Torrance City Council
December 17, 2024

environment that also pose a material threat of a future release to the environment.

Historical records indicate a 500-gallon waste oil underground storage tank (UST) was located at the former Montgomery Ward Auto Express in 1971. A large resurfaced concrete patch located west of the building was visible during the site visit indicating the feature was likely removed. Conditions of the tank and analytical results of the excavation samples at the time of removals are unknown. Los Angeles County Fire Department (LACoFD) records indicate an above ground storage tank (AST) containing waste oil was located on the northern exterior of the former Montgomery Ward Auto Express. DTSC recommends the City of Torrance adhere to the following:

1. A Soil Management Plan (SMP) not be implemented as a primary cleanup plan as stated in the Environmental Site Assessment, “F ollowing building
demolition and during Site excavation and grading, any impacted soil that may be present could be identified and addressed via procedures outlined in a soil management plan.” DTSC recommends that any potential contamination be fully characterized and then remediated under the oversight of a self-certified local agency, DTSC or Regional Water Quality Control Board. A SMP alone cannot sufficiently identify and document the potential contaminants that may pose a threat to human health and the environment.

DTSC recommends that a cleanup plan, a Removal Action Workplan (RAW) or Remedial Action Plan (RAP), be prepared to adequately address all site impacts after complete characterization.

2. T
he City of Torrance enter into a voluntary agreement to address contamination at brownfields and other types of properties or receive oversight from a self-certified local agency, DTSC or Regional Water Quality Control Board. If entering into one of DTSC’s voluntary agreements, please note that DTSC uses a single standard Request for Lead Agency Oversight Application for all agreement types. Please apply for DTSC oversight using this link: Request for Agency Oversight Application. Submittal of the online application includes an agreement to pay costs incurred during agreement 88 Leo Oorts
October 16, 2024

preparation. If you have any questions about the application portal, please contact your Regional Brownfield Coordinator.

3. DTSC recommends that all imported soil and fill material should be tested to assess any contaminants of concern meet screening levels as outlined in DTSC's Preliminary Endangerment Assessment (PEA) Guidance Manual.

Additionally, DTSC advises referencing the DTSC Information Advisory Clean Imported Fill Material Fact Sheet if importing fill is necessary. To minimize the possibility of introducing contaminated soil and fill material there should be documentation of the origins of the soil or fill material and, if applicable, sampling be conducted to ensure that the imported soil and fill material are suitable for the intended land use. The soil sampling should include analysis based on the source of the fill and knowledge of the prior land use. Additional information can be found by visiting DTSC’s Human and Ecological Risk Office (HERO) webpage.

DTSC appreciates the opportunity to review and comment on the MND for Fashion Square at Del Amo 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 concerns, please contact me or a member of our CEQA Unit Team.

Sincerely,
Dave Kereazis
Associate Environmental Planner
CEQA Unit-Permitting/HWMP
Department of Toxic Substances Control
[email protected]
89 Leo Oorts
October 16, 2024

cc: (via email)
Governor’s Office of Planning and Research
CEQA State Clearinghouse
[email protected]
Scott Wiley
Associate Governmental Program Analyst
CEQA Unit-Permitting/HWMP
Department of Toxic Substances Control
[email protected]
Tamara Purvis
Associate Environmental Planner
CEQA Unit-Permitting/HWMP
Department of Toxic Substances Control
[email protected]
90 ITEM 8D
ATTACHMENT 8
Project Plans
(Limited Distribution)
Available on the City webpage:
bit.ly/Fashion-Square-at-Del-Amo-Project
ITEM 8D
ATTACHMENT 8
91 138
AGENDA ITEM NO.

8 D

(SUPPLEMENTAL
NO. 1)

DATE:

November 6
, 2024

TO:

Planning Commission

FROM:

Leo Oorts
, Planning
Manager

SUBJECT:

3405 Carson Street (APN 7366
-
019
-
123)

21405, 21515 Madrona Avenue (APN 7366
-
019
-
182,
7366
-
019
-
183)

Conditional Use Permit

(
CUP
23 -
00012)

Environmental Assessment (EAS23
-
00003)

Development Permit (DVP23
-
00002)

Modification (MOD23
-
00007)

Division of Lot (DIV23
-
00003)

Modification (MOD23
-
00008)

Consideration
of an Environmental Assessment for adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration, and approval of
a Conditional Use Permit

and

a
Development Permit

to allow
the construction of a 260
-
unit
townhome
development
, a Division of Lot to allow a Vesting
Tentative Tract Map
(No. 83498)
for condominium purposes, a Mo
dification of Variance
(V79
-
3) pertaining to the off
-
street parking
boundary

for the Del Amo Fashion Center, and
a Modification of Development Permit (DVP96
-
00001) pertaining to the Master Plan
boundary
f
or the Del Amo Fashion Center, on
property

located
in the H
-
DA1 Zone at
the
northwest corner of Carson Street and Madrona Avenue at 3405 Carson Street and
21405, 21515 Madrona Avenue (APN
7366
-
019
-
123,
7366
-
019
-
182, 7366
-
019
-
183)
,

referred
to
as t
he Fashion

Square at Del Amo Project.

SUPPLEMENTAL

Revis
ion to

Conditions of Approval
Please find attached Planning Commission Resolution No. 24 -
073 that has been revised to
clarify the
conditions

of approval (
Nos
.

49 , 68
)

and add
a new condition of approval (No. 69)
related to sewer
and
water
line connections

(Attachment
1 )
.

No other revisions are made to the conditions of approval.

Staff notes the
revised condit
ions of approval

are not
required by the
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative
Declaration (IS/MND)

and
are
not
necessary to mitigate an avoidable significant effect
, and therefore

recirculation of the IS/MND

is not required
.

Revision to

Access and Circulation

Staff notes the

IS/MND and
staff report
both
inadvertently

reference
d

a preliminary version of the

Local
Circulation Analysis

tha
t

described

minor modifications
to
the existing median
along
Madrona Avenue
to

align
the primary driveway entrance

and

provide
an acceleration lane for left turns out.

In co
nsultation

with the Public Works Department

and the project applicant
,
staff has confirmed the project

does

not
involve modifications to the
existing
median along Madrona Avenue

and
no
improvements to offsite
circulation are warranted in the
immediate vicinity of the project site.

No other revisions are made to the
project description.

Staff notes the
revision

described above
merely clarifies
the project description

and does not constitute
a substantial revision under
the California Environmental Quality Act (
CEQA
)

and therefore
recirculation
of the IS/MND is not required
.

The

findings and conclusions of the IS/MND are not affected by the revisions described above
and

staff
continues to recommend adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND)

and approval of the project
.

A

TTACHMENTS

1. Resolution

No
.
24 -
0 73

(Revised)
1 139
ITEM 8D
ATTACHMENT 1
Resolution No. 24-073 (Revised)
ITEM 8D
ATTACHMENT 1
2 140

PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO.

2 4
-
07 3

A RESOLUTION OF THE

PLANNING COMMISSION

OF THE CITY OF

TORRANCE, CALIFORNIA APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT AS PROVIDED FOR IN DIVISION 9, CHAPTER 5, ARTICLE 1

OF THE TORRANCE MUNICIPAL CODE

TO ALLOW
THE
CONSTRUCTION OF A 260
-
UNIT

TOWNHOME

DEVELOPMENT

ON

PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE H
-
DA1

ZONE AT THE NORTHWEST
CORNER OF CARSON STREET AND MADRONA AVENUE AT 3405
CARSON STREET AND 21405, 21515 MADRONA AVENUE (APN 7366 -
019
-
123, 7366
-
019
-
182, 7366
-
019
-
183)
.

CUP2
3 -
000
12 :

LENNAR HOMES (MADRONA F & F, LLC)

WHEREAS
,

the Planning Commission of the City of Torrance conducted a duly noticed public hearing on
November
6 , 202
4 to consider an application filed by
Lennar Homes (Madrona F & F, LLC)

for adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and
for approval of a Conditional Use Permit

and a Development Permit to allow the
construction of a 260
-
unit
townhome

development, a Division of Lot to allow a Vesting Tentative Tract Map (No. 83498) for condominium
purposes, a Modification of Variance (V79
-
3) pertaining to the
off
-
street parking boundary

for the Del Amo Fashion Center, and a Modification of Development Permit (DVP96
-
00001) pertaining to the Master Plan
boundary
for the Del Amo Fashion Center
,

on property
located in the H
-
DA1 Zone at the northwest corner of Carson Street and Madrona Avenue at 3405 Carson Street and 21405, 21515 Madrona Avenue (APN 7366 -
019
-
123, 7366
-
019
-
182, 7366
-
019
-
183),
herein
referred as the Fashion Square at Del Amo Project; and

WHEREAS
, due and legal publication of notice was given to owners of property in the vicinity thereof and due and legal hearings have been held, all in accordance with the provisions of Division 9, Chapter 1, Article 45, and Division 9, Chapter 2, Article 28, and Division 9, Chapter 2, Article 29, and Division 9,
Chapter 2, Article 36, and Division 9, Chapter 5, Article 1 of the Torrance Municipal Code; and

WHEREAS
,
based on all the evidence found and public testimony considered the Planning
Commission

of the City of Torrance
by roll call vote
approved a motion to adopt

a Mitigated Negative
Declaration
for

the
Fashion Square at Del Amo Project
;

and

WHEREAS
, the Planning Commission of the City of Torrance does hereby find and determine as follows:

a)
That the project site is located
at the northwest corner of Carson Street and Madrona Avenue at 3405 Carson Street and 21405, 21515 Madrona Avenue (APN 7366 -
019
-
123, 7366
-
019
-
182, 7366
-
019
-
183);
b)
That the project site is described as “
BEING
PARCEL 6 AND PORTIONS OF PARCELS 4, 7, 8
AND

9 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 1387,

AS PER MAP FILE
D

IN BOOK 23 PAGES 71 AND 72 OF
PARCEL MAPS”

in the Office of the Los Angeles County Recorder, State of California; c)
That the
project
, as conditioned, will not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience or welfare, as the environmental impacts associated with the project

have been
assessed through an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration in accordance with the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
.

The
project

would not have a significant effect on the
environment when mitigation measures are incorporated and therefore a Mitigated Negative Declaration was adopted
;
d)
That
the
project
is conditionally permitted within the Del Amo Business District (H -
DA1 Zone) and
complies with the objective development standards of the Hawthorne Boulevard Corridor Specific Plan
and
the Torrance Municipal Code and
is
consistent with the
Commercial Center
land use
designation of the General Plan

of the City of Torrance;
3 141

e)

That the
project
, as conditioned, will not impair the integrity and character of the Del Amo Business District (H
-
DA
1 Zone)

because the project is compatible with the
surrounding
urban
use
s

that

i
nclude

a regional commercial center

to the west
, professional office

and medical
building
s

to the
north and south
, and single
-
family residences

and a public school
to the east
;

f)

That the project site is physically suitable for the
project
, as conditioned, because the project site is
situated within an urbanized environment and already served by all necessary utilities and public services, and will not extend any roads or other infrastructure;

g)

That the
project
, as conditioned, will be compatible with existing and proposed future land uses within the Del Amo Business District (H
-
DA
1 Zone) and the general area in which the project is to be located because the project site is surrounded by
urban uses that include a regional commercial
center to the west, professional office

and medical

buildings to the north and south, and single
-
family residences
and a public school
to the east;

h)

That the
project
, as conditioned, will encourage and be consistent with the orderly development of the City as provided for in the General Plan and the Hawthorne Boulevard Corridor Specific Plan because the
project is located within the Del Amo Business District (H -
DA
1 Zone) and the
Commercial Center land use designation, which is described as the urban core of the City of Torrance, containing the largest and tallest buildings as well as the most diverse and highest concentration of land uses, such as the Del Amo Fashio
n Center along Hawthorne Boulevard and
the surrounding commercial centers near Torrance Boulevard and Sepulveda Boulevard;

i)

That the
project
, as conditioned, will not discourage the appropriate existing or planned future use of surrounding property and tenancies because the project represents an improvement to the area.

For example, the project architecture demonstrates appeal through modulat ion of building masses,
elevations, and rooflines that promote visual interest. Additional features and design enhancements include various
community

amenities
,

such as
an

open space

park

and
a recreation center,

that
promote quality exper
ience
,
increased value
, and a cohesive environment
;

j)

That there will be adequate provisions for water, sanitation, and public utilities and services to ensure t
he project
is not detrimental to public health and safety because the project site is situated within an urbanized environment and is already served by all necessary utilities and public services
and

will not extend any roads or other infrastructure. The

addition of 2
60 dwelling

units or
6 30

persons
at full occupancy

(

2. 42

persons per household)

represents a negligible impact on utility and
public service
capacity and

will not result in the need to construct new or physically alter public
facilities. In addition, the project applicant is required to pay development impact fees and school district fees to offset the incremental increase in the demand for public services;

k)

That there will be adequate provisions for public access to serve the project
, as conditioned,
because the project
site is bounded by three street
s

and a private street
, thus allowing fire truck
access on all four sides

of the project site
. Multiple pedestrian paths of travel are also provided on each street frontage

that

offer direct connection to
the
residen
ces
, onsite parking, and
common

areas. Lastly, the project site is served
by
public transit stops located near the intersection of Carson Street and Madrona Avenue and major public transit stops located within one -
half mile near Carson
Street and Hawthorne Boulevard
;

l)

That the location, size, design, and operating characteristics of the p
roject
, as conditioned, will not
be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience or welfare, or to the property of persons located in the area because the project has been thoroughly reviewed and found to be in compliance with the
objective
development standards of the
Del Amo Business District (
H
-
DA
1 Zone
)

and is consistent with the Commercial Center land use designation;

4 142

m)

That the
project
, as conditioned, will not produce any or all of the following results:

•

Damage or nuisance from noise, smoke, odor, dust or vibration,

•

Hazard from explosion, contamination or fire,

•

Hazard occasioned by unusual volume or character of traffic or the congregating of large numbers of people or vehicles;
and

WHEREAS,

the Planning Commission by the following roll call vote

APPROVED

CUP23
-
00012,
subject to conditions:

AYES:

COMMISSIONERS:

NOES:

COMMISSIONERS:

ABSENT:

COMMISSIONERS:

ABSTAIN:

COMMISSIONERS:

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED

that
CUP2
3 -
000
12 filed by
Lennar Homes (Madrona F & F,
LLC) in

conjunction with
a Development Permit to allow the construction of a 260 -
unit
townhome

development, a Division of Lot to allow a Vesting Tentative Tract Map (No. 83498) for condominium purposes, a Modification of Variance (V79
-
3) pertaining to the
off
-
street parking boundary

for the Del
Amo Fashion Center, and a Modification of Development Permit (DVP96 -
00001) pertaining to the
Master Plan

boundary

for the Del Amo Fashion Center,

on property located in the H
-
DA1 Zone at the
northwest corner of Carson Stree
t and Madrona Avenue at 3405 Carson Street and 21405, 21515 Madrona Avenue (APN 7366
-
019
-
123, 7366
-
019
-
182, 7366
-
019
-
183), herein referred as the Fashion
Square at Del Amo Project
, on file in the Community Development Department of the City of Torrance, is hereby

APPROVED

subject to the following conditions:

1. That use of the subject property shall be subject to all conditions imposed in Conditional Use Permit 2 3
-
000
12 ; and any amendments thereto or modifications thereof as may be approved from time to time pursuant to Section 92.28.1 et seq. of the Torrance Municipal Code on file in the office of the Community Development Director of the City of Torrance; and further, that the said use shall be
established or constructed and shall be maintained in conformance with such maps, plans, specifications, drawings, applications or other documents presented by the applicant to the Community Development Department and upon which
the
Planning Commission

relied in granting
approval;

2. That if Conditional Use Permit 2
3 -
000
12 is not used within one year after granting of the permit, it shall expire and become null and void unless extended by the Community Development Director for an additional period as provided for in Section 92.27.1;

3. That a copy of Planning Commission Resolution

Nos. 24
-
072, 24
-
073, 24
-
074, 24
-
075, 24
-
076, and
24 -
077

and
the
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) shall appear on all grading
plans, building plans, construction specifications, and bid documents associated with the
project
to
facilitate coordination and effective implementation of the conditions of approval and the mitigation measures
; (Planning)

4. That

a copy of

the Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
with

wet
blue
ink
signature
of the
property owner
or

legal
agent

shall be submitted to the Community

Development

Department
for recordkeeping prior to
issuance of the
grading

permit; (Planning)

5. That
all
mitigation measures and regulatory compliance measures identified in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) shall be
adhered to and
implemented

during
the

compliance

period
; (Planning)

5 143

6. That a draft copy of the Covenants,
Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for review and approval by the City Attorney’s Office prior to the recordation of a condominium plan to permit sale of individual units to ensure that all condit ions
required by the
Planning Commission

to be included in the CC&Rs are in fact properly included in the document and that a copy of the
recorded
document shall be submitted to the Community
Development Department for
recordkeeping
; (Planning)

7. That the Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) shall include

provisions for a tie breaker
vote; (Planning)

8. That the Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) shall include provisions for the storage, collection, and retrieval of the shared trash receptacles (trash, green waste, and recyclables) and trash enclosures areas; (Planning)

9. That the Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) shall include provisions for reciprocal access and parking agreements for the drive aisles, vehicle turnaround areas, and guest parking spaces; (Planning)

10. That a detailed street improvement plan
for Del Amo Circle East
accompanied
by

a

letter of
authorization from property ownership

of the private street

shall be submitted with the building plan
set for review
prior to permit issuance
, and that the street improvement
s

for Del Amo Circle East
shall be completed prior
to
the last dwelling
unit

receiv
ing

its final building inspection
; (Planning)

11. That
the offsite circulation improvements to the
intersection of Prairie Avenue and Redondo Beach
Boulevard
,
as described in the
Local Circulation Analysis,

shall be completed prior to the last
dwelling unit receiving its final building inspection
; (Planning)

12. That during all construction activities a toll free telephone number and webpage shall be available for receiving complaints and general inquiries relating to the construction of the project. The toll free telephone number and webpage
address
shall be posted in four conspicuous locations along
the project site perimeter prior to issuance of grading permits

to the satisfaction of the Community
Development Director
; (Planning)

13. That during all construction activities the project site shall be secured with perimeter fencing and screened with a
decorative wrap

approved by the
Community Development Director
. The
perimeter
fencing and
decorative wrap shall be installed prior to issuance of grading permits

and maintained
in good condition
to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director; (Planning)

14. That an exterior photometric lighting plan shall be submitted with the building plan set for review prior to permit issuance. The lighting plan shall be prepared in compliance with the California Green Code (CGC) and shall ensure that all parking areas an
d pathways are provided with adequate
illumination, security lights that are non
-
glaring, and that all building lights are properly shaded and reflected to prevent excess lighting onto adjacent uses and public streets. Lighting values at property line sha
ll not exceed 1 foot candle.

Light fixtures in the uncovered parking area

shall not
exceed 15 feet
in height and
shall be positioned in line with the parking striping so as not to prevent vehicle overhang

or obstruction
; (Planning)

15. That a roof plan for each building type shall be included with the building plan set for review prior to permit issuance. The roof plan shall identify the parapet heights and setbacks to ensure that all roof appurtenances, such as ducts and vents, all mec
hanical equipment, electrical boxes, meters, pipes,
transformers, air conditioners and all other equipment on the roof are completely screened from public view and nearby taller buildings. Equipment screening shall be compatible with the building exterior

finish and color and shall be constructed in such a manner that noise emanating from the roof appurtenances is not audible beyond the property line or from adjacent properties; (Planning)

6 144

16. That a
utility management plan shall be submitted with the building plan set for review prior to permit issuance. The utility management plan shall identify the placement, design, and screening of all utility and related equipment, including but not limited to a ny transformer, panel, meter, backflow
preventer, double detector check assembly, fire riser, etc. Screening shall comply with all utility company and emergency access requirements to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director; (Planning)

17. That a landscape plan shall be submitted with the building plan set for review prior to permit issuance. The landscape plan shall be prepared in compliance with the latest State Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance and shall utilize drought tolerant Califo rnia friendly vegetation, shade
-
producing trees, and shall provide a water efficient irrigation system. Outdoor furniture and fixtures such as lighting, trellises, raised planters, benches, trash receptacles, fencing, etc., shall be included on the landsc
ape plan.

The planting arrangement shall include tree wells in the uncovered parking area at a ratio of 1 tree for every 6 parking spaces, and shall provide landscaping of sufficient height
and texture to provide an effective screen of all trash enclosures, transformers, utility connections, backflow devices. All trees planted within the project site shall not be less than 24 inch box in size, and all

shrubs shall not be less than 5 gallon in size.

The landscape plan shall include

the parkways
along
Cars
on Street,
Fashion Way,
and
Madrona Avenue

and shall be planted with a street tree at
the rate of 1 tree for every 50 feet or portion thereof ;

(Planning)

18. That a striping
,
signage
, and parking

plan
shall be prepared in conformance with the
development
standards for residential parking areas (Article 5, Chapter 3 of Division 9 of the Torrance Municipal Code) and said plan shall be submitted with the building plan set for review prior to permit issuance .

The striping and signage shall include stop and/or yield controls

for all drive aisles and parking
areas
, directional signage, and pavement markings to assist right -
of
-
way assignment and
pedestrian safety. The plan shall note the spaces reserved for resident use only, the spaces reserved for
accessible parking, electric vehicle parking, loading, and guest parking. The guest parking spaces shall be clearly labeled and shall remain unassigned to any specific unit. All parking spaces shall be striped with double lines (6” both sides of center) to facilitate the movement into and
out of the parking space. Parking spaces adjacent to walls shall be minimum 10’ wide. The onsite curbs and drive aisles shall be striped red color and signed “NO PARKING” to facilitate fire access and to prohibit paral
lel parking. Signage shall be installed at the entrance of each drive way on
Fashion Way and Madrona Avenue

alerting drivers of the pedestrian
pathways

and that the drive
aisle shall not be used for recreational activities or other non -
vehicular activities. The driveways,
parking spaces, turnaround areas, and
pathways

shall be treated with high quality finishes and
decorative features, such as stamped concrete or pavers, to the satisfaction of the Community
Development Director
; (Planning)

19. That no less than two loading spaces for pickups and deliveries shall be provided onsite; (Planning)

20. That
no less than

10% of
the uncovered
parking spaces shall be reserved for electric vehicle
charging (EV), with no less than
15 EV spaces fully operable at the time of occupancy and maintained in good operating

condition at all times.

The placement and installation of EV spaces,
electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE), and electric vehicle charging stations (EVCS) shall comply with the
California Green Code (CGC) and shall be identified on the building plan set for review prior to permit issuance
. The EV spaces shall not have solar panel canopies or similar shade structures and shall not have displays for advertisement. The EV spaces may be dispersed throughout the townhome development or centrally located within the uncovered parking area ;
(Planning)

21. That a sample of the exterior building materials, finishes, and color shall be submitted with the building plan set for review prior to permit issuance. The sample shall include the gates, perimeter fencing/walls, and outdoor furniture. The exterior buil ding materials, finishes, and color shall have
a cohesive design to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director; (Planning)

7 145

22. That the District Color Dark Purple “Eggplant” (Pantone Matching System Reference No. 255) shall be incorporated as an accent color to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director; (Planning)

23. That all pedestrian pathways connecting to the project site from the sidewalks along Carson Street, Fashion Way, and Madrona Avenue shall feature a decorative element, such as stamped concrete, pavers or other enhancement to the satisfaction of the Communi ty Development Director; (Planning)

24. That the community amenities (e.g. open space park, recreation center, pool, etc.) shall be maintained in good condition, repaired, and kept free of trash, litter, debris, graffiti and vandalism; (Planning)

25. That the community amenities (e.g. open space park, recreation center, pool, etc.) shall be available
for resident
use and
shall not be leased to third parties for regular use or special events;

26. That
no less than three
building directories with maps
shall be provided onsite

to the satisfaction of
the Community
Development Director
; (Planning)

27. That no vending machines, publication racks, telephones, kiosks, donation bins and similar items shall be permitted outside of

the buildings
; (Planning)

28. That no outdoor sound amplifying equipment, speakers, radios, paging, telephone bells, buzzers
and similar noise emitting devices shall be permitted outside of the buildings; (Planning)

29. That all forms of barbed wire and razor wire, chain link fence or similar fence type shall be prohibited; (Planning)

30. That exterior security bars and roll
-
up doors applied to windows and building entrances shall be prohibited; (Planning)

31. That pickups and deliveries of products, material or trash and parking lot sweeping shall occur onsite and shall not be allowed prior to 7:00 a.m. or after 10:00 p.m., and that such restrictions shall be posted at the trash enclosure, the loading spaces, a
nd the driveway entrances to the satisfaction of
the Community Development Director; (Planning)

32. That each dwelling unit shall be provided with a
washer and dryer appliance (laundry) as shown on
the floor plans; (Planning)

33. That each residential unit shall be provided with 200 cubic feet of lockable storage space to the satisfaction of the

Community Development Director
. The storage space may be located
within the
garage
above each parking space extending downward not closer than 4’ 6” above the floor and not further than 3’ from the rear of the parking space; (Planning)

34. That
i
n the event that soil conditions on the

project

site are encountered that exceed standards
established in the
Soil Management Plan (
SMP
)
, the applicant, on behalf of the City of Torrance,
shall adhere to the recommendations of the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) and shall
enter into
a

voluntary

agreement

program
with the DTSC
or seek oversight with the Los
Angeles County Site Mitigation Unit

to
ensur
e

proper evaluation of the
p
roject
site
is completed
;
(Planning)

35. That all

imported soil and fill material shall be tested to assess any contaminants of concern meet screening levels
as outlined in the
Department of Toxic Substances Control (
DTSC
)

Preliminary
Endangerment Assessment (PEA) Guidance Manual
. If importing fill is necessary,
the DTSC
Information Ad
visory Clean Imported Fill Material Fact Sheet shall be referenced,

and
the origins of
the soil and fill
material
shall be documented
.

Soil s
ampling shall be conducted to ensure that the
imported soil and fill
material are suitable for the intended land use

and

shall include analysis based
on the source of the fill and knowledge of the prior land use ; (Planning)

36. That the existing block walls located within the public parkway adjacent to the right turn pocket on Madrona Ave
nue

shall be removed
; (Engineering)

8 146

37. That the existing hardscape in the parkway adjacent to the right turn pocket on Madrona Avenue shall be removed and replaced with approved landscaping; (Engineering)

38. That the existing storm drain pipes within the property shall be abandoned and removed. No pipe shall be located under the proposed building footprint
s
; (Engineering)

39. That the existing 10' storm drain easement shall be vacated prior to the issuance of the building permit
s
; (Engineering)

40. That the proposed driveway on Fashion Way shall be constructed to a commercial radius type driveway minimum 25’ wide, with depressed back of walk, and wheelchair ramps per City of Torrance standards; (Engineering)

41. That
the
proposed driveway on Madrona Avenue shall be constructed to a commercial radius type driveway minimum 30’ wide, with depressed back of walk, and wheelchair ramps; (Engineering)

42. That the applicant shall submit a sewer study discussing the impact on the public sewer system.

The study shall include flow monitoring data and be approved by the Engineering Division of the Community Development Department prior to issuance of grading p ermit. The applicant shall design
and construct improvements to the public sewer system as per recommendations of the approved study prior to occupancy
; (Engineering)

43. That separate sewer laterals shall be provided for each building to the public sewer mainline. The existing sewer lateral shall be videoed and video submitted to the Engineering Division of the Community Development Department prior to issuance of the buil ding permit
s
. The existing sewer
lateral shall be replaced if damage is found; (Engineering)

44. That the applicant shall design and construct the private sewer system to public standards if
proposed pipe size diameter is 8
-
inches or larger. The sewer plans, prepared by a professional engineer, shall be submitted by the applicant to the Engineering Division of the Community Development Department for review and ap
proval prior to issuance of grading permit
s
. Private
sewer to be constructed prior to occupancy; (Engineering)

45. That a hydrology study shall be submitted to and approved by the Engineering Division of the Community Development Department prior to approval of the grading plan. The study shall include method of detaining the difference between the 10
-
year and 50
-
year
storm. Determine proposed
building finished floor elevation with adequate freeboard; (Engineering)

46. That Torrance Municipal Water shall be the service provider for the development; ( Public Works
)

47. That the applicant shall coordinate with California Water Service Company for the removal of any water lines within the property; (Engineering)

48. That (7) new 3
-
port fire hydrants with break off check valves shall be installed in the public right of way ((5) hydrants along Madrona Ave and (2) hydrants along Fashion Way); (Engineering)

49. That approximately 2,100 LF of DIP water main and appurtenances shall be designed and constructed along the property frontage along the south half of Fashion Way and west half of Madrona Avenue. The proposed water main shall have two (2) connection points

to the existing
Torrance Municipal Water main situated along the east side of Madrona Avenue. Prior to designing the DIP water main, the applicant shall perform and provide to the City a Comprehensive Utility Potholing Report of all underground utilities

along the south half of Fashion Way and the west half
of Madrona Avenue to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director. The Comprehensive Utility Potholing Report shall include any and all available data to determine any potential conflict with any exis
ting underground utility and the future 2,100 LF DIP water main. If the Public Works Director determines a conflict exists, the applicant shall design and construct an alternate alignment DIP water main and appurtenances equivalent in capacity, pressure, f low, performance and service
operation to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director and Fire Chief; (Public Works and Fire)

9 147

50. T
hat a fire
meter and double check valve assembly shall be installed at each fire connection to the public main if on
-
site fire hydrants are installed; (Engineering)

51. That the applicant shall contact the City of Torrance Fire Department to determine fire suppression requirements; (Engineering)

52. That the project site shall be served by master public water meter(s) (meters larger than 2" shall be located above ground on private property adjacent to public right -
of
-
way) with privately owned,
maintained and administered submetering system for each dw elling unit. Common areas shall be
served by a separate meter; (Engineering)

53. That all proposed and/or existing water meters larger than 2", double check detector assemblies and reduced pressure backflow assemblies shall be located above ground on private property near the public right
-
of
-
way, shall be screened from public view with

approved plant material, and shall
be constructed per City of Torrance standards. Final location of said facilities and landscape screening shall be incorporated into water, fire and landscape plan for review prior to the issuance
of the first building p
ermit associated with the project
. Landscape screening shall provide access
to water and fire department at all times and be maintained diligently to the satisfaction of the Fire Marshal; (Engineering)

54. That a dedicated water meter and reduced pressure assembly shall be provided for landscape irrigation; (Engineering)

55. That
the uncovered parking area shall have
guest parking spaces
that are

clearly marked
for

guest
use only; (Environmental)

56. That bicycle racks shall be provided onsite and that a placement plan and bicycle rack detail shall be submit
ted
to the satisfaction of the Environmental Division; (Environmental)

57. That address numbers shall
measure at a minimum 4” in height and be a color that contrasts with the color of the façade; (Environmental)

58. That roof top numbers shall be installed in order to assist law enforcement and emergency personnel locate the property. The numbers shall measure a minimum 4’ in height, 2’ in width, spaced 12” apart, be parallel to the street and be a non -
reflective col
or that contrasts with the color
of the roof; (Environmental)

59. That all
new
signs shall be approved by the Environmental Division with appeal rights to the Planning Commission; (
Environmental)

60. That prohibited signs shall include: A
-
frame or freestanding signs; bow or flag banners; air assisted and inflatable signs; signs attached to light, utility poles, trees, or vehicles; persons holding signs; and temporary signage mounted on the roof of the
building; (Environmental)

61. That a noise attenuation plan shall be submitted to the Environmental Division prior to the issuance of the first building permit associated with the project to the satisfaction of the Community
Development Director
. The acoustical engineer / noise consultant shall contact the Environmental Division prior to conducting the noise study. The recommendations of the noise attenuation plan shall be adhered to so that when the proposed development is completed, noise fro m this use will
comply with the noise ord
inance of the Torrance Municipal Code, will not disturb the internal tenants, and will not disturb neighboring properties
; (Environmental)

10 148

62. That prior to occupancy the applicant shall perform the following as it pertains to the oil well:

a.

Submit an application for Construction Site Well review to the
California Geological Energy
Management

Division

(CalGem).

b.

Submit
a copy of the CalGem letter
to the Environmental Division of the
Community
Development Department.

c.

The property owner shall comply with California Geological Energy Management (CalGem) determinations regarding the abandoned well.

d.

The property owner shall provide a site plan showing:

•

The location of the
abandoned well.

•

Distances left around the abandoned well as indicated below so that future re -
abandonment is possible.

•

An open and unobstructed area shall be provided immediately adjacent to the surface location of the well head as follows: No structure or property line shall be closer than ten (10) feet to any two (2) adjacent sides of the said well; No structure or prop
erty line shall be closer than fifty (50) feet from the third (3rd) side of the said well; and The fourth (4th) side shall have open access so that an oil well abandonment rig can be driven onto the site.

•

Well shall be vented.

63. That upon completion of the project the applicant shall hire a Certified Access Specialist (CASp) to verify the project complies with California Building Code. All deficiencies shall be addressed to the satisfaction of the Building Official; (Grading)

64. That non
-
glaring security lighting shall be utilized for parking areas; (Police)

65. That a building directory and site map shall be provided at the main entrances to the townhome development and at recreation center building. The directory and map shall identify the townhome unit numbers and location; (Police)

66. That knox box access shall be provided for all secured access gates, common doors, and vehicle access gates to the townhome development; (Police)

67. That the townhome development name, building nomenclature, and street address shall be visible from the street for emergency response; (Police)

68. That the applicant, prior to designing the onsite sewer system, shall perform and provide to the City a Comprehensive Utility Potholing Report of all underground utilities in, and in the vicinity of, the signalized intersection of Fashion Way at Madrona Av
enue to the satisfaction of the Public Works
Director. The Comprehensive Utility Potholing Report shall include any and all available data to determine any potential conflict with any existing underground utility and the future onsite sewer system that sha
ll flow to the north and connect to the Fashion Way/Madrona Avenue lateral near the northeastern corner of the project site, listed as Option 1 “Opal Street Sewer & Sewer Lift Station” in the Sewer System Hydraulic Analysis; (Public Works)

69. That the onsite sewer system shall flow to the north and connect to the Fashion Way/Madrona Avenue lateral near the northeastern corner of the project site, listed as Option 1 “Opal Street Sewer & Sewer Lift Station” in the Sewer System Hydraulic Analysis,

to the satisfaction of the Public Works
Director, unless consideration of an alternate flow direction for all or a portion of the onsite sewer system is warranted based on the Comprehensive Utility Potholing Report and as determined solely by the Public W
orks Director. The applicant shall then revise the sewer study, if needed, to determine any impact on the public sewer system.

If it is determined that an alternate flow direction
sewer system is warranted and has no impact on the public sewer system, the

applicant shall bear
the entire cost for its design, permitting and construction to the point of connection with the offsite public sewer system, including any related modifications, relocation, removals, repairs, replacement et. al. to the offsite public

sewer system and any other impacted utility all to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director;
(Public Works)

11 149

70. That the applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Torrance and its agents, officers, and employees from and against any claim, action, or proceeding against the City agency or its agents, officers, or employees to attack, set aside,

void, or annul an approval by the City,
including, without limitation, an action by an advisory commission, appeal board, or legislative body concerning this discretionary approval. This defense and indemnification shall include the payment of all legal
costs incurred on behalf of the City in connection with the application, and the defense of any claim, action or proceeding challenging the approval of this Conditional Use Permit or the project. The City will promptly notify the applicant of any claim, a ction, or proceeding and agrees to
cooperate to the extent required for an effective defense. In the event a legal challenge to the discretionary approval is successful, and an award of attorney fees is made to the challenger, the applicant shall be respo
nsible to pay the full amount of such an award
; and

71. That within 30 days of the public hearing the applicant shall retrieve all "Notice of Public Hearing" signs and stakes, provided there is no appeal, and return to the Community Development Department; and

72. That all conditions of all other City departments received prior to or during the consideration of the project by the Planning Commission shall be met.

INTRODUCED, APPROVED,
and

ADOPTED

at the regular meeting of the
Planning Commission

of the
City of Torrance held on the
6th

day of
November

2024
.

ATTEST:

__________________________________

___________________________________

Secretary, Torrance Planning Commission

Chairman, Torrance Planning Commission

12 150

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES) ss

CITY OF TORRANCE )

I, LEO OORTS, Secretary to the Planning Commission of the City of Torrance, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was duly introduced, approved, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Torrance at a regular meeting of s aid Commission held on
the 6th day of November, 2024, by the following roll call vote:

AYES:

COMMISSIONERS:

NOES:

COMMISSIONERS:

ABSENT:

COMMISSIONERS:

ABSTAIN:

COMMISSIONERS:

__________________________________

Secretary, Torrance Planning Commission

13 151
October 2024

DRAFT

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/

M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N

FASHION SQUARE AT DEL AMO PROJECT

TORRANCE, CALIFORNIA

ATTACHMENT 5
152
This page intentionally left blank
153
October 2024

DRAFT

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/

M I T I G A TE D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N

FASHION SQUARE AT DEL AMO PROJECT

TORRANCE, CALIFORNIA

Submitted to:

City of Torrance
Community Development Department
3031 Torrance Boulevard
Torrance, California 90503

Prepared by:

LSA
3210 El Camino Real, Suite 100
Irvine, California 92602
(949) 553-0666

Project No. LHC2101
154
This page intentionally left blank
155
i

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24)

TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................................................... i FIGURES AND TABLES ............................................................................................................................ iii LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ............................................................................................. v

1.0 PROJECT INFORMATION ................................................................................... 1-1

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ..................................................................................... 2-1

2.1 Project Overview ............................................................................................................... 2-1

2.2 Project Location ................................................................................................................ 2-1

2.3 Existing Land Use ............................................................................................................... 2-1

2.4 Surrounding Land Uses ..................................................................................................... 2-7

2.5 Current Land Use and Zoning Designations ...................................................................... 2-7

2.6 Project Characteristics ...................................................................................................... 2-7

2.7 Intended Uses of the Environmental Document ............................................................ 2-16

3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED ...................................... 3-27

3.1 Determination ................................................................................................................. 3-27

4.0 CEQA ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST .................................................................. 4-1

4.1 Aesthetics .......................................................................................................................... 4-1

4.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources .................................................................................. 4-3

4.3 Air Quality ......................................................................................................................... 4-5

4.4 Biological Resources ........................................................................................................ 4-15

4.5 Cultural Resources .......................................................................................................... 4-19

4.6 Energy .............................................................................................................................. 4-26

4.7 Geology and Soils ............................................................................................................ 4-31

4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions ............................................................................................. 4-38

4.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials................................................................................... 4-44

4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality ......................................................................................... 4-52

4.11 Land Use and Planning .................................................................................................... 4-65

4.12 Mineral Resources ........................................................................................................... 4-66

4.13 Noise................................................................................................................................ 4-68

4.14 Population and Housing .................................................................................................. 4-76

4.15 Public Services ................................................................................................................. 4-78

4.16 Recreation ....................................................................................................................... 4-83

4.17 Transportation ................................................................................................................ 4-86

4.18 Tribal Cultural Resources ................................................................................................ 4-91

4.19 Utilities and Service Systems ........................................................................................... 4-94

4.20 Wildfire .......................................................................................................................... 4-101

4.21 Mandatory Findings of Significance .............................................................................. 4-103

5.0 LIST OF PREPARERS .......................................................................................... 5-1

156
F

A S H I O N
S

Q U A R E A T
D
E L
A
M O
T

O R R A N C E
,

C

A L I F O R N I A

I

N I T I A L
S

T U D Y
/M

I T I G A T E D
N

E G A T I V E
D

E C L A R A T I O N
O

C T O B E R
2024

P:
\
LHC2101
-

Del Amo Residential
\

WORK PRODUCT
\
1_Initial Study
\
1_PublicReviewDraft
\
Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10
-
8 -

24.docx

(
10/08/24
)
ii

APPENDICES

AQ:

AIR QUALITY

CUL:

CULTURAL RESOURCES
CUL.1
–

HISTORIC RESOURCES EVALUATION

CUL.2
–

ARCHEOLOGICAL RESOURCES STUDY
CUL.3
–

TRIBAL CONSULTATION

HAZ: PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT
HYDRO: DRAINAGE CONCEPT/HYDROLOGY REPORT
MMRP: MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
NOI:

NOISE AND VIBRATION

NOI
.1
–

NOISE LIMIT REGIONS

NOI
.2
–

NOISE MONITORING LOCATIONS

NOI
.3
–

CONSTRUCTION NOISE CALCULATIONS

NOI.4
–

FHWA NOISE MODEL

PRINTOUT

TRA:

TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS

TCR:

NAHC SACRED LANDS FILE RESULTS LETTER

157
iii

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24)

FIGURES AND TABLES

FIGURES
Figure PD.1: Project Location .............................................................................................................. 2-3 Figure PD.2: Project Site ...................................................................................................................... 2-5 Figure PD.3: Site Plan .......................................................................................................................... 2-9 Figure PD.4: Fire Lane Access ............................................................................................................ 2-13 Figure PD.5: Landscape Plan.............................................................................................................. 2-17 Figure PD.6: Building Type B 6-Units Rendering ............................................................................... 2-19 Figure PD.7: Building Type C 6-Units Rendering................................................................................ 2-21 Figure PD.8: Building Type C 12-Units Rendering ............................................................................. 2-23 Figure PD.9: Recreation Center Rendering........................................................................................ 2-25

TABLES
Table PD-1: Proposed Project Building Program ............................................................................... 2-11 Table AQ-1: Regional Thresholds for Construction and Operational Emissions ................................. 4-7 Table AQ-2: SCAQMD Localized Significance Thresholds .................................................................... 4-8 Table AQ-3: Short-Term Regional Construction Emissions ............................................................... 4-10 Table AQ-4: Project Operational Emissions ....................................................................................... 4-11 Table AQ-5: Project Localized Construction and Operational Emissions .......................................... 4-12 Table CUL-1: Project Site History ....................................................................................................... 4-19 Table EN-1: Estimated Annual Energy Use of Proposed Project ....................................................... 4-29 Table GHG-1: Greenhouse Gas Emissions ......................................................................................... 4-40 Table NOI-1: Typical Construction Equipment Noise Levels ............................................................. 4-70 Table NOI-2 Construction Noise Levels by Phase .............................................................................. 4-70 Table NOI-3: Vibration Source Amplitudes for Construction Equipment ......................................... 4-74 Table NOI-4: Construction Vibration Levels ...................................................................................... 4-75 Table PU-1: Projected School Enrollment ......................................................................................... 4-81 Table REC-1: Parks and Recreational Facilities in the Vicinity of the Project Site ............................. 4-83 Table TRA-1: Proposed Project Trip Generation ............................................................................... 4-86

158

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) iv
This page intentionally left blank

159
v

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24)

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS
AAQS ambient air quality standards
AB Assembly Bill
ADT average daily trips
AIA Airport Influence Area
ALUP Airport Land Use Plan
APN Assessor’s Parcel Number
AQMP Air Quality Management Plan
AST Aboveground Storage Tank
Basin South Coast Air Basin
Basin Plan Basin Plan for the Coastal Watersheds of Los Angeles and Ventura Counties bgs below ground surface
BMP best management practice
BTU British Thermal Units
C-CTR Commercial Center
CA FID UST Facility Inventory Database
CAL FIRE California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection CalEEMod California Emissions Estimator Model
CalGEM California Geologic Energy Management Division
California Register California Register of Historical Resources CAP Climate Action Plan
CARB California Air Resources Board
CBC California Building Code
160

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) vi
CCR California Code of Regulations
CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife
CDS continuous deflection separation
CEC California Energy Commission
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CGP Construction General Permit
CH4 methane
CHMIRS California Hazardous Material Incident Report System CHRIS California Historical Resources Information System City City of Torrance
CNEL community noise equivalent level
CO carbon monoxide
CO2 carbon dioxide
CO2e carbon dioxide equivalent
County County of Los Angeles
CUP Conditional Use Permit
cy cubic yard/yards
H-DA1 Del Amo Business Sub-District One
dB decibel(s)
dBA A-weighted decibel(s)
DIF Development Impact Fee
DTSC California Department of Toxic Substances Control
EDR Environmental Data Resources, Inc.

