HomeMy WebLinkAboutRES 17-7094 Final EIR part B attachment4.3 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
alternatives are available. Take authorizations from the California Department of Fish and
Wildlife (CDFW) are required for any unavoidable impact on state -listed species resulting
from proposed projects.
Santa Monica Bay Restoration Commission: The Santa Monica Bay Restoration Commission
is an independent state organization devoted to restoring and protecting Santa Monica
Bay and its resources. The State of California and the US Environmental Protection Agency
established the Santa Monica Bay Restoration Project (SMBRP) as a National Estuary
Program in December 1988. The SMBRP was formed to develop the Santa Monica Bay
Restoration Plan to ensure the long-term health of the bay and its watershed. The primary
mission of the SMBRP is to facilitate and oversee the implementation of the plan.
California Coastal Act of 1976: The California Coastal Act of 1976 and the California
Coastal Commission, the state's coastal protection act and planning agency, were
established by voter initiative in 1972 to plan for and regulate new development and to
protect public access to and along the shoreline. The Coastal Act contains policies to
guide local and state decision -makers in the management of coastal and marine
resources. To provide maximum public access to the coast and public recreation areas,
the Coastal Act directs each local government located within the Coastal Zone to
prepare a Local Coastal Program (LCP) consistent with Section 30501 of the Coastal Act,
in consultation with the Coastal Commission and with public participation.
LOCAL
• City of Hermosa Beach General Plan: The City's General Plan was last adopted in October
1979. Policies that relate to natural resources are included in the Conservation and Open
Space elements of the existing General Plan. Policies address preserving and enhancing
open space areas, including the beach; prohibiting oil drilling on the beach or by offshore
platform: and minimizing the effects of water runoff.
• City of Hermosa Beach Local Coastal Program (LCP): An LCP consists of the Coastal Land
Use Plan (general plan -level policies and maps) and a Local Implementation Program
(coastal zoning code, zoning maps, and implementing ordinances). The City does not
have a certified LCP. The Coastal Land Use Plan component, adopted by the City and
certified by the California Coastal Commission in 1981, as amended, does not include
policies or programs specifically related to biological resources.
• City of Hermosa Beach Municipal Code: Chapter 8.44 of the Municipal Code ensures the
future health, safety, and general welfare of citizens of the city and the water quality of
the receiving waters of the surrounding coastal areas. The chapter prohibits illicit
discharges and connections, littering, disposal of landscape debris, non-stormwater
discharges, and any discharges in violation of the Municipal National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) Permit. Chapter 12.36 strives to preserve and protect trees in
the public right-of-way (parkway). The chapter prohibits the planting, maintenance,
damage, destruction, or removal of parkway trees. Chapter 12.36 also states that a permit
is necessary for the removal of a parkway tree. Additionally, during construction projects,
the project proponent must take all necessary precautions to protect parkway trees.
4.3.4 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
For the purposes of this EIR, the impact analysis provided below is based on the following California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Appendix G thresholds of significance and impacts
on biological resources are considered significant if adoption and implementation of PLAN
Hermosa would:
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.3-11
PLAN Hermosa
Final Environmental Impact Report
4.3 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
1) 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 CDFW or the USFWS.
2) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations or by the CDFW or
the USFWS.
3) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section
404 of the CWA (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through
direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means.
4) 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.
5) Conflict with local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, including but not
limited to Chapter 12.36 of the Hermosa Beach Municipal Code protecting certain trees.
6) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted habitat conservation plan, natural community
conservation plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan.
There are no habitat conservation plans, natural community conservation plans, or other related
plans for lands in the planning area. Therefore, there would be no impact related to conflict with
provisions of such a plan, and this threshold is not discussed further in this resource section.
ANALYSIS APPROACH
The analysis of impacts is based on the likely consequences of adoption and implementation of
PLAN Hermosa compared to existing conditions. The following analysis of impacts on biological
resources is qualitative and based on available habitat, limited field review, and species
occurrence information for the planning area, along with a review of regional information. A
significant impact would occur if a substantial degradation in the quality of the environment or
reduction of habitat would occur that would eliminate or reduce the population of a sensitive
species in the planning area. The analysis assumes that all future and existing development in the
planning area complies with all applicable laws, regulations, design standards, and plans. An
analysis of cumulative impacts uses qualitative information for the planning area and the region.
PLAN HERMOSA POLICIES AND IMPLEMENTATION ACTIONS
PLAN Hermosa policies and implementation actions that address biological resources include the
following:
Policies
Parks + Open Space Element
0 9.1 Protect critical habitats. Preserve, protect, and improve remaining open space areas
to the greatest extent possible to improve on existing limited habitats and prevent further
elimination of species.
• 9.2 Beach maintenance. Consider species and habitat impacts and potential
improvements when implementing beach maintenance activities.
• 9.3 Beach habitat. Ensure beaches can function as a quality habitat for permanent and
migratory species.
• 9.4 Coordinated habitat protection. Enhance information sharing and research regarding
habitat and wildlife with resource agencies and neighboring jurisdictions to ensure
coordinated decision -making and management.
PLAN Hermosa City of Hermosa Beach
Final Environmental Impact Report August 2017
4.3-12
4.3 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
• 9.5 Minimal activity impacts to habitat. Protect coastal and marine habitats from impacts
from maintenance, construction, recreation, and industrial activities.
• 9.6 Tree protection. Protect existing trees and tree copses that may provide temporary or
permanent bird habitat and encourage replacement with specimen trees whenever they
are lost or removed.
• 10.1 Urban forest. Expand the urban forest and green spaces citywide on public and
private property.
• 10.2 Non-invasive landscapes. Encourage the planting of native, non-invasive, and
drought -tolerant landscaping and trees, and encourage the planting of edible
landscapes and fruit trees.
• 10.3 Green space co -benefits. Recognize the many positive qualities provided by
landscaping, trees, and green space including reduced heat gain, controlled stormwater
runoff, absorbed noise, reduced soil erosion, improved aesthetic character, and
absorption of air pollution.
• 10.4 Scenic features. Ensure landscaping, trees, and green spaces on public property are
designed to conserve scenic and natural features of Hermosa Beach.
• 10.5 Park landscaping. Landscaping in parks located within the Coastal Zone shall consist
of non-invasive and drought -tolerant plants.
Implementation Actions
• LAND USE-12. Create a checklist and resource guide comprising local, state, and federal
requirements for the development of offshore renewable energy facilities to streamline
permitting requirements and improve public awareness.
• PARKS-21. Partner with local nonprofits such as the Santa Monica Bay Restoration
Commission or the University of California, Los Angeles, to conduct education
demonstration projects or presentations on coastal and marine habitat conservation.
• PARKS-22. Evaluate existing beach conditions and identify areas that may be appropriate
to restore vegetated dune habitat. Pursue grant funding.
• PARKS-23. Review and revise as needed, the City's tree ordinance to ensure protection of
existing parkway trees, and update the master tree list.
• PARKS-24. Complete and maintain a citywide public tree inventory, including quantity,
species type, diameter, condition, trimming strategies and geo-codes and
recommendations.
• PARKS-25. Maintain a list of approved plantings for trees and landscaping within City
parkways.
• PARKS-26. Amend the municipal code to incorporate tree removal and replacement
requirements in the public right of way. If preservation of existing mature trees is not
feasible, removed trees shall be replaced at a minimum 2:1 ratio either on -site, or
elsewhere as prescribed by the City.
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.3-13
PLAN Hermosa
Final Environmental Impact Report
4.3 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
IMPACT 4.3-1 Would PLAN Hermosa Have a Substantial Adverse Effect on Any Special -Status
Species? PLAN Hermosa would guide future development and reuse projects in
the city in a manner that could result in the development or expansion of beach -
supporting uses that could adversely affect western snowy plover and California
least tern. This impact would be potentially significant.
The city is largely built out with urban uses and does not support habitat suitable for special -status
plant species, as shown in Table 4.3-2 and Figure 4.3-1. Additionally, PLAN Hermosa does not
propose any land use changes that would convert existing open space areas to developed uses.
Special -status plant species are not expected to occur because of the extirpation or modification
of natural habitats in the planning area. In addition, beach areas are highly disturbed and no
vegetated dune habitat remains. Therefore, no impacts on special -status plants species would
occur.
Two special -status wildlife species (California least tern and western snowy plover) have the
potential to occur in the beach habitats in the planning area, as shown in Table 4.3-3 and Figure
4.3-2. Based on current and anticipated future extent of beach activity in the city (e.g., routine
grooming, recreation, and patrolling), these species are expected to have a low potential of
nesting. There are documented observations of the western snowy plover roosting at the beach
during the winter adjacent to 19th and 22nd streets as well as from 26th to 28th streets (City of
Hermosa Beach 2015). PLAN Hermosa would limit uses on the beach to structures that are essential
to the safe operation and enjoyment of the beach (e.g., restrooms, playgrounds, stormwater
facilities).
The Parks + Open Space Element includes several policies that would assist in the protection of
these species. In particular, Policies 9.3, 9.4, 9.5, and 9.6 would protect coastal and marine habitats
from construction impacts and would protect trees and beaches so they can function as a quality
habitat for permanent and migratory species. For instance, under Policy 9.4, the City would
enhance information sharing and research regarding habitat and wildlife with resource agencies
and neighboring jurisdictions to ensure coordinated decision -making and management.
Further, the Parks + Open Space Element would support restoring potentially suitable habitat for
special -status species by pursuing grant funding to initiate a process to restore vegetated dune
habitat in appropriate areas of the beach.
However, the potential for impacts to these species is considered significant.
Mitigation Measures
MM 4.3-1 Construction of facilities on the beach that must occur between the months of
April and August (roosting season for snowy plovers) will require preconstruction
surveys to determine the presence of western snowy plovers or California least
terns. If these species are present, no construction may occur until the species
leave the roost based on review by a qualified biologist and consultation with
the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and the US Fish and
Wildlife Service (USFWS). If the project is within a Special Protection Zone,
construction activities will not be allowed until western snowy plovers are no
longer present. If the area is not within a Special Protection Zone, a qualified
biologist will survey the area for western snowy plovers using established
protocols and in coordination with the USFWS and CDFW to determine if plovers
are present. If they are present, no work will occur until after snowy plovers
leave the roost site for the season. The qualified biologist will also survey the
PLAN Hermosa City of Hermosa Beach
Final Environmental Impact Report August 2017
4.3-14
4.3 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
area for California least terns using established protocols and in coordination
with the USFWS and CDFW to determine if California least terns are present. If
surveys are negative for western snowy plovers or California least terns, work
may proceed during the roosting period and the biologist will be present to
monitor the establishment of the beach landing sites to ensure that no western
snowy plovers or California least terns are injured or killed, should they arrive in
the area subsequent to work commencing. The project will include
fencing/walls that will prevent western snowy plovers or California least terns
from entering the work areas. The biologist will conduct weekly site visits to
ensure that fencing/walls are intact until construction activities are finished at
the sites and all equipment is removed from the beach. The results of the
preconstruction survey will be submitted to the City prior to the establishment
of beach landing sites. All biological monitoring efforts will be documented in
monthly compliance reports to the City.
Significance After Mitigation
Implementation of mitigation measure MM 4.3-1 would specifically require that western snowy
plovers or California least terns which roost on the beach are protected if they occur in an area
proposed for beach -supporting facilities. Implementation of this mitigation measure would reduce
this impact to less than significant.
IMPACT 4.3-2 Would PLAN Hermosa Have a Substantial Adverse Effect on Sensitive Biological
Communities or Riparian Habitat? Hermosa Beach does not contain any sensitive
biological communities or riparian habitat that could be impacted by
implementation of PLAN Hermosa. No impact would occur.
Numerous federal regulations include protections for endangered species, coastal and marine
areas and wildlife, and surface water resources. Additional California regulations, including the
California Endangered Species Act and the Coastal Act, protect certain special -status species
and important habitat areas, including Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas (ESHAs). In its plans,
the City must comply with state and federal requirements to protect special -status species, native
plants, beach areas, and the watershed. No ESHAs are present in Hermosa Beach.
PLAN Hermosa does not propose land use changes that would convert existing open space areas
containing native vegetation or habitat to developed uses. Therefore, future development would
not result in loss or degradation of riparian habitat or sensitive natural communities. Additionally,
policies in the Parks + Open Space Element would protect sensitive habitat (Policies 9.3, 9.4, and
9.5 protect beach, coastal, and marine habitats). Policy 9.1 would require protection and
preservation of critical habitats to prevent further extirpation of species.
The PLAN Hermosa policies and implementation actions discussed above would ensure that
potential impacts on sensitive natural communities are reduced or avoided if those communities
are later identified in the planning area. In addition, projects must comply with state laws that
would reduce impacts on sensitive natural communities. Therefore, no impact would occur.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
IMPACT 4.3-3 Would PLAN Hermosa Have a Substantial Adverse Effect on Federally Protected
Wetlands as Defined by Section 404 of the Clean Wafer Act? PLAN Hermosa
would guide future development and reuse projects in the city in a manner that
could indirectly impact jurisdictional waters of the United States, particularly
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Final Environmental Impact Report
4.3-15
4.3 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Santa Monica Bay. However, implementation of PLAN Hermosa policies and
implementation actions and enforcement of existing grading and erosion
regulations would result in a less than significant impact.
There are no federally protected wetlands or water bodies considered waters of the United States
within the city boundaries.
However, Santa Monica Bay is a jurisdictional water of the United States and could be indirectly
impacted by development in Hermosa Beach. The potential for stormwater flows to affect water
quality would be controlled through implementation of Municipal Code Chapter 8.44 (Stormwater
and Urban Runoff Pollution Control Regulations), which includes the City's Low -Impact Design
Ordinance (Municipal Code Section 8.44.095) and the City's Green Street Policy. Construction
activities resulting from implementation of PLAN Hermosa would also temporarily increase the
amount of sediments and pollutants in stormwater runoff. Implementation of PLAN Hermosa
policies and implementation actions and enforcement of existing grading and erosion regulations
(Municipal Code Section 8.44.090 and NPDES Construction General Permit stormwater pollution
prevention plan requirements) would result in a less than significant impact. See Impact 4.8-1, in
Section 4.8, Hydrology and Water Quality, of this EIR for a more complete discussion of this impact.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
IMPACT 4.3-4 Would PLAN Hermosa Interfere Substantially with the Movement of Native
Resident or Migratory Fish or Wildlife Species or Within an Established Migratory
Corridor? PLAN Hermosa would guide future development and reuse projects in
the city in a manner that could impede wildlife movement in the planning area.
However, PLAN Hermosa policies and implementation actions would result in a
less than significant impact.
Wildlife movement is affected when physical constraints impede the ability of wildlife to search for
food, water, shelter, and mates. In addition, when urban development fragments open space or
creates obstacles or distractions, it compromises the quality of wildlife corridors and further hinders
wildlife movement. Hermosa Beach is an urbanized community. Open space and areas not
disturbed or heavily used by humans are scarce and are generally located at the beach along
the coastline, the Hermosa Valley Greenbelt, the hillside along Loma Drive, and the Valley
neighborhood. implementation of PLAN Hermosa would not result in any actions that would
substantially alter these areas.
Although no established migratory routes have been identified in the city, several migratory
wildlife species are found along the city's coastline. Common coastal seabirds found foraging
near the shore of Hermosa Beach include western and Clark's grebes, cormorants, loons,
California brown pelicans, and gulls. Coastal birds are at their highest densities during the winter
months. Mammal species found in the area include various cetaceans (whales, dolphins, and
porpoises), pinnipeds (seals and sea lions), and sea otters. All marine mammals are protected
under the Marine Mammal Protection Act. Additionally, several invertebrate species, such as
crustaceans and worms, live in the sand of the intertidal zone. These invertebrates attract
shorebirds such as sanderling, western sandpiper, least sandpiper, willet), and various species of
gull. Western snowy plover, a special -status species, is known to winter on the shores of Hermosa
Beach.
Implementation of PLAN Hermosa would result in further protection for existing open spaces and
wildlife corridors. PLAN Hermosa does not propose land use changes that would convert existing
open space areas containing native vegetation or habitat to developed uses. However, future
PLAN Hermosa City of Hermosa Beach
Final Environmental Impact Report August 2017
4.3-16
4.3 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
development, including infrastructure improvements, could potentially result in loss or
degradation of wildlife corridors. Parks + Open Space Element Policies 9.3 and 9.5 would protect
habitats and wildlife movement corridors from construction, recreation, and industrial activities
while also ensuring the beaches function as high quality habitat for migratory species. Subsequent
discretionary projects in the city would be required to demonstrate compliance with these policies
and provide site -specific measures to address any potential impacts to migratory species.
Implementation of PLAN Hermosa policies would ensure that habitats used by migratory species
would be protected from impacts associated with construction, recreation, and industrial
activities. Therefore, impacts on wildlife corridors and wildlife movement would be minimized, and
the impact would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
IMPACT 4.3-5 Would PLAN Hermosa Conflict with Any Local Policies or Ordinances Protecting
Biological Resources, Such as a Tree Preservation Policy or Ordinance? PLAN
Hermosa would guide future development and reuse projects in the city in a
manner that would not result in a conflict with a local policy or ordinance
protecting biological resources, including but not limited to Chapter 12.36 of the
Hermosa Beach Municipal Code protecting certain trees. Therefore, impacts
would be less than significant.
Hermosa Beach Municipal Code Chapter 12.36, Trees, protects biological resources by preserving
and protecting trees in the public right-of-way (parkway). Additionally, several Parks + Open
Space Element policies recognize the importance of and seek to protect green spaces and urban
forests citywide on public and private property. For example, Policy 10.1 promotes expansion of
urban forests and green spaces. Policy 10.2 requires planting of native, non-invasive landscaping
and trees and encourages the planting of edible landscapes and fruit trees. Additionally,
implementation actions PARKS-24 and PARKS-25 require that a citywide tree inventory be
completed and maintained and that the tree ordinance be reviewed and revised as needed to
ensure protection of existing trees. Development projects would be required to minimize the
removal of natural vegetation and replace any existing mature trees removed at a minimum of
2:1 ratio either on -site or elsewhere as prescribed by the City.
Future projects proposed under PLAN Hermosa would be required to comply with applicable local
ordinances. Regulatory processes to ensure compliance are already in place and would not be
affected by the plan. In addition, PLAN Hermosa policies and implementation actions would
ensure the protection of existing trees in the city. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
CUMULATIVE SETTING, IMPACTS, AND MITIGATION MEASURES
The cumulative setting associated with PLAN Hermosa is the Southern California Bight, which is a
region that consists of a large and gradual bend in the California coastline that is adjacent to the
Los Angeles metropolitan area and contains a diverse range of habitats and marine life. This
region is impacted by the existing urban conditions in the region as well as from recreational
activities, urban runoff, and related impacts of urban uses. This cumulative setting also includes
approved, proposed, planned, and other reasonably foreseeable projects and development in
Hermosa Beach and the South Bay Cities Council of Governments (COG) planning area.
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Final Environmental Impact Report
4.3 -17
4.3 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Developments and planned land uses, including PLAN Hermosa, would contribute to impacts on
biological resources in the region.
IMPACT 4.3-6 Would PLAN Hermosa Contribute to Cumulative Effects on Biological Resources?
Implementation of PLAN Hermosa, in combination with existing, approved,
proposed, and reasonably foreseeable development in the South Bay Cities
COG planning area, could result in the conversion of habitat and impact
biological resources. Biological impacts from PLAN Hermosa would be limited
due to the small size of potential projects and the focus on urban infill sites, and
PLAN Hermosa would not contribute to any cumulative impacts. This would be a
less than cumulatively considerable impact.
PLAN Hermosa does not propose land use changes that would affect open space in the city.
However, cumulative changes, including land use changes, could affect wildlife movement either
directly or indirectly due to factors discussed in Impacts 4.3-1 and 4.3-4 above and are limited to
the city and not regional biological conditions or wildlife movement. PLAN Hermosa does not
propose land use changes that would convert existing open space areas to developed uses.
Furthermore, the policies and implementation actions described in Impact 4.3-4 would reduce
PLAN Hermosa's contribution to cumulative effects. Because PLAN Hermosa would not convert
existing open space areas to developed uses and would implement these policies and
implementation actions, the plan's contribution to cumulative effects would not be considerable.
The impact would be less than cumulatively considerable.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
PLAN Hermosa
Final Environmental Impact Report
4.3-18
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.3 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
4.3.5 REFERENCES
CDFW (California Department of Fish and Wildlife). 2014a. California Natural Diversity Database -
February 4, 2014, update. Sacramento: CDFW Biogeographic Data Branch.
2014b. California Wildlife Habitat Relationships System Life History Accounts and Range
Maps (online edition). Sacramento: CDFW Biogeographic Data Branch.
http://www.dfg.co.gov/biogeodata/cwhr/cawildlife.aspx.
City of Hermosa Beach. 2015. Transpacific Submarine Fiber Optic Cable Draft EIR.
2017. PLAN Hermosa.
CNPS (California Native Plant Society). 2014. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants (online
edition, v8-01 a). Sacramento: CNPS.
Cornell Lab of Ornithology. 2014. All About Birds.
http://www.aIlaboutbirds.org/Page.aspx?pid=1 189.
Goudey, Charles B., and Scott R. Miles. 1998. Ecological Subregions of California: Section &
Subsection Descriptions. Major contributions by Earl B. Alexander and John O. Sawyer.
UDSA, Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Region.
Hamilton, W. J. 2004. "Tricolored Blackbird (Agelaius tricolor)." In The Riparian Bird Conservation
Plan: A strategy for reversing the decline of riparian -associated birds in California.
California Partners in Flight.
Kus, B. 2002. "Least Bell's Vireo (Vireo bellii pusillus)." In The Riparian Bird Conservation Plan: a
strategy for reversing the decline of riparian -associated birds in California. California
Partners in Flight.
McNab, W. H., D. T. Cleland, J. A. Freeouf, J. E. Keys Jr., G. J. Nowacki, C.A. Carpenter, compilers.
2007. Description of ecological subregions: sections of the conterminous United States.
General Technical Report WO-76B. Washington, DC: USDA, Forest Service.
Nafis, Gary. 2014. California Herps: A Guide to Reptiles and Amphibians of California. Accessed
February 26, 2014. hftp://www.californiaherps.com/.
USFS (US Forest Service). 2014. Vegetation Classification & Mapping.
http://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/r5/landmanagement/resourcemanagemenf/?cid=stelprd
b5347192.
USFWS (US Fish and Wildlife Service). 1998a. Vernal Pools of Southern California Recovery Plan.
Portland, OR: USFWS.
1998b. Recovery Plan for the El Segundo Blue Butterfly. Portland, OR: USFWS.
1998c. Recovery Plan for the Pacific Pocket Mouse. Portland, OR: USFWS.
2002. Final Recovery Plan Southwestern Willow Flycatcher (Empinodax traillii extimus).
Albuquerque, NM: USFWS.
2005. Recovery Plan for Vernal Pool Ecosystems of California.
2006. California Least Tern 5-Year Review. Carlsbad, CA: USFWS.
2007. Recovery Plan for the Pacific Coast Population of the Western Snowy Plover
(Charadrius alexandrius nivosus). Sacramento: USFWS.
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Final Environmental Impact Report
4.3-19
4.3 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
2009. Light-footed Clapper Rail (Ralluss longirostris levipes) 5-Year Review: Summary and
Evaluation. Carlsbad, CA: USFWS.
2010. Coastal California Gnatcatcher (Poliopfila californica californica) 5-year Review:
Summary and Evaluation. Carlsbad, CA: USFWS.
