TRANSPORTATION Potentially Significant
Would the project Significant with
Impact Mitigation
Incorporation
a) Conflict with a program plan, ordinance, or policy
addressing the circulation systems, induding transit, ~ D roadway, bicyde and pedestrian facilities?
b) Conflict with or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines ~ D Section 15064.3, subdivision (b)? C) Substantially inctease hazards due lo a geometric
design realure (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
intersection(s) or incompatible uses (e.g. rarm □ □
equipment))?
d) Result in inadequate emergency access? □ □
3.17 1 Environmental Setting
Less Than No Significant Impact Impact
□ D
□ □
~ □
~ □
SB 743 caused revisions to the CEOA Guidelines which established new criteria for determining the significance of transportation impacts, so that level of service or other similar measures of vehicular capacity or traffic congestion would not be the sole basis for determining significant impacts under CEQA.
The revised CEQA Guidelines utilize the vehicle miles traveled (VMT) metric to evaluate the significance of transportation related impacts for development projects, land use plans, and transportation infrastructure projects. The Governor's Office of Planning and Research (OPR) has provided a Technical Advisory (December 2018) that recommends specific VMT significance thresholds that may constitute a significant transportation impact and lead agencies have the discretion to set or apply their own thresholds of significance. OPR recommends use of a per-capita measurement of VMT for CEQA analysis based on average VMT per resident for evaluation of residential development. The City has similarly adopted thresholds of significance consistent with the OPR recommendation. Certain types of development, such as development within a one-half-mile of an existing major transit stop can generally be presumed to have a less than significant impact.
Regional and local access roads in the City include SR 1 (Pacific Coast Highway), SR 22 (Garden Grove Freeway), 1-405 (San Diego Freeway), Seal Beach Boulevard, Westminster Boulevard, Main Street, and Marina Drive. OCTA provides public transportation services on Bus Routes 1, 42 and 60. Senior transportation programs are provided by California Yellow Cab, and Senior Non-Emergency Transportation is also provided to provide access for routine medical care (City of Seal Beach 20231).
There are also multiple pedestrian and bicycle paths in the City, and the General Plan Circulation Element includes goals, objectives and policies related to improved bicycle and pedestrian routes (City of Seal Beach 2003a), as follows:
Goal: Provide a citywide system of safe, efficient, and attractive bicycle and pedestrian routes for commuter, school and recreational use.
3.59 CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures • Objective: Promote the safety of bicyclists and pedestrians by adhering to citywide standards and practices.
• 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 indude 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 dosing gaps in the bikeway and sidewalk network.
Develop programs that encourage the safe utilization of easements and/or rights-of-way along flood control channels, public utilities. railroads. and streets wherever possible for the use of bicycles and/or pedestrians.
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 bicyde support facilities and cyding education/information programs.
3-60
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures 317.2 Environmental Impact Analysis
a) Would the project conflict with a program plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation systems, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities? Finding: Potentially Significant Impact
Implementation of the Project would result in an increase in demand for public lransil, bicycle. and pedestrian systems, which would require the improvement and expansion of the circulation system, in addition to what was evaluated in the Housing Element Update. As such, an evaluation of the policies addressing potential impacts to these facilities is required, and this potentially significant impact will be further analyzed in the EIR.
b) Would the project conflict with or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
Finding: Potentially Significant Impact
The proposed Project would change the City's zoning code to allow for increased and densified residential development at the identified Housing Opportunity Sites throughout the city. Traffic generated by future Project implementation, in additional to regional growth, could contribute to already congested traffic conditions in and around the City. In a=rdance with the City's VMT guidelines, the Orange County Transportation Analysis Model (OCTAM), or another similar model as approved by the City Engineer, would be used to evaluate the Project's potential impact on VMT. As such, an evaluation of Project consistency with the applicable VMT thresholds is required, and this potentially significant impact will be further analyzed in the EIR.
c) Would the project substantially increase hazards to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? Finding: Less Than Significant Impact
As with the General Plan, Project implementation would result in the alteration and intensification of existing land uses in the city. Therefore, future residential development resulting from Project implementation would require individual evaluations of the roadway alignments, intersection geometrics, and traffic control features. Roadway improvements would be made in accordance with applicable roadway design guidelines, as well as the Caltrans Roadway Design Manual, in addition to the General Plan Circulation Element policies pertaining to roadway design and improving the safety of all users of the transportation system. Therefore, with adherence to all applicable guidelines, policies and requirements related to roadway design, Project implementation would not substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature or incompatible use, and impacts would be less than significant. As such, this topic does not require further evaluation in the El R.
3-61
1 Commented (SP41): Seal Beach is already l
anomalously 'under pa~ by not providing protected
painted bike lanes along ils section of PCH, even while lhe cities lo the north and 10 the south of us have long since done so. The Project will significantly increase
traffic and lums ( a specific danger lo cyclists since
I automobile right hand lums bisect bike lanes and
frequently hil cyclists) through this already crowded
section of PCH. This Impact should be studied further
I
and mitigation should be considered, including adding
those missing bike lanes on PCH and creating
additional dedicated bike lanes and/or share lanes on
other streets lhroughoul lhe Cily lo maintain and
improve bike-ability, safety, and bike access
connectedness. Other miligalion could include cycling
education for cyclists and drivers, signage, lane
painting, and enforcement of distracted driving.
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures d) Would the project result in inadequate emergency access? Finding: Less Than Significant Impact
As stated above, Project implementation would result in the alteration and intensification of existing land uses in the City which could result in inadequate emergency access if the new developments proposed under the Project are not designed to City standards and requirements. As such, future residential development resulting from Project implementation would be subject to review and approval by the City's Public Works Department to evaluate roadway alignments, intersection geometrics, and traffic control features, which would be made in a=rdance with all applicable local and state requirements related to emergency access and the safety of all users of the transportation system. Therefore, with adherence to all applicable guidelines, policies and requirements related to roadway design and emergency access requirements, Project implementation would not result in inadequate emergency access, and impacts would be less than significant. As such, this topic does not require further evaluation in the EIR. 3-62
Commented (SP42J: I disagree with this finding. 7 There have been recent development projects (including PCH and 2nd) that have significantly
impacted travel times along critical emergency access
routes. Those impacts have been historically
underestimated and/or not made transparent during
project review and approval processes. Impacts have
been poorly mitigated and monitored; basically I unaccounted for. We cannot rely solely on the same failing administrative policies and procedures to
I remedy the increasingly dangerous travel time delays
and driving safety that we are all witnessing in our
community. The risk for a critical and significant impact to emergency access and driving safety needs to be
studied and made completely transparent to the public
and subject to public review in the EIR. In addition, the identification and mitigation or cumulative traffic delays ~ be a critical part of the EIR.
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures
3.18 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
Less Than
TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES Potentially Significant
Significant with Would the project: Impact Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than No Slgnifican Impact t Impact
a) VVould the Project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value lo a California Native American tribe, and that is:
i. Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of
historical resources as defined in Public ~ □ □ □
Resources Code section 5020.1 (k), or
ii. A resource determined by the lead agency, in its
discretion and supported by substantial
evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set
forth in subdivision of Public Resources Code
Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth (8: □ □ □ in subdivision of Public Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the
significance of the resource to a California Native
American tribe?
3 18 1 Envlronmentc.ll Setting
According to the City's General Plan, prehistoric occupation of the Seal Beach area was associated with the Gabrielino- Native Americans, who inhabited much of northern Orange County. The Gabrielinos were known for high population densities, complex social organization, and highly developed maritime economies. The Gabrielinos were in an area that extended from Ventura County to the north and San Bernadine County to the east. The tribes maintained a common language, material culture, and ceremonial and political systems. The Gabrielino community of Motuuchey was located in Seal Beach. In addition to the Gabrielino, ii is understood that the Juaneno Native Americans, the neighboring tribe to the south, also frequented the Seal Beach area (City of Seal Beach 2003).
3.18.2 Environmental Impact Analysis
a) Would the Project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
IJ
i. Listed or eligible for listing in the CRHR, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1 (k), or ii, A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision of 3-63
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision of Public Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe? 1-11) Finding: Potentially Significant Impact
The County, as the CEQA Lead Agency, will consult with appropriate tribes with the potential for interest in the region. Based on this consultation, it will be identified if the proposed Housing Opportunity Sites are located in an area having the potential for tribal cultural resources. SB 18 states: "Prior to the adoption or any amendment of a general plan or specific plan, a local government must notify the appropriate tribes (on the contact list maintained by the NAHC) of the opportunity to conduct consultations for the purpose of preserving, or mitigating impacts to, cultural places located on land within the local government's jurisdiction that is affected by the proposed plan adoption or amendment. Tribes have 90 days from the date on which they receive notification to request consultation, unless a shorter timeframe has been agreed to by the tribe.•
In accordance with Assembly Bill (AB) 52 and SB 18, the City provided notice to the appropriate Native American Tribes on November 15, 2023, inviting them to participate and consult with the City through its AB 52 and SB 18 Native American outreach efforts. The results of the outreach and consultation effort will be described in the EIR. Therefore, this potentially significant impact will be evaluated further in the EIR.
IJ 3-64
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures
3.19 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Less Than
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Potentially Significant
Significant with Would the project Impact Mitigation
Incorporation
a) Require or result in the relocation or construction or new or expanded water, wastewater treatment, or
stormwaler drainage, electric power, natural gas, or ~ D telecommunicalions facilities, lhe construction or relocation or which could cause significant
environmental effects?
b) Have sufficient water supply available to serve the
project and reasonably foreseeable future ~ D development during normal, dry and multiple dry years?
c) Result in a determination by lhe wastewater lreatment provider which serves or may serve lhe project that it
has adequale capacity to serve the project's [8: D
projected demand in addition to lhe provider's
existing commitments?
d) Generate solid waste in excess or State or local
standards, or in excess of the capacity or local D D infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals?
e) Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid D □ waste? 3 19.1 Environmental Setting
Less Than
Slgnifican
t Impact
D
D
D
~
129
The City's current population is served by existing utility and service systems, as described below.
Waler
No
Impact
D
D
D
D
D
The City a retail water supplier that provides water for its residents and their customers using the imported water supply obtained from its regional wholesaler, MWDOC and local groundwater from the Orange County Groundwater Basin, which is managed by the OCWD.
The City's Water Division operates three active groundwater wells, an active service connection with MWDOC, emergency interconnections with other utilities, two reservoirs with a total storage capacity of seven million gallons (MG), two booster stations, four disinfection sites, approximately 680 hydrants and manages 74.8-mile water mains system with about 5,346 service connections. Water use within the City's service area has been relatively stable in the past decade with an annual average of 3,482 acre-feet (AF) for potable use. In Fiscal Year 2019-20, the City's water use was 3,273 AF of potable water (groundwater and imported). In Fiscal Year 2019-20, the City relied on 65 percent groundwater and 35 percent imported water. There is currently no recycled water available for use within the City's service area (City of Seal Beach 2021 ).
3-65
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures Wastewater
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 Distrid (OC San) for treatment and disposal. The sewer system service area encompasses about 1,705 acres and indudes approximately 34 miles of sewer main, serving about 5,000 customers.
The wastewater colleded in the City's system is conveyed to OC San's extensive system of gravity flow sewers, pump stations, and pressurized sewers. Ultimately, the wastewater is treated at OC San treatment plants in Fountain Valley (Plant No. 1) and Huntington Beach (Plant No. 2). Plant No. 1 has a total rated primary capacity of 108 million gallons per day (MGD) and a secondary treatment capacity of 80 MGD. Plant No. 2 has a rated primary capacity of 168 MGD and secondary treatment capacity of 90 MGD. Both plants share a common ocean outfall, but Plant No. 1 currently provides all its secondary treated wastewater to OCWD's Groundwater Replenishment System (GWRS) for beneficial reuse. The 120-inch diameter ocean outfall extends 4 miles off the coast of Huntington Beach. A 78-inch diameter emergency outfall also extends 1.3 miles off the coast. In 2020, 2,520 AF of wastewater was collection from the City (City of Seal Beach 2021).
Stonnwater Drainage
The City has two drainage systems - the sewer and the storm drains. Sewers carry waste to a sewage treatment plant where the water is deaned and then reused or deposited into the ocean away from beaches. The storm drain system was designed to solely prevent flooding of City streets by carrying excess rainwater out to the ocean. Much of the City's runoff drains into the Navel Weapons Base with the remainder split between the Pacific Ocean, Coyote Creek, and the San Gabriel River (City of Seal Beach 2023d).
Solid Waste
The City contracts with Republic Services to provide trash, recycling, and green waste collection for all City residents and commercial businesses (City of Seal Beach 2023c). other Utillties
Southern California Gas Company is the gas provider and Southern California Edison is the electricity provider for the City.
3-66
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures
3.19.2 Environmental Impact Analysis
a) Would the project require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment, or stormwater drainage, electrical power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects?
Finding: Potentially Significant Impact
The Project sets the framework for future growth and development in the City by providing additional opportunities for development of low- and moderate-income housing and therefore, does not directly result in development. Future housing developments facilitated by the Project would be subject to individual environmental review and would occur incrementally as market conditions allow and at the discretion of the individual property owner. Under implementation of the Project, redevelopment of underutilized sites could acccmmodate a total of approximately 205 new housing units and potential rezone parcels could accommodate a total or approximately 1,628 new housing units. Based on this, by implementing the Project, the City would be able to provide approximately 1,833 additional housing units.
The addition of approximately 1,833 additional housing units would result in increased demand to water, wastewater, stormwater. and other utilities and its facilities. This increase in demand could require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded utility facilities and could result in a potentially significant impact. Therefore, this impact will be evaluated in the EIR. b) Would the project have sufficient water supply available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years? Finding: Potentially Significant Impact
Implementation of the Project could result in approximately 1,833 additional housing units in the City which would increase demand for water supply. The Project would require an evaluation of water supply needs, which would include an analysis of the sufficiency of available and new water supplies to serve the Project, in addition to reasonably foreseeable development. As such, this potentially significant impact will be evaluated in the EIR.
c) Would the project result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that is has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments?
Finding: Potentially Significant Impact
Implementation of the Project could result in approximately 1,833 additional housing units in the City which would increase demand for wastewater treatment. This increased demand could result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider that it does not have capacity to serve the projected demand and could result in a potentially significant impact. Therefore, this impact will be evaluated in the EIR.
EJ 3-67
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures d) Would the project generate solid waste In excess of State or local standards, or In excess of the capacity of local Infrastructure, or otherwise Impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals?
Finding: Less Than Significant Impact
According to CalRecycle, in 2022 the City's residential population had a solid waste disposal rate of 6.3 pounds per day per person, and the City had a total disposal amount of 28,468 tons annually (CalRecycle 2022). According to the DOF, as of January 2023, the City is estimated to have a persons per household rate of 1.83 persons per household (DOF 2023). Therefore, as implementation of the Project would provide approximately 1,833 additional housing units to the City, the 1,833 additional units would be anticipated to result in a population of 3,354 people. Using the disposal rate provided by CalRecycle, the 3,354 residents would result in a generation of approximately 21, 130 pounds per day (10.6 tons per day) of solid waste. This would result in an increase of 3,869 tons of solid waste generated by the City annually. As identified previously, the City had a total annual disposal amount of2B,468 tons in 2022. The potential increase in solid waste generated by implementation of the Project would represent a 14 percent increase in solid waste generated by the City per day and annually. This is not anticipated to result in significant impacts, as buildout of the additional residential units would take place over time and solid waste generated would increase incrementally over time as the additional residential units are constructed.