EECAP Energy Efficiency Climate Action Plan
161
vii

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) EMFAC2021 California Emission Factor Model Version 2021 EO Executive Order
EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency
ERF Effective Response Force
ESA Environmental Site Assessment
EVA emergency vehicle access
FAR floor area ratio
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
FHWA Federal Highway Administration
FINDS Facility Index System/Facility Registration System FIRM Flood Insurance Rate Map
ft foot/feet
FTA Federal Transit Administration
g gravitational force equivalent
GHG greenhouse gas
gpd gallons per day
Groundwater
Discharge Permit
Discharges of Groundwater from Construction and Project Dewatering to Surface Waters in Coastal Watershed of Los Angeles and Ventura Counties GSAs Groundwater Sustainability Agencies
GWh gigawatt-hour
GWP Global Warming Potential
HAZNET Hazardous Waste Information System
HFCs hydrofluorocarbons
HIST Cortese Hazardous Waste and Substance Site List
162

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) viii
HIST UST Historical Underground Storage Tank
HRE Historic Resources Evaluation
HREC Historical Recognized Environmental Condition
HVAC heating, ventilation, and air conditioning
HWP EnviroStor Permitted Facilities
I-405 Interstate 405
IS/MND Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
ISO Insurance Services Office
JWPCP Joint Water Pollution Control Plant
ITE Institute of Transportation Engineers
kWh kilowatt-hour
LACSD Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts
Ldn day‐night average noise level
Leq equivalent continuous sound level
LACoFD Los Angeles County Fire Department
LID Low Impact Development
Lmax maximum instantaneous noise level
LOS level of service
LST Localized Significance Threshold
LUST Leaking Underground Fuel Tank
MEP maximum extent practicable
mg/kg milligrams per kilogram
mgd million gallons per day
mi mile/miles
163
ix

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) MLD Most Likely Descendant
mpg miles per gallon
mph miles per hour
MRZ Mineral Resource Zone
MS4 Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System
MT metric ton/tons
MWD Metropolitan Water District of Southern California
N2O nitrous oxide
NAHC Native American Heritage Commission
NOI Notice of Intent
NOV Notice of Violation
NOX nitrogen oxide
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
O3 ozone
PAH polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons
Pb lead
PCBs polychlorinated biphenyls
PCH Pacific Coast Highway
PFCs perfluorocarbons
PGA peak ground acceleration
PLID Preliminary Low Impact Development Plan
PM10 particulate matter less than 10 microns in size
PM2.5 particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in size
ppm parts per million
164

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) x
PPV peak particle velocity
PRC Public Resources Code
PRD Permit Registration Document
PRIMP Paleontological Resources Impact Mitigation Program project Fashion Square at Del Amo Project
RCM Regulatory Compliance Measure
RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
RCRAInfo Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Information REC Recognized Environmental Condition
RHNA Regional Housing Needs Assessment
RSL Regional Screening Level
RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board
SAFE Safer Affordable Fuel-Efficient
SB Senate Bill
SBCCOG South Bay Cities Council of Governments
SCAG Southern California Association of Governments
SCAQMD South Coast Air Quality Management District
SCCIC South-Central Coastal Information Center
SCE Southern California Edison
SEMS-Archive Superfund Enterprise Management System Archive sf square foot/feet
SF6 sulfur hexafluoride
SGMA Sustainable Groundwater Management Act
SLF Sacred Lands File
165
xi

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) SLIC Cleanup Program Sites
SMARA Surface Mining and Reclamation Act
SMART Stormwater Multiple Application and Report Tracking System SoCalGas Southern California Gas Company
SO2 sulfur dioxide
SOX sulfur oxides
SQG small quantity generator
sq mi square mile/miles
SR State Route
SRA Source Receptor Area
SVP Society of Vertebrate Paleontology
SWAT Special Weapons and Tactics
SWEEPS UST Statewide Environmental Evaluation and Planning System SWPPP Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
SWQDv stormwater quality design volume
SWRCB State Water Resources Control Board
SWF/LS Solid Waste Facilities/Landfill Sites
TAC toxic air contaminant
TFD Torrance Fire Department
TMW Transit Priority Area
TPA Transit Priority Area
TPD Torrance Police Department
TPH total petroleum hydrocarbons
TSDF treatment, storage, and disposal facility
166

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) xii
TUSD Torrance Unified School District
USDOT United States Department of Transportation
USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service
UST Underground Storage Tank
UWMP Urban Water Management Plan
VHFHSZ Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone
VMT vehicle miles traveled
VOC volatile organic compounds
WBMWD West Basin Municipal Water District
WDID Waste Discharge Identification Number
ZEV zero emission vehicle

167
1-1

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24)

1.0 PROJECT INFORMATION

1. Project Title:

Fashion Square at Del Amo
(EAS23-00003, CUP23-00012, DIV23-00003, DVP23-00002, MOD23-00007, MOD23-00008)

2. Lead Agency Name and Address:

City of Torrance
Community Development Department
3031 Torrance Boulevard
Torrance, CA 90503

3. Contact Person and Phone Number:

Leo Oorts, Planning Manager
(310) 618-5990

4. Project Location:

Northwest corner of West Carson Street and Madrona Avenue at 3405 West Carson Street and 21405, 21515 Madrona Avenue (APNs: 7366-019-123, 7366-019-182, and 7366-019-183)
Torrance, CA 90503

5. Project Sponsor’s Name and Address:

Lennar Corporation
15131 Alton Parkway, Ste. 365
Irvine, CA 92618

6. General Plan Designation:

Commercial Center (C-CTR)

7. Zoning:

Hawthorne Boulevard Corridor Specific Plan
Del Amo Business Sub-District One (H-DA1)

8. Description of Project:

The Fashion Square at Del Amo Project (proposed project/project) would include the construction of a residential development comprising approximately 260 residential condominium units and associated community amenities, on a 16.37-acre site at the northwest corner of West Carson Street and Madrona Avenue (project site) in the City of Torrance (City).

The project site is currently developed with two structures, a restaurant and commercial space, and is located adjacent to the Del Amo Fashion Center. The proposed project would require a several authorizations from the City of Torrance, including a Conditional Use Permit (CUP), to allow the proposed residential uses in the Del Amo Business Sub-District One (H-DA1). 168

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) 1-2

9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting:

The project site is located adjacent to the Del Amo Fashion Center, at Del Amo Circle East/North, immediately west of the project site. Single-family neighborhoods are located across Madrona Avenue, immediately east of the project site. The Madrona Middle School campus is located northeast of the project site on Madrona Avenue at El Dorado Street. South of the project site, across West Carson Street, are commercial uses including an office building, a bank branch, and a gas station. Immediately north of the project site across Fashion Way are several medical office buildings. The Hickory Tree School, a private preschool and elementary school, is located approximately 300 feet (ft) southeast of the project site on Madrona Avenue, just south of West Carson Street.

10. Other Public Agencies Whose Approval is Required (e.g., permits, financial approval, or participation agreements):

Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board, City of Lawndale, County of Los Angeles

11. Have California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area requested consultation pursuant to Public Resource Code section 21080.3.1? If so, is there a plan for consultation that includes, for example, the determination of significance of impacts to tribal cultural resources, procedures regarding confidentiality, etc.? The City of Torrance (City) submitted requests to the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) for a Sacred Lands File Search, as well as a records search from the South-Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC) for Native American historical and archeological resources on May 22, 2024. In response, the NAHC provided a Tribal Consultation List of California Native American tribes that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project site on June 11, 2024, but did not indicate any results for the Sacred Lands File Search Database and is included as Attachment TCR. The SCCIC results indicated that no archaeological or built-environment resources were located within the project site, and two cultural reports/studies were identified within the 0.5-mile radius of the project radius.

The City of Torrance sent notifications regarding the proposed project to Tribes that have submitted to the City a formal request for notification. The following tribes were notified by the City on June 24, 2024: Cahuilla Band of Indians, Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation, Gabrielino-Tongva Tribe, Gabrielino Tongva Indians of California Tribal Council, Gabrielino/Tongva Nation, Gabrieleno/Tongva San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians, Santa Rosa Band of Cahuilla Indians, and Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians.

169
2-1

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24)

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

2.1 PROJECT OVERVIEW
The Fashion Square at Del Amo Project (proposed project/project) would include the construction of a residential development comprising approximately 260 residential condominium units and associated community amenities, on a 16.37-acre site at the northwest corner of West Carson Street and Madrona Avenue (project site) in the City of Torrance (City). The project site is currently developed with two structures, a restaurant and commercial space, and is located adjacent to the Del Amo Fashion Center. The proposed project would require a several authorizations from the City of Torrance, including a Conditional Use Permit (CUP), to allow the proposed residential uses in the Del Amo Business Sub-District One (H-DA1).

2.2 PROJECT LOCATION
The project site is located at the northwest corner of West Carson Street and Madrona Avenue at 3405 West Carson Street and 21405, 21515 Madrona Avenue in the City of Torrance, in the southwest portion of Los Angeles County, California. Torrance encompasses approximately 20.53 square miles (sq. mi.) in Los Angeles County and is bounded by the City of Redondo Beach on the west and northwest, Lawndale and Gardena on the north, Carson and the neighborhoods of Harbor Gateway and Harbor City in Los Angeles on the east, and the Cities of Lomita, Rolling Hills Estates, and Palos Verdes Estates to the south. The project site occupies three parcels, Assessor’s Parcel Numbers (APNs) 7366-019-123, 7366-019-182, and 7366-019-183.

Regional access to the project site is available from Interstate 405 (I-405), which is approximately two miles northeast of the project site. The two nearest State highways to the project site are Hawthorne Boulevard (State Route [SR] 107), approximately 0.4 mile to the west, and Western Avenue (SR-213), approximately two miles east of the project site. Access to the project site is also provided by Pacific Coast Highway (PCH, also known as SR-1). PCH is located approximately two miles west and south of the project site. Local access is provided by West Carson Street and Madrona Avenue, with secondary access from Del Amo Circle East/North and Fashion Way (see Figure PD.1: Project Location).

2.3 EXISTING LAND USE
The project site is developed with a restaurant, built circa 1979, located on the southeast corner of the property, and a vacant commercial building on the northeast corner of the property, with the balance being used for vehicle parking on deteriorated asphalt parking areas. (see Figure PD.2:

Project Site).

The project site is flat and features a gentle slope from north to south with no significant topographical features. The only vegetation on site is ornamental landscaping, including trees along the site perimeter and throughout the parking lots. The parking lots are currently used for access to both the existing uses, as well as Del Amo Fashion Center. 170

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) 2-2
This page intentionally left blank

171
USGS 7.5' Quad - T orrance (1981) , CA
I:\LHC2101\GIS\Pro\Del Amo Residential Project\Del Amo Residential Project.aprx (5/22/2024) FIGURE

PD.1
ÃÃ1
ÃÃ47
ÃÃ72
ÃÃ90
ÃÃ19ÃÃ91
§¨¦105
§¨¦10
§¨¦110
§¨¦105
§¨¦110
§¨¦10
§¨¦710
§¨¦605
§¨¦405
Project
Location
Project Vicinity
0 1000 2000
FEET
Project Location
Fashion Square at Del Amo Project
Project Location
Pacific Ocean
Los Angeles
C
ounty
Torrance
Torrance
Torrance Blvd
Hawthorne Blvd
Sepulveda Blvd
Madrona Ave
Del Amo Circle
172

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) 2-4
This page intentionally left blank

173
SOURCE: Esri Imagery 2024
I:\LHC2101\GIS\Pro\Del Amo R
esidential Project\Del Amo Residential Project.aprx (5/21/2024) FIGURE

PD

.2
0 500 1000
FEET
Project Location
Fashion Square at Del Amo Project
Project Location
Del Amo
Fashion Cen
ter
Torrance
W Carson St
Madrona Ave
Fashion Way
Del Amo Circle
Hawthorne Blvd
Torrance Blvd
174
F

A S H I O N
S

Q U A R E A T
D
E L
A
M O
T

O R R A N C E
,

C

A L I F O R N I A

I

N I T I A L
S

T U D Y
/M

I T I G A T E D
N

E G A T I V E
D

E C L A R A T I O N
O

C T O B E R
2024

P:
\
LHC2101
-

Del Amo Residential
\

WORK PRODUCT
\
1_Initial Study
\
1_PublicReviewDraft
\
Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10
-
8 -

24.docx

(
10/08/24
)
2 -
6 This page intentionally left blank

175
2 -
7 I

N I T I A L
S

T U D Y
/M

I T I G A T E D
N

E G A T I V E
D

E C L A R A T I O N

O

C T O B E R
2024

F

A S H I O N
S

Q U A R E A T
D
E L
A
M O
T

O R R A N C E
,

C

A L I F O R N I A

P:
\
LHC2101
-

Del Amo Residential
\

WORK PRODUCT
\
1_Initial Study
\
1_PublicReviewDraft
\
Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10
-
8 -

24.docx

(
10/08/24
)

2.4 SURROUNDING LAND USES

The project site is located adjacent to the Del Amo
Fashion Center, at Del Amo Circle East/North,
immediately west of the project site. Single
-
family neighborhoods are located across Madrona
Avenue, immediately east of the project site. The Madrona Middle School campus is located northeast of the project si
te on Madrona Avenue at El Dorado Street. South of the project site, across West Carson Street, are commercial uses including an office building, a bank branch, and a gas station. Immediately north of the project site across Fashion Way are several medical

office
buildings. The Hickory Tree School, a private preschool and elementary school, is located approximately 300 feet (ft) southeast of the project site on Madrona Avenue, just south of West Carson Street.

2.5 CURRENT LAND USE AND ZONING DESIGNATIONS

According to the City’s General Plan Land Use Map, the project site has a land use designation of Commercial Center (C
-
CTR)
.

According to the City’s Zoning Map, the project site is currently zoned as Hawthorne Boulevard Corridor Specific Plan Area. Per the Hawthorne Boulevard Corridor Specific Plan, the project site is within the Del Amo Business Sub -
District One (
H
-
DA1). Allowable uses within
H
-
DA1 include a variety of mixed
-
use projects, including commercial, retail, and office uses.

Residential uses are
also permitted within
H
-
DA1 subject to issuance of a
C
onditional
U
se
P
ermit
(CUP).

The proposed project would require a CUP to allow the proposed residential uses as a mixed -
use project when considered with the adjacent retail uses (Del Amo Fashion Center). Approval of the CUP would ensure that the project is consistent with the City’s G eneral Plan land use designation,
the City’s zoning designation, and the Hawthorne Boulevard Corridor Specific Plan.

2.6 PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS

2.6.1 Project Characteristics

2.6.1.1 Proposed Land Use

The proposed project
would include

the construction of a residential development on the project site, comprising approximately 260 residential units
and

associated community amenities, including
open space and resident and visitor parking.

2.6.1.2 Residential Townhomes

The approximately 260 residential units
would include a mix of
37 buildings that would contain two
-
bedroom, three
-
bedroom, and four
-
bedroom units. The dwelling units would be located throughout the project site in three distinct building types, Building Types A, B, and C. As shown in Figure
PD
.3
:

Site Plan
, the project would include: 13 Type A building, 18 Type B buildings, 6 Type C buildings and one structure dedicated to recreational uses. Building Type A units would be in the southeastern
and
south
-
central

part of the project site, Building Type B units along the western and southern periphery of the project site, and Building Type C units in the northeastern and northern part of the project site (see
Figure
PD
.3
:

Site Plan
). Table
PD
-
1 shows the breakdown of units by building type,
number of buildings
by

number

and size of proposed units.

176
F

A S H I O N
S

Q U A R E A T
D
E L
A
M O
T

O R R A N C E
,

C

A L I F O R N I A

I

N I T I A L
S

T U D Y
/M

I T I G A T E D
N

E G A T I V E
D

E C L A R A T I O N
O

C T O B E R
2024

P:
\
LHC2101
-

Del Amo Residential
\

WORK PRODUCT
\
1_Initial Study
\
1_PublicReviewDraft
\
Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10
-
8 -

24.docx

(
10/08/24
)
2 -
8 This page intentionally left blank

177
A1.0SITE PLAN
SITE PLAN OVERALL0 40 8020
Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com

LENNAR HOMES
15131 Alton Parkway, Suite 365
Irvine, CA 92618

DEL AMO
TORRANCE, CA # 2020-0686

SCHEMATIC DESIGN
APRIL 8, 2024

MATCH LINEMATCH LINE

MATCH LINEMATCH LINE
Scale: 1" = 40'-0"
Product C - 6 - Unit Buildings
Product A - Back to Back TH - 8-Plex
Product B - Rowtowns - 6 - Plex
Product C - 12 - Unit Buildings
Product Legend
Rec/Pool Building
Product B - Rowtowns - 4 - Plex
A1.5
A1.7
Street Scene
Street Scene
A1.7
Street Scene
A1.6
Street Scene
Building Type A 8-Plex
Building Type B 4-Plex
Building Type B 6-Plex
Building Type C 6-Unit Building
Building Type C 12-Unit Building
Recreation Center
LEGEND
1 2
3 4
5 6SOURCE: KTGY Architecture & Planning - (4/8/2024)
FEET
2001000
FIGURE PD.3
I:\LHC2101\G\Site_Plan.ai (5/22/2024)
Fashion Square at Del Amo Project
Site Plan
178

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) 2-10
This page intentionally left blank

179
2-11

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) Table PD-1: Proposed Project Building Program
Building Type Number of Proposed
Buildings
Number of Dwelling
Units per Building Total Dwelling Units
Type A 13 8 units 104
Type B 3 4 units 102 15 6 units
Type C 3 6 units 54 3 12 units
Total 260
Source: June 5th, 2024 – SMP Environmental Design

2.6.1.3 Architectural Design
The architectural design of the proposed project would be consistent with all design guidelines provided in the Hawthorne Boulevard Corridor Specific Plan. The proposed townhomes would include parapet roofs, fiber cement horizontal siding, vinyl windows, fiber cement trim, and metal/glass railings. The use of contrasting color tones would break up the scale and massing of the proposed residential buildings.

Buildings would range in heights from 17 feet (the recreation center) to 67 feet (the Type C 12-units buildings) as described below. Figures PD.4 through PD.9 show the proposed project renderings as follows:
• Figure PD.4: Building Type A Rendering—Elevation of approximately 35 ft. • Figure PD.5: Building Type B 4-Units Rendering—Elevation of approximately 46 ft. • Figure PD.6: Building Type B 6-Units Rendering—Elevation of approximately 47 ft. • Figure PD.7: Building Type C 6-Units Rendering—Elevation of approximately 44 ft. • Figure PD.8: Building Type C 12-Units Rendering—Elevation of approximately 67 ft. • Figure PD.9: Recreation Center Rendering—Elevation of approximately 17 ft.

2.6.1.4 Access Circulation, and Parking
Site access would be provided via two driveways: the main entrance would be a driveway from Madrona Avenue and the second entrance would be a driveway along Fashion Way. A main drive aisle, extending south from Fashion Way and connecting to the main driveway from Madrona Avenue would run the length of the project site. A secondary drive aisle would loop to the west from Fashion Way and connect to the main drive aisle at the intersection with the main driveway from Madrona. This loop would be intersected by three internal alley ways. Another secondary drive aisle would provide a second loop in the southern half of the project site, intersected by six alleyways.

There would be two entry and exit driveways for the proposed project, one would have limited turning movements on Fashion Center Way, and the other existing driveway on Madrona Avenue would have turning movement. An emergency vehicle access (EVA) would be provided on West Carson Street for the Torrance Fire Department. EVA entry and exits would be closed to residents at all times. Figure PD.4: Fire Lane Access, depicts the project site fire lanes. 180

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) 2-12
This page intentionally left blank

181
E.V.A.
32'-11"
23'-2" 26'-5" 37'-2"
20'-0"
20'-0"
60'-0"
26'-0" 31'-0" 26'-0"
26'-0"
26'-0" 26'-0"
26'-0"
26'-0" 26'-0" 26'-0" 26'-0" 26'-0"
32'-0"
26'-0"
26'-0" 26'-0"
32'-0"
26'-0"
26'-0"
26'-0" 26'-0"
32'-0"
26'-0"
26'-0"
26'-0"
26'-0"
32'-0"
32'-0"
32'-0"
32'-0"
26'-0"
32'-0"
32'-0"
31'-0" 32'-0"
26'-0"
31'-0"
26'-0"
32'-0"
31'-0"
115'-2"
26'-0"
20'-0"
20'-0"
20'-0"
19'-0"
8'-6"
31'-0"
32'-0"
31'-0"
32'-0"
19'-0"
8'-6"
32'-0"
32'-0"
Entry
R19'-0"
R19'-0"
R19'-0"
R19'-0"
R19'-0"
R19'-0"
R19'-0"
R19'-0"
R19'-0"
R19'-0"
R19'-0"
R19'-0"
R19'-0"
R19'-0"
120'
120'
105' 105'
150'150'
120'
120'
150'150'
150'
130'
R10'-0" R10'-0"
150'
105' 105'
Double
Detector
Check
Assembly
Backflow
Preventor
108'
150'
140'
140'
135'
150'
A6.0FIRE ACCESS EXHIBIT
SITE PLAN OVERALL0 40 8020
Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com

LENNAR HOMES
15131 Alton Parkway, Suite 365
Irvine, CA 92618

DEL AMO
TORRANCE, CA # 2020-0686

SCHEMATIC DESIGN
APRIL 8, 2024

MATCH LINEMATCH LINE

MATCH LINEMATCH LINE
Scale: 1" = 40'-0"
Product C - 6 - Unit Buildings
Product A - Back to Back TH - 8-Plex
Product B - Rowtowns - 6 - Plex
Product C - 12 - Unit Buildings
Product Legend
Rec/Pool Building
Product B - Rowtowns - 4 - Plex
LEGEND
Fire Access Route
Fire Hydrant
Fire Riser Room / FDC
Stair Access to Roof
Elevator Access to Roof
Hose Pull100'
SOURCE: KTGY Architecture & Planning - (4/8/2024)
FEET
2001000
FIGURE PD.4
I:\LHC2101\G\Fire_Lane_Access.ai (5/22/2024)
Fashion Square at Del Amo Project
Fire Lance Access
182

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) 2-14
This page intentionally left blank

183
2-15

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) The project would provide 520 garage parking spaces, 155 uncovered parking spaces, and 24 private driveway parking spaces, for a total of 699 parking spaces dedicated for the project’s residential uses, at an overall ratio of 2.7 spaces per unit. The project would also provide 90 diagonal parking spaces on Del Amo Circle between Fashion Way and West Carson Street, including the 65 required parking spaces for the use of the adjacent Del Amo Fashion Center.1

2.6.1.5 Open Space and Landscaping
Figure PD.5: Landscape Plan provides the proposed details of the landscape design for the proposed project. The site plans include 207,716 sf of landscaping throughout the project site, which would comprise approximately 25 percent of the total project site. This would include 35,265 sf in the northeastern corner of the project site for use as a private park, 195,635 sf of landscaping, and 14,568 sf of open space in the central area of the residential development. This central open space area would serve as the community’s recreation area and would contain various amenities such as a residential plaza area, covered dining and barbecue areas, and a pool, as well as lounge seating and fire pits. In addition, the project would include private open space for the proposed units in the form of decks.

2.6.1.6 Utilities
A sewer system analysis report was prepared by Hunsaker & Associates (September 2024), which looked at different sewer connection options for the proposed project. Three different options were proposed in the report. Option 1 proposed to connect the wastewater system to the Fashion Way and Madrona Avenue lateral near the northeastern corner of the project site. Option 2 proposed to connect the existing wastewater system to the existing on-site sewer lateral that would drain onto El Dorado Street. Option 3 proposed connecting to the existing wastewater system on Carston Street to make use of the existing gravity system. The report ultimately determined all three options could be viable for the City with improvements. In addition, the report found that the City’s public sewer system has sufficient capacity to accommodate the proposed project’s effluent, in multiple configurations. Therefore, the proposed project proponents intend to utilize the Opal Street Sewer Main connection in the intersection of Fashion Way and Madrona Avenue which was constructed by the City of Torrance.

The proposed project would also construct and provide several utility systems to provide potable water lines and a network of fire suppression lines ranging from 8 to 12 inches in diameter. Water laterals from residential buildings would connect to the existing water mains in West Carson Street and/or Madrona Avenue. The proposed project would include constructing dry utility natural gas, electrical, and communications lines on the property, which would connect to existing service lines within Madrona Avenue and/or West Carson Street.

1 The current property currently contains parking access for the Del Amo Fashion Center, the 50 space relocation is subject to City approval through project application to amend current Del Amo Fashion Center parking variance, which originally approved the Del Amo Fashion Center offsite parking. 184

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) 2-16

2.6.1.7 Project Phasing
The proposed project’s construction phasing is described below. The overall construction schedule is anticipated to last about 41 months. Grading is currently estimated to involve 23,378 cubic yards (cy) of cut and 16,420 cy of fill, resulting in 6,960 cy of soil for export.

2.6.1.8 Discretionary Permits
A request for approval of a 260 unit mixed-use residential condominium project, by adoption of EAS23-00003-Mitigated Negative Declaration, approval of CUP23-00012- Conditional Use Permit, DVP23-00002-Development Permit, DIV23-00003-Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 83498, MOD23- 00007-Modification of the Fashion Center Mall Parking Variance V79-3, and MOD23-00008- Modification of the Fashion Center Mall Master Plan- Development Permit (DVP96-00001), on properties located in the Hawthorne Boulevard Corridor Specific Plan – Del Amo Business Sub- District One (H-DA1 Zone), at 3405 Carson Street and 21405, 21515 Madrona Avenue, Torrance, California.

2.7 INTENDED USES OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT
This Initial Study examines the environmental impacts of the proposed project. This Initial Study also addresses various actions that would be required by the City and others should an environmental determination be adopted, and the proposed project be approved. It is the intent of this Initial Study to evaluate the environmental impacts of the proposed project, thereby enabling the City of Torrance, other responsible agencies, and interested parties to make informed decisions with respect to the requested entitlements.

185
SOURCE: SMP Environmental Design
FEET
2501250
FIGURE PD.5
I:\LHC2101\G\Landscape_Plan.ai (12/13/2021)
Fashion Square at Del Amo Project
Landscape Plan
186

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) 2-18
This page intentionally left blank

187
AB1.1ROWTOWNS - PERSPECTIVE
6 - PLEX
Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com

LENNAR HOMES
15131 Alton Parkway, Suite 365
Irvine, CA 92618

DEL AMO
TORRANCE, CA # 2020-0686

SCHEMATIC DESIGN
APRIL 8, 2024
SOURCE: KTGY Architecture & Planning - (4/8/2024)

NOT TO SCALE
FIGURE PD.6
I:\LHC2101\G\BuildingType_B_6Plex.ai (5/21/2024)
Fashion Square at Del Amo Project
Building Type B 6-Plex Rendering
188

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) 2-20
This page intentionally left blank

189
SOURCE: Woodley Architectural Group, Inc

NOT TO SCALE
FIGURE PD.7
I:\LHC2101\G\BuildingType_C_6Unit.ai (5/22/2024)
Fashion Square at Del Amo Project
Building Type C 6-Unit Rendering
AC2.0

03.27.2024
190

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) 2-22
This page intentionally left blank

191
AC2.3

03.27.2024
SOURCE: Woodley Architectural Group, Inc

NOT TO SCALE
FIGURE PD.8
I:\LHC2101\G\BuildingType_C_12Unit.ai (5/22/2024)
Fashion Square at Del Amo Project
Building Type C 12-Unit Rendering
192

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) 2-24
This page intentionally left blank

193
AD1.0REC BUILDING - PERSPECTIVE
Architecture + Planning
888.456.5849
ktgy.com

LENNAR HOMES
15131 Alton Parkway, Suite 365
Irvine, CA 92618

DEL AMO
TORRANCE, CA # 2020-0686

SCHEMATIC DESIGN
APRIL 8, 2024
SOURCE: KTGY Architecture & Planning - (4/8/2024)

NOT TO SCALE
FIGURE PD.9
I:\LHC2101\G\Rec_Center.ai (5/22/2024)
Fashion Square at Del Amo Project
Recreation Center Rendering
194

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) 2-26
This page intentionally left blank

195
3 -
27 I

N I T I A L
S

T U D Y
/M

I T I G A T E D
N

E G A T I V E
D

E C L A R A T I O N

O

C T O B E R
2024

F

A S H I O N
S

Q U A R E A T
D
E L
A
M O

T

O R R A N C E
,

C

A L I F O R N I A

P:
\
LHC2101
-

Del Amo Residential
\

WORK PRODUCT
\
1_Initial Study
\
1_PublicReviewDraft
\
Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10
-
8 -

24.docx

(
10/08/24
)

3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED

The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project , involving at
least one impact that is a “Potentially Significant Impact” as indicated by the checklist in Chapter 3.0 .

Aesthetics

Agricultur
e

and Forestry Resources

Air Quality

Biological Resources

Cultural Resources

Energy

Geology/Soils

Greenhouse Gas Emissions

Hazards & Hazardous Materials

Hydrology/Water Quality

Land Use/Planning

Mineral Resources

Noise

Population/Housing

Public Services

Recreation

Transportation

Tribal Cultural Resources

Utilities/Service Systems

Wildfire

Mandatory Findings of Significance

3.1 D

ETERMINATION

On the basis of this initial evaluation:

I find that the proposed
p
roject COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIV E DECLARATION will be
prepared.

I find that the proposed
p
roject MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.

I find that the proposed
p
roject MAY have a “
P
otentially
S
ignificant
I
mpact” or “
P
otentially
S
ignificant
U
nless
M
itigated” 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 att ached
sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.

I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to appli cable
standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed
p
roject, nothing further is required.

Signature

Date

October 8, 2024
196

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) 3-28
This page intentionally left blank
197
4-1

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24)

4.0 CEQA ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST

4.1 AESTHETICS

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section 21099, would the project:
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, 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, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality?

d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?

4.1.1 Impact Analysis
a. Would the project have a substantial effect on a scenic vista? No Impact. The Community Resources Element of the City of Torrance General Plan identifies nearby scenic vistas as the San Gabriel Mountains and Pacific Ocean. The City has adopted development policies for hillside areas, which typically offer scenic vistas of these resources. The project site is located in a largely urbanized area bordered by development on all sides, not located on a hillside, and is not located immediately nearby a hillside area, thus no scenic views from the site or nearby areas would be adversely affected. Therefore, no impacts to scenic vistas would occur and no mitigation measures would be required.
b. Would the project substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? No Impact. According to the California State Scenic Highway System Map, the project site is not located near any State Scenic Highway. Further, no scenic resources such as trees, rock outcroppings, or historic resources within a scenic highway would be damaged or removed. The previously disturbed site provides a limited number of mature trees and vegetation, which are proposed to be removed during construction; however, they are not considered a scenic resource within a State Scenic Highway. Further, the City requires that a landscaping plan, including trees, shrubs and groundcover, shall be submitted for approval prior to building permit issuance, which would replace the existing trees. Therefore, no impacts on scenic resources within a State Scenic Highway would occur, and no mitigation measures would be required. 198

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) 4-2
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, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality? No Impact. The project site is located within a largely developed urban environment, in an area with residential and commercial land uses adjacent to the project site. As mentioned previously, there are no scenic views in the vicinity of the site that would be adversely affected by the proposed project. All final designs of the project would conform to all applicable Land Use and Development Standards allowed within H-DA1 of the Hawthorne Boulevard Corridor Specific Plan, which include all townhome types conforming to a building height under 200 feet and achieving a maximum floor area ratio (FAR) of 1.0. In addition, the project was developed to provide step backs from existing viewpoints, by planning for step backs from Madrona Avenue, with building heights increasing from Madrona Avenue and West Carson Street, thus providing a visual transition from the existing residential neighborhood to the proposed project. In addition to the proposed step back, all final project designs would be subject to City review and approval. This would ensure that the project would not substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings. Therefore, no significant impact would occur, and no mitigation measures would be required.
d. Would the project create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
Less than Significant Impact. The proposed project would not introduce new sources of light or glare that would be incompatible with the surrounding urban areas, or which would pose a safety hazard to motorists using adjacent streets. The area contains numerous sources of nighttime lighting, including streetlights, architectural and security lighting, and automobile headlights from surrounding roadways. The Torrance Municipal Code and California Building Code require that any new lighting be cast downward and shielded so as not to illuminate beyond the project boundary and to avoid any light from spilling over onto the adjacent properties. The final design, configuration, and orientation of lighting features and fixtures under the project would be subject to City review and approval, acting to ensure that the project lighting would be compatible with, and would complement, architectural and site designs, and further that the project lighting would be compatible with and would not adversely affect off-site land uses. Therefore, impacts associated with new sources of substantial light or glare would be less than significant, and no mitigation measures would be required.
199
4-3

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24)

4.2 AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES
In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state’s inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment Project; and the forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
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 Williamson Act contract?
c. Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code Section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code Section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as
defined by Government Code Section 51104(g))?

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, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?

4.2.1 Impact Analysis
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? No Impact. The project site is currently developed with an existing single-story commercial building on the northeastern portion of the project site and a restaurant, located on the southeastern portion of the project site. As shown on Figure PD-2, Project Site, the project site is surrounded by the Del Amo Fashion Center and other commercial uses, a residential neighborhood, and a school.

The proposed project would be located in a fully developed urban area that does not contain agricultural uses. The map of Important Farmland in California prepared by the California Department of Conservation does not identify the project site as being Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance. As of 2018, the entire project site and surrounding 200

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) 4-4
area is located in an area designated “Urban and Built-Up Land.” Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not convert designated Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance to a non-agricultural use. No impact would occur, and no mitigation is required.
b. Would the project conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? No Impact. The project site is currently zoned as Hawthorne Boulevard Corridor Specific Plan Area.

Per the Hawthorne Boulevard Corridor Specific Plan, the project site is within the H-DA1 zone.

Allowable uses within the H-DA1 zone include a variety of mixed-use projects, including commercial, retail, and office uses. Residential uses are also permitted within H-DA1. The proposed project does not propose a change to the project site’s zoning designation. The area surrounding the project site consists of Urban and Built-Up Land, and the project site itself is non-enrolled land (i.e., land not enrolled in a Williamson Act contract and not mapped by the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program). Therefore, there would be no conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract. No impact would occur, and no mitigation is required. c. Would the project conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code Section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code Section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code Section 51104(g))?
No Impact. The project site is not currently used for timberland production, is not zoned as forest land or timberland, and does not contain forest land or timberland as defined by Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 1220(g), PRC Section 4526, or Government Code Section 51104(g). Therefore, no impacts to forest land or timberland would occur, and no mitigation is required. d. Would the project result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forestland to non-forest use? No Impact. The project site is currently developed with restaurant and commercial uses. The proposed project would not convert forest land to a non-forest use. Likewise, the proposed project would not contribute to environmental changes that would result in the conversion of forest land to a non-forest use. Therefore, no impact would occur, and no mitigation is required. 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?
No Impact. The project site is not used for agricultural production and does not contain any forest land. The project site is currently zoned as Hawthorne Boulevard Corridor Specific Plan Area and is used for restaurant and commercial uses. The project site and surrounding area are characterized by commercial, residential, and school uses. The proposed project would not convert farmland to non- agriculture use. Likewise, because the project site is already developed and is not within the vicinity of any existing agricultural land or land zoned for agricultural uses, the proposed project would not contribute to environmental changes that could result in the conversion of farmland to non- agricultural use. Therefore, no impact would occur, and no mitigation is required. 201
4-5

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24)

4.3 AIR QUALITY
Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management district or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
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) adversely affecting a substantial number of people?

4.3.1 Impact Analysis
a. Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? Less than Significant Impact. The project site is located within the South Coast Air Basin (Basin). The South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) is the regional government agency that monitors and regulates air pollution within the Basin. The Federal Clean Air Act and the California Clean Air Act mandate the control and reduction of specific air pollutants. Under these Acts, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the California Air Resources Board (CARB) have established ambient air quality standards for specific "criteria" pollutants, designed to protect public health and welfare. Primary criteria pollutants include carbon monoxide (CO), volatile organic compounds (VOC), nitrogen oxides (NOX), particulate matter (PM10), sulfur dioxide (SO2), and lead (Pb). Secondary criteria pollutants include ozone (O3), and fine particulate matter (PM2.5). These ambient air quality standards are levels of contaminants, which represent safe levels that avoid specific adverse health effects associated with each criteria pollutant.

An Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) describes air pollution control strategies to be undertaken by a city or county in a region classified as a nonattainment area to meet the requirements of the federal Clean Air Act. The main purpose of an AQMP is to bring an area into compliance with the requirements of federal and state ambient air quality standards (AAQS). The applicable air quality plan is the SCAQMD’s adopted 2022 AQMP. The AQMP is based on regional growth projections developed by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG).

Consistency with the 2022 AQMP for the Basin would be achieved if a project is consistent with the goals, objectives, and assumptions in the AQMP that were designed to achieve the federal and state air quality standards. Per the SCAQMD’s CEQA Air Quality Handbook, there are two main indicators of a project’s consistency with the applicable AQMP: (1) would not increase the frequency or 202

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) 4-6
severity of an air quality standards violation or cause a new violation, and (2) is consistent with the growth assumptions in the AQMP. Consistency review is presented as follows:

Consistency Criterion 1. As demonstrated below, the proposed project would result in short- term construction and long-term operational pollutant emissions that are all less than the CEQA significance emissions thresholds established by SCAQMD. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in an increase in the frequency or severity of an air quality standards violation or cause a new air quality standards violation. As such, the proposed project is considered consistent with Criterion 1.