2012. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Revised Designation of Critical
Habitat for the Pacific Coast Population of the Western Snowy Plover. Final rule. Federal
Register 77(1 18): 36728-36869.
2014a. Information, Planning, and Conservation System (IPaC).
2014b. Critical Habitat Portal. Accessed February 2014.
2014c. 5-Year Review for Palos Verdes Blue Butterfly. Carlsbad, CA: USFWS.
PLAN Hermosa
Final Environmental Impact Report
4.3-20
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES
S �
'�, •.
4.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES
4.4.1 INTRODUCTION
This resource section evaluates the potential environmental effects related to cultural resources
(i.e., archaeological, paleontological, and historical resources) associated with implementation
of PLAN Hermosa. The analysis includes an overview of archaeological, paleontological, and
historical resources in Hermosa Beach, a discussion of federal, state, and local regulations
pertaining to the management of these resources, and a discussion of the type of these
resources likely to be encountered in the planning area. PLAN Hermosa Public Safety Element,
Land Use + Design Element, Parks + Open Space Element, and Sustainability + Conservation
Element policies and implementation actions both pose potential threats to historical resources
and promote the identification, protection, and maintenance of cultural resources to reduce
potential threats.
NOP Comments: No comments were received in response to the Notice of Preparation (NOP)
addressing cultural resource concerns. Comments included written letters and oral comments
provided at the NOP scoping meeting.
Reference Information: Information for this section is based on a technical report titled
Archaeological and Paleontological Resources Assessment and Historic Resources Existing
Conditions Report to support PLAN Hermosa, prepared by PCR Services Corporation and
attached to this document as Appendix C-7. The scope of work included an archaeological
resources records search through the California Historical Resources Information System, South
Central Coastal Information Center (CHRIS-SCCIC), a Sacred Lands File search through the
California Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), a paleontological resources records
search through the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County (NHMLAC), review of City
Planning Division and Building and Safety Division property files, and a citywide windshield survey
of all buildings over 45 years old. All cultural resources investigations were conducted by staff
who meet and exceed the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualifications Standards in
History, Architectural History, Archaeology, and Historic Preservation.
Definitions: Cultural resources are defined as physical evidence or place of past human activity:
site, object, landscape, or structure; or a site, structure, landscape, object, or natural feature of
significance to a group of people traditionally associated with it.
Archaeology is the recovery and study of material evidence of human life and culture of past
ages. Over time, this material evidence becomes buried, fragmented or scattered, or otherwise
hidden from view. In urban areas such as Hermosa Beach and environs, archaeological
resources may include both prehistoric remains (before 1769 A.D.) and remains dating to the
historical period (1769 to 1950 A.D.). Prehistoric (or Native American) resources can include
village sites, temporary camps, lithic (stone tool) scatters, rock art, roasting pits/hearths, milling
features, rock features, and burials. Historic archaeological resources can include refuse heaps,
bottle dumps, ceramic scatters, privies, foundations, and burials and are generally associated in
California with the Spanish Mission Period (after A.D. 1769) to the mid -twentieth century of the
American Period (1950s).
Paleontology is a branch of geology that studies the life forms of the past, especially prehistoric
life forms, through the study of plant and animal fossils. Paleontological resources represent a
limited, nonrenewable, and impact -sensitive scientific and educational resource. Fossil remains
such as bones, teeth, shells, and leaves are found in the geologic deposits (rock formations)
where they were originally buried. Paleontological resources include not only the actual fossil
remains but also the collecting localities and the geologic formations containing those localities.
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Final Environmental Impact Report
4.4-1
4.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES
Historical resource is a term encompassing prehistoric/historic archaeological sites and/or the
built environment, which includes historic sites, buildings, structures, objects, districts, and
landscapes.
4.4.2 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Appendix C-7 includes a prehistoric and historic overview of Hermosa Beach and the
surrounding areas, describes methods of identifying known cultural resources in the planning
area, and discusses themes and property types in the city. It also includes a regulatory setting
pertaining to cultural resources located in the planning area. Key findings from the
environmental setting are summarized below by resource type.
ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES
No known archaeological sites or isolates have been recorded in the city, based on information
in the SCCIC database. However, one archaeological site (CA-LAN-1872) has been recorded
immediately adjacent and south of the city's southern boundaries, along Herondo Street. CA-
LAN-1872 is a historic and prehistoric archaeological site believed to represent a portion of the
Gabrielino village of Engva, which was located along the edges of the Old Salt Lake. The Old
Salt Lake is also known to have been located immediately outside and in very close proximity to
the city's southern boundaries. The Old Salt Lake has been designated as State Historic
Landmark No. 373 and is also listed in the California Register of Historical Resources (California
Register). These resources are known to have been destroyed by modern development (e.g.,
construction of an apartment complex, expansion of the Redondo Beach Generating Station,
and road expansion), and the Old Salt Lake was known to have been filled in with concentrated
chloride brine in the early 1900s.
The results of the paleontological resources records search conducted at the Natural History
Museum of Los Angeles County indicated that three fossil localities of the same sedimentary
deposits (older Quaternary terrace deposits) which occur within the city limits have been found
nearby. These localities have yielded fossils of horses, a marine whale, and a mammoth at
depths between 15 to 35 feet below the surface. Other research indicated that adjacent to the
city limits (at the Redondo Beach Generating Station), a Rancholabrean-age tooth of an extinct
llama was found at a depth of approximately 30 feet below the surface. A fossil horse tooth was
also found near the Redondo Beach Generating Station at a depth of about 35 feet below the
surface. Paleontological resources are discussed further in Appendix C-7.
HISTORICAL RESOURCES
There are 28 previously identified individual historical resources and two potential districts in
Hermosa Beach which are included in the City's current General Plan Land Use Element (Historic
-Preservation-)-that- could-lie-maferially or -visually impacted -by -PLAN -Hermosa- as the -result of
alteration of these resources or their immediate surroundings. A description of existing historic
resources in the city are included in Appendix C-7.
• Two properties are designated local landmarks and are listed on the California Register:
the Bijou Theater at 1229-1235 Hermosa Avenue and the Community Center at 710 Pier
Avenue.
• One property, the Clark Building at 861 Valley Drive, is listed on the California Register.
• Two properties have been designated by the City (201 1) as "potential landmarks that
warrant further study by Section 17.53.040(B) of the Historic Preservation ordinance (per
Planning Commission Resolution No. 98-65)": the Bank of America Building at 90 Pier
Avenue and the Hermosa Hotel at 20-26 Pier Avenue.
PLAN Hermosa
Final Environmental Impact Report
4.4-2
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES
• Two potential districts have been identified by the City: a residential neighborhood
bounded by 16th Street, The Strand, and 20th Street, and the Hermosa Avenue and
Strand Houses north of 26th Street.
Hermosa Beach has not been surveyed previously; therefore, a citywide windshield survey was
conducted by certified architectural historians to examine existing conditions and identify
examples of property types, styles, and methods of construction that represent key periods of
development in Hermosa Beach. There are approximately 3,600 parcels with improvements over
45 years old in Hermosa Beach.
Architectural Overview
Early Twentieth -Century Development
Of the resources identified in the Windshield Survey,
approximately 60% are single-family one-story residential
properties constructed between 1906 and 1930. These
residences are located in the earliest subdivided tracts, such as
the Hermosa Beach, First Addition to Hermosa Beach and
Shakespeare tracts. The earliest recorded resource is a single-
family beach cottage constructed in 1906, followed by two
single-family beach cottages constructed in 1907 and located.
The vast majority of the beach cottages in Hermosa Beach are
derivatives of the Craftsman style, Period Revival styles and
Eclectic Cottages. Cottages were constructed on a budget,
which is reflected in their vernacular design and use of
inexpensive materials, such as wood -frame construction resting
on brick foundations and minimal architectural ornamentation.
Many of the houses were quickly constructed small seasonal
homes that were added onto in multiple stages. The beach
cottage architecture emphasized simple focal points: decorative shingling or board -and -batten
siding exterior treatments, gabled or hipped roofs, bay windows, porches, windows and doors.
Generally the residences are small-scale to allow for the maximum amount of yard space,
patios, and courtyards to promote outdoor living. Concentrations of the beach cottage
property type are located south of Pier Avenue in the Hermosa Beach and First Addition Tracts,
in the Shakespeare Tract, and just east of the former Santa Fe railroad south of 6th Street.
Walk is an example of
residential tract. Other
Parkette (3rd Street).
Associated with this period are approximately twelve walk -
streets located between Hermosa Avenue and The Strand
Hermosa Beach Tract, and there are two walk streets located on
31 st and 30th Streets between Manhattan Avenue and
Morningside Drive in the Shakespeare Tract. The streets are
closed to vehicles and the houses face inward toward each
other.
Small parks called "parkettes" are distinctive landscape
features. The Sand Hill Parkette located at Circle Drive and Loma
a small park integrated into the early First Addition of Hermosa Beach
parkettes include Moondust Parkette (2nd Street) and Ocean View
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Final Environmental Impact Report
4.4-3
4.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES
Larger, two-story residences were constructed between 1910
and 1930 in the earliest tracts in closest proximity to the beach
with views of the Ocean. The Strand, Hermosa Avenue,
Manhattan Avenue, and Circle Avenue have some of the
grander residences in Hermosa Beach designed in the Arts and
Crafts, Shingle and Craftsman styles.
Popular from 1895-1915, Arts and Crafts movement designers
blended elements of the late 19th-century Shingle and Queen
Anne styles with 20th-century Craftsman and Colonial Revival
styles. A highly eclectic style, it promoted social reform ideals
implicit in handcraft and simplified structure and ornament.
Intended to reconnect architecture to the crafting of natural
materials, the primary material associated with the Arts and
Crafts Movement was wood, with many residences having
elaborately crated wood framing, interior paneling, and built-in
furniture. Other materials commonly used were brick and stone.
Generally, Arts and Crafts designed residential buildings fall in to
two property types: the 1- or 1 '/2-story bungalow or the 2-story
house. Associated styles were sometimes applied to places of
worship, artisans' studios, and social halls, but were only rarely
used during this period for government or industrial buildings.
There are three good examples of the shingle style located on
Hermosa Avenue, Manhattan Avenue, and The Strand. The
Shingle style (1900-1920) is a uniquely American adaptation that
surrounds the basic forms of Queen Anne and Colonial Revival
with unembellished wood shingles, and adds foundations and
porches of rough field stone with classical column porch posts.
The Craftsman style is more ubiquitous in Hermosa Beach
compared to the two previously mentioned styles. The
Windshield Survey recorded approximately eight Craftsman style
residences. The Craftsman style (1905-1940) borrows from English
arts and crafts, oriental wood architecture, and a variety of
other sources such as California adobe dwellings, Swiss chalets,
and barns and log cabins. These simple residences were
informal in plan, elevation, and detail. Sensitive to the
surrounding natural environment, they hugged the ground and
had low-pitched and wide -projecting gable roofs, with rafters
exposed. Most had large parches under a secondary (lower)
roof supported by square or elephantine columns. Bases and
foundations used river rock or clinker brick which connected
them to the surrounding landscape.
During the 1920s and 1930s, Hermosa Beach experienced
another wave of single-family development infilling the older
tracts in Hermosa Beach. Between 1920 and 1940, one- and
two-story Spanish Colonial and Mediterranean Revival -style
residences were constructed. Typical character -defining
features of these styles designed between 1900 and 1940
include asymmetrical facades, courtyards, verandas, red clay
file roofs, stucco -finished walls, wood framed multi -paned
PLAN Hermosa
Final Environmental Impact Report
4.4-4
r
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES
casement windows with prominent lintels and sills, arched doorways, wrought -iron window grilles,
decorative carvings, glazed tiles and fountains.
There are a few residences constructed during the 1920s-1930s period that represent other styles,
including Tudor Revival, Italianate, and Art Deco style residences. There is a single-family
residence located on 33rd Street, which is a good example of the Tudor style with steeply
pitched cross -gabled roof. The Tudor style is identified by steeply pitched roofs, usually side -
gabled, with one or more prominent cross gables; tall, narrow windows, usually in groups, with
multi -pane glazing; and massive chimneys crowned by decorative chimney pots.
The two-story single-family residence at Circle
Drive is an example of the Art Deco style. The Art
Deco tradition was established by the Exposition
Internationale des Arts Decoratif et Industriels
Modernes in Paris in 1925. The style used the tools
of industrialization for highly artistically expressive
purposes. It celebrated a break from historic
precedence, the decorative arts, new
construction and fabrication methods, and
creative uses of technology in the modern world,
particularly within booming cities of the 1920s.
Character -defining features of the Art Deco style
include stepped fapade, sunrise and floriated
patterns, polychromatic mosaic tiles, metal casement type window, zig-zag parapet trim, and
chevron and lozenge molding. An apartment building at the southern end of The Strand is a rare
example of an Art Deco -style apartment building.
The overwhelming majority of Hermosa Beach's
early residential properties are single-family,
however there are a few duplexes, apartment
buildings, and bungalow courts. The Pueblo
F Apartment building is a rare example of a
Pueblo Revival -style apartment building
�.. constructed in 1924. A derivative of the Spanish
���,�trr _ Colonial Revival style, the Pueblo Revival style is
characterized by battered walls, rounded
corners, and flat roofs with projecting rounded
- roof beams or vigas. Straight -headed windows
generally are set deep into the walls. Second
and third floor levels are stepped or terraced.
Other typical character -defining features of this style include asymmetrical facades, courtyards,
red clay file roofs, stuccoed walls, wood framed rectangular windows with prominent heavy
timber lintels and wood sills, arched doorways, wrought iron window grilles, canales, projecting
vigas, decorative carvings and mosaic tile.
Another rare property type is the Bungalow Court, and there are Spanish Colonial Revival
examples at on 17th Street, Hermosa Avenue, Manhattan Avenue, Monterey Boulevard, and
Owosso Avenue, and a Beach Cottage example on Manhattan Avenue.
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Final Environmental Impact Report
4.4-5
4.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES
Commercial architecture constructed in Hermosa
Beach during the first three decades of the twentieth
century, reflects national architectural trends.
Representative architectural styles include most of
the Period Revival styles, however the primary
architectural elements are unreinforced brick
construction, parapets, and adaptable storefronts.
During the historic period, early twentieth century
commercial properties developed along Hermosa
Avenue, Pier Avenue, and Pacific Coast Highway (El
Camino Real). There are few commercial properties
remaining extant from the early period of Hermosa
Beach's development.
The most distinctive non-residential resource in
Hermosa Beach is the Vetter Windmill. Originally the
Vetter Windmill was located at Ardmore Avenue and
16th Street, where it was erected by Herman Vawter
to provide water for his flower and vegetable
gardens. The Vetter Windmill has been relocated to
Greenwood Park at the northeast intersection of
Aviation Boulevard and Pacific Coast Highway.
There is an Early 20th Century Utilitarian Brick
Commercial Building which was constructed in 1913
located on Hermosa Avenue. Constructed two years
later is a one-story commercial building with
storefronts on Manhattan Avenue. There are two
representative examples of 1920s commercial
buildings; Art Deco/Moderne building on Hermosa
Avenue; and Renaissance Revival building on Pacific
Coast Highway. The Renaissance Revival style (1895-
1930) features symmetrical facades, with masonry or
stone exterior walls highlighted by cast stone or terra
cotta detailing and has arched openings.
Located near the former pier, are the Beaux Arts style
Bijou Building (former Metropolitan Theater)
constructed in 1923, and an Art Deco style former
hotel located on Pier Plaza constructed in 1924. The
Beaux Arts style (1885-1930) uses formal symmetry,
Italian Renaissance form, and classical Greek and
Roman decorative elements like columns, pediments
and balustrades to create a grand and imposing
architectural statement.
Located in the First Addition to Hermosa Beach Tract
is the Neoclassical Revival style First Church of Christ
Scientist constructed in 1926. Character -defining
features of the Neoclassical Revival style include
fluted columns topped by complex capitals, friezes
and entablatures embellished with garlanded or
patterned carvings and massive porticos.
PLAN Hermosa
Final Environmental Impact Report
4.4-6
N
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
There are two Works Progress Administration
(WPA) Moderne Schools in Hermosa Beach, the
North School located at 417 25th Street and Pier
Avenue School located at 710 Pier Avenue. In
1935, Mayor John Clark built a Lawn Bowling
facility with the help of WPA funds between 8th
and 9th Street on Valley Drive. The facility consists
of the WPA Moderne Clark Stadium and Clark
Field located on approximately six acres. The
WPA/PWA Moderne style was popular during the
Great Depression as developed by the various
government relief projects sponsored by the
Works Progress Administration and Public Works
Administration (PWA). The government created
jobs for architects, designers, and builders by
putting them to work, creating hundreds of
government and civic buildings, including post
offices, train stations, public schools, museums,
bridges, and dams throughout the United States.
WPA/PWA Moderne structures reflect a greater
use of conservative and classical elements and
have a distinct monumental feel to them. The
WPA/PWA Moderne style was characterized by
board -form or smooth concrete exterior; typically
flat -roofed, although occasionally gabled or
hipped and tiles; generally symmetrical; mostly
horizontal emphasis; piers, often fluted or
reeded, separating recessed window channels;
incorporation of shallow relief panels and interior
murals; rounded and bull -nosed corners or other
curved elements; and Art Deco motifs such as
chevrons.
Post -War Development
Following World War ll, there was some single -
and multi -family residential infill in older Hermosa
Beach tracts and newly subdivided tracts were
improved. Architectural styles popular during this
period were the Ranch, Minimal Traditional, and
Mid -Century Modern.
There are four Ranch -style residences in Hermosa
Beach constructed between 1938 and 1957.
Ranch style (1945-1965) buildings are usually one
story, rectangular in plan with broad tiled or
wood or composition shingled roofs often with a
side gable or gable -on -hipped roof extension,
and also broad hipped roofs with overhanging
eaves and exposed rafters. Ranch features are
sometimes found mixed with the Minimal
Traditional style.
4.4-7
PLAN Hermosa
Final Environmental Impact Report
4.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES
The Sea Skiff Apartments constructed in 1961 and a
building on 27th Street constructed in 1951 are good
examples of a Mid -Century Modern style apartment
buildings. Mid- Century Modern style architecture
reflects the influence of the Modern Movement and
International Style architecture along with other
post -World War II architectural trends. Modern
materials, architectural innovations in plan, function
and use, incorporation of modern amenities in
residential architecture, and a lack of traditional
architectural ornamentation characterize the style.
Commercial infill along the vacated railroad rights -
of -way that were improved into roads also occurred
during the Post War period. There are approximately
four Mid -Century Modern commercial buildings
along Aviation Boulevard, Hermosa Avenue, Pacific
Coast Highway, and Pier Avenue. Mid -Century
Modern design (1945-1965) used sleek, simplified
geometry and asymmetrical, intersecting angular
planes of masonry volumes and glass curtain walls,
locked together by a flat planar roof. Designers
embraced the optimistic spirit of the time,
experimenting with the newest technologies and
materials in building, such as concrete and
aluminum, and incorporating futuristic elements.
The former grocery store constructed in 1945 on Pier
Avenue, and the Carousel constructed in 1950 at
the Greenwich Village intersection with Hermosa
Avenue are examples of Roadside Vernacular
buildings designed to draw traffic off the street.
PLAN Hermosa
Final Environmental Impact Report
4.4-8
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES
The Sea Sprite motel was constructed in 1958 near
the ocean and is an example of a Mid -Century
Modern style motel related to recreation. An
industrial Vernacular Modern building constructed
in 1968 on Cypress Avenue housed one of the first
surf board industries in Hermosa Beach. The
building was used as Greg Noll's surfboard
factory. Surf board manufacturing and surfing is
very important to the economic and recreation
history of Hermosa Beach. Constructed during the
post -World War II era, functionalist Vernacular
Modern style (1945-1965) industrial buildings were common throughout Southern California.
Designed to accommodate light industry, these building were generally one-story and utilized
modular tilt -up construction methods and standardized materials in order to minimize
construction costs. The exteriors were generally exposed brick or concrete although there are a
few examples with stucco on the front elevations. The primary fagade was usually more
decorative utilizing Mid -Century Modern design motifs and the focus was bold signage
advertising the company name. Often the buildings were set -back from the street behind a
Modern landscape.
The Modern New Formalist style Civic Center
complex comprised of City Hall, Public Library,
Police Station and Fire Station buildings were
designed by Savo Stoshitch between 1961 and
1965 at the corner of Pier Avenue and Valley
Drive. The New Formalist style (1960-1975)
embraced many Classical precedents such as
building proportion and scale, classical columns,
highly stylized entablatures, and colonades. The
upper floors or roof were either cantilevered or
supported by an exo-structure that was vertical to the outer edge of the upper floors or roof.
Roofs dominate the form of New Formalist buildings and are designed as large, heavy slabs that
project out from the building. Often supported by massive tapering concrete columns, the roof
underside sometimes features a raised grid pattern. These buildings were often on a platform or
plinth that opened onto a landscaped plaza.
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
The Hermosa Valley Greenbelt is a unique City
landscape that was developed during the late
1980s from an abandoned Santa Fe rail line. The
park follows the historic railroad right-of-way which
runs south to north through the City.
4.4-9
PLAN Hermosa
Final Environmental Impact Report
4.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES
4.4.3 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK
Federal, state, and local laws, regulations, and policies pertain to cultural resources in the
planning area. They provide the regulatory framework for addressing all aspects of cultural
resources that would be affected by implementation of PLAN Hermosa. The regulatory
framework for cultural resources is discussed in detail in Appendix C-7. Key regulations used to
reduce environmental impacts are summarized below.
FEDERAL
• Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act: Section 106 requires federal
agencies, or those they fund or permit, to consider the effects of their actions on
properties that are listed in or are eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic
Places (National Register).
• National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA): NEPA directs federal agencies to prepare a
detailed statement of the environmental impacts of any "major federal action
significantly affecting the quality of the human environment." The human environment
consists of many aspects, including what NEPA terms cultural resources. Cultural
resources also include the cultural use of the physical and natural environment, social
institutions, lifeways, religious practices, and other cultural institutions.
STATE
■ California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA): CEQA specifically defines a historical
resource and explicitly defines when an action would have a substantial adverse
change in the significance of a historical resource. CEQA includes provisions that
specifically address the protection of cultural resources by requiring consideration of
impacts of a project on unique archaeological resources, historical resources, and
paleontological resources.
• Senate Bill (SB) 18: SB 18 requires that cities and counties contact and consult with
California Native American tribes before adopting or amending general plans and
specific plans, or when designating land as open space.
• Assembly Bill (AB) 52: AB 52 amends CEQA by requiring that lead agencies consult with
Native American groups or individuals regarding the identification, evaluation, and
treatment of tribal cultural resources prior to the release of an environmental document.
The City ,requested consultation with Native American tribes under AB 52 in August 2015.
In accordance with AB 52 and SB 18, the City notified all of the relevant tribal
organizations identified by the Native American Heritage Commission for the City of
Hermosa Beach. To date, none of the tribal organizations have requested formal
consultation through the General Plan update or EIR process. However the Soboba Band
of Luiseno Indians and the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation have
requested that an experienced, trained, and certified Native American monitor be on
site during any ground -disturbing activities related to subsequent projects.
• California Health and Safety Code Section 7050: This code section states that if human
remains are uncovered during ground -disturbing activities, the contractor or the project
proponent must immediately halt potentially damaging excavation in the area of the
burial and notify the county coroner to determine the nature of the remains.