Future residential development resulting from Project implementation would be required to comply with City Municipal Code Section 11.4.10.025, Recycling and Solid Waste Facilities, which includes standards for solid waste and recycling areas. Additionally, construction activities associated with development of the Housing Opportunity Sites identified in the Housing Element Update would be required to comply with all City construction and demolition waste requirements. City Municipal Code Chapter 9.65, Recycling and Diversion of Construction and Demolition waste, outlines requirements such as preparation of a waste management plan, diversion requirements for construction and demolition debris, and reporting requirements. Future residential development resulting from Project implementation would not generate solid waste in excess of standards or capacity of infrastructures and impacts would be less than significant. As such, this topic does not require further evaluation in the EIR. e) Would the project comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
Finding: Less Than Significant Impact
Exiting regulations related to solid waste include AB 939 California Integrated Waste Management Act, AB 341, AB 1327 California Solid Waste Reuse and Recycling Act of 1991, California Green Buildings Standards Code, and the City Municipal Code Section 11.4.10.025, Recycling and Solid Waste Facilities, and Chapter 9.65, Recycling and Diversion of Construction and Demolition Waste. The Project would be required to adhere to all relevant existing statutes and regulations related to solid waste, including waste diversion and reduction measures adopted by the City. Compliance with existing statutes and regulations would ensure that future residential development resulting from Project implementation are constructed
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures and operated in accordance with solid waste statues and regulations, and this impact would be less than significant. As such, this topic does not require further evaluation In the EIR.
IJ 3-69
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures
3.20 WILDFIRE
Less Than
WILDFIRE Potentially Significant
Would the project: Significant with
Impact Mitigation
Incorporation
Less Than
Slgnlllcan
t Impact
If localed in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones; a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response
plan or emergency evacuation plan? □ □ □
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and olher faclors,
exacerbale wildfire risks, and thereby expose project
occupants to pollutant concenlrations from a wildfire □ □ □ or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
C) Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure {such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency
water sources, power lines, or other utilities) that may □ □ □ exacerbate fire risk or that may resull in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment?
d) Expose people or structures to significant risks,
including downslope or downstream flooding or
landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope □ □ □ instability, or drainage changes?
3.20.1 l:nvironmental Setting
No
Impact
[8]
~
[8]
[8]
The City and Project area are surrounding by urban and developed lands. The neighborhood of College Park West is identified by the City as a community of risk to wildfire as a result of its isolation, proximity to open space areas, topographic conditions, and regional wind patterns (City of Seal Beach 2003). The Housing Opportunity Sites and surrounding vicinities are not identified as communities at risk and do not contain land designated as a VHFHSZ (CAL FIRE 2023a).
The Housing Opportunity Sites are located within the jurisdiction of the OCFA Division 1. The majority of the City, including the Housing Opportunity Sites, are located within a Local Responsibility Area, as much of the City has been identified as have a low risk for wildfire. Furthermore, Federal Responsibility Areas (FRAs) are located in the central portion of the City, encompassing Seal Beach NWR, Joint Forces Training Base, and the Seal Beach Naval Weapons Station (CAL FIRE 2023c).
The City's General Plan Safety Element includes the following goals and policies related to wildfire hazards (City of Seal Beach 2003):
Policy 1A; Periodically review and update the Emergency Operations Plan to ensure effective implementation of the Plan during an emergency. Incorporate into the Plan as appropriate; o a citizen response model using a neighborhood coordinate system, such as a Neighborhood Watch program:
3-70
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures o a comprehensive communications component that maximizes public emergency coordination, response and resource allocation;
o a program of coordination with county, regional, state, and federal emergency agencies, schools, hospitals, and utility companies and their plans; and o a program of coordination with the police.
• Policy 1 B: Amend the Emergency Operations Plan to include evacuation plans, and include provisions for emergency shelter, transportation, clothing, food and medical aid, identifying the facilities and persons within the community that may be utilized in an emergency and communicating this information to neighborhood associations and the American Red Cross. • Policy 4A: Ensure that adequate facilities and fire service personnel are maintained based on population, fire hazards in and around the City and a performance standard of an average total reflect 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 throughout ongoing, appropriate and cost-effective changes to the City's Zoning, Building and Fire Codes and standards.
• Policy 40: Work with the Water Department and OCFA to analyze the supply and delivery of the water system for fire fighting use to help identify and correct deficiencies. • Policy 4E: Develop and ear1y warning system of 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 necessary new fire flow water lines and hydrants in accordance with the recommendations of OCFA.
• Policy 4G: Encourage property owners to create defensible space surrounding their homes, including providing access for firefighters, maintaining planting and outdoor areas, and minimizing combustible structures.
m 3-71
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures
3.20.2 Environmental Impact Analysis
a) Would the project substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Finding: No Impact
Project implementation would not occur within a SRA or VHFHSZ. Furthermore, the City has prepared an EOP and a LHMP to ensure protection of City residents in times of emergency and to identify local hazards and provide measures to address these hazards (City of Seal Beach 2017). Future residential development resulting from Project implementation would be required to comply with applicable fire and building codes and would be required to be reviewed by OCFA's Community Risk Reduction Division prior to approval. Additionally, Project implementation would be required to comply with policies identified in the General Plan to ensure effective emergency response. Compliance with General Plan policies, applicable fire and building codes, and the City's Emergency Operations Plan and LHMP would ensure that Project implementation would not substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or evacuation plan, and there would be no impact. As such, this topic does not require further evaluation in the EIR.
b) Would the project due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
c) Would the project require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines, or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment? d) Would the project expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes?
b-d) Finding: No Impact
The Project proposes rezoning program to a=mmodate the planning of low- and moderate-income housing, as required by the state's RHNA allocation for the City. As Project implementation would not occur within an SRA or VHFHSZ, the Project would entail the redevelopment and rezoning of the Housing Opportunity Sites identified in the Housing Element Update. Future development resulting from Project implementation would be required to adhere to a wide range or state and local codes pertaining to fire protection and would be required to comply with OCFA requirements. Adherence to City and County requirements and Project review by the OCFA Community Risk Reduction Division would minimize impacts resulting rrom Project implementation to the extent possible and would ensure that new development would not exacerbate fire hazards and would not expose people or structures to significant risks associated with post-fire landslides, mudflows, and flooding. Therefore, with implementation of applicable state and local codes and adherence to the City and County requirements, Project m 3-72
Commented (SP43J: The potential impact to
I emergency response and evacuation rrom traffic delays due to increased congestion needs to be evaluated in
the EIR, made transparent lo the public, receive public review. Potentially significant impacts should be
avoided or mitigated.
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures implementation would not exacerbate fire risks or expose people or structures to significant risks, and there would be no impact.
Project implementation would result in the parcels being converted for additional housing and would result in construction and installation of associated infrastructure to accommodate new development.
Associated infrastructure would be constructed in accordance with City and County requirements and regulations and would be required to adhere to the measures in the individual requirements for new infrastructure to minimize potential impacts. Additionally, future residential development resulting from Project implementation would be required to implement General Plan policies identified to minimize risk from wildfire hazards. With adherence to applicable building practices and requirements, infrastructure associated with Project implementation would not exacerbate fire risk, and there would be no impact. As such, this topic does not require further evaluation in the EIR. 3-73
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures
3.21 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Less Than
MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE Potentially Significant Would the project: Significant with
Impact Mitigation
Incorporation
a) Have lhe potential to degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce lhe number or ~ □
restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or
animal or eliminate important examples of the major
periods of California history or prehistory?
b) Have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulative considerable? ("Cumulative considerable" means that
the incremental effects of a Project are considerable
when viewed in connection with the effects of past ~ □
Projects, the effects of other current Projects, and the effects of probable future Projects)?
c) Have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or ~ □ indirectly?
3.21 1 Environmental Impact Analysis
Less Than No Significant Impact Impact
□ □
□ □
□ □
a) Would the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? Finding: Potentially Significant Impact
Project implementation would result in potenlially significant impacts to biological and cultural resources, and these impacts will be further analyzed in the EIR. Consultation pursuant to AB 52 and SB 18 is currently being conducted and has not yet been completed at the time of this document. As such, impacts related to tribal cultural resources are potentially significant and will be analyzed further in the EIR. b) Would the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulative considerable? ("Cumulative considerable" means that the incremental effects of a Project are considerable when viewed In connection with the effects of past Projects, the effects of other current Projects, and the effects of probable future Projects)? Finding: Potentially Significant Impact
The proposed Project, in conjunction with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future related projects, has the potential to result in significant cumulative impacts when the independent impacts of the 3-74
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Environmental Setting, Analysis, and Mitigation Measures proposed Project and the impacts of related projects combine to create impacts greater than those of the proposed Project alone. A list of the related projects or growth projections will be developed for the EIR.
The potential for the proposed Project in conjunction with the related projects and their cumulative contributions to environmental impacts will be evaluated in the EIR.
The cumulative impacts addressed in the EIR will be the same as the individual resource areas which will be evaluated in the EIR. The extent and significance of potential cumulative impacts resulting from the combined effects of the proposed Project plus other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects will be evaluated in the El R.
c) Would the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
Finding: Potentially Significant Impact
As described in this Initial Study, implementation of the proposed Project could result in impacts to human beings resulting from potential air quality and GHG emissions, noise, transportation, and water quality impacts. Therefore, further analysis of these potential impacts is required, and potential impacts will be evaluated in the EIR.
3-75
,----
Commented [SP44]: Cumulative impacts lhal need lo
be identified, evaluated, and avoided or mitigated in the EIR include, al minimum, all of the following: Noise,
Traffic, Emergency Response nme, Evacuation nme,
Waler Demand and Supply, Electric Power Demand
and Supply, Recreational Resources, Sewer Capacity.
Stormwaler Management Capacity, Flood Prevention I
and Flood Prevention Infrastructure Capacity. _J
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
Report Preparation
4.0 REPORT PREPARATION
4.1 LIST OF PREPARERS
Preparers
Trevor Macenski Senior Principal; Principal in Charge
Anna Radonich Principal Environmental Planner, Project Manager Emily Medler Environmental Planner
Jennifer Webster Environmental Planner
Kaela Johnson Environmental Planner, GIS
4-1
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
References
5.0 REFERENCES
California Department of Conservation (DOC). 2023a. California Important Farmland Finder. https-J/maps.conservat,on.ca.gov/DLRP/CIFF/. Accessed August 2023.
California Department of Conservation (DOC). 2023b. CGS Information Warehouse: Mineral Land Classification. https://maps.conservation.cagov/cgs/informat1onwarehouse/mdex.html?mao=mlc.
Accessed August 2023.
California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2013. NCCP Plan Summary - Orange County Transportation Authority NCCP/HCP - Natural Community and Land Cover Types. httos.//nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentlD=65795&mhne. Accessed August 2023.
California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2023. NCCP Plan Summary - Orange County Transportation Authority NCCP/HCP.
https://wildlife.ca.qov/Conservalion/Planning/NCCP/Plans/OCTA. Accessed August 2023.
California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE). 2023a Fire Hazard Severity Zones in State Responsibility Area. June 15, 2023. htlps://calfirerorestry.maps.arcgis.comiapps/webappviewer/index.html?id=988d431 a42b242b29d89597ab693d 008. Accessed August 2023.
California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE). 2023b. Forest Practice Watershed Mapper v2. https://eg,s.fire.ca.gov/Watershed Mapper/. Accessed August 2023.
California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE). 2023c. State Responsibility Area (SRA) Viewer. httos.//calfireforestry maps. arcgis comiapps/webappv,ewer/index html?1d=468717 e399fa4238ad86861638765 ce1 . Accessed August 2023.
California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle). 2022. Disposal Rate Calculator - Seal Beach, 2022.
https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/LGCentral/AnnualReporting/DisposalRateCalculator. Accessed August 2023.
California Energy Commission (CEC). 2019. 2018 Power Content Label Submitted by Southern California Edison, Version July 2019. https://www.energy.ca.gov/s1tes/defaulUfiles/2020- 01 /2018 PCL Southern California Edison odf. Accessed August 2023.
California Energy Commission (CEC). 2023a. Electricity Consumption by Entity. http //www ecdms energy ca.qov/elecbyutil aspx. Accessed August 2023.
California Energy Commission (CEC). 2023b. Gas Consumption by Entity. hllp.//www ecdms.energy.ca.gov/gasbyutil.aspx. Accessed August 2023. 5-1
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
References
California Geologic Survey (CGS). 2023. Earthquake Zones of Required Investigations. https //maps.conservation.ca gov/cgSIEQZApp/app/. Accessed August 2023.
California Public Utilities Commission. 2023. Renewables Portfolio Standard (RPS) Program. https:/lwww.cpuc.ca.gov/rps/. Accessed August 2023.
City or Seal Beach. 2003. City or Seal Beach General Plan, December 2003. https.//www.sealbeachca.gov/Departments/Community-Development/PlanningDevelopment/General-Plan. Accessed August 2023.
City of Seal Beach. 2013. Zoning Map (Index) - Updated March 2013. https:/lwww. sealbeachca.qov/Portals/0/Documents/Main lndexForZoning Maps 2013. pdf.
Accessed August 2023.
City of Seal Beach. 2017. Emergency Operations Plan.
https:llwww.sealbeachca.gov/Portals/O/Documents/Basic%20Plan%20September% 20Combined %20(Final3%20111417).pdf?ver=2018-02-03-023025-607. Accessed August 2023.
City of Seal Beach. 2021. 2020 Urban Water Management Plan, Final Draft, June 2021. https://www.sealbeachca.gov/Portals/O/Documents/Public%20Wor1<s/Seal%20Beach%202020%2 OUWMP%20FINAL %20DRAFT-2021 05 27 pdf?ver-2021-06-01-161424-263. Accessed August 2023.
City of Seal Beach. 2022. City of Seal Beach 2021-2029 Housing Element-Adopted February 7, 2022. https://www.sealbeachca.gov/Portals/O/Documents/6th%20Seal%20Beach%20Hous1nq%20Elem ent Adopted-compressed.pdf?ver-2022-02-10-091549-117. Accessed August 2023.
City of Seal Beach. 2023a. City of Seal Beach 2021-2029 Housing Element - Updated August 24, 2023. https://www.sealbeachca.gov/Portals/O/Documents/Housing%20Element/SB HousingElement Draft%20Aug%202023%20Introduction%20and%20Needs%20Assessment%20Redline pdf?ver=2023-08-24-140025-913×tamp=1692911346061 . Accessed October 2023.
City of Seal Beach. 2023b. City of Seal Beach Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan, Draft May 2023. https.//www.sealbeachca.gov/Portals/O/Documents/Seal%20Beach%20LUP DRAFT%20compre ssed.pdf?ver-2023-05-09-154143-560. Accessed August 2023.
City of Seal Beach. 2023c. City of Seal Beach Public Works Department - Maintenance Operations Division - Trash & Recycling. https.//www sealbeachca.gov/Departments/PubllcWorks/Maintenance-Operations#trash recycling. Accessed August 2023.