Consistency Criterion 2. The SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook indicates that consistency with 2022 AQMP growth assumptions must be analyzed for new or amended General Plan elements, Specific Plans, and significant projects. Significant projects include airports, electrical generating facilities, petroleum and gas refineries, designation of oil drilling districts, water ports, solid waste disposal sites, and offshore drilling facilities. The proposed project would include the construction of a residential development comprising of four and five-story residential condominium complex with 260 units and associated community amenities. Given its size, the proposed project is not defined as significant for the purposes of the AQMP consistency analysis. In addition, the proposed project is consistent with growth assumptions within the City’s General Plan and the regional AQMP and would not require a General Plan amendment.

Therefore, the proposed project would be consistent with the Criterion 2.

Based on the analysis presented above, the proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan and would result in a less than significant impact. No mitigation is required.
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?
Less than Significant Impact. The SCAQMD has established daily emission thresholds for construction and operation of proposed projects. The emission thresholds were established based on the attainment status of the air basins within the SCAQMD region with regard to air quality standards for specific criteria pollutants. Because the concentration standards were set at a level that protects public health with an adequate margin of safety, these emission thresholds are regarded as conservative and would overstate an individual project’s contribution to health risks.

The SCAQMD has established thresholds of significance for criteria pollutant emissions generated during both construction and operation of projects as shown in Table AQ-1, below.

The SCAQMD considers any projects in the Basin with construction- or operation-related emissions that exceed any of the emission thresholds above to have potentially significant impacts. 203
4-7

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) Table AQ-1: Regional Thresholds for Construction and
Operational Emissions
Emissions Source Pollutant Emissions Threshold (lbs/day) VOCs NOX CO PM10 PM2.5 SOX
Construction 75 100 550 150 55 150
Operations 55 55 550 150 55 150
Source: South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). 2019. Air Quality Significance Thresholds. Website:
http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/scaqmd-air-quality-significance-thresholds.pdf?sfvrsn=2 (accessed July 2024).

CO = carbon monoxide
lbs/day = pounds per day
NOX = nitrogen oxides
PM2.5 = particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in size PM10 = particulate matter less than 10 microns in size
SOX = sulfur oxides
VOCs = volatile organic compound

In addition, the SCAQMD published its Final Localized Significance Threshold (LST) Methodology in July 2008, recommending that all air quality analyses include an assessment of air quality impacts to nearby sensitive receptors.2 This guidance was used to analyze potential localized air quality impacts associated with construction of the proposed project. LSTs are developed based on the size or total area of the emission source, the ambient air quality in the source receptor area, and the distance between the project and the nearest sensitive receptor. The SCAQMD defines structures that house persons (e.g., children, the elderly, persons with pre-existing respiratory or cardiovascular illness, and athletes and others who engage in frequent exercise) or places where they gather as sensitive receptors (i.e., residences, schools, playgrounds, child-care centers, convalescent centers, retirement homes, and athletic fields).

LSTs are based on the ambient concentrations of that pollutant within the project Source Receptor Area (SRA) and the distance to the nearest sensitive receptor. For the proposed project, the appropriate SRA for the LST is the Southwest Coastal Los Angeles County Area (SRA 3). SCAQMD provides LST screening tables for 25-, 50-, 100-, 200-, and 500-meter source-receptor distances.

While the project site is approximately 17 acres, based on the anticipated construction equipment, it is assumed that the maximum daily disturbed acreage would be 3.5 acres for construction of the proposed project.3 The maximum 5-acre LST thresholds were used for the operational LST analysis.

This approach is conservative as it assumes that all on-site emissions associated with the project would occur within a concentrated 5-acre area. The nearest sensitive receptors are the single-family homes located approximately 115 feet east of the project site across Madrona Avenue. An LST analysis was completed to show the construction and operational impacts at a distance of 35 meters (115 feet) to the nearest sensitive receptors. Table AQ-2 lists the LST thresholds that apply during project construction and operation.

2 SCAQMD. 2008. Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology. July. 3 SCAQMD. n.d. Fact Sheet for Applying CalEEMod to Localized Significance Thresholds. Website:
http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/localized-significance-thresholds/caleemod- guidance.pdf (accessed July 2024).
204

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) 4-8
Table AQ-2: SCAQMD Localized Significance Thresholds
Emissions Source Pollutant Emissions Threshold (lbs/day) NOX CO PM10 PM2.5
Construction (3.5 acres, 35-meter distance) 162.0 1,457.0 21.0 7.5 Operations (5 acres, 35-meter distance) 194.0 1,871.0 7.2 2.4 Source: Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology (SCAQMD, July 2008).

CO = carbon monoxide
lbs/day = pounds per day
LST = localized significance threshold
NOx = nitrogen oxides
PM2.5 = particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in size PM10 = particulate matter less than 10 microns in size
SCAQMD = South Coast Air Quality Management District

The Basin is currently designated nonattainment for the federal and State standards for 8-hour O3 and PM2.5. The Basin is also nonattainment for the State standards for 1-hour O3 and PM10. The Basin’s nonattainment status is attributed to the region’s development history. Past, present, and future development projects contribute to the region’s adverse air quality impacts on a cumulative basis. By its very nature, air pollution is largely a cumulative impact. No single project is sufficient in size to, by itself, result in nonattainment of AAQS. Instead, a project’s individual emissions contribute to existing cumulatively significant adverse air quality impacts. If a project’s contribution to the cumulative impact is considerable, then the project’s impact on air quality would be considered significant.

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 a project exceeds the identified SCAQMD significance thresholds identified above in Table AQ-1, its emissions would be cumulatively considerable, resulting in significant adverse air quality impacts to the region’s existing air quality conditions. Therefore, additional analysis to assess cumulative impacts is not necessary. The following analysis assesses the potential project-level air quality impacts associated with construction and operation of the proposed project.

Construction Emissions. During construction, short-term degradation of air quality may occur due to the release of particulate matter emissions (i.e., fugitive dust) generated by demolition, grading, building construction, paving, and other activities. Emissions from construction equipment are also anticipated and would include CO, NOX, VOC, directly emitted PM2.5 or PM10, and toxic air contaminants (TACs) such as diesel exhaust particulate matter.

Construction activities associated with the proposed project would include demolition, grading/utility improvements, site preparation, building construction, architectural coating, and paving activities. Construction-related effects on air quality from the proposed project would be greatest during the site preparation phase due to the disturbance of soils. If not properly controlled, these activities would temporarily generate particulate emissions. Sources of fugitive dust would include disturbed soils at the construction site. Unless properly controlled, vehicles leaving the site would deposit dirt and mud on local streets, which could be an additional source of airborne dust after it dries. PM10 emissions would vary from day to day, depending on the nature and magnitude of construction activity and local weather conditions. PM10 emissions would depend on soil moisture, silt content of soil, wind speed, and amount of operating 205
4-9

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) equipment. Larger dust particles would settle near the source, whereas fine particles would be dispersed over greater distances from the construction site.

Water or other soil stabilizers can be used to control dust, resulting in emission reductions of 50 percent or more. SCAQMD has established Rule 403: Fugitive Dust, which would require the Applicant to implement measures that would reduce the amount of particulate matter generated during the construction period. The Rule 403 measures that were incorporated in this analysis include:
• Water active sites at least three times daily (locations, where grading is to occur, shall be thoroughly watered prior to earthmoving).
• Cover all trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials, or maintain at least 2 ft (0.6 meter) of freeboard (vertical space between the top of the load and the top of the trailer) in accordance with the requirements of California Vehicle Code Section 23114. • Reduce traffic speeds on all unpaved roads to 15 miles per hour or less.

In addition to dust-related PM10 emissions, heavy trucks and construction equipment powered by gasoline and diesel engines would generate CO, sulfur oxides (SOx), NOx, VOCs and some soot particulate (PM2.5 and PM10) in exhaust emissions. If construction activities were to increase traffic congestion in the area, CO and other emissions from traffic would increase slightly while those vehicles idle in traffic. These emissions would be temporary in nature and limited to the immediate area surrounding the construction site.

Construction emissions were estimated for the proposed project using the California Emissions Estimator Model Version 2022.1 (CalEEMod). This analysis assumed a 41-month construction schedule for the proposed project, with construction activities beginning in Summer of 2025 until completion in Winter 2028. This analysis also included the demolition of the existing on- site buildings. During site grading, there would be utility upgrades, which would require soil moving consisting of 23,378 cubic yards (CY) of cut and 16,420 CY of fill, resulting in 6,960 CY of soil for export, which was also included in the analysis. This analysis also assumes that architectural coating activities would overlap building construction and paving activities, which was included in CalEEMod. Low VOC paints would be required to be consistent with SCAQMD Rule 1113, which was applied in CalEEMod. Other precise details of construction activities are unknown at this time; therefore, default assumptions (e.g., construction equipment and worker trips) from CalEEMod were used. This analysis assumes the use of Tier 2 construction equipment as allowed for under the CARB in-use off-road diesel fueled fleets regulation. Site preparation, grading, and building activities would involve the use of standard earthmoving equipment such as large excavators, cranes, and other related equipment.4 Table AQ-3 identifies the maximum daily emissions associated with construction activities during each construction phase. Appendix

4 CARB. 2022. In-Use Off-Road Diesel-Fueled Fleets Regulation. November. Website: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/ our-work/programs/use-road-diesel-fueled-fleets-regulation (accessed August 2024) 206

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) 4-10
Table AQ-3: Short-Term Regional Construction Emissions
Construction Year Maximum Daily Regional Pollutant Emissions (lbs/day) VOCs NOX CO SOX Total PM10 Total PM2.5
2025 1.4 49.2 36.8 0.1 9.0 5.0
2026 1.4 49.2 36.7 0.1 5.3 2.7
2027 1.3 20.6 26.0 <0.1 3.4 1.3
2028 49.7 21.7 28.4 <0.1 3.9 1.5
Peak Daily Emissions 49.7 49.2 36.8 0.1 9.0 5.0
SCAQMD Threshold 75.0 100.0 550.0 150.0 150.0 55.0
Significant? No No No No No No
Source: Compiled by LSA (July 2024).

CO = carbon monoxide
lbs/day = pounds per day
NOX = nitrogen oxides
PM2.5 = particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in size PM10 = particulate matter less than 10 microns in size
SCAQMD = South Coast Air Quality Management District
SOX = sulfur oxides
VOCs = volatile organic compounds

AQ provides CalEEMod output sheets for the construction emissions associated with the proposed project.

As shown in Table AQ-3, construction emissions associated with the proposed project would not exceed the SCAQMD’s thresholds for VOC, NOX, CO, SOX, PM2.5, and PM10 emissions. In addition to the construction period thresholds of significance, the project is required to comply with regional rules that assist in reducing short-term air pollutant emissions. As previously described, SCAQMD Rule 403 requires that fugitive dust be controlled with best available control measures so that the presence of such dust does not remain visible in the atmosphere beyond the property line of the emission source. In addition, SCAQMD Rule 403 requires the implementation of dust suppression techniques to prevent fugitive dust from creating a nuisance offsite. Even though the project’s construction would not exceed any of the emissions thresholds as noted in Table AQ-3, compliance with Rule 403 dust suppression techniques can further reduce the fugitive dust generation. With compliance with Rule 403, the construction of the proposed project would not result in a cumulatively considerable increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is in nonattainment under an applicable federal or State AAQS. Impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.

Operational Emissions. Long-term air pollutant emissions associated with operation of the proposed project include emissions from area, energy, and mobile sources. Area-source emissions include architectural coatings, consumer products, and landscaping. Energy-source emissions result from activities in buildings that use natural gas. Mobile-source emissions are from vehicle trips associated with operation of the proposed project.

PM10 emissions result from running exhaust, tire and brake wear, and the entrainment of dust into the atmosphere from vehicles traveling on paved roadways. Entrainment of PM10 occurs when vehicle tires pulverize small rocks and pavement, and the vehicle wakes generate airborne dust. The contribution of tire and brake wear is small compared to the other PM emission processes. Gasoline-powered engines have small rates of particulate matter emissions compared with diesel-powered vehicles.
207
4-11

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) Energy-source emissions result from activities in buildings for which natural gas is used. The quantity of emissions is the product of usage intensity (i.e., the amount of natural gas) and the emission factor of the fuel source. The emission factor is determined by the fuel source, with cleaner energy sources, like renewable energy, producing fewer emissions than conventional sources. The proposed project would comply with the 2022 California Green Building Standards Code, which was included in this analysis.

Typically, area-source emissions consist of direct sources of air emissions at the project site, including architectural coatings, consumer products, and use of landscape maintenance equipment. This analysis assumes that the proposed project would not include any wood- burning hearths or stoves.

Long-term operation emissions associated with the proposed project were calculated using CalEEMod. Trip generation rates used in CalEEMod for the proposed project were based on the project’s trip generation estimates as identified in Section 3.17, Transportation, which assumes that the proposed project would generate 1,013 average daily trips (ADT) when accounting for pass-by trips and internal capture. The long-term operational emissions associated with the proposed project are shown in Table AQ-4. The operational emissions estimates shown in Table AQ- 4 are conservative in that they do not provide credit for emissions generated by the existing on-site uses. Appendix AQ provides CalEEMod output sheets for the operational emissions of the proposed project.

Table AQ-4: Project Operational Emissions
Emission Type Maximum Daily Regional Pollutant Emissions (lbs/day) VOCs NOX CO SOX PM10 PM2.5
Mobile Sources 3.0 2.3 25.5 0.1 6.1 1.6
Area Sources 17.5 3.7 16.3 <0.1 0.3 0.3
Energy Sources 0.1 1.6 0.7 <0.1 0.1 0.1
Total Project Emissions 20.6 7.6 42.6 0.1 6.5 2.0
SCAQMD Threshold 55.0 55.0 550.0 150.0 150.0 55.0
Exceeds Threshold? No No No No No No
Source: Compiled by LSA (July 2024).

Note: Some values may not appear to add correctly due to rounding.

CO = carbon monoxide
lbs/day = pounds per day
NOX = nitrogen oxides
PM2.5 = particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in size PM10 = particulate matter less than 10 microns in size
SCAQMD = South Coast Air Quality Management District
SOX = sulfur oxides
VOCs = volatile organic compounds

The results shown in Table AQ-4 indicate operational emissions associated with the proposed project would not exceed the significance criteria for daily VOC, NOX, CO, SOX, PM10, or PM2.5 emissions. Therefore, operation of the proposed project would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is in nonattainment under an applicable federal or State AAQS. Impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
208

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) 4-12
Localized Significance Analysis. Project construction and operation emissions were compared to the LST screening tables in SRA 3, based on a 115-foot source-receptor distance. The results of the LST analysis, summarized in Table AQ-5, indicate that the project would not result in an exceedance of SCAQMD LST during project construction or operation.

Table AQ-5: Project Localized Construction and Operational Emissions Source Pollutant Emissions (lbs/day)
NOX CO PM10 PM2.5
Construction Emissions
On-Site Emissions 48.8 35.3 8.8 5.0
Localized Significance Threshold 162.0 1,457.0 21.0 7.5 Significant? No No No No
Operational Emissions
On-Site Emissions 5.4 18.3 0.7 0.5
Localized Significance Threshold 194.0 1,871.0 7.2 2.4
Significant? No No No No
Source: Compiled by LSA (July 2024).

Note: Source Receptor Area 3, based on a 3.5-acre construction disturbance daily area and a 5-acre project site for operation, at a distance of 35 meters (115 feet) from the project boundary.

CO = carbon monoxide
lbs/day = pounds per day
NOX = nitrogen oxides
PM2.5 = particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in size PM10 = particulate matter less than 10 microns in size

By design, the localized impact analysis only includes on-site sources; however, the CalEEMod outputs do not separate on-site and off-site emissions for mobile sources. For a worst-case scenario assessment, the emissions detailed in Table AQ-5 assume all area- and energy-source emissions would occur on site, and 5 percent of the project-related new mobile sources (which is an estimate of the amount of project-related on-site vehicle and truck travel) would occur on site. Considering the total trip length included in CalEEMod, the 5 percent assumption is conservative. Table AQ-5 indicates the localized operational emissions would not exceed the LSTs at nearby residences. Therefore, the proposed operational activity would not result in a locally significant air quality impact.

As detailed in Table AQ-5, the emission levels indicate that the project would not exceed SCAQMD LSTs during project construction or operation. The project’s peak operational on-site NOX emissions would be less than 1 pound per day. Due to the small size of the proposed project in relation to the overall Basin, the level of emissions is not sufficiently high to use a regional modeling program to correlate health effects on a Basin-wide level. On a regional scale, the quantity of emissions from the project is incrementally minor. Because the SCAQMD has not identified any other methods to quantify health impacts from small projects, and due to the size of the project, it is speculative to assign any specific health effects to small project-related emissions. However, based on this localized analysis, the proposed project would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. Therefore, the project would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial levels of pollutant concentrations. 209
4-13

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) Long-Term Microscale (CO Hot Spot) Analysis. Vehicular trips associated with the proposed project would contribute to congestion at intersections and along roadway segments in the vicinity of the project site. Localized air quality impacts would occur when emissions from vehicular traffic increase as a result of the proposed project. The primary mobile-source pollutant of local concern is CO, a direct function of vehicle idling time and, thus, of traffic flow conditions. CO transport is extremely limited; under normal meteorological conditions, it disperses rapidly with distance from the source. However, under certain extreme meteorological conditions, CO concentrations near a congested roadway or intersection may reach unhealthful levels, affecting local sensitive receptors (e.g., residents, schoolchildren, the elderly, and hospital patients).

Typically, high CO concentrations are associated with roadways or intersections operating at unacceptable levels of service or with extremely high traffic volumes. In areas with high ambient background CO concentrations, modeling is recommended to determine a project’s effect on local CO levels.

An assessment of project-related impacts on localized ambient air quality requires that future ambient air quality levels be projected. Existing CO concentrations in the immediate project vicinity are not available. Ambient CO levels monitored at the Compton Monitoring Station, the closest station to the project site, showed a 1-hour concentration of 3.4 parts per million (ppm) (the State standard is 20 ppm) and an 8-hour concentration of 3.0 ppm (the State standard is 9 ppm) in 2022. The highest CO concentrations would normally occur during peak traffic hours; hence, CO impacts calculated under peak traffic conditions represent a worst-case analysis.

Reduced speeds and vehicular congestion at intersections result in increased CO emissions.

Given the extremely low level of CO concentrations in the project area and the lack of unacceptable levels of service at any intersections affected by the project, project-related vehicles are not expected to contribute significantly to CO concentrations exceeding the State or federal CO standards. Therefore, operation of the proposed project would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is in nonattainment under an applicable NAAQS and CAAQS, and impacts would be less than significant.
c. Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Less than Significant Impact. Sensitive receptors are defined as people that have an increased sensitivity to air pollution or environmental contaminants. Sensitive receptor locations include schools, parks and playgrounds, day care centers, nursing homes, hospitals, and residential dwelling units. Land uses located adjacent to the project site include residential and commercial uses. The closest sensitive receptor to the project site includes the single-family homes located approximately 115 feet east of the project site across Madrona Avenue.

Construction of the proposed project may expose surrounding sensitive receptors to airborne particulates, as well as a small quantity of exhaust pollutants (i.e., usually diesel-fueled vehicles and equipment) during the construction period. However, construction contractors would be required to implement measures to reduce or eliminate emissions by following SCAQMD standard construction 210

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) 4-14
practices. Once operational, the project would not result in substantial localized emissions. As shown in Table AQ-5, the project would not result in significant localized emissions during project construction or operation. Therefore, the project would not be a source of substantial pollutant emissions and sensitive receptors would not be exposed to substantial pollutant concentrations during project construction and operation. Therefore, the proposed project would result in less than significant impacts during construction and operation, and no mitigation is required. d. Would the project result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
Less than Significant Impact. Heavy-duty equipment on the project site during construction would emit odors, primarily from equipment exhaust. In addition, the application of asphalt and architectural coatings during construction activities may result in odors. Standard construction requirements would minimize odor impacts from construction. The construction odor emissions would be temporary, short-term, and intermittent in nature and would cease upon completion of the respective phase of construction and is thus considered less than significant.

SCAQMD Rule 402 regarding nuisances states: “A person shall not discharge from any source whatsoever such quantities of air contaminants or other material 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, or which cause, or have a natural tendency to cause, injury or damage to business or property.” The proposed project does not contain land uses typically associated with emitting objectionable odors. It is expected that project-generated refuse would be stored in covered containers and removed at regular intervals in compliance with the City’s solid waste regulations. The proposed project would also be required to comply with SCAQMD Rule 402 to prevent occurrences of public nuisances. Therefore, odors associated with the proposed project construction and operations would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
211
4-15

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24)

4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a
candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife
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 Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife
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 removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?

d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with
established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?

e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?

f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?

4.4.1 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 by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
No Impact. The project site is currently occupied by two buildings, a paved parking lot, and landscaping. In its existing condition, the project site contains a small amount mature trees and ornamental vegetation throughout the project site and along Madrona Avenue, West Carson Street, Del Amo Circle, and Fashion Way. The disturbed condition of the project site is generally not suitable to support special-status plant or animal species.

The United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Critical Habitat for Threatened & Endangered Species map does not identify any locations of critical habitat within the project site. The closest known critical habitat is located approximately 2 miles south of the project site and directly north of Ernie Howlett Park in Rolling Hills Estates. No special-status species are anticipated to be directly 212

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) 4-16
affected by the project due to the lack of suitable habitat on the project site. Additionally, the Torrance General Plan Community Resource Element does not identify any candidate, sensitive, or special status species that occupies the project site. Therefore, no impacts to sensitive or special- status species would result from implementation of the proposed project, and no mitigation is required.
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, regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? No Impact. The project site is located in an urban area and is highly disturbed and developed with two buildings, a paved parking lot, and landscaping, and does not support any special-status or sensitive riparian habitat as identified in regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) or USFWS. Therefore, no impacts related to riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities identified in a local or regional plan would result from project implementation, and no mitigation is required.
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?
No Impact. According to the National Wetlands Inventory managed by the USFWS, the project site does not contain federally protected wetlands. The project site is located entirely outside of streambeds, banks, and riparian habitat. No potential waters of the United States or CDFW jurisdictional areas are located on the project site. Therefore, the project would have no impact and no mitigation is necessary.
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?
Less than Significant. Due to the lack of sensitive or special-status species or their habitats on the project site, the project would not result in impacts on candidate, sensitive, or special-status animal species. However, the proposed project would involve the removal or demolition of all existing site features, including removal of existing mature trees within the project site. These trees have the potential to provide suitable nesting habitat for raptors and other unknown migratory non-game native bird species. The proposed project would avoid impacts on nesting resident and/or migratory birds either by avoiding vegetation removal during the avian nesting season (February 1 through August 31) or by implementing Regulatory Compliance Measure 4-1. The proposed project has the potential to impact active migratory bird nests if and to the extent that those trees are removed during the avian nesting season and they contain nests. Regulatory Compliance Measure 4-1 would address any impacts to nesting resident and/or migratory birds should it be necessary to conduct vegetation removal during the nesting season and nests are present.

Regulatory Compliance Measure. The following Regulatory Compliance Measure is an existing regulation that is applicable to the proposed project and is considered in the analysis of 213
4 -
17 I

N I T I A L
S

T U D Y
/M

I T I G A T E D
N

E G A T I V E
D

E C L A R A T I O N

O

C T O B E R
2024

F

A S H I O N
S

Q U A R E A T
D
E L
A
M O
T

O R R A N C E
,

C

A L I F O R N I A

P:
\
LHC2101
-

Del Amo Residential
\

WORK PRODUCT
\
1_Initial Study
\
1_PublicReviewDraft
\
Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10
-
8 -

24.docx

(
10/08/24
)

potential impacts related to biological resources. The City considers this requirement to be mandatory; therefore, it is not a mitigation measure.

Regulatory Compliance Measure 4
-
1:

Nesting Bird Survey and Avoidance
. If vegetation
removal, construction, or grading activities are planned to occur within the active nesting bird season (February 1 through August 31), the Applicant/Developer shall
confirm to the City of Torrance Community
Development Director, or designee, that a qualified
biologist has been retained who shall conduct a
preconstruction nesting bird survey no more than 3
days prior to the start of such activities. The nesting bird survey shall include the work area and areas adjacent to the site (within 500 feet, as feasible) that could
potentially be affected by project-related activities such as noise, vibration, increased human activity, and dust.

For any active nest(s) identified, the qualified biologist shall establish an appropriate buffer zone around the
active nest(s). The appropriate buffer shall be
determined by the qualified biologist based on species, location, and the nature of the proposed activities.

Project activities shall be avoided within the buffer zone until the nest is deemed no longer active, as
determined by the qualified biologist.

The surveys shall be documented with a biological
resources survey log and at the conclusion of
monitoring shall be submitted to the City of Torrance.5 With implementation of Regulatory Compliance Measure 4
-
1, the proposed project’s potential
impacts on nesting migratory birds would be avoided

and project impacts would be less than
significant
, and no mitigation is required
.

e
.

Would the
project

conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
No Impact.

The project site is not subject to or otherwise affected by a local tree preservation ordinance or other local ordinances protecting biological resources. There are no biologically significant resources within the project site, nor are there any local ordi nances or area
-
wide
preservation or conservation plans or policies (e.g., a tree preservation policy) applicable to the project site. The project site is not located on or near any street designated as a special area for street trees as shown on

Figure CR
-
6, Special Designated Areas for Street Trees, of the General Plan 5 Underlined text was added to clarify Regulatory Compliance Measure enforcement mechanism.

214

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) 4-18
Community Resources Element.6 The project would also be required to comply with the City’s Tree Ordinance (TMC Division 7, Chapter 5), which requires a permit to be obtained prior to cutting, trimming, removing, pruning, planting, injuring, or interfering with any trees on a public street.

Therefore, the proposed project would have no impact related to a conflict with a local tree preservation ordinance or other local ordinances protecting biological resources. No mitigation is required.
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?
No Impact. The project site is surrounded by commercial, residential, and school uses, and is not located in an environmentally sensitive area. The project site is not located within or otherwise affected by a Habitat Conservation Plan or Natural Community Conservation Plan. The proposed project does not propose or require development or activities that would conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan or Natural Community Conservation Plan.

Therefore, the proposed project would have no impact related to a conflict with an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan or Natural Community Conservation Plan, and no mitigation is required.

6 City of Torrance. City of Torrance General Plan – Community Resources Element. April 2010. Website:
https://www.torranceca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/2722/636302127526600000 . Accessed June 12, 2024.
215
4-19

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24)

4.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to §15064.5?
b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5?
c. Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries?

4.5.1 Impact Analysis
a. Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to §15064.5?
No Impact. A Historic Resources Evaluation (HRE) was prepared for the proposed project and is included as Appendix CUL. The HRE analyzed the potential for the proposed project to cause substantial adverse changes to any historical resources that may exist in or around the project site.

The HRE found that, the one structure on site older than 45 years old, located at 21405 Madrona Avenue it not eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources or the Torrance Register of Historic Resources under any criteria. In addition, research did not identify any historically significant people associated with the building nor did it find the site as a whole to be eligible for listing. The shopping center, including the Montgomery Ward, was demolished leaving the building at 21405 Madrona Avenue as an isolated remnant. The 21405 Madrona Avenue building has lost its significance and integrity. Therefore, it is not eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources or for designation under the local preservation ordinance. It is not a “historical resource” for purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as presented below.

Project Site. The project site was located in the former Torrance oil field circa 1920s. In the 1950s The Del Amo Fashion Center was constructed, and additional development continued through the 1990s. Between 2005-2009 demolition and redevelopment continued and by 2010 the project site was developed into its current configuration. A history of the project site development in included in Table CUL-1 below.

Table CUL-1: Project Site History
Date Project Site Description
1924-1947 The project site appears developed by Chanslor-Canfield Midway Oil Company. Structures are visible on the northern and western portion of the property, Del Amo #2 oil derrick and oil sump pit are located on the southern portion of the property, railroad tracks are visible crossing the central portion of project site and four above ground storage tanks (ASTs) are visible straddling the southern margin of the project site.
216

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) 4-20
Table CUL-1: Project Site History
Date Project Site Description
1947-1963 Additional structures have developed in the central portion of the project site. By 1954, multiple structures are no longer visible in the central portion of the property along with the ASTs which were along the southern property margin. By 1963, Del Amo #2 oil derrick has been removed from the southern portion of the project site.
1970-2000 The Chanslor-Canfield Midway Oil Company buildings, oil well, and railroad tracks are no longer visible.

The project site is graded. By 1977, the existing structure in the northeast portion of the project site has been developed. The central portion of the project site is developed by the Del Amo Shopping Center. By 1981, the existing building has been developed in the southeast portion of the project site. 2005-2009 The central portion of the project site has been demolished. A building has been developed in the central eastern portion of the project site and by 2009 is no longer visible. 2010-present The project site appears in its exiting configuration.

Source: ASTM Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Northwest Block At Madrona Avenue and West Carson Street Torrance, California.

Haley & Aldrich, Inc, June 2023

• Montgomery Ward: Opening as the eleventh store in the Los Angeles area, Montgomery Ward opened its doors at the Del Amo Fashion Square in 1971, on the project site. The $3.75 million store featured two levels and 177,000 square feet of shopping space and was designed by architects Mazzetti, Leach, Cleveland & Associates with E.W. Hahn Inc. as the contractor (Desser 1971). The store offered a “complete line of merchandise from home furnishings to records and stereo and television equipment to lawnmowers to a complete automotive center” (Redondo Reflex 1971). The freestanding, 4,300-square foot automotive center, located at 21405 Madrona Avenue, was located east of the department store. It had a 20-car capacity and also featured a garden center (Desser 1971). The store closed in 2001 after almost 30 years of service (Daily News 2009). The Montgomery Ward store was demolished in 2006 to make room for the new Lifestyle Wing at the mall. The automotive center was left in place and no longer in operation.
• 21405 Madrona Avenue Building Evaluation: The 21405 Madrona Avenue building is evaluated below for historical significance under the criteria for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources (California Register) and for designation under the City’s ordinance. PRC Section 5024.1 established the California Register. The requirements for listing in the California Register, including the criteria for listing and having integrity, are similar to those of the National Register. Generally, a resource is considered by the lead agency to be “historically significant” if the resource meets the criteria for listing in the California Register (14 CCR Section 15064.5(a)(3)). For a cultural resource to qualify for listing in the California Register, it must be significant under one or more of the following criteria:
○ Criterion 1: Associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of California’s history and cultural heritage ○ Criterion 2: Associated with the lives of persons important in our past 217
4-21

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) ○ Criterion 3: Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of an important creative individual, or possesses high artistic values
○ Criterion 4: Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history
Many of the City’s criteria for designation are similar to those of the California Register. Where appropriate, these have been listed in parenthesis along with the California Register criteria. • Criterion 1 (City Criteria 1): the 21405 Madrona Avenue building is most closely associated with development and expansion of the Del Amo Fashion Center and the Montgomery Ward department store chain, which are in turn associated with the important historical theme of shopping center development. However, the property was an ancillary building to the Montgomery Ward department store and part of an expansion to the Del Amo Fashion Center that has since been demolished. The building has lost integrity of association, setting, and feeling and is no longer part of the larger development. It does not convey an association with either the Del Amo Fashion Center or Montgomery Ward and does not appear eligible for listing in the California Register under Criterion 1. • Criterion 2 (City Criteria 2): research did not identify any historically significant people associated with the 21405 Madrona Avenue building. Although it was originally part of Montgomery Ward, which was the first successful mail order business in the late 1800s, this 1971 building is insignificant in the larger scheme of the company’s history. Therefore, the building and associated project site are not eligible for listing in the California Register under Criterion 2.
• Criterion 3 (City Criteria 3, 4, 5): the 21405 Madrona Avenue building would need to be a notable example of an architectural style or associated with a prominent architect to be eligible for listing under this criterion. The 21405 Madrona Avenue building was the work of the architectural firm Mazzetti, Leach, Cleveland & Associates, the official consulting architect of the Los Angeles area Montgomery Ward department stores. However, the automotive shop and garden shop is not a notable example of the work designed by Mazzetti, Leach, Cleveland & Associates. There are no known works by this firm listed in the National Register of Historic Places or the California Register to suggest they are master architects. The few known commercial buildings they designed were better examples of the Modern style of architecture whereas the subject building was constructed in the vernacular with no distinguishing features. The building and associated project site are not eligible under Criterion 3.
• Criterion 4 (City Criteria 6): the automotive shop and garden center was constructed using common materials and construction practices. It does not have the potential to yield information important to the history or prehistory of the local area, California, or the nation and is therefore not eligible under Criterion 4.
218

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) 4-22
The following addresses the remaining City criteria for designation. • City Criterion 7: the 21405 Madrona Avenue building may be one of the last remaining Montgomery Ward automotive centers and garden shops; however, its loss of association and setting has diminished its integrity, and it is therefore not significant under City Criterion 7.

For the reasons stated above, the existing building located at 21405 Madrona Avenue is not eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources or the Torrance Register of Historic Resources under any criteria. In addition, research did not identify any historically significant people associated with the building. For these reasons, the property at 21405 Madrona Avenue in Torrance does not qualify as a “historical resource” as defined by the CEQA.

No impact would occur, and no mitigation is required.
b. Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5?
Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation. An Archaeological Resources Study was prepared for the proposed project (see Appendix CUL). As a part of the Archaeological Resources Study, a California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) records search at the South- Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC) at California State University, Fullerton, was completed on December 13, 2021. The records search determined that no archaeological cultural were recorded at the project site or within a 0.5-mile radius of the project site. In addition, the NAHC was contacted on May 22, 2024, in order to request a SLF search for the project limits. The results from this SLF search came back negative.

The earliest historic-period map reviewed for the project site dates to 1896, at which time the project site was undeveloped, and the nearest natural freshwater source was a stream draining out of a slough, approximately 1.0 mile east-northeast of the project site. A map dating to 1924 depicts an oil well in the southwestern corner of the project site, and West Carson Street was developed. By 1934, a spur of the Atchison Topeka and Santa Fe rail line followed the current alignment of Madrona Avenue. The rail line spur shown in the 1963 aerial photograph is depicted on a 1951 map.

A 1964 map depicts an additional rail line spur on the project site.

Excavation associated with project implementation is anticipated to reach a depth of no more than 12 feet below existing grade for utility trenching and other improvements. The records search found no record of previously recorded cultural resources on the project site. However, there have been no subsurface studies within the project site or the records search radius, and the presence of historic-period development and railroad spurs within the project site indicate a moderate potential for subsurface historic-period archaeological deposits.

Additionally, the presence of a freshwater stream (which could have been used as a food and water source by prior inhabitants of the area) within 1.0 mile of the project site indicates a low to moderate potential for subsurface prehistoric archaeological resources. Accordingly, ground disturbance associated with the proposed project may result in inadvertent discovery of 219
4-23

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) archaeological resources. Implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-1 would reduce potential impacts to subsurface historic-period or prehistoric archaeological resources to less than significant.

Mitigation Measure CUL-1 Unknown Discovery Prior to issuance of a grading permit for the project, the Applicant/Developer shall confirm to the City of Torrance Community Development Director, or designee, that a qualified archaeologist (one who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s standards) has been retained to provide professional archaeological services. The qualified archaeologist (or an archaeologist supervised by the qualified archaeologist) shall be present at the pre-grade conference to establish procedures for archaeological resource monitoring. In the event that any prehistoric or historic subsurface cultural resources are discovered during ground disturbing activities, all work within 25 feet of the resources shall be halted and the Applicant and/or lead agency shall consult with the qualified archaeologist, historian or paleontologist to assess the significance of the find. In the event that these resources are of Native American origin, all work within 25 feet of the resources shall be halted and the lead agency shall consult with the appropriate Tribal representative. The archaeologist will stake the area of discovery, placing stakes no more than 10 feet apart, forming a circle around the point of discovery.

If any find is determined to be significant, representatives of the Applicant and/or lead agency and the qualified professional would meet to determine the appropriate avoidance measures or other appropriate measure, with the ultimate determination to be made by the City of Torrance. If the resource is determined to be a Tribal Cultural Resource and thus significant under CEQA, the
Applicant/Developer shall retain a qualified archaeologist and a Tribal monitor, at the Applicant’s expense, to prepare a mitigation plan, which shall be implemented by the appropriate entity in accordance with State guidelines and in consultation with the consulting Tribe. All significant cultural materials recovered shall be subject to scientific analysis, professional museum curation, and/or a report prepared by the qualified professional according to current professional standards.

In considering any suggested measure proposed by the qualified professional, the Applicant shall determine whether avoidance is necessary or feasible in light of factors such as the uniqueness of the find, project design, costs, and other considerations. For Tribal Cultural Resources, avoidance is always preferred.

If avoidance is unnecessary or infeasible, other appropriate measures (e.g., data recovery) shall be instituted. For Tribal Cultural 220

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) 4-24
Resources, data recovery is never an appropriate mitigation. If avoidance is not feasible, the mitigation plan shall outline appropriate treatment of the resource in coordination with the consulting Tribe and, if applicable, a qualified archaeologist.

Examples of appropriate mitigation for Tribal Cultural Resources include, but are not limited to, protecting the cultural character and integrity of the resources, protecting traditional use of the resources, protecting the confidentiality of the resources, and/or heritage recovery. Work may proceed on other parts of the project site while mitigation measures for cultural resources is carried out.

If significant materials are recovered, the qualified professional shall prepare a report on the findings for submittal to the South Central Coast Information Center.

With implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-1, potential impacts to archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5 would be reduced to less than significant with mitigation impact. c. Would the project disturb any humans remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries?
Less Than Significant. The project site is not located near or adjacent to any known cemeteries and there are no known human remains interred on the project site. In addition, due to the developed nature of the project site the likelihood of encountering buried human remains is low. However, while there are no known human remains on the project site, below surface human remains may be present and subject to inadvertent discovery due to ground disturbance associated with the proposed project. Disturbing human remains could violate State law, as well as destroy the resource. In the unlikely event that human remains are encountered during project-related ground disturbance, the construction contractor would be required to comply with applicable regulatory requirements, including notifying the proper authorities and adhering to standard procedures that would ensure the respectful handling of human remains.

Construction contractors are required to adhere to Section 15064.5(e) of the California Code of Regulations (CCR), Section 5097 of the Public Resources Code (PRC), and Section 7050.5 of the State Health and Safety Code. To ensure proper treatment of burials in the event of an unanticipated discovery of a burial, human bone, or suspected human bone, the law requires that all excavation or grading in the vicinity of the find halt immediately within 50 feet, the area of the find be protected, and the contractor immediately notify the County Coroner of the find. Compliance with State regulations (specified below in Regulatory Compliance Measure [RCM] CUL-1) would ensure that any potential impacts to unknown buried human remains would be less than significant by ensuring appropriate examination, treatment, and protection of human remains as required by State law.

Compliance with RCM CUL-1 would reduce any impact to less than significant. As this is a regulatory requirement, RCM CUL-1 is not considered a mitigation measure, and it is outlined below for ease of access.
221
4-25

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) RCM CUL-1 outlines existing regulations that are applicable to the proposed project and are considered in the analysis of potential impacts related to cultural resources. The City of Torrance considers these requirements to be mandatory; therefore, compliance with these regulations is not considered mitigation.

Regulatory Compliance Measure CUL-1: In the event that human remains are encountered on the project site, work within 50 feet of the discovery shall be redirected and the County Coroner notified immediately
consistent with the requirements of CCR Section
15064.5(e). Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made a determination of origin and
disposition pursuant to PRC Section 5097.98. If the
remains are determined to be Native American, the
County Coroner shall notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) within 24 hours, which shall
determine and notify a Most Likely Descendant (MLD).

With the permission of the City, the MLD may inspect the site of the discovery. The MLD shall complete the
inspection within 48 hours of being granted access to the site. The MLD may recommend scientific removal and
nondestructive analysis of human remains and items
associated with Native American burials. Consistent with CCR Section 15064.5(d), if the remains are determined to be Native American and an MLD is notified, the City shall consult with the MLD as identified by the NAHC to develop an agreement for treatment and disposition of the
remains. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the
Director of the City’s Community Development
Department, or designee, shall verify that all grading plans specify the requirements of CCR Section 15064.5(e), State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, and PRC Section
5097.98, as stated above.

With implementation of regulatory requirements, as outlined in RCM CUL-1, project impacts related to human remains would be less than significant.
222

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) 4-26

4.6 ENERGY

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a. Result in a 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?

4.6.1 Impact Analysis
a. Would the project result in a potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources during project construction or operation?
Less than Significant Impact. The following analysis focuses on the four sources of energy that are relevant to the proposed project: electricity consumption, natural gas consumption, the equipment fuel necessary for project construction, and vehicle fuel necessary for project operations. For the purposes of this analysis, the amounts of electricity, construction fuel, and fuel use from operations are quantified and compared to that consumed in Los Angeles County.