• California Register of Historical Resources: The California Register includes resources that
are listed in or are formally determined eligible for listing on the National Register, as well
as some California State Landmarks and Points of Historical Interest. The eligibility criteria
for listing in the California Register are similar to those for National Register listing, but
focus on the importance of the resources to California history and heritage.
PLAN Hermosa
Final Environmental Impact Report
4.4-10
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES
California State Historical Landmarks: California Historical Landmarks are buildings,
structures, sites, or places that have been determined to have statewide historical
significance and meet specific criteria. The resource must also be approved for
designation by the county or local jurisdiction, be recommended by the State Historical
Resources Commission, and be officially designated by California State Parks. California
Historical Landmarks are automatically listed in the California Register.
California Points of Historical Interest: California Points of Historical Interest are sites,
buildings, features, or events that are of local (city or county) significance and have
anthropological, cultural, military, political, architectural, economic, scientific, technical,
religious, experimental, or other value.
LOCAL
• Hermosa Beach Municipal Code (Section 17.53, Historic Resources Preservation): See
discussion below under "Criteria for Eligibility."
Criteria for Eligibility
Cultural resources fall within the jurisdiction of several levels of government. Federal laws provide
the framework for the identification and in certain instances, protection of historic resources. The
National Historic Preservation Act, enacted in 1966, established the National Register program
under the Secretary of the Interior. Additionally, state and local jurisdictions play active roles in
the identification, documentation, and protection of such resources within their communities.
Enacted in 1992, the California Register program is administered by the State Office of Historic
Preservation and the State Historical Resources Commission. The City of Hermosa Beach
adopted a preservation ordinance in 1998 (Hermosa Beach Municipal Code, Chapter 17.53,
Ordinance 98-1186). A summary of the regulatory setting as it relates to the impact analysis is
included below.
To be eligible for listing in the National Register, a resource must be significant in American
history, architecture, archaeology, engineering, or culture. Four criteria for evaluation have been
established to determine the significance of a resource:
1) It is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad
patterns of our history.
2) It is associated with the lives of persons significant in our past.
3) It embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction or
that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent
a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual
distinction.
4) It yields, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history..
The criteria for eligibility for the California Register are based on National Register criteria. Certain
resources are determined by the statute to be automatically included in the California Register
by operation of law, including California properties formally determined eligible for or listed in
the National Register. To be eligible for the California Register, a historic resource must be
significant at the local, state, or national level, under one or more of the following four criteria:
1) It is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad
patterns of California's history and cultural heritage.
2) It is associated with the lives of persons important in our past.
3) It 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.
City of Hermosa Beach
August 20I7
4.4-11
PLAN Hermosa
Final Environmental Impact Report
4.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES
4) It has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.
Under the City's current policies and preservation ordinance, only resources that are designated
as federal, state, or local landmarks are protected from alterations, degradation, or demolition.
Designated landmarks are required to obtain a Certificate of Appropriateness from the City of
Hermosa Beach prior to making alterations. When proposed alteration or demolition to other
potentially historic resources requires a discretionary review, a thorough analysis of the potential
impact on the cultural significance of the building will be studied under CEQA before the
decision to alter or demolish the project can be made.
A historic resource may be designated a local landmark, pursuant to City Municipal Code
Sections 17.53.070 through 17.53.120, if it meets one or more of the following criteria:
1) It exemplifies or reflects special elements of the city's cultural, social, economic, political,
aesthetic, engineering, or architectural history.
2) It is identified with persons or events significant in local, state, or national history.
3) It embodies distinctive characteristics of a style, type, period, or method of construction,
or is a valuable example of the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship.
4) It is representative of the notable work of a builder, designer, or architect.
5) Its unique location or singular physical characteristic(s) represents an established and
familiar visual feature or landmark of a neighborhood, community, or the city.
Nomination of a historic resource as a landmark is made by the City, or by application of the
property owner or property owners representing a majority or controlling interest in the property
on which the resource is located. To be eligible for consideration as a landmark, a historic
resource must be at least 50 years old; with the exception that a historic resource of at least 30
years old may be eligible if the City Council determines that the resource is exceptional, or that it
is threatened by demolition, removal, relocation, or inappropriate alteration.
4.4.4 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
For the purposes of this EIR, impacts on historical resources are considered significant if adoption
and implementation of PLAN Hermosa would:
1) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource
pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5.
2) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic
feature.
�) Disturb-anyy-human-r mains.i'ncluding fhose-nJerred outside-of-f-0rmal-cemeLf€ries.
4) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as
defined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5.
ANALYSIS APPROACH
The analysis of impacts is based on the likely consequences of implementation of PLAN
Hermosa, compared to existing conditions of cultural resources within the city. It is assumed that
all future and existing development in the city would comply with applicable laws, regulations,
design standards, and plans. Presented below are the applicable policies and implementation
actions outlined in PLAN Hermosa that would affect cultural resources.
PLAN Hermosa City of Hermosa Beach
Final Environmental Impact Report August 2017
4.4-12
4.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES
Subsequent public and private projects that include construction excavations (e.g.,
grubbing/clearing, demolition grading, trenching, and boring) are activities that have
potential to impact or cause a substantial adverse change to archaeological and historic
resources, paleontological resources, and human remains. Subsequent projects that do not
require excavation activities would cause no direct impacts on archaeological and
paleontological resources, and human remains; therefore, no additional analysis or mitigation
is necessary for these specific types of activities. Other development activities that would
excavate heavily disturbed soils or artificial fill would also cause no impact on intact and
significant archaeological resources, paleontological resources, or human remains since they
have likely been displaced by previous disturbances (such as the original construction of a
condominium complex) and there would be very limited to no potential to encounter intact
and significant resources in artificial fill soils.
PLAN HERMOSA POLICIES AND IMPLEMENTATION ACTIONS
PLAN Hermosa policies and implementation actions that address cultural resources are listed
below. If implemented in the future, these particular policies and actions may reduce or avoid
adverse material impacts on historical resources either directly or indirectly.
Policies
Land Use + Design Element
• 5.5 Preservation and adaptive reuse. Encourage the preservation or adaptive reuse of
historic structures and iconic landmarks.
• 5.6 Eclectic and diverse architecture. Seek to maintain and enhance neighborhood
character through eclectic and diverse architectural styles.
• 7.1 Re -purposing surplus property. Promote the reuse of surplus publicly -owned property
for other uses that benefit the community.
• 7.3 School modernization upgrades. Support HBCSD plans to renovate and modernize
school facilities to meet growing capacity needs in a manner that minimizes burdens to
adjacent neighborhoods.
• 10.1 Historic landmarks and districts. Encourage the voluntary designation of potentially
historic resources as landmarks or historic districts.
• 10.2 Protect designated landmarks. Continue to use the Certificate of Appropriateness
process for reviewing applications to demolish or alter designated landmarks.
• 10.3 Public and institutional facilities. Consider the designation of potentially historic
public or institutional resources under threat of demolition or deterioration.
• 10.4 Historic resources as cultural tourism. Promote historic places and cultural tourism as
an economic development strategy.
• 10.5 Adaptive reuse and sustainable development. Promote historic preservation as
sustainable development and encourage adaptive reuse of historic or older properties.
• 10.6 History and cultural heritage. Support and encourage efforts to document and
share the cultural heritage and history of Hermosa Beach.
• 10.7 Culturally inclusive planning. Ensure that historic preservation planning is culturally
inclusive and reflective of the unique background and diversity of neighborhoods in the
city.
• 10.8 Incentives and technical assistance. Provide expert technical assistance to owners
of potentially eligible and designated historic properties with tools and incentives to
maintain historic resources.
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Final Environmental Impact Report
4.4-13
4.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES
• 10.9 Salvage architectural features or materials. Encourage the preservation or reuse of
historic architectural features on site or within the community.
• 10.10 Archaeological and paleontological resources. Recognize the prehistory and
history of the city and strive to identify, protect, and preserve archaeological and
paleontological resources.
Public Safety Element
• 1.9 Facilitate retrofits. Encourage and facilitate retrofits of seismically high -risk buildings.
Implementation Actions
• GOVERNANCE-5. Incorporate guidance related to Native American consultation and
treatment of prehistoric and Native American resources into local CEQA guidelines for
Hermosa Beach.
• LAND USE-2. Establish development standards within the Zoning Code to establish any
new land use designations and modify existing development standards to articulate the
appropriate building form, scale, and massing for each established character area and
the applicable density/intensity standards.
• LAND USE-13. Amend the CEQA documentation and initial study process to ensure
cultural and historical resources are studied in accordance with CEQA and any local
historic preservation programs.
• LAND USE-14. Amend Hermosa Beach Historic Preservation Ordinance to align with
Historic Preservation goals and policies including but not limited to:
• Clarify that the City Council may nominate City -owned properties and that only the
property owner may nominate private property.
• Establish a list of encouraged actions that a property owner may take when a
property over 50 years in age is demolished, which could include photo
documentation of key architectural features, salvage or donation of key
architectural features or original materials, or installation of plaque, or other actions
to reflect or recognize the former structure.
• LAND USE-15. Review and update eligibility criteria to use in the designation of local
historic sites or historic districts.
• LAND USE-16. Develop emergency preparedness and disaster response plans for cultural
resources, including a recovery action plan that addresses long-range decisions likely to
be faced by the City following a major disaster, including economic recovery, protocols
for demolition or restoration of damaged historic structures, and fee deferral for repair
permits.
• LAND USE-17. Create a program to provide for the voluntary installation of plaques
and/or public art related to historic buildings and sites in the city.
• LAND USE-18. Research and develop innov rtive policiesfarpresenting_hisforic_pr_oper_ties.
• LAND USE-19. Work with community organizations to develop brochures, guides, walking
tours, and other marketing materials to highlight existing public art in Hermosa Beach.
• LAND USE-20. Develop historic preservation expertise among staff and decision makers
on the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation, preservation ordinances,
the State Historical Building Code, environmental review for historical resources, and tax
credits and incentives.
• LAND USE-21. All discretionary projects that include ground disturbance or excavation
activities on previously undisturbed land shall be required to conduct archaeological
investigations in accordance with CEQA regulations to determine if the project is
sensitive for cultural resources. Additionally, as the Lead Agency for future discretionary
PLAN Hermosa
Final Environmental Impact Report
4.4-14
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES
projects, the City is required under AB 52 to notify tribal organizations of proposed
projects and offer to consult with those tribal organizations that indicate interest.
Following any tribal consultation or archaeological investigation, the City shall weigh and
consider available evidence to determine whether there is a potential risk for disturbing
or damaging any cultural or tribal resources and whether any precautionary measures
can be required to reduce or eliminate that risk. Those precautions may include requiring
construction workers to complete training on archaeological and tribal resources before
any ground disturbance activity and/or requiring a qualified archaeologist or tribal
representative to monitor some or all of the ground disturbance activities. The City shall
require the preservation of discovered archaeologically significant resources (as
determined based on city, state, and federal standards by a qualified professional) in
place if feasible or provide mitigation (avoidance, excavation, documentation, curation,
data recovery, or other appropriate measures) prior to further disturbance.
IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
IMPACT 4.4-1 Would PLAN Hermosa Cause a Substantial Adverse Change in the Significance
of an Archaeological Resource? Implementation of PLAN Hermosa could
provide for future development and reuse projects on previously undisturbed
land throughout the city, which could cause a substantial adverse change in
the significance of an archaeological resource as defined in CEQA Guidelines
Section 15064.5. However, PLAN Hermosa includes implementation actions that
require archaeological investigations for discretionary projects on previously
undisturbed lands determined sensitive for cultural resources, and require the
preservation of any discovered archaeologically significant resources.
Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.
Subsequent public and private projects under PLAN Hermosa that include excavation (e.g.,
grubbing/clearing, grading, trenching, and boring) into native soil could have the potential to
impact or cause a substantial adverse change to undiscovered archaeological resources,
paleontological resources, and human remains. Future development that does not require
excavation activities would cause no impacts on archaeological resources, paleontological
resources, and human remains; therefore, no additional analysis or mitigation is necessary for
these specific types of activities. Other development that would excavate heavily disturbed soils
or artificial fill would cause no impact on intact and significant archaeological resources,
paleontological resources, or human remains since such resources have likely been displaced
by previous disturbances and there would be very limited to no potential to encounter intact
and significant resources in artificial fill soils.
No known archaeological resources (historic or prehistoric) from the SCCIC's database have
been recorded within the city. These findings, however, do not preclude the possibility of
encountering undiscovered archaeological resources during construction, given the proven
prehistoric and historic occupation of the region (as described in Appendix C-7), the
identification of surface and subsurface archaeological resources near the PLAN Hermosa
planning area (e.g., Old Salt Lake and CA-LAN-1872), and the favorable natural conditions (e.g.,
Pacific Ocean) that would have attracted prehistoric and historic inhabitants to the area. The
archaeological monitoring of numerous construction projects throughout the region in recent
decades has demonstrated the existence of deeply buried archaeological deposits, especially
in locations of rapid Holocene deposition such as alluvial fans.
The lack of known archaeological resources identified in the planning area may be because
projects were constructed prior to cultural resources protection laws and because parcels were
not surveyed prior to construction. It is also possible that buried archaeological resources that
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Final Environmental Impact Report
4.4-15
4.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES
were not visible to previous archaeological surveyors have now been brought to the surface as
a result of disturbance (e.g., clearing, grading) or natural processes (e.g., erosion, wind, floods).
Development in Hermosa Beach could result in damage to prehistoric- and historic -period
archaeological resources located at or near previously undisturbed ground surfaces as the result
of construction. In addition, infrastructure and other improvements requiring ground disturbance
could result in damage to or destruction of archaeological resources buried below the ground
surface. Archaeological sites have the potential to contain intact deposits of artifacts,
associated features, and dietary remains that could contribute to the regional prehistoric or
historic record or may be of cultural or religious importance to Native American groups.
Land Use + Design Element Policy 10.10 directs the City to recognize the prehistory and history of
Hermosa Beach and strive to identify, protect, and preserve the city's archaeological resources.
The direction to recognize archaeological resources would be accomplished through
archaeological investigations, as appropriate, which would include research, Native American
consultation (implementation action GOVERNANCE-5), pedestrian surveys, and testing during
the CEQA planning process (i.e., prior to construction), as well as monitoring during ground -
disturbing activities (i.e., during construction). The proper handling of discovered resources and
enforcement of applicable state and federal laws and regulations would qualify as the directed
maintenance of archaeological resources. Much of the planning area is built out, and most new
development pursuant to PLAN Hermosa would therefore take place aboveground on
previously disturbed land, thereby minimizing the potential to disturb archaeological resources.
However, ground -disturbing activities on previously undisturbed land could affect the integrity of
an as -yet -unknown archaeological resource, thereby causing a substantial change in the
significance of the resource. Although efforts would be made to identify and mitigate impacts
on potential archaeological resources prior to ground disturbance, there is no way to know if
significant archaeological resources occur below undisturbed ground surfaces.
Implementation action LAND USE-21 would require archaeological investigations, as necessary,
by a qualified archaeologist for projects subject to CEQA involving ground -disturbing activities
for areas not previously surveyed and/or that are determined sensitive for cultural resources and
would require preparation and implementation of a treatment plan if buried resources would be
affected by a proposed project. For example, an initial archaeological study (Phase I
Assessment), at a minimum, would consist of the following tasks to identify known archaeological
resources in a given project site: a cultural resources records search through the South Central
Coastal Information Center of the California Historical Resources Information System, a
pedestrian survey of the project site, a review of the land use history, and coordination with
knowledgeable organizations or individuals (e.g., Hermosa Beach Historical Society, Native
American tribes). If warranted, additional analyses such as archaeological test excavations
and/or remote sensing methods would be implemented to identify resources.
To-identify-if--a-project requires -archae-ological-invest-ig-atio-ns,- the-Cif-y_ would -review available
geotechnical studies to determine whether excavation activities would impact native soils. If a
geotechnical study is not available for review, then the City would need to make a
determination based on a review of recent aerial photography of the project location,
available data from adjacent or nearby sites, and professional judgement. Thus, with
implementation action LAND USE-21 1, future development and reuse projects under PLAN
Hermosa would implement the appropriate treatment and/or preservation of resources if
encountered. Therefore, potentially significant impacts on archaeological resources would be
less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
PLAN Hermosa City of Hermosa Beach
Final Environmental Impact Report August 2017
4.4-16
4.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES
IMPACT 4.4-2 Would PLAN Hermosa Cause Disturbance of Any Human Remains?
Implementation of PLAN Hermosa would guide future development and reuse
projects in the city in a manner that could disturb human remains. With
implementation of existing policies and procedures, this impact would be less
than significant.
As discussed in Appendix C-7, no known human remains were identified from the SCCIC records
in the PLAN Hermosa planning area. However, these findings do not preclude the existence of
previously unknown human remains located below the ground surface that may be
encountered during construction excavations associated with subsequent projects in the city.
The discovery of Native American human remains, including cases of multiple burials, is not
uncommon in the region (e.g., Malaga Cove). Similar to the discussion regarding
archaeological resources above, it is also possible to encounter buried human remains during
construction given the proven prehistoric and historic occupation of the region, the
identification of multiple surface and subsurface archaeological resources in the PLAN Hermosa
planning area, and the favorable natural conditions that would have attracted prehistoric and
historic inhabitants to the area.
Subsequent projects in Hermosa Beach could result in damage to human remains located at or
near previously undisturbed ground surfaces as the result of construction involving ground
disturbance. In addition, infrastructure and other improvements requiring ground disturbance
could result in damage to or destruction of human remains buried below the ground surface.
Human remains have the potential to contribute to the regional prehistoric or historic record or
may be of cultural or religious importance to Native American groups.
However, if human remains are discovered as part of project construction or other ground -
disturbing activities, the project applicant and/or contractor would notify the City and
immediately halt work at the site. The county coroner would be notified according to California
Public Resources Code Section 5097.98 and California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5. If
the remains are determined to be Native American, the coroner would notify the Native
American Heritage Commission and the procedures outlined in CEQA Section 15064.5(d) and
(e) would be followed. Additionally, the City requires the presence of an on -site monitor for
discretionary projects involving ground disturbance or excavation of soil. Therefore, because of
compliance with state laws, this impact would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
IMPACT 4.4-3 Would PLAN Hermosa Directly or Indirectly Destroy a Unique Paleontological
Resource, Site, or Geologic Feature? Implementation of PLAN Hermosa would
guide future development and reuse projects in the city in a manner that could
damage previously unknown unique paleontological resources, sites, or unique
geologic features. This impact would be potentially significant.
As described in Appendix C-7, no known fossil localities have been recorded within the city in
the NHMLAC database. However, three fossil localities of the same sedimentary deposits (older
Quaternary terrace deposits) that currently underlie the entire city have been found nearby.
These localities have yielded fossils of horses, a marine whale, and a mammoth at depths
between 15 to 35 feet below surface. Previous research also indicated that a Rancholabrean-
age tooth of an extinct llama was found at the Redondo Beach Generating Station (located
adjacent to but outside of the planning area) at a depth of approximately 30 feet below
surface. A fossil horse tooth was also found near the Redondo Beach Generating Station at a
depth of about 35 feet below surface.
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.4-17
PLAN Hermosa
Final Environmental Impact Report
4.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES
Subsequent projects in Hermosa Beach could result in damage to paleontological resources
located at or near previously undisturbed ground surfaces as a result of construction. In addition,
infrastructure and other improvements requiring ground disturbance could result in damage to
or destruction of paleontological resources buried below the ground surface. Paleontological
resources have the potential to contribute to the regional geological and paleontological
record of the region and may be of scientific importance to researchers.
Land Use + Design Element Policy 10.10 directs the City to recognize the prehistory and history of
Hermosa Beach and strive to identify, protect, and preserve paleontological resources. The
proper handling of discovered resources and enforcement of applicable state and federal laws
and regulations would qualify as the directed maintenance of paleontological resources.
Much of the planning area is built out, and most new development pursuant to PLAN Hermosa
would therefore take place above ground on previously disturbed land, thereby minimizing the
potential to disturb paleontological resources. Very little land in Hermosa is undisturbed, and
even less of that land would be available for redevelopment since it is currently designated as
open space, beach, or other public amenity and would not be built on. Although efforts would
be made to identify and mitigate impacts to potential paleontological resources prior to ground
disturbance, there is no way to know if significant paleontological resources occur below
undisturbed ground surfaces. Therefore, this impact would be potentially significant.
Mitigation Measures
MM 4.4-3 As a standard condition of approval for future development projects
implemented under PLAN Hermosa that involve ground disturbance or
excavation:
• For any project where earthmoving or ground disturbance activities are
proposed at depths that encounter older Quaternary terrace deposits, a
qualified paleontologist shall be present during excavation or
earthmoving activities.
• If paleontological resources are discovered during earthmoving activities,
the construction crew shall immediately cease work in the vicinity of the
find and notify the City. The project applicant(s) shall retain a qualified
paleontologist to evaluate the resource and prepare a recovery plan in
accordance with Society of Vertebrate Paleontology guidelines (1996).
The recovery plan may include, but is not limited to, a field survey,
construction monitoring, sampling and data recovery procedures,
museum storage coordination for any specimen recovered, and a report
of findings. Recommendations in the recovery plan that are determined
by the lead agency to be necessary and feasible shall be implemented
before construction activities can resume at the site where the
p-aleonf-olo-gical-r-esour_ces_were _discovered.
Significance After Mitigation
With implementation mitigation measure MM 4.4-3, PLAN Hermosa would provide for the
appropriate treatment and/or preservation of paleontological resources, if encountered. For
instance, a paleontological resource evaluation would consist of a paleontological resources
records search through the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County, a pedestrian survey
of the project site (if applicable), a review of the land use history, and a review of geologic
mapping and/or geotechnical reports. At that point, appropriate mitigation would be
developed and implemented to mitigate impacts on the paleontological resource. Therefore,
potentially significant impacts on paleontological resources would be reduced to less than
significant.
PLAN Hermosa City of Hermosa Beach
Final Environmental Impact Report August 2017
4.4-18
4.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES
IMPACT 4.4-4 Would PLAN Hermosa Cause a Substantial Change in the Significance of a
Historical Resource? Implementation of PLAN Hermosa would provide for future
development and reuse projects in the city in a manner that could cause a
substantial change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in
CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5. Although implementation of PLAN Hermosa
policies and actions would protect historical resources, this would be a
potentially significant impact.
The City of Hermosa Beach adopted a preservation ordinance in 1998, which outlines the
landmark designation criteria, the nomination and application requirements for local landmarks,
and the certificate of appropriateness requirements. Under the City's current policies and
preservation ordinance, only resources that are officially listed federal, state, or local landmarks
are protected. In Hermosa Beach, local landmarks can only be nominated by the City Council
or the property owner; a landmark cannot be nominated by members of the community. The
City does not have a dedicated historic preservation commission. Instead, the City Council
carries out the duties of a historic preservation commission by designating landmarks and
conducting preservation design review. Since adoption of the preservation ordinance, only one
historical resource has been formally designated as a local landmark, the Bijou Building. Also, the
historic preservation code identifies two additional buildings, the Bank of America Building (90
Pier Avenue) and the Hermosa Hotel (20-26 Pier Avenue), which require preservation design
review for any proposed alterations. Any alterations to city landmarks or potential landmarks on
a list of historic resources established by the City must first apply for a certificate of
appropriateness.