City of Seal Beach. 2023d. City of Seal Beach Public Works Department - Storm Water & NPDES. https:/lwww.sealbeachca.gov/Departments/Public-Works/Storm-Water-NPDES. Accessed August 2023.
City of Seal Beach. 2023e. Seal Beach, California Municipal Code. https:/llibrary.gcode.us/lib/seal beach caipub/munic,pal code. Accessed August 2023.
IJ 5-2
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
References
City of Seal Beach. 2023f. Transportation Services. https://www sealbeachca.qov/CityServices/Transportation-Services. Accessed August 2023.
California Department of Finance (DOF). 2023. E-5 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State, January 2021-2023, with 2020 Benchmark, May 2023. https //dof ca.gov/forecasting/demoqraph1cs/est1mates/e-5-population-and-housing-est1mates-forc1t1es-count1es-and-the-state-2020-2023/. Accessed August 2023.
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). 2023. FEMA Flood Map Service Center. https //msc fema.gov/portal/search. Accessed August 2023.
Los Alamitos Unifies School District. (2003). Our District. https //www.losal.org/our-distnct. Accessed August 2023.
Los Angeles County. 2004. Airport Land Use Commission Comprehensive Land Use Plan. https://planning.lacounty.gov/wp-contenVuploads/2022/10/Los-Angeles-County-A,rport-Land-UsePlan.pdf. Accessed November 2023.
Orange County. 2013. County of Orange General Plan - Resources Element, December 2013. https://ocds.ocpubl1cworks.com/s1tes/ocpwocds/files/1mport/data/files/40235.pdf. Accessed August 2023.
Orange County. 2023. Orange County Landbase. https //www.ocg1s.com/ocpw/landrecords/. Accessed August 2023.
Orange County Fire Authority (OCFA). 2023. Orange County Fire Authority website - Member Cities. https//ocfa.org/AboutUs/PartnerCities aspx. Accessed August 2023.
State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). 2023. GeoTracker database. https://qeotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/map/?CMD=runreport&myaddress=Search+GeoTracker.
Accessed August 2023.
Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) 6" Cycle Final RHNA Allocation Plan. 2021 https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/fileattachments/6'" cycle final rhna allocation plan 070121 . pdf?1646938785 . Accessed September 2023.
Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), 6'" Cycle Regional Housing Needs Assessment. 2023. https:/tscag.ca.gov/rhna. Accessed September 2023.
Southern California Edison (SCE). 2019. Southern California Edison's Service Area. https //newsroom edison.corn/internal red,recvcrns ,pressroom corn.s3.amazonaws corn/166/files /20193/SCE%20Service%20Area%20Fact%20Sheet Ver2 04252019.pdf. Accessed August 2023.
Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas). 2023. Company Profile. https://www.socalgas com/aboutus/cornpany-profile. Accessed August 2023. 5-3
CITY OF SEAL BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT AND ZONING CODE UPDATES Initial Study
References
United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2023a. Seal Beach National Wildlife Refuge. hllps://www.fws.gov/refuge/seal-beach. Accessed August 2023.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2023b. Seal Beach National Wildlife Refuge - Species. hllps./lwww.fws.gov/refuge/seal-beach/species. Accessed August 2023. 5-4
Appendix B
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas,
and Energy Impact Assessment
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and
Energy Impact Assessment
City of Seal Beach Housing Element
and Zoning Code Updates Project
February 28, 2025
Prepared for:
City of Seal Beach
Community Development Department
211 Eighth Street
Seal Beach, CA 90740
Prepared by:
Stantec Consulting Services, Inc.
555 Capitol Mall Suite 650
Sacramento CA 95814
() Stantec
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT i
Table of Contents
ABBREVIATIONS .....................................................................................................................III
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY..............................................................................................1.1
1.1 PROJECT UNDERSTANDING.....................................................................................1.1
1.2 SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS...........................................................................................1.1
1.3 MITIGATION MEASURES............................................................................................1.2
2.0 INTRODUCTION..........................................................................................................2.7
2.1 PURPOSE OF ANALYSIS............................................................................................2.7
2.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ...........................................................................................2.7
2.2.1 Surrounding Land Uses and Existing Conditions.........................................2.9
3.0 AIR QUALITY ............................................................................................................3.10
3.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING ....................................................................................3.10
3.1.1 Climate and Meteorology ..........................................................................3.10
3.1.2 Criteria Air Pollutants ................................................................................3.10
3.1.3 Attainment Status......................................................................................3.11
3.1.4 Ambient Air Quality ...................................................................................3.14
3.1.5 Odors........................................................................................................3.15
3.1.6 Toxic Air Contaminants .............................................................................3.15
3.1.7 Sensitive Receptors ..................................................................................3.17
3.2 REGULATORY SETTING ..........................................................................................3.18
3.2.1 Federal......................................................................................................3.18
3.2.2 State .........................................................................................................3.18
3.2.3 Regional....................................................................................................3.21
3.2.4 Local .........................................................................................................3.22
4.0 GREENHOUSE GAS ................................................................................................. 4.23
4.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING ....................................................................................4.23
4.1.1 Greenhouse Gases ...................................................................................4.23
4.1.2 Global Warming Potential..........................................................................4.25
4.1.3 Sources of Greenhouse Gas Emissions....................................................4.25
4.1.4 Effects of Global Climate Change .............................................................4.26
4.2 REGULATORY SETTING ..........................................................................................4.26
4.2.1 State .........................................................................................................4.26
4.2.2 Regional....................................................................................................4.31
4.2.3 Local .........................................................................................................4.31
5.0 ENERGY....................................................................................................................5.33
5.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING ....................................................................................5.33
5.2 REGULATORY SETTING ..........................................................................................5.33
5.2.1 Federal......................................................................................................5.33
5.2.2 State .........................................................................................................5.36
5.2.1 Local .........................................................................................................5.37
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT ii
6.0 METHODOLOGY AND MODELING PARAMETERS.................................................6.38
6.1 CRITERIA POLLUTANT AND GHG EMISSION METHODS ......................................6.38
6.1.1 Modeling Assumptions ..............................................................................6.38
6.2 ENERGY CALCULATION METHODS........................................................................6.39
7.0 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ANALYSIS.............................................................................7.1
7.1 CEQA GUIDELINES.....................................................................................................7.1
7.1.1 Thresholds of Significance ..........................................................................7.1
7.2 AIR IMPACT ANALYSIS...............................................................................................7.2
8.0 GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ANALYSIS................................................................8.15
8.1 CEQA GUIDELINES...................................................................................................8.15
8.1.1 Thresholds of Significance ........................................................................8.15
8.2 GHG IMPACT ANALYSIS ..........................................................................................8.15
10.0 ENERGY IMPACT ANALYSIS...................................................................................10.8
10.1 CEQA GUIDELINES...................................................................................................10.8
10.2 ENERGY IMPACT ANALYSIS ...................................................................................10.8
11.0 REFERENCES...........................................................................................................11.1
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Housing Element Update Buildout Assumptions.........................................................2.8 Table 2. California and National Ambient Air Quality Standards.............................................3.12 Table 3. Attainment Status of the South Coast Air Basin........................................................3.13 Table 4. Anaheim Monitoring Station Data (2021-2023).........................................................3.14 Table 5. SCAQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds............................................................7.1 Table 6. Construction of Housing Opportunity Site 4 – Criteria Pollutant Emissions ................7.6 Table 7. Project Operations – Criteria Pollutant Emissions (Unmitigated) ................................7.7 Table 8. Project Operations – Criteria Pollutant Emissions (Mitigated).....................................7.8 Table 9. Estimated Annual Construction GHG Emissions......................................................8.16 Table 10. Project Operations – Greenhouse Gas Emissions (Unmitigated)............................8.16 Table 11. Project Operations – Greenhouse Gas Emissions (Mitigated) ................................8.17 Table 12. Project Consistency with 2022 Scoping Plan Greenhouse Gas Reduction Strategies ..................................................................................................................8.5 Table 12. Project Consistency with Connect SoCal Greenhouse Gas Reduction Strategies ..................................................................................................................8.6 Table 13. Construction of Housing Opportunity Site 4 – On-Road Vehicle Fuel Consumption ...........................................................................................................10.9 Table 14. Project Operations – On-Road Vehicle Fuel Consumption ...................................10.11
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A: CalEEMod Modeling Results
Appendix B: Energy Calculations
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT iii
ABBREVIATIONS
μg/m3
AB
ACBMs
AQMP
BTU
C. immitis
CAAQS
CAFE
CalEEMod
CARB
CCAA
CEC
CEQA
CH4
City
CO
CO2
CPUC
DPM
DRRP
EIR
EISA
EO
EPCA
FCAA
GHG
GWh
GWP
HAP
HCD
HFCs
HRA
IRA
kBTU
kWh
LCFS
LEV
LSTs
MC/RHD
MMT
MMTCO2e
MSSP
Micrograms Per Cubic Meter
Assembly Bill
Asbestos-Containing Building Materials
Air Quality Management Plan
British Thermal Unit
Coccidiodes immitis
California Ambient Air Quality Standards
Corporate Average Fuel Economy
California Emissions Estimator Model
California Air Resources Board
California Clean Air Act
California Energy Commission
California Environmental Quality Act
Methane
City of Seal Beach
Carbon Monoxide
Carbon Dioxide
California Public Utilities Commission
Diesel Particulate Matter
Diesel Risk Reduction Plan
Environmental Impact Report
Energy Independence and Security Act
Executive Order
Energy Policy and Conservation Act
Federal Clean Air Act
Greenhouse Gases
gigawatt-hours
Global Warming Potential
Hazardous Air Pollutants
California Department of Housing and Community Development Hydrofluorocarbons
Health Risk Assessment
Inflation Reduction Act
1,000 British Thermal Units
kilowatt-hour
Low Carbon Fuel Standard
Low-Emission Vehicle
Localized Significance Thresholds
Mixed Commercial/Residential High Density
Million Metric Tons
Million Metric Tons of Carbon Dioxide Equivalents
Main Street Specific Plan
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT iv
MTCO2e
N2O
NAAQS
NESHAP
NHTSA
NOA
NF3
NOX
NO2
O3
Pb
PFCs
PM
PM2.5
PM10
ppb
ppm
Project
RFS
RHNA
ROG
RTP/SCS
RPS
SAFE
SB
SCAB
SCAG
SCAQMD
SCE
SF6
SIP
SO2
SoCalGas
TAC
USEPA
USC
VMT
ZEV
Metric Tons of Carbon Dioxide Equivalents
Nitrous Oxide
National Ambient Air Quality Standards
National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
Naturally Occurring Asbestos
Nitrogen Trifluoride
Oxides of Nitrogen
Nitrogen Dioxide
Ozone
Lead
Perfluorocarbons
Particulate Matter
Fine particulate matter; particulate matter 2.5 microns or smaller Particulate matter; particulate matter 10 microns or smaller parts per billion
parts per million
City of Seal Beach Housing Element and Zoning Code Updates Project Renewable Fuel Standard
Regional Housing Needs Allocation
Reactive Organic Gases
Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy Renewable Portfolio Standard
Safer Affordable Fuel-Efficient
Senate Bill
South Coast Air Basin
Southern California Association of Governments
South Coast Air Quality Management District
Southern California Edison
Sulfur Hexafluoride
State Implementation Plan
Sulfur Dioxide
Southern California Gas Company
Toxic Air Contaminant
United States Environmental Protection Agency
United States Code
Vehicle Miles Traveled
Zero Emission Vehicle
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT Executive Summary
1.1 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1.1 PROJECT UNDERSTANDING
The City of Seal Beach Housing Element and Zoning Code Updates Project (Project) would involve implementing the City’s Housing Element Update, which is intended to provide the City of Seal Beach (City) with a comprehensive strategy for promoting the production of safe, decent and affordable housing and affirmatively furthering fair housing during the housing cycle. The Housing Element Update identifies an inventory of Housing Opportunity Sites throughout the City that have the potential for providing additional housing to meet the City’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). The City's latest RHNA calls for 1,243 new housing units, including 459 new units for residents in the low- and very low-income categories. Of the eight Housing Opportunity Sites included in the Project, six would require rezoning, and two are underutilized sites that do not require rezoning. The City’s rezoning effort would also include the establishment of a new zoning designation, “Mixed Commercial/Residential High Density” (MC/RHD). In addition to the Housing Opportunity Sites, the Housing Element Update includes a modification to the existing Main Street Specific Plan (MSSP). This analysis provides a programmatic evaluation of future development of up to 1,606 new residential units facilitated by the Project.
1.2 SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS
Impact AIR-1: The Project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan. Significant and Unavoidable Impact.
Impact AIR-2: The Project would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or State ambient air quality standard. Significant and Unavoidable Impact.
Impact AIR-3: The Project would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. Significant and Unavoidable Impact.
Impact AIR-4: The Project would not result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) affecting a substantial number of people. Less Than Significant Impact.
Impact GHG-1: The Project would not generate direct and indirect greenhouse gas emissions that would result in a significant impact on the environment. Significant and Unavoidable Impact.
Impact GHG-2: The Project would not conflict with any applicable plan, policy or regulation of an agency adopted to reduce the emissions of greenhouse gases. Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated.
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT Executive Summary
1.2 Impact ENR-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. Less Than Significant Impact.
Impact ENR-2: The Project would not conflict with or obstruct a State or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency. Less Than Significant Impact.
1.3 MITIGATION MEASURES
MM AQ-1. Quantify Construction Criteria Pollutant Emissions. Prior to discretionary approval by the City for development projects subject to CEQA review, project applicants shall prepare and submit a technical air quality assessment estimating project constructionrelated criteria pollutant emissions to the City for review and approval. The evaluation shall be prepared in accordance with SCAQMD guidance. If construction-related criteria pollutant emissions are determined to have the potential to exceed the SCAQMD regional and localized thresholds of significance, emission reduction measures shall be incorporated into the project to the maximum extent feasible, subject to the discretion of the City. Acceptable options for reducing emissions may include:
• Using construction equipment rated by the United States Environmental Protection Agency as having Tier 4 emission limits for engines above 50 horsepower.
• Require all paints and architectural coatings to be super-compliant VOC content (0 grams/Liter [g/L] to 10 g/L). If VOC emissions still exceed thresholds, then the applicant may elect to prohibit architectural coating activities during summer months (June, July, and August) when ozone formation peaks.
Regardless of the results of the emissions modeling, the following best practices shall be implemented throughout the duration of all construction activity:
• All off-road equipment operating at the construction site must be maintained in proper working condition according to manufacturers’ specifications. • Idling shall be limited to 5 minutes or less in accordance with the Off-Road Diesel Fueled Fleet Regulation as required by CARB.
• Clear Signage regarding idling restrictions shall be placed at the entrances to the construction site.
• Portable equipment over 50 horsepower must have either a valid SCAQMD Permit to Operate (PTO) or a valid statewide Portable Equipment Registration Program (PERP) placard and sticker issued by CARB.
• Water all active construction areas at least three times daily, or as often as needed to control dust emissions. Watering should be sufficient to prevent airborne dust from leaving the site.
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT Executive Summary
1.3 • Cover all trucks hauling soil, sand, and other loose materials or require all trucks to maintain at least two feet of freeboard (i.e., the minimum required space between the top of the load and the top of the trailer). • Pave, apply water three times daily or as often as necessary to control dust, or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking areas, and staging areas at construction sites.