Electricity. Electricity is a man-made resource. The production of electricity requires the consumption or conversion of energy resources (including water, wind, oil, gas, coal, solar, geothermal, and nuclear resources) into energy. Electricity is used for a variety of purposes (e.g., lighting, heating, cooling, and refrigeration, and for operating appliances, computers, electronics, machinery, and public transportation systems. According to the most recent data available, in 2022, California’s electricity was generated primarily by natural gas (47.5 percent), renewable sources (52.2 percent), large hydroelectric (7.2 percent), nuclear (8.7 percent), coal (less than 1.0 percent), and other unspecified sources. Total electric generation in California in 2022 was 287,220 gigawatt-hours (GWh), up 3.4 percent from the 2021 total generation of 277,764 GWh.7
The project site is within the service territory of Southern California Edison (SCE). SCE provides electricity to more than 15 million people in a 50,000 sq mi area of Central, Coastal, and Southern California. According to the California Energy Commission (CEC), total electricity consumption in the SCE service area in 2022 was 85,870 GWh (31,603 GWh for the residential sector and 54,267 GWh for the non-residential sector). Total electricity consumption in Los

7 California Energy Commission (CEC). 2023a. 2022 Total System Electric Generation. Website:
https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-almanac/california-electricity-data/2022-total-system- electric-generation (accessed July 2024).
223
4-27

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) Angeles County in 2022 was 68,485 GWh (23,255 GWh for the residential sector and 45,230 GWh for the non-residential sector).8
Natural Gas. Natural gas is a non-renewable fossil fuel. Fossil fuels are formed when layers of decomposing plant and animal matter are exposed to intense heat and pressure under the surface of the Earth over millions of years. Natural gas is a combustible mixture of hydrocarbon compounds (primarily methane) that is used as a fuel source. Natural gas is found in naturally occurring reservoirs in deep underground rock formations. Natural gas is used for a variety of uses (e.g., heating buildings, generating electricity, and powering appliances such as stoves, washing machines and dryers, gas fireplaces, and gas grills). Natural gas consumed in California is used for electricity generation (45 percent), residential uses (21 percent), industrial uses (25 percent), and commercial uses (9 percent). California continues to depend on out-of-state imports for nearly 90 percent of its natural gas supply.9 The Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas) is the natural gas service provider for the project site. SoCalGas provides natural gas to approximately 21.8 million people in a 24,000 sq mi service area throughout Central and Southern California, from Visalia to the Mexican border.

According to the CEC, total natural gas consumption in the SoCalGas service area in 2022 was 5,026 million therms (2,230 million therms for the residential sector and 2,796 million therms for the non-residential sector). Total natural gas consumption in Los Angeles County in 2022 was 2,820 million therms (1,122 million therms for the residential sector and 1,698 million therms for the non-residential sector).10
Petroleum/Transportation Energy. Petroleum is also a non-renewable fossil fuel. Petroleum is a thick, flammable, yellow-to-black mixture of gaseous, liquid, and solid hydrocarbons that occurs naturally beneath the earth's surface. Petroleum is primarily recovered by oil drilling. It is refined into a large number of consumer products, primarily fuel oil, gasoline, and diesel. The average fuel economy for light‐duty vehicles (autos, pickups, vans, and sport utility vehicles [SUVs]) in the United States has steadily increased from about 14.9 miles per gallon (mpg) in 1980 to 22.9 mpg in 2021.11 Federal fuel economy standards have changed substantially since the Energy Independence and Security Act was passed in 2007. This act, which originally mandated a national fuel economy standard of 35 mpg by year 2020,12 applies to cars and light trucks of Model Years 2011 through 2020. In March 2020, the EPA and National Highway Traffic

8 CEC. 2023b. Electricity Consumption by County and Entity. Websites: http://www.ecdms.energy.ca.gov/ elecbycounty.aspx and http://www.ecdms.energy.ca.gov/elecbyutil.aspx ( accessed July 2024). 9 CEC. 2021. Supply and Demand of Natural Gas in California. Website: https://www.energy.ca.gov/data- reports/energy-almanac/californias-natural-gas-market/supply-and-demand-natural-gas-california (accessed July 2024).
10 CEC. 2023c. Gas Consumption by County and Entity. Website: http://www.ecdms.energy.ca.gov/gasby county.aspx and http://www.ecdms.energy.ca.gov/gasbyutil.aspx (accessed July 2024). 11 United States Department of Transportation (USDOT). “Table 4‐23: Average Fuel Efficiency of U.S. Light Duty Vehicles.” Website: https://www.bts.gov/content/average-fuel-efficiency-us-light-duty-vehicles (accessed July 2024).
12 United States Department of Energy. 2007. “Energy Independence & Security Act of 2007.” Website:
https://www.afdc.energy.gov/laws/eisa (accessed July 2024). 224

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) 4-28
Safety Administration (NHTSA) finalized the Safer Affordable Fuel-Efficient (SAFE) Vehicles Rule for Model Years 2021–2026 Passenger Cars and Light Trucks, further detailed below.

Gasoline is the most used transportation fuel in California, with 97 percent of all gasoline being consumed by light-duty cars, pickup trucks, and SUVs. According to the most recent data available, in 2022, total gasoline consumption in California was 316,425,000 barrels or 1,597.6 trillion British Thermal Units (BTU).13 Of the total gasoline consumption, 299,304,000 barrels or 1,511.2 trillion BTU were consumed for transportation.14 Based on fuel consumption obtained from California Emission Factor Model Version 2021 (EMFAC2021), approximately 614.7 million gallons of diesel and approximately 3.8 billion gallons of gasoline will be consumed from vehicle trips in Los Angeles County in 2024.

The proposed project would increase the demand for electricity, natural gas, and gasoline. The discussion and analysis provided below are based on data included in the CalEEMod output, which is included in Appendix AQ.

Construction Energy Use. The anticipated construction schedule assumes that the proposed project would be built over approximately 41 months. The proposed project would require demolition, site preparation, grading/utility improvements, construction, paving, and architectural coating activities during construction.

Construction of the proposed project would require energy for the manufacture and transportation of construction materials, preparation of the site for grading activities, and construction. Petroleum fuels (e.g., diesel and gasoline) would be the primary sources of energy for these activities. Construction activities are not anticipated to result in an inefficient use of energy because gasoline and diesel fuel would be supplied by construction contractors who would conserve the use of their supplies to minimize their costs on the project. In addition, construction activities would comply with applicable regulations that aim to reduce energy demand, including the California Air Resources Board “In-Use Off-Road Diesel Fueled Fleets Regulation”, which limits engine idling times to reduce harmful emissions and reduce wasteful consumption of petroleum-based fuel. Compliance with applicable energy regulations would reduce short-term energy demand during construction of the proposed project to the extent feasible, and proposed project construction would not result in a wasteful or inefficient use of energy. Energy usage on the project site during construction would be temporary in nature and would be relatively small in comparison to the State’s available energy sources. Therefore, construction energy impacts would be less than significant.

Operational Energy Use. Energy use consumed by the proposed project would be associated with natural gas use, electricity consumption, and fuel used for vehicle trips associated with the

13 United States Energy Information Administration (EIA). 2022. California State Profile and Energy Estimates, Data. Website: www.eia.gov/state/seds/data.php?incfile=/state/seds/sep_fuel/html/ fuel_mg.html&sid=CA (accessed July 2024).
14 Ibid.
225
4-29

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) project. Energy and natural gas consumption was estimated for the project using default energy intensities by land use type in CalEEMod.

The proposed project would also result in energy usage associated with gasoline to fuel project- related trips. Table EN-1 shows the estimated potential increased electricity, gasoline, and diesel demand associated with the proposed project. The electricity rates are from the CalEEMod analysis, while the gasoline and diesel rates are based on the traffic analysis and the USEPA’s gasoline fuel economy estimates for 2020 and the California diesel fuel economy estimates for 2021.

Table EN-1: Estimated Annual Energy Use of Proposed Project Land Use Electricity Use
(kWh per year)
Natural Gas Use
(kBTU per year)
Gasoline
(gallons per year)
Diesel
(gallons per year)
Condo/Townhouse 1,193,963 62,494 110,164 72,997
Parking Lot 49,606 0 0 0
Proposed Project 1,243,569 62,494 110,164 72,997
Source: Compiled by LSA (July 2024).
kBTU = thousand British thermal units
kWh = kilowatt hours

As shown in Table EN-1, the estimated potential increase in electricity demand associated with the proposed project would be approximately 1,243,569 kilowatt-hours (kWh) per year. In 2022, Los Angeles County consumed 68,485 GWh or 68,484,956,280 kWh. Therefore, electricity demand associated with the proposed project would be less than 0.01 percent of Los Angeles County’s total electricity demand.

The estimated potential increased natural gas demand associated with the proposed project would be approximately 62,494 therms per year, as shown in Table EN-1. In 2022, Los Angeles County consumed approximately 2,820 million therms or approximately 2,820,285,935 therms.

Therefore, natural gas demand associated with the proposed project would be less than 0.01 percent of Los Angeles County’s total natural gas demand.

As shown above in Table EN-1, vehicle trips associated with the proposed project would consume approximately 110,164 gallons of gasoline per year and 72,997 gallons of diesel per year. Based on fuel consumption obtained from EMFAC2021, approximately 614.7 million gallons of diesel and approximately 3.8 billion gallons of gasoline will be consumed from vehicle trips in Los Angeles County in 2024. Therefore, vehicle trips associated with the proposed project would increase the annual fuel use in Los Angeles County by less than 0.01 percent for gasoline fuel usage and approximately 0.01 percent for diesel fuel usage. The proposed project would result in fuel usage that is a small fraction of current annual fuel use in Los Angeles County, and fuel consumption associated with vehicle trips generated by project operations would not be considered inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary in comparison to other similar developments in the region. Therefore, gasoline demand generated by vehicle trips associated with the proposed project would be a minimal fraction of gasoline and diesel fuel consumption in California.
226

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) 4-30
The proposed project would be constructed to 2022 Title 24 standards, which would help to reduce energy and natural gas consumption. The project would be required to adhere to all federal, State, and local requirements for energy efficiency, which would substantially reduce energy usage. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in the wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of fuel or energy and would incorporate renewable energy or energy efficiency measures into building design, equipment use, and transportation. Construction and operation period impacts related to consumption of energy resources would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.
b. Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency? Less than Significant Impact. In 2002, the Legislature passed Senate Bill 1389, which required the CEC to develop an integrated energy plan every 2 years for electricity, natural gas, and transportation fuels for the Integrated Energy Policy Report. The plan calls for the State to assist in the transformation of the transportation system to improve air quality, reduce congestion, and increase the efficient use of fuel supplies with the least environmental and energy costs. To further this policy, the plan identifies a number of strategies, including assistance to public agencies and fleet operators in implementing incentive programs for zero emission vehicles (ZEVs) and their infrastructure needs, and encourages urban designs that reduce VMT and accommodate pedestrian and bicycle access.

The CEC’s 2023 Integrated Energy Policy Report provide the results of the CEC’s assessments of a variety of energy issues facing California. As indicated above, energy usage on the project site during construction would be temporary in nature and would be relatively small in comparison to the overall use in Los Angeles County. In addition, energy usage associated with operation of the proposed project would be relatively small in comparison to the overall use in Los Angeles County, and the State’s available energy resources. Further, the proposed project would replace a nearly 50- year-old restaurant and commercial building. Therefore, energy impacts at the regional level would be negligible. Because California’s energy conservation planning actions are conducted at a regional level, and because the proposed project’s total impact on regional energy supplies would be minor, the proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct California’s energy conservation plans as described in the CEC Integrated Energy Policy Report. Additionally, as demonstrated above, the proposed project would not result in the inefficient, wasteful, and unnecessary consumption of energy. Potential impacts related to conflict with or obstruction of a State or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required. 227
4-31

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24)

4.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a. Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning
Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.

ii. Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? iv. Landslides?
b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and
potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?

d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property?

e. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water?

f. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?

4.7.1 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 earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.

No Impact. According to the California Department of Conservation 2015 Fault Activity Map15, there are no known earthquake faults that run through the project site, nor is there any other evidence of a known fault that runs through the project site. Therefore, although the proposed project is in a seismically active region, it would not result in any impact related to the rupture

15 California Department of Conservation. Fault Activity Map. 2015. Website: https://maps.conservation.ca. gov/cgs/fam/. Accessed June 17, 2024.
228

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) 4-32
of a known, on-site earthquake fault, and there would be no impact and no mitigation is required.
ii. Strong seismic ground shaking?
Less than Significant Impact. Similar to the entire Southern California region, the project site is subject to strong ground motion resulting from earthquakes on nearby faults. There are several faults in the vicinity of the project site that are capable of producing strong ground motion, including the Los Alamitos Fault, the Newport-Inglewood Fault, the Puente Hills Blind Thrust Fault, the San Joaquin Hills Thrust Fault, the Palos Verdes Fault, and the Whittier Fault. During an earthquake along any of these faults or other faults in the region, seismically induced ground shaking would be expected to occur. The severity of the shaking would be influenced by the magnitude of the earthquake, the distance of the project site to the seismic source, the soil conditions, the depth to groundwater, and the duration of the seismic event.

Peak ground acceleration (PGA) is a measure of earthquake acceleration on the ground and an important input parameter for earthquake engineering. Based on the Geotechnical Assessment (Geotechnologies, 2003), a design-level PGA of 0.49 g has been calculated for the project site.

This acceleration is consistent with other areas in this region of California that are underlain by similar geologic materials and indicates that strong seismic ground shaking generated by seismic activity is considered a potentially significant impact that may affect people or structures associated with the proposed project. With adherence to the regulatory standards described in Regulatory Compliance Measure GEO-1, potential project impacts related to seismic ground shaking would be reduced to a less than significant level.

Regulatory Compliance Measures. The following regulatory compliance measure includes existing regulations that are applicable to the proposed project and are considered in the analysis of potential impacts related to geology and soils. The City of Torrance considers these requirements to be mandatory; therefore, they are not considered mitigation measures.

Regulatory Compliance Measure GEO-1: California Building Code Compliance Seismic Standards. Prior to issuance of construction
permits, a final soils report shall be prepared for
review and approval by the City. The City shall
review grading and building plans to verify that
grading and structural design conforms to the
requirements of the soils report and the City
Municipal Code. All structures shall be designed in
accordance with the seismic parameters presented
in the soils report and applicable sections of the
most current California Building Code (CBC).
iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? Less than Significant Impact. As described in the Geotechnical Assessment (Geotechnologies, 2003) prepared for the Del Amo Fashion Center Renovation project, the project site is not 229
4-33

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) classified as part of a "Liquefiable" area per the Seismic Hazards Maps produced by the State of California. This determination is based on groundwater depth records, soil type and distance to a fault capable of producing a substantial earthquake.

The Geotechnical Assessment further references that groundwater was not encountered during exploratory borings at up to depths of 50 feet below the existing ground surface. A liquefaction analysis was performed by conservatively assuming a groundwater level of 10 feet below the existing site grade. The liquefaction potential evaluation was performed by assuming a magnitude 7.1 earthquake, and a peak ground acceleration of 0.53g (the peak ground acceleration that would have a 10 percent probability of exceedance in 50 years). The liquefaction analysis in the Geotechnical Assessment indicated that soils at the project site would not be prone to liquefaction. Further, Figure S-2 (Seismic-Related Hazards) from the City’s Safety Element16, which highlights areas with the potential to experience landslides or liquefication-induced ground displacements, does not identify the project site as being located within these areas. No significant geotechnical constraints related to seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction, were identified in the Geotechnical Assessment. Therefore, potential impacts for these constraints are considered less than significant. iv. Landslides?
No Impact. The Geotechnical Assessment states that the probability of seismically induced landslides occurring on the project site is considered to be low due to the general lack of slope geometry across the site. Further, Figure S-2 (Seismic-Related Hazards) from the City’s Safety Element,17 which highlights areas with the potential to experience landslides or liquefication- induced ground displacements does not include the project site. No landslides are anticipated as the result of the proposed project, and there would be no impact. No mitigation is required. b. Would the project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Less than Significant Impact. Most of the site is covered by older degraded asphalt. The northern boundary of the site consists of some landscaping, trees, shrubs, and turf. The total surface area of these existing unpaved areas is approximately 7 acres. During project construction, soil would be exposed and drainage patterns would be temporarily altered during grading and other construction activities, and there would be an increased potential for soil erosion and siltation compared to existing conditions. Additionally, during a storm event, soil erosion and siltation could occur at an accelerated rate. As discussed in Section 3.10.1 Response (a), the Construction General Permit requires the preparation of a SWPPP to identify construction BMPs to be implemented as part of the proposed Project to reduce impacts on water quality during construction, including those impacts associated with soil erosion and siltation. As specified in RCM-WQ-1 in Section 4.10, and in accordance with City Municipal Code, the proposed project would comply with the requirements of the Construction General Permit. With compliance with the requirements in the Construction General Permit and implementation of the construction BMPs as specified in RCM-WQ-1 and in

16 City of Torrance. General Plan – Chapter 4: Safety Element. April 2010. Website: https://www.torranceca. gov/home/showpublisheddocument/2724/636302127533630000. Accessed June 17, 2024. 17 Ibid.
230

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) 4-34
compliance with the City Municipal Code, construction impacts related to on- or off-site erosion or siltation would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.

The project site is currently developed with one operating restaurant, commercial space, and surface parking. The project would decrease impervious surface area on the project site by approximately 1.5 acres, which would decrease storm water runoff and subsequentially decrease erosion and siltation. As discussed in the Drainage Concept/Hydrology Report, the proposed project is anticipated to decrease overall flows (Hunsaker & Associates, 2022). Additionally, as specified in RCM-WQ-3 and RCM-WQ-4 in Section 3.10, Hydrology and Water Quality, in compliance with the Los Angeles County MS4 Permit requirements and the City’s Municipal Code, the three hydrodynamic separators (CDS) units would remove debris and sediment prior to stormwater runoff entering the project’s storm drain system. The proposed on-site storm drain facilities would connect to the existing City system located south of project site Although stormwater runoff would eventually be discharged to receiving waters via the existing storm drain system, there is minimal potential for downstream erosion or siltation to occur because the receiving waters are not subject to hydromodification. Therefore, a less than significant impact related to off-site erosion or siltation would occur, and no mitigation is required.
c. Would the project be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslides, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
Landslides.

Less than Significant Impact. Landslides and other forms of mass wasting, including mud flows, debris flows, and soil slips occur as soil moves downslope under the influence of gravity. Landslides are frequently triggered by intense rainfall or seismic shaking. Because the project site is located in a relatively flat area, landslides or other forms of natural slope instability do not represent a significant hazard to the project. In addition, as stated above, the site is not within a State-designated hazard zone for an earthquake‐induced landslide.

Therefore, there are no potential impacts related to landslides and project impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.

Lateral Spreading.

Less than Significant Impact. Lateral spreading often occurs on very gentle slopes or flat terrain. The dominant mode of movement is lateral extension accompanied by shear or tensile fracture. This failure is caused by liquefaction and is usually triggered by rapid ground motion, such as that experienced during an earthquake, but can also be artificially induced.

When coherent material, either bedrock or soil, rests on materials that liquefy, the upper units may undergo fracturing and extension and may then subside, translate, rotate, disintegrate, or liquefy and flow. The Geotechnical Assessment18 indicates that lateral

18 Geotechnologies, Inc. 2003. Geotechnical Engineering Investigation - Proposed Del Amo Fashion Center Renovation North of Sepulveda Boulevard and East of Hawthorne Boulevard - Torrance, California.

Prepared for The Hummel Company. December 23, 2003. Geotechnologies, Inc. File No. 18511-S 231
4-35

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) spreading is not a potential concern with respect to the proposed project. Therefore, potential impacts related to lateral spreading would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.

Subsidence.

No Impact. Subsidence refers to broad‐scale changes in the elevation of land. Common causes of land subsidence are pumping water, oil, and gas from underground reservoirs; dissolution of limestone aquifers (sinkholes); collapse of underground mines; drainage of organic soils; and initial wetting of dry soils (hydrocompaction). Subsidence is also caused by heavy loads generated by large earthmoving equipment. The project site is not located within an area of known subsidence that may be associated with groundwater, peat loss, or oil extraction. Therefore, the proposed project would not be subject to potential geotechnical hazards related to subsidence and the project would have no impact, and no mitigation is required.

Liquefaction and Compressible/Collapsible Soils.

Less than Significant Impact. As discussed under Threshold 3.7.1 (a)(iii) above, the project site is not subject to significant constraints related to liquefaction. Adherence to the regulatory standards described in Regulatory Compliance Measure GEO-1 would avoid significant impacts with respect to liquefaction and compressible soils. This measure would ensure that project grading and building design comply with the applicable requirements in the CBC (adopted by the City as its Building Code with certain amendments), and current engineering standards of practice. Adherence to these requirements would ensure that excessive settlement resulting from liquefaction and compression of existing undocumented fill and native alluvial soils on the project site would be reduced to a less than significant level, and no mitigation is required.
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? Less than Significant Impact. Expansive soils are soils that experience volumetric changes in response to increases or decreases in moisture content. The Geotechnical Assessment19 states that the project site contains soil types have low shrink-swell potential range and, therefore, are not susceptible to high expansion. In the event that it is determined that near-surface soils within proposed building pad areas exhibit an elevated expansion potential, potential impact of those expansive soils would be addressed through the design of structural foundations and floor slabs in compliance with applicable requirements in the CBC (Regulatory Compliance Measure GEO-1). Since the potential for expansive soils is low and any potential expansion would be addressed through compliance with applicable code requirements, the proposed project would not create substantial potential risks to life or property, and there would be less than significant impacts. No mitigation is required.

19 Ibid.
232

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) 4-36
e. Would the project have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water?
No Impact. The proposed project would not use septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems. It is anticipated that the proposed project would connect to existing sanitary sewer and wastewater facilities located in the public right-of-way that collect and convey raw sewage and wastewater generated from the project site. The project would not have soil impacts that would prevent the provision of wastewater service to the project and therefore, the project would have no impact and no mitigation would be required.
f. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation. The project site is underlain by Old Eolian Deposits. This geologic formation has high paleontological sensitivity due to the prevalence of scientifically important Rancholabrean and Irvingtonian fossils found in similar deposits elsewhere in the region. Project plans and personal communication with Hunsaker and Associates, Irvine Inc., (May 2022) indicate that excavation for grading will extend to a depth of 5 feet, and trenching for utilities will extend to a depth of 12 feet. Excavation for grading and utilities would occur in the Old Eolian Deposits, which have high paleontological sensitivity. Therefore, there is a potential for the project to impact scientifically significant paleontological resources. To ensure that potential impacts to undiscovered paleontological resources remain less than significant, preparation of a Paleontological Resources Impacts Mitigation Program, paleontological monitoring of construction activities, appropriate treatment of newly discovered resources, and preparation of a final paleontological monitoring report would be required, as outlined in mitigation PALEO-1a through c.

Implementation of mitigation measure PALEO-1 would reduce potential impacts to paleontological resources to a less than significant level.

Mitigation Measure PALEO-1a A qualified, professional paleontologist who meets the standards set by the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (SVP) shall be retained by the Applicant to develop a Paleontological Resources Impact Mitigation Program (PRIMP) for this project. The PRIMP shall be consistent with the guidelines of the SVP and shall include the methods that will be used to protect paleontological resources that may exist within the project limits, as well as procedures for monitoring, fossil preparation and identification, curation into a repository, and preparation of a report at the conclusion of ground disturbance.

Mitigation Measure PALEO-1b Prior to grading permit issuance, the following measure shall be included on grading plans: Ground-disturbing activities shall be monitored by a qualified paleontological monitor following a PRIMP. If paleontological resources are encountered during the course of ground disturbance, the paleontological monitor shall have the authority to temporarily redirect construction away from 233
4-37

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) the area of the find in order to assess its significance. In the event that paleontological resources are encountered when a
paleontological monitor is not present, work with 25 feet of the find shall be redirected and the paleontologist or paleontological monitor shall be contacted to assess the find for scientific significance. If determined to be scientifically significant, the fossil shall be collected from the field.

Mitigation Measure PALEO-1c Collected resources shall be prepared to the point of identification, identified to the lowest taxonomic level possible, cataloged, and curated into the permanent collections of a museum repository. At the conclusion of the monitoring program, a report of findings shall be prepared to document the results of the monitoring program and submitted to the City prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy.

With implementation of mitigation measures, PALEO 1a through c, project impacts related to paleontological resources would be less than significant, as it outlines the need for a Paleontological Resources Impacts Mitigation Program, paleontological monitoring of construction activities, appropriate treatment of newly discovered resources, and preparation of a final paleontological monitoring report would be required, thus avoiding impacts to paleontological resource.

234

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) 4-38

4.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the
environment?

b. Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?

4.8.1 Impact Analysis
a. Would the project generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
Less than Significant Impact. Greenhouse gases (GHGs) are present in the atmosphere naturally, are released by natural sources, or are formed from secondary reactions taking place in the atmosphere. The gases that are widely seen as the principal contributors to human-induced global climate change are:
• Carbon dioxide (CO2);
• Methane (CH4);
• Nitrous oxide (N2O);
• Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs);
• Perfluorocarbons (PFCs); and
• Sulfur Hexafluoride (SF6).

Over the last 200 years, humans have caused substantial quantities of GHGs to be released into the atmosphere. These extra emissions are increasing GHG concentrations in the atmosphere and enhancing the natural greenhouse effect, believed to be causing global warming. While manmade GHGs include naturally-occurring GHGs such as CO2, CH4, and N2O, some gases, like HFCs, PFCs, and SF6 are completely new to the atmosphere.

Certain gases, such as water vapor, are short-lived in the atmosphere. Others remain in the atmosphere for significant periods of time, contributing to climate change in the long term. Water vapor is excluded from the list of GHGs above because it is short-lived in the atmosphere and its atmospheric concentrations are largely determined by natural processes, such as oceanic evaporation.

These gases vary considerably in terms of Global Warming Potential (GWP), a concept developed to compare the ability of each GHG to trap heat in the atmosphere relative to another gas. The GWP is based on several factors, including the relative effectiveness of a gas to absorb infrared radiation and length of time that the gas remains in the atmosphere (“atmospheric lifetime”). The GWP of 235
4-39

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) each gas is measured relative to CO2, the most abundant GHG. The definition of GWP for a particular GHG is the ratio of heat trapped by one unit mass of the GHG to the ratio of heat trapped by one unit mass of CO2 over a specified time period. GHG emissions are typically measured in terms of pounds or tons of “CO2 equivalents” (CO2e).

In October 2008, the SCAQMD released a Draft Guidance Document – Interim CEQA GHG Significance Threshold that suggested a tiered approach to analyzing GHG emissions in a project level analysis. In the Draft Guidance Document, the SCAQMD provided numerical thresholds that can be applied to smaller projects (like the proposed project). Although the interim GHG significance thresholds are 3,000 metric tons (MT) per year of CO2e for residential and commercial land uses where the SCAQMD is the Lead Agency. If emissions exceed the numerical screening threshold, a more detailed review of the project’s GHG emissions is warranted. The SCAQMD has proposed an efficiency target for projects that exceed the bright-line threshold. The current recommended approach is per-capita efficiency targets. The SCAQMD is not recommending use of a percent emissions reduction target. Instead, the SCAQMD proposes proposed a 2020 efficiency target of 4.8 MT CO2e per year per service population (residents plus employees) for project-level analyses.

Therefore, this analysis first evaluates the proposed project against the SCAQMD threshold of 3,000 MT CO2e per year. If it is determined that the proposed project is estimated to exceed this screening threshold, it will then be compared to the efficiency-based threshold.

Construction Emissions. Construction activities associated with the proposed project would produce combustion emissions from various sources. During construction, GHGs would be emitted through the operation of construction equipment and from worker and builder supply vendor vehicles, each of which typically use fossil-based fuels to operate. The combustion of fossil-based fuels creates GHGs such as CO2, CH4, and N2O. Furthermore, CH4 is emitted during the fueling of heavy equipment. Exhaust emissions from on-site construction activities would vary daily as construction activity levels change.

As indicated above, the SCAQMD does not have an adopted threshold of significance for construction related GHG emissions. However, Lead Agencies are required to quantify and disclose GHG emissions that would occur during construction. The SCAQMD requires the construction GHG emissions to be amortized over the life of the project (defined as 30 years), added to the operational emissions, and compared to the applicable interim GHG significance threshold tier.

Using CalEEMod, it is estimated that the proposed project would generate approximately 2,412.7 metric tons of CO2e during construction of the project. When annualized over the 30- year life of the project, annual emissions would be 80.4 metric tons of CO2e.

Operational Emissions. Long-term GHG emissions are typically generated from mobile sources (e.g., cars, trucks and buses), area sources (e.g., maintenance activities and landscaping), indirect emissions from sources associated with energy consumption, waste sources (land filling and waste disposal), and water sources (water supply and conveyance, treatment, and distribution). Mobile-source GHG emissions would include project-generated vehicle trips to and from the project. Area-source emissions would be associated with activities such as landscaping 236

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) 4-40
and maintenance on the project site. Energy source emissions would be generated at off-site utility providers as a result of increased electricity demand generated by the project. Waste source emissions generated by the proposed project include energy generated by land filling and other methods of disposal related to transporting and managing project generated waste.

In addition, water source emissions associated with the proposed project are generated by water supply and conveyance, water treatment, water distribution, and wastewater treatment.

Following guidance from the SCAQMD, GHG emissions were estimated using CalEEMod. Trip generation rates used in CalEEMod for the proposed project were based on the project’s trip generation estimates as identified in Section 3.17, Transportation, which assumes that the proposed project would generate 1,013 ADT when accounting for pass-by trips and internal capture. Table GHG-1 shows the GHG emissions of the proposed project.

Table GHG-1: Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Emission Type Operational Emissions (MT/yr)
CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Mobile Source 1,038.7 0.1 <0.1 1,054.3
Area Source 58.1 <0.1 <0.1 58.2
Energy Source 631.6 <0.1 <0.1 633.7
Water Source 22.9 0.3 <0.1 33.1
Waste Source 17.2 1.7 0.0 60.1
Total Operational Emissions 1,839.4
Amortized Construction Emissions 80.4
Total Annual Emissions 1,919.8
SCAQMD Threshold 3,000
Exceed? No
Source: Compiled by LSA (July 2024).

CH4 = methane
CO2 = carbon dioxide
CO2e = carbon dioxide equivalent
GHG = greenhouse gas
MT/CO2e = metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent
MT/yr = metric tons per year
N2O = nitrous oxide
SCAQMD = South Coast Air Quality Management District

As discussed above, according to SCAQMD, a project would have less than significant GHG emissions if it would result in operational-related GHG emissions of less than 3,000 MT CO2e per year. Based on the analysis results, the proposed project would result in approximately 1,919.8 MT CO2e per year, which would be below the numeric threshold of 3,000 MT CO2e. Therefore, operation of the proposed project would not generate substantial GHG emissions; therefore, impacts related to operational GHG emissions would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.
b. Would the project conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
Less than Significant Impact. This analysis evaluates the proposed project’s consistency with the City’s Climate Action Plan (CAP) and other applicable State and regional GHG reduction plans, including the CARB 2022 Scoping Plan.
237
4-41

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) City of Torrance Climate Action Plan. The City adopted an Energy Efficiency Climate Action Plan (EECAP) in December 2015 and subsequently adopted a more comprehensive Climate Action Plan CAP in December 2017. The EECAP became one chapter of the 2017 CAP upon its final publication. While these plans provide the City with goals and policies for reducing GHG emissions, they do not provide sufficient information to quantify GHG emissions reductions, and therefore are not considered “qualified CAPs” under CEQA. These plans can be used to show project consistency with the GHG emissions reduction goals and policies of the City. The CAP focuses on five broad categories of climate adaptation efforts:
• Land Use and Transportation: Facilitate pedestrian and neighborhood development, and identify ways to reduce automobile emissions, including supporting zero-emission vehicle infrastructure, improving pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure, enhancing public-transit service, and supporting reductions in single-occupancy vehicle use. • Energy Efficiency: Emphasize energy efficiency retrofits for existing buildings, energy performance requirements for new construction, water-efficient landscaping, and financing programs that will allow home and business owners to obtain low-interest loans for implementing energy efficiency in their buildings.
• Solid Waste: Focus on increasing waste diversion and encouraging participation in recycling and composting throughout the community.
• Urban Greening: Create “carbon sinks” because they store GHG emissions that are otherwise emitted into the atmosphere as well as support the health of the community. • Energy Generation and Storage: Demonstrate the City’s commitment to support the implementation of clean, renewable energy while decreasing dependence on traditional, GHG-emitting power sources.

As part of the efforts under each category, the South Bay Cities Council of Governments (SBCCOG) identified a broad menu of feasible strategies for the local municipalities to enhance their efforts to reduce GHG emissions. The CAP set forth a GHG emission reduction target of 15 percent below 2005 levels by 2020 and 45 percent below 2005 levels by 2035. The strategies outlined in the CAP would achieve an annual citywide reduction of 256,740 metric tons of CO2e by 2035, meeting the goals of the CAP.

The proposed project would be consistent with the City CAP goal of increasing energy efficiency in new residential buildings by complying with the latest California Building Code (Title 24), including CALGreen, as well as incorporating high efficiency lighting fixtures and appliances to minimize lighting electricity consumption. CALGreen, is the first Statewide Green Building Code.

CALGreen lays out minimum requirements for newly constructed buildings in California to reduce GHG emissions through improved efficiency and process improvements. It requires builders to install plumbing that cuts indoor water use by as much as 20 percent, to divert 50 percent of construction waste from landfills to recycling, and to use low pollutant paints, carpets, and floors.
238

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) 4-42
2022 Scoping Plan. In addition, the proposed project was analyzed for consistency with the 2022 Scoping Plan, Executive Order (EO) B-30-15, Senate Bill (SB) 32, and Assembly Bill (AB) 197.

EO B-30-15 added the immediate target of reducing GHG emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030. CARB released a second update to the Scoping Plan, the 2017 Scoping Plan, to reflect the 2030 target set by Executive Order B-30-15 and codified by SB 32. SB 32 affirms the importance of addressing climate change by codifying into statute the GHG emissions reductions target of at least 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 contained in EO B-30-15. SB 32 builds on AB 32 and keeps us on the path toward achieving the State’s 2050 objective of reducing emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels. The companion bill to SB 32, AB 197, provides additional direction to the CARB related to the adoption of strategies to reduce GHG emissions.

Additional direction in AB 197 intended to provide easier public access to air emissions data that are collected by CARB was posted in December 2016.

The 2022 Scoping Plan20 assesses progress toward the statutory 2030 target, while laying out a path to achieving carbon neutrality no later than 2045. The 2022 Scoping Plan Update 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.

The 2022 Scoping Plan focuses on building clean energy production and distribution infrastructure for a carbon-neutral future, including transitioning existing energy production and transmission infrastructure to produce zero-carbon electricity and hydrogen, and utilizing biogas resulting from wildfire management or landfill and dairy operations, among other substitutes.

The 2022 Scoping Plan states that in almost all sectors, electrification will play an important role.

The 2022 Scoping Plan evaluates clean energy and technology options and the transition away from fossil fuels, including adding four times the solar and wind capacity by 2045 and about 1,700 times the amount of current hydrogen supply. As discussed in the 2022 Scoping Plan, EO N-79-20 requires all new passenger vehicles sold in California will be zero-emission by 2035, and all other fleets will have transitioned to zero-emission as fully possible by 2045, which will reduce the percentage of fossil fuel combustion vehicles.

The 2022 Scoping Plan measures applicable to the proposed project include energy efficiency measures, water conservation and efficiency measures, and transportation and motor vehicle measures, as discussed below.

Energy efficient measures are intended to maximize energy efficiency building and appliance standards, pursue additional efficiency efforts including new technologies and new policy and implementation mechanisms, and pursue comparable investment in energy efficiency from all retail providers of electricity in California. In addition, these measures are designed to expand the use of green building practices to reduce the carbon footprint of California’s new and existing inventory of buildings. As discussed above, the proposed project would comply with the

20 CARB. 2022. 2022 Scoping Plan for Achieving Carbon Neutrality. December. 239
4-43

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) latest Title 24 standards, regarding energy conservation and green building standards.

Therefore, the proposed project would comply with applicable energy measures.

Water conservation and efficiency measures are intended to continue efficiency programs and use cleaner energy sources to move and treat water. Increasing the efficiency of water transport and reducing water use would reduce GHG emissions. As noted above, the project would comply with the latest Title 24 standards, which includes a variety of different measures, including reduction of wastewater and water use. In addition, the proposed project would be required to comply with the California Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with any of the water conservation and efficiency measures.

The goal of transportation and motor vehicle measures is to develop regional GHG emissions reduction targets for passenger vehicles. Specific regional emission targets for transportation emissions would not directly apply to the proposed project. The second phase of Pavley standards will reduce GHG emissions from new cars by 34 percent from 2016 levels by 2025.

Vehicles traveling to the project site would comply with the Pavley II (LEV III) Advanced Clean Cars Program. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with the identified transportation and motor vehicle measures.

Therefore, the proposed project would comply with existing State regulations adopted to achieve he overall GHG emissions reduction goals identified in the 2022 Scoping Plan, EO B-30- 15, SB 32, and AB 197 and would be consistent with applicable plans and programs designed to reduce GHG emissions. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs. 240

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) 4-44

4.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?

b. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident
conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment?

c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste 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, 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 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area?

f. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?

g. Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires?

4.9.1 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? Less than Significant Impact. Hazardous materials are chemicals that could potentially cause harm during an accidental release or mishap, and are defined as being toxic, corrosive, flammable, reactive, an irritant, or a strong sensitizer.21 Hazardous substances include all chemicals regulated under the United States Department of Transportation’s “hazardous materials” regulations and the EPA “hazardous waste” regulations. Hazardous wastes require special handling and disposal because of their potential to damage public health and the environment. The probable frequency and severity of consequences from the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials is affected by the type of substance, the quantity used or managed, and the nature of the activities and operations.

21 A “sensitizer” is a chemical that can cause a substantial proportion of people or animals to develop an allergic reaction in normal tissue after repeated exposure to a chemical. 241
4-45

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) Construction of the proposed project would temporarily increase the transport, use, and disposal of construction-related hazardous materials and petroleum products (e.g., diesel fuel, lubricants, paints and solvents, and cement products containing strong basic or acidic chemicals). These materials are commonly used at construction sites, and the construction activities would be required to comply with applicable State and federal regulations for proper transport, use, storage, and disposal of excess hazardous materials and hazardous construction waste. The construction contractor would maintain equipment and supplies for containing and cleaning up small hazardous materials spills and would train workers in such containment and cleanup. The contractor would immediately notify the Torrance Fire Department (TFD) and the Los Angeles County Fire Department (LACoFD) in the event of a hazardous materials release of an amount and/or toxicity that could not be safely contained and cleaned up by on-site construction workers. In addition, RCM-WQ-1 (see Section 10, Hydrology and Water Quality, of this IS/MND) requires compliance with the waste discharge permit requirements to avoid potential impacts to water quality due to spills or runoff from hazardous materials used during construction. Therefore, with adherence to the regulatory standards included in RCM-WQ-1, construction-related impacts related to the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials would be less than significant.

The proposed project includes the development of residential dwelling units. Residential uses typically do not present a hazard associated with the accidental release of hazardous substances into the environment because residents are not anticipated to use, store, dispose, or transport large volumes of hazardous materials. Hazardous substances associated with residential uses are typically limited in both amount and use such that they can be contained without impacting the environment.

As a residential development, long-term operation activities typical of the proposed residential uses involve the use and storage of small quantities of potentially hazardous materials in the form of cleaning solvents, fertilizers, and pesticides. For example, maintenance activities related to landscaping include the use of fertilizers and light equipment (e.g., lawn mowers and edgers) that may require fuel. As stated previously, these types of activities do not involve the use of large or substantial amounts of hazardous materials. Furthermore, such materials would be contained, stored, and used in accordance with manufacturers’ instructions and handled in compliance with applicable federal, State, and local regulations. In addition, operation of the proposed project would not store, transport, generate, or dispose of large quantities of hazardous substances. Therefore, potential impacts from the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials resulting from operation of the proposed project would be less than significant, and no mitigation would be required.
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?
Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation. A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) was completed for the project site in June 2024 (2024 Phase I ESA) and is provided as Appendix HAZ. The 2024 Phase I ESA included a property reconnaissance to visually assess the project site and the surrounding area conditions and land uses. The purpose of the Phase I ESA was to identify and 242

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) 4-46
assess the environmental characteristics of the project site that could impact present or future land uses.

The 2024 Phase I ESA identified two recognized environmental conditions (RECs)22 associated with the project site. Both REC, as outlined below, were associated with the former Montgomery Ward Auto Express (automotive center) building located in the northern portion of the project site. These RECs are described as follows:
• REC #1: Underground Storage Tank (UST). Historical records indicate a 500-gallon waste oil UST was located at the former Montgomery Ward Auto Express in 1971. A large resurfaced concrete patch located west of the building was visible during the site visit indicating the feature was likely removed. Conditions of the tank and analytical results of the excavation samples at the time of removals are unknown.