The City does not have a comprehensive list of potentially eligible historic properties over 45
years old. During the preparation of the City's General Plan Land Use Element in 1994, 28
historical resources and two historic districts were identified as potentially eligible; however, some
of these potential resources have been demolished or substantially altered. Furthermore, this list
is now over 20 years old and many additional properties now meet the age threshold for
consideration that would have not been considered in 1994. A new windshield survey was
conducted to examine existing conditions and identify examples of property types, styles, and
methods of construction that represent key periods of development in Hermosa Beach.
Subsequent public and private projects under PLAN Hermosa could lead to the demolition of
historic or potentially eligible historic buildings and structures. PLAN Hermosa states that
approximately 67 percent of the city's total land area is improved with residential uses, with the
remaining land uses defined by commercial (7 percent), light industrial (4 percent), institutional
(22 percent), and vacant land (0.5 percent). As such, the greatest concentration of historical
resources (60 percent), as described above, is located in the residential use areas and is subject
to redevelopment pressures. In regard to the Walk Street, Sand Section, North End, and Hermosa
Hills neighborhoods, PLAN Hermosa describes the future vision of these neighborhoods as
preserving building form and scale, maintaining neighborhood connectivity, orienting buildings
toward the street or walk streets, and enhancing multimodal connectivity and access.
Additionally, development in commercial, industrial, and civic center areas of Hermosa Beach
could result in damage to or demolition of other historical resources. The Civic Center Complex
was surveyed as potentially eligible at the local level during the windshield survey; however,
PLAN Hermosa describes a transformation of the building orientation and design, the
modernization of facilities, and construction of parking facilities in the Civic Center District. The
light industrial area named the Cypress District is proposed to be re -envisioned, with emphasis
placed on the transformation of the building design and orientation and the public realm and
streetscape in the area. PLAN Hermosa's vision of the Downtown District along Pier Avenue and
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.4-19
PLAN Hermosa
Final Environmental Impact Report
4.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES
Hermosa Avenue appears to be the retention of the buildings that are "iconic and historic in
nature, and new buildings are carefully integrated to retain the town's eclectic charm."
Provisions of the City's current preservation ordinance (Municipal Code Section 17.53) would not
prevent the demolition or impairment of a historic building or structures that are not formally
designated as a landmark under the City's preservation ordinance or listed on the City's
potential historical resources list, but that meet the definition of historical resource for the
purpose of CEQA. Demolition of such a historical resource would be a significant impact under
CEQA. Furthermore, it is possible that some structures that have not yet been surveyed could be
eligible historical resources.
The Land Use + Design Element of PLAN Hermosa lists a number of policies to encourage and
strengthen historic preservation in the city, including Policies 10.1 through 10.10. PLAN Hermosa
Policies 10.1, 10.2, 10.3, 10.4, and 10.6 would encourage the voluntary designation of potentially
eligible historic resources as landmarks or historic districts, discourage the inappropriate
alteration or demolition of designated landmarks, require the evaluation of historic resources
associated with discretionary projects prior to demolition, and provide incentives for preservation
of historic resources. The implementation actions set forth in PLAN Hermosa recommend a
number of programs to support the goals and policies described above.
PLAN Hermosa policies and implementation actions requiring the identification and protection
of historic resources, along with adherence to existing federal, state, and City regulations, would
provide greater protections to locally designated and potential historical resources. Other
implementation actions address amending CEQA documentation and the initial study program
to ensure historic resources are adequately addressed (LAND USE-13). However, implementation
of PLAN Hermosa would not prevent the demolition of or substantial adverse change to
potentially eligible historic buildings and structures that qualify as historical resources pursuant to
CEQA, but have not been formally designated under the City's preservation ordinance or listed
on the City's potential landmark list. Therefore, this impact would be potentially significant.
Mitigation Measures
MM 4.4-4a The City shall require project applicants of discretionary projects to conduct
historical resources studies, surveys, and assessment reports on a project -by -
project basis, when a project proposes to alter, demolish, or degrade a
designated landmark or a potential historic landmark as defined by Hermosa
Beach Municipal Code Section 17.53.
MM 4.4-4b The City shall maintain the "Historical Resources in Hermosa Beach" guide,
and shall update the guide so that it is informed by current resource data and
its goals and policies are consistent with the Land Use + Design Element.
-MMA.44c-- T-he City -shall _cleve-l_op_pr_o_ce-dur_es-sand_ncmin--afion-applic�afions-fo-facilitate
and streamline the designation of local historic sites and historic districts.
MM 4.4-4d Historical resources studies, surveys, and assessment reports shall be
performed by persons who meet the Secretary of the Interior's Professional
Qualification Standards for Archaeology and Historic Preservation (48 CFR
44716) .
Significance After Mitigation
Implementation of mitigation measures MM 4.4-4a through MM 4.4-4d would reduce impacts on
historical resources to the extent feasible. However, impacts on potentially eligible historic
structures could occur depending on the proposed uses, the cost of rehabilitation, and safety
PLAN Hermosa City of Hermosa Beach
Final Environmental Impact Report August 2017
4.4-20
4.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES
considerations. Thus, it may not be feasible in all circumstances to rehabilitate a structure and
retain its historic significance. Given this uncertainty and the small and dense size of the city
limiting the options for alternate locations, this impact would be significant and unavoidable.
CUMULATIVE SETTING, IMPACTS, AND MITIGATION MEASURES
The geographic context for cumulative impacts on archaeological resources, human remains,
paleontological resources, and cultural resources is future development in Hermosa Beach and
the South Bay Cities Council of Governments (COG) planning area. Many of these locations are
in the PLAN Hermosa planning area and share common historic, archaeological, and
paleontological characteristics.
IMPACT 4.4-5 Would PLAN Hermosa Contribute to Cumulative Effects on Archaeological
Resources? Implementation of PLAN Hermosa in addition to future
development in the South Bay Cities COG planning area could cause a
substantial change in the significance of an archaeological resource. The loss
of some archaeological resources may be prevented through implementation
of PLAN Hermosa policies and similar policies in other communities. PLAN
Hermosa also includes implementation actions to minimize impacts by requiring
archaeological investigations on previously undisturbed lands, and requiring the
preservation of any discovered archaeologically significant resources. These
implementation actions would ensure that these resources can be protected
and preserved. This impact would be less than cumulatively considerable.
Future development could include ground -disturbing activities on previously undisturbed land
that could affect archaeological resources. The cumulative effect would be the loss of
prehistoric cultural resources. Future development would increase the likelihood that
archaeological resources could be discovered. However, implementation action LAND USE-21
would require archaeological investigations, as necessary, by a qualified archaeologist for
projects subject to CEQA involving ground -disturbing activities for areas not previously surveyed
and/or that are determined sensitive for cultural resources and would require preparation and
implementation of a treatment plan if buried resources would be affected by a proposed
project.
Therefore, cumulative development would not result in the demolition or destruction of
archaeological resources, which could contribute to the erosion of the prehistoric record of the
planning area and the region and this would be less than cumulatively considerable impact.
Mitigation Measure
None required.
IMPACT 4.4-6 Would PLAN Hermosa Contribute to Cumulative Effects on Human Remains?
Implementation of PLAN Hermosa in addition to anticipated future
development in the South Bay Cities COG planning area could disturb human
remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries. The loss of some
human remains may be prevented through implementation of PLAN Hermosa
policies and similar policies in other communities. Additionally, PLAN Hermosa
includes implementation actions to minimize impacts by requiring
archaeological investigations on previously undisturbed lands, and requiring the
preservation of any discovered archaeologically significant resources. These
implementation actions would ensure that these resources can be protected
and preserved. This impact would be less than cumulatively considerable.
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Final Environmental Impact Report
4.4-21
4.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES
Future development could include ground -disturbing activities on previously undisturbed land
that could potentially affect human remains. The cumulative effect would be the loss of human
remains. Future development would increase the likelihood that human remains could be
discovered.
However, implementation action LAND USE-21 would require archaeological investigations, as
necessary, by a qualified archaeologist for projects subject to CEQA involving ground -disturbing
activities for areas not previously surveyed and/or that are determined sensitive for cultural
resources and would require preparation and implementation of a treatment plan if buried
resources would be affected by a proposed project. Therefore, cumulative development would
not result in the demolition or destruction of human remains, which could contribute to the
erosion of the prehistoric record of the planning area and the region. This impact would be less
than cumulatively considerable.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
IMPACT 4.4-7 Would PLAN Hermosa Contribute to Cumulative Effects on Paleontological
Resources? Ground disturbance, earthmoving, and excavation activities
associated with implementation of PLAN Hermosa combined with construction
activities in the South Bay Cities COG planning area could damage previously
unknown unique paleontological resources. This impact would be cumulatively
considerable.
Portions of the city are underlain by potentially fossil -bearing Pleistocene non -marine sediment
and Holocene alluvium. Significant fossils, including unique specimens and vertebrate remains,
have been discovered in Pleistocene and Holocene sediments throughout the Los Angeles area,
ranging from finds at the La Brea Tar Pits to mastodon and other fossils discovered in western
Riverside County during the construction of Diamond Valley Lake. Excavations and ground -
disturbing activities on these sediments throughout the region would disturb significant
paleontological resources. This cumulative impact would be cumulatively considerable.
Mitigation Measures
Implement mitigation measure MM 4.4-3.
Significance After Mitigation
Ground disturbance, earthmoving, and excavation activities would occur under PLAN Hermosa
and in the South Bay Cities COG planning area. As discussed above, mitigation measure MM
4.4-3 would reduce impacts on paleontological resources by requiring that fossil specimens be
recovered and recorded and undergo appropriate curation, in the event that resources are
encountered during construction activities in Hermosa Beach. With implementation of mitigation
measure MM 4.4-3, PLAN Hermosa's contribution to significant cumulative paleontological
resources impacts would be offset and would result in a less than cumulatively considerable
impact.
IMPACT 4.4-8 Would PLAN Hermosa Contribute to Cumulative Effects on Historical Resources?
Implementation of PLAN Hermosa in addition to anticipated future
development in the South Bay Cities COG planning area could cause a
substantial change in the significance of a historical resource. The loss of some
historical resources may be prevented through implementation of PLAN
Hermosa policies and similar policies in other communities. However, this would
PLAN Hermosa City of Hermosa Beach
Final Environmental Impact Report August 2017
4.4-22
4.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES
not ensure that these resources can be protected and preserved. This impact
would be cumulatively considerable.
Cumulative impacts on historical resources may occur under PLAN Hermosa when one or more
goals or policies has the potential to impact several historical resources and would erode the
historical character and significance of the built environment in Hermosa Beach such that the
character of these resources would be compromised and no longer able to convey the
resources' significant historical or architectural associations, resulting in a cumulatively significant
impact. Additionally, the lack of strong historic preservation standards regionally could further
result in the loss of specific architectural styles, such as the beach bungalow, that are
representative of the historical character in the beach cities area. This impact would be
cumulatively considerable.
Mitigation Measures
Implement mitigation measures MM 4.4-4a through MM 4.4-d.
Significance After Mitigation
Implementation of mitigation measures MM 4.4-4a through MM 4.4-4d would not ensure that
historical resources would be protected and preserved. As described in the analysis presented in
Impact 4.4-4, impacts on historic resources cannot be reduced to less than significant. Therefore,
this impact would remain cumulatively considerable and significant and unavoidable.
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Final Environmental Impact Report
4.4-23
4.4 CULTURAL RESOURCES
4.4.5 REFERENCES
California Office of Historic Preservation. 1995. Instructions for Recording Historical Resources.
City of Hermosa Beach. 2011. Historical Resources in Hermosa Beach.
htt www.hermc)sabch.org/modules/showdoc:umen t.asx?documentid=1351.
2017. PLAN Hermosa.
National Park Service. 1985. National Register Bulletin 24: Guidelines for Local Surveys: A Basis for
Preservation Planning. hftps://www.nps.gov/nr/publications/bulletins/pdfs/nrb24.pdf.
1990. National Register Bulletin 15: How to Apply the National Register Criteria for
Evaluation. htfps://www.nps.gov/nr/publications/bulletins/pdfs/nrb15.pdf.
1997. National Register Bulletin 16: How to Complete the National Register Registration
Form. htfps://www.nps.gov/nr/publications/bulletins/pdfs/nrbI6a.pdf.
n.d. Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties Website.
htfps://www.nps.gov/fps/sfandards.htm.
PLAN Hermosa
Final Environmental Impact Report
4.4-24
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.5 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
4.5 GEOLOGY AND $OILS
4.5.1 INTRODUCTION
This resource section evaluates the potential environmental effects related to geology and soils
from implementation of PLAN Hermosa. The analysis includes a review of regional geology,
seismicity and faulting, and soils.
Issues regarding water quality impacts from soil erosion are discussed in Chapter 4.8, Hydrology
and Water Quality. PLAN Hermosa Public Safety Element policies and implementation actions
presented in the implementation plan guide development and infrastructure practices designed
to protect residents and structures from seismic -related hazards.
NOP Comments: No comments were received in response to the Notice of Preparation (NOP)
addressing the geology and soils analysis. Comments included written letters and oral comments
provided at the NOP scoping meeting.
Reference Information: Information for this resource chapter is based on numerous sources,
including the PLAN Hermosa Technical Background Report (TBR) and other publicly available
documents. The TBR prepared for the project is attached to this document as Appendix C.
4.5.2 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Appendix C-9 describes the regional and local conditions related to geology and soils. Key
findings of the environmental setting are presented below.
GEOLOGY AND TOPOGRAPHY
Hermosa Beach is located along the southwestern margin of the Los Angeles Basin and Coastal
Plain. The Los Angeles Basin is an alluvial -filled basin bounded to the north and east by the Santa
Monica, San Gabriel, and Santa Ana mountains and to the west and south by the Pacific Ocean
and the Palos Verdes Peninsula.
The planning area is underlain by Holocene -age dune sands located west of the adjacent older
alluvial deposits of the Los Angeles Basin. Beneath the surficial dune sands is the Pleistocene -age
San Pedro Formation, consisting of unconsolidated and semi -consolidated stratified sands with
some clays, silts, and gravels. The late Pliocene -age Pico Formation, consisting of marine siltstones
and sandstones, sits beneath the San Pedro Formation. Beneath the Pico Formation is the early
Pliocene -age Repetto Formation, consisting of siltstones with layers of sandstones and
conglomerates. Beneath the Repetto Formation is the Miocene -age Puente Formation, which
contains the primary oil reservoir in the planning area (City of Hermosa Beach 2014).
Hermosa Beach sits at the southwest end of Santa Monica Bay and ranges in elevation from sea
level in the west to about 200 feet above sea level at inland locations (USGS 1981).
SEISMIC HAZARDS
The primary seismic hazards in the city are fault ground ruptures and ground shaking. Secondary
seismic hazards include liquefaction, lateral spreading, differential settlement, landslide -induced
earthquakes, and subsidence.
Seismic Ground Shaking and Fault Rupture
Earthquakes can cause strong ground shaking that may damage property and infrastructure. The
strength of an earthquake is generally expressed in two ways: magnitude and intensity. The
magnitude is a measure that depends on the seismic energy radiated by the earthquake as
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.5-1
4.5 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
recorded on seismographs. The intensity at a specific location is a measure that depends on the
effects of the earthquake on people or buildings and is used to'express the severity of ground
shaking.
The most commonly used scale to measure earthquake intensities (ground shaking and damage)
is the Modified Mercalli Intensity (MMI) Scale, which measures the intensity of an earthquake's
effects in a given locality and is based on observations of earthquake effects at specific places.
On the MMI Scale, values range from I to XII (see Table 4.5-1). While an earthquake has only one
magnitude, it can have various intensities, which decrease with distance from the epicenter and
vary depending on the underlying soil conditions (CGS 2002). Table 4.5-1 provides descriptions of
the effects of ground shaking intensities along with a general range of moment magnitudes that
are often associated with those intensities.
TABLE 4.5-1
EFFE[Ts OF RIGHTER MAGNITUDE AND MODIFIED MERCALLI INTENSITY
MW
Modified
Effects of Intensity
Mercalli Scale
1.0-3.0
I
I. Not felt except by a very few under especially favorable conditions.
M Felt only by a few persons at rest, especially on upper floors of buildings. Delicately
suspended objects may swing.
3.0-3.9
II —III
M. Felt quite noticeably by persons indoors, especially on upper floors of buildings.
Many people do not recognize it as an earthquake. Standing motor cars may rock
slightly. Vibrations similar to the passing of a truck. Duration estimated.
IV. Felt indoors by many, outdoors by few during the day. At night, some awakened.
Dishes, windows, doors disturbed; walls make cracking sound. Sensation like heavy
truck striking building. Standing motor cars rocked noticeably.
4.0-4.9
IV—V
V. Felt by nearly everyone, many awakened. Some dishes, windows, etc., broken; a few
instances of cracked plaster, unstable objects overturned. Disturbances of trees,
❑les, and other tall oh ects sometimes noticed. Pendulum clocks ma top.
VI. Felt by all, many frightened. Some heavy furniture moved; a few instances of fallen
plaster. Damage slight.
VII. Everybody runs outdoors. Damage negligible in building of good design and
5.0-5.9
VI—VII
construction; slight to moderate in well-built ordinary structures; considerable in
poorly built or badly designed structures; some chimneys broken. Noticed by
arsons driving motor cars.
VM. Damage slight in specially designed ctriictures; considerable in ordinary substantial
buildings, with partial collapse; great in poorly built structures. Panel walls thrown
out of frame structures. Fall of chimneys, factory stacks, columns, monuments, walls.
Heavy furniture overturned. Sand and mud ejected in small amounts. Changes in
6.0-6.9
VIII—IX
well water. Persons driving motor cars disturbed.
JX Damage considerable in specially designed structures; well -designed frame
structures thrown out of plumb; great in substantial buildings, with partial collapse.
Buildings shifted off foundations. Ground cracked conspicuously. Underground
pipes broken.
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.5-2
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.5 GEOLOGY AND $OILS
MW
Modified
Mercalli Scale
Effects of Intensity
X. Some well-built wooden structures destroyed; most masonry and frame structures
destroyed with foundations; ground badly cracked. Rails bent. Landslides
considerable from river banks and steep slopes. Shifted sand and mud. Water
splashed (slopped) over banks.
7.0 and
X or higher
XI. Few, if any, (masonry) structures remain standing. Bridges destroyed. Broad fissures
higher
in ground. Underground pipelines completely out of service. Earth slumps and land
slips in soft ground. Rails bent greatly.
XII. Damage total. Practically all works of construction are damaged greatly or destroyed.
Waves seen on ground surface. Lines of sight and level are distorted. Objects are
thrown upward into the air.
Source: CGS 2002
Faults are classified as "active" and "potentially active." An active fault is one that has had
surface displacement within Holocene time (about the last 11,000 years), while a potentially active
fault is one that has been active during Quaternary time (last 1,600,000 years). These definitions
are used in delineating Special Studies Zones as mandated by the 1994 Alquisf-Priolo Earthquake
Fault Zoning Act.' A fault rupture is the sudden release of elastic energy that results from the sliding
of one part of the earth's crust past another. The resulting fracture is known as a fault, while the
sliding movement of earth on either side of a fault is called fault rupture.
The planning area is not located in a fault -rupture hazard zone, as defined by the Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Act (CGS 2010). Based on information from the California Geological
Survey (2010), no known major active faults are located in the planning area. The closest active
faults are the Newport -Inglewood fault, approximately 5 miles to the east, and the Palos Verdes
fault, approximately 2 miles to the west (CGS 2010). An inactive offshore fault, named Offshore
Fault 103, is approximately 1.4 miles west of the planning area (City of Hermosa Beach 2014).
Figure 4.5-1 (Regional Faults) shows the location of the planning area relative to mapped active
and potentially active faults in Southern California.
Historic records indicate that the planning area has experienced seismic ground shaking from a
number of seismic events over the last century and a half. For example, the 1933 Long Beach
earthquake, which occurred on the nearby Newport -Inglewood fault, caused serious damage to
weak masonry structures and killed 115 people throughout the region. The earthquake had an
estimated moment magnitude of M6.4 on the Richter scale (City of Hermosa Beach 2014; USGS
2013b; Southern California Earthquake Data Center 2014).
' The Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act requires the California State Geologist to establish regulatory
zones now known as Earthquake Fault Zones; prior to January 1, 1994, these zones were known as Special
Studies Zones.
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.5-3
4.5 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
~0
Legend
r!w•r. f w A '!ia
Source: CGS 2010
FIGURE 4.5-1
REGIONAL FAULTS
Los'"'"'
:r - ••.,.
Angeles
Santa • -•�'
Monica R '.
• 9
1.,1
A
• �
k ffi M
Manhattan
,; I-'f,4 {" 1
,
Beach
Hermosa
Beach
-
A ` f —b
L:l1 boj:)(tlf
-
Beach
`
Long
Beach
S MINa • `,y �•
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.5 -4
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.5 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Landslides
A landslide is the downhill movement of masses of earth material under the force of gravity.
Factors contributing to landslide potential include steep slopes, unstable terrain, and proximity to
earthquake faults. This process typically involves surface soil and an upper portion of underlying
bedrock. Movement may be very rapid or so slow that a change of position can be noted only
over a period of weeks or years. The size of a landslide can range from several square feet to
several square miles. There are several landslide zones in Hermosa Beach, as shown on Figure 4.5-2
(Landslide and Liquefaction Zones). These zones have a potential for permanent ground
displacement, based on previous landslide movement or local topographic, geological,
geotechnical, or subsurface water conditions. They are identified as follows: one near South Park,
east of Monterey Boulevard between 2nd Street and 6th Street; one on the city's southern border
at the intersection of Valley Drive and Ardmore Avenue; one to the north of Gould Avenue
between Ardmore Avenue and Pacific Coast Highway (State Route [SR] 1); and one on the
western border of the city between 8th Street and 6th Street. An additional landslide zone is
located just east of the city limits between Havemeyer Lane and Haynes Lane in Redondo Beach
(DOC 1999). Future development in these zones requires mitigation of potential landslide hazards.
Liquefaction
Liquefaction is the loss of soil strength caused by a sudden increase in pore water pressure during
shaking and is one of the most destructive secondary effects of seismic shaking. Liquefaction
occurs primarily in saturated and loose, fine- to medium -grained soils. Liquefaction occurs most
often where groundwater lies within 30 feet of the surface, but it may also occur in areas where
groundwater is up to 50 feet beneath the surface.
In general, the entire planning area west of Hermosa Avenue may include potentially liquefiable
layers, as shown on Figure 4.5-2. A liquefaction zone is also identified in the southern portion of the
planning area near the northeast corner of Monterey Boulevard and Herondo Street.
If groundwater levels in these areas rise to within 30 to 50 feet of the ground surface, the sediments
would have a moderate to high susceptibility for liquefaction. The highest water levels recorded
in Hermosa Beach are measured at 10 feet deep along the coast (DOC 1998). The type of soil
present along the city's coastal area indicates the potential for large liquefiable areas. This area
could become larger as the sea level rises and causes groundwater tables to rise as well. For more
information on sea level rise, please refer to Section 4.8, Hydrology and Water Quality.
Lateral Spreading
Lateral spreading occurs as a result of liquefaction in which a subsurface layer becomes a
liquefied mass, and gravitational and inertial forces cause the mass to move downslope.
Development within landslide or liquefaction zones generally requires additional design
considerations of different construction methods. This type of secondary seismic hazard is not
expected to occur, as most of the liquefaction areas in the city are located in relatively flat areas
(City of Hermosa Beach 2014).
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.5-5
4.5 GEOLOGY AND $OILS
FIGURE 4.5-2
LANDSLIDE AND LIQUEFACTION ZONES
V Vand
C7 uuM� INr
.� - ca.rr Ian. rumen.