MM AQ-2. Quantify Operational Criteria Pollutant Emissions. Prior to discretionary approval by the City for development projects subject to CEQA review, project applicants shall prepare and submit a technical air quality assessment estimating project operationalrelated criteria pollutant emissions to the City for review and approval. The evaluation shall be prepared in accordance with SCAQMD guidance. If operational-related criteria pollutant emissions are determined to have the potential to exceed the SCAQMD thresholds of significance, emission reduction measures shall be incorporated into the project to the maximum extent feasible, subject to the discretion of the City. Acceptable options for reducing operational emissions may include, but are not limited to, the following:
• Prohibition of natural gas hearths.
• Installation of solar water heaters or tankless water heaters. • Exceeding Title 24 energy standards.
• Constructing Level 2 EV charging stations for multi-family developments and pre-wiring to allow for Level 2 EV charging stations in single-family residential garages.
• Require all paints and architectural coatings to be super-compliant VOC content (0 to 10 g/L).
MM AQ-3. Construction Health Risk Assessment. Prior to future discretionary project approval for any component that would involve construction lasting more than 2 months and within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors, the project applicant shall submit a construction health risk assessment (HRA) to the City for review and approval. The level of detail required for the HRA is described below:
A quantitative health risk assessment shall be prepared in accordance with SCAQMD and OEHHA guidance to identify the potential for increased cancer and non-cancer health risks. If the health risks do not exceed the applicable thresholds, further mitigation is not necessary. If the resultant health risks are determined to exceed SCAQMD thresholds of significance, the applicant shall implement measures to reduce DPM exhaust emissions and associated risks to below the applicable thresholds. Methods may include requiring the use of off-road equipment engines that meet or exceed CARB’s Tier 4 Final engine emissions standards for off-road equipment exceeding 50 horsepower (hp).
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT Executive Summary
1.4 Any emissions reduction measures identified in the HRA shall be incorporated into the site development plan as a component of the project. Prior to issuance of any construction permit, the construction contractor shall ensure that all construction plans submitted to the Community Development Department clearly show incorporation of all applicable 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 State CEQA Guidelines, a Lead Agency for a project can and should consider mitigation measures to reduce substantial adverse effects related to 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.
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 lightcolored 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 off-site 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;
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT Executive Summary
1.5 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; 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; e) 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; f) 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
g) Designate a percentage of parking spaces for ride-sharing vehicles or high occupancy vehicles, and provide adequate passenger loading and unloading for those vehicles;
h) Land use siting and design measures that reduce GHG emissions, including:
o Retaining on-site 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
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT Executive Summary
1.6 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.
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT Introduction
2.7 2.0 INTRODUCTION
2.1 PURPOSE OF ANALYSIS
The purpose of this Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact is to evaluate the existing conditions and potential impacts to air quality, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and energy resource areas from construction and operations of the development facilitated by Project. This analysis is intended to support preparation of a California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) program-level Environmental Impact Report (EIR). This evaluation relies on guidance and thresholds established by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), the California Air Resources Board (CARB), and the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD).
2.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Seal Beach City Council adopted the City of Seal Beach’s Housing Element Update on February 7, 2022. In response to California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) comments, the City updated the Housing Element Update on August 24, 2023. The City is preparing the Housing Element Update to comply with the legal mandate requiring each local government to identify adequate sites for housing to meet the existing and projected housing needs for varying income-levels in the community. The Housing Element Update is intended to provide the City with a comprehensive strategy for promoting the production of safe, decent and affordable housing and affirmatively furthering fair housing during the housing cycle.
The City's latest RHNA allocation calls for 1,243 new housing units, including 459 new units for residents in the low- and very low-income categories. The City must demonstrate to HCD that the Housing Element Update has adequate land capacity and implementing policies to accommodate its RHNA allocation.
The Project would involve implementing the City’s Housing Element Update. The Housing Element Update identifies an inventory of Housing Opportunity Sites throughout the City that have the potential for providing additional housing to meet the City’s RHNA allocation. The sites are broken into two categories:
(a) underutilized sites that do not require zoning code changes; and (b) sites where zoning modifications are proposed. The Housing Element Update originally included 13 Housing Opportunity Sites. However, in response to comments received from HCD during the CEQA process, the number of Housing Opportunity Sites identified has been reduced to eight. Of the eight Housing Opportunity Sites, six would require rezoning. The City’s rezoning effort would also include the establishment of a new zoning designation, MC/RHD, which would apply to five of the eight Housing Opportunity Sites. The new MC/RHD mixed-use zoning designation is needed to facilitate a density equivalent to Residential High Density (RHD)-46 (up to 46 units per acre) but with a minimum density of 40 units per acre. This new zone district would facilitate housing for lower-income households as required by the state’s RHNA allocation for the City and facilitate the inclusion of affordable units. In addition to the Housing Opportunity Sites, the Housing Element Update includes a proposal for the Main Street Program. The Housing Element Update’s Main Street Program does not identify specific housing opportunity sites but would
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT Introduction
2.8 modify the existing MSSP to allow for residential units to be developed at select properties located within the MSSP area. The analysis contained herein assumes the development under the Main Street Program at 70 precent of maximum buildout resulting in the potential for 115 new dwelling units to be developed within the MSSP area. Finally, this analysis also accounts for the residential component of the Old Ranch Country Club (ORCC). The Housing Element Update identified Old Ranch Country Club Pipeline Project as a pipeline project. As such, specific impact findings associated with the development of the Old Ranch Country Club Pipeline Project are being evaluated separately by the City in a standalone EIR. The Old Ranch Country Club Pipeline Project is a proposed 5.2-acre Specific Plan on the existing Old Ranch Country Club and would convert a portion of the existing golf course to a mixed-use development with 167 residential units. The 167 residential units of Old Ranch Country Club Pipeline Project (herein referred to as the residential component of the ORCC Specific Plan Project) are programmatically evaluated within this EIR as these 167 residential units are included within the City’s site inventory to meet its RHNA requirements. The other portions of the ORCC Specific Plan are not included within RHNA requirements and therefore were not included within this analysis.
In total, the analysis contained herein assumed buildout under the Project to result in the potential for 1,773 new dwelling units (1,491 dwelling units from the eight Housing Opportunity Sites, 115 dwelling units from the Main Street Program, and the 167 units from the residential component of the ORCC Specific Plan Project) to be developed within the City.
Based on this, by implementing the Project, the City would be able to provide 1,606 additional housing units, thereby accommodating the 2021-2029 RHNA allocation (1,243 new housing units) and a substantive buffer to demonstrate capacity for all income levels. The buildout assumptions for development of the Project are shown in Table 1.
Table 1. Housing Element Update Buildout Assumptions
Site No. Site Name Developable Acres Maximum Density
(du/ac) Total Units
Underutilized Sites
1 1780 Pacific Coast Highway 0.25 21.8 5
2 Leisure World 5.5 32.2 177
Total Units from Underutilized Sites 182
Rezoned Sites
3 Accurate Storage 1.8 46 83
4 The Shops at Rossmoor 12 46 552
5 Old Ranch Town Center 8.3 46 382
6 Seal Beach Plaza 1.5 46 69
7 Seal Beach Center 2.7 46 124
8 99 Marina Drive 3 33 99
Total Units from Proposed Rezoning 1,309
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT Introduction
2.9 Site No. Site Name Developable Acres Maximum Density (du/ac) Total Units
Total Units including Underutilized Sites
and Rezone
35.05 -- 1,491
Other Sites
Main Street Program* -- -- 115
Residential Component of the ORCC Specific
Plan Project
5.2 167
Total Units under Buildout 1,773
* The Housing Element Update assumes under the Main Street Program, two residential units would be proposed and permitted within the Main Street Specific Plan area during the Housing Element Update’s planning period. However, based on a 70 percent buildout scenario of the 163 total dwelling units identified in the Initial Study for the Main Street Specific Plan area, 115 dwelling units is the assumed buildout condition under the Main Street Program for the purposes of CEQA.
2.2.1 Surrounding Land Uses and Existing Conditions
The Project site is comprised of eight identified Housing Opportunity Sites dispersed throughout the City of Seal Beach, California and totaling approximately 83.45 acres. However, the majority of the Housing Opportunity Sites would only allow for development within portions of the overall Housing Opportunity Site due to existing development and, therefore, the total developable acres for the Housing Opportunity Sites would total 35.05 acres. Additionally, the Project site includes the Main Street Specific Plan area which provides an additional 9.2 acres of developable acres. Therefore, the Project includes 92.65 total acres of land within the City but would have a total developable acreage of 44.25 acres.
The City is located at the northwestern edge of Orange County, California. It borders the City of Long Beach and Los Angeles County to the northwest, the Orange County cities of Los Alamitos to the north, Westminster to the east, Huntington Beach to the southeast, and the Pacific Ocean to the southwest.
As the existing land uses are comprised of a variety of land uses across the City, the surrounding land uses are similarly varied in character. Surrounding land uses generally consist of residential development, vacant land, commercial and retail uses, parking lots, mobile home parks, institutional and industrial uses, and military uses as well as other urban and suburban land uses throughout the City.
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT Air Quality
3.10 3.0 AIR QUALITY
3.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The Project is located within the City of Seal Beach in Orange County, which is within the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB). SCAB includes all of Orange County and the non-desert portions of Los Angeles, Riverside, and San Bernardino counties and is under the jurisdiction of the SCAQMD. Regulatory oversight authority regarding air quality rests at the local, State, and federal levels with the SCAQMD, California Air Resources Board (CARB), and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), respectively.
The existing air quality setting is described further below.
3.1.1 Climate and Meteorology
The SCAB covers approximately 12,000 square miles, consisting of Orange County and the urbanized areas of San Bernardino, Riverside, and Los Angeles counties. The distinctive climate of the SCAB is determined by its terrain and geographic location. The SCAB is a coastal plain with connecting broad valleys and low hills, bounded by the Pacific Ocean to the southwest and high mountains around the perimeter. The general region lies in the semi-permanent high-pressure zone of the eastern Pacific, resulting in a mild climate tempered by cool sea breezes with light average wind speeds. The usually mild climatological pattern is interrupted occasionally by periods of extremely hot weather, winter storms, or Santa Ana winds. The SCAB is classified as a dry-hot desert climate (SCAQMD 1993).
3.1.2 Criteria Air Pollutants
Criteria air pollutants includes ozone (O3), carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur dioxide (SO2), particulate matter (measured both in units of smaller than 2.5 microns in diameter [PM2.5] and in units of particulate matter smaller than 10 microns in diameter [PM10]), and lead (Pb).
Ozone. Most ground-level ozone is formed as a result of complex photochemical reactions in the atmosphere between reactive organic gases (ROG), nitrogen oxides (NOx), and oxygen. ROG and NOx are considered precursors to the formation of ozone, a highly reactive gas that can damage lung tissue and affect respiratory function. While ozone in the lower atmosphere is considered a damaging air pollutant, ozone in the upper atmosphere is beneficial, as it protects the Earth from harmful ultraviolet radiation. However, atmospheric processes preclude ground-level ozone from reaching the upper atmosphere (USEPA 2023a).
Carbon Monoxide. CO is a colorless, odorless, poisonous gas produced by the incomplete combustion of fossil fuels. Elevated levels of CO can result in harmful health effects, especially for the young and elderly, and can also contribute to global climate change (USEPA 2023a).
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT Air Quality
3.11 Nitrogen Dioxide. NO2 is a brownish, highly reactive gas primarily produced as a result of the burning of fossil fuels. NO2 can also lead to the formation of ozone in the lower atmosphere. NO2 can cause respiratory ailments, especially in the young and elderly, and can lead to degradations in the health of aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems (USEPA 2023a).
Sulfur Dioxide. SO2 is primarily emitted from the combustion of coal and oil by steel mills, pulp and paper mills, and non-ferrous smelters. High concentrations of SO2 can aggravate existing respiratory and cardiovascular diseases in asthmatics and others who suffer from emphysema or bronchitis. SO2 also contributes to acid rain, which in turn, can lead to the acidification of lakes and streams (USEPA 2023a).
Particulate Matter. Airborne PM is not a single pollutant, but rather is a mixture of many chemical species. PM is a complex mixture of solids and aerosols composed of small droplets of liquid, dry solid fragments, and solid cores with liquid coatings. Particles vary widely in size, shape, and chemical composition, and may contain inorganic ions, metallic compounds, elemental carbon, organic compounds, and compounds from the earth’s crust. Particles are defined by their diameter for air quality regulatory purposes. Those with a diameter of 10 microns or less (PM10) are inhalable into the lungs and can induce adverse health effects. Fine particulate matter is defined as particles that are 2.5 microns or less in diameter (PM2.5). Therefore, PM2.5 compromises a portion of PM10. Emissions from combustion of gasoline, oil, diesel fuel or wood produce much of the PM2.5 pollution found in outdoor air, as well as significant proportion of PM10. PM10 also includes dust from construction sites, landfills and agriculture, wildfires and brush/waste burning, industrial sources, wind-blown dust from open lands, pollen, and fragments of bacteria.
PM may be either directly emitted from sources (primarily particles) or formed in the atmosphere through chemical reactions of gases (secondary particles) such as SO2, NOx, and certain organic compounds (USEPA 2023a).
Lead. Sources of Pb include pipes, fuel, and paint, although the use of Pb in these materials has declined dramatically over the years. Historically, a main source of Pb was automobile emissions. Pb can be inhaled directly or ingested by consuming Pb-contaminated food, water, or dust. Fetuses and children are most susceptible to Pb poisoning, which can result in heart disease and nervous system damage (USEPA 2024a). Through regulations, USEPA has gradually reduced the Pb content of gasoline. This program has essentially eliminated violations of the Pb standard in urban areas except those areas with Pb point sources.
3.1.3 Attainment Status
The USEPA and CARB designate air basins where ambient air quality standards are exceeded as “nonattainment” areas. If standards are met, the area is designated as an “attainment” area. If there is inadequate or inconclusive data to make a definitive attainment designation, they are considered “unclassified.” National non-attainment areas are further designated as marginal, moderate, serious, severe, or extreme as a function of deviation from standards. Attainment status is based on the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and the California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS).
Each standard has a different definition, or “form” of what constitutes attainment, based on specific air
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT Air Quality
3.12 quality statistics. For example, the federal 8-hour CO standard is not to be exceeded more than once per year; therefore, an area is in attainment of the CO standard if no more than one 8-hour ambient air monitoring value exceeds the threshold per year. In contrast, the federal annual standard for PM2.5 is met if the 3-year average of the annual average PM2.5 concentration is less than or equal to the standard.
The Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA) identifies two types of NAAQS. Primary standards provide public health protection, including protecting the health of sensitive populations such as asthmatics, children, and the elderly. Secondary standards provide public welfare protection, including protection against decreased visibility and damage to animals, crops, vegetation, and buildings (USEPA 2023a). The CAAQS are equal to or more stringent than the NAAQS and include pollutants for which national standards do not exist. Table 2 presents the applicable CAAQS and NAAQS.