In March 2003, as part of a Phase II Limited Site Investigation (see Appendix HAZ), three soil borings were taken in the vicinity of the removed waste oil UST. The soil samples were analyzed for total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH), TPH as gasoline, TPH as diesel, volatile organic compounds (VOCs), polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), and metals. The analysis indicated that no contaminants were detected at concentrations that exceeded the then in effect U.S. EPA Region 9 Regional Screening Levels (RSLs) for soil with the exception of arsenic (which was detected at 2.3 mg/kg in one sample collected at a depth of 12 feet) and chromium (which was detected at 6.7 mg/kg and 13 mg/kg in two samples collected at depths of 6 and 12 feet bgs, respectively). Based on the relatively low concentrations of compounds detected in the soil in 2003, the fact that the sources of the contamination were removed, and the depth to groundwater at the site is anticipated to be greater than 80 feet bgs, it does not appear that any remaining residual contamination of on-site soils resulting from the former waste oil UST is of significant environmental concern to the site. No records indicate that regulatory agency approval for the former UST has been granted. • REC #2: Aboveground Storage Tank Waste Oil Release (AST). Los Angeles County Fire Department (LACoFD) records indicate an AST containing waste oil was located on the northern exterior of the former Montgomery Ward Auto Express. On August 4, 1997, a plume of oil originating from the hazardous waste storage enclosure was observed to be ponded on the paved surface in the parking area. The LACoFD issued a Notice of Violation (NOV) on August 5, 1997. Documents provided did not mention any further regulatory actions and it is possible residual petroleum remains at the project site.

22 RECs are defined by the ASTM E1527-21 Standard as “The ASTM E1527-21 Standard defines a REC as: (1) the presence of hazardous substances or petroleum products in, on, or at the subject property due to a release to the environment; (2) the likely presence of hazardous substances or petroleum products in, on, or at the subject property due to a release or likely release to the environment; or (3) the presence of hazardous substances or petroleum products in, on, or at the subject property under conditions that pose a material threat of a future release to the environment.” 243
4-47

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) In addition, the 2024 Phase I ESA also identified two historical recognized environmental conditions (HRECs). These HRECs included four hydraulic hoists and an onsite clarifier. The 2024 Phase I ESA describes these HRECs as follows:
• HREC #1: Four Hydraulic Hoists. In 2003, four hydraulic hoists were removed from the northern portion of the former Montgomery Ward Service Center. The LACoFD issued a No Further Action letter dated 19 June 2003, stating the hoist area has been satisfactorily mitigated for the current use and there are no further requirements or restrictions relating to the site. • HREC #2: Onsite Clarifier. In 2003, a clarifier was excavated from the southwest side of the former Montgomery Ward Service Center. The LACoFD issued a No Further Action letter dated June 18, 2003, stating the clarifier area has been satisfactorily mitigated for the current use and no further requirements or restriction relating to the site.

The 2024 Phase I ESA identified one de minimis condition on the project site.23 The de minimis condition identified on the project site is associated with areas of oil-stained concrete and asphalt in poor conditions throughout the project site.

In addition to the RECs, HRECs, de minimis finding, the Phase I ESA identified other findings. Other findings are those notable items encountered as part of the Phase I ESA that are not considered RECs. These other findings include:
• Other Finding #1: Re-abandonment of Onsite Abandoned Del Amo #2. The City of Torrance, in consultation with CalGEM, may require that Del Amo #2 be re-abandoned by the well owner to meet current oil well destruction standards. The current well owner is Kelt California, Inc. according to CalGEM records. Prior to re-abandonment, the former oil well will need to be located and may require a specialized geophysical survey and/or coordination with CalGEM. The City may also require setbacks from the oil well be maintained and/or the installation of a vent cap at the former well location.
• Other Finding #2: Active Petroleum Distribution Pipelines are Located on or Adjacent to the Property. A pipeline easement is located along the landscaped area on the eastern property margin of the project site. The pipeline is active and operated by Chevron Pipeline Co. and reportedly contain jet fuel and crude oil. Pipelines under Madrona Avenue are active and owned by Shell Pipeline Co., Plains Marketing, L.P., Phillips 66 Pipeline LLC, and Crimson Pipeline, L.P. and contain multiple petroleum products including crude oil. • Other Finding #3: Abundance of Debris. An abundance of construction debris and waste staging debris piles were located across the project site. Should future redevelopment occur in this area, the removal of the waste and construction debris should be handled with care. Care

23 A de minimis condition is defined by the ASTM E1527-21 as a condition related to a release (of materials) that generally does not present a threat to human health or the environment and that would generally not be subject to an enforcement action.
244

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) 4-48
should also be taken when removing the debris should be properly containerized and disposed of at an appropriate recycling or disposal facility.
• Other Finding #4: Historical Railroad Tracks and Historical Buildings. Three sections of railroad tracks and a number of historical buildings were located on the project site associated with the Chanslor-Canfield Midway Oil Company operations. Former industrial operations may have included the use of petroleum products, solvents, adhesives, and/or other chemicals. It is possible that former industrial operations may have adversely affected subsurface conditions at the project site. Based on the time that has elapsed since industrial use, two previous instances of project site redevelopment, and no identified records of historical spills or environmental response actions, it does not appear that significant chemical impacts remain in the vicinity of the former rail tracks or the former buildings.

Based on the results of the 2024 Phase I ESA, it is unlikely that the proposed project would 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. However, in the event that during ground disturbing activities associated with Project construction, any impacted soil is encountered and identified, these materials would be addressed via procedures outlined in a soil management plan, as provided for In Mitigation Measure HAZ-1: Soil Management Plan. Implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 would reduce impacts to less than significant.

Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 Soil Management Plan. Prior to or concurrent with demolition permit applications, the Construction Contractor shall provide a Soil Management Plan to the City of Torrance for review and approval.

The Soil Management Plan shall include the procedures for pre‐ demolition surveys and testing for hazardous building materials such as asbestos, lead‐based paint, mercury, and polychlorinated biphenyls, and removal and disposal of hazardous building materials. All inspections, surveys, and analyses shall be performed by appropriately licensed and qualified individuals in accordance with applicable regulations. All identified hazardous materials shall be removed, handled, and properly disposed of by appropriately licensed contractors according to all applicable regulations during demolition of structures. The Construction Contractor shall provide documentation (e.g., all required waste manifests, sampling, and air monitoring analytical results) to the City of Torrance showing that abatement of hazardous building materials has been completed in full compliance with all applicable regulations. The City of Torrance shall document that the Soil Management Plan has been approved prior to issuance of demolition permits. In the event that soil conditions on the site are encountered that exceed standards established in the Soil Management Plan, the Applicant/Developer shall, on behalf of the City of Torrance, enter into a Standard Voluntary Agreement (SVA) program with the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) or seek oversight with the Los Angeles 245
4-49

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) County Site Mitigation Unit to ensure proper evaluation of the project is completed.
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? Less than Significant with Mitigation Impact. The project site is located within 0.25 mile of Madrona Middle School, which is located 100 feet east of the project site and across Madrona Avenue.

Hickory Tree School is located 270 feet southeast of the project site and across West Carson Street and Madrona Avenue. South Bay Academy is located approximately 1,000 feet to the north. The First Lutheran Church and School is located approximately 0.35 mile (1,800 feet) to the southeast.

Jefferson Middle School is located approximately 0.6 mile (3,200 feet) to the west. Fern Elementary school is located approximately 0.75 mile (4,000 feet) northeast. Anza Elementary School is approximately 0.9 mile (5,000 feet) to the west. Arnold Elementary School is located approximately

0.8 mile (4,200 feet) to the southwest. Torrance Elementary School is located approximately 1.3 miles (7,000 feet) to the southeast.

As stated previously, the proposed project is not anticipated to release hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste in significant quantities; however, odors may be emitted during the normal course of construction, including equipment exhaust and architectural coatings, which are typical of most construction sites and temporary in nature. Additionally, during the normal course of construction, there would also be limited transport of potentially hazardous materials (e.g., gasoline, diesel fuel, paints, solvents, fertilizer) to and from the project site. As with other recent developments, the project would be required to comply with all City and County Hazardous Materials Management Plans and implement Mitigation Measure MM HAZ-1 in addition to regulations addressing transport, use, storage, and disposal of these materials.

Therefore, impacts associated with hazardous emissions or handling of hazardous materials within

0.25 mile of a school would be considered less than significant with incorporation of MM HAZ-1. 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 create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?
Less than Significant Impact. As part of the Phase I ESAs, EDR conducted searches of available environmental records for the project site and properties up to 1.0 mile away from the project site.

The project site is listed in a number of environmental databases, including Facility Inventory Database (CA FID UST), Statewide Environmental Evaluation and Planning System (SWEEPS UST), UST, and Historical UST (HIST UST) due to the 550-gallon waste oil UST, which as mentioned above under Response (b), is not of significant environmental concern to the site. The site is also listed in Facility and Manifest Data (HAZNET) as having generated hazardous waste (including waste oil and mixed oil, other organic solids, unspecified oil-containing waste, and unspecified organic liquid mixture), in the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Information (RCRAInfo) as a small quantity generator (SQG) of hazardous waste, and in Facility Index System/Facility Registration System (FINDS) regarding its listings on other regulatory and compliance databases. The Phase I ESAs note that these listings do not suggest a contamination concern on the site. 246

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) 4-50
There were several listings in the database report for off-site facilities within applicable ASTM.

Several of these listings (e.g., RCRA hazardous waste generators, USTs, Historical Auto Stations, compliance listings), by themselves, are not indicative of a contamination concern and therefore were not further evaluated. A number of facilities appear on databases indicating potential contamination concerns (e.g., LUST, Superfund Enterprise Management System Archive [SEMS- Archive], Corrective Action Report [CORRACTS], Resource Conservation and Recovery Act [RCRA] Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Facilities [TSDF], Solid Waste Information System [SWF/LF], Hazardous Waste and Substance Site List [HIST Cortese], California Hazardous Material Incident Report System [CHMIRS], Cleanup Program Sites [SLIC], EnviroStor, EnviroStor Permitted Facilities [HWP], and Los Angeles County Site Mitigation). Of the properties representing a potential environmental concern, only one that was noted as adjoining the project site to the northeast (i.e., 21400 Madrona Avenue) is listed as a UST. However, the property status is listed as “inactive” in the database. The Phase I ESAs concluded that no off-site properties pose a potential hazard to the project site.

No evidence or indication of recognized environmental concerns (RECs) or conditions indicative of releases and threatened releases of hazardous substances on, at, in, or to the project site have been discovered except for the historical land uses of the project site. As stated previously, the proposed project is not anticipated to release hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste in significant quantities. Therefore, impacts to the public or the environment would be less than significant, and no mitigation measures would be required. e. Would the project be located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area? No Impact. Torrance Municipal Airport – Zamperini Field (Torrance Airport) is located approximately

1.5 miles south of the project site. However, the project site is located outside the Airport Influence Area (AIA) for Torrance Airport as defined in the Los Angeles County Airport Land Use Plan (ALUP).

Therefore, the project would not result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project site, and there would be no impact. f. Would the project impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Less than Significant Impact. The proposed project would not impair implementation of or physically interfere with any adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. The project would be subject to review by all pertinent City departments/divisions, including, but not limited to, Building & Safety, Fire, Engineering, and Planning. The driveways would be designed in accordance with all applicable design and safety standards required by the adopted fire, safety, and building codes. The parking lot layout would be designed to meet requirements to allow adequate access for emergency vehicles. Del Amo Circle East, which is a private street, may be partially or fully closed during construction activities. However, the project would not substantially impede public access or travel upon public rights-of-way. Public street closures would be regulated by the right-of- way permit process. Therefore, impacts to emergency response plans or emergency evacuation plans would be considered less than significant. No mitigation measures would be required. 247
4-51

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) g. Would the project expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires?
No Impact. The project site is located within a fully urbanized area. There are no wildlands adjacent or in the vicinity of the project site, and the project site is not within a State or federal responsibility area, nor is it classified as a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ) by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE). Therefore, there would be no risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires. No impact would occur, and no mitigation is required. 248

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) 4-52

4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a. Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality?

b. Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge 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 of impervious
surfaces, in a manner which would:

i. Result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site; ii. Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or offsite;

iii. Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff; or

iv. Impede or redirect flood flows?
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 management plan?

4.10.1 Impact Analysis
a. Would the project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality? Less than Significant Impact. The proposed project involves the construction of 260 residential units and associated community amenities, including open space and parking, located on a 16.37-acre project site. Pollutants of concern during construction include sediments, trash, petroleum products, concrete waste (dry and wet), sanitary waste, and chemicals. Each of these pollutants on its own or in combination with other pollutants can have a detrimental effect on water quality. During construction activities, excavated soil would be exposed, and there would be an increased potential for soil erosion and sedimentation compared to existing conditions. In addition, chemicals, liquid products, petroleum products (e.g., paints, solvents, and fuels), and concrete-related waste may be spilled or leaked and have the potential to be transported via stormwater runoff into receiving waters (i.e., Los Angeles/Long Beach Inner Harbor and the Los Angeles/Long Beach Outer Harbor [Hunsaker & Associates, 2022]).

As construction of the proposed project would disturb greater than one acre of soil, the project is subject to the requirements of a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General 249
4-53

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activities (Order WQ 2022-0057-DWQ, NPDES No. CAS000002) (Construction General Permit). The CGP requires preparation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and implementation of construction BMPs during construction activities. Construction BMPs would include, but not be limited to, Erosion Control and Sediment Control BMPs designed to minimize erosion and retain sediment on site and Good Housekeeping BMPs to prevent spills, leaks, and discharge of construction debris and waste into receiving waters. The City’s Municipal Code also requires compliance with the CGP by requiring an applicant for a grading or building permit to provide the City with proof that the Notice of Intent (NOI) to comply with the CGP has been filed and a SWPPP has been prepared.24 As specified in RCM-WQ-1, the project would obtain coverage under the Construction General Permit, including preparation of a SWPPP that will specify construction BMPs to be implemented to target pollutants of concern. Implementation of RCM-WQ-1 and compliance with the City of Torrance’s Municipal Code, would ensure construction impacts related to surface water quality standards, waste discharge requirements, and surface water quality would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.

According to the Preliminary Low Impact Development Plan (PLID) prepared for the project (Hunsaker & Associates, 2022), groundwater was not encountered during exploratory borings at depths of up to 50 feet (ft) below ground surface (bgs). Groundwater in the project vicinity is estimated at greater 80 ft bgs (Hunsaker & Associates, 2022). Excavation associated with the proposed project is anticipated to reach a depth of 12 ft bgs. Although not anticipated, as described in RCM-WQ-2, if groundwater is encountered during excavation, dewatering would be conducted in accordance with the requirements of Waste Discharge Requirements for Discharges of Groundwater from Construction and Project Dewatering to Surface Waters in Coastal Watershed of Los Angeles and Ventura Counties (Groundwater Discharge Permit), Order No. R4--2023-0429, NPDES No.

CAG994004. The construction contractor would comply with the requirements of Order No. R4- 2023-0429, NPDES No. CAG994004 for discharges of groundwater from construction activities to surface waters. This order requires water sampling, analysis, treatment (if required), and reporting of dewatering related discharges of groundwater extracted during construction prior to its release into surface waters to ensure that effluent limitations for constituents are not exceeded. As a result, groundwater dewatering during project construction would not introduce pollutants to receiving waters or violate water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. Adherence to Los Angeles County and Ventura County Waste Discharge Requirements as outlined in RCM-WQ-2 would ensure that if dewatering is required during construction, the proposed project would not degrade water quality and no mitigation is required.

Stormwater infiltration has the potential to affect groundwater quality in areas of shallow groundwater. The PLID provides details regarding the project’s stormwater quality management program, including proposed BMPs to reduce or eliminate pollutants of concern in stormwater runoff and on-site stormwater retention. As discussed above, groundwater could occur at depths below 50 ft bgs. While pollutants in stormwater are generally removed by soil through absorption as water infiltrates, as discussed in the PLID (Hunsaker & Associates, 2022), infiltration is not feasible on the project site due to the compacted nature of the underlying soils and very low infiltration

24 City of Torrance Municipal Code, Div. 4, Ch. 10, Sec. 410.1.040. 250

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) 4-54
rates. Therefore, stormwater infiltration during construction is not expected and there would be no direct path for pollutants to reach groundwater. Project construction would not violate groundwater quality standards, waste discharge requirements, or substantially degrade groundwater quality and impacts would be less than significant and no mitigation would be required.

Pollutants of concern from long-term operations include pathogens (bacteria/viruses), metals, nutrients, toxic organic compounds, pesticides/herbicides, sediments/total suspended solids, trash and debris, and oil and grease (Hunsaker & Associates, 2022). As specified in RCM-WQ-3, the Project would comply with the requirements of the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Order No. R4-2012-0175 NPDES PERMIT NO. CAS004001).25 The Los Angeles County Flood Control District, the County of Los Angeles, and, 84 incorporated cities within the coastal watersheds of Los Angeles County, including the City of Torrance, are subject to the Los Angeles County MS4 permit. The Los Angeles County MS4 permit requires permittees to lessen the water quality impacts of development through the use of smart growth practices (e.g., compact development and infill or redevelopment to direct development away from environmentally sensitive areas), minimizing impervious surface area footprint, employing Low Impact Development (LID) design principals to mimic predevelopment hydrology, maintain existing riparian buffers, minimize pollutant loading from impervious surfaces, properly select, design, and maintain LID and hydromodification control BMPs, reduce changes to pre-development hydrology, prioritize the selection of BMPs to remove storm water pollutants, reduce storm water runoff volume, and beneficially use storm water to protect water quality. Operation of the project would also be subject to the City of Torrance’s stormwater pollution control requirements.26 Both the Los Angeles County MS4 Permit and the City of Torrance Municipal Code requires planning priority projects to prepare a LID that demonstrates how the project would retain stormwater runoff on site for the stormwater quality design volume (SWQDv) defined as the runoff from: the 85th percentile 24-hour runoff event as determined from the Los Angeles County 85th percentile precipitation isoheytal map or the volume of runoff produced from a

0.75-inch, 24-hour rain event; whichever is greater. In the event 100 percent on-site retention of the SWQDv is not technically feasible, partially or fully, the LID Plan must demonstrate the infeasibility.

According to the Preliminary LID, stormwater runoff onsite will be conveyed as surface flow to the project’s backbone storm drain system, then conveyed to the existing 54-inch storm drain system at the project site’s southern boundary that leads to the Del Amo Sump Retention Basin on the south side of West Carson Street. The Del Amo Sump Retention Basin is just south of the project site and owned and operated by the City. Run-on from existing areas to the west, north, and east of the project site (i.e., Del Amo Plaza, Fashion Way and surrounding improvements, and Madrona Avenue respectively) would also be conveyed to the project’s backbone storm drain system and discharged through the 54-inch storm drain system to Del Amo Sump Retention Basin (Hunsaker & Associates 2022).

25 Los Angeles Region Waste Discharge Requirements for Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Discharges Within the Coastal Watersheds of Los Angeles County, Except Those Discharges Originating from the City of Long Beach MS4 (Order No. R4-2012-0175, as amended by State Water Board Order WQ 2015-0075 and Los Angeles Water Board Order R4-2012-0175-A01 NPDES PERMIT NO. CAS004001) 26 City of Torrance Municipal Code, Div. 4, Ch. 10, 411.1.070 251
4-55

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) According to the Preliminary LID, the proposed project will include the following site design principles, structural and non-structural controls, stormwater quality control measures to reduce and/or eliminate pollution from entering the storm drain system:
• Site planning to provide stormwater retention
• Drought tolerant landscaping to decrease water demand; • Minimize impervious surface area to reduce pollutants of concern and erosion and sediment transport;
• Storm drain stencil to discourage downstream dumping; • Outdoor trash storage/waste handling areas in order to control trash debris; • Landscape irrigation practices to reduce transport of pollutants of concern; • Building materials selection to reduce leaching of pollutants of concern; • Education of property owners to ensure understanding of downstream water quality; • Activity restrictions in accordance with the proposed projects Covenant, Conditions, and Restrictions;
• Common area landscape management to ensure erosion and sediment control; • Common area litter control to ensure good housekeeping of projects common areas; and • Street sweeping private streets to reduce infiltration of liter into water sources.

Stormwater quality control measures function to augment site design principles and source control BMPs to reduce stormwater runoff volume and potential pollutant loads in runoff to the maximum extent practicable (MEP). The Los Angeles County MS4 Permit and City Municipal Code require that all designated projects retain the SWQDv on-site using retention-based measures unless retention- based measures are determined to be infeasible. As stated previously, because of the low infiltration rates on the project site, infiltration would not take place during project implementation.

However, the proposed project proposes the use of three hydrodynamic separators (CDS units) to pre-treat project runoff (and any offsite run-on) prior to being discharged to the Del Amo Sump Retention Basin. Two CDS units will be located in the southwest corner of the property and the third CDS unit will be located at the center of the property along the western boundary. The proposed CDS units will remove trash/litter, debris, and sediment to meet the zero trash discharge requirements of the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board Basin Plan. The Del Amo Sump Retention Basin would be employed as a regional retention BMP to satisfy the project’s LID BMP requirements.
252

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) 4-56
As discussed above and specified in RCM WQ-3 and RCM WQ-4, the proposed project would comply with the Los Angeles County MS4 Permit and the requirements of the City’s Municipal Code.

Compliance with these requirements would reduce operational impacts related to surface water quality standards, waste discharge requirements, and/or degradation of water quality would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.

A majority of the project site will be impervious and the small areas that will be pervious, such as landscaped areas, have very slow infiltration rates due to the underlying highly compacted soils. In addition, the groundwater is at least 50 feet bgs. Therefore, there is no direct path for pollutants to reach groundwater. In addition, the project would be required to implement LID features to treat stormwater before it could potentially reach groundwater. Therefore, because the operation of the proposed project would not violate groundwater quality standards, waste discharge requirements, and/or degradation of groundwater quality, impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.

Regulatory Compliance Measures. The following RCMs include existing regulations that are applicable to the proposed project and are considered in the analysis of potential impacts related to hydrology and water quality. The City of Torrance considers these requirements to be mandatory; therefore, they are not considered mitigation measures.

Regulatory Compliance Measure WQ-1: Construction General Permit. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall obtain coverage
under the State Water Resources Control Board
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
General Permit for Storm Water Discharges
Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance
Activities (Order No. 2009-0009-DWQ, National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System No.

CAS000002, as amended by Orders No. 2010-0014-
DWQ and 2012-0006-DWQ) (Construction General
Permit). This shall include the submission of Permit
Registration Documents (PRDs), including a Notice
of Intent (NOI) for coverage under the permit to the
State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) via
the Stormwater Multiple Application and Report
Tracking System (SMARTs). The Applicant shall
provide the Waste Discharge Identification Number
(WDID) to the City of Torrance (City) to
demonstrate proof of coverage under the
Construction General Permit. A Stormwater
Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) shall be
prepared and implemented for the proposed
Project in compliance with the requirements of the
Construction General Permit. The SWPPP shall
identify construction best management practices
253
4-57

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) (BMPs) to be implemented to ensure that the
potential for soil erosion and sedimentation is
minimized and to control the discharge of
pollutants in stormwater runoff as a result of
construction activities. Upon completion of
construction and stabilization of the site, a Notice of Termination will be submitted via SMARTs.

Regulatory Compliance Measure WQ-2: Los Angeles County Groundwater Discharge Permit. At least 45 days prior to groundwater
dewatering activities, the City of Torrance shall
submit an NOI to the Los Angeles Regional Water
Quality Control Board (RWQCB) to obtain coverage
under the Waste Discharge Requirements for
Discharges of Groundwater from Construction and
Project Dewatering to Surface Waters in Coastal
Watershed of Los Angeles and Ventura Counties
(Groundwater Discharge Permit), Order No. R4-
2018-0125, NPDES No. CAG994004. The
construction contractor shall comply with the
requirements of Order No. R4-2018-0125, NPDES
No. CAG994004. Groundwater dewatering activities
shall comply with all applicable provisions in the
Groundwater Discharge Permit, including water
sampling, analysis, treatment (if required), and
reporting of dewatering-related discharges. Upon
completion of groundwater dewatering activities,
an NOI shall be submitted to the Los Angeles
RWQCB.

Regulatory Compliance Measure WQ-3: Los Angeles County MS4 Permit. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the City shall ensure that a final Low Impact Development (LID) Plan is prepared in
compliance with the requirements of the Waste
Discharge Requirements for Municipal Separate
Storm Sewer System (MS4) Discharges within the
Coastal Watersheds of Los Angeles County, Except
Those Discharges Originating from the City of Long
Beach MS4 (Los Angeles County MS4 Permit), Order
No. R4-2012-0175, NPDES Permit No. CAS004001,
as amended by Order Nos. WQ 2015-0075 and R4-
2012-0175-A01).

Regulatory Compliance Measure WQ-4: City of Torrance Municipal Code. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall prepare a
254

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) 4-58
Low Impact Development (LID) Plan in accordance
with Division 4 Chapter 11 Low Impact
Development Strategies of the City of Torrance
Municipal Code. The LID shall demonstrate how the
project would retain stormwater runoff on site for
the stormwater quality design volume (SWQDv)
defined as the runoff from: the 85th percentile, 24-
hour rain event as determined from the Los Angeles
County 85th percentile precipitation isoheytal map
or the volume of runoff produced from a 0.75-inch,
24-hour rain event; whichever is greater. When, as
determined by the Community Development
Department, one hundred percent (100%) on-site
retention of the SWQDv is technically infeasible,
partially or fully, the infeasibility shall be
demonstrated in the submitted LID Plan. In these
circumstances, the project site may biofiltrate one
and one-half (1.5) times the portion of the
remaining SWQDv that is not reliably retained on
site. Biofiltration BMPs must adhere to the design
specifications provided in the Los Angeles County
MS4 permit.
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?
No Impact. According to the Preliminary LID prepared for the project, groundwater was not encountered during exploratory borings up to depths of 50 ft bgs (Lennar, 2022). As discussed above, groundwater in the project’s vicinity is estimated at greater 80 ft bgs. Excavation associated with the proposed project is anticipated to reach a depth of 12 ft. Therefore, groundwater is not anticipated to be encountered during construction. Neither groundwater dewatering nor groundwater extraction would be required during project construction. Construction impacts related to depletion of groundwater supplies or interference with groundwater recharge would be less than significant, and no mitigation would be required.

There is currently one operating restaurant, a former auto repair facility, and surface parking on the project site. According to the Preliminary LID, development of the project would decrease impervious surface area on the project site by approximately 1.5 acres, which would theoretically allow for an increase in opportunities for infiltration and groundwater recharge. However, infiltration is not feasible onsite because the underlying soils are compacted, resulting in very low infiltration rates. Furthermore, project operations would not require groundwater extraction.

Therefore, the proposed project would have no impact related to the depletion of groundwater supplies or interference with groundwater recharge, and no mitigation would be required. 255
4-59

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) 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; Less than Significant Impact. During construction activities the project site would be disturbed.

Soil would be exposed, and drainage patterns would be temporarily altered during grading and other construction. Accordingly, there would be an increased potential for soil erosion and siltation compared to existing conditions. During a storm event, soil erosion and siltation could occur at an accelerated rate. As discussed above in Response (a), the Construction General Permit requires the preparation of a SWPPP to identify construction BMPs to be implemented as part of the proposed project to reduce impacts on water quality during construction, including those impacts associated with soil erosion and siltation. As specified in RCM-WQ-1, above, and in accordance with the Municipal Code, the proposed project would comply with the requirements of the Construction General Permit. Compliance with the requirements of the Municipal Code, the Construction General Permit, and implementation of the RCM-WQ-1 construction BMPs would limit construction impacts related to on- or off-site erosion or siltation to less than significant, and no mitigation is required.

The project site is developed with one operating restaurant, a former auto repair facility, and a surface parking lot. As discussed above, the project would decrease impervious surface area on the project site by approximately 1.5 acres, which would decrease stormwater runoff and subsequentially decrease erosion and siltation. As discussed in the Drainage Concept/Hydrology Report (see Appendix HYDRO), the proposed project is anticipated to decrease overall flows (Hunsaker & Associates 2022). Additionally, as specified in RCM-WQ-3 and RCM-WQ-4, in compliance with the Los Angeles County MS4 Permit requirements and the City’s Municipal Code, the CDS units would remove debris and sediment prior to stormwater runoff entering the project’s storm drain system. The proposed on-site storm drain facilities would connect to the existing City system located south of project site. Although stormwater runoff would eventually be discharged to receiving waters via the existing storm drain system, there is minimal potential for downstream erosion or siltation to occur because the receiving waters are not subject to hydromodification. Therefore, a less than significant impact related to off-site erosion or siltation would occur, and no mitigation is required.
ii. Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or offsite;
Less than Significant Impact. During construction activities, the proposed project would not permanently alter the existing drainage pattern on site. Stormwater runoff would continue to be conveyed via the existing drainage infrastructure and therefore construction activities would not increase the rate or amount of surface runoff and would not result in flooding on or off site.

With adherence to RCM-WQ-1, construction impacts related to altering the existing drainage pattern of the site or area or increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner that would result in flooding onsite or offsite would be less than significant and no mitigation is required.
256

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) 4-60
The project site is developed with a commercial building, a restaurant use, and a surface parking lot. As stated in Response (c)(i) above, the development of the proposed project would decrease impervious surface area by approximately 1.5 acres, which would decrease the rate and volume of stormwater runoff. RCM-WQ-3 requires compliance with the Los Angeles County MS4 Permit and RCM-WQ-4 requires compliance with the City Municipal Code, which requires planning priority projects to retain stormwater runoff on site for the SWQDv defined as the runoff from the 0.75-inch, 24-hour rain event or the 85th percentile, 24-hour rain event as determined from the Los Angeles County 85th percentile precipitation isoheytal map (Hunsaker & Associates, 2022). The Preliminary LID prepared for the proposed project determined that the proposed project SWQDv would comply with the Los Angeles County MS4 Permit and the City’s Municipal Code and therefore would not substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff.

Additionally, the proposed project would rely on existing drainage infrastructure and match existing drainage patterns onsite. The proposed project would include two new connections to existing 54-inch storm drain systems along Del Amo Circle East and West Carson Street at the southwest corner of the project. These new connections would be sized appropriately to accommodate proposed runoff volume and flows. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in significant impacts on on-site or off-site flooding. The Drainage Concept/Hydrology Report concluded that the existing 54-inch storm drain has the capacity to convey the 50-year storm flow rate (Hunsaker & Associates, 2022). All new proposed storm drainpipes and structures will be sized during the final design to convey the proposed peak flows.

The proposed drainage facilities and BMPs needed to accommodate stormwater runoff would also be appropriately sized so that on-site flooding would not occur. The Drainage Concept/Hydrology Report prepared for the proposed project concluded that the proposed project would have no adverse impacts on downstream drainage systems (Hunsaker & Associates, 2022). Finally, the proposed project would not alter the course of a stream or river.

With the implementation of LID BMPs and RCM-WQ-2, impacts related to on- or off-site flooding from an increase in surface runoff would be less than significant and no mitigation is required.
iii. Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff; or Less than Significant Impact. As discussed in Response (a), pollutants of concern during construction include sediments, trash, petroleum products, concrete waste (dry and wet), sanitary waste, and chemicals. Each of these pollutants on its own or in combination with other pollutants can have a detrimental effect on water quality. Drainage patterns would be temporarily altered during grading and other construction activities, and construction-related pollutants could be spilled, leaked, or transported via storm runoff into adjacent drainages and downstream receiving waters. However, as specified in RCM-WQ-1, the proposed project would be required to comply with the requirements set forth by the Construction General Permit and SWPPP, which would specify BMPs to be implemented to control the discharge of pollutants in stormwater runoff as a result of construction activities.

The operation of the proposed project has the potential to introduce pollutants to the storm drain system from the proposed on-site uses. As discussed in Response (a), expected pollutants 257
4-61

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) of concern from long-term operations include pathogens (bacteria/viruses), metals, nutrients, toxic organic compounds, pesticides/herbicides, sediments/total suspended solids, trash and debris, and oil and grease. As required by RCM-WQ-3 and RCM-WQ-4, the LID would require the implementation of operational BMPs to reduce pollutants of concern in stormwater runoff.

With implementation of operational BMPs, no substantial additional sources of polluted runoff would be discharged to the storm drain system.

Development of the proposed project would decrease impervious surface area on the project site by a total of approximately 1.5 acres, which would decrease stormwater runoff generated during project operation. The proposed project would install new storm drains and hydrodynamic separators (CDS units). The proposed storm drainage system would connect to an existing 54-inch storm drain which will convey stormwater to Del Amo Sump Retention Basin south of the project site. As discussed in the Drainage Concept/Hydrology Report (see Appendix HYDRO), on-site drainage facilities would be adequately sized to convey and reduce runoff, such that on-site and off-site drainage facility capacity would not be exceeded during a design storm.

Therefore, the proposed project would not result in an exceedance of planned or existing stormwater drainage systems.

For the reasons discussed above, with adherence to measures RCM-WQ-1 RCM-WQ-3, and RCM-WQ-4, project impacts associated with the introduction of substantial sources of polluted runoff or additional runoff would be less than significant and would not result in an exceedance in capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems. No mitigation would be required.
iv. Impede or redirect flood flows?
Less than Significant Impact. As previously discussed, while the drainage patterns would be temporarily altered during grading and other construction, the proposed project would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the project site, nor would it alter the course of a stream or river through the addition of impervious surfaces in a manner that would impede or redirect flood flows. Furthermore, the project site is not located within a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) designated 100-year floodplain. According to the FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) No. 06037C1928F, the project site is located within Zone X. Zone X is designated as an area determined to be outside the 0.2% annual chance floodplain (500-year floodplain).27 As the project would not place improvements and structures directly within a 100- year floodplain, the project would not impede or redirect flood flows. Therefore, impacts related to impeding or redirecting of flood flows would be less than significant and no mitigation would be required.

27 Federal Emergency Management Agency, Flood Insurance Rate Map # 06037C1928F, < https://msc.fema. gov/portal/search?AddressQuery=torrance%2C%20ca> (accessed June 21, 2024). 258

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) 4-62
d. In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, would the project risk release of pollutants due to project inundation?
Less than Significant Impact. Tsunamis are ocean waves generated by tectonic displacement of the seafloor associated with shallow earthquakes, seafloor landslides, rock falls, and exploding volcanic islands. Tsunamis can have wavelengths of up to 120 miles and travel as fast as 500 miles per hour (mph) across hundreds of miles of deep ocean. Upon reaching shallow coastal waters, the waves can reach up to 50 ft in height, causing great devastation to near-shore structures. The project site is located approximately 2.6 miles from the Pacific Ocean shoreline. According to the California Department of Conservation’s Los Angeles County Tsunami Hazard Areas Map, the project site is located outside of the hazard area.28 Therefore, the project site is not subject to inundation from tsunamis, and there is no risk of release of pollutants due to inundation associated with tsunami.

Seiching occurs when seismic ground shaking induces standing waves (seiches) inside water retention facilities (e.g., reservoirs and lakes). Such waves can cause retention structures to fail and flood downstream properties. The closest water retention facilities to the project site are the Ocean Avenue Basin located approximately 2,000 ft southwest of the project site and the Amie Basin located approximately 1 mile northwest of the project site. These water retention facilities are quite small and do not pose a risk of inundation from seiche. Therefore, the project site is not subject to inundation from seiche waves, and there is no risk of release of pollutants due to inundation from seiche.

As discussed in Response (c)(iv), the project site is located within Zone X (designated as an area determined to be outside the 0.2% annual or 500-year floodplain). The project would introduce new residential land uses on the project site, which would change potential on-site pollutants as compared to existing conditions. However, as discussed in Response (a), BMPs would be implemented to target and reduce pollutants of concern on the project site. In addition, as discussed above in Section 3.9, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, hazardous substances associated with residential uses would be limited in both amount and use. The materials used onsite would be contained, stored, and used in accordance with manufacturers’ instructions and handled in compliance with applicable standards and regulations. There are no levees within the vicinity of the project site and as discussed above there are no water bodies within the vicinity of the project site that would pose a risk of flooding. Furthermore, because BMPs would reduce the introduction of pollutants on the site and any hazardous materials used onsite would be properly stored and contained, there would be a low potential for pollutants to be released from the project site in the unlikely event of inundation of the project site. Therefore, impacts related to release of pollutants in the event of inundation from flooding would be less than significant. No mitigation is required. e. Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
No Impact. The project is within the jurisdiction of the Los Angeles RWQCB. In September 2014, the Los Angeles RWQCB adopted the Basin Plan for the Coastal Watersheds of Los Angeles and Ventura

28 California Department of Conservation, Tsunami Hazard Area Map <https://www.conservation.ca.gov/ cgs/tsunami/maps/los-angeles> (accessed June 21, 2024). 259
4-63

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) Counties (Basin Plan)29 which designates beneficial uses for all surface and groundwater within its jurisdiction and establishes the water quality objectives and standards necessary to protect those beneficial uses. As summarized below, the project would comply with the applicable NPDES permits and would implement construction and operational BMPs to reduce pollutants of concern in stormwater runoff.

As discussed in Response (a), during construction activities, excavated soil would be exposed, and there would be an increased potential for soil erosion and sedimentation compared to existing conditions. In addition, chemicals, liquid products, petroleum products (e.g., paints, solvents, and fuels), and concrete-related waste may be spilled or leaked and have the potential to be transported via stormwater runoff into receiving waters. As specified in RCM-WQ-1, the proposed Project would be required to comply with the requirements set forth by the CGP, which requires the preparation of a SWPPP and implementation of construction BMPs to control stormwater runoff and discharge of pollutants.

As discussed in Response (a), the primary pollutants of concern during project operations are pathogens (bacteria/viruses), metals, nutrients, toxic organic compounds, pesticides/herbicides, sediments/total suspended solids, trash and debris, and oil and grease. As stated in RCM-WQ-3, a final LID would be prepared for the project in compliance with the Los Angeles County MS4 Permit.

The Final LID would detail the Site Design, Source Control, and/or Treatment Control BMPs that would be implemented to treat stormwater runoff and reduce impacts to water quality during operation. The proposed BMPs would capture and treat stormwater runoff and reduce pollutants of concern in stormwater runoff.

The proposed project would comply with the applicable NPDES permits, which require the preparation of a SWPPP, preparation of a Final LID, and implementation of construction and operational BMPs to reduce pollutants of concern in stormwater runoff. As such, the project would not result in water quality impacts that would conflict with the LARWQCB Basin Plan. Impacts related to conflict with a water quality control plan would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.

The State of California enacted the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) in September 2014. SGMA requires governments and water agencies of high- and medium-priority basins to halt overdraft of groundwater basins. SGMA requires the formation of local Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (GSAs), which are required to adopt Groundwater Sustainability Plans to manage the sustainability of the groundwater basins. The project site is located within the West Coast Subbasin of the Coastal Plain of Los Angeles Groundwater Basin, which is managed by the California Department of Water Resources. The West Coast Subbasin is identified by the Department of Water Resources as a very low/low-priority basin; therefore, development of a Groundwater Sustainability Plan is not required. Because there is no adopted Groundwater Sustainability Plan applicable to the groundwater basin within the project site, the project would not

29 California Water Boards, Los Angeles Region, LARWQCB Basin Plan, Water Quality Control Plan: Los Angeles Region Basin Plan for the Coastal Watersheds of Los Angeles and Ventura Counties <https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/losangeles/water_issues/programs/basin_plan/ > (accessed June 21, 2024).
260

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) 4-64
conflict with or obstruct the implementation of a sustainable groundwater management plan. As discussed in Responses (a) and (b), the proposed project would have a less than significant impact to groundwater quality, interfere with groundwater recharge, or decrease groundwater supplies.

Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur related to conflict with or obstruction of water quality control plans or sustainable groundwater management plans, and no mitigation is required. 261
4-65

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24)

4.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
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 an environmental effect?

4.11.1 Impact Analysis
a. Would the project physically divide an established community? No Impact. The proposed project is not expected to divide an established community because the project will redevelop a site that is currently occupied by commercial uses and is part of the larger Del Amo Fashion Center. The project site is currently zoned within the Del Amo Business Sub-District One (H-DA1) under the Hawthorne Boulevard Corridor Specific Plan. Under the H-DA1 designation, mixed-use projects including residential uses are allowed (with a CUP). The proposed project would not place any structures in an established community that would physically divide that community and thereby prevent interaction between members of the community. The project would be developed within the confines of the project site and would not create a physical barrier. Therefore, the project will not physically divide an established community and the project would have no impact, and no mitigation measures would be required.
b. Would the project cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
Less than Significant Impact. As mentioned previously, the project site is currently zoned H-DA1 under the Hawthorne Boulevard Corridor Specific Plan, which allows mixed-use projects, including those with residential uses. Therefore, the project's proposed use is permitted in the H-DA1 zone. In addition, the City’s General Plan Land Use Map designates the project site as Commercial Center (C- CTR), which is consistent with the project site’s current uses containing office buildings and a restaurant. However, in order to allow the proposed project’s residential uses as part of a mixed-use project, a CUP would be required when considered with the adjacent retail uses (Del Amo Fashion Center). Approval of the CUP would ensure that the project is consistent with the City’s zoning designation, the City’s General Plan land use designation, and the Hawthorne Boulevard Corridor Specific Plan.