LpAd9dw Joe
wr*ww vdw" caner.. r9w
Source: CGS 2010
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.5-6
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.5 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
- Differential Settlement
Differential settlement is a process whereby soils settle non -uniformly, potentially resulting in stress
and damage to structures. Native earth materials in Hermosa Beach are relatively dense and
therefore not prone to seismically induced settlement (City of Hermosa Beach 2014).
SOILS
The California Department of Conservation (DOC) prepared soil maps for the state of California
by US Geological Survey (USGS) quadrangle; the planning area lies within the Redondo Beach
quadrangle. The oldest Quaternary geologic unit mapped in the Redondo Beach quadrangle is
the Pleistocene San Pedro Formation. The only identified soil substrate mapped in the planning
area is Quaternary Older Alluvium (DOC 1998).
Erosion
Soil erosion is a process whereby soil materials are worn away and transported to another area by
either wind or water. Rates of erosion can vary depending on the soil material and structure,
placement, and human activity. In the planning area, opportunities for accelerated erosion
include the steepening of slopes, removing ground cover, and other human -induced activities
associated with construction and landscaping.
Expansive Soils
Expansive soils consist largely of clays, which greatly increase in volume when saturated with water
and shrink when dried. If does not appear that expansive clays or soils exhibiting shrink -swell
characteristics underlie the planning area. However, since no citywide soil report exists, expansive
and collapsible soils are analyzed on a project -by -project basis.
4.5.3 REGULATORY SETTING
Federal, state, and local laws, regulations, and policies pertain to geology and soils in the planning
area. They provide the regulatory framework for addressing aspects of geology and soils that
would be affected by implementation of PLAN Hermosa. The regulatory framework for geology
and soils is discussed in detail in Appendix C-9. The following summarizes key regulations used to
reduce potential environmental impacts of implementing PLAN Hermosa.
FEDERAL
Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act: US Congress passed the Earthquake Hazards
Reduction Act in 1977 to reduce the risks to life and property from future earthquakes in
the United States through the establishment and maintenance of an effective earthquake
hazards reduction program. To accomplish this goal, the act established the National
Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program. This program was substantially amended in
November 1990 by the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program Act, which
refined the description of agency responsibilities, program goals, and objectives.
STATE
• Alquist-Priolo Act: The Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act was created to prohibit
the location of structures designed for human occupancy across the traces of active faults
(lines of surface rupture), thereby reducing the loss of life and property from an
earthquake. The planning area does not contain Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones
(CGS 2010).
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.5-7
4.5 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
LOCAL
Seismic Hazards Mapping Act: The 1990 Seismic Hazards Mapping Act (Public Resources
Code Sections 2690-2699.6) addresses hazards such as strong ground shaking,
earthquake -induced landslides, and, in some areas, zones of amplified shaking. The act
established a mapping program for areas that have the potential for liquefaction,
landslide, strong ground shaking, or other earthquake and geologic hazards. The
California Geological Survey (CGS) is the primary state agency charged with
implementing the act and provides local jurisdictions with the seismic hazard zone maps
that identify areas susceptible to liquefaction, earthquake -induced landslides, and
amplified shaking.
California Building Code (CBC): The California Building Standards Commission is
responsible for coordinating, managing, adopting, and approving building codes in
California. The 2013 CBC became effective on January 1, 2014, and updated all the
subsequent codes under the California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 24 (24 CCR), which
provides minimum standards for building design. The State requires local governments to
adopt Title 24 on a triennial basis. Where no other building codes apply, Chapters 16, 17,
18, 20, and 21 of the 2010 CBC regulate excavation, foundations, and retaining walls.
California Coastal Act: The California Coastal Act of 1972 created the California Coastal
Commission to enact policies and standards in its coastal development permit decisions.
Among many issues, the Coastal Commission and the coastal development permit
program protect against loss of life and property in the Coastal Zone from coastal hazards,
including geologic hazards (Section 30006.5, Public Resources Code, Division 20, California
Coastal Act). Section 30262(5) of the act also provides that "development will not cause
or contribute to subsidence hazards unless it is determined that adequate measures will
be undertaken to prevent damage from such subsidence."
City of Hermosa Beach Municipal Code: Chapter 15.36 of the Municipal Code promotes
public safety and welfare by reducing the risk of death or injury that may result from the
effects of earthquakes on existing unreinforced masonry bearing wall buildings. The
provisions of the chapter require existing seismically unreinforced buildings to be retrofitted
and provide minimum seismic reinforcement standards for new buildings.
City of Hermosa Beach Building Requirements: The City requires developers to submit a
geotechnical report before starting construction on new buildings. As mentioned above,
groundwater levels under sites located west of Hermosa Avenue can be as shallow as 10
feet from the surface. The geotechnical reports ensure that new developments
appropriately consider and design geological, soil, and seismic safety conditions for each
project site.
4.5.4 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
--THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
For the purposes of this EIR, impacts on geology and soils are considered significant if adoption
and implementation of PLAN Hermosa would:
1) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of
loss, injury, or death, involving:
a) 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 California Geological Survey
(formerly Division of Mines and Geology) Special Publication 42.
PLAN Hermosa City of Hermosa Beach
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report August 2017
4.5-8
4.5 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
b) Strong seismic ground shaking.
c) Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction.
d) Landslides.
2) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil.
3) 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.
4) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code
(1994), creating substantial risks to life or property.
5) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative
wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of
wastewater.
The City of Hermosa Beach Municipal Code does not include provisions for new development
with on -site septic systems and there are no existing individual septic systems within the city.
Therefore, there would be no impact related to the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater
disposal systems. This topic will not be discussed further in this EIR.
ANALYSIS APPROACH
The impact analysis of PLAN Hermosa implementation evaluates geological hazards and their
potential to affect future development. The following impact analysis is based on a review of
published information, surveys, and reports regarding regional geology and soils. Information was
obtained from private and governmental agencies and Internet websites, including the USDA
Natural Resources Conservation Service, the California Geological Survey, and the US Geological
Survey.
PLAN HERMOSA POLICIES AND IMPLEMENTATION ACTIONS
PLAN Hermosa policies and implementation actions that reduce potential geology and soils
impacts include the following:
Policies
Public Safety Element
• 1.1 Evaluate risks. Buildings and infrastructure will be periodically evaluated for seismic, fire,
flood, and coastal storm hazard risks and identified risks will be minimized by complying
with California Building Code standards and other applicable regulations.
• 1.2 Prepare geotechnical reports. Geotechnical reports will be prepared for new
development projects in areas with the potential for liquefaction or landslide.
• 1.9 Facilitate retrofits. Encourage and facilitate retrofits of seismically high -risk buildings.
• 1.10 Consider site -specific soil conditions. Require new structures to consider site -specific
soil conditions.
Implementation Actions
• SUSTAIN ABILITY-1 b. Revise the Municipal Code as necessary to ensure it reflects up-to-date
practices to reduce potential for soil erosion and ways to minimize or eliminate the effects
of grading on the loss of topsoil.
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.5-9
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.5 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
• SUSTAINABILITY-17. Develop a citywide expansive and corrosive soils screening tool to
reduce the need for site -specific soil reports.
• SAFETY-1. Continue to adopt and enforce the most up-to-date California Building
Standards Code and California Fire Code, with appropriate local amendments.
• SAFETY-2. Continue to inventory unreinforced brick masonry, soft -story, and other
seismically vulnerable private buildings. Identify potential funding sources to assist with
seismic retrofits.
• SAFETY-3. Enforce seismic design provisions of the current California Building Standards
Code related to geologic, seismic, and slope hazards, with appropriate local
amendments.
• SAFETY-4. For properties identified as possibly containing acidic, expansive, or collapsible
soils, require site -specific soil condition reports and appropriate mitigation as a condition
of new development.
• SAFETY-6. Evaluate the landslide potential of a project site and require implementation of
landslide mitigation measures when, during the course of a geotechnical investigation,
areas prone to landslide are found. Potential landslide mitigation measures include, but
are not limited to the following:
• Avoidance: Developments should be built sufficiently far away from the threat that
they will not be affected even if a landslide does occur.
• Reduction: Reduction of landslide hazards should be achieved by increasing the
factor of safety of the landslide area to an acceptable level, based on current
engineering standards and practices. This can be accommodated by eliminating
slopes with active/inactive landslides, removing the unstable soil and rock materials, or
applying one or more appropriate slope stabilization methods (such as buttress fills,
subdrains, soil nailing, crib walls, etc.).
• SAFETY-7. Require projects located within the Liquefaction Areas identified in PLAN
Hermosa to evaluate the liquefaction potential and require implementation of mitigation
measures when, during the course of a geotechnical investigation, shallow groundwater
(60 feet or less) and potentially liquefiable soils are found. Potential liquefaction mitigation
measures include, but are not limited to, soil densification or compaction, displacement
or compaction grouting, and use of post -tensioned slab foundations, piles, or caissons.
IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
IMPACT 4.5-1 Would PLAN Hermosa Expose People or Structures to Substantial Adverse Effects
Associated with Fault Rupture and Seismic Hazards? PLAN Hermosa would
provide for and regulate future development and reuse projects in the city,
including buildings and structures that would potentially expose people and
structures to seismic hazards. Implementation of existing laws, regulations, and
policies, as outlined in the Regulatory Setting subsection, and PLAN Hermosa
policies would minimize seismic hazards impacts to people and structures to a
less than significant level.
As previously discussed, the planning area is located in a seismically active area and could
experience seismic ground shaking and seismic -related ground failure (i.e., liquefaction and
landslides) from earthquakes on active faults. The city is already developed, and people and
structures in Hermosa Beach are subject to both existing primary and secondary geological
hazards. To prevent loss of life and property, the City of Hermosa Beach adopted the California
Building Code as outlined in Title 15, Buildings and Construction, of the City's Municipal Code.
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.5 -10
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.5 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
The current adopted CBC includes design criteria for seismic loading and other geologic hazards,
including design criteria for geologically induced loading from geological hazards. While shaking
impacts could be potentially damaging, they would also be reduced in their impacts due to CBC
criteria that recognize this potential. The CBC includes provisions for buildings to structurally survive
an earthquake without collapsing and includes measures such as anchoring to the foundation
and structural frame design. Additionally, Chapter 15.36 of the City's Municipal Code requires
existing seismically unreinforced buildings to be retrofitted. This requirement would apply to infill
development or redevelopment that would reuse existing buildings considered "high risk buildings"
(as defined in Municipal Code Section 15.36.030) that have at least one unreinforced masonry
bearing wall (Section 15.36.020).
PLAN Hermosa policies and implementation actions would further protect people and structures
from risks associated with seismic -related hazards. For instance, Public Safety Element Policy 1.1
would require that all new buildings and infrastructure be evaluated for seismic hazard risks, while
Policy 1.2 requires geotechnical reports be prepared for new development projects in areas with
the potential for liquefaction or landslides. Additionally, implementation actions SAFETY-6 and
SAFETY-7 require that future project sites be evaluated for landslide and liquefaction potential. The
site -specific geotechnical investigations and actions SAFETY-6 and SAFETY-7 would ensure that
proposed buildings developed under PLAN Hermosa are properly designed to address these
constraints.
Thus, while PLAN Hermosa would result in the exposure of people to dangers associated with
earthquakes, applicable building standards and implementation of PLAN Hermosa policies and
implementation actions would minimize these dangers. The plan would not increase the potential
for seismic activity or the inherent risks that come with living in a seismically active region.
Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
IMPACT 4.5-2 Would PLAN Hermosa Result in Substantial Soil Erosion or Loss of Topsoil? PLAN
Hermosa would provide for and regulate future development and reuse projects
in the city, which would entail ground -disturbing activities that could lead to soil
loss. Compliance with existing policies regarding soil erosion and implementation
of PLAN Hermosa policies would minimize impacts associated with erosion and
loss of topsoil. This impact would be less than significant.
PLAN Hermosa implementation could result in actions that would require soil -disturbing activities
such as grading, hillside construction, and other activities that could accelerate soil erosion and
expose topsoil. Landscaping activities could also result in soil exposure and limited soil erosion.
However, all construction activities would be required to comply with CBC Chapter 70 standards,
which would ensure implementation of appropriate measures during soil -disturbing activities to
reduce erosion. Project construction would also comply with City Municipal Code grading and erosion
standards, as outlined in Chapter 8.44, Stormwater and Urban Runoff Pollution Control Regulations.
PLAN Hermosa implementation actions SUSTAINABILITY-16 and SAFETY-1 would further reduce
erosion associated with future construction by requiring the City to update both the Municipal
Code and the building code to reflect the most up-to-date practices for soil erosion prevention.
Additionally, development involving clearing, grading, or excavation that causes soil disturbance
of 1 or more acres, or a project involving less than 1 acre that is part of a larger development plan
and includes clearing, grading, or excavation, is subject to provisions of the National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) State General Permit (Order No. 2009-0009), as discussed in
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.5-11
4.5 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Section 4.8, Hydrology and Water Quality. Any development of this size in the planning area would
be required to prepare and comply with an approved stormwater pollution prevention plan
(SWPPP). The SWPPP considers the full range of erosion control best management practices,
including any additional site -specific and seasonal conditions. Such existing requirements would
significantly reduce the potential for substantial erosion or topsoil loss to occur in association with
new development.
Since erosion impacts are often dependent on the type of development, intensity of
development, and amount of lot coverage of a particular project site, impacts can vary.
However, compliance with existing standards and implementation of PLAN Hermosa policies would
minimize the potential for soil erosion and loss of topsoil. Therefore, this impact would be less than
significant.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
IMPACT 4.5-3 Would PLAN Hermosa Locate Structures on Unstable and Expansive Soils? PLAN
Hermosa would provide for and regulate future development and reuse projects
in the city. Because Hermosa Beach has a low potential for expansive soils and
PLAN Hermosa contains policies to minimize development in areas with unstable
or expansive soils, this impact would be less than significant.
As discussed above, it does not appear that expansive clays or soils exhibiting shrink -swell
characteristics are present in the planning area. As such, the potential for exposure to these types
of hazards from implementation of PLAN Hermosa would be low.
Additionally, the CBC and other related construction standards apply seismic requirements and
address certain grading activities. The CBC includes common engineering practices requiring
special design and construction methods that reduce or eliminate potential expansive soil -related
impacts. These methods can include overexcavation of foundations, import of more stable
material, positive drainage systems, or changes in structure design to mitigate for unstable soils.
Compliance with CBC regulations would ensure the adequate design and construction of
building foundations to resist soil movement.
PLAN Hermosa Public Safety Element implementation action SUSTAINABILITY-17 would require the
City to develop a citywide screening tool to identify areas in which site -specific soil conditions
reports may be needed. Such reports also include Specific engineering design methods for
construction in areas with these types of soils if necessary. Further, implementation action SAFETY-4
requires new structures to consider site -specific soil conditions. These measures would further
reduce the potential for loss of life from development on expansive or unstable soils.
Development under PLAN Hermosa would be designed and constructed in accordance with
applicable engineering standards and local policies that address soil stability. Therefore, this
impact would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
CUMULATIVE SETTING, IMPACTS, AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Site -specific topography, soil conditions, and surrounding development determine geological
and soil -related impacts, which generally are not considered cumulative in nature. For example,
seismic events may damage or destroy a building, but the development of a new building would
PLAN Hermosa City of Hermosa Beach
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report August 2017
4.5-12
4.5 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
not cause other areas to be more susceptible to seismic hazards. However, erosion and sediment
deposition can be cumulative in nature, depending on the type and amount of development
proposed in a given geographical area. The cumulative setting for soil erosion consists of existing,
planned, proposed, and reasonably foreseeable land use conditions in Hermosa Beach and the
South Bay Cities Council of Governments (COG) planning area.
IMPACT 4.5-4 Would PLAN Hermosa Contribute to Cumulative Geologic and Soil Hazards
Impacts? Implementation of PLAN Hermosa, in addition to other existing,
planned, proposed, approved, and reasonably foreseeable development
projects in the South Bay Cities COG planning area, may result in cumulative soil
erosion impacts. However, compliance with existing regulations intended to
reduce soil erosion during construction would reduce this impact to less than
cumulatively considerable.
PLAN Hermosa's intent is to minimize soil erosion through implementation of new policies and
continued strengthening of existing policies. As discussed above, adoption and implementation
of PLAN Hermosa would not lead to substantial soil erosion or topsoil loss. It would also not result in
any changes to existing federal, state, and city policies and standards regulating soil erosion. As
such, compliance with existing City policies and implementation of PLAN Hermosa policies would
offset Hermosa Beach's contribution to cumulative soil erosion impacts.
Further, new development in the region would have to abide by CBC regulations. Additionally,
and as described above, all development involving clearing, grading, or excavation that causes
soil disturbance of 1 or more acres, or any project involving less than 1 acre that is part of a larger
development plan and includes clearing, grading, or excavation, would be subject to the State
General Permit and would be required to prepare and implement an approved SWPPP
containing erosion control measures.
Because policies and programs included in
regulations would reduce the potential for soil
would be less than cumulatively considerable.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
PLAN Hermosa and existing federal and state
erosion and loss of topsoil, cumulative impacts
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.5-13
4.5 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
4.5.5 REFERENCES
Cal OES (California Office of Emergency Services). 2013.2013 State Hazard Mitigation Plan.
Accessed February 2014.
http://hazardmitigation.calema.co.gov/docs/SHMP_Final_2013.pdf.
CGS (California Geological Survey). 1978. Fault Evaluation Report FER-43.
1998. Seismic Hazard Report for the Redondo Beach 7.5-Minute Quadrangle, Los Angeles
County, California.
2002. Note 32, How Earthquakes and Their Effects Are Measured. Sacramento: CGS.
2010. Online Website Fault Maps and Special Publication 42, Alquist-Priolo Earthquake
Fault Zones. Accessed November 2015.
ftp://ftp.consrv.ca.gov/pub/dmg/pubs/sp/Sp42.pdf.
2015. Regulatory Maps. Accessed November 2015.
http://maps.conservafion.ca.gov/cgs/informafionwarehouse/index.html?map=regulatory
maps.
City of Hermosa Beach. 2014. EBB Oil Drilling & Production Project Final Environmental Impact
Report.
http://www.hermosabch.org/ftp/oil_docs/FEIR%20Hermosa%20beach%200il%20Project_
All%20Sections.pdf.
2017. PLAN Hermosa.
DOC (California Department of Conservation). 1998. Seismic Hazard Zone Report for the
Redondo Beach 7.5-Minute Quadrangle, Los Angeles County, California. Accessed
February 2014.
hftp://gmw.consrv.ca.gov/shmp/download/quad/REDONDO_BEACH/reports/redob_ev
al.pdf.
1999. State of California Seismic Hazard Zones Redondo Beach Quadrangle Official Map.
Accessed February 2014.
http://gmw.consrv.ca.gov/shmp/download/quad/REDONDO_BEACH/maps/ozn_redob.
pdf.
Los Angeles RWQCB (Regional Water Quality Control Board, Los Angeles Region). 1995. Water
Quality Control Plan, Los Angeles Region. http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/rwgcb4
/water issues/programs/basin plan/electronics_documents/bp 1 _introduction.pdf.
Southern California Earthquake Data Center. 2014. Significant Earthquakes and Faults,
Chronological Earthquake Index, Long Beach Earthquake, Accessed February 2014.
http://www.data.scec.org/significant/longbeach 1933.html.
USGS (US Geological Survey). 1981. Redondo Beach Quadrangle Topographic Map. Accessed
January 2014. http://www.archive.org/download/usgs_drg_ca_33118_g4/o331 18g4.tif.
2013a. Earthquake Hazards Program, Banded Deaggregations. Accessed January 2014.
http://egint.cr.usgs.gov/deaggband/2002/index.php.
2013b. Magnitude Intensity Comparison. Accessed January 2014.
hftp://earfhquake.usgs.gov/learn/topics/mag_vs_inf.php.
PLAN Hermosa City of Hermosa Beach
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report August 2017
4.5-14
4.6 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
4.6 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
4.6.1 INTRODUCTION
This resource section discusses PLAN Hermosa's contribution to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions
and the associated effects of climate change. Policies contained in the Land Use + Design,
Mobility, Sustainability + Conservation, Parks + Open Space, and Infrastructure elements of PLAN
Hermosa are intended to reduce the contribution of GHG emissions in Hermosa Beach from both
community activities and municipal operations. The reader is referred to Section 4.2, Air Quality,
for a discussion of project impacts associated with air quality.
NOP Comments: No comments were received in response to the Notice of Preparation (NOP)
related to GHG emissions. Comments included written letters and oral comments provided at
the NOP scoping meeting.
Reference Information: Information for this resource chapter is based on numerous sources,
including the PLAN Hermosa Technical Background Report (TBR), the Hermosa Beach
Sustainability Plan, the Hermosa Beach Carbon Neutral Scoping Plan, the 2015 City of Hermosa
Beach GHG Inventory, Forecasting, Target -Setting Report for an Energy Efficiency Climate Action
Plan, the Community Carbon Planning Tool, and other publicly available documents. The TBR is
attached as Appendix C-5.
4.6.2 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Various gases in the earth's atmosphere, classified as atmospheric GHGs, play a critical role in
determining the earth's surface temperature. Solar radiation enters the earth's atmosphere from
space and a portion of the radiation is absorbed by the earth's surface. The earth emits this
radiation back toward space, but the properties of the radiation change from high -frequency
solar radiation to lower -frequency infrared radiation. Greenhouse gases, which are transparent
to solar radiation, are effective in absorbing infrared radiation. As a result, the radiation that
otherwise would have escaped back into space is now retained, resulting in a warming of the
atmosphere. This is known as the greenhouse effect. Among the prominent GHGs contributing to
the greenhouse effect are carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), and nitrous oxide (N20).
Each GHG differs in its ability to absorb heat in the atmosphere based on the lifetime, or
persistence, of the gas molecule in the atmosphere. Methane traps over 21 times more heat per
molecule than CO2, and N20 absorbs 310 times more heat per molecule than CO2. Often,
estimates of GHG emissions are presented in carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2e), which weigh
each gas by its global warming potential. Expressing GHG emissions in CO2e takes the
contribution of all GHG emissions to the greenhouse effect and converts them to a single unit
equivalent to the effect that would occur if only CO2 were being emitted.
According to the California Association of Environmental Professionals (2015) Beyond 2020
whitepaper, scientific studies have demonstrated a causative relation between increasing man-
made GHG emissions and a long-term trend in increasing global average temperatures. This
conclusion is the consensus of the vast majority of climate scientists who publish in the field. The
effects of past increases in temperature on the climate and the earth's resources are well
documented in the scientific literature, which is best summarized in the Intergovernmental Panel
on Climate Change's (IPCC) periodic reports, the latest of which is the Fifth Assessment Report,
released in 2014.
The IPCC's work to model and evaluate future climatic conditions indicates that if GHG
emissions to continue to increase at current rates, there will be substantial adverse effects to
both humans and the natural environment. Many scientific bodies around the world have
concluded that avoiding the most severe outcomes of climate change will require keeping
global average temperatures to rising no more than two degrees Celsius by the end of the
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.6-1
4.6 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
century and limiting carbon dioxide emissions to below 450 parts per million (IPCC 2014). In order
to limit global temperature increases to two degrees Celsius, the IPCC and organizations like the
Union of Concerned Scientists have indicated that the United States and other developed
countries would need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions anywhere from 78 to 95 percent
below 1990 levels, with most organizations identifying an approximately 80 percent reduction
below 1990 levels by 2050 to provide stabilization at the two degree Celsius threshold (IPCC
2014).