Table 2. California and National Ambient Air Quality Standards Pollutant Averaging Time California Standards1
National Standards2
Primary Secondary
Ozone (O3)
8-hour 0.070 ppm (137 µg/m3) 0.070 ppm (137
µg/m3) Same as Primary
Standards
1-hour 0.09 ppm (180 µg/m3) --
Carbon monoxide
(CO)
8-hour 9.0 ppm (10 mg/m3) 9 ppm (10 mg/m3)
--
1-hour 20 ppm (23 mg/m3) 35 ppm (40 mg/m3)
Nitrogen dioxide
(NO2)
Annual arithmetic
mean 0.030 ppm (57 µg/m3) 0.053 ppm (100 µg/m3) Same as Primary Standard
1-hour 0.18 ppm (339 µg/m3) 100 ppb (188 µg/m3)
Sulfur dioxide (SO2)
Annual arithmetic
mean -- 0.030 ppm (80 µg/m3) --
24-hour 0.04 ppm (105 µg/m3) 0.14 ppm (80 µg/m3) --
3-hour -- -- 0.5 ppm
(1300 µg/m3)
1-hour 0.25 ppm (655 µg/m3) -- --
Respirable
Particulate Matter
Smaller than 10
Microns in Diameter
(PM10)
Annual arithmetic
mean 20 µg/m3 --
Same as Primary
Standards
24-hour 50 µg/m3 150 µg/m3
Respirable
Particulate Matter
Smaller than 2.5
Microns in Diameter
(PM2.5)3
Annual arithmetic
mean 12 µg/m3 9.0 µg/m3 15 µg/m3
24-hour No separate standard 35 µg/m3 Same as Primary
Standards
Sulfates 24-hour 25 µg/m3 -- --
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT Air Quality
3.13 Pollutant Averaging Time California Standards1
National Standards2
Primary Secondary
Lead (Pb)
30-day average 1.5 µg/m3 -- --
Calendar quarter -- 1.5 µg/m3
Same as Primary
Rolling 3-month Standard
average -- 0.15 µg/m3
Hydrogen sulfide
(H2S) 1-hour 0.03 ppm (42 µg/m3) -- --
Vinyl chloride
(chloroethene) 24-hour 0.01 ppm (26 µg/m3) -- --
Visibility reducing
particles 8-hour
In 1989, the Air Resources
Board converted the general
statewide 10-mile visibility
standard to instrumental
equivalents, which are
extinction of 0.23 per
kilometer.
-- --
Notes:
1. CO, SO2 (1- and 24-hour), NO2, O3, PM10, and visibility reducing particles standards are not to be exceeded.
2. Not to be exceeded more than once a year except for annual standards.
3. On February 7, 2024, the USEPA issued a pre-publication version of the Final Rule to lower the primary annual NAAQS for PM2.5 from 12.0 µg/m3 to 9.0 µg/m3
.
-- = no standard established
µg/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter
mg/m3 = milligrams per cubic meter
ppm = parts per million
Source: CARB 2016.
Table 3 presents the federal and State attainment status for the SCAB, in which the Project is located.
The Project is in an area designated non-attainment for both the federal and State standards for O3 and PM2.5, the State standard for PM10, and the federal standard for lead (SCAQMD 2016a).
Table 3. Attainment Status of the South Coast Air Basin Pollutant Federal Designation State Designation
Ozone (O3) –
1-Hour and 8-Hour Non-Attainment (Extreme) Non-Attainment Carbon Monoxide (CO) –
1-Hour and 8-Hour Attainment/Maintenance Attainment
Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) –
1-Hour and Annual Attainment Attainment
Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) – Annual Unclassifiable/Attainment * Particulate Matter (PM10) – 24-Hour Attainment/Maintenance Non-Attainment Particulate Matter (PM2.5) – Annual Non-Attainment (Serious) Non-Attainment Lead (Pb) – 3-Month Rolling Non-Attainment *
I I I I I I I I C•i
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT Air Quality
3.14 Pollutant Federal Designation State Designation
Hydrogen Sulfide (H2S) – 1-Hour * Attainment
Sulfates – 24-Hour * Attainment
Vinyl Chloride – 24-Hour * Attainment
Note: * = Not Applicable/No Standards.
Source: SCAQMD 2016a.
3.1.4 Ambient Air Quality
The nearest air quality monitoring station to the Project sites is the Anaheim Monitoring Station located at 1630 West Pampas Lane. Table 4 includes a summary of the air quality monitoring data for the years 2021 through 2023. The table shows the number of times the station recorded pollutant concentrations above federal and State air quality standards and the highest annual reading for each pollutant.
Table 4. Anaheim Monitoring Station Data (2021-2023)
Pollutant Air Pollutant, Averaging Time (Units) 2021 2022 2023 Ozone
(ppm)
Maximum 1-hour measurement 0.089 0.102 0.089
Number of days over National 1-hour standard 0 0 0
Number of days over California 1-hour standard 0 1 0
Maximum 8-hour measurement 0.068 0.076 0.076
Number of days over National 8-hour standard 0 1 2
Number of days over California 8-hour standard 0 1 2
Nitrogen Dioxide
(ppb)
Maximum 1-hour measurement 67.1 53.0 50.9
Annual average 12 11 10
Number of days over National 1-hour standard 0 0 0
Number of days over California 1-hour standard 0 0 0
PM2.5
(µg/m3)
Maximum 24-hour measurement 54.4 33.1 45.6
Annual average 11.6 9.9 *
Number of days over National 24-hour standard 10 0 1
PM10
(µg/m3)
Maximum 24-hour measurement 63.6 67.0 97.8
Annual average 23.4 20.9 20.6
Number of days over National 24-hour standard 0 0 0
Number of days over California 24-hour standard 1 1 1
Source: CARB 2024a.
Notes: ppm = parts per million; ppb = parts per billion; µg/m3 = micrograms per liter; * means there was insufficient data to determine the value.
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT Air Quality
3.15 3.1.5 Odors
Typically, odors are regarded as an annoyance rather than a health hazard. However, manifestations of a person’s reaction to foul odors can range from the psychological (i.e., irritation, anger, or anxiety) to the physiological (i.e., circulatory and respiratory effects, nausea, vomiting, and headache).
The ability to detect odors varies considerably among the population and is subjective. Some individuals can smell very minute quantities of specific substances; others have varying sensitivities to odors; and people may have different reactions to the same odor (e.g., bakery, gasoline). It is important to note that an unfamiliar odor is more easily detected and is more likely to cause complaints than a familiar one. This is because of the phenomenon known as odor fatigue, in which a person can become desensitized to almost any odor and recognition only occurs with an alteration in the intensity.
Quality and intensity are two properties present in any odor. The quality of an odor indicates the nature of the smell experience (e.g., a description of flowery or sweet). Intensity refers to the strength of the odor and depends on the odorant concentration in the air. When an odorous sample is progressively diluted, the odorant concentration decreases, the odor intensity weakens, and it eventually becomes so low that the detection or recognition of the odor is quite difficult. At some point during dilution, the concentration of the odorant drops below a human’s detection threshold.
3.1.6 Toxic Air Contaminants
Toxic air contaminants (TACs) are air pollutants that may cause or contribute to an increase in mortality or serious illness, or which may pose a hazard to human health. TACs are usually present in minute quantities in the ambient air but, due to their high toxicity, they may pose a threat to public health even at very low concentrations. Because there is no threshold level below which adverse health impacts are not expected to occur, TACs differ from criteria pollutants for which acceptable levels of exposure can be determined and for which State and federal governments have set ambient air quality standards. TACs, therefore, are not considered “criteria pollutants” under either the FCAA or the California Clean Air Act (CCAA) and are not subject to NAAQS or CAAQS ambient air quality standards. Instead, USEPA and CARB regulate hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) and TACs, respectively, through statutes and regulations that generally require the use of the maximum or best available control technology to limit emissions. In conjunction with SCAQMD rules, these federal and State statutes and regulations establish the regulatory framework for TACs. At the national level, USEPA has established national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAPs) in accordance with the requirements of the FCAA and subsequent amendments. These are technology-based, source-specific regulations that limit allowable emissions of HAPs.
Within California, TACs are regulated primarily through the Tanner Air Toxics Act (Assembly Bill [AB] 1807) and the Air Toxics Hot Spots Information and Assessment Act of 1987 (AB 2588). AB 1807 sets forth a formal procedure for CARB to designate substances as TACs. The following provides a summary of the primary TACs of concern within the State of California and related health effects.
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT Air Quality
3.16 Diesel Particulate Matter
Diesel particulate matter (DPM) was identified as a TAC by the CARB in August 1998. DPM is emitted from both mobile and stationary sources. In California, on-road diesel-fueled vehicles contribute approximately 42 percent of the statewide total, with an additional 55 percent attributed to other mobile sources such as construction and mining equipment, agricultural equipment, and transport refrigeration units. Stationary sources, contributing about three percent of emissions, include shipyards, warehouses, heavy equipment repair yards, and oil and gas production operations. Emissions from these sources are from diesel-fueled internal combustion engines. Stationary sources that report DPM emissions also include heavy construction, manufacturers of asphalt paving materials and blocks, and diesel-fueled electrical generation facilities (CARB 2024b).
In October 2000, CARB issued a report entitled Risk Reduction Plan to Reduce Particulate Matter Emissions from Diesel-Fueled Engines and Vehicles, which is commonly referred to as the Diesel Risk Reduction Plan (DRRP). The DRRP provides a mechanism for combating the DPM problem. The goal of the DRRP is to reduce concentrations of DPM. The key elements of the DRRP are to clean up existing engines through engine retrofit emission control devices, to adopt stringent standards for new diesel engines, and to lower the sulfur content of diesel fuel through advanced technology emission control devices on diesel engines. When fully implemented, the DRRP will significantly reduce emissions from both old and new diesel-fueled motor vehicles and from stationary sources that burn diesel fuel. In addition to these strategies, CARB continues to promote the use of alternative fuels and electrification. As a result of these actions, DPM concentrations and associated health risks in future years are projected to decline (CARB 2024b). In comparison to year 2010 inventory of statewide DPM emissions, CARB estimates that emissions of DPM in 2035 will be reduced by more than 50 percent.
DPM is typically composed of carbon particles (also called “soot” or “black carbon”) and numerous organic compounds, including over 40 known cancer-causing organic substances. Examples of these chemicals include polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, benzene, formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, acrolein, and 1,3-butadiene. Diesel exhaust also contains gaseous pollutants, including volatile organic compounds and NOx. NOx emissions from diesel engines are important because they can undergo chemical reactions in the atmosphere leading to formation of PM2.5 and O3.
In California, diesel exhaust particles have been identified as a carcinogen accounting for an estimated 70 percent of the total known cancer risks in California. DPM is estimated to increase statewide cancer risk by 520 cancer occurrences per million residents exposed over an estimated 70-year lifetime. Noncancer health effects associated with exposure to DPM include premature death, exacerbated chronic heart and lung disease, including asthma, and decreased lung function in children. Short-term exposure to diesel exhaust can also have immediate health effects. Diesel exhaust can irritate the eyes, nose, throat and lungs, and it can cause coughs, headaches, lightheadedness, and nausea. In studies with human volunteers, diesel exhaust particles made people with allergies more susceptible to the materials to which they are allergic, such as dust and pollen. Exposure to diesel exhaust also causes inflammation in the lungs, which may aggravate chronic respiratory symptoms and increase the frequency or intensity of asthma attacks (CARB 2024b).
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT Air Quality
3.17 Individuals most vulnerable to non-cancer health effects of DPM are children whose lungs are still developing and the elderly who often have chronic health problems. The elderly and people with emphysema, asthma, and chronic heart and lung disease are especially sensitive to DPM (CARB 2024b).
In addition to its health effects, DPM significantly contributes to haze and reduced visibility.
Valley Fever
Valley fever is an infection caused by a fungus that lives in the soil. The fungus that causes Valley fever, Coccidiodes immitis (C. immitis), is found in the southwestern United States, parts of Mexico and Central America, and parts of South America. The fungus grows naturally and is endemic in many areas within California. People can get this infection by breathing in fungal spores from the air, especially when the wind blows the soil with the fungal spores into the air, or the dirt is moved by human activity. About 10,000 cases in the United States are reported each year, mostly from Arizona and California. Valley fever can be misdiagnosed because its symptoms are like those of other illnesses. For most people, the symptoms of Valley fever will go away within a few months without any treatment. Some people may develop a more severe infection, especially those with compromised immune systems (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 2020).
In California, the number of reported Valley fever cases has greatly increased in recent years. Since 2000, the number of reported cases from increased from 1,000 to more than 9,000 cases reported in 2019 (California Department of Public Health 2021). In 2022, 297 cases of Valley fever were recorded within Orange County (California Department of Public Health 2024).
Asbestos
Asbestos is the name given to a number of naturally occurring fibrous silicate minerals with useful properties such as thermal insulation, chemical and thermal stability, and high tensile strength. The three most common types of asbestos are chrysotile, amosite, and crocidolite. Chrysotile, also known as white asbestos, is the most common type of asbestos found in buildings. Chrysotile makes up approximately 90 to 95 percent of all asbestos contained in buildings in the United States. Exposure to asbestos fibers may result in health issues such as lung cancer, mesothelioma (a rare cancer of the thin membranes lining the lungs, chest, and abdominal cavity), and asbestosis (a non-cancerous lung disease that causes scarring of the lungs). Exposure to asbestos can occur during demolition or remodeling of buildings constructed prior to 1977 when it was banned for use in buildings. Exposure to naturally occurring asbestos can occur during soil disturbing activities in areas with deposits present (USEPA 2024b).
3.1.7 Sensitive Receptors
Some land uses are considered more sensitive to air pollution than others due to the types of population groups or activities involved. Sensitive population groups include children, the elderly, the acutely ill, and the chronically ill, especially those with cardiovascular diseases. Examples of sensitive receptors include hospitals, residences, convalescent facilities, and schools. The Project sites contain and are located adjacent to various sensitive uses, primarily single- and multi-family residences.
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT Air Quality
3.18 3.2 REGULATORY SETTING
Air quality within the Project area is regulated by several jurisdictions, including the USEPA, CARB, and SCAQMD. Each of these jurisdictions develops rules, regulations, and policies to attain the goals or directives imposed upon them through legislation. Although USEPA regulations may not be superseded, both State and local regulations may be more stringent.
3.2.1 Federal
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
At the federal level, the USEPA has been charged with implementing national air quality programs. The USEPA’s air quality mandates are drawn primarily from the FCAA, which was signed into law in 1970.
Congress substantially amended the FCAA in 1977 and again in 1990.
Federal Clean Air Act
The FCAA required the USEPA to establish NAAQS, and also set deadlines for their attainment. Two types of NAAQS have been established: primary standards, which protect public health, and secondary standards, which protect public welfare from non-health-related adverse effects, such as visibility restrictions. NAAQS are summarized in Table 2.
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants Pursuant to the FCAA of 1970, the USEPA established the NESHAPs. These are technology-based source-specific regulations that limit allowable emissions of HAPs. Among these sources include asbestos-containing building materials (ACBMs). NESHAPs include requirements pertaining to the inspection, notification, handling, and disposal of ACBMs associated with the demolition and renovation of structures.
Non-Road Diesel Rule
The USEPA has established a series of increasingly strict emissions standards for new off-road diesel equipment, on-road diesel trucks, and locomotives. New construction equipment used for the Project, including heavy-duty trucks and off-road construction equipment, would be required to comply with the emissions standards.