Therefore, with approval of the CUP, the proposed project would not conflict with any land use plan, policy or regulation. Therefore, impacts are considered less than significant, and no mitigation measures would be required.
262

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) 4-66

4.12 MINERAL RESOURCES

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state?

b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan?

4.12.1 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?
No Impact. The Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA) enacted by California Legislature in 1975 provides guidelines to assist with the classification and designation of mineral lands. These areas were designated under the basis of several geologic factors but do not give regard to existing land uses and ownership. These Mineral Resource Zones (MRZs) are divided into the following four categories:
• MRZ-1: An area where adequate information indicates that no significant mineral deposits are present, or where it is judged that little likelihood exists for their presence. • MRZ-2: An area where adequate information indicates that significant mineral deposits are present, or where it is judged that a high likelihood exists for their presence. • MRZ-3: An area containing mineral deposits of which their significance cannot be properly evaluated.
• MRZ-4: An area where information is not adequate enough to be able to assign to any other MRZ zone.

Of these four categories, lands classified as MRZ-2 are of the greatest importance. Such areas are underlain by demonstrated mineral resources or are located where geologic data indicate that significant measured or indicated resources are present. MRZ-2 areas are designated by the State of California Mining and Geology Board as being “regionally significant.” Such designations require that a lead agency’s land use decisions involving designated areas are to be made in accordance with its mineral resource management policies and that it considers the importance of the mineral resource to the region or the State as a whole, not just to the lead agency’s jurisdiction.

According to the Community Resources Element of the City of Torrance General Plan (2010), the project site is designated as MRZ-3, indicating that the significance of mineral deposits cannot be determined from available data. The majority of land within the City is classified as MRZ-1 and MRZ- 263
4-67

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24)

3. In addition, there are no known mineral resources in close proximity to the project site.

Therefore, no impacts related to the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and to the residents of the State would result from project implementation, and no mitigation is required.
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? No Impact. As stated previously, the project site is not part of an MRZ or recovery area designated in the City’s General Plan or other land use plan. Therefore, no impact would occur, and no mitigation is required.
264

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) 4-68

4.13 NOISE

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project result in:
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 groundborne vibration or
groundborne 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 2 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?

4.13.1 Impact Analysis
a. Would the project result in 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? Less than Significant Impact. Noise impacts can be described in three categories. The first is audible impacts that refer to increases in noise levels noticeable to humans. Audible increases in noise levels generally refer to a change of 3 dBA or greater, because, as described earlier, this level of noise change has been found to be barely perceptible in exterior environments. The second category, potentially audible, refers to a change in the noise level between 1 and 3 dBA. This range of noise levels has been found to be noticeable only in laboratory environments. The last category is changes in noise level of less than 1 dBA that are inaudible to the human ear. A change in noise level of at least 5 dBA would be required before any noticeable change in human response would be expected and a 10 dBA change is subjectively heard as approximately a doubling in loudness and can cause an adverse response. Only audible changes in existing ambient or background noise levels are considered potentially significant.

Short-Term Construction Noise Impacts. Short-term noise impacts would be associated with demolition of the existing structures, excavation, grading, and construction of the proposed structures. Construction-related short-term noise levels would be higher than existing ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project site at the present time but would no longer occur once construction of the proposed project is completed.

Two types of short-term noise impacts could occur during construction of the proposed project.

The first type involves construction crew commutes and the transport of construction equipment and materials to the site, which would incrementally increase noise levels on roads leading to the site. The second type of short-term noise impact is related to noise generated during demolition, excavation, grading, and construction on the project site. 265
4-69

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) • Construction Traffic: Using information from the assumptions applied in the CalEEMod emissions modeling for the proposed project (refer to Section 4.3, Air Quality, and Section

4.7, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, for additional information), the total number of these construction related trips is estimated to be 622 vehicles per day. Although there would be a relatively high single-event noise exposure potential causing intermittent noise nuisance (passing trucks at 50 ft would generate up to a maximum of 84 dBA), the effect on longer- term (hourly or daily) ambient noise levels would be small when compared to existing ADT volumes on Madrona Boulevard, West Carson Street, Fashion Way, and Del Amo Circle East, respectively, as provided by the project’s Local Circulation Analysis. Because construction- related vehicle trips would not approach the daily traffic volumes for Madrona Boulevard, West Carson Street, Fashion Way, and Del Amo Circle East, traffic noise would not increase by 3 dBA. A noise level increase of less than 3 dBA would not be perceptible to the human ear in an outdoor environment. Therefore, short-term, construction-related impacts associated with worker commute and equipment transport to the project site would be less than significant.
• Construction Activities: Short-term noise impacts would occur during demolition, grading, paving, and site preparation activities associated with future development of the project site. Construction is performed in discrete steps, or phases, each with its own mix of equipment and, consequently, its own noise characteristics. These various sequential phases would change the character of the noise generated on site. Therefore, the noise levels vary as construction progresses. Despite the variety in the type and size of construction equipment, similarities in the dominant noise sources and patterns of operation allow construction-related noise ranges to be categorized by work phase.

Table NOI-1 lists typical construction equipment noise levels (Lmax) recommended for noise impact assessments, based on a distance of 50 feet between the equipment and a noise receptor, obtained from the Federal Highway Administration Roadway Construction Noise Model. Construction-related short-term noise levels would no longer occur once construction of the project is completed.

Table NOI-1 lists maximum noise levels recommended for noise impact assessments for typical construction equipment, based on a distance of 50 feet between the equipment and a noise receptor. Typical maximum noise levels range up to 90 dBA Lmax at 50 feet during the noisiest construction phases. The site preparation and grading phases, including excavation and grading of the site, tend to generate the highest noise levels because earthmoving machinery is the noisiest construction equipment. Earthmoving equipment includes excavating machinery such as backfillers, bulldozers, draglines, and front loaders. Earthmoving and compacting equipment includes compactors, scrapers, and graders. Typical operating cycles for these types of construction equipment may involve 1 or 2 minutes of full-power operation followed by 3 or 4 minutes at lower power settings.
266

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) 4-70
Table NOI-1: Typical Construction Equipment Noise Levels Equipment Description Acoustical Usage Factor (%) Maximum Noise Level (Lmax) at 50 Feet Backhoes 40 80
Compactor (ground) 20 80
Compressor 40 80
Cranes 16 85
Dozers 40 85
Dump Trucks 40 84
Excavators 40 85
Flat Bed Trucks 40 84
Forklift 20 85
Front-end Loaders 40 80
Graders 40 85
Impact Pile Drivers 20 95
Jackhammers 20 85
Pick-up Truck 40 55
Pneumatic Tools 50 85
Pumps 50 77
Rock Drills 20 85
Rollers 20 85
Scrapers 40 85
Tractors 40 84
Welder 40 73
Source: Roadway Construction Noise Model (Federal Highway Administration 2006).

Note: Noise levels reported in this table are rounded to the nearest whole number.

Lmax = maximum instantaneous sound level

As presented below, Table NOI-2 shows the construction phases, the expected duration of each phase, the equipment expected to be used during each phase, the composite noise levels of the equipment at 50 ft, the distance of the nearest residential building from the average location of construction activities (a distance of 365 ft), and noise levels expected during each phase of construction for the proposed project. These noise level projections do not take into account intervening topography or barriers. Attachment NOI provides construction noise calculations.

Table NOI-2 Construction Noise Levels by Phase
Phase Duration
(days) Equipment
Composite Noise
Level at 50 ft
(dBA Leq)
Distance to
Sensitive
Receptor (ft)1
Noise Level at
Receptor
(dBA Leq)
Demolition 20 3 Concrete/Industrial Saw, 3
Excavators, 2 Dozers 93 365 72
Site Preparation 10 3 Dozers, 4 Tractors/Loaders/
Backhoes 91 365 69
Grading 305
2 Excavator, 1 Grader, 1 Dozer, 2
Scrapers, 2 Tractors/Loaders/
Backhoes
92 365 72
Building
Construction 515
1 Crane, 3 Forklifts, 1 Generator Set,
3 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes, 1
Welder
90 365 70
267
4-71

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) Table NOI-2 Construction Noise Levels by Phase
Phase Duration
(days) Equipment
Composite Noise
Level at 50 ft
(dBA Leq)
Distance to
Sensitive
Receptor (ft)1
Noise Level at
Receptor
(dBA Leq)
Paving 80 2 Pavers, 2 Paving Equipment, 2
Rollers 91 365 71
Architectural
Coating 20 1 Compressor 76 365 59
Source: Compiled by LSA (2022).
1 Distances are from the average location of construction activity for each phase, center of project site. Residential zoned properties would be approximately 105 ft of the edge of construction activity dBA Leq = average A-weighted hourly noise level
ft = foot/feet

It is expected that average noise levels during construction at the nearest sensitive receptors, the single-family homes to the east, would approach 72 dBA Leq during the grading phase, which would take place for a duration of approximately 61 weeks, at different locations throughout the site. Average noise levels during other construction phases would range from 59 dBA Leq to 72 dBA Leq. Compliance with the allowed hours in the City’s Noise Ordinance would ensure that construction noise does not disturb residents during typical sleeping hours or during hours when ambient noise levels are likely to be lower (i.e., at night). Although construction noise would be higher than the ambient noise in the vicinity of the project site, it would cease to occur once project construction is completed. Additionally, with the incorporation of Regulatory Compliance Measure NOI-1, all feasible and reasonable measures to reduce construction noise would be implemented and a less than significant impact would occur.

Long-Term Off-Site Construction Noise Impacts. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model (FHWA RD-77-108) was used to evaluate traffic-related noise conditions in the vicinity of the project site. This model requires various parameters, including traffic volumes, vehicle mix, vehicle speed, and roadway geometry to compute typical equivalent noise levels during daytime, evening, and nighttime hours. The resultant noise levels are weighted and summed over 24-hour periods to determine the Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) values. The existing and existing plus project traffic volumes in the project area were obtained from the traffic analysis prepared for the proposed project. These noise levels represent worst-case scenarios, which assume that no shielding is provided between the traffic and the location where the noise contours are drawn. The FHWA Noise Model Printouts are provided in Appendix NOI.

The results indicate that the increase in noise associated with project-related traffic would be very small, ranging from 0.0 to 0.6 dBA along the segments analyzed. These noise level increases are not perceptible by the human ear; therefore, off-site traffic noise impacts would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.

Long-Term Off-Site Stationary Noise Impacts. The proposed project would have rooftop heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) equipment. For the proposed buildings along Madrona Avenue near the existing residences to the east, it is anticipated that the HVAC 268

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) 4-72
equipment would be located on the rooftops behind a parapet. The proposed project would have up to 54 rooftop HVAC units within 500 ft from the nearest residence to the east of the project site. The units would vary in distance from 170 ft to 430 ft from the nearest sensitive uses. To be conservative, it was assumed that all units would be in operation simultaneously.

Based on reference noise level measurements from the manufacturer Trane, mechanical ventilation equipment is likely to approach 66.6 dBA Leq at a distance of 5 ft. HVAC operations would result in a composite level of 45.6 dBA Leq at the nearest sensitive receptor to the east.

This noise level would be well below the City’s exterior daytime and nighttime noise levels standards of 55 dBA Leq and 50 dBA Leq, respectively, for Region 4. Additionally, this level would be below the existing ambient hourly noise levels measured at LT-2, which range from 53.4 to

67.3 dBA Leq, and would therefore satisfy Section 46.2.6 of the City’s Municipal Code which allows a 5 dBA increase when ambient levels exceed the established noise criteria.

Additionally, with the incorporation of Regulatory Compliance Measure RCM-NOI-2, the noise levels generated by the proposed project’s HVAC equipment would be less than significant and no mitigation is required.

As RCM-NOI-1 and 2 are regulatory requirements; they are not considered mitigation measures and are outlined below for ease of access.

Regulatory Compliance Measure NOI-1: Construction Noise and Vibration. Prior to issuance of building permits, the City of Torrance (City)
Director of Community Development Department,
or designee, shall verify that grading and
construction plans include the following
requirements:
• Ensure that the greatest distance between
noise sources and sensitive receptors during
construction activities has been achieved.
• Construction equipment, fixed or mobile, shall
be equipped with properly operating and
maintained noise mufflers consistent with
manufacturers’ standards.
• Construction staging areas shall be located
away from off site sensitive uses during the
later phases of project development.
• The construction contractor shall place all
stationary construction equipment so that
emitted noise is directed away from sensitive
receptors nearest the project site whenever
feasible.
269
4-73

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) • The construction contractor shall use on-site
electrical sources to power equipment rather
than diesel generators where feasible.
• All residential units located within 300 ft of the
construction site shall be sent a notice
regarding the construction schedule. A sign,
legible at a distance of 50 ft, shall also be
posted at the construction site. All notices and
the signs shall indicate the dates and duration
of construction activities, as well as provide a
telephone number for the “noise disturbance
coordinator.”
• A “noise disturbance coordinator” shall be
established. The disturbance coordinator shall
be responsible for responding to any local
complaints about construction noise. The
disturbance coordinator shall determine the
cause of the noise complaint (e.g., starting too
early, bad muffler, etc.) and shall be required to
implement reasonable measures to reduce
noise levels. All notices that are sent to
residential units within 300 ft of the
construction site and all signs posted at the
construction site shall list the telephone
number for the disturbance coordinator.

Regulatory Compliance Measure NOI-2: HVAC Equipment. Prior to issuance of construction permits, the City of Torrance Director of Community
Development, or designee, shall verify that that the
approved plans indicate that mechanical equipment
(e.g., heating, ventilation, and air conditioning
[HVAC]) shall have a sound rating of less than 66.5
dBA when measured at 5 ft, or shall be structurally
insulated to assure compliance with the City Noise
Ordinance.
270

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) 4-74
b. Would the project result in generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
Less than Significant Impact. Construction operations can generate varying degrees of ground vibration depending on the construction procedures and the construction equipment used. The operation of construction equipment generates vibrations that spread through the ground and diminish in amplitude with distance from the source. The effect on buildings located in the vicinity of the construction site often varies depending on soil type, ground strata, and construction characteristics of the receptor buildings. The results from vibration can range from no perceptible effects at the lowest vibration levels to low rumbling sounds and perceptible vibration at moderate levels, to slight damage at the highest levels. Ground-borne vibration from construction activities rarely reaches the levels that damage structures. As described above, the FTA has published standard vibration velocities for construction equipment operations.

Table NOI-3 shows the PPV values at 25 ft from the construction vibration source. Bulldozers and other heavy-tracked construction equipment (except for pile drivers and vibratory rollers) generate approximately 0.089 in/sec PPV of ground-borne vibration when measured at 25 ft, based on the FTA Manual. The greatest levels of vibration are anticipated to occur during the site preparation phase, which is expected to use a bulldozer and a loaded truck. All other phases are expected to result in lower vibration levels. The distance to the nearest buildings for vibration impact analysis is measured between the nearest off-site buildings and the project site boundary (assuming the construction equipment would be used at or near the project site boundary) because vibration impacts occur normally within the buildings.

Table NOI-3: Vibration Source Amplitudes for
Construction Equipment
Equipment Reference PPV/LV at 25 ft
PPV (in/sec) LV (VdB)1
Pile Driver (Impact), Typical 0.644 104
Pile Driver (Sonic), Typical 0.170 93
Vibratory Roller 0.210 94
Hoe Ram 0.089 87
Large Bulldozer2 0.089 87
Caisson Drilling 0.089 87
Loaded Trucks 0.076 86
Jackhammer 0.035 79
Small Bulldozer 0.003 58
Sources: FTA Noise and Vibration Manual (FTA 2018).
1 RMS vibration velocity in decibels (VdB) is 1 µin/sec. 2 Equipment shown in bold is expected to be used on site. µin/sec = micro-inches per second
ft = feet
FTA = Federal Transit Administration
in/sec = inches per second
LV = velocity in decibels
PPV = peak particle velocity
RMS = root-mean-square
VdB = vibration velocity decibels

271
4-75

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) Table NOI-4 shows the vibration levels at the closest residential, school, and commercial buildings from each type of construction equipment. Other buildings in the vicinity of the project site are located further away and would experience lower vibration levels. As shown in Table 4.13.M, vibration levels generated during project construction would not result in a community annoyance because vibration levels would not exceed the FTA Manual community annoyance threshold of 84 VdB for commercial uses and 78 VdB for residences during daytime hours. In addition, vibration levels would not result in building damage because vibration levels would not exceed the FTA Manual damage threshold of 0.2 PPV [inch/sec] and nearby buildings were observed to be constructed of non-engineered timber and masonry. Therefore, ground-borne vibration and ground- borne noise levels generated by project construction activities would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.

Table NOI-4: Construction Vibration Levels
Land Use Direction Equipment/
Reference
Vibration
Level (VdB)
Reference
Vibration
Level
(PPV)
Reference
Vibration
Distance
(ft)
Distance
(ft)
Maximum
Vibration
Level
(VdB)
Maximum
Vibration
Level
(PPV)
Commercial North Large Bulldozers 87 0.089 25 100 69 0.011 Loaded Trucks 86 0.076 25 100 68 0.010
School East Large Bulldozers 87 0.089 25 145 64 0.006
Loaded Trucks 86 0.076 25 145 63 0.005
Residential East Large Bulldozers 87 0.089 25 125 66 0.008 Loaded Trucks 86 0.076 25 125 65 0.007
Commercial
(Gas Station) Southeast Large Bulldozers 87 0.089 25 260 56 0.003 Loaded Trucks 86 0.076 25 260 55 0.002
Commercial South Large Bulldozers 87 0.089 25 125 66 0.008 Loaded Trucks 86 0.076 25 125 65 0.007
Commercial West Large Bulldozers 87 0.089 25 75 73 0.017 Loaded Trucks 86 0.076 25 75 72 0.015
Source: Compiled by LSA Associates, Inc. (2022).

Note: The FTA-recommended building damage threshold is 0.2 PPV [inch/sec] at the receiving structure or building.

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 2 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? No Impact. The Los Angeles International Airport, Torrance Municipal Airport, Hawthorne Municipal Airport, Compton/Woodley Airport, and Long Beach Airport are located 7.5 miles (mi) north, 1.7 mi south, 6.1 mi north, 6.8 mi northeast, and 10.5 mi east of the project site, respectively. Based on the Los Angeles County Airport Land Use Plan (ALUC 2004), the project site is outside the 65 dBA CNEL and 70 dBA CNEL noise contours as well as outside the planning boundary/influence area for all of these airports. The project site is not in the vicinity of a private airstrip. Therefore, the project would have no impact related to public airports are anticipated, and no mitigation is required. 272

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) 4-76

4.14 POPULATION AND HOUSING

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a. Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?

b. Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?

4.14.1 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)?
Less than Significant Impact. The proposed project would include the total development of 260 market-rate residential dwelling units. According to the California Department of Finance’s City/County Population and Housing Estimates, the City had an average household size of 2.42 persons per household as of January 2024.30 Based on the average household size (2.42 persons per household) and the new residential dwelling units proposed as part of the project (260 units), the project is estimated to add approximately 629 new residents with implementation of the proposed project. The addition of 629 new residents would represent approximately 0.44 percent of the City’s 2024 population of 142,91031, which can cumulatively be considered a less than significant increase.

The anticipated population growth at the project site is well within the growth forecast that was identified in the City of Torrance 2021-2029 Housing Element update. The population of the City of Torrance is forecast to increase to 159,800 residents in 2040.

The 260 market-rate residential units included in the proposed project would help the City meet the need for above-moderate-income units included in SCAG’s 6th Cycle Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) allocation. Because there is a need for additional housing over SCAG projections and the City is required by State law (Government Code Section 65580, et seq.) to plan for its fair share of the projected housing construction needs in the region, the population growth resulting from the proposed project would not constitute substantial unplanned population growth in the area.

30 California Department of Finance. Table E-1: Cities, Counties, and the State Population and Housing Estimates with Annual Percentage Change – January 1, 2023 and 2024. Website: https://dof.ca.gov/wp- content/uploads/sites/352/Forecasting/Demographics/Documents/E -1_2024_InternetVersion.xlsx.

Accessed June 7, 2024.
31 Ibid.
273
4-77

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) Additionally, the project site is bordered on all sides by urban uses, including single-family residential, educational, and commercial uses. The project does not propose to expand any surrounding utility infrastructure in the vicinity of the project site. Therefore, the proposed project would not directly or indirectly induce population growth through the extension of roads or other infrastructure. Moreover, the project applicant is required to pay development impact fees and school district fees to offset the incremental increase in the demand for public services. Accordingly, potential impacts related to substantial inducement of population growth, either directly or indirectly, would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required. b. Would the project displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
No Impact. In its existing condition, the project site is developed with a commercial building and a separate currently operating restaurant. No housing currently exists on the project site, and implementation of the proposed project would not displace any housing or associated populations.

Instead, the proposed project intends to provide the city with an additional 260 housing units, which, as discussed above in 4.14.1(a), would add approximately 629 residents to the City’s population. Therefore, there would be no impact related to the displacement of substantial numbers of existing people or housing. No mitigation is required. 274

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) 4-78

4.15 PUBLIC SERVICES

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a. Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable
service ratios, response times or other performance
objectives for any of the public services:

i. Fire protection?
ii. Police protection?
iii. Schools?
iv. Parks?
v. Other public facilities?

4.15.1 Impact Analysis
a. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services:
(i). Fire protection?
Less than Significant Impact. The Torrance Fire Department (TFD) is an Insurance Services Office (ISO) Class 1 all-risk public safety organization responsible for protecting, serving, and improving the quality of life in Torrance. The TFD’s emergency response resources include seven engine companies, two truck companies, five paramedic rescue units, a hazardous materials unit, Urban Search & Rescue, a multi-casualty unit, an air & light unit, and a Platoon Commander serving as the Emergency Scene Manager. The TFD currently employs 144 sworn and 50.5 non-sworn civilian employees for a total of 194.5 positions in the department.32 In 2022, the TFD responded to a total of 16,672 service calls.33
There are six fire stations in Torrance. Fire Station No. 6, which is approximately 0.5 mile west of the project site, would be the first to the project in the event of an emergency and would thus be designated as the “first-in” station. Fire Station No. 6 houses one engine company, one ladder truck company, one paramedic unit, and one air & light unit. Engine company personnel

32 Torrance Fire Department (a). 2023-2028 Strategic Plan. 2023. Website: https://www.torranceca.gov/ home/showpublisheddocument/82346/638204466044400000. Accessed June 10, 2024. 33 Torrance Fire Department (b). Internal Annual Quality Improvement Update 2022. 2022. Website:
https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/9063f2f6a4704153b40fa98a887e72c8 . Accessed June 10, 2024. 275
4-79

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) from Fire Station No. 6 are also cross trained to respond as part of the TFD's Hazardous Materials Response Team. Fire Station No. 6 staffs 10 emergency response personnel. “Second call” stations are fire stations that support the “first-in” station. Fire Stations No. 1 and 5 would be designated as the “second call” stations to support Fire Station No. 6. Fire Station No. 1, at 1701 Crenshaw Boulevard, is approximately 0.9 mile east of the project site and houses two engine companies, one ladder truck company, one paramedic unit, a Hazardous Materials trailer, and the shift commander (Battalion Chief). Engine company personnel from Fire Station No. 1 are also cross trained to respond as part of the TFD's Hazardous Materials Response Team.

There are 14 response personnel staffed at Fire Station No. 1 each day. Fire Station No. 5, at 3940 Del Amo Boulevard, is approximately 1 mile northeast of the project site and houses one engine company and one paramedic rescue unit. Six response personnel are staffed at Fire Station No. 5. According to the City’s General Plan Safety Element, it is the City’s goal to have a maximum 6-minute Fire Department response time. For Code-3 (law/fire) responses, TFD’s overall 90 percent performance for first unit total response time (call received until on scene) over a 4-year period from 2018-2022 was 7 minutes, 30 seconds.34 For 90 percent of all high-risk structure fires for the 4-year period, the total response time for the arrival of the Effective Response Force (ERF), which is staffed with 16 firefighters and officers, was 7 minutes and 58 seconds. These response times currently exceed the City’s goal for a 6-minute response time as stated in the Safety Element of the General Plan.

As stated in Response 4.14.1(a), the City’s population as of January 1, 2024, is 142,910, resulting in a personnel-to-population ratio of 1.36 firefighters/1,000 population based on current TFD staff of 194.5 sworn and civilian personnel. As a residential project, the proposed project would not be anticipated to result in an excessive increase in calls for service. In addition, as discussed in Section 3.17, Transportation, the proposed project would not result in inadequate emergency access.

Additionally, on-site fire protection services (including fire hydrants, fire mains, sprinklers, and alarms) would be incorporated in the project. The proposed project would adhere to the development standards described in the City’s Municipal Code related to public safety. The proposed project would also be required to comply with current editions of the CBC, California Fire Code, and related codes. As stated in Section 4.14, Population and Housing, the proposed project would not induce substantial population growth in Torrance and therefore would be able to be served by Fire Station No. 6.

In addition, since November 2005, the City of Torrance has collected a Development Impact Fee (DIF) at plan check. The DIF is a one-time cost (other than a tax or special assessment fee) that is charged by a local government agency. The DIF is applied to pay a portion of the costs identified for public facilities used for transportation services, undergrounding of utilities, sewers, and storm drains. In January 2007, the DIF fees were also extended to cover Police and Fire facilities.

Further, the project is expected to be adequately supported by the existing fire protection facilities currently located near the project; therefore, no need is anticipated for new or

34 Torrance Fire Department (b). Internal Annual Quality Improvement Update 2022. 2022. Website:
https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/9063f2f6a4704153b40fa98a887e72c8 . Accessed June 10, 2024. 276

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) 4-80
expanded fire protection facilities. Therefore, the project would have less than significant impact with regard to fire protection, and no mitigation measures would be required. (ii). Police protection?
Less than Significant Impact. The Torrance Police Department (TPD) would serve the project site. Management and supervision of the TPD is provided by one chief and a Command Staff comprising four captains. Each captain is responsible for one of the major components within the TPD’s structure: Administrative, Patrol, Special Operations, and Services Bureaus. The TPD currently employs 227 sworn police officers and 128 civilian staff.35 The City’s population as of January 1, 2024, is 142,910, thereby resulting in a personnel-to-population ratio of 1.6 sworn TPD officers/1,000 residents.

The services provided by TPD include a Patrol Bureau with a seven-person Crime Scene Investigation unit, a Gang Detail, a Canine Detail, and the Special Operations Bureau, which offers a Crime Impact Team and a Narcotics Team. Also located within the Special Operations Bureau is Commercial Enforcement, Parking Enforcement, and the Police Motor Squad. The TPD also maintains its own Special Weapons and Tactics (SWAT) unit.

As discussed in Section 4.14, Population and Housing, the proposed project is estimated to increase the population of Torrance by 629 residents. When considered with the existing population, the project-related population increase would not result in the need for new or expanded police protection facilities. As discussed in 3.15.1(a)(i) above, the City of Torrance would collect a DIF, which includes Police Facilities. Therefore, the increase in population associated with the proposed project would be minimal compared to the number of police officers currently employed by the City and would not trigger the need for new or physically altered police facilities.

The proposed in-fill project would not increase the demand for police protection services that would result in the need for new or expanded police protection facilities. As discussed in Response 3.15(a)(i) above, the City of Torrance has collected a DIF, which includes Police Facilities. Therefore, the project will have a less than significant impact with regard to police protection, and no mitigation measures would be required. (iii). Schools?
Less than Significant Impact. The Torrance Unified School District (TUSD) serves the entire city and is governed by five School Board members. The TUSD is composed of 17 elementary schools, eight middle schools, four high schools, one continuation school, and one alternative high school. The District also has three adult school campuses. TUSD’s enrollment totaled 22,490 students in the 2020–2021 school year.

35 City of Torrance. Torrance Police Department – Police. Website: https://www.torranceca.gov/our-city/ police. Accessed June 10, 2024.
277
4-81

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) The project site is within the attendance boundaries of the following schools: Hickory Elementary School (1 mile southeast of the site), Jefferson Middle School (0.6 mile west of the site), and Torrance High School (1.3 miles east of the site).

The California Office of Public School Construction published general student yield factors for elementary, secondary (middle/high school), and unified school districts in California. These student generation rates were used to estimate the number of elementary and secondary school students that could be generated as a result of project implementation. Based on these generation factors, it is estimated that the proposed project’s 260 residential units could generate approximately 130 elementary school students and 52 middle/high school students (refer to Table PU-1, Projected School Enrollment, below) Table PU-1: Projected School Enrollment
Grade Levels Student Generation Factor Projected Enrollment Elementary School 0.5 student/unit 130 students
Middle/High School 0.2 student/unit 52 students
TOTAL -- 182 students
Source: State of California, Office of Public School Construction. January 2019. School Facility Program Handbook. Website: https://www.dgs.ca.gov/-/media/Divisions/OPSC/Services/Guides-and- Resources/SFP_Hdbk_ADA.ashx?la=en&hash=14D0F03EABD3AF437F3F4E2FDE1A602AFDFEE6C2 (accessed June 12, 2024).

Note: The projected enrollment is based on 260 residential units.

According to the City’s Permit Fees webpage, the current Development Impact Fees for projects within the TUSD’s jurisdictional boundaries were $4.79 per square foot of enclosed residential floor space.36
Pursuant to California Education Code Section 17620(a)(1), the governing board of any school district is authorized to levy a fee, charge, dedication, or other requirement against any construction within the boundaries of the district for the purpose of funding the construction or reconstruction of school facilities. The Applicant would be required to pay school fees to reduce any impacts of new residential development on school services as provided in Section 65995 of the California Government Code. The fees are collected by the TUSD.

Pursuant to the provisions of Government Code Section 65996, a project’s impact on school facilities is fully mitigated through payment of the requisite school facility development fees current at the time a building permit is issued. Therefore, with payment of the required fees, potential impacts to school services and facilities associated with implementation of the proposed project would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.

36 City of Torrance. Permit Fees. Website: https://www.torranceca.gov/our-city/community-development/ building/permit-fees. Accessed June 10, 2024.
278

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) 4-82
(iv). Parks?
Less than Significant Impact. Please refer to Section 4.16, Recreation, of this Draft IS/MND for a detailed discussion related to the proposed project’s potential impacts to parks and recreational facilities. As discussed previously in Section 4.14, Population and Housing, the proposed project could add approximately 629 new residents to the City’s population, which could incrementally increase usage of City parks and recreational facilities. As described in Section 4.16, the addition of approximately 629 new residents would result in the limited use of existing recreational facilities in the project vicinity. However, the proposed project would not result in significant population growth; therefore, it would not result in a significant increase in demand for park facilities. Consequently, the project would not accelerate the deterioration of existing parks; therefore, the construction of new or rehabilitated park facilities would not be required. As discussed in 4.15.1(a)(i) above, the City of Torrance would collect a DIF. As of October 2020, the DIF fees were extended to cover Parks, Libraries, and General Services (Public Facilities).

Therefore, impacts to parks services and facilities would be less than significant, and no mitigation measures would be required.
(v). Other public facilities?
Less than Significant Impact. Other public facilities, not previously mentioned above, may include, but are not limited to, building and planning services, libraries, recreational facilities that are not parks (parks were addressed in Response 4.15.1(a)(iv)), and public works/maintenance services (trash, street sweeping, sewers, storm drains, transit, etc.). As previously mentioned, the City collects a DIF and applies a portion of the costs for public facilities used for transportation services, undergrounding of utilities, sewer, and storm drains.

As discussed in Response 4.15.1(a)(iv) above, the City has expanded the DIF to cover Parks, Libraries and General Services. Although the proposed project would add 629 new residents would incrementally increase demand for use of the public facilities, the project-related population increase and accompanying demand for community services is not expected to trigger the need for new or physically altered community facilities beyond what has been previously assessed for the zone and General Plan designation. Therefore, the proposed project would have less than significant impacts with regard to public facilities, and no mitigation measures would be required.
279
4-83

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24)

4.16 RECREATION

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?

b. Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?

4.16.1 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?
Less than Significant Impact. As described in Section 4.14, Population and Housing, the proposed project includes the construction of a 260-unit, multi-family residential development that would add 629 new residents. Currently, there are four parks and recreational facilities in Torrance that are within 1.5 mile of the project site, as shown below in Table REC-1. Based on proximity, these parks and recreation facilities are expected to serve the project site; however, all the parks in Torrance could be affected because residents can use any park or recreation facility throughout the City.

Table REC-1: Parks and Recreational Facilities in the Vicinity of the Project Site Name and Address
Distance from
Project Site
(miles)
Size
(acres) Amenities
Delthrone Park
3401 Spencer St.

Torrance, CA 90503

1.1 9.7
Picnic area, barbecues, playground, basketball court,
rubberized fitness course, handicapped access, and
restrooms.

Greenwood Park
1520 Greenwood Ave.

Torrance, CA 90503

1.1 3.4
Playground, softball field, basketball court, meeting rooms, kitchen, and handicapped access.

Discovery Park
22526 Ocean Ave.

Torrance, CA 90505

1.2 0.39
Picnic gazebo, barbecue, playground, and handicapped
access.

Paradise Park
5006 Lee St.

Torrance, CA 90503

1.5 4.7
Picnic area, barbecues, playground, bouncer accessible, tennis courts, and restrooms.

Currently, the City states in its Community Resources Element that it utilizes a rule of thumb measurement of 3.0 to 5.0 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents, similar to many other cities throughout California. However, the Community Resources Element further states that the City utilizes an overall goal of 10 acres of public recreation land per 1,000 residents. As of when the 280

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) 4-84
Community Resources Element was adopted in 2010, the City stated it had a total supply of approximately 367.9 acres of park and recreation facilities. Based on the City’s population of 142,910 as of January 1, 202437 and the standard of 10 acres for each 1,000 residents in the Torrance Community Resources Element, the City should optimally have 1,429.1 acres of park and recreation facilities within its boundaries to serve its existing population. Therefore, the City currently has a deficiency of approximately 1,061.2 acres (1,429.1 – 367.9 = 1,061.2). The addition of approximately 629 residents to Torrance could incrementally increase usage of City parks and recreation facilities. The proposed project’s additional residents would require 6.3 acres of parkland based on the goal of 10 acres/1,000 residents in the City’s Community Resources Element. Further, the City notes in its Community Resources Element that efforts to achieve this ideal ratio are made through joint-use arrangements with the TUSD. With the combined resources of the City and the TUSD, there are 618 acres of active green space and recreation facilities available to residents, which improves the overall parkland ratio in the City but still falls short of its goal. To offset this deficit, the City does require project developers to have to pay an approximate fee of $550 per dwelling unit in addition to $4.79 per square foot towards TUSD fees.38 These fees are split between the City’s Recreation Fund and Open Space fund to assist with the public recreational space deficit within Torrance.

Therefore, the proposed project would not result in a substantial increase in the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of any such facility would occur or be accelerated, and the proposed project’s impact would be less than significant. No mitigation is required. b. Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Less than Significant Impact. The proposed project would provide 16,684 sf of open space in the central area of the residential development. This central open space area would serve as the community’s recreation area and would contain various amenities such as a residential plaza area that would provide tenants with active and passive recreation uses. The construction of this open space area is part of the proposed project, and the potential adverse effects associated with the construction and operation of the proposed project, which include this open space area, have been considered throughout this Initial Study and would be mitigated as appropriate. Additionally, the inclusion of this open space community area would offset some of the park and recreational demand associated with new residents. Therefore, the proposed project does not require construction or expansion of existing off-site recreation facilities and would not result in adverse physical effects at those facilities.

37 California Department of Finance. Table E-1: Cities, Counties, and the State Population and Housing Estimates with Annual Percentage Change – January 1, 2023 and 2024. Website: https://dof.ca.gov/wp- content/uploads/sites/352/Forecasting/Demographics/Documents/E -1_2024_InternetVersion.xlsx.

Accessed June 7, 2024.
38 City of Torrance. Permit Fees. Website: https://www.torranceca.gov/our-city/community-development/ building/permit-fees. Accessed June 10, 2024.
281
4-85

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) As discussed earlier in Section 4.14, Population and Housing, the proposed project’s 260 residential units could result in the addition of approximately 629 residents to the City’s population. Based on the City’s goal of 10 acres of public recreation land per 1,000 residents, the proposed project would increase the demand for parkland in the City by 6.3 acres. However, as required by the City’s current permit fees, the project developers will have to pay an approximate fee of $550/dwelling unit in addition to $4.79/square foot towards TUSD fees. This fee will be split between the City’s Recreation Fund and Open Space Fund to assist with the public recreational space deficit within the city.

Therefore, impacts related to the construction or expansion of recreational facilities is included as part of the proposed project and would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required. 282

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) 4-86

4.17 TRANSPORTATION

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a. Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities?

b. Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines §15064.3, subdivision (b)?
c. Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?

d. Result in inadequate emergency access?

4.17.1 Impact Analysis
a. Would the project conflict with a program plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities? Less than Significant Impact. The proposed project’s transportation effects were evaluated in the project Local Circulation Analysis (Linscott Law & Greenspan, 2024a) and the Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Screening Assessment (Linscott Law & Greenspan, 2024b) based on the assumption that 272 units would be developed on site, included as Appendix TRA. Subsequent to the preparation of the transportation assessment the proposed project was reduced from 272 units to 260 units. However, to present a conservative analysis this section presents the potential impacts from construction and operation of 272 units. The proposed project at 260 units would result in a net reduction of 45 daily trips, including 5 fewer a.m. peak-hour trips (1 inbound and 4 outbound) and 4 fewer p.m. peak- hour trips (2 inbound and 2 outbound) than the 272 units presented below.

In order to assess the impact of the proposed project on the surrounding circulation system, project- related trips were calculated by using trip rates from the Institute of Transportation Engineers’ (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition (2021). As summarized in Table TRA-1, the proposed project is projected to generate 1,235 daily trips, including 101 trips in the a.m. peak hour (23 inbound and 78 outbound) and 106 trips in the p.m. peak hour (65 inbound and 41 outbound), based on the ITE trip rates.

Table TRA-1: Proposed Project Trip Generation
Land Use Average
Daily Trips
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
In Out Total In Out Total
Proposed Trip Generation1
Multifamily Housing Mid Rise Not Close to Rail
Transit (TE/DU)

4.54 23% 77% 0.37 61% 39% 0.39
Proposed Trip Generation Forecast
Multifamily Housing Mid Rise (272 DU) 1,235 23 78 101 65 41 106 283
4-87

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) Table TRA-1: Proposed Project Trip Generation
Land Use Average
Daily Trips
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
In Out Total In Out Total
Internal Capture Reduction (Daily: 18%, AM 2%,
PM 18%)
-222 -1 -1 -2 -12 -7 -19
Total Proposed Project Trip Generation 1,013 22 77 99 53 34 87 1 Trip rates from the Institute of City of Torrance Traffic Impact Assessment Guidelines for Land Use Projects (2021).

DU = dwelling unit

Due to the proximity of the Del Amo Fashion Center, the trip generation of the proposed project includes internal trip capture adjustments (18 percent daily, 2 percent in the a.m. peak hour, and 18 percent in the p.m. peak hour). As shown in Table TRA-1, the net trip generation of the proposed project (accounting for the interaction between the proposed project and the Del Amo Fashion Center) is 1,013 daily trips, including 99 trips in the a.m. peak hour (22 inbound and 77 outbound) and 87 trips in the p.m. peak hour (53 inbound and 34 outbound). This net trip generation is conservative in that it does not provide credit for trips generated by the existing on-site uses. In accordance with the City of Torrance Traffic Impact Assessment Guidelines for Land Use Projects (January 2021),39 the proposed project would result in net generation of more than 500 daily trips.

Therefore, a Level of Service (LOS)-based Traffic Circulation Analysis was prepared for the proposed project.

With Senate Bill 743 (SB743) becoming effective statewide in July 2020, automobile delay (LOS) is not considered to be a significant environmental effect under CEQA. Pursuant to SB 743, CEQA requires the evaluation of VMT when analyzing a project’s environmental effects on transportation.

However, lead agencies may evaluate LOS for planning purposes when reviewing a project against the agency’s general plan policies. As such, the City requested that the Applicant evaluate LOS in the Local Circulation Analysis prepared by Linscott, Law & Greenspan. The following discussion, which briefly summarizes this LOS analysis, is provided for informational purposes only.