Although the State of California has taken action through legislation and executive orders to
curb the generation or release of additional greenhouse gas emissions, the state still faces
intensifying impacts of climate change in coming decades, as a result of emissions already
released into the atmosphere (CNRA 2009a). The California Climate Adaptation Strategy
indicates that California should expect overall hotter and drier conditions, with a continued
reduction in winter snow (with concurrent increases in winter rains), as well as increased average
temperatures and accelerating sea level rise. In addition to changes in average temperatures,
sea level, and precipitation patterns, the intensity of extreme weather events is also changing
(CNRA 2009a).
Climate change temperature projections identified in the 2009 California Climate Adaptation
Strategy suggest the following:
• Average temperature increase is expected to be more pronounced in the summer than
in the winter season.
• Inland areas are likely to experience more pronounced warming than coastal regions.
• Heat waves are expected to increase in frequency, with individual heat waves also
showing a tendency toward becoming longer and extending over a larger area, thus
more likely to encompass multiple population centers in California at the same time.
• Because GHGs remain in the atmosphere for decades, temperature changes over the
next 30 to 40 years are already largely determined by past emissions. By 2050,
temperatures are projected to increase by an additional 1.8 to 5.4°F [degrees
Fahrenheit] (an increase one to three times as large as that which occurred over the
entire twentieth century).
• By 2100, the models project temperature increases between 3.6 and 9°F. (CNRA 2009a)
According to the 2009 California Climate Aclaptafion Strategy, the impacts of climate Change in
California have the potential to include but are not limited to the areas discussed in Table 4.6-1
(Potential Statewide Impacts from Climate Change).
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.6-2
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.6 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
TABLE 4.6-1
POTENTIAL STATEWIDE IMPACTS FROM CLIMATE CHANGE
Potential
Statewide Impact
Description
Climate change is expected to lead to an increase in ambient (i.e., outdoor) average air
temperature, with greater increases expected in summer. Larger temperature increases are
anticipated in inland communities as compared to the California coast. The potential health
impacts from sustained and significantly higher than average temperatures include heat
Public Health
stroke, heat exhaustion, and the exacerbation of existing medical conditions such as
cardiovascular and respiratory diseases, diabetes, nervous system disorders, emphysema, and
epilepsy. Numerous studies have indicated that there are generally more deaths during
periods of sustained higher temperatures. The elderly, infants, and socially isolated people with
pre-existing illnesses who lack access to air conditioning or cooling spaces are among the
most at risk during heat waves.
The impacts of flooding may include population displacement, severe psychosocial stress with
resulting mental health impacts, exacerbation of pre-existing chronic conditions, and infectious
disease. Additionally, impacts can range from a loss of personal belongings, and the emotional
ramifications from such loss, to direct injury and/or mortality.
Drinking water contamination outbreaks in the United States are associated with extreme
precipitation events. Runoff from rainfall is also associated with coastal contamination that can
lead to contamination of shellfish and contribute to food -borne illness. Floodwaters may
contain household, industrial, and agricultural chemicals, as well as sewage and animal waste.
Flooding and heavy rainfall events can wash pathogens and chemicals from contaminated
soils, farms, and streets into drinking water supplies. Flooding may also overload storm and
wastewater systems, or flood septic systems, also leading to possible contamination of
Floods and
drinking water systems.
Droughts
Drought impacts develop more slowly over time. Risks to public health that Californians may
face from drought include impacts on water supply and quality, food production (both
agricultural and commercial fisheries), and risks of waterborne illness. As surface water
supplies are reduced as a result of drought conditions, the amount of groundwater pumping is
expected to increase to make up for the water shortfall. The increase in groundwater pumping
has the potential to lower the water tables and cause land subsidence. Communities that
utilize well water will be adversely affected by drops in water tables or through changes in
water quality. Groundwater supplies have higher levels of total dissolved solids compared to
surface waters. This introduces a set of effects for consumers, such as repair and maintenance
costs associated with mineral deposits in water heaters and other plumbing fixtures, and on
public water system infrastructure designed for lower salinity surface water supplies. Drought
may also lead to increased concentration of contaminants in drinking water sup2lies.
The state's water supply system already faces challenges to provide water for California's
growing population. Climate change is expected to exacerbate these challenges through
increased temperatures and possible changes in precipitation patterns. The trends of the last
Water Resources
century, especially increases in hydrologic variability, will likely intensify in this century. The
state can expect to experience more frequent and larger floods and deeper droughts. Rising
sea level will threaten the Delta water conveyance system and increase salinity in near -coastal
_groundwater supplies.
Global climate change has the potential to intensify the current threat to forests and
landscapes by increasing the risk of wildfire and altering the distribution and character of
Forests and
natural vegetation. If temperatures rise into the medium warming range, wildfire occurrence
Landscapes
statewide could increase from 57 to 169 percent by 2085. However, since wildfire risk is
determined by a combination of factors, including precipitation, winds, temperature, and
landscape and vegetation conditions, future risks will not be uniform throughout the state.
Source: CNRA 2009a
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.6-3
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.6 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Global and US Emissions
Global emissions have continued to increase nearly every year since 2000, reaching 34.5 billion
metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalents (MTCO2e) in 2012. The six largest emitting
countries/regions were China (29 percent), the United States (15 percent), the European Union
(I I percent), India (6 percent), the Russian Federation (5 percent), and Japan (2 percent) (PBL
Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency 2013).
According to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), in March 2015 the
monthly global average carbon dioxide concentration surpassed 400 parts per million (ppm) for
the first time since tracking was initiated (NOAA 2015). This is considered a significant milestone,
as it shows that humans burning fossil fuels have caused global carbon dioxide concentrations
to rise more than 120 ppm since pre -industrial times around the year 1800 (NOAA 2015). Half of
this rise has occurred since 1980. By February 2016, the monthly average had risen to 404.02 ppm
(NOAA 2016).
Recent assessments annual GHG emissions in the United States indicate that in 2014 emissions
increased approximately 1 percent since 2013 to 6.8 billion MTCO2e. While the 1 percent
increase is attributed to increased fuel use and miles traveled, it still represents an approximately
9 percent decrease in emissions from 2005 levels (EPA 2016).
California Emissions
California produced 441 million metric tons of CO2e (MMTCO2e) in 2014 (CARB 2016),
representing nearly 7 percent of all US emissions and 2 percent of global emissions. In 2014, the
consumption of fossil fuels in the transportation sector was the single largest source of GHG
emissions in California, accounting for 37 percent of total GHG emissions in the state (CARB
2016). This category was followed by the industrial sector (24 percent) and the electric power
sector, including both in -state and out-of-state sources (20 percent) (CARB 2016).
FIGURE 4.6-1
CAUFORNIA GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS BY SECTOR, 2014
Electricity
Generation
(Imports) _ Agriculture
8`% � 896 Residential
Electricity _
Generation (In - 6%
State) �� Cammercia!
12% r 5%
Not Specified
<1%
industrial
24%
Source: CARB 2015
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.6-4
37%
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.6 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
In 2014, total greenhouse gas emissions were 441.5 MMTCO2e, representing an overall decrease
of 9.4 percent since peak levels in 2004. During the 2000 to 2014 period, per capita GHG
emissions in California continued to drop from a peak in 2001 of 13.9 MTCO2e per person to 11.4
MTCO2e per person in 2014, an 18 percent decrease (CARB 2016). To curb statewide emissions,
the State of California has taken numerous legislative actions, described in the Regulatory
Setting subsection, and implemented several incentive -based programs to reduce statewide
greenhouse gas emissions over the last 10 years.
500
d 400
2 300
N
C
O
200
�E
W
W
0 100
FIGURE 4.6-2
CALIFORNIA GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS, 2000-2014
O .• rV M d Ln kD n W M O rV M V
N S S o N o S S o 8 0 0 0 0 0
N N N N N N N N N N N N N
Source: CARB 2014o
■ Recycling and Waste
p High GWP
■ Agriculture
gCommercial and Residential
NEIPctric Power
® Industrial
❑Transportation
The City of Hermosa Beach, working in conjunction with the South Bay Cities Council of
Governments, prepared greenhouse gas inventories for 2005, 2007, 2010, and 2012 (City of
Hermosa Beach 2015a). The inventories estimate emissions for on -road transportation, off -road
equipment, residential and commercial energy use, solid waste generation, and water and
wastewater emissions. The inventories were prepared consistent with industry protocols including
the U.S. Community Protocol for Accounting and Reporting of Greenhouse Gas Emissions, the
Local Government Operations Protocol, and the California Association of Environmental
Professionals whitepapers on inventorying, forecasting, and setting targets for GHG emissions.
Transportation sector emissions are the result of gasoline and diesel combustion in vehicles
traveling to, from, or within Hermosa Beach, but exclude emissions associated with vehicles that
pass through the city without stopping (City of Hermosa Beach 2015b). Residential and
commercial energy use calculates the emissions generated by electricity and natural gas
consumed by residences and commercial businesses within Hermosa Beach, while solid waste
emissions are based on the amount of waste disposed in landfills, where it decomposes and
generates methane. Finally, water and wastewater emissions are calculated by determining the
energy needed to extract, transport, treat, and dispose of the water resources consumed by the
community.
Table 4.6-2 (Hermosa Beach Greenhouse Gas Emissions by Sector, 2005, 2007, 2010, 2012)
illustrates Hermosa Beach's GHG inventory for the years 2005, 2007, 2010, and 2012. In 2005,
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.6-5
4.6 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Hermosa Beach generated approximately 137,160 metric tons of CO2e. On -road transportation,
at 73,567 metric tons of CO2e, represented the largest share of emissions at 54 percent. In 2007,
the city generated approximately 132,768 metric tons of CO2e, a 3.2 percent decrease from the
total emissions in 2005. This decrease was attributed to fewer emissions from all emission
categories. By 2012, the city had a reduction in emissions of 7.7 percent from the 2005 inventory,
with emissions decreasing in most sectors. Between 2005 and 2012, the wastewater sector
observed a small increase in emissions and the residential energy sector saw a nearly 5 percent
increase in emissions.
TABLE 4.6-2
HERMOSA BEACH GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS BY SECTOR, 2005, 2007, 2010, 2012
Sector
2005
(MTCO2e)
% of
Total
2007
(MTCO2e)
% of
Total
2010
(MTCO2e)
% of
Total
2012
(MTCO2e)
% of
Total
On -Road Transportation
73,567
54%
71,863
54%
70,277
55% 1168,235
54%
Residential Energy
32,293
24%
31,964
24%
32,700
26%
33,808
27%
Commercial Energy
20,280
15%
19,792
15%
18,372
14%
17,830
14%
Solid Waste
6,015
4%
.4,584
3%
3,510
3%
3,334
3%
Water
4,065
3%
3,942
3%
2,552
2%
2,600
2%
Off -road Sources
888
1%
588
<1%
419
<1%
745
<1%
Wastewater
52
<1%
35
<1%
59
<1%
59
<1%
Total
137,160
132,768
127,889
126,611
Change from 2005
-3.2%
-6.8%
-7.7%
Source: City of Hermosa Beach 2015b
On a per capita basis, the Hermosa Beach community generated 6.4 MTCO2e per year per
resident in 2012, based on California Department of Finance estimates of 19,699 residents in
2012. The per capita estimates are lower than the California average of 11.9 MTCO2e per
resident in 2014.
4.6.3 REGULATORY SETTING
State and local laws, regulations, and policies provide a regulatory framework for addressing
GHG emissions under PLAN Hermosa. Key laws, regulations, and policies helping to reduce local
emissions are summarized below.
---STATE
The California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (Assembly Bill [AB] 32 and Senate Bill
[SB] 32): AB 32 is the primary legislation that has driven GHG regulation and analysis in
California between 2006 and 2016, by instructing the California Air Resource Board
(CARB) to develop and enforce regulations for the reporting and verifying of statewide
GHG emissions. The heart of the bill is the requirement that statewide GHG emissions be
reduced to 1990 levels by 2020. Based on CARB's calculations of emissions levels,
California must reduce GHG emissions by approximately 15 percent below 2005 levels to
achieve this goal. In September 2016, the Governor signed SB 32, which builds upon the
statewide targets for 2020 by establishing a longer -term target so that "statewide
greenhouse gas emissions are reduced to 40 percent below the 1990 levels by 2030." The
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.6-6
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.6 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
bill further authorized CARB to adopt regulations to achieve the maximum
technologically feasible and cost-effective greenhouse gas emissions reductions.
California Executive Orders S-3-05 (2005) and B-30-15 (2015): These two executive orders
highlight longer -term GHG emissions reduction targets for the state, though such targets
have not yet been adopted by the legislature and signed into law. Specifically,
Executive Order (EO) S-3-05 seeks to achieve a reduction of GHG emissions of 80 percent
below 1990 levels by 2050, consistent with the scientific consensus that developed
regions will need to reduce emissions at least 80 percent below 1990 levels to limit global
warming to two degrees Celsius. Executive Order B-30-15 seeks to establish an interim
target, between the 2020 target established through AB 32 and the long-term targets in
EO S-3-05, to achieve a reduction of GHG emissions of 40 percent below 1990 levels by
2030.
• CEQA and Greenhouse Gas Emissions (Senate Bill 97): In 2007, the Natural Resources
Agency was directed by the legislature to prepare amendments to the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, providing direction to lead agencies on
how to analyze and mitigate greenhouse gas emissions. According to the Governor's
Office of Planning and Research, the amendments adopted in 2009 to the CEQA
Guidelines helped to clarify the following:
1) Lead agencies must analyze the greenhouse gas emissions of proposed projects and
must reach a conclusion regarding the significance of those emissions. (See CEQA
Guidelines Section 15064.4.)
2) When a project's greenhouse gas emissions may be significant, lead agencies must
consider a range of potential mitigation measures to reduce those emissions. (See
CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.4(c).)
3) Lead agencies must analyze potentially significant impacts associated with placing
projects in hazardous locations, including locations potentially affected by climate
change. (See CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.2(a).)
4) Lead agencies may significantly streamline the analysis of greenhouse gases on a
project level by using a programmatic greenhouse gas emissions reduction plan
meeting certain criteria. (See CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.5(b).)
5) CEQA mandates analysis of a proposed project's potential energy use (including
transportation -related energy), sources of energy supply, and ways to reduce energy
demand, including through the use of efficient transportation alternatives. (See
CEQA Guidelines Appendix F.)
These amendments essentially provided two pathways for lead agencies to conduct GHG
emissions analysis: (1) individually analyze and mitigate the greenhouse gas emissions generated
by any project subject to CEQA, or (2) develop, at the programmatic level, a Qualified GHG
Reduction Strategy and require each project to demonstrate that the project is consistent with
the strategy. The amendments to the CEQA Guidelines additionally outlined the components
required for a public agency's GHG emissions reduction strategy in order to be deemed
qualified. The requirements for a Qualified GHG Reduction Strategy should:
• Quantify greenhouse gas emissions, both existing and projected over a specified time
period, resulting from activities within a defined geographic area.
• Establish a level, based on substantial evidence, below which the contribution to
greenhouse gas emissions from activities covered by the plan would not be cumulatively
considerable.
• Identify and analyze the greenhouse gas emissions resulting from specific actions or
categories of actions anticipated within the geographic area.
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.6-7
4.6 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
• Specify measures or a group of measures, including performance standards, that
substantial evidence demonstrates, if implemented on a project -by -project basis, would
collectively achieve the specified emissions level.
• Establish a mechanism to monitor the plan's progress toward achieving the level and to
require amendment if the plan is not achieving specified levels.
• Be adopted in a public process following environmental review.
Rather than a state or regional agency determining whether a public agency's GHG reduction
plan meets the requirements to be deemed qualified, to date, the responsibility has remained
with each individual agency to demonstrate how its GHG reduction plan fulfills each
component of the requirements. The City of Hermosa Beach anticipates that PLAN Hermosa, in
conjunction with this Environmental Impact Report, is designed to meet the intent of a Qualified
GHG Reduction Strategy and will elaborate how these documents are consistent with each
component of the CEQA Guidelines under the discussion related to Impact 4.6-2.
LOCAL
South Coast Air Management District (SCAQMD). To provide guidance to local lead
agencies on determining the significance of greenhouse gas emissions in CEQA
documents, SCAQMD staff is in the process of developing significance thresholds for
criteria air pollutants and GHGs relative to general plans. A SCAQMD Working Group has
proposed several possible thresholds, including thresholds for analysis of general plan
impacts. On September 28, 2010, SCAQMD Working Group Meeting #15 considered use
of a metric ton per service population metric as a threshold for plan -level analysis,
though it has not adopted any thresholds for the land use sector to date. The first
threshold corresponds to a 2020 service population metric of 6.6 metric tons of CO2e per
service population (residents plus employees) per year. The second proposed threshold is
a 2035 service population metric of 4.1 metric tons of CO2e per service population per
year. These efficiency thresholds were developed based on the statewide GHG
inventory and statewide emission reduction goals of AB 32.
Hermosa Beach 2011 Sustainability Plan. The City is involved in a number of efforts to
reduce GHG emissions. The City Council adopted the first Sustainability Plan for Hermosa
Beach in 2011. The Sustainability Plan describes community and municipal GHG
emissions, compares future emissions to the AB 32 emissions reduction target (15 percent
below 2005 levels), and outlines a series of strategies and actions to reduce GHG
emissions. The strategies address emissions from building energy (commercial, residential,
and municipal), transportation, solid waste, and water consumption, determining that
the suite of programs could reasonably reduce emissions 15 percent below 2005 levels.
Although the Sustainability Plan qualitatively compared future emissions to the AB 32
emissions reduction target, it did not adopt targets for greenhouse gas emissions.
Municipal-C-0rbon-Neutral-PAan In 2015-,4he City -of
to become a carbon neutral municipal organization no later than 2020 through adoption
of the Municipal Carbon Neutral Plan. This plan sets the City up to demonstrate
environmental leadership at the municipal level and identifies carbon reduction
programs and initiatives to achieve the carbon neutral goal. By setting an aggressive
municipal goal, the City hopes to set an example to the Hermosa Beach community and
to other communities in the region to take bold action to reduce greenhouse gas
emissions and limit the degree of catastrophic impacts that climate change could have
in the future.
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.6-8
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.6 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
4.6.4 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
ANALYSIS APPROACH
The analysis of impacts is based on the likely consequences of adoption and implementation of
PLAN Hermosa compared to existing conditions. This analysis uses the information provided in the
2015 City of Hermosa Beach GHG Inventory, Forecasting, Target -Setting Report for an Energy
Efficiency Climate Action Plan (2015 GHG Inventory Report) and the local growth projections
determined based on available land capacity (see Chapter 3.0, Project Description) as the basis
for projecting future GHG emissions in the city, as well as the Carbon Planning Tool developed to
evaluate the GHG reduction potential of various policies.
As mentioned in the Environmental Setting subsection, the inventories were prepared consistent
with industry protocols, including the U.S. Community Protocol for Accounting and Reporting of
Greenhouse Gas Emissions, the Local Government Operations Protocol, and the California
Association of Environmental Professionals whitepapers on inventorying, forecasting, and setting
targets for GHG emissions.
The Hermosa Beach Carbon Planning Tool is an Excel -based tool built to estimate the
effectiveness of implementing various programs on reducing greenhouse gas emissions, as well
as the associated costs and benefits from implementing measures. The tool includes data and
information specific to Hermosa Beach regarding energy consumption, travel patterns, and
building stock and relies on best practices such as the California Air Pollution Control Officers
Association (CAPCOA) Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures to outline the
assumptions and methods for calculating the greenhouse gas reduction potential of various
implementation measures. Appendix E-1 (PLAN Hermosa Greenhouse Gas Reduction
Assumptions) details the sources and assumptions used in the Carbon Planning Tool to estimate
the potential emissions reductions from each strategy. The analysis relies on assumptions based
on current technology (e.g., the average electrical output of 1 kilowatt [kW] of solar in Hermosa
Beach is currently 1,488 kilowatt hours [kWh] annually) unless regulation or peer -reviewed
research can reasonably project the effect that future technology would have on reducing GHG
emissions (e.g., state and federal fuel efficiency standards for light -duty passenger vehicles
mandate that the average fuel efficiency of a vehicle fleet will increase from 34 miles per gallon
in 2016 to 55 miles per gallon by 2025).
PLAN HERMOSA POLICIES AND IMPLEMENTATION ACTIONS
Understanding that over 50 percent of the community's GHG emissions come from
transportation, the City proposes a land use plan that allows for more office space (more
professional jobs in town) to reduce commute dependence, more community -serving retail
dispersed more evenly throughout the community to reduce the length of trips or dependence
on automobiles for local trips, a wide variety of transportation system improvements to provide
safe walking, bicycling, and transit, and green infrastructure options. Additionally, the City
proposes to reduce the carbon intensity from energy consumption by increasing the amount of
renewable energy generated and by implementing efficiency and conservation programs to
reduce the amount of energy consumed. PLAN Hermosa policies and implementation actions
that reduce potential GHG-related impacts include the following:
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.6-9
4.6 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Policies
Transportation
Governance Element
• 4.4 Regional transportation and infrastructure decisions. Actively support regional
transportation and infrastructure projects and investment decisions that benefit the City
and the region.
Land Use + Design Element
• Land Use Designations - The range and diversity of uses allowed within each land use
designation plays a role in the number of trips a use generates and the mode of
transportation chosen to make that trip. The more diversity in uses (between commercial,
office/professional, residential, etc.) in a given area, combined with a safe transportation
network, results in shorter trips that can be made by driving, walking, biking, or transit.
• 1.1 Diverse and distributed land use pattern. Strive to maintain the fundamental pattern
of existing land uses, preserving residential neighborhoods, while providing for
enhancement and transformation of corridors and districts in order to improve
community activity and identity.
• 1.2 Focused infill potential. Proposals for new development should be directed toward
the city's commercial areas with an emphasis on developing transit -supportive land use
mixes.
1.3 Access to daily activities. Strive to create sustainable development patterns such that
the majority of residents are within walking distance to a variety of neighborhood goods
and services, such as supermarkets, restaurants, churches, cafes, dry cleaners, laundry
mats, farmers' markets, banks, personal services, pharmacies and similar uses.
• 1.4 Diverse commercial areas. Promote the development of diversified and unique
commercial districts with locally owned businesses and job- or revenue -generating uses.
• 4.2 Employment centers. Encourage the development and co -location of additional
office space and employment centers along corridors, preferably above ground -floor
commercial uses on second or third floors.
• 4.7 Access to transit. Support the location of transit stations and enhanced stops near the
intersection of Aviation Blvd and Pacific Coast Highway, and adjacent to Gateway
Commercial uses to facilitate and take advantage of transit service, reduce vehicle trips
and allow residents without private vehicles to access services.
• 4.10 Pedestrian access. For all new development, encourage pedestrian access, and
create strong building entries that are primarily oriented to the street.
• 6.2 Streetscaping. Proactively beautify existing streetscapes with street trees, landscaping
and pedestrian -scaled lighting.
• 6.3 Green infrastructure network. Establish an interconnected green infrastructure
network throughout Hermosa Beach that serves as a network for active transportation,
recreation and scenic beauty and connects all areas of the city. In particular,
connections should be made between the beach, parks, the Downtown,
neighborhoods, and other destinations within the city. Consider the following
components when designing and implementing the green/open space network:
- Preserved open space areas such as the beach and the Greenbelt;
- Living streets with significant landscaping and pedestrian and bicycle amenities; and
- Community and neighborhood parks, and schools.