3.2.2 State
California Air Resources Board
The CARB is the agency responsible for coordination and oversight of State and local air pollution control programs in California and for implementing the CCAA of 1988. Other CARB duties include monitoring air quality (in conjunction with air monitoring networks maintained by air pollution control districts and air quality management districts), establishing CAAQS, which in many cases are more stringent than the
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT Air Quality
3.19 NAAQS, and setting emissions standards for new motor vehicles. The emission standards established for motor vehicles differ depending on various factors including the model year, and the type of vehicle, fuel and engine used. The CAAQS are summarized in Table 2.
California Clean Air Act
The CCAA requires that all air districts in the State endeavor to achieve and maintain CAAQS for O3, CO, SO2, and NO2 by the earliest practical date. The CCAA specifies that districts focus attention on reducing the emissions from transportation and area-wide emission sources, and the act provides districts with authority to regulate indirect sources. Each district plan is required to either (1) achieve a 5 percent annual reduction, averaged over consecutive 3-year periods, in district-wide emissions of each nonattainment pollutant or its precursors, or (2) to provide for implementation of all feasible measures to reduce emissions. Any planning effort for air quality attainment would thus need to consider both State and federal planning requirements.
Assembly Bills 1807 & 2588 - Toxic Air Contaminants
Within California, TACs are regulated primarily through AB 1807 (Tanner Air Toxics Act) and AB 2588 (Air Toxics Hot Spots Information and Assessment Act of 1987). The Tanner Air Toxics Act sets forth a formal procedure for CARB to designate substances as TACs. This includes research, public participation, and scientific peer review before CARB designates a substance as a TAC.
Existing sources of TACs that are subject to the Air Toxics Hot Spots Information and Assessment Act are required to: (1) prepare a toxic emissions inventory; (2) prepare a risk assessment if emissions are significant; (3) notify the public of significant risk levels; and (4) prepare and implement risk reduction measures.
Assembly Bill 617
In response to AB 617 (C. Garcia, Chapter 136, Statutes of 2017), the CARB established the Community Air Protection Program. The Community Air Protection Program includes community air monitoring and community emissions reduction program’s focus is to reduce exposure in communities most impacted by air pollution. The Legislature has appropriated funding to support early actions to address localized air pollution through targeted incentive funding to deploy cleaner technologies in these communities, as well as grants to support community participation in the AB 617 process. AB 617 also includes new requirements for accelerated retrofit of pollution controls on industrial sources, increased penalty fees, and greater transparency and availability of air quality and emissions data, which will help advance air pollution control efforts throughout the State.
Regulatory Attainment Designations
Under the CCAA, CARB is required to designate areas of the State as attainment, nonattainment, or unclassified with respect to applicable standards. An “attainment” designation for an area signifies that pollutant concentrations did not violate the applicable standard in that area. A “nonattainment” designation indicates that a pollutant concentration violated the applicable standard at least once,
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT Air Quality
3.20 excluding those occasions when a violation was caused by an exceptional event, as defined in the criteria. Depending on the frequency and severity of pollutants exceeding applicable standards, the nonattainment designation can be further classified as serious nonattainment, severe nonattainment, or extreme nonattainment, with extreme nonattainment being the most severe of the classifications. An “unclassified” designation signifies that the data does not support either an attainment or nonattainment designation. The CCAA divides districts into moderate, serious, and severe air pollution categories, with increasingly stringent control requirements mandated for each category.
The USEPA designates areas for O3, CO, and NO2 as “does not meet the primary standards,” “cannot be classified,” or “better than national standards.” For SO2, areas are designated as “does not meet the primary standards,” “does not meet the secondary standards,” “cannot be classified,” or “better than national standards.” However, CARB terminology of attainment, nonattainment, and unclassified is more frequently used. The USEPA uses the same sub-categories for nonattainment status: serious, severe, and extreme. In 1991, USEPA assigned new nonattainment designations to areas that had previously been classified as Group I, II, or III for PM10 based on the likelihood that they would violate national PM10 standards. All other areas are designated “unclassified.” As noted previously, the Project is in an area designated non-attainment for both the federal and State standards for O3 and PM2.5, the State standard for PM10, and the federal standard for lead (SCAQMD 2016a).
Low-Emission Vehicle Program
The CARB first adopted Low‐Emission Vehicle (LEV) program standards in 1990. These first LEV standards ran from 1994 through 2003. LEV II regulations, running from 2004 through 2010, represent continuing progress in emission reductions. As the State’s passenger vehicle fleet continues to grow and more sport utility vehicles and pickup trucks are used as passenger cars rather than work vehicles, the more stringent LEV II standards were adopted to provide reductions necessary for California to meet federally mandated clean air goals outlined in the 1994 State Implementation Plan (SIP). In 2012, CARB adopted the LEV III amendments to California’s LEV regulations. These amendments include more stringent emission standards for both criteria pollutants and greenhouse gases for new passenger vehicles.
On-Road Heavy-Duty Vehicle Program
The CARB has adopted standards for emissions from various types of new on‐road heavy‐duty vehicles.
Section 1956.8, Title 13, California Code of Regulations contains California’s emission standards for on‐ road heavy‐duty engines and vehicles, and test procedures. CARB has also adopted programs to reduce emissions from in‐use heavy‐duty vehicles including the Heavy‐Duty Diesel Vehicle Idling Reduction Program, the Heavy‐Duty Diesel In‐Use Compliance Program, the Public Bus Fleet Rule and Engine Standards, and the School Bus Program and others.
In addition, the CARB’s Truck and Bus regulation was established to meet federal attainment standards.
This regulation requires heavy-duty diesel vehicles that operate in California to reduce TAC emissions
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT Air Quality
3.21 from their exhaust. Diesel exhaust is responsible for 70 percent of the cancer risk from airborne toxics.
Therefore, as of January 1, 2023, nearly all trucks and buses were required to have 2010 or newer model year engines to reduce PM and NOx emissions. To help ensure that the benefits of this regulation are achieved, starting in 2020, only vehicles compliant with this regulation were registered by the California Department of Motor Vehicles.
3.2.3 Regional
SCAG Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy The Southern California Association of Governments (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 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS), which is entitled Connect SoCal.
Connect SoCal 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.
South Coast Air Quality Management District
The SCAQMD is the agency primarily responsible for ensuring that NAAQS and CAAQS are not exceeded, and the air quality conditions are maintained in the SCAB. Responsibilities of SCAQMD include, but not limited to, preparing plans for the attainment of ambient air quality standards, adopting and enforcing rules and regulations concerning sources of air pollution, issuing permits for stationary sources of air pollution, inspecting stationary sources of air pollution, responding to citizen complaints, monitoring ambient air quality and meteorological conditions, and implementing programs and regulations required by the FCAA and the CCAA.
SCAQMD 2022 Air Quality Management Plan
SCAB is designated as non-attainment for both federal and State standards for O3 and PM2.5, the State standard for PM10, and the federal standard for lead. Because the SCAB currently exceeds these NAAQS and CAAQS, the SCAQMD is required to implement strategies to reduce pollutant levels to recognized acceptable standards. The most recent air plan is the 2022 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP), created in conjunction with the SCAG, CARB, and USEPA to meet federal ozone and PM2.5 standards.
The 2022 AQMP accounts for projected population growth and predicted future emissions in energy and transportation demand, and determined control strategies for the eventual achievement of the NAAQS attainment designations. These control strategies are either organized into the SCAQMD rules and regulations, or otherwise set forth as formal SCAQMD recommendations to other agencies. The 2022 AQMP includes policies that are consistent with the SCAQMD and specify review according to the
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT Air Quality
3.22 recommendations of SCAQMD guidelines. Other policies are aimed at reducing transportation emissions and emissions from major stationary sources (SCAQMD 2022).
SCAQMD Rules and Regulations
The SCAQMD rules are regulations that may apply to the Project include, but are not limited to, the following:
• Rule 201: Permit to Construct. This rule requires that projects shall obtain a permit to construct from the SCAQMD prior to initiating construction activities. • Rule 401: Visible Emissions. This rule prohibits discharges of visible air contaminants from any single source.
• Rule 402: Nuisance. This rule prohibits the discharge from any source such quantities of air contaminants or other materials which cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to any considerable number of persons or to the public, or which endanger the comfort, repose, health, or safety of any such persons or the public.
• Rule 403: Fugitive Dust. The purpose of this rule is to reduce the amount of particulate matter in the ambient air as a result of anthropogenic fugitive dust sources by requiring actions to prevent, reduce, or mitigate fugitive dust emissions.
• Rule 1113: Architectural Coatings. This rule is intended to limit the VOC content on architectural coatings used within the SCAQMD.
• Rule 1403: Asbestos Emissions from Demolition/Renovation Activities: This rule specifies work practices to limit asbestos emissions from building demolition and renovation activities.
3.2.4 Local
City of Seal Beach General Plan
The City of Seal Beach prepared their General Plan in September 2003 in order to plan for the City’s development. The 2013-2021 Housing Element as well as the updated Housing Element include the following goals to promote energy efficiency which would in turn reduce air quality emissions (City of Seal Beach 2003).
• Goal 6: Encourage more efficient energy use in residential developments. o Policy 6a: Promote energy conservation through “green building” techniques that reduce water consumption, improve energy efficiency and lessen a building’s overall environmental impact.
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT Greenhouse Gas
4.23 4.0 GREENHOUSE GAS
4.1 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.
4.1.1 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 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 2023b).
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 2023b).
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
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT Greenhouse Gas
4.24 sources in soil and water, particularly microbial action in wet tropical forests. The atmospheric lifetime of N2O is approximately 120 years (USEPA 2023b).
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 2023b).
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 2023b).
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 Health and Safety Code).
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 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 2023c).
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).
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT Greenhouse Gas
4.25 4.1.2 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 weight 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.
4.1.3 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 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 2024d).
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
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT Greenhouse Gas
4.26 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 2024e).
4.1.4 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.
4.2 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.
4.2.1 State
Assembly Bill 32 and Senate Bill 32
AB 32 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
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT Greenhouse Gas
4.27 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 85percent below 1990 levels. The bill would require 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. 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.
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT Greenhouse Gas
4.28 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 2024c).
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 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.
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT Greenhouse Gas
4.29 Senate Bill 1368: Emission Performance Standards
Enacted in 2006, SB 1368 directs the California Public Utilities Commission (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 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
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT Greenhouse Gas
4.30 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. 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 2024d).
Executive Order S-13-08: Climate Adaptation Strategy
EO S‐13‐08 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, 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
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT Greenhouse Gas
4.31 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.
4.2.2 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 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS), which is entitled Connect SoCal. Connect SoCal 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.
4.2.3 Local
City of Seal Beach General Plan
The City of Seal Beach prepared their General Plan in September 2003 in order to plan for the City’s development. The 2013-2021 Housing Element as well as the updated Housing Element include the following goals to promote energy efficiency which would in turn reduce GHG emissions (City of Seal Beach 2003).
• Goal 6: Encourage more efficient energy use in residential developments.
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT Greenhouse Gas
4.32 o Policy 6a: Promote energy conservation through “green building” techniques that reduce water consumption, improve energy efficiency and lessen a building’s overall environmental impact.
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT Energy
5.33 5.0 ENERGY
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 was 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).
5.2 REGULATORY SETTING
The following includes the key federal, State, and local regulations related to energy resources that are applicable to the Project.
5.2.1 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
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT Energy
5.34 Administration (NHTSA) is responsible for establishing additional vehicle standards and for revising existing standards. NHTSA and the 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 the 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:
• 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 the 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
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT Energy
5.35 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 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.
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT Energy
5.36 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 2024c).
5.2.2 State
California Public Utilities Commission
The 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.
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 Public Resources Code (PRC) section 25000 et seq.)
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT Energy
5.37 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.
5.2.1 Local
City of Seal Beach General Plan
The City of Seal Beach prepared their General Plan in September 2003 in order to plan for the City’s development. The 2013-2021 Housing Element as well as the updated Housing Element include the following goals to promote energy efficiency (City of Seal Beach 2003). • Goal 6: Encourage more efficient energy use in residential developments. o Policy 6a: Promote energy conservation through “green building” techniques that reduce water consumption, improve energy efficiency and lessen a building’s overall environmental impact.
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT Methodology and Modeling Parameters
6.38 6.0 METHODOLOGY AND MODELING PARAMETERS
The following discussion explains the methodology and modeling parameters that will be used to estimate air quality and GHG emissions, potential health risks, and energy demand associated with implementation of the Project.
6.1 CRITERIA POLLUTANT AND GHG EMISSION METHODS
The California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) is a statewide land use emissions computer model designed to provide a uniform platform for government agencies, land use planners, and environmental professionals to quantify potential criteria pollutant and GHG emissions associated with both construction and operations from a variety of land use projects. CalEEMod quantifies direct GHG emissions, such as construction and operational activities and vehicle use, and indirect emissions, such as energy use, solid waste disposal, vegetation planting and/or removal, and water use. Further, CalEEMod identifies mitigation measures to reduce criteria pollutant and GHG emissions along with calculating the benefits achieved from measures chosen by the user.
CalEEMod was developed for the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association in collaboration with the California Air Districts. Default data (e.g., emission factors, trip lengths, meteorology, source inventory) have been provided by the various California Air Districts to account for local requirements and conditions. CalEEMod is a comprehensive tool for quantifying air quality impacts from land use projects located throughout California. The model can be used for a variety of situations where an air quality analysis is necessary or desirable, such as preparing CEQA or National Environmental Policy Act documents, conducting pre-project planning, and, verifying compliance with local air quality rules and regulations, etc.
CalEEMod Version 2022.1.1.28 was used to estimate construction and operational impacts of the Project.
6.1.1 Modeling Assumptions
Impacts resulting from implementation of the Project are assessed at a programmatic level because specific information for buildout of each Housing Opportunity Site is not available at this time. In the absence of specific thresholds of significance for programmatic analyses, this analysis broadly evaluates Project consistency with the applicable air quality plan (2022 AQMP) and GHG reduction plans (SCAG’s RTP/SCS and CARB’s 2022 Scoping Plan). In addition, short-term construction emissions of criteria pollutants and GHGs are estimated based on a reasonably foreseeable subcomponent of the Project, and long-term operational emissions are estimated assuming full buildout of the Project.
Construction at Housing Opportunity Site 4
Construction emissions were estimated for the most emissions-intensive Project component, which is expected to be buildout of Housing Opportunity Site 4 as this site could accommodate the most housing
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT Methodology and Modeling Parameters
6.39 units (see Table 1). At maximum buildout, Housing Opportunity Site 4 can accommodate 552 high-density residential units at a density of 46 dwelling units per acre.
Construction was assumed to begin in early 2025. The construction schedule, off-road equipment types and usage, and worker vehicle trips were left as model default values. Additional haul truck trips were added (10 one-way trips per day during demolition and 15 one-way trips per day during site preparation) to account for the potential off-hauling of demolished building materials and/or soil import or export. It was assumed that 100 percent of off-site worker, vendor, and haul truck trips would occur on paved roadways consistent with defaults for Orange County. The CalEEMod results are included in Appendix A. Daily emissions were quantified for the construction of Housing Opportunity Site 4 and assessed in comparison to the SCAQMD significance thresholds. In addition, a qualitative assessment of construction of all Project components is included in the analysis.