The Local Circulation Analysis evaluated the project’s traffic effects at 27 key intersections in the project study area, which included six State-controlled intersections, and the two driveways proposed by the project. This evaluation analyzed LOS conditions at these intersections under existing, existing plus Year 2028 ambient growth, and existing plus Year 2023 ambient growth plus project conditions. Using LOS thresholds contained in City of Torrance Traffic Impact Assessment Guidelines for Land Use Projects, the addition of project traffic to the circulation system would exceed the LOS threshold at one of the 27 study intersections (Prairie Avenue/Redondo Beach Boulevard). The project proposes to restripe the intersection’s southbound approach within the City of Lawndale and the southbound departure within the City of Torrance to include an additional through lane. In addition, the existing traffic signal would be modified as necessary.

The proposed project would be required to comply with the Circulation and Infrastructure Element of the City’s General Plan, as well as regulations outlined in the Municipal Code. The Circulation and

39 City of Torrance. Traffic Impact Assessment Guidelines for Land Use Projects. January 2021. Website:
https://www.torranceca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument?id=63027. Accessed 6/20/24. 284

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) 4-88
Infrastructure Element provides objectives and policies for the City’s transportation system including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities. The overarching goal of this element is to implement a balanced, functional, and efficient circulation system, and incorporate alternative modes of travel that allow for the safe movement of people and goods. As proposed, the overall project and improvements at the intersection of Prairie Avenue/Redondo Beach Boulevard would not conflict with this goal or related objectives and policies. With the intersection improvements in place, the proposed project would not generate a substantial number of daily or peak-hour vehicle trips to warrant modifications to any other transportation facilities. The overall project design would provide and maintain required access for transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities and such facilities would be designed in a manner that is consistent with the City’s transportation policies.

The proposed project would not result in a significant conflict with the City’s transportation plans or policies and no mitigation is required, therefore project impacts are less than significant. b. Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines §15064.3, subdivision (b)? Less than Significant Impact. State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b), states that transportation impacts for land use projects are to be measured by evaluating the project’s VMT or the amount and distance of automobile travel attributable to the project. Under CEQA, VMT exceeding an applicable threshold of significance may indicate a significant impact. Generally, projects within one-half mile of either an existing major transit stop or a stop along an existing high- quality transit corridor should be presumed to cause a less than significant transportation impact.

The City of Torrance Traffic Impact Assessment Guidelines for Land Use Projects provide guidance for screening land use projects from a detailed VMT analysis and the presumption of a less than significant transportation impact. The general screening criteria is based on an assessment of the project’s trip generation, the location of proposed residential or office uses in a low VMT area, or the proximity of a project to a major transit stop or stop along a high-quality transit corridor. A VMT analysis is not warranted if the requirements of one of these criteria are met.

For the transit stop criteria, the City of Torrance Traffic Impact Assessment Guidelines for Land Use Projects recommend that projects located within a one mile of either an existing major transit stop or an existing stop along an existing high-quality transit corridor are screened-out from a VMT analysis. A major transit stop is a site containing an existing rail or bus rapid transit station, a ferry terminal served by either a bus or rail transit service, or the intersection of two or more major bus routes with a frequency of service interval of 15 minutes or less during the morning and afternoon commute periods. A high-quality transit corridor is a corridor with fixed-route bus service intervals no longer than 15 minutes during peak commute hours.

Figure 10 of the City of Torrance Traffic Impact Assessment Guidelines for Land Use Projects provides a Transit Priority Area (TPA) map illustrating a one-half mile radius from major transit stops and stops along high-quality transit corridors (dated January 2021). Based on a review of this map, the proposed project is located within a TPA. As such, the proposed project is eligible to be screened out from a VMT analysis provided that it does not meet any of the following four limiting factors:
• Has a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of less than 0.75
285
4-89

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) • Includes more parking for use by residents, customers, or employees of the project than required by the City (if on-site parking is required)
• Is inconsistent with the 2024-2050 SCAG RTP/SCS (Connect SoCal) • Replaces affordable residential units with a smaller number of moderate- or high-income residential units
The proposed project has a FAR greater than 0.75. The proposed project would also provide no more parking than required by the City. In addition, as confirmed by the City, the proposed project is consistent with the 2024-2050 SCAG RTP/SCS (Connect SoCal). Lastly, the proposed project would not replace affordable residential units, as the existing site is occupied by non-residential uses.

Based on the discussion above, a VMT analysis would not be warranted for the proposed project since it is located within a TPA and has no limiting factors as detailed above. Therefore, it can be concluded that the proposed project and its VMT impacts are presumed to be less than significant.

The proposed project would not conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b). No mitigation is required.
c. Would the project substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? Less than Significant Impact. Vehicular access would be provided via two full access driveways. The first full-access unsignalized driveway would be located on Madrona Avenue, the second full-access unsignalized driveway would be located on Fashion Way in place of the northerly Del Amo Circle access. The drive aisles, extending north from Madrona Avenue, west from Fashion Way, and south from Del Amo Circle, would intersect in the center of the site. Vehicular access along West Carson Street would be limited to emergency/fire access only. The proposed project would relocate the full access unsignalized driveway along Madrona Avenue approximately 50 feet south of Onrado Street, which would result in modifications to the existing median to allow left turns in/out of this driveway.

Proposed changes to the existing intersection at Prairie Avenue/Redondo Beach Boulevard would also be reviewed for approval by the City of Lawndale and County of Los Angeles.

As the proposed project would relocate the existing full-access unsignalized driveway along Madrona Avenue to the south, the following modifications would be included:
• Madrona Avenue—Modify the existing median to align with the new driveway location along Madrona Avenue and to provide left turns in/out. In addition, provide an acceleration lane for left turns out from this driveway.
• Del Amo Circle East—Convert from a four-lane roadway to a two-lane roadway, with 65 on- street parking stalls intended for exclusive use by visitors to the Del Amo Fashion Center.

As previously addressed, the proposed project’s Local Circulation Analysis identified the need for transportation improvements at one intersection (Prairie Avenue/Redondo Beach Boulevard). With these improvements, the analysis identified no operational deficiencies or related potential hazards at this intersection or the Madrona Avenue, Fashion Way, and Del Amo Circle East driveway access 286

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) 4-90
points proposed by the project. As such, the proposed project would not substantially increase hazards for vehicles due to a geometric design feature or incompatible uses, and any effects would be considered less than significant. No mitigation is necessary. d. Would the project result in inadequate emergency access? Less than Significant Impact. As discussed above, site access would be provided by two driveway access points located at Madrona Avenue and Fashion Way. The drive aisles, extending north from Madrona Avenue, and west from Fashion Way, would intersect in the central portion of the site.

Vehicular access along West Carson Street would be limited to emergency/fire access only. The proposed project would relocate the full-access unsignalized driveway along Madrona Avenue approximately 50 feet south of Onrado Street which would result in modifications to the existing median to allow left turns in/out of this driveway. All emergency access routes to the proposed project and adjacent areas would be kept cleared and unobstructed during demolition and construction of the proposed project. No roadway closures or lane closures are anticipated as part of project construction. Therefore, the proposed project’s effects on emergency access would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
287
4-91

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24)

4.18 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:

i. Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code Section
5020.1(k)? Or

ii. A resource determined by the lead agency, in its
discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1? In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public
Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall
consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.

4.18.1 Impact Analysis
Assembly Bill (AB) 52 requires meaningful consultation with California Native American Tribes on potential impacts to tribal cultural resources, as defined in Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 21074 as sites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a California Native American tribe that are eligible for inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources or included in a local register of historical resources. Per PRC Section 21080.3.1, a tribe must submit a written request to the relevant lead agency if it wishes to be notified of proposed projects in its traditionally and culturally affiliated area. Lead agencies must provide written formal notification to the tribes that have requested it within 14 days of determining that a project application is complete or of deciding to undertake a project. The tribe must respond to the lead agency within 30 days of receipt of the notification if it wishes to engage in consultation on the project, and the lead agency must begin the consultation process within 30 days of receiving the request for consultation. Consultation concludes when either (1) the parties agree to mitigation measures to avoid a significant effect, if one exists, on a tribal cultural resource, or (2) a party, acting in good faith and after reasonable effort, concludes that mutual agreement cannot be reached. AB 52 also addresses confidentiality during tribal consultation per PRC Section 21082.3(c). 288

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) 4-92
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:
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)? ii. A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1? In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.

Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. The Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) is a State agency that maintains the Sacred Lands File (SLF), an official list of sites that are of cultural and religious importance to California Native American tribes. The NAHC was contacted on May 22, 2024, in order to request a SLF search for the project limits, as well as a list of potential Native American contacts for consultation.

In compliance with AB 52, letters have been distributed to the 16 Native American tribal contacts identified by the NAHC in its inquiry response. The letters, which were sent via email on June 20, 2024, provided each tribe with an opportunity to request consultation with the City regarding the proposed project. The purpose of this effort was to provide Native American tribes with the opportunity for meaningful participation and to identify known tribal cultural resources on or near the project limits.

In the response to the notification letter, the Cahuilla Band of Indians requested all cultural materials associated with the Project for review. No other response was received from the Tribes that were notified. On September 9, 2024, the Lead Agency contacted the Cahuilla Band of Indians and shared a copy of all cultural materials associated with the Project for review. In response, the Cahuilla Band of Indians acknowledged receipt of the information. No other response has been received from the Cahuilla Band of Indians. The record of tribal consultation efforts is included as Appendix CUL3 to this IS/MND.

In compliance with AB 52, the tribes had 30 days from the date of receipt of notification to request consultation on the proposed project. Information provided through the AB 52 tribal consultation process typically informs the assessment as to whether tribal cultural resources are present within the project limits and the significance of any potential impacts to such resources.

To date, we received two responses to the consultation request. On June 24, 2024 the City received a request from the Cahuilla Band of Indians requesting all cultural materials associated with the project. The City responded on August 28, 2024. No response was received to date. The City also received an email on June 24, 2024 from the Santa Rosa Band of Cahuilla Indians deferring consultation to the Soboba Band of Luiseño Indians. To date the City did not receive a request for consultation from the Soboba Band of Luiseño Indians. The Santa Rosa Band of Cahuilla Indians was notified that a request for consultation was not requested. 289
4-93

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) Further, as discussed in Section 4.5, Cultural Resources, of this IS/MND, no known cultural resources have been documented within the project limits or in the direct vicinity of the proposed project based on archival research and a pedestrian field survey. Further, low potential exists for the proposed project to impact tribal cultural resources due to significant prior disturbance from past grading and development activities within the project limits and in the surrounding area. Regulatory Compliance Measure (RCM) CUL-1, identified in Section 4.5, sets forth procedures for handling inadvertent discoveries of human remains, including those determined to be Native American. In addition, the proposed project would also incorporate Mitigation Measure CUL-1, which outlines stop work procedures in the case of unknown discovery.

Adherence to RCM CUL-1 and implementation of MM CUL-1, which outline procedures for handling of human remains. MM CUL-1 states that if the remains are determined to be Native American, the County Coroner shall notify the NAHC within 24 hours, which shall determine and notify a MLD. With the permission of the City, the MLD may inspect the site of the discovery.

The MLD shall complete the inspection within 48 hours of being granted access to the site, and decide on the treatment of the human remains. Therefore, MM CUL-1 would ensure that impacts related to the inadvertent discovery of Native American cultural resources or human remains would be less than significant and impacts to tribal cultural resources would be less than significant.
290

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) 4-94

4.19 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a. Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or stormwater
drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects?

b. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during
normal, dry and multiple dry years?

c. Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?

d. Generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals?

e. Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?

4.19.1 Impact Analysis
a. Would the project require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or stormwater drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects?
Less than Significant Impact.

Water. Torrance Municipal Water (TMW) would provide water services to the project site and would connect the proposed project to the existing water main along West Carson Street. TMW provides water to a population of approximately 105,080 throughout its service area.

The 2020 City of Torrance Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) demonstrates that the TMW has adequate domestic water supply for future water demands through 2045 under normal, dry, and multiple dry water years. The City’s water supply sources consist of imported water from the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD), groundwater produced from the West Coast Basin, desalinated groundwater produced from the Goldsworthy Groundwater Desalter, and recycled water produced at West Basin Municipal Water District’s (WBMWD) Edward C. Little Water Recycling Facility in El Segundo. MWD’s 2020 UWMP finds that MWD is able to meet full-service demands of its member agencies with existing supplies from 2025 through 2045 during normal years, a single dry year, and multiple dry years.

The project site has an existing private water system connected to an existing water main along West Carson Street. The proposed project would also install two networks of water lines, a 291
4-95

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) network of fire flow lines ranging from 8 to 12 inches in diameter and connecting to an existing network of 10-inch water lines throughout the project site. Water laterals from the proposed residential buildings would connect to the existing water main along West Carson Street. The on-site system would be constructed in compliance with the City’s building and plumbing codes in the Municipal Code. An extension of the water infrastructure from the adjacent streets into the project site would be a routine part of the construction process analyzed in this IS/MND and would not have a material environmental impact. The water facility improvements would be limited to the project site and connection points to the adjacent, existing TMW facilities.

Therefore, the proposed project would neither require nor result in the construction of new water facilities, or the expansion of existing facilities (which could cause a significant environmental impact), and the impact would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.

Wastewater Treatment/Stormwater Drainage. The Public Works Department of the City of Torrance maintains local sewer and storm drain systems. The Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts (LACSD) is the regional agency responsible for the collection and treatment of wastewater, including the construction, operation, and maintenance of sanitation facilities. The LACSD is responsible for the provision of wastewater treatment facilities that serve the project site. The project site is served by LACSD’s Joint Water Pollution Control Plant (JWPCP) in Carson.

JWPCP provides both primary and secondary treatment for approximately 260 million gallons per day (mgd) of wastewater and has a total permitted capacity of 400 mgd.

No significant increase in wastewater flows is anticipated as a result of construction activities on the project site. Sanitary services during construction would be provided by portable toilet facilities that transport waste off site for treatment and disposal. Therefore, during construction, potential impacts to wastewater treatment and wastewater conveyance infrastructure would be less than significant, and no mitigation would be required.

According to wastewater generation factors included in the CalEEMod emissions model, the proposed project is estimated to generate 46,726 gallons per day (gpd) of wastewater (approximately 90 percent of the project’s indoor water use estimate of 18.95 mgy). The City’s public sewer system has sufficient capacity to accommodate the proposed project’s effluent, in multiple configurations. Therefore, the proposed project proponents intend to utilize the Opal Street Sewer Main connection in the intersection of Fashion Way and Madrona Avenue which was constructed by the City of Torrance. In addition, an existing 10-inch sewer lateral is located on the project site serving the former auto repair facility. As discussed above, the proposed project is anticipated to generate approximately 46,726 gpd of wastewater, which is approximately 0.018 percent of the available daily treatment capacity at the LACSD’s JWPCP in Carson. Therefore, the JWPCP has the capacity to accommodate the increased wastewater flows from the proposed project. The proposed project would be adequately served by the capacity and the existing wastewater conveyance system.

Sewer improvements associated with the proposed project would be designed and constructed to City and LACSD standards. The proposed project’s site plans would be accompanied by adequate plans for sewer improvements prepared by a Registered Professional Engineer and facilities would be dedicated to the City and/or LASD at the completion of construction.

Therefore, the proposed project would result in less than significant impacts related to the 292

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) 4-96
construction or expansion of wastewater treatment facilities. Therefore, the proposed project would neither require nor result in the construction of new water treatment or collection facilities, or the expansion of existing facilities (which could cause a significant environmental impact), and the impact would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.

A Hydrology Study has been prepared for the proposed project, and the entire project would meet the requirements of the Low Impact Development (LID) Standards Manual to improve water quality and mitigate potential water quality impacts from stormwater and non- stormwater discharges. As described above in Response 4.10(c), the project would not exceed the capacity of existing stormwater drainage systems during storm events. Overall, impacts would be less than significant because no expansion of existing facilities would be required with project implantation. No mitigation measures would be required.

Electric Power. Electrical power would be supplied to the project site by Southern California Edison (SCE). SCE provides electricity to more than 15 million people in a 50,000-square-mile area of Central, Coastal, and Southern California. According to the California Energy Commission (CEC), total electricity consumption in the SCE service area in 2022 was 85,870 GWh (31,603 GWh for the residential sector and 54,267 GWh for the non-residential sector). Total electricity consumption in Los Angeles County in 2022 was 68,485 GWh (23,255 GWh for the residential sector and 45,230 GWh for the non-residential sector).

Short-term construction activities would be limited to providing power to the staging area and portable construction equipment and would not substantially increase the demand for electricity. The heavy equipment used for construction is primarily powered by diesel fuel.

Temporary electric power would be provided via existing utility boxes and lines on the project site. Given the limited nature of potential demand for electricity during construction and the availability of existing power lines on the site, there would not be a need to construct new or alter existing electric transmission facilities. Impacts to local regional supplies of electricity would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.

The proposed project includes connections to the surrounding electrical system on site.

Operation of the proposed project would increase on-site electricity demand. CalEEMod was used to calculate the approximate annual electricity demand of the proposed project. As discussed in Section 4.6, Energy, the proposed project would be required to adhere to all federal, State, and local requirements for energy efficiency, including the Title 24 standards, which would substantially reduce energy usage. The estimated potential increase in electricity demand associated with the proposed project would be approximately 1,243,569 kilowatt-hours (kWh) per year. In 2022, Los Angeles County consumed 68,485 GWh or 68,484,956,280 kWh.

Therefore, electricity demand associated with the proposed project would be less than 0.01 percent of Los Angeles County’s total electricity demand.

Service providers utilize projected demand forecasts in order to provide an adequate supply or plan for surplus in their service areas. Because the proposed project would only represent a small fraction of electricity demand in Los Angeles County, the proposed project would meet Title 24 requirements, there would be sufficient electricity supplies available, and energy demand for the proposed project would be less than significant. 293
4-97

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) The supply and distribution network within the area surrounding the project site would remain essentially the same as exists currently, with the exception of on-site improvements to serve the proposed project. These on-site improvements would connect to the existing infrastructure and provide electrical service to the proposed residential uses. The proposed project would not increase electrical demand beyond existing projections from the local electricity provider, and the project site is within a developed service area with existing demand. Therefore, the proposed project would not require the construction of any physical improvements related to the provision of electricity service that would result in significant environmental impacts, and the proposed project’s impacts would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.

SCE provides electric power services to Torrance, including the installation and maintenance of mainline systems. The distribution systems adequately serve local customers, and SCE provides as-needed upgrades over time to meet the changing demands. Additionally, the City requires that new projects meet the 2022 California Energy Code (Title 24) and 2022 California Green Building Code, which reduces energy consumption from the previous code. Therefore, impacts to electric facilities would be considered less than significant because no expansion of existing facilities will be required. No mitigation measures would be required.

Natural Gas. SoCalGas is the natural gas service provider for the project site. SoCalGas provides natural gas to approximately 21.8 million people in a 24,000-square-mile service area throughout Central and Southern California, from Visalia to the Mexican border. According to the CEC, total natural gas consumption in the SoCalGas service area in 2022 was 5,026 million therms (2,230 million therms for the residential sector and 2,796 million therms for the non- residential sector). Total natural gas consumption in Los Angeles County in 2022 was 2,820 million therms (1,122 million therms for the residential sector and 1,698 million therms for the non-residential sector).

Short-term construction activities would not result in demand for natural gas since construction activities/equipment would not require accessing existing adjacent natural gas facilities.

Therefore, construction activities would not impact natural gas services, and the proposed project would not require new or physically altered gas transmission facilities.

Operation of the proposed project would increase on-site natural gas demand. As discussed in Section 4.6, Energy, the proposed project would be required to adhere to all federal, State, and local requirements for energy efficiency, including the Title 24 standards, which would significantly reduce energy usage. CalEEMod was used to calculate the approximate annual natural gas demand of the proposed project. As discussed in Section 4.6, Energy, the estimated potential increased natural gas demand associated with the proposed project would be approximately 62,494 therms per year. In 2022, Los Angeles County consumed approximately 2,820 million therms or approximately 2,820,285,935 therms. Therefore, natural gas demand associated with the proposed project would be less than 0.01 percent of Los Angeles County’s total natural gas demand.

As noted above, service providers utilize projected demand forecasts in order to provide an adequate supply or plan for surplus in their service areas. As discussed in Section 4.6, Energy, because the proposed project would only represent a small fraction of natural gas demand in 294

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) 4-98
Los Angeles County, the proposed project would meet the requirements of Title 24, there would be sufficient natural gas supplies available, and natural gas demand for the proposed project would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.

The supply and distribution network within the area surrounding the project site would remain essentially the same as exists today except for standard on-site improvements to serve the proposed project. Levels of service to off-site users would not be adversely affected. Existing gas transmission and distribution services maintained by SoCalGas would provide natural gas service to the proposed project. The proposed project would not increase natural gas demand beyond existing projections from the local natural gas provider, and the project site is within a developed service area with existing demand. Therefore, the proposed project would not require the construction of any physical improvements related to the provision of natural gas service that would result in significant environmental impacts, and the proposed project’s potential impacts would be less than significant. No mitigation would be required.

Telecommunications Facilities. Telephone, television, and internet services are offered by a variety of providers in Torrance, including AT&T, Frontier Communications, Spectrum, HughesNet, and ViaSat. Non-satellite providers include Frontier, DirectTV, Spectrum Cable, and DishTV. Satellite internet providers include ViaSat. These services are privately operated and offered to each location in the city for a fee defined by the provider.

Existing telephone, cable, and internet service lines in the vicinity would continue to serve the project site. Internal to the project site, the Applicant would be responsible for constructing adequate telecommunication facility extensions for the proposed project. As with the electrical system, the City actively pursues its policy of undergrounding these utilities. The City recognizes the benefits to be achieved by requiring all new utilities to be placed underground and to retrofit existing aboveground systems, where possible, in association with new construction.

The City utilizes residential and non-residential undergrounding impact fees to further this goal.

The reconfiguration of these facilities would occur on site during the site preparation and earthwork phase and are not expected to impact any telephone, cable, or internet services off site that serve the surrounding areas. Additionally, telecommunication facilities are generally installed concurrently with utility expansions, and impacts associated with the expansion of telecommunications facilities are already considered in the air quality, noise, and construction traffic analysis. Therefore, the proposed project’s impacts associated with the relocation or construction of new or expanded telecommunication facilities and impacts would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.
b. Would the project have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years? Less than Significant Impact. As mentioned in Response 4.19.1(a), above, the relatively small increase in water use would be accounted for in the anticipated growth rates for the City in the UWMP. The proposed project would not necessitate new or expanded water entitlements, and TMW would be able to accommodate the increased demand for potable water under a worst-case scenario as forecasted in the 2020 UWMP. Taking into account population growth, TMW is able to meet demand in the multiple dry-year scenario for years 2025, 2030, 2035, 2040, and 2045. As 295
4-99

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) described above, the proposed project is anticipated to use approximately 30.9 mgy of water.

Further, the total amount of anticipated water usage by the proposed project represents an approximately 0.56 percent increase of TMW’s current annual water demand. Additionally, the proposed project would be required to comply with all State laws for water conservation measures, including the use of low-flow fixtures. Therefore, water demand from the proposed project would be within TMW’s current and projected water supplies available to serve the proposed project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry, and multiple dry years. Impacts related to water supplies would be less than significant, and no mitigation would be required. c. Would the project result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?
Less than Significant Impact. Refer to Response 4.19.1(a). Although the proposed project would increase wastewater generation on site, the increased wastewater flows from the proposed project could be accommodated within the existing design capacity of LACSD’s JWPCP, which would serve the project site. Therefore, the City’s Public Works Department and LACSD would have adequate capacity to serve the projected demand of the proposed project in addition to its existing commitments. Therefore, impacts related to wastewater treatment would be less than significant, and no mitigation would be required.
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?
Less than Significant Impact. The project currently generates solid waste from existing restaurant and office uses and is served by commercial solid waste collection and disposal services. The proposed project would be required to comply with State and local solid waste reduction, diversion, and recycling policies and regulations. The proposed project proposes residential uses and would not generate volumes or types of waste not already considered and addressed under existing policies, regulations, and infrastructure systems. The proposed project would be served by a private refuse collector. Therefore, the potential for the proposed project to 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 is considered less than significant. The project would not impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals. Therefore, impacts to solid waste disposal would be less than significant, and no mitigation measures would be required. f. Would the project comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
Less than Significant Impact. The City has implemented programs to ensure compliance with statewide solid waste source reduction and recycling strategies and targets. The proposed project would be required to comply with applicable City and State waste diversion and recycling mandates.

Moreover, the proposed project would implement conventional residential uses and would not establish uses or activities that would conflict with or obstruct local, State, and federal solid waste management regulations. All solid waste generated by the proposed project would be collected and 296

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) 4-100
disposed of as part of the City’s municipal waste stream. Solid waste management services are provided throughout the City, including collection and transfer of refuse, green waste, and bulky items. Recycling services are also provided. The potential for the proposed project to conflict with federal, State, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste is therefore considered less than significant, and no mitigation measures would be required. 297
4-101

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24)

4.20 WILDFIRE

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project:

a. Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
b. Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?

c. Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment?

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?

4.20.1 Impact Analysis
a. Would the project substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
No Impact. According to CAL FIRE, the City of Torrance is not within a State or federal responsibility area, nor is it classified as VHFHSZ. The project site is located within a developed urban area that does not contain expanses of wildland area. Fire protection services for the project site and vicinity are currently available through the TFD. Adherence to local fire department building and site design requirements, and compliance with codified fire protection and prevention measures during construction and operation of the development are required. Therefore, no impacts to an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan are expected. No mitigation measures would be required.
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?
No Impact. The project site is not located within a VHFHSZ. The project site is located on a flat site within a developed urban environment, surrounded by commercial and residential uses, and is not located near any wildland areas. Therefore, no wildfire impacts from project development are anticipated, and no mitigation measures would be required. 298

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) 4-102
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? No Impact. As mentioned above, the project site is not located within a VHFHSZ. The project site is located on a relatively flat site in a largely developed urban area, surrounded by commercial and residential uses, and is not located near any wildland areas. Therefore, no installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure is expected to be required other than typical developments to connect utilities to existing infrastructure for residential developments. These improvements will be reviewed by applicable City departments, including Building & Safety, and the TFD to make sure the improvements meet all applicable building and safety codes and to ensure that the improvements do not exacerbate any fire risks. Therefore, no impacts from project development would occur related to exacerbation of fire risk, and no mitigation measures would be required.
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?
No Impact. As mentioned above, the project site is not located within a VHFHSZ. The project site is located on a relatively flat site in a largely developed urban area, surrounded by commercial and residential uses, and is not located near any wildland areas. Furthermore, the project site is not located near a canyon, slope, drainage course, stream, or other natural feature that could expose people or structures to runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides. Therefore, no impacts from project development would occur related to these issues, and no mitigation measures would be required. 299
4-103

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24)

4.21 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the
major periods of California history or prehistory?

b. Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are
considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.)

c. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?

4.21.1 Impact Analysis
a. Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? As discussed in Section 4.4, Biological Resources, the proposed project would not 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, or substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, and this topic would be less than significant with implementation of City RCM: Nesting Bird Survey. As discussed in Section 4.5, Cultural Resources, the proposed project would not eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory, and this topic would be less than significant with implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-1: Unknown Discovery and City RCM: Human Remains. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant. b. Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)?
CEQA defines cumulative impacts as “two or more individual effects which, when considered together, are considerable, or which can compound to increase other environmental impacts.” 300

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24) 4-104
Section 15130 of the CEQA Guidelines requires evaluation of potential environmental impacts when the project’s incremental effect is cumulatively considerable. “Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of an individual project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of “reasonably foreseeable probable future” projects, per CEQA Section 15355. Cumulative impacts can result from a combination of the proposed project together with other closely related projects that cause an adverse change in the environment. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor but collectively significant projects taking place over time.

For all of the topics discussed in this Initial Study, the proposed project’s impacts would be individually limited and not cumulatively considerable because the impacts are either temporary in nature (i.e., limited to the construction period) or limited to the project site (i.e., accidental discovery). Additionally, for each of the topics analyzed in the Initial Study, the proposed project would have no impacts, less than significant impacts, or impacts that would be lowered to a less than significant level through the implementation of mitigation measures or City regulatory compliance measures, and therefore would not substantially contribute to any potential cumulative impacts.

When future development proposals are considered by the City, these proposals would undergo environmental review pursuant to CEQA, and when necessary, mitigation measures would be adopted as appropriate. In most cases, this environmental review and compliance with project conditions of approval, relevant policies and mitigation measures, and the General Plan, and compliance with applicable regulations would ensure that significant impacts would be avoided or otherwise mitigated to less than significant levels.

Implementation of these measures would ensure that the impacts of the proposed project and other projects within the vicinity would be below established thresholds of significance and that these impacts would not combine with the impacts of other cumulative projects to result in a cumulatively considerable impact on the environment as a result of project development. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.
c. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
As discussed throughout this Initial Study, implementation of the proposed project would not result in any significant environmental effects. As such, implementation of the proposed project would not cause substantial direct or indirect adverse effects to human beings. No impact would occur.

301
5-1

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N O C T O B E R 2024

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E A T D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

P:\LHC2101 - Del Amo Residential\WORK PRODUCT\1_Initial Study\1_PublicReviewDraft\Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10-8-24.docx (10/08/24)

5.0 LIST OF PREPARERS
City of Torrance
Leo Oorts, Planning Manager - Community Development Department LSA Associates
Ryan Bensley, Project Director
Florentina Craciun, Project Manager
Chris Jones, Senior Environmental Planner
Jazmine Estores, Environmental Planner
J.T. Stephens, Executive Vice President / Noise and Vibration Cara (Carlucci) Cunningham, Air Quality, Energy and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Lennar
Gary Jones, Vice President - Land Acquisition at Lennar Donald D. Lamm, AICP, Managing Principal, Diamond Star Associates Andrew K. Fogg, Partner, Cox Castle

302
F

A S H I O N
S

Q U A R E A T
D
E L
A
M O
T

O R R A N C E
,

C

A L I F O R N I A

I

N I T I A L
S

T U D Y
/M

I T I G A T E D
N

E G A T I V E
D

E C L A R A T I O N
O

C T O B E R
2024

P:
\
LHC2101
-

Del Amo Residential
\

WORK PRODUCT
\
1_Initial Study
\
1_PublicReviewDraft
\
Del_Amo_Res_Printcheck_City_Review V2 10
-
8 -

24.docx

(
10/08/24
)
This page intentionally left
blank

303

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E AT D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G AT E D N E G AT I V E D E C L A R AT I O N O C T O B E R 2 0 2 4

Adopted Measures for Project Approval
Period of Compliance Compliance
with
Measure
Completed?
Prior to the
Start of
Construction*
During
Construction**
Post-
construction
or Operational
Mitigation Measure (MM)
MM CUL-1: Unknown Discovery X X
MM PALEO-1a: Paleontological Resources Impact Mitigation Program (PRIMP) X MM PALEO-1b: Paleontological Monitoring X
MM PALEO-1c: Report of Findings X
MM HAZ-1: Soil Management Plan X X
Regulatory Compliance Measure (RCM)
RCM 4-1: Nesting Bird Survey and Avoidance X X
RCM CUL-1: Human Remains X
RCM GEO-1: California Building Code Compliance Seismic Standards X X RCM WQ-1: Construction General Permit X
RCM WQ-2: Los Angeles County Groundwater Discharge Permit X RCM WQ-3: Los Angeles County MS4 Permit X
RCM WQ-4: City of Torrance Municipal Code X
RCM NOI-1: Construction Noise and Vibration X X X
RCM NOI-2: HVAC Equipment X X X
* = Prior to any ground disturbing activities at the project site ** = Construction is broadly defined to include physical activities associated with construction of a development project including, but not limited to site preparation, clearing, demolition, excavation, shoring, foundation installation, and building construction

_____ I agree to implement the attached mitigation measures and regulatory compliance measures as conditions of project approval.

_______________________________________ _______________________________________ Property Owner or Legal Agent Signature Date

Table A: Agreement to Implement Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program & Regulatory Compliance Measures ATTACHMENT 6
304

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E AT D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G AT E D N E G AT I V E D E C L A R AT I O N O C T O B E R 2 0 2 4

Table B: Mitigation and Monitoring Reporting Program
Mitigation Measures Implementation
Responsibility
Mitigation Schedule Monitoring/Reporting
Responsibility
Monitoring Actions/
Completion Criteria

4.1: Aesthetics
The proposed project would not result in significant adverse impacts related to aesthetics. No mitigation is required.

4.2: Agriculture and Forest Resources
The proposed project would not result in significant adverse impacts related to agriculture and forest resources. No mitigation is required.

4.3: Air Quality
The proposed project would not result in significant adverse impacts related to air quality. No mitigation is required.

4.4: Biological Resources
The proposed project would not result in significant adverse impacts related to biological resources. No mitigation measures have been proposed.

4.5: Cultural Resources
MM CUL-1 Unknown Discovery. Prior to issuance of a
grading permit for the project, the
Applicant/Developer shall confirm to the
City of Torrance Community Development
Director, or designee, that a qualified
archaeologist (one who meets the Secretary
of the Interior’s standards) has been
retained to provide professional
archaeological services. The qualified
archaeologist (or an archaeologist
supervised by the qualified archaeologist)
shall be present at the pre-grade
conference to establish procedures for
archaeological resource monitoring. In the
event that any prehistoric or historic
subsurface cultural resources are
discovered during ground disturbing
activities, all work within 25 feet of the
resources shall be halted and the Applicant
and/or lead agency shall consult with the
qualified archaeologist, historian or
paleontologist to assess the significance of
the find. In the event that these resources
are of Native American origin, all work
Construction
contractor and
project applicant
During ground
disturbing
activities during
construction
Qualified
archaeologist,
or if identified
resources are of
Native
American Origin
an appropriate
Tribal
Representative
Considered
complete upon
submission of
monitoring report
to the City of
Torrance
Community
Development
Department
305

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E AT D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G AT E D N E G AT I V E D E C L A R AT I O N O C T O B E R 2 0 2 4

Table B: Mitigation and Monitoring Reporting Program
Mitigation Measures Implementation
Responsibility
Mitigation Schedule Monitoring/Reporting
Responsibility
Monitoring Actions/
Completion Criteria
within 25 feet of the resources shall be
halted and the lead agency shall consult
with the appropriate Tribal representative.

The archaeologist will stake the area of
discovery, placing stakes no more than 10
feet apart, forming a circle around the point
of discovery.

If any find is determined to be significant,
representatives of the Applicant and/or lead
agency and the qualified professional would
meet to determine the appropriate
avoidance measures or other appropriate
measure, with the ultimate determination
to be made by the City of Torrance. If the
resource is determined to be a Tribal
Cultural Resource and thus significant under
CEQA, the Applicant/Developer shall retain
a qualified archaeologist and a Tribal
monitor, at the Applicant’s expense, to
prepare a mitigation plan, which shall be
implemented by the appropriate entity in
accordance with State guidelines and in
consultation with the consulting Tribe. All
significant cultural materials recovered shall
be subject to scientific analysis, professional
museum curation, and/or a report prepared
by the qualified professional according to
current professional standards.

In considering any suggested measure
proposed by the qualified professional, the
Applicant shall determine whether
avoidance is necessary or feasible in light of
factors such as the uniqueness of the find,
306

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E AT D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G AT E D N E G AT I V E D E C L A R AT I O N O C T O B E R 2 0 2 4

Table B: Mitigation and Monitoring Reporting Program
Mitigation Measures Implementation
Responsibility
Mitigation Schedule Monitoring/Reporting
Responsibility
Monitoring Actions/
Completion Criteria
project design, costs, and other
considerations. For Tribal Cultural
Resources, avoidance is always preferred.

If avoidance is unnecessary or infeasible,
other appropriate measures (e.g., data
recovery) shall be instituted. For Tribal
Cultural Resources, data recovery is never
an appropriate mitigation. If avoidance is
not feasible, the mitigation plan shall
outline appropriate treatment of the
resource in coordination with the consulting
Tribe and, if applicable, a qualified
archaeologist. Examples of appropriate
mitigation for Tribal Cultural Resources
include, but are not limited to, protecting
the cultural character and integrity of the
resources, protecting traditional use of the
resources, protecting the confidentiality of
the resources, and/or heritage recovery.

Work may proceed on other parts of the
project site while mitigation measures for
cultural resources is carried out.

If significant materials are recovered, the
qualified professional shall prepare a report
on the findings for submittal to the South
Central Coast Information Center.

4.6: Energy
The proposed project would not result in significant adverse impacts related to energy. No mitigation would be required.

307

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E AT D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G AT E D N E G AT I V E D E C L A R AT I O N O C T O B E R 2 0 2 4

Table B: Mitigation and Monitoring Reporting Program
Mitigation Measures Implementation
Responsibility
Mitigation Schedule Monitoring/Reporting
Responsibility
Monitoring Actions/
Completion Criteria

4.7: Geology and Soils
MM PALEO-1a Paleontological Resources Impact
Mitigation Program (PRIMP) . A qualified,
professional paleontologist who meets the
standards set by the Society of Vertebrate
Paleontology (SVP) shall be retained by the
Applicant to develop a Paleontological
Resources Impact Mitigation Program
(PRIMP) for this project. The PRIMP shall be
consistent with the guidelines of the SVP
and shall include the methods that will be
used to protect paleontological resources
that may exist within the project limits, as
well as procedur es for monitoring, fossil
preparation and identification, curation
into a repository, and preparation of a
report at the conclusion of ground
disturbance.

Project applicant Prior to ground
disturbing activities
A qualified
paleontologist
Considered complete
upon PRIMP approval by
the City of Torrance City
of Torrance Community
Development Department
MM PALEO-1b Paleontological Monitoring. Prior to
grading permit issuance, the following
measure shall be included on grading plans:

Ground-disturbing activities shall be
monitored by a qualified paleontological
monitor following a PRIMP . If
paleontological resources are encountered
during the course of ground disturbance,
the paleontological monitor shall have the
authority to temporarily redirect
construction away from the area of the find
in order to assess its significance. In the
event that paleontological resources are
encountered when a paleontological
monitor is not present, work within 25 feet
of the find shall be redirected and the
Project applicant Prior to grading permit
issuance and
throughout the
duration of ground
disturbing activities
A qualified
paleontologist
Considered complete
upon issuance of grading
permit and submission to
the City of Torrance City
of Torrance Community
Development Department
grading plans that include
PRIMP measures
308

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E AT D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G AT E D N E G AT I V E D E C L A R AT I O N O C T O B E R 2 0 2 4

Table B: Mitigation and Monitoring Reporting Program
Mitigation Measures Implementation
Responsibility
Mitigation Schedule Monitoring/Reporting
Responsibility
Monitoring Actions/
Completion Criteria
paleontologist or paleontological monitor
shall be contacted to assess the find for
scientific significance. If determined to be
scientifically significant, the fossil shall be
collected from the field.

MM PALEO-1c Report of Findings. Collected resources
shall be prepared to the point of
identification, identified to the lowest
taxonomic level possible, cataloged, and
curated into the permanent collections of
a museum repository. At the conclusion of
the monitoring program, a report of
findings shall be prepared to document
the results of the monitoring program and
submitted to the City prior to the issuance
of a certificate of occupancy.

Project applicant Throughout the
duration of ground
disturbing activities and
Within 6 months of the
completion of
paleontological
monitoring
Qualified
paleontologist
Considered complete
upon final approval of
finding report by the City
of Torrance Community
Development Department

4.8: Greenhouse Gas Emissions
The proposed project would not result in significant adverse impacts related to greenhouse gas emissions. No mitigation would be required.

4.9: Hazards and Hazardous Materials
MM HAZ-1 Soil Management Plan.

Prior to or concurrent with demolition
permit applications, the Construction
Contractor shall provide a Soil Management
Plan to the City of Torrance for review and
approval. The Soil Management Plan shall
include the procedures for pre-demolition
surveys and testing for hazardous building
materials such as asbestos, lead-based
paint, mercury, and polychlorinated
biphenyls, and removal and disposal of
hazardous building materials. All
inspections, surveys, and analyses shall be
performed by appropriately licensed and
Project applicant and
construction
contractor
Prior to or concurrent
with demolition permit
applications
Construction
Contractor
Considered complete
upon approval of Soil
Management Plan by the
City of Torrance
Community Development
Department
309

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E AT D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G AT E D N E G AT I V E D E C L A R AT I O N O C T O B E R 2 0 2 4

Table B: Mitigation and Monitoring Reporting Program
Mitigation Measures Implementation
Responsibility
Mitigation Schedule Monitoring/Reporting
Responsibility
Monitoring Actions/
Completion Criteria
qualified individuals in accordance with
applicable regulations. All identified
hazardous materials shall be removed,
handled, and properly disposed of by
appropriately licensed contractors
according to all applicable regulations
during demolition of structures. The
Construction Contractor shall provide
documentation (e.g., all required waste
manifests, sampling, and air monitoring
analytical results) to the City of Torrance
showing that abatement of hazardous
building materials has been completed in
full compliance with all applicable
regulations. The City of Torrance shall
document that the Soil Management Plan
has been approved prior to issuance of
demolition permits. In the event that soil
conditions on the site are encountered that
exceed standards established in the Soil
Management Plan, the Applicant/Developer
shall, on behalf of the City of Torrance,
enter into a Standard Voluntary Agreement
(SVA) program with the Department of
Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) or seek
oversight with the Los Angeles County Site
Mitigation Unit to ensure proper evaluation
of the project is completed.