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.6-10
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.6 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
• 6.5 Provision of sidewalks. Encourage pedestrian -friendly sidewalks on both sides of
streets in neighborhoods.
• 6.7 Pedestrian -oriented design. Eliminate urban form conditions that reduce walkability
by discouraging surface parking and parking structures along walkways, long blank walls
along walkways, and garage -dominated building facades.
• 6.8 Balance pedestrian/vehicular circulation. Require vehicle parking design to consider
pedestrian circulation. Require the following of all new development along corridors:
- Where parking lots front the street, the City will work with existing property owners to
add landscaping between the parking lot and the street.
- Parking lots should be landscaped to create an attractive pedestrian environment
and reduce the impact of heat islands.
- The number of curb cuts and other intrusions of vehicles across sidewalks should be
minimized.
- When shared parking supply options are not available, encourage connections
between parking lots on adjacent sites.
- Above -ground parking structures should be designed according to the some urban
design principles as other buildings.
- Encourage the use of systems to increase parking lot efficiency, such as mechanical
lift systems or occupancy sensors.
• 9.1 Ocean -based energy resources. Encourage and support research and responsible
development of renewable ocean -based energy sources. Renewable energy sources
appropriate to Hermosa Beach shall be limited to wave, tidal, solar, and wind sources
that meet the region's and state's need for affordable sources of renewable energy.
• 9.2 Renewable energy facilities. To reduce or avoid conflicts, communicate and
collaborate with affected ocean users, coastal residents and businesses, and applicants
seeking state or federal authorization for the siting, development, and operation of
renewable energy facilities.
• 9.3 Ecosystem preservation. Ensure that any future proposed offshore facilities do not
have unacceptable adverse effects on the integrity, stability, and complexity of the
marine ecosystem, important marine habitat, and areas important to fisheries,
navigation, recreation, and aesthetic enjoyment.
• 9.5 Reclamation. Require renewable energy facility operations to restore the natural
characteristics of a site to the extent practicable when a project is decommissioned and
removed.
• 13.3 Fresh food offerings. Encourage the continuation and expansion of fresh food
offerings including farmers' markets, community gardens, and edible landscapes in
Hermosa Beach.
Mobility Element
• 1.1 Consider all modes. Require the planning, design, and construction of all new and
existing transportation projects to consider the needs of all modes of travel to create
safe, livable and inviting environments for all users of the system.
• 2.5 Require sustainable practices. Incorporate environmental sustainability practices into
designs and strategic management of road space and public right-of-ways, prioritizing
practices that can serve dual infrastructure purposes.
• 3.2 Complete pedestrian network. Prioritize investment in designated priority sidewalks to
ensure a complete network of sidewalks and pedestrian -friendly amenities that
enhances pedestrian safety, access opportunities and connectivity to destinations.
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.6-11
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.6 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
• 3.3 Active transportation. Require commercial development or redevelopment projects
and residential projects with four or more units to accommodate active transportation by
providing on -site amenities, necessary connections to adjacent existing and planned
pedestrian and bicycle networks, and incorporate people -oriented design practices.
• 3.4 Access opportunities. Provide enhanced mobility and access opportunities for local
transportation and transit services in areas of the city with sufficient density and intensity
of uses, mix of appropriate uses, and supportive bicycle and pedestrian network
connections that can reduce vehicle trips within the city's busiest corridors.
• 3.5 Incentivize other modes. Incentivize local shuttle/trolley services, rideshare and car
share programs, and developing infrastructure that support low speed, low carbon (e.g.
electric) vehicles.
• 3.6 Complete bicycle network. Provide a complete bicycle network along all designated
roadways while creating connections to other modes of travel including walking and
transit.
• 4.1 Shared parking. Facilitate park -once and shared parking policies among private
developments that contribute to a shared parking supply and interconnect with
adjacent parking facilities.
• 4.4 Preferential parking program. Periodically study and evaluate the current inventory of
public parking supply and update the preferential parking program.
• 4.5 Sufficient bicycle parking. Require a sufficient supply of bicycle parking to be
provided in conjunction with new vehicle parking facilities by both public and private
developments.
• 4.6 Priority parking. Provide priority parking and charging stations to accommodate the
use of Electric Vehicles (EVs), including smaller short -distance neighborhood electric
vehicles.
• 4.9 Encourage TDM strategies. Encourage use of Transportation Demand Management
(TDM) strategies and programs such as carpooling, ride hailing, and alternative
transportation modes as a way to reduce demand for additional parking supply.
• 5.1 Prioritize development of infrastructure. Prioritize the development of roadway and
parking infrastructure that encourages private electric and other low carbon vehicle
ownership and use throughout the city.
• 5.2 Local transit system. Develop a local transit system that facilitates efficient transport
of residents, hotel guests, and beachgoers between activity centers, and to Downtown
s.
businesses and the beach.
• 5.3 Incentivize TDM strategies. Incentivize the use of Transportation Demand
Management (TDM) strategies as a cost effective method for maximizing existing
transportation infrastructure to accommodate mobility demands without significant
�xpransion t_o_infrrastru-c-tur_o.
• 5.5 Multimodal development features. Encourage land use features in development
projects to ensure more compact, connected, and multimodal development that
supports reduced trip generation, trip lengths, and greater ability to utilize alternative
modes of travel.
• 6.1 Regional network. Work with government agencies and private sector companies to
develop a comprehensive, regionally integrated transportation network that connects
the community to surrounding cities.
• 6.3 Support programs. Facilitate greater local and regional mobility through programs for
shared equipment or transportation options such as car sharing and bike sharing.
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.6-12
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.6 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
• 6.6 Greater utilization of BCT. Consider exploring opportunities for greater utilization of the
Beach Cities Transit system for improved mobility along major corridors and as a potential
means of improved regional transit connections.
Sustainability + Conservation Element
• 2.5 Land use and transportation investments. Promote land use and transportation
investments that support greater transportation choice, greater local economic
opportunity, and reduced number and length of automobile trips.
• 3.2 Mobile source reductions. Support land use and transportation strategies to reduce
emissions, including pollution from commercial and passenger vehicles.
• 3.3 Fuel efficient fleets. Promote fuel efficiency and cleaner fuels for vehicles as well as
construction and maintenance equipment by requesting that City contractors provide
cleaner fleets.
Parks + Open Space Element
4.2 Enhanced access points. Increase and enhance access to parks and open space,
particularly across major thoroughfares, as well as access points that promote physical
activity such as pedestrian- and bike -oriented access points.
• 4.3 Safe and efficient trail network. Develop a network of safe and efficient trails, streets,
and paths that connect residents, visitors, and neighboring communities to the beach,
parks, and activity centers.
• 6.4 Transit access. Coordinate with regional agencies and neighboring jurisdictions to
improve regional and local transit access to beach access points.
• 6.5 Wayfinding and coastal access. Maximize bicycle and pedestrian access and safety
getting to and around the Coastal Zone through infrastructure and wayfinding
improvements.
• 6.12 Complete bike and pedestrian network. Prioritize completion of proposed South Bay
Bike Master Plan improvements in the Coastal Zone that connect to other bike routes
and paths throughout the city and to the surrounding region.
Infrastructure Element
• 2.4 Sidewalk improvements. Consider innovative funding strategies, such as cost -sharing,
ADA accessibility grants, or sidewalk dedications, to improve the overall condition,
safety, and accessibility of sidewalks.
• 2.5 Active transportation dedications. Require new development and redevelopment
projects to provide land or infrastructure necessary to accommodate active
transportation, such as widened sidewalks, bike racks, and bus stops, in compliance with
ADA accessibility standards.
• 2.6 Traffic signal coordination. Maintain and operate the traffic signal system with
advanced technologies to manage traffic operations and maintain traffic signal
infrastructure.
Energy Consumption
Sustainability + Conservation Element
4.1 Renewable energy generation. Support and facilitate the installation of renewable
energy projects on homes and businesses.
4.2 Retrofit program. Provide an energy retrofit program and incentives to assist home
and building owners to make efficiency improvements.
4.3 Rental efficiency. Adopt a financing program to incentivize rental efficiency retrofits,
such as green leasing.
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.6-13
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.6 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
• 4.5 Sustainable building standards. Use sustainable building checklists to minimize or
eliminate waste and maximize recycling in building design, demolition, and construction
activities.
Infrastructure Element
• 6.4 Innovative and renewable technology. Encourage the exploration and establishment
of innovative and renewable utility service technologies. Allow the testing of new
alternative energy sources that are consistent with the goals and policies of PLAN
Hermosa and comply with all relevant regulations.
• 6.5 Renewable energy facilities. Unless a renewable energy facility would cause an
unmitigatable impact to health or safety, allow them by right.
• 6.6 Community choice aggregation. Collaborate with nearby local and regional
agencies to provide greater renewable energy choices to the community.
Water Conservation
Sustainability + Conservation Element
• 5.1 Recycled water facilities. Increase the availability of recycled water supply (i.e.
purple pipes) and facilitate the installation of distribution facilities throughout the city to
conserve potable water use.
• 5.3 Water conservation programs. Update and improve water conservation and
efficiency programs, requirements, and incentives on a regular basis.
• 5.5 Greywater. Encourage the installation of greywater irrigation or disposal systems.
Infrastructure Element
• 3.2 Alternative water supplies. Pursue expansion of recycled water infrastructure and
other alternative water supplies to meet water demands of the community that cannot
be offset through conservation measures.
• 3.3 Recycled water infrastructure. Encourage the use and integration of dual plumbing
system hookups to accommodate recycled water into new development.
• 3.6 Water infrastructure. Support the development of water storage, recycling, greywater
treatment, and necessary transmission facilities to meet necessary water demand.
Waste + Recycling
Sustainability + Conservation Element
• 6.1 Franchise agreements. Ensure waste franchise agreements and program offerings
provide progressively higher rates of waste diversion.
• 6.2 Food waste collection. Ensure food waste collection is available and convenient for
all residents, businesses, and organizations.
• 6.3 Multi -family and commercial recycling. Require the provision of convenient recycling
options in multi -family residential and commercial uses, until single -stream services make
it unnecessary to separate recycling from other materials.
• 6.6 Composting programs. Provide composting equipment at community facilities and
events and encourage home and commercial composting.
• 6.9 Building salvage. Maximize building salvage and deconstruction in remodeling or
building demolition projects.
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.6-14
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.6 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Construction Equipment
Sustainability + Conservation Element
• 3.4 Landscape equipment. Discourage the use of equipment with two-stroke engines
and publicize the benefits and importance of alternative technologies.
• 3.5 Clean fuels. Support increased local access to cleaner fuels and cleaner energy by
encouraging fueling stations that provide cleaner fuels and energy to the community.
Other Sectors/Supportive Policies
Sustainability + Conservation Element
1.2 Highest return on investment. Prioritize the implementation of greenhouse gas
reduction projects that simultaneously reduce ongoing operational costs to the City.
• 1.6 Demonstration and pilot projects. Utilize demonstration and pilot projects as a means
to evaluate the greenhouse gas reduction potential and cost effectiveness of projects.
• 2.1 State targets and goals. Reduce greenhouse gas emissions at a rate that meets or
exceeds long-term State targets and goals to reduce emissions by at least 66% below
2005 levels by 2040.
• 2.2 Health and economic benefits. Prioritize the implementation of greenhouse gas
reduction projects that simultaneously provide the greatest economic and health
benefits to the community.
• 2.4 Diversify GHG reduction strategies. Pursue a diverse mixture of greenhouse gas
reduction strategies across the transportation, energy, waste sectors, commensurate with
their share of the community's greenhouse gas emissions.
• 2.7 Greenhouse gas thresholds. Establish greenhouse gas emissions thresholds for use in
evaluating non-exempt discretionary projects consistent with the California
Environmental Quality Act and require projects above that threshold to substantially
mitigate all feasible greenhouse gas emissions, and locally offset the remainder of
greenhouse gas emissions produced to meet thresholds.
Parks + Open Space Element
• 1.4 Low -maintenance design. Promote environmentally sustainable and low
maintenance design principles in the renovation, addition, or maintenance of parks and
recreation facilities.
• 3.5 Health and physical activity. Increase the availability of space and variety of
activities that promote community health and physical activity such as community
gardens, fitness stations/equipment, and fields/courts.
• 8.10 Sustainable events. Improve sustainability and environmental protection associated
with special events.
• 10.1 Urban forest. Expand the urban forest and green spaces citywide on public and
private property.
10.2 Non-invasive landscapes. Encourage the planting of native, non-invasive, and
drought -tolerant landscaping and trees, and encourage the planting of edible
landscapes and fruit trees.
Infrastructure Element
• 1.5 New technologies. When feasible, utilize emerging technologies and funding
strategies that improve infrastructure efficiency, sustainability, and resiliency.
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.6-15
4.6 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Implementation Actions
• SUSTAINABILITY-1. Establish a local greenhouse gas impact fee for discretionary projects
to offset their greenhouse gas emissions generated above established thresholds, by
providing funding for implementation of local GHG reduction projects.
• SUSTAINABILITY-2. Establish greenhouse gas emissions thresholds of significance and
standardize potential mitigation measures for non-exempt discretionary projects.
• SUSTAINABILITY-4. Identify, prioritize, and implement greenhouse gas reduction projects
utilizing the City's carbon reduction planning tools for community and municipal
operations.
• SUSTAINABILITY-5. Regularly monitor and evaluate the City's greenhouse gas emissions
inventory and report on progress toward greenhouse gas reduction goals.
Thresholds of Significance
The impact analysis provided below is based on the application of the following CEQA
Guidelines Appendix G thresholds of significance. Greenhouse gas -related impacts are
considered significant if implementation of PLAN Hermosa would:
1) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a
significant impact on the environment.
2) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of
reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases.
Subsequent development allowed under PLAN Hermosa would result in the generation of GHG
emissions associated with future construction activities, consisting primarily of emissions from
equipment use and construction worker transportation, as well as long-term operations,
consisting primarily of new stationary source emissions such as natural gas used for heating,
transportation emissions, and indirect source emissions such as electricity usage for lighting.
Addressing GHG generation impacts requires an agency to make a determination as to what
constitutes a significant impact. The amendments to the CEQA Guidelines (Section 15064.4)
specifically allow lead agencies to determine thresholds of significance that illustrate the extent
of an impact and are a basis from which to apply mitigation measures. This means that each
agency is left to determine whether a project's GHG emissions will have a "significant" impact
on the environment. The guidelines direct that agencies are to use "careful judgment" and
"make a good -faith effort, based to the extent possible on scientific and factual data, to
describe, calculate or estimate" the projecf's GHG emissions (14 California Code of Regulations
[CCR] Section 15064.4(a)).
A number of regulatory agencies throughout the state have drafted or adopted varying
threshold approaches and guidelines for analyzing greenhouse gas emissions in CEQA
documents. The different thresholds include compliance with a qualified GHG reduction
strategy, performance -based reductions, numeric "bright -line" thresholds, and efficiency -based
thresholds.
The California Supreme Court decision in the Centers for Biological Diversity et al. vs. California
Department of Fish and Wildlife, the Newhall Land and Farming Company (November 30, 2015,
Case No. S217763) confirmed that when an "agency chooses to rely completely on a single
quantitative method to justify a no -significance finding, CEQA demands the agency research
and document the quantitative parameters essential to that method."
While the calculation of an efficiency metric is useful to evaluate new development within the
context of a long-term goal, the proposed PLAN Hermosa buildout time frame of 2040 extends
beyond the time horizon identified in the metrics proposed by the SCAQMD (2020, 2035).
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.6-16
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.6 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Additionally, because PLAN Hermosa includes policies to reduce GHG emissions
comprehensively from both new and existing development, it is more appropriate to utilize the
State's long-term GHG reduction goals and scientific consensus to determine whether PLAN
Hermosa includes policies and programs to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to a level that is
considered less than significant.
In order to align with or be on a trajectory to meet the State's long-term greenhouse gas
reduction goals and the scientific consensus of the emissions reductions needed to limit global
warming to two degrees Celsius, the City of Hermosa Beach would need to reduce emissions
equivalent to the following levels:
• To 1990 levels by 2020 (equivalent to 15 percent below 2005 levels) - consistent with AB 32
• To 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 (equivalent to 49 percent below 2005 levels) -
consistent with SB 32 and EO B-30-15
• To 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050 (equivalent to 83 percent below 2005 levels) -
consistent with EO S-3-05
Since PLAN Hermosa has a buildout time horizon of 2040, the minimum equivalent GHG
reduction needed to be consistent with long-term state targets would be 60 percent below 1990
levels by 2040, which equates to 66 percent below 2005 levels.
IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
IMPACT 4.6-1 Would PLAN Hermosa Generate Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Either Directly or
Indirectly, That May Have a Significant Impact on the Environment? PLAN
Hermosa would guide future development and reuse projects in the city in a
manner that could result in additional greenhouse gas emissions generated.
However, the plan also includes numerous policies and actions to reduce or
eliminate GHG emissions from both new and existing development through
incentives and voluntary actions that will meet or exceed the long-term
greenhouse gas reduction goals to reduce emissions at least 66 percent below
2005 levels by 2040 (excluding offsets —see discussion on page 4.6-22) through
direct and local programs. However, since the City is relying on incentive -based
or voluntary actions to achieve GHG reduction goals, there is a lower degree of
certainty that the emissions reductions thresholds would be met compared to
regulatory or mandatory actions. This impact would be potentially significant.
GHG emissions contribute, on a cumulative basis, to the significant adverse environmental impacts
of global climate change. No single land use project could generate enough GHG emissions to
noticeably change the global average temperature. The combination of GHG emissions from
past, present, and future projects contributes substantially to global climate change and its
associated environmental impacts and as such is addressed only as a cumulative impact.
Emissions Forecast and Local Target
The City's GHG inventory report assessed baseline/current emissions levels in Hermosa Beach.
The inventory relied on standardized protocols including the U.S. Community Protocol for
Accounting and Reporting of Greenhouse Gas Emissions and the Association of Environmental
Professionals Supplement to the Protocol for California to calculate the estimated emissions
generated by activities in Hermosa Beach. In 2005, Hermosa Beach generated approximately
137,160 MTCO2e annually from activities related to transportation, electricity use, natural gas use,
waste disposal, and water/wastewater activities. Between 2005 and 2012, emissions in Hermosa
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.6-17
4.6 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Beach decreased to 126,611 MTCO2e, which represents a 7.7 percent decrease in emissions or
an average decrease in emissions of 1.1 percent per year (City of Hermosa Beach 2015a).
Annual emissions generated vary from year to year based on a variety of factors, but often
increase as the number of people living or working in a given area increases. The 2015 GHG
inventory report forecast emissions levels for Hermosa Beach in 2035 if population, housing, and
employment forecasts reached the levels projected by the Southern California Association of
Governments (SCAG) in the 2035 Regional Transportation Plan and no new programs to reduce
emissions were implemented, referred to as a business -as -usual or BAU forecast. Since the 2015
report was prepared, the City of Hermosa Beach provided more locally relevant information to
SCAG on population, housing, and employment forecasts that were incorporated into the 2040
Regional Transportation Plan. Subsequently, the City of Hermosa Beach developed an updated
BAU forecast for the year 2040 using the local projections adopted by SCAG and the Carbon
Planning Tool developed by the City. It should be noted that 2040 emissions are projected to be
lower than 2005 emissions due to the decreases achieved between 2005 and 2012, and the
limited increase in the number of additional residents, employees, and housing units expected
between 2012 and 2040.
Table 4.6-3 (Hermosa Beach Baseline (2005), Forecast (2040) Emissions, and Target Level (2040))
depicts the baseline emissions in 2005, the BAU forecast for 2040, and the emissions levels
needed to be on a similar trajectory to long-term state targets by 2040.
TABLE 4.6-3
HERMOSA BEACH BASELINE (2005), FORECAST (2040) EMISSIONS, AND TARGET LEVEL (2040)
Time Frame/Target
Emissions Levels (MTCO2e)
Baseline Emissions (2005)
137,160
Business -as -Usual Forecast Emissions (2040)
133,430
Emissions Levels to Meet State Target (2040)/66% below 2005 levels
46,630
Reductions Needed to Achieve 2040 Target
-86,800
Source: City of Hermosa Beach 2016
State Programs to Reduce Emissions Locally
Legislation, such as AB 1493 and the Advanced Clean Cars Program, the Low Carbon Fuel
Standard, the Renewables Portfolio Standard, and the California Building Energy Efficiency
Standards and Green Building Standards, described in Table 4.6-4 (California Policies Reducing
Emissions Locally), is geared toward reducing GHG emissions on a statewide level. However,
these legislative actions will help to reduce GHG emissions locally, as residents and businesses
purchase-additional-fuel-etffc-ient and -electric --vehicles or consume-elecf(icity consume -energy
produced with greater amounts of renewable energy.
PLAN Hermosa City of Hermosa Beach
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report August 2017
4.6-18
4.6 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
TABLE 4.6-4
CALIFORNIA POLICIES REDUCING EMISSIONS LOCALLY
Legislation
Description
Assembly Bill 1493
AB 1493 (the Pavley Standard) (Health and Safety Code Sections 42823 and 43018.5) aims to
and Advanced Clean
reduce GHG emissions from noncommercial passenger vehicles and light -duty trucks of model
Cars Program
years 2009-2016. By 2025, when all rules will be fully implemented, new automobiles will emit
up to 24 percent fewer CO2e emissions and 75 percent fewer smog -forming emissions.
EO S-01-07 (2007) requires a 10 percent or greater reduction in the average fuel carbon
Low Carbon Fuel
intensity for transportation fuels in California. The regulation took effect in 2010 and is codified
Standard (LCFS)
at Title 17, California Code of Regulations Sections 95480-95490. The LCFS will reduce
greenhouse gas emissions by reducing the carbon intensity of transportation fuels used in
California by at least 10 percent by 2020.
The Renewables Portfolio Standard (RPS) requires retail sellers of electric services to increase
procurement from eligible renewable energy resources to 33 percent of total retail sales by
Renewables Portfolio
2020. The 33 percent standard is consistent with the RPS goal established in the Scoping Plan.
Standard
The passage of Senate Bill 350 in 2015 updates the RPS to require the amount of electricity
(Senate Bill X12 &
generated and sold to retail customers per year from eligible renewable energy resources to be
Senate Bill 350)
increased to 50 percent by December 31, 2030. The bill would make other revisions to the RPS
program and to certain other requirements on public utilities and publicly owned electric
utilities.
In general, the California Building Energy Efficiency Standards require the design of building
shells and building components to conserve energy. The California Energy Commission
adopted changes to the 2013 Building Energy Efficiency Standards contained in the California
Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 6 (also known as the California Energy Code) and associated
California Building
administrative regulations in Part 1. The amended standards took effect in the summer of 2014.
Energy Efficiency
The 2013 Building Energy Efficiency Standards are 25 percent more efficient than previous
Standards
standards for residential construction and 30 percent better for nonresidential construction.
The standards offer builders better windows, insulation, lighting, ventilation systems, and other
features that reduce energy consumption in homes and businesses. Energy -efficient buildings
require less electricity, and increased energy efficiency reduces fossil fuel consumption and
decreases GHG emissions.
The California Green Building Standards Code (California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 11),
commonly referred to as the CALGreen Code, is a statewide mandatory construction code that
was developed and adopted by the California Building Standards Commission and the
Department of Housing and Community Development. The CALGreen standards require new
California Green
residential and commercial buildings to comply with mandatory measures under the topics of
Building Standards
planning and design, energy efficiency, water efficiency/conservation, material conservation
and resource efficiency, and environmental quality. CALGreen also provides voluntary tiers and
measures that local governments may adopt that encourage or require additional measures in
the five green building topics. The most recent update to the CALGreen Code went into effect
July 1, 2014.