Operation of Full Project Buildout
Buildout of the Project would generate air pollutant and GHG emissions from on-road vehicle travel (mobile sources), consumer products and landscaping (area sources), and natural gas combustion (energy sources). Operational emissions associated with the Project were estimated for the year 2029, estimated buildout of the Project, using CalEEMod and compared to the SCAQMD thresholds of significance. The trip generation rate for each land use was updated to be consistent with the Projectspecific VMT Assessment prepared by Stantec Consulting Inc, and the trip lengths and purposes were left as CalEEMod defaults. The CalEEMod results are included in Appendix A.
6.2 ENERGY CALCULATION METHODS
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). The energy calculations are included as Appendix B.
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 residential units at a density of 46 dwelling units per acre. For operation, energy-use was calculated for 1,773 residential units.
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT Air Quality Impact Analysis
7.1 7.0 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ANALYSIS
7.1 CEQA GUIDELINES
According to the CEQA Guidelines’ Appendix G Environmental Checklist, the following questions are analyzed and evaluated to determine whether impacts related to air quality are considered to be significant environmental effects.
Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution district may be relied upon to make the following determinations.
Would the Project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or State ambient air quality standard? c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) affecting a substantial number of people?
7.1.1 Thresholds of Significance
Pursuant to Section 15064(b) of the CEQA Guidelines, the final determination of whether a project is significant is within the purview of the Lead Agency. The SCAQMD has adopted mass daily thresholds of significance for NOx, VOC, PM10, PM2.5, SOx, CO, and Pb to determine the significance of a project’s potential air quality impacts. Table 5, below, presents the mass daily thresholds applied to the Project and used for purposes of this analysis.
Table 5. SCAQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds
Mass Emissions Thresholds Emissions (lbs/day)
VOC NOX CO SOX PM10 PM2.5 Pb
Construction 75 100 550 150 150 55 3
Operation 55 55 550 150 150 55 3
Notes: N/A = not applicable
Source: SCAQMD 1993.
The SCAQMD has also developed Localized Significance Thresholds (LSTs) for NOx, PM10, PM2.5, and CO. The LSTs are intended to represent the maximum emissions from a project that would not cause or contribute to an exceedance of the CAAQS or NAAQS, and were developed based on the ambient
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT Air Quality Impact Analysis
7.2 concentrations of each criteria pollutant at specific source receptor areas. It is noted that the use of LSTs is a voluntary approach to analysis and may implemented at the discretion of local agencies (SCAQMD 2008a). SCAQMD only recommends the use of LSTs for projects under 5 acres in size. Accordingly, the LSTs are not applicable for the Project, which includes approximately 44.25 acres of development space.
According to SCAQMD, a significant health impact would occur if a project would result in an incremental cancer risk that exceeds 10 persons in one million, or the chronic and acute risks exceed a calculated Hazard Index value of 1.0.
7.2 AIR IMPACT ANALYSIS
Impact AIR-1 Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?
Impact Analysis
Air districts are required to prepared air quality plans to identify strategies to bring regional emissions into compliance with federal and State air quality standards. As noted previously, the SCAB is designated as a non-attainment area for both the federal and State standards for O3 and PM2.5, the State standard for PM10, and the federal standard for lead (SCAQMD 2016a). Accordingly, SCAQMD, in collaboration with CARB and SCAG, has prepared air quality plans, including the 2022 AQMP, to achieve attainment of the applicable ozone and PM standards. The SCAG’s RTP/SCS is also considered an applicable air quality plan. Project consistency with the SCAG RTP/SCS is evaluated in Table 12.
The 2022 AQMP was adopted in December 2022 and represents the most updated regional blueprint for achieving the federal air quality standards and minimizing public health concerns related to air quality.
The 2022 AQMP particularly focuses on attainment of the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The Project would be considered to conflict with the 2022 AQMP if it would:
1. Contribute to exceedances and/or delay attainment of the ozone standards;
2. Result in an exceedance of the planned growth within the project area; or
3. Interfere with implementation of the ozone reduction measures established in the AQMP.
With regard to Item 1, air districts establish emissions thresholds to demonstrate the point at which a project would be considered to increase the regional air quality violations. As described in further detail under Impact AIR-2, construction and operations of the residential development facilitated by the Project is anticipated to exceed the threshold of significance established by the SCAQMD for VOC emissions even with implementation of Mitigation Measures AQ-1 and AQ-2. VOC is an ozone precursor and, by exceeding the VOC threshold of significance, cumulative buildout of the Project may delay attainment of the ozone AAQS.
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT Air Quality Impact Analysis
7.3 With regard to Item 2, the population projections in the SCAQMD’s 2022 AQMP are based on the regional growth projections included in the SCAG’s 2020 RTP/SCS (SCAQMD 2022). According to the Demographics and Growth Forecast Technical Report prepared for the 2020 RTP/SCS, the City of Seal Beach housing stock is projected to grow from 13,100 households in 2016 to 13,300 households in 2045 (SCAG 2020). The City’s household growth projected in the 2020 RTP/SCS, and therefore in the 2022 AQMP, is less than what is planned in the Housing Element, which considers up to 1,773 new residential units by 2029. Implementation of the Project would result in household and population growth that exceeds the projections in the 2022 AQMP and, as a result, the Project is expected to result in emissions that are higher than what was planned for the City in the 2022 AQMP.
With regard to Item 3, the 2022 AQMP notes that attaining the 2015 8-hour ozone standard by 2037 will require both continuation and acceleration of existing ozone reduction strategies, as well as deployment of new strategies. Proposed measures to reduce ozone include stationary and mobile source NOx reduction strategies, supplemented by strategic VOC emission reductions. The following ozone reduction measures identified in the 2022 AQMP are relevant to residential land uses:
• R-CMB-01: Emission Reductions from Replacement with Zero Emission or Low NOx Appliances – Residential Water Heating
• R-CMB-02: Emission Reductions from Replacement with Zero Emission or Low NOx Appliances – Residential Space Heating
• R-CMB-03: Emissions Reductions from Residential Cooking Devices • R-CMB-04: Emission Reductions from Replacement with Zero Emission or Low NOx Appliances – Residential Other Combustion Sources
• CTS-01: Further Emission Reductions from Coatings, Solvents, Adhesives, and Lubricants Each of the foregoing measures are intended for implementation at the local or regional government level, rather than the project level. For example, the 2022 AQMP notes that each measure shall be implemented by (1) adopting a new rule to require compliance and (2) offering incentive funds to facilitate adoption of low-emissions technologies. Because the measures are not directly applicable to the Project, development facilitated under the Project would not interfere with implementation of the air quality improvement strategies established in the AQMP.
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 would increase the total residential units to 1,773 and would further increase the Project’s household and population growth that exceeds the projections in the 2022 AQMP. Additionally, the impacts from construction of a larger residential development were evaluated within Table 3.2-5 below. Additionally, operational impacts from the total 1,773 units were evaluated within Table 3.2-6 and 3.2-7. Emissions were found to exceed thresholds and therefore, the 167 residential units proposed under the ORCC
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT Air Quality Impact Analysis
7.4 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
Because the Project could contribute to a delay in attainment of the ozone AAQS and would result in an exceedance of the planned growth within the City, the Project could conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan. Even with the implementation of mitigation, the impact remains significant and unavoidable.
Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Significant Impact.
Mitigation Measures
MM AQ-1. Quantify Construction Criteria Pollutant Emissions. Prior to discretionary approval by the City for development projects subject to CEQA review, project applicants shall prepare and submit a technical air quality assessment estimating project constructionrelated criteria pollutant emissions to the City for review and approval. The evaluation shall be prepared in accordance with SCAQMD guidance. If construction-related criteria pollutant emissions are determined to have the potential to exceed the SCAQMD regional and localized thresholds of significance, emission reduction measures shall be incorporated into the project to the maximum extent feasible, subject to the discretion of the City. Acceptable options for reducing emissions may include:
• Using construction equipment rated by the United States Environmental Protection Agency as having Tier 4 emission limits for engines above 50 horsepower.
• Require all paints and architectural coatings to be super-compliant VOC content (0 grams/Liter [g/L] to 10 g/L). If VOC emissions still exceed thresholds, then the applicant may elect to prohibit architectural coating activities during summer months (June, July, and August) when ozone formation peaks.
Regardless of the results of the emissions modeling, the following best practices shall be implemented throughout the duration of all construction activity:
• All off-road equipment operating at the construction site must be maintained in proper working condition according to manufacturers’ specifications. • Idling shall be limited to 5 minutes or less in accordance with the Off-Road Diesel Fueled Fleet Regulation as required by CARB.
• Clear Signage regarding idling restrictions shall be placed at the entrances to the construction site.
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT Air Quality Impact Analysis
7.5 • Portable equipment over 50 horsepower must have either a valid SCAQMD Permit to Operate (PTO) or a valid statewide Portable Equipment Registration Program (PERP) placard and sticker issued by CARB.
• Water all active construction areas at least three times daily, or as often as needed to control dust emissions. Watering should be sufficient to prevent airborne dust from leaving the site.
• Cover all trucks hauling soil, sand, and other loose materials or require all trucks to maintain at least two feet of freeboard (i.e., the minimum required space between the top of the load and the top of the trailer). • Pave, apply water three times daily or as often as necessary to control dust, or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking areas, and staging areas at construction sites.
MM AQ-2. Quantify Operational Criteria Pollutant Emissions. Prior to discretionary approval by the City for development projects subject to CEQA review, project applicants shall prepare and submit a technical air quality assessment estimating project operationalrelated criteria pollutant emissions to the City for review and approval. The evaluation shall be prepared in accordance with SCAQMD guidance. If operational-related criteria pollutant emissions are determined to have the potential to exceed the SCAQMD thresholds of significance, emission reduction measures shall be incorporated into the project to the maximum extent feasible, subject to the discretion of the City. Acceptable options for reducing operational emissions may include, but are not limited to, the following:
• Prohibition of natural gas hearths.
• Installation of solar water heaters or tankless water heaters. • Exceeding Title 24 energy standards.
• Constructing Level 2 EV charging stations for multi-family developments and pre-wiring to allow for Level 2 EV charging stations in single-family residential garages.
• Require all paints and architectural coatings to be super-compliant VOC content (0 to 10 g/L).
Level of Significance After Mitigation
Significant and Unavoidable Impact.
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT Air Quality Impact Analysis
7.6 Impact AIR-2 Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or State ambient air quality standard?
Impact Analysis
In developing thresholds of significance for air pollutants, the SCAQMD considered the emission levels for which a project’s individual emissions would be cumulatively considerable. If an individual project exceeds the identified significance thresholds, its emissions would be cumulatively considerable, resulting in significant adverse air quality impacts to the region’s existing air quality conditions. As noted previously, the Project does not propose any individual development projects at this time but, rather, would facilitate the future development of up to 1,773 residential units as identified in the Housing Element.
Construction Emissions
Construction activities facilitated by the Project would result in emissions of criteria pollutants due to the use of off-road equipment, heavy-duty haul trucks, and employee commutes to and from the construction sites. In addition, fugitive dust would be generated from earth-moving activities. Emissions from construction-related activities are generally short-term in duration but may still cause adverse air quality impacts.
Specific buildout details of each Project component are not available at this time; accordingly, this analysis presents estimated construction emissions associated with the most emissions-intensive component of the Project, which entails buildout of Housing Opportunity Site 4. Housing Opportunity Site 4 totals 27 acres, 12 acres of which can be developed, and was modeled to accommodate 552 multifamily units, based on the maximum allowable buildout. The estimated criteria pollutant emissions associated with construction of Housing Opportunity Site 4 are presented in Table 6.
Table 6. Construction of Housing Opportunity Site 4 – Criteria Pollutant Emissions
Emissions (lbs/day)
VOC NOX CO SOX PM10 PM2.5
Construction of Housing Opportunity Site 4 166.23 13.78 36.26 0.04 6.14 1.77 SCAQMD Threshold of Significance 75 100 550 150 150 55
Exceed Threshold? Yes No No No No No
Source: Appendix A.
As shown above, buildout of Housing Opportunity Site 4, which is expected to be the most emissionsintensive component of the Project, may generate construction emissions that exceed SCAQMD mass daily thresholds for VOC. These emission calculations are based on CalEEMod default factors based on land use type and size which are generally more conservative than project-specific inputs. However,
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT Air Quality Impact Analysis
7.7 performing more specific emissions calculations for any of the Housing Opportunity Areas or the MSSP to determine significance on a project site by project site basis would be speculative.
Future housing development facilitated by the Project would be subject to discretionary permits and future CEQA review. However, since the largest Housing Opportunity site exceeds SCAQMD thresholds, other sites may result in potentially significant emissions due to a more intensive construction timeline, additional demolition and grading, or additional construction trips. Under Mitigation Measure AQ-1, each component facilitated by the Project would be required to quantify construction emissions and, if emissions exceed the applicable thresholds, the component would reduce emissions to the maximum extent feasible, including through the use of super-compliant VOC coatings. While Mitigation Measure AQ-1 would reduce construction exhaust emissions, potential future development projects accommodated under the Project, both individually and cumulatively, could still exceed the SCAQMD significance thresholds for construction. As a result, the cumulative impact from construction of the Project remains significant and unavoidable.
Operational Emissions
Implementation of the Project and the residential components of the ORCC Specific Plan Project would result in future development of up to 1,773 new residential units. Emissions during operation of the Project would be generated primarily from resident vehicle trips to and from the sites (mobile sources). In addition, the buildout facilitated by the Project would generate emissions from area sources, which include the use of fireplaces, consumer products, landscaping equipment, and others. Estimated operational emissions from cumulative Project buildout are presented in Table 7. As shown in the table, full buildout of the residential units facilitated by the Project would result in VOC emissions that exceed the applicable SCAQMD threshold. Therefore, Mitigation Measure AQ-2 is required.
As required by Mitigation Measure AQ-2, each component facilitated by the Project would be required to quantify their individual operational emissions and, if emissions exceed the applicable thresholds, the component would reduce emissions to the maximum extent feasible. For this example, architectural coatings were limited to those with a VOC content less than 10 grams per liter. The emissions that would occur from operations with the implementation of mitigation are presented in Table 8.
Table 7. Project Operations – Criteria Pollutant Emissions (Unmitigated) Source
Emissions (lbs/day)
VOC NOX CO SOX PM10 PM2.5
Mobile 28.4 22.3 253 0.70 71.0 18.3
Area 50.0 0.00 101 <0.005 0.05 0.04
Energy 0.36 6.08 2.59 0.04 0.49 0.49
Total1 79.0 28.3 356 0.75 71.5 18.8
SCAQMD Threshold of Significance 55 55 550 150 150 55
Exceed Threshold? Yes No No No No No
Source: Appendix A.
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT Air Quality Impact Analysis
7.8 Source
Emissions (lbs/day)
VOC NOX CO SOX PM10 PM2.5
1 Totals may not appear to sum due to rounding.
Table 8. Project Operations – Criteria Pollutant Emissions (Mitigated) Source
Emissions (lbs/day)
VOC NOX CO SOX PM10 PM2.5
Mobile 28.6 22.3 253 0.70 71.0 18.3
Area 40.7 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Energy 0.33 5.61 2.39 0.04 0.45 0.45
Total 69.6 27.9 255 0.74 71.45 18.7
SCAQMD Threshold of Significance 55 55 550 150 150 55
Exceed Threshold? Yes No No No No No
Source: Appendix A.