4.10: Hydrology and Water Quality
The proposed project would not result in significant adverse impacts related to Hydrology and Water Quality. No mitigation measures have been proposed

4.11: Land Use and Planning
The proposed project would not result in significant adverse impacts related to land use and planning. No mitigation would be required.

310

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E AT D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G AT E D N E G AT I V E D E C L A R AT I O N O C T O B E R 2 0 2 4

Table B: Mitigation and Monitoring Reporting Program
Mitigation Measures Implementation
Responsibility
Mitigation Schedule Monitoring/Reporting
Responsibility
Monitoring Actions/
Completion Criteria

4.12: Mineral Resources
The proposed project would not result in significant adverse impacts related to mineral resources. No mitigation would be required.

4.13: Noise
The proposed project would not result in significant adverse impacts related to Noise. No mitigation measures have been proposed

4.14: Population and Housing
The proposed project would not result in significant adverse impacts related to population and housing. No mitigation would be required.

4.15: Public Services
The proposed project would not result in significant adverse impacts related to public services. No mitigation would be required.

4.16: Recreation
The proposed project would not result in any significant adverse impacts related to recreation. No mitigation would be required.

4.17: Transportation
The proposed project would not result in any significant adverse impacts related to transportation. No mitigation would be required.

4.18: Tribal Cultural Resources
Refer to MM CUL-1.

4.19: Utilities and Service Systems
The proposed project would not result in any significant adverse impacts to utilities and service systems. No mitigation would be required.

4.20: Wildfire
The proposed project would not result in any significant adverse impacts to wildfire. No mitigation would be required.

4.21: Mandatory Findings of Significance
Refer to Mitigation Measures CUL-1, PALEO-1a thru 1c, and HAZ-1. 311

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E AT D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G AT E D N E G AT I V E D E C L A R AT I O N O C T O B E R 2 0 2 4

Table C: Regulatory Compliance Measures
Regulatory Compliance Measure Implementation
Responsibility
Mitigation Schedule Monitoring/Reporting
Responsibility
Monitoring Actions/
Completion Criteria

4.1: Aesthetics
No regulatory compliance measures have been proposed in relation to aesthetics or visual impacts.

4.2: Agriculture and Forest Resources
No regulatory compliance measures have been proposed in relation to agriculture and forest resources.

4.3: Air Quality
No regulatory compliance measures have been proposed in relation to air quality impacts.

4.4: Biological Resources
RCM 4-1 Nesting Bird Survey and Avoidance.

If vegetation removal, construction, or
grading activities are planned to occur
within the active nesting bird season
(February 1 through August 31), the
Applicant/Developer shall confirm to
the City of Torrance Community
Development Director, or designee, that
a qualified biologist has been retained
who shall conduct a preconstruction
nesting bird survey no more than 3 days
prior to the start of such activities. The
nesting bird survey shall include the
work area and areas adjacent to the site
(within 500 feet, as feasible) that could
potentially be affected by project-
related activities such as noise,
vibration, increased human activity, and
dust. For any active nest(s) identified,
the qualified biologist shall establish an
appropriate buffer zone around the
active nest(s). The appropriate buffer
shall be determined by the qualified
biologist based on species, location, and
Project
applicant/construction
contractor
Within the active nesting
bird season (February 1
through August 31), no
more than 3 days prior to
the start of vegetation
removal, construction or
grading activities
Qualified Biologist Considered complete upon
determination the nest is
no longer active, as
determined by the qualified
biologist and submittal of
survey logs to the City of
Torrance Community
Development Department
312

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E AT D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G AT E D N E G AT I V E D E C L A R AT I O N O C T O B E R 2 0 2 4

Table C: Regulatory Compliance Measures
Regulatory Compliance Measure Implementation
Responsibility
Mitigation Schedule Monitoring/Reporting
Responsibility
Monitoring Actions/
Completion Criteria
the nature of the proposed activities.

Project activities shall be avoided within
the buffer zone until the nest is deemed
no longer active, as determined by the
qualified biologist.

The surveys shall be document with a
biological resources survey log and at
the conclusion of monitoring shall be
submitted to the City of Torrance.

4.5: Cultural Resources
RCM CUL-1 Human Remains. In the event that
human remains are encountered on the
project site, work within 50 feet of the
discovery shall be redirected and the
County Coroner notified immediately
consistent with the requirements of
CCR Section 15064.5(e). Health and
Safety Code Section 7050.5 state s that
no further disturbance shall occur until
the County Coroner has made a
determination of origin and disposition
pursuant to PRC Section 5097.98. If the
remains are determined to be Native
American, the County Coroner shall
notify the Native American Heritage
Commission (NAHC) within 24 hours,
which shall determine and notify a
Most Likely Descendant (MLD). With
the permission of the City, the MLD may
inspect the site of the discovery. The
MLD shall complete the inspection
within 48 hours of being granted access
to the site. The MLD may recommend
scientific removal and nondestructive
Construction Contractor Prior to issuance
of grading permit
and during
ground
disturbance
activities
County Coroner Considered
complete upon
completion of
ground disturbing
activities and
approval of grading
plans by the City of
Torrance
Community
Development
Department
313

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E AT D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G AT E D N E G AT I V E D E C L A R AT I O N O C T O B E R 2 0 2 4

Table C: Regulatory Compliance Measures
Regulatory Compliance Measure Implementation
Responsibility
Mitigation Schedule Monitoring/Reporting
Responsibility
Monitoring Actions/
Completion Criteria
analysis of human remains and items
associated with Native American
burials. Consistent with CCR Section
15064.5(d), if the remains are
determined to be Native American and
an MLD is notified, the City shall consult
with the MLD as identified by the NAHC
to develop an agreement for treatment
and disposition of the remains. Prior to
the issuance of grading permits, the
Director of the City’s Community
Development Department, or designee,
shall verify that all grading plans specify
the requirements of CCR Sec tion
15064.5(e), State Health and Safety
Code Section 7050.5, and PRC Section
5097.98, as stated above.

4.6: Energy
No regulatory compliance measures have been proposed in relation to energy impacts.

4.7: Geology and Soils
RCM GEO-1 California Building Code Compliance
Seismic Standards. Prior to issuance of
construction permits, a final soils report
shall be prepared for review and
approval by the City. The City shall
review grading and building plans to
verify that grading and structural design
conforms to the requirements of the
soils r eport and the City Municipal
Code. All structures shall be designed in
accordance with the seismic
parameters presented in the soils
report and applicable sections of the
most current California Buildi ng Code
City of Torrance Prior to issuance of
construction permits
City of Torrance Considered complete
upon issuance of
construction permits and
approval of Final Soil
report by the City of
Torrance Community
Development Department
314

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E AT D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G AT E D N E G AT I V E D E C L A R AT I O N O C T O B E R 2 0 2 4

Table C: Regulatory Compliance Measures
Regulatory Compliance Measure Implementation
Responsibility
Mitigation Schedule Monitoring/Reporting
Responsibility
Monitoring Actions/
Completion Criteria
(CBC).

4.8: Greenhouse Gas Emissions
No regulatory compliance measures have been included in relation to greenhouse gas emissions.

4.9: Hazards and Hazardous Materials
No regulatory compliance measures have been included in relation to hazards and hazardous materials.

4.10: Hydrology and Water Quality
RCM WQ-1 Construction General Permit.

Prior to issuance of a grading permit,
the Applicant shall obtain coverage
under the State Water Resources
Control Board National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System General
Permit for Storm Water Discharges
Associated with Construction and Land
Disturbance Activities (Order No. 2009-
0009-DWQ, National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System No.

CAS000002, as amended by Orders No.
2010-0014-DWQ and 2012-0006-DWQ)
(Construction General Permit). This shall
include the submission of Permit
Registration Documents (PRDs),
including a Notice of Intent (NOI) for
coverage under the permit to the State
Water Resources Control Board
(SWRCB) via the Stormwater Multiple
Application and Report Tracking System
(SMARTs). The Applicant shall provide
the Waste Discharge Identification
Number (WDID) to the City of Torrance
(City) to demonstrate proof of coverage
under the Construction General Permit.

A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
The project applicant Prior to issuance of a
grading permit
City of Torrance Considered complete
upon completion of
construction and
stabilization of the site
and the and submission of
required documentation
to the City of Torrance
Community Development
Department
315

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E AT D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G AT E D N E G AT I V E D E C L A R AT I O N O C T O B E R 2 0 2 4

Table C: Regulatory Compliance Measures
Regulatory Compliance Measure Implementation
Responsibility
Mitigation Schedule Monitoring/Reporting
Responsibility
Monitoring Actions/
Completion Criteria
(SWPPP) shall be prepared and
implemented for the proposed Project
in compliance with the requirements of
the Construction General Permit. The
SWPPP shall identify construction best
management practices (BMPs) to be
implemented to ensure that the
potential for soil erosion and
sedimentation is minimized and to
control the discharge of pollutants in
stormwater runoff as a result of
construction activities. Upon
completion of construction and
stabilization of the site, a Notice of
Termination will be submitted via
SMARTs.

RCM WQ-2 Los Angeles County Groundwater
Discharge Permit.

At least 45 days prior to groundwater
dewatering activities, the City of
Torrance shall submit an NOI to the Los
Angeles Regional Water Quality Control
Board (RWQCB) to obtain coverage
under the Waste Discharge
Requirements for Discharges of
Groundwater from Construction and
Project Dewatering to Surface Waters in
Coastal Watershed of Los Angeles and
Ventura Counties (Groundwater
Discharge Permit), Order No. R4-2018-
0125, NPDES No. CAG994004. The
construction contractor shall comply
with the requirements of Order No. R4-
2018-0125, NPDES No. CAG994004.

Groundwater dewatering activities shall
Construction Contractor At least 45 days prior to
groundwater
dewatering activities
City of Torrance

Considered complete
upon completion of
groundwater dewatering
activities and submission
of required
documentation to the City
of Torrance Community
Development Department
316

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E AT D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G AT E D N E G AT I V E D E C L A R AT I O N O C T O B E R 2 0 2 4

Table C: Regulatory Compliance Measures
Regulatory Compliance Measure Implementation
Responsibility
Mitigation Schedule Monitoring/Reporting
Responsibility
Monitoring Actions/
Completion Criteria
comply with all applicable provisions in
the Groundwater Discharge Permit,
including water sampling, analysis,
treatment (if required), and reporting of
dewatering-related discharges. Upon
completion of groundwater dewatering
activities, an NOI shall be submitted to
the Los Angeles RWQCB.

RCM WQ-3 Los Angeles County MS4 Permit.

Prior to issuance of a grading permit,
the City shall ensure that a final Low
Impact Development (LID) Plan is
prepared in compliance with the
requirements of the Waste Discharge
Requirements for Municipal Separate
Storm Sewer System (MS4) Discharges
within the Coastal Watersheds of Los
Angeles County, Except Those
Discharges Originating from the City of
Long Beach MS4 (Los Angeles County
MS4 Permit), Order No. R4-2012-0175,
NPDES Permit No. CAS004001, as
amended by Order Nos. WQ 2015-0075
and R4-2012-0175-A01).

Project applicant Prior to issuance of a
grading permit
City of Torrance Considered complete
upon approval or the Low
Impact Development plan
by the City of Torrance
Community Development
Department
RCM WQ-4 City of Torrance Municipal Code.

Prior to issuance of a grading permit,
the Applicant shall prepare a Low
Impact Development (LID) Plan in
accordance with Division 4 Chapter 11
Low Impact Development Strategies of
the City of Torrance Municipal Code.

The LID shall demonstrate how the
project would retain stormwater runoff
on site for the stormwater quality
design volume (SWQDv) defined as the
Project applicant Prior to issuance of a
grading permit
City of Torrance Considered complete
upon issuance of grading
permit and approval of
LID plan by the City of
Torrance Community
Development Department
317

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E AT D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G AT E D N E G AT I V E D E C L A R AT I O N O C T O B E R 2 0 2 4

Table C: Regulatory Compliance Measures
Regulatory Compliance Measure Implementation
Responsibility
Mitigation Schedule Monitoring/Reporting
Responsibility
Monitoring Actions/
Completion Criteria
runoff from: the 85th percentile, 24-
hour rain event as determined from the
Los Angeles County 85th percentile
precipitation isoheytal map or the
volume of runoff produced from a 0.75-
inch, 24-hour rain event; whichever is
greater. When, as determined by the
Community Development Department,
one hundred percent (100%) on-site
retention of the SWQDv is technically
infeasible, partially or fully, the
infeasibility shall be demonstrated in
the submitted LID Plan. In these
circumstances, the project site may
biofiltrate one and one-half (1.5) times
the portion of the remaining SWQDv
that is not reliably retained on site.

Biofiltration BMPs must adhere to the
design specifications provided in the Los
Angeles County MS4 permit.

4.11: Land Use and Planning
No regulatory compliance measures have been included in relation to land use and planning.

4.12: Mineral Resources
No regulatory compliance measures have been included in relation to mineral resources.

4.13: Noise
RCM NOI-1 Construction Noise and Vibration.

Prior to issuance of building permits,
the City of Torrance (City) Director of
Community Development Department,
or designee, shall verify that grading
and construction plans include the
following requirements:
• Ensure that the greatest
distance between noise
City of Torrance Director
of Community
Development
Department, or designee
Prior to issuance of
building permits
City of Torrance
Director
Considered complete
upon issuance of
construction permits after
review of grading and
construction plans by the
City of Torrance
Community Development
Department to ensure
that noise standards are
318

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E AT D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G AT E D N E G AT I V E D E C L A R AT I O N O C T O B E R 2 0 2 4

Table C: Regulatory Compliance Measures
Regulatory Compliance Measure Implementation
Responsibility
Mitigation Schedule Monitoring/Reporting
Responsibility
Monitoring Actions/
Completion Criteria
sources and sensitive
receptors during construction
activities has been achieved.
• Construction equipment, fixed
or mobile, shall be equipped
with properly operating and
maintained noise mufflers
consistent with
manufacturers’ standards.
• Construction staging areas
shall be located away from off
site sensitive uses during the
later phases of project
development.
• The construction contractor
shall place all stationary
construction equipment so
that emitted noise is directed
away from sensitive receptors
nearest the project site
whenever feasible.
• The construction contractor
shall use on-site electrical
sources to power equipment
rather than diesel generators
where feasible.
• All residential units located
within 300 ft of the
construction site shall be sent
a notice regarding the
construction schedule. A sign,
legible at a distance of 50 ft,
met
319

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E AT D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G AT E D N E G AT I V E D E C L A R AT I O N O C T O B E R 2 0 2 4

Table C: Regulatory Compliance Measures
Regulatory Compliance Measure Implementation
Responsibility
Mitigation Schedule Monitoring/Reporting
Responsibility
Monitoring Actions/
Completion Criteria
shall also be posted at the
construction site. All notices
and the signs shall indicate
the dates and duration of
construction activities, as well
as provide a telephone
number for the “noise
disturbance coordinator.”
• A “noise disturbance
coordinator” shall be
established. The disturbance
coordinator shall be
responsible for responding to
any local complaints about
construction noise. The
disturbance coordinator shall
determine the cause of the
noise complaint (e.g., starting
too early, bad muffler, etc.)
and shall be required to
implement reasonable
measures to reduce noise
levels. All notices that are sent
to residential units within 300
ft of the construction site and
all signs posted at the
construction site shall list the
telephone number for the
disturbance coordinator.

RCM NOI-2 HVAC Equipment.

Prior to issuance of construction
permits, the City of Torrance Director of
Community Development, or designee,
shall verify that that the approved plans
Project applicant Prior to issuance of
construction permits
City of Torrance
Director
Considered complete
upon issuance of
construction permits after
review of grading and
construction plans by the
320

F A S H I O N S Q U A R E AT D E L A M O

T O R R A N C E, C A L I F O R N I A

I N I T I A L S T U D Y/M I T I G AT E D N E G AT I V E D E C L A R AT I O N O C T O B E R 2 0 2 4

Table C: Regulatory Compliance Measures
Regulatory Compliance Measure Implementation
Responsibility
Mitigation Schedule Monitoring/Reporting
Responsibility
Monitoring Actions/
Completion Criteria
indicate that mechanical equipment
(e.g., heating, ventilation, and air
conditioning [HVAC]) shall have a sound
rating of less than 66.5 dBA when
measured at 5 ft, or shall be structurally
insulated to assure compliance with the
City Noise Ordinance.

City of Torrance
Community Development
Department to ensure
that noise standards are
met

4.14: Population and Housing
No regulatory compliance measures have been included in relation to population and housing.

4.15: Public Services
No regulatory compliance measures have been included in relation to public services.

4.16: Recreation
No regulatory compliance measures have been included in relation to recreation impacts.

4.17: Transportation
No regulatory compliance measures have been included in relation to transportation.

4.18: Tribal Cultural Resources
Refer to RCM CUL-1.

4.19: Utilities and Service Systems
No regulatory compliance measures have been included in relation to utilities and service systems.

4.20: Wildfire
No regulatory compliance measures have been included in relation to wildfire impacts.

4.21: Mandatory Findings of Significance
Refer to Regulatory Compliance Measures 4-1, CUL-1, GEO-1, WQ-1 thru WQ-4, and NOI-1.

321
Attachment 7 - Fashion Square at Del Amo
3405 Carson Street (APN 7366-019-123)
21405, 21515 Madrona Avenue (APN 7366-019-182, 7366-019-183)

The purpose of this attachment is to respond, in writing, to public comments received on environmental issues on the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) for the proposed Fashion Square at Del Amo project (proposed project). The City of Torrance Community Development Department received a total of nine comment letters, eight comments from individuals and one letter from a public agency, as shown in Table 1 below.

The City of Torrance Community Development Department is providing the responses in Table 1 although not required by CEQA (see CEQA Guidelines Section 15088). The City of Torrance Community Development Department considered the comments received on the draft IS/MND, evaluated the issues raised and found that the comments did not provide new information; they did not identify any new significant impacts or an increase in severity of previously identified impacts; and they do not identify or result in additio nal feasible mitigation measures.
322
Table 1: Fashion Square at Del Amo Response to Comments Name of Commenter Type of Commenter Main Issues Raised Response Erika Jerez Individual Increase in traffic and
noise in the project
vicinity, increase
pressure on utilities;
suggested scaling down
the project
Traffic: Please note that with Senate Bill 743 (SB743) becoming effective statewide in July 2020, automobile delay (LOS) is not considered to be a significant environmental effect under CEQA.

Pursuant to SB 743, CEQA requires the evaluation of VMT when analyzing a project’s environmental effects on transportation.

Therefore, the LOS analysis was provided for informational purposes only, and the project was found to be consistent with City of Torrance General Plan. As outlined in Section 4.17, Transportation, of the IS/MND with implementation of proposed intersection improvements, the proposed project would not generate a substantial number of daily or peak-hour vehicle trips to warrant modifications to any other transportation facilities. The addition of project traffic to the circulation system would exceed the LOS threshold at one of the 27 study intersections (Prairie Avenue/Redondo Beach Boulevard). The project proposes to restripe the intersection’s southbound approach within the City of Lawndale and the southbound departure within the City of Torrance to include an additional through lane. In addition, the existing traffic signal would be modified as necessary.

You Jerome Funt Individual Bad location for project
due to traffic and crime;
decrease in property
values
Traffic: see above

Sandra Will Individual Worried about increase
in traffic and pollution;
ask City to consider
running busses at 20
minute intervals city
wide to offset increase in
car trips
Traffic: see above
Air Quality: As outlined in Section 4.3 Air Quality, project construction emissions would be below Short – Term Regional Construction Emissions thresholds as established by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) is the regional government agency that monitors and regulates air pollution within the project Basin. In addition, as shown in Table AQ-4, the project ATTACHMENT 7
323
operational emissions would also be below established thresholds.

Table AQ-5, further indicate that the project would not result in an exceedance of SCAQMD localized significance analysis during project construction or operation, which analyzed impact at 115 feet from the project site.

Kara Ryan Individual Concerns regarding
increase in traffic,
parking and pollution
from project
implementation;
concerns to livability of
the area
See Traffic and Air Quality responses above
Lisa Maguire and D
Belitz
(submitted same
letter)
Individuals Concerns regarding
community character;
traffic and safety
impacts; noise increase;
aesthetic impact;
conditional use and
community input
process
See Traffic and Air Quality responses below
Aesthetic Character: As outlined in Section 4.1 Aesthetics of the IS/MND, the project was designed to provide step backs from existing viewpoints, by planning for step backs from Madrona Avenue, with building heights increasing from Madrona Avenue and West Carson Street, thus providing a visual transition from the existing residential neighborhood to the proposed project. In addition to the proposed step back, all final project designs would be subject to City review and approval.

Noise: Section 4.13 Noise of the IS/MND includes a discussion of potential noise increases during both construction and operation. It is expected that average noise levels during construction at the nearest sensitive receptors, the single-family homes to the east, would approach 72 dBA Leq during the grading phase, which would take place for a duration of approximately 61 weeks, at different locations throughout the site. Average noise levels during other construction phases would range from 59 dBA Leq to 72 dBA Leq.

However, compliance with the allowed hours in the City’s Noise Ordinance would ensure that construction noise does not disturb 324
residents during typical sleeping hours or during hours when ambient noise levels are likely to be lower (i.e., at night). Although construction noise would be higher than the ambient noise in the vicinity of the project site, it would cease to occur once project construction is completed. Additionally, with the incorporation of Regulatory Compliance Measure NOI-1, all feasible and reasonable measures to reduce construction noise would be implemented and a less than significant impact would occur.

In addition, the project specific analysis found that the increase in noise associated with project-related traffic would be very small, ranging from 0.0 to 0.6 dBA along the segments analyzed. These noise level increases are not perceptible by the human ear; therefore, off-site traffic noise impacts would be less than significant.

Teresa Evans Individual Asks to stop project due
to increase in traffic
See Traffic Response below
Thomas Dorsey Individual Supports project if
reduced to four stories

Department of Toxic
Substances Control
Agency DTSC Recommends that
a Soil Management Plan
be implemented at the
project site; that the City
of Torrance enter into a
voluntary agreement and
that all imported soil and
fill material be tested.

See Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 Soil Management Plan; see
Condition of Approval 34 for coordination of voluntary agreements and Condition of Approval 35 for testing of imported soil.

325
1 From: CDD Info <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 14, 2024 8:36 AM
To: Niemeyer, Natalie
Cc: Oorts, Leo
Subject: FW: Overcrowding is a concern

CDD INFO
Community Development
Email: [email protected]
This email, and any attachments to it, may contain confidential information and is intended for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this email and any attachments. Any review, reliance, disclosure, copying, storing, distribution, forwarding without express permission, or use of the contents of the information received in error is strictly prohibited.
-----Original Message-----
From: Erika Jerez
Sent: Saturday, October 12, 2024 2:38 PM
To: CDD Info <[email protected]>
Subject: Overcrowding is a concern
[You don't often get email from . Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ]
Hello – I’m writing about the scope of the project at Carson and Prairie. I realize we have a need for more affordable housing in the city, but the size and scope of this project seems a bit overkill for the location, no? I’m very concerned about our infrastructure. Anza was destroyed with all the traffic from all the apartments and it took forever to fix. It was one of the worst roads to drive on in the city. Any chance the size of the project could be scaled down? If noise and infrastructure concerns are not enough to pause the project, I’m not sure what would be.

Please reconsider the size and scope of this project as it will affect the landscape and feel of our very special town.

Concerned homeowner,
West Torrance
Erika Jerez
Sent from my iPhone
326
1 From: CDD Info <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 14, 2024 8:36 AM
To: Niemeyer, Natalie
Cc: Oorts, Leo
Subject: FW: Housing project on Madrona Avenue

CDD INFO
Community Development
Email: [email protected]
This email, and any attachments to it, may contain confidential information and is intended for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this email and any attachments. Any review, reliance, disclosure, copying, storing, distribution, forwarding without express permission, or use of the contents of the information received in error is strictly prohibited.
-----Original Message-----
From: Jerry Funt
Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2024 1:52 PM
To: CDD Info <[email protected]>
Subject: Housing project on Madrona Avenue
[You don't often get email from Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ]
Sent from my iPhone
I live near the Delamo mall there is so much traffic in the area and tons of crime at the mall.I think it’s a terrible place to build housing .

Every day we hear police siren’s running to the mall.Plus you will devalue our property if you overcrowd this area Thank You Jerome Funt
327
1 From: CDD Info <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 14, 2024 8:37 AM
To: Niemeyer, Natalie
Cc: Oorts, Leo
Subject: FW: PLEASE STOP BUILDING APARTMENTS-CONDOMINIUMS

CDD INFO
Community Development Department
[email protected]
TorranceCA.Gov |
Facebook |
X (Formerly Twitter) |
Instagram
This email, and any attachments to it, may contain confidential information and is intended for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this email and any attachments.

Any review, reliance, disclosure, copying, storing, distribution, forwarding without express permission, or use of the contents of the information received in error is strictly prohibited.

From: Sandra Will
Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2024 2:56 PM
To: CDD Info <[email protected]>
Subject: PLEASE STOP BUILDING APARTMENTS-CONDOMINIUMS
Dear Sir\Madam:

We are residents of Torrance and have lived here for more than 35 years, we are tired of so much Pollution from the vehicles and overcrowding housing projects that is about to happen, again. They have already added a lot of buildings thru the years, one of the latest that we know of is the one by PCH and Palos Verdes Blvd. and the traffic is getting ridicoulos. Now the new development that is about to happens is by Del Amo Mall where our beloved Black Angus is going to be destroyed. Please STOP this project.

Best thing the city should offer are buses that can run every 20 minutes around the City, so people can at least use the bus and no need to use their cars. We don't have enough buses and they don't run as often. Thank you for your time.

Yours,
Sandra Will
You don't often get email from . Learn why this is important 328
1 From: CDD Info <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 14, 2024 8:37 AM
To: Niemeyer, Natalie
Cc: Oorts, Leo
Subject: FW: Public Comment: Fashion Square at Del Amo

CDD INFO
Community Development Department
[email protected]
TorranceCA.Gov |
Facebook |
X (Formerly Twitter) |
Instagram
This email, and any attachments to it, may contain confidential information and is intended for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this email and any attachments.

Any review, reliance, disclosure, copying, storing, distribution, forwarding without express permission, or use of the contents of the information received in error is strictly prohibited.

From: Lisa Maguire
Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2024 6:19 PM
To: CDD Info <[email protected]>
Subject: Public Comment: Fashion Square at Del Amo
Subject: Public Comment – Fashion Square at Del Amo
Project: Fashion Square at Del Amo (EAS23-00003, CUP23-00012, DIV23-00003, DVP23-00002, MOD23- 00007, MOD23-00008)
Project Location: Northwest corner of West Carson Street and Madrona Avenue at 3405 West Carson Street and 21405, 21515 Madrona Avenue (APNs: 7366-019-123, 7366-019-182, and 7366-019-183) Torrance, CA 90503 Regarding: Public Comment regarding the Adequacy of the IS/MND for Fashion Square at Del Amo Project To the City of Torrance Community Development Department, Planning Division:

I am submitting my comments regarding the adequacy of the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) for the Fashion Square at Del Amo Project. While I understand that the project site has a land use designation of Commercial Center and is located within the Del Amo Business Sub-District One (H-DA1), I have several concerns regarding the environmental impacts and how they have been addressed in the IS/MND.

My comments pertain to the following areas:

1. Incompatibility with Surrounding Land Uses (Land Use and Planning) You don't often get email from . Learn why this is important 329
2 The IS/MND notes that the project is adjacent to single-family residential neighborhoods across Madrona Avenue. However, it inadequately assesses the project's impact on the character and livability of these neighborhoods. The introduction of 260 residential units, with buildings up to 67 feet in height, will significantly alter the aesthetic and spatial relationship between the commercial center and the surrounding lower-density residential area. The assessment does not fully explore the potential incompatibilities in terms of height, density, and the urbanization of an area primarily characterized by single-family homes. While the IS/MND mentions conformance with zoning standards, it does not address potential cumulative effects on the residential neighborhood's character, privacy, and overall quality of life.

2. Traffic and Transportation Impacts
The IS/MND briefly discusses transportation impacts but does not adequately address the potential for increased traffic congestion in the adjacent single-family neighborhood, particularly on Madrona Avenue. The project’s scale and density, combined with the two proposed driveways and increased vehicular access, will introduce more traffic to local streets that serve residential areas. While the study mentions compliance with the City’s traffic standards, it fails to provide a detailed analysis of how this traffic increase will affect local streets, pedestrian safety (especially with nearby schools such as Madrona Middle School and Hickory Tree School), and the overall livability of the area. The IS/MND needs a more comprehensive transportation impact study t hat considers traffic flow into these residential areas.

3. Aesthetic and Visual Impacts
The proposed buildings, particularly the 67-foot-high structures, will have a significant visual impact on the surrounding neighborhood. The IS/MND does not adequately address the potential for the project to obstruct views, cast shadows, or otherwise diminish the aesthetic quality of the single-family neighborhood.

Furthermore, the IS/MND mentions that the project will comply with the zoning height limitations, but it does not thoroughly assess how the proposed height, massing, and architectural style will affect the views from nearby homes and public spaces, nor does it propose meaningful mitigation measures to minimize these impacts.

4. Noise Impacts
While the IS/MND mentions compliance with noise standards during construction and operation, the document does not fully assess the noise impacts on the single-family homes adjacent to the project. The construction of 260 residential units, including the associated parking and community amenities, will inevitably generate significant noise during the long construction period (41 months). Furthermore, the operational noise from increased vehicular traffic, residents, and activities in community spaces will create an ongoing disturbance to the neighborhood, particularly at night. These potential noise impacts have not been adequately mitigated in the IS/MND, and further analysis is needed.

5. Hydrology and Water Quality
The IS/MND acknowledges the need to assess hydrology and water quality impacts, but it does not sufficiently address how the large-scale development will affect water drainage patterns, especially considering the proximity of existing residential homes. The development of impervious surfaces across such a large area could increase stormwater runoff, potentially impacting the local neighborhood’s drainage systems. Further clarification is required on how stormwater will be managed, especially during heavy rainfall, and whether local infrastructure can handle the increased demand.

6. Conditional Use Permit (CUP) Process and Public Input 330
3 The project requires a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to allow residential uses in the H-DA1 zone, yet the IS/MND does not clearly articulate how the community's input will be integrated into the CUP process. The existing neighborhood has a right to weigh in on how this major development will affect the area's residential nature, and more transparency is needed regarding how the CUP will address these concerns. The IS/MND should outline specific measures for ongoing public consultation and mitigation strategies that prioritize the neighborhood’s existing character.

Conclusion
In conclusion, the IS/MND for the Fashion Square at Del Amo Project fails to adequately address several critical environmental and community impacts. The scale, density, and height of the proposed development, combined with potential increases in traffic, noise, and aesthetic degradation, raise significant concerns about the compatibility of this project with the surrounding single-family neighborhood. I urge the City to reconsider the adequacy of the IS/MND and conduct further studies to fully assess the project's impacts, particularly concerning its effect on the residential areas adjacent to the site.

Sincerely,

Resident of the surrounding single-family neighborhood of Torrance

331
1 Jazmine Estores
From: CDD Info <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2024 8:50 AM
To: Oorts, Leo; Martinez, Oscar
Cc: Ramirez, Michelle
Subject: FW: Public Comment-Fashion Square at Del Amo

From:

Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2024 8:38 AM
To: CDD Info <[email protected]>
Subject: Public Comment-Fashion Square at Del Amo

Subject: Public Comment – Fashion Square at Del Amo
Project: Fashion Square at Del Amo (EAS23-00003, CUP23-00012, DIV23-00003, DVP23-00002, MOD23-00007, MOD23-00008)
Project Location: Northwest corner of West Carson Street and Madrona Avenue at 3405 West Carson Street and 21405, 21515 Madrona Avenue (APNs: 7366-019-123, 7366-019-182, and 7366-019-183) Torrance, CA 90503
Regarding: Public Comment regarding the Adequacy of the IS/MND for Fashion Square at Del Amo Project To the City of Torrance Community Development Department, Planning Division:

As a lifelong resident of Torrance, having lived in this community for over 75 years, I have seen many changes in our city, some for the better and some that have posed challenges to the character of our neighborhoods. I am writing to express my concerns regarding the adequacy of the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) for the Fashion Square at Del Amo Project, which proposes a large-scale residential development near an established, single-family residential neighborhood.

The long-standing character of Torrance’s neighborhoods, particularly in the area surrounding Madrona Avenue and West Carson Street, is important to protect, and I am deeply concerned that the proposed project has not been adequately reviewed in terms of its potential impacts on this community. Below are my specific concerns related to the IS/MND:

1. Impact on Community Character
The IS/MND fails to fully recognize the potential impacts that the proposed project will have on the longstanding single-family residential neighborhoods. Torrance has been known for its quiet, family- friendly atmosphere, where homes and streets have maintained a sense of peace and continuity. The proposed introduction of 260 residential condominium units, with buildings up to 67 feet in height, would disrupt the scale and character of the surrounding single-family homes. The IS/MND does not sufficiently consider how this drastic shift in density, building height, and population will affect the You don't often get email from Learn why this is important 332
2 neighborhood. The document needs to go beyond zoning and consider the real-world impacts on the community.

2. Traffic and Safety Concerns
In my many years of living in Torrance, I have seen traffic worsen over time, particularly with the expansion of commercial developments. The IS/MND does not adequately account for the likely increase in traffic from an additional 260 residential units, especially on Madrona Avenue, which serves as a major thoroughfare for local residents and nearby schools. The IS/MND’s traffic impact assessment does not fully address how this influx of new vehicles will impact the safety of pedestrians, including children attending Madrona Middle School and Hickory Tree School, both of which are located near the project site.

Increased traffic near these schools will create significant safety risks, and this issue has not been properly mitigated in the current IS/MND. The document also does not thoroughly explore the impact of additional traffic on emergency response times, which are critical to maintaining public safety.

3. Inadequate Consideration of Noise and Pollution
The introduction of such a large development will inevitably bring increased noise and air pollution to the surrounding residential areas. Torrance has long been a relatively quiet place to live, but with the constant noise of construction expected to last for 41 months, and the subsequent noise from increased traffic and residents, the quality of life for current homeowners will be severely impacted.

The IS/MND's noise analysis downplays the long-term effects of construction and operational noise on nearby homes. Moreover, the increase in vehicles and residents will contribute to poor air quality, which has not been sufficiently addressed or mitigated in the document. The cumulative effect of these factors could significantly degrade the living conditions in the adjacent single-family neighborhoods.

4. Environmental and Aesthetic Impact
Torrance has historically placed great value on maintaining its aesthetic charm and environmental quality. The IS/MND does not sufficiently address the aesthetic impact of constructing large, multi- story buildings so close to a neighborhood of single-family homes. The towering structures will change the skyline, block natural light, and reduce privacy for existing homes.

The IS/MND’s discussion of landscaping and architectural design does not mitigate these concerns, nor does it address the potential environmental impacts of increased stormwater runoff from the large impervious surface area. Given the recent changes in weather patterns, it is crucial that the City ensure proper safeguards are in place to prevent hydrological issues, which the IS/MND does not fully address.

5. Conditional Use Permit (CUP) and Community Input
As a Torrance resident who has been involved in the community for many decades, I believe that the issuance of a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) should be carefully scrutinized. The IS/MND acknowledges that residential uses within the H-DA1 zone are subject to a CUP, but it fails to thoroughly engage the community or seek meaningful input from residents who will be most affected 333
3 by this development. More efforts must be made to involve local homeowners in this decision-making process, ensuring that their concerns are not overlooked.

Conclusion
As a resident of Torrance for over 75 years, I have a deep connection to this community and its future. While development is inevitable, it is critical that new projects are compatible with the existing character of our neighborhoods and do not degrade the quality of life for those who have lived here for generations. The current IS/MND does not adequately address the significant concerns related to community character, traffic, noise, environmental impact, and public safety. I urge the City of Torrance to reconsider the adequacy of this document and require a more comprehensive study that fully accounts for the potential long-term impacts on the surrounding residential areas.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Sincerely,
Resident of Torrance for Over 75 Years

334
1 Jazmine Estores
From: CDD Info <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2024 2:51 PM
To: Oorts, Leo; Martinez, Oscar
Subject: FW: Lennar Corporation project

From: Kara Ryan
Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2024 2:27 PM
To: CDD Info <[email protected]>
Subject: Lennar Corporation project

Urgent: Request to Halt Lenar Building Apartment Expansion at Del Amo Mall To Whom it May Concern,
I am writing to express my concerns about the proposed apartment expansion by Lenar at Del Amo Mall and to request that the project be reconsidered.

The Del Amo Mall area is already facing significant congestion, and this expansion would only exacerbate the existing traffic, parking, and infrastructure challenges. Adding a large number of new residential units without a comprehensive plan to address these issues could overwhelm local resources, strain public services, and diminish the quality of life for both current and future residents.

Furthermore, the neighbors directly across, myself include, will be particularly impacted by the increased noise, traffic, and overcrowding. Our daily lives will be disrupted by the construction process and the long-term consequences of additional residents in an already busy area.

I also believe that a thorough environmental impact study should be conducted to assess how the expansion will affect the surrounding community. Additionally, it’s essential to consider the feedback and concerns of local residents and business owners who will be directly affected by this development.

I urge you to carefully reconsider this expansion and prioritize a solution that benefits the broader community without compromising the livability of the area.

Thank you for your time and attention to this matter. I look forward to hearing your thoughts on this issue.

Kara Ryan
Torrance resident for 55 years
You don't often get email from Learn why this is important 335
1 Jazmine Estores
From: CDD Info <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, October 16, 2024 1:59 PM
To: Niemeyer, Natalie
Cc: Oorts, Leo
Subject: FW: PUBLIC COMMENT

CDD INFO
Community Development Department
[email protected]
TorranceCA.Gov |
Facebook |
X (Formerly Twitter) |
Instagram
This email, and any attachments to it, may contain confidential information and is intended for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this email and any attachments.

Any review, reliance, disclosure, copying, storing, distribution, forwarding without express permission, or use of the contents of the information received in error is strictly prohibited.

From: Soul Of America
Sent: Wednesday, October 16, 2024 1:52 PM
To: CDD Info <[email protected]>
Subject: PUBLIC COMMENT

I support the Carson Del Amo Development project with one caveat. Limit it to 4 stories. -Thomas Dorsey
West Torrance resident
You don't often get email from . Learn why this is important 336
1 Jazmine Estores
From: CDD Info <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2024 9:01 AM
To: Niemeyer, Natalie
Cc: Oorts, Leo
Subject: FW: Housing Development at Carson and Madrona Ave

CDD INFO
Community Development Department
[email protected]
TorranceCA.Gov |
Facebook |
X (Formerly Twitter) |
Instagram
This email, and any attachments to it, may contain confidential information and is intended for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this email and any attachments.

Any review, reliance, disclosure, copying, storing, distribution, forwarding without express permission, or use of the contents of the information received in error is strictly prohibited.

From: Teri Evans
Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2024 8:35 AM
To: CDD Info <[email protected]>
Subject: Housing Development at Carson and Madrona Ave

Please stop this development. Torrance has become an overdeveloped and overdriven city over a very short time. This development of over 200 apartments will make traffic even more congested and our little streets cannot take anymore. I urge you to find a way to cancel the development of these apartments.

Thank you,
Teresa Evans
Torrance Resident
You don't often get email from Learn why this is important 337
https://dtsc.ca.gov

SENT VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL
October 16, 2024
Leo Oorts
Planning Manager
City of Torrance
3031 Torrance Boulevard
Torrance, CA 90503
[email protected]
RE: MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE FASHION SQUARE AT DEL AMO PROJECT, DATED OCTOBER 9, 2024 STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NUMBER:
2024100400
Dear Leo Oorts,
The Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for the Fashion Square at Del Amo Project (Project). The proposed project would include the construction of a residential development of approximately 260 residential condominium units and associated community amenities on a 16.37-acre site at the northwest corner of West Carson Street and Madrona Avenue in the City of Torrance. The Project site is currently developed with two structures and is located adjacent to the Del Amo Fashion Center. The proposed Project would require several authorizations from the City of Torrance, including a Conditional Use Permit, to allow the proposed residential uses as a mixed-use project.

In June 2024, a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) was prepared for the Project by Haley & Aldrich, Inc. The ESA identified the presence of hazardous waste and past petroleum production in, on, or at the subject property due to a release to the

Leo Oorts
October 16, 2024