As shown above, even with mitigation, operational emissions of VOC would exceed the threshold of significance. While Mitigation Measure AQ-2 would reduce operational emissions, cumulative future development projects accommodated under the Project could still exceed the SCAQMD significance thresholds. As a result, the cumulative impact from operations of the Project remains 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 impacts from construction of a larger residential development were evaluated within Table 3.2-5. Additionally, operational impacts from the total 1,773 units were evaluated within Tables 3.2-6 and 3.2-7. Therefore, the 167 residential 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
As shown in Table 6, construction emissions of the most intensive Project component would exceed the applicable threshold of significance for VOC emissions. Even with implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ-1, a significant impact may occur. Additionally, as presented in Table 8, even with implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ-2, operational criteria pollutant emissions could exceed the applicable thresholds of significance. Therefore, the Project could result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or State ambient air quality standard, and the impact would be significant and unavoidable.
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT Air Quality Impact Analysis
7.9 Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Significant Impact.
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measure AQ-1 and AQ-2 are required.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
Significant and Unavoidable Impact.
Impact AIR-3 Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?
Impact Analysis
As discussed above, the Project itself does not propose any development; however, the Project would facilitate future development of up to 1,773 residential units throughout the City. The candidate housing sites were evaluated at a programmatic level, and no air modeling was conducted for this analysis.
This discussion qualitatively addresses whether implementation of the Project would expose sensitive receptors to construction-generated fugitive dust (PM10), Valley fever spores, naturally occurring asbestos (NOA), construction-generated DPM, or operational related TACs.
According to CARB, some land uses are considered more sensitive to air pollution than others due to the types of population groups or activities involved. Heightened sensitivity may be caused by health problems, proximity to the emissions source, or duration of exposure to air pollutants. Children, pregnant women, the elderly, and those with existing health problems are especially vulnerable to the effects of air pollution. Accordingly, land uses that are typically considered to be sensitive receptors include residences, schools, childcare centers, playgrounds, retirement homes, convalescent homes, hospitals, and medical clinics. As noted previously, the identified Housing Opportunity Sites, Main Street Program, and the residential component of the ORCC Specific Plan Project contain and are located adjacent to various sensitive uses, primarily single- and multi-family residences.
Construction Emissions
During construction associated with the Project, the potential exists for emissions of fugitive dust, Valley fever, NOA, and DPM to be released. Each TAC is discussed separately below.
Fugitive Dust and Valley Fever
Fugitive dust would be generated during construction facilitated by the Project. As noted previously, Valley fever is an infection caused by inhalation of the spores of a fungus, C. immitis, that lives in soil.
Activities or conditions that increase the amount of fugitive dust contribute to greater exposure, and they include dust storms, grading, and recreational off-road activities.
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT Air Quality Impact Analysis
7.10 Most of the fugitive dust generated during construction activities would remain localized and would be deposited near each construction site. Additionally, SCAQMD Rule 403, Fugitive Dust, limits the discharge of PM emissions and establishes Best Available Control Measures that are applicable to all construction activities (SCAQMD 2005). Consistent with the SCAQMD Best Available Control Measures, construction of each component facilitated by the Project would be required to use water trucks to stabilize soils. In addition, the City of Seal Beach is generally built out; therefore, much of the development facilitated by the Project would occur in urban areas where conditions are generally not dry, dusty, or windy. Furthermore, as required by Mitigation Measure AQ-2, development of each component subject to discretionary approval shall evaluate their individual construction emissions. If the component is determined to result in PM emissions that exceed the SCAQMD thresholds, then minimization measures would be incorporated to reduce PM emissions to the maximum extent feasible. Overall, construction activities associated with future development facilitated by the Project would not result in sensitive receptor exposure to substantial concentrations of fugitive dust, including dust that may contain C. immitis spores.
Asbestos
Construction in areas of rock formations that contain NOA could release asbestos to the air and pose a health hazard. A review of the map with areas more likely to have rock formations containing NOA in California indicates that there is no known asbestos in the City of Seal Beach (USGS 2011). Therefore, construction of the Project would not expose sensitive receptors to NOA.
Many of the components of the Project would entail demolition of existing structures in order to accommodate new housing. For buildings constructed prior to 1980, the Code of Federal Regulations (29 CFR 1926.1101) states that all thermal system insulation and surface materials must be designated as “presumed asbestos containing material” unless proven otherwise. ACBMs could include, but are not limited to, plaster, ceiling tiles, thermal systems insulation, floor tiles, vinyl sheet flooring, adhesives, and roofing materials. Compliance with SCAQMD Rule 1403, Asbestos Emissions from Demolition/Renovation Activities, would ensure that any ACBMs encountered during construction activities are handled appropriately, and risks to existing sensitive receptors would not occur.
Localized Significance Thresholds
SCAQMD has established localized significance thresholds for NOx, CO, PM10, and PM2.5 to determine the risk of elevated levels of ozone precursors and particulate matter at nearby receptors. Thresholds were established based on an individual project’s size, location, and distance to receptors. However, SCAQMD established in the PEIR for the 2016 AQMP that the LST screening methodology is not applicable to regional projects such as local general plans, specific plans, or air quality plans since the individual project plans are typically not known at plan adoption (SCAQMD 2016b). Therefore, since the analysis is evaluating the buildout of the Housing Element, a localized construction analysis would be speculative for individual projects. However, with implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ-1, the Project would be required to quantify the individual construction emissions and reduce as feasible below SCAQMD thresholds.
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT Air Quality Impact Analysis
7.11 Diesel Particulate Matter
Exposure to DPM from diesel vehicles and off-road construction equipment can result in health risks to nearby sensitive receptors. Pollutant concentrations are typically highest near sources of emissions and dissipate with distance. Thus, the sensitive receptors in and adjacent to each of the Housing Opportunity Sites would be the most susceptible to adverse health effects resulting from construction-related DPM emissions. The actual level of risk would depend on a variety of factors that can only be determined once the specifics of a project are known. Since the details regarding future construction activities are not known at this time, including phasing of future individual projects, construction duration and phasing, and preliminary construction equipment, preparation of a meaningful HRA is not possible at the plan level.
Rather, Mitigation Measure AQ-3 is required to assess the potential impact associated with exposing sensitive receptors to substantial concentration of DPM. Since health risks are a factor of duration of exposure, source emission rates, and distance of the receptor, an individual’s health risks during construction may still be significant and unavoidable.
Operational Emissions
The greatest potential for exposure to TACs during long-term operations is from the use of heavy-duty diesel trucks and stationary generators that use diesel fuel. The Project would facilitate development of up to 1773 residential units throughout the City. The majority of vehicle trips associated with the Project would be from residents and, as a result, future development associated with the Project would result in very few diesel truck trips. Additionally, the residential units developed under the Project are not expected to include any stationary generators. Should a generator be proposed as part of a future development under the Project, the project would be required by SCAQMD to evaluate the impacts of the generator as part of obtaining a Permit to Operate. For these reasons, once operational, the Project would not be expected to expose nearby sensitive receptors to substantial amounts of TACs.
During operations, dust emissions would be negligible because most of the Project area would be occupied by buildings, pavement, and landscaped areas. This would preclude the possibility of Project operations resulting in exposure to fugitive dust emissions and C. immitis spores that may result in Valley fever infection.
As noted above, SCAQMD has established localized significance thresholds for NOx, CO, PM10, and PM2.5 to determine the risk of elevated levels of ozone precursors and particulate matter at nearby receptors. A localized operational analysis would be speculative for individual projects. However, with implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ-2, the Project would be required to quantify the individual operational emissions and reduce as feasible below SCAQMD thresholds.
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 impacts from construction and operation of the residential component of the ORCC Specific Plan may result in impacts to health risks. Construction of the residential component of the ORCC Specific Plan Project would still be required to comply with all SCAQMD applicable rules and regulations pertaining to dust control and permitting and therefore, the 167
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT Air Quality Impact Analysis
7.12 residential 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
Based on the analysis above, during construction, the Project could expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. With implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ-3, the impact would be reduced to the maximum extent feasible. However, the impact may remain significant and unavoidable.
Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Significant Impact.
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measures AQ-1 and AQ-2 are required.
MM AQ-3. Construction Health Risk Assessment. Prior to future discretionary project approval for any component that would involve construction lasting more than 2 months and within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors, the project applicant shall submit a construction health risk assessment (HRA) to the City for review and approval. The level of detail required for the HRA is described below:
A quantitative health risk assessment shall be prepared in accordance with SCAQMD and OEHHA guidance to identify the potential for increased cancer and non-cancer health risks. If the health risks do not exceed the applicable thresholds, further mitigation is not necessary. If the resultant health risks are determined to exceed SCAQMD thresholds of significance, the applicant shall implement measures to reduce DPM exhaust emissions and associated risks to below the applicable thresholds. Methods may include requiring the use of off-road equipment engines that meet or exceed CARB’s Tier 4 Final engine emissions standards for off-road equipment exceeding 50 horsepower (hp).
Any emissions reduction measures identified in the HRA shall be incorporated into the site development plan as a component of the project. Prior to issuance of any construction permit, the construction contractor shall ensure that all construction plans submitted to the Community Development Department clearly show incorporation of all applicable mitigation measures.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
Significant and Unavoidable Impact.
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT Air Quality Impact Analysis
7.13 Impact AIR-4 Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) affecting a substantial number of people?
Impact Analysis
While offensive odors rarely cause any physical harm, they can still be unpleasant, leading to distress among the public and often generating citizen complaints. The occurrence and severity of odor impacts depends on numerous factors, including nature, frequency, and intensity of the source, the wind speed and direction, and the sensitivity of the receptor.
Construction activities facilitated by the Project could result in short-term odorous emissions from diesel exhaust associated with diesel-fueled equipment. However, these emissions would be intermittent and would dissipate rapidly from the source. Construction of all components facilitated by the Project would also be required to comply with all applicable SCAQMD rules and regulations, particularly associated with permitting of air pollutant sources. Compliance with the aforementioned regulations would help to minimize emissions, including emissions leading to odors.
The SCAQMD has identified land uses commonly subject to odor complaints. These land uses include agriculture (farming and livestock), wastewater treatment, food processing plants, chemical plants, composting, refineries, landfills, dairies, and fiberglass molding (SCAQMD 1993). The Project entails development of residential uses and would not involve any of the land uses identified to result in odor complaints nor involve any components with the potential to create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people.
Finally, SCAQMD regulates objectionable odors through Rule 402, Nuisance (SCAQMD 1976). Thus, although not anticipated, if odor complaints are made during implementation of the Project, the SCAQMD would ensure that such odors are addressed, and any potential odor effects are minimized or eliminated.
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. Residential developments are not land uses commonly subject to odor complaints and all developments within SCAQMD would be subject to rules and regulations pertaining to odor. Therefore, the 167 residential 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 would not result in other emissions, such as those leading to odors, affecting a substantial number of people. Therefore, the impact would be less than significant.
Level of Significance Before Mitigation
Less Than Significant Impact.
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT Air Quality Impact Analysis
7.14 Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is necessary.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
Less Than Significant Impact.
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis
8.15 8.0 GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT ANALYSIS
8.1 CEQA GUIDELINES
The CEQA Guidelines define a significant effect on the environment as “a substantial, or potentially substantial, adverse change in the environment.” To determine if a project would have a significant impact on GHGs, the type, level, and impact of emissions generated by the project must be evaluated.
The following GHG significance thresholds are contained in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines:
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment; or
b) Conflict with any applicable plan, policy or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases.
8.1.1 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 2008b). 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.
8.2 GHG IMPACT ANALYSIS
Impact GHG-1 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 the future development of up to 1,606 residential units as identified in the Housing Element. Buildout of the future components 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 8, below, presents a summary of the estimated GHG emissions that would result from construction of Housing Opportunity Site 4, which is
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis
8.16 expected to be the most emissions-intensive component of 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.
Table 9. 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 1773 units.
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 residential components 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 10.
Table 10. 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
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis
8.17 Source Emissions (MTCO2e per year)
Project Total 15,773
SCAQMD Thresholds of Significance 3,000
Exceeds Threshold? Yes
Source: Appendix A.
As shown in the table, full buildout of the residential 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 11 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 on-site 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 11. 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 Project Total 14,745
SCAQMD Thresholds of Significance 3,000
Exceeds Threshold? Yes
Source: Appendix A.
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis
8.2 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 residential 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 residential 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
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 housing 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
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 State CEQA Guidelines, a Lead Agency for a project can and should consider mitigation measures to reduce substantial adverse effects related to 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.
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 lightcolored roofs, trees for shade, and sunlight. o Incorporate passive environmental control systems that account for the characteristics of the natural environment.
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis
8.3 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 off-site 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; o Provide traffic calming measures;
o Provide bicycle parking;
o Limit or eliminate park supply;
o Unbundle parking costs;
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis
8.4 o Provide parking cash-out programs;
o Implement or provide access to commute reduction program; e) 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; f) 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
g) Designate a percentage of parking spaces for ride-sharing vehicles or high occupancy vehicles, and provide adequate passenger loading and unloading for those vehicles;
h) Land use siting and design measures that reduce GHG emissions, including:
o Retaining on-site 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
Significance and Unavoidable Impact.
Impact GHG-2 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
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis
8.5 1990 no later than 2045, as directed by AB 1279 (CARB 2022). Table 12 identifies the Scoping Plan policies that may be applicable to the developments facilitated by the Project.
Table 12. 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
In April 2024, the SCAG Regional Council approved the 2024-2050 Connect SoCal RTP/SCS. The primary goal of Connect SoCal is to achieve sustainable regional growth while reducing GHG emissions
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis
8.6 through transportation and land use planning. Project consistency with the specific goals of Connect SoCal which are applicable to the Project are evaluated in Table 12.
Table 13. Project Consistency with Connect SoCal 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. The Project would facilitate the development of up to 1,606 residential units throughout the City. The housing types consist of multifamily residences designated for varying income levels, including lowincome and moderate-income units. Additionally, Orange County Transportation Authority and Long Beach Transit both provide public transit services throughout the City. Thus, future residents of components 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 supports 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 residential 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 residential units and therefore, the 167 residential 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.
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT
9.7 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 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
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.
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT Energy Impact Analysis
10.8 10.0 ENERGY IMPACT ANALYSIS
10.1 CEQA GUIDELINES
The CEQA Guidelines define a significant effect on the environment as “a substantial, or potentially substantial, adverse change in the environment.” To determine whether a project would have a significant impact on energy the following must be evaluated.
Would the project:
a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation? b) Conflict with or obstruct a State or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency?
10.2 ENERGY IMPACT ANALYSIS
Impact ENR-1 Result in potential 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 residential units that would be facilitated under the Project 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 facilitated by 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 onroad 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 housing 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
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT Energy Impact Analysis
10.9 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 developed 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, was estimated to consume 46,170 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 13 provides an estimate of the total on-road vehicle fuel usage during construction of Housing Opportunity Site 4.
Table 14. 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
AIR QUALITY, GREENHOUSE GAS, AND ENERGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT Energy Impact Analysis
10.1 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 component facilitated by the Project would result in the consumption of petroleum-based fuels and 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 component of 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 would result in future development of up to 1773 new residential units.