"Senate Bill 375 is codified at Government Code Sections 65080, 65400, 65583, 65584.01, 65584.02, 65584.04, 65587, 65588, 14522.1,
14522.2, and 65080.01, as well as at Public Resources Code Sections 21061.3 and 21159.28 and Chapter 4.2.
These actions require limited local action and are accounted for in the City's emissions forecasts
to provide a more accurate picture of future emissions and the remaining gap to be filled with
local policies and programs to reduce emissions to levels consistent with state
recommendations. This forecast is called the adjusted BAU forecast. Table 4.6-5 (Comparison of
BAU and Adjusted BAU Emissions (2040)) summarizes the projected community GHG emissions
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.6-19
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.6 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
for the city through 2040. Through 2020, the implementation of state programs and regulations is
expected to reduce local emissions approximately 23 percent below baseline emissions,
exceeding the State -recommended goal of 15 percent below baseline emissions by
approximately 8 percent (City of Hermosa Beach 2016).
TABLE 4.6-5
COMPARISON OF BAU AND ADJUSTED BAU EMISSIONS (2040)
Sector
BAU
ABAU
Percentage
Reduction
On -Road Transportation
Off -Road Sources
64,560
43,320
33%
1,090
730
33%
Nonresidential Energy
24,120
16,460
32%
Residential Energy
37,400
29,800
20%
Solid Waste
3,480
3,480
0%
Water & Wastewater
2,780
1,630
41%
Total Emissions
133,430
95,420
28%
Source: City of Hermosa Beach 2016
As shown, the city's adjusted BAU emissions are estimated to be approximately 95,420 MTCO2e
in 2040. This change represents a 28 percent reduction from BAU levels in 2040 or approximately
38,000 MTCO2e reduced annually from implementation of state legislation.
As depicted in Figure 4.6-3 (Emissions Reductions Needed to Meet State and Local Targets), the
impact of state legislation on local emissions in 2040 would leave a remaining gap of 48,800
MTCO2e to be reduced by local policy to achieve state goals and a remaining gap of 95,420
MTCO2e to achieve a carbon neutral goal by 2040 as proposed in the draft of PLAN Hermosa.
140,000
120,000
100,000
80,000
60,000
40,000 1
20,000
0
FIGURE 4.6-3
EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS NEEDED TO MEET STATE AND LOCAL TARGETS
2005 2012 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.6-20
s ABAU Forecast
s� Reductions Needed to Meet
State Goals
Reductions Needed to Meet
Local Goals
BAU Forecast
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.6 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
PLAN Hermosa Emissions Reductions
As noted previously, numerous policies and implementation actions are included in PLAN
Hermosa that are intended to facilitate the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions from both
existing and future activities. The applicable policies and implementation actions can be found
in every element of PLAN Hermosa and are intended to reduce emissions associated with
transportation and travel patterns, related to energy consumption from residential and
commercial uses, from the disposal of solid waste in landfills, and from the energy needed to
transport and treat the water consumed and the wastewater produced in Hermosa Beach.
Building Efficiency
PLAN Hermosa seeks to improve the efficiency of both existing and future buildings and associated
activities by reducing the amount of energy needed to operate heating and cooling equipment,
lighting, and household appliances, thereby reducing GHG emissions. Goals and policies
contained in the Sustainability + Conservation Element are intended to reduce energy -related
emissions from buildings that already exist today and by offering incentives, financing options, and
retrofit programs (Sustainability + Conservation Element Policies 4.2 and 4.3), while Sustainability +
Conservation Element Policy 4.5 aims to minimize energy consumption from new buildings.
Renewable Energy Generation
While building efficiency policies and programs can help to reduce energy demand, energy
consumption can almost never be completely eliminated. However, GHG emissions from energy
used by residential, commercial, and other uses in Hermosa Beach can be further reduced by
switching from traditional fossil fuel -based energy sources to cleaner and renewable sources of
energy production. Policies in the Sustainability + Conservation Element aiming to increase
renewable energy projects include Policy 4.1 to support and facilitate the installation of
renewable energy projects on homes and businesses. Additionally, policies in the Land Use +
Design Element speak to identifying locations appropriate for additional renewable energy
technologies (Policy 9.1), ensuring they are compatible with surrounding uses and protect
ocean resources (Policies 9.2 and 9.3), and that sites with renewable energy systems are
returned to the natural characteristics of a site at the end of their useful life (Policy 9.5). Finally,
policies in the Infrastructure Element speak to encouraging the exploration and establishment of
innovative and renewable utility service technologies (Policy 6.4), to allow renewable energy
facilities by right when they would not cause an unmitigatable impact on health or safety (Policy
6.5), and to collaborate with nearby local and regional agencies to develop programs that
provide greater renewable energy choices (Policy 6.6).
Transportation and Land Use
PLAN Hermosa seeks to reduce the environmental impact (including GHG emissions) of land
development by increasing the viability of walking, biking, and transit and by reducing reliance
on the automobile through cohesive land use patterns, thus reducing GHG emissions. This
reduction is due to the sustainability-related aspects of the proposed policy provisions of the
Land Use + Design Element, Mobility Element, and Sustainability + Conservation Element. Mobility
Element Policy 5.5 seeks to encourage land use features in development projects to ensure that
more compact, connected, and multimodal development supports reduced trip generation,
reduced trip lengths, and a greater ability to utilize alternative modes. In addition, Land Use +
Design Element Policy 1.2 states that proposals for new development should be directed toward
the city's commercial areas with an emphasis on developing transit -supportive land use mixes,
Land Use + Design Element Policy 4.10 requires all new development to consider pedestrian
access. Mobility Element Policy 3.2 would prioritize investment in designated priority sidewalks to
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.6-21
4.6 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
ensure a complete network of sidewalks and pedestrian -friendly amenities that enhances
pedestrian safety, access opportunities, and connectivity to destinations. Mobility Element Policy
4.5 requires a sufficient supply of bicycle parking to be provided in conjunction with new vehicle
parking facilities by both public and private developments.
Section 4.14, Transportation, identifies the effects of PLAN Hermosa's policy provisions on traffic
generation, vehicle miles traveled, and thus mobile source GHG emissions, which are the
predominant source of GHG emissions in the city. As described in Section 4.14, daily traffic trips
and the daily rate of vehicle miles traveled (VMT) are projected to decrease under PLAN
Hermosa compared to existing conditions by approximately 12.9 percent. This reduction in VMT
would roughly equate to 2,600 fewer daily vehicle trips and 30,000 less vehicle miles traveled per
day, due to the mobility -related policy provisions described above. An expanded discussion of
the PLAN Hermosa policies reducing VMT is provided in Section 4.14 and Appendix G-2.
Other Sectors and Offsets
There are also policies within PLAN Hermosa for reducing GHG emissions from waste disposal and
the transport/treatment of water and wastewater. Sustainability + Conservation Element Policies
6.1, 6.2, 6.3, 6.6, and 6.9 identify methods to reduce waste, which include food waste collection,
multi -family and commercial recycling, composting programs, and greater use of recycled or
salvaged materials. Policies under Sustainability + Conservation Element Goal 5 identify policies
to facilitate greater use of greywater, recycled water, and rainwater.
Finally, PLAN Hermosa also includes several policies to support the reduction of GHG emissions
that are not specific to a certain activity or sector. For instance, Sustainability + Conservation
Element Policy 2.1 states that Hermosa Beach will reduce its GHG emissions in alignment with
state targets and goals. Implementation action SUSTAINABILITY-1 will establish a GHG impact fee
for all future discretionary development projects to offset their GHG contribution, and
SUSTAINABILITY-5 requires the City to regularly monitor and evaluate Hermosa Beach's progress
toward community -wide greenhouse gas reductions.
Summary of Greenhouse Gas Reductions
As noted in the Thresholds of Significance discussion above, PLAN Hermosa needs to
demonstrate an ability to achieve long-term statewide goals by reducing community GHG
emissions by approximately 66 percent below 2005 levels by 2040 to be considered a less than
significant impact. Full implementation of the policies and actions in PLAN Hermosa has the
potential to reduce emissions through local projects by at least 66 percent below 2005 levels by
2040. Table 4.6-6 (Summary of Annual Emissions Reductions by Sector in 2040) illustrates the
range of activities and the estimated level of emissions reductions to be achieved by 2040. The
assumptions and data used to calculate the estimated reductions in GHG emissions are
documented in Appendix E of this EIR.
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.6-22
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.6 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
TABLE 4.6-6
SUMMARY OF ANNUAL EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS BY SECTOR IN 2040 1
Share of Carbon
Reductions (%)
Annual Carbon
Reduction (MTCO2e)
Baseline 2005 Emissions
137,160
2012 Emissions
-7.7%
126,610
BAU Emissions (2040)
+5.0%
133,430
State Programs (2040)
-27.7%
38,010
Local Remaining Emissions to Be Reduced
95,420
Building Efficiency
New Construction Residential Efficiency
-1.3%
1,810
Existing Buildings Residential Efficiency
-4.4%
6,100
New Construction Nonresidential Efficiency
-2.0%
2,810
Existing Buildings Nonresidential Efficiency
-2.0%
2,770
Subtotal
-9.8%
13,490
Renewable Energy Generation
Rooftop Solar
-5.9%
8,100
Community Solar
-0.4%
550
Renewable Energy Procurement
-7.3%
10,010
Purchased Renewables (Green Rate)
-0.0%
0
Subtotal
-13.6%
18,660
Transportation + Land Use
Land Use & Transportation Alternatives
-4.0%
5,500
Additional Transportation Strategies
-1.9%
2,560
Electric Vehicles
-7.4%
10,100
Subtotal
-13.0%
18,160
Other Sectors + Offsets
Waste + Recycling
-2.5%
3,480
Water + Wastewater
-0.2%
330
Subtotal
-2.7%
3,810
TOTAL
-69.9%
54,110
Source: City of Hermosa Beach 2016
As shown in Table 4.6-6, full implementation of the policies and actions in PLAN Hermosa has the
potential to achieve emissions reduction targets consistent with the State's long-term emissions
reduction goals. However, the degree of certainty at which the city can meet GHG targets
beyond 2020 is limited since attainment would at least be partially reliant on implementation of
1 This table has been revised from the Draft EIR based on City Council direction to remove offsets.
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.6-23
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.6 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
statewide programs and because some of the policies included in PLAN Hermosa are reliant on
voluntary or incentive -based actions. Because the implementation of PLAN Hermosa is partially
reliant on voluntary or incentive -based policies and actions, as well as state regulations to be
implemented in the future, the impact would be considered potentially significant and
cumulatively considerable.
Mitigation Measures
MM 4.6-1a The City of Hermosa Beach will utilize the climate action plan, under
development by the South Bay Cities Council of Governments, and other
appropriate tools to research current data gaps, identify and take specific
actions, and define the responsible parties and time frames needed to
achieve the greenhouse gas reduction goals (monitoring milestones)
identified in mitigation measure MM 4.6-1 b.
MM 4.6-1b The City of Hermosa Beach will re -inventory community GHG emissions and
evaluate implementation progress of policies to reduce GHG emissions for the
calendar year of 2020 and a minimum of every five years thereafter. The
interim reduction goals to be achieved for consistency with long-term state
goals include:
• 2020: 15 percent below 2005 levels
• 2025: 31 percent below 2005 levels
• 2030: 49 percent below 2005 levels
• 2035: 57 percent below 2005 levels
• 2040: 66 percent below 2005 levels
MM 4.6-1c The City will revise PLAN Hermosa and/or the City's Climate Action Plan, and
other appropriate tools when, upon evaluation required in mitigation measure
MM 4.6-1 b, the City determines that Hermosa Beach is not on track to meet
the applicable GHG reduction goals. Revisions to PLAN Hermosa, the Climate
Action Plan, or other City policies and programs will include additional
regulatory measures or incentives that provide a higher degree of certainty
that emissions reduction targets will be met. Use of an adaptive management
approach would allow the City to evaluate progress by activity sector (e.g.,
transportation, energy, water, waste) and prescribe additional policies or
programs to be implemented in the intervening five years for activity sectors
that are not on track to achieve the GHG reduction goals.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
With the addition of mitigation measures MM 4.6-1 a through MM 4.6-1c, the City of Hermosa
Beach is committing to achieving specific emissions reduction targets within every five-year time
period and modifying policies and programs, including the addition of new policies or
modification of existing policies to become mandatory, to achieve greater levels of emissions
reductions if the City falls short of meeting the established targets in mitigation measure MM
4.6-1b. While City Council recommended changes to the goals and policies of PLAN Hermosa,
the changes are still anticipated to reach emissions reduction levels consistent with the
established thresholds. The implementation of PLAN Hermosa policies to reduce greenhouse gas
emissions, in conjunction with mitigation measures MM 4.6-1a through MM 4.6-1c, will add the
degree of certainty needed to determine that PLAN Hermosa would have a less than significant
impact on greenhouse gas emissions and would not be cumulatively considerable.
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.6-24
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.6 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
CEQA GUIDELINES FOR A QUALIFIED GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTION STRATEGY
This section is provided for informational purposes and is not meant to serve as an analysis in
determining levels of significance for PLAN Hermosa. Instead, the following description is meant
to demonstrate how PLAN Hermosa meets the criteria for a Qualified GHG Reduction Strategy
and that future projects may streamline environmental analysis, and determine the project has a
less than significant impact for greenhouse gas emissions, by demonstrating their consistency
with PLAN Hermosa as a Qualified GHG Reduction Strategy.
As previously stated, the California Natural Resources Agency and the Governor's Office of
Planning and Research have identified the necessary components of a greenhouse gas
reduction strategy that should be incorporated to be deemed a Qualified GHG Reduction
Strategy. PLAN Hermosa is designed to serve as the City of Hermosa Beach's Qualified
Greenhouse Gas Reduction Strategy, and this EIR elaborates how each of the required
components for such a strategy are met. The discussion below is a summary of how PLAN
Hermosa meets the intent of each component, with more details and explanation included
earlier in this section.
• Quantify greenhouse gas emissions, both existing and projected over a specified time
period, resulting from activities within a defined geographic area.
The City of Hermosa Beach, in collaboration with the South Bay Cities Council of
Governments, used actual activity data and emissions factors to estimate the
contribution of greenhouse gas emissions, including carbon dioxide (CO2), methane
(CH4), and nitrous oxide (N2O), from existing activities within the geographic boundaries
of Hermosa Beach for the calendar years 2005, 2007, 2010, and 2012. These emissions
inventories relied upon standardized protocols including the U.S. Community Protocol for
Accounting and Reporting of Greenhouse Gas Emissions and the Association of
Environmental Professionals Supplement to the Protocol for California to calculate the
estimated emissions generated by activities in Hermosa Beach. In 2005, Hermosa Beach
generated approximately 137,160 MTCO2e annually from activities related to
transportation, electricity use, natural gas use, waste disposal, and water/wastewater
activities.
To project emissions over the time horizon of PLAN Hermosa (2040), the City of Hermosa
Beach used the population, housing, and employment forecasts that were incorporated
into the 2040 Regional Transportation Plan to develop a business -as -usual forecast for the
year 2040 using the Carbon Planning Tool developed by the City. BAU emissions in 2040
are projected to be lower than 2005 emissions due to the decreases achieved between
2005 and 2012, and the limited increase in the number of additional residents,
employees, and housing units expected between 2012 and 2040. Additionally, the
projections considered the effect that legislation and regulation at the state level would
have on reducing emissions locally by developing an adjusted BAU forecast for 2040.
• Establish a level, based on substantial evidence, below which the contribution to
greenhouse gas emissions from activities covered by the plan would not be cumulatively
considerable.
In order to limit global temperature increases to two degrees Celsius and prevent the
most catastrophic effects of climate change, the IPCC and organizations like the Union
of Concerned Scientists have indicated that the United States and other developed
countries would need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions anywhere from 78 to 95
percent below 1990 levels, with most organizations identifying an approximately 80
percent reduction below 1990 levels by 2050 to provide stabilization at the two degree
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.6-25
4.6 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Celsius threshold (IPCC 2014). California has taken early action and efforts to avoid the
most catastrophic effects of climate change by establishing aggressive statewide
greenhouse gas reduction goals through legislation and executive orders (AB 32, SB 32,
EO B-30-15, EO S-3-05).
In order to align with or be on a trajectory to meet the State's long-term greenhouse gas
reduction goals and the scientific consensus of the emissions reductions needed to limit
global warming to 2 degrees Celsius, the City of Hermosa Beach would need to reduce
emissions equivalent to the following levels:
• To 1990 levels by 2020 (equivalent to 15 percent below 2005 levels) - consistent with
AB 32
• To 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 (equivalent to 49 percent below 2005 levels) -
consistent with SB 32 and EO B-30-15
• To 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050 (equivalent to 83 percent below 2005 levels) -
consistent with EO S-3-05
Since PLAN Hermosa has a buildout time horizon of 2040, the minimum equivalent GHG
reduction needed to be consistent with long-term state targets and determine that the
cumulative activities in Hermosa Beach as less than cumulatively considerable would be
a target to reduce emissions 60 percent below 1990 levels by 2040, which equates to 66
percent below 2005 levels.
Identify and analyze the greenhouse gas emissions resulting from specific actions or
categories of actions anticipated within the geographic area.
The goals, policies, and actions to reduce GHG emissions in Hermosa Beach included in
PLAN Hermosa, and detailed earlier in this section, are designed to meet or exceed the
GHG reduction target of 66 percent below 2005 levels by 2040 when fully implemented.
The potential emissions reductions were quantified for the year 2040 using the Hermosa "
Beach Carbon Planning Tool. The Carbon Planning Tool is an Excel -based tool built to
estimate the effectiveness of implementing various programs on reducing greenhouse
gas emissions, as well as the associated costs and benefits from implementing measures.
The tool includes data and information specific to Hermosa Beach regarding energy
consumption, travel patterns, and building stock and relies on best practices such as the
CAPCOA Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures to outline the assumptions
and methods for calculating the greenhouse gas reduction potential of various
implementation measures. The Carbon Planning Tool includes the links and sources used
for each data point and assumptions used to calculate emissions reductions and is
provided in Appendix E.
The GHG reduction strategies included in PLAN Hermosa are organized by goal or topic
area to correspond with the sectors and sources of GHG emissions as follows:
■ Building -Efficiency
• Renewable Energy Generation
• Transportation and Land Use
• Other Sectors and Offsets
The measures included in PLAN Hermosa are a diverse mix of regulatory, educational,
and incentive -based programs. The reduction measures are intended to reduce GHG
emissions from each source to avoid reliance on any one strategy or sector to achieve
the target. In total, existing actions, state programs, and the goals, policies, and actions
of PLAN Hermosa, along with mitigation measures MM 4.6-1a, MM 4.6-1b, and MM 4.6-
1c, will reduce GHG emissions in Hermosa Beach at least 66 percent below 2005 levels by
2040.
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.6-26
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.6 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Specify measures or a group of measures, including performance standards, that
substantial evidence demonstrates, if implemented on a project -by -project basis, would
collectively achieve the specified emissions level.
To facilitate individual project consistency and keep Hermosa Beach on track to
collectively achieve the specified emissions level, implementation actions in PLAN
Hermosa direct the City to:
• SUSTAINABILITY-1. Establish a local greenhouse gas impact fee for discretionary
projects to offset greenhouse gas emissions generated above established thresholds,
by providing funding for implementation of local GHG reduction projects.
• SUSTAINABILITY-2. Establish greenhouse gas emissions thresholds of significance and
standardize potential mitigation measures for non-exempt discretionary projects.
By establishing a greenhouse gas impact fee and standardizing potential measures for
individual projects to implement, the City will have the tools necessary to ensure
individual projects are minimizing the levels of greenhouse gas emissions generated,
while offering projects multiple pathways to compliance.
■ Establish a mechanism to monitor the plan's progress toward achieving the level and to
require amendment if the plan is not achieving specified levels.
The estimated emissions reduction potential from implementation of PLAN Hermosa
exceeds the trajectory of the State's long-term greenhouse gas reduction goals (66
percent below 2005 levels by 2040). However, the degree of certainty at which the city
can meet GHG targets beyond 2020 is limited since attainment would at least be
partially reliant on implementation of statewide programs and because some of the
policies included in PLAN Hermosa are reliant on voluntary or incentive -based actions
taken by the community. To address this uncertainty, PLAN Hermosa includes
implementation action SUSTAINABILITY-5 to "Regularly monitor and evaluate the City's
greenhouse gas emissions inventory and progress toward greenhouse gas reduction
goals." This EIR further strengthens that implementation action by incorporating specific
metrics to be achieved for each five-year time increment through mitigation measure
MM 4.6-1 b.
The combination of implementation actions and mitigation measures intended to
regularly evaluate progress and institute a mechanism to amend PLAN Hermosa when
emissions reduction goals are not met will ensure the City is consistently making progress
toward the long-term state goals and local targets.
• Be adopted in a public process following environmental review.
As the City's integrated General Plan and Local Coastal Program, PLAN Hermosa is
legally required to be reviewed by the Planning Commission, and the Planning
Commission must hold at least one public hearing before providing a recommendation
to the City Council pursuant to California Government Code Section 65353(a). Any
amendment to a general plan is also further obligated to undergo environmental review
prior to approval or adoption. Prior to holding public hearings at which the City Council
will consider adoption, the City of Hermosa Beach will complete the environmental
review process for PLAN Hermosa, which will include a 60-day public review period on
the Draft EIR, preparation of response to comments, and a Final EIR.
Beyond the obligations of state law to adopt PLAN Hermosa through a public process
following environmental review, the community engagement and opportunities for the
community to provide feedback during this process to date have included:
City of Hermosa Beach
August 20I7
4.6-27
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.6 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
• Five community workshops or walking tours
• A three-part educational series
• An online portal, in addition to email and in -person opportunities to submit comments,
questions, and feedback
• A 15-member community working group (which met on more than a dozen
occasions)
• Twenty study sessions with the Planning Commission, City Council, Parks and
Recreation Commission, Emergency Preparedness Commission, and Public Works
Commission
• Numerous informal opportunities to present PLAN Hermosa to community groups and
local organizations at their standing meetings
This extensive level of community engagement over a three-year period has helped to
raise the community's awareness in the need to address greenhouse gas emissions and
participate in the identification of potential opportunities to achieve the long-term goals.
IMPACT 4.6-2 Would PLAN Hermosa Conflict with an Applicable Plan, Policy, or Regulation
Adopted for the Purpose of Reducing the Emissions of Greenhouse Gases? PLAN
Hermosa would guide future development and reuse projects in the city in a
manner that is consistent with state and local plans, policies, or regulations
adopted to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The applicable plans, policies,
and regulations include the AB 32 Scoping Plan, the City of Hermosa Beach
Sustainability Plan, and the City of Hermosa Beach Municipal Carbon Neutral
Plan. PLAN Hermosa includes goals, policies, and actions that would meet or
exceed the goals established within each of these applicable plans; therefore,
the impact would be less than significant.
PLAN Hermosa's consistency with the AB 32 Scoping Plan, Hermosa Beach Sustainability Plan,
and Municipal Carbon Neutral Plan is evaluated below. A numeric summary of the relevant GHG
emissions reduction goals articulated through state legislation or executive orders and locally
adopted planning documents, along with the level of GHG reductions that are anticipated to be
achieved through the implementation of policies in PLAN Hermosa, is presented in Table 4.6-7.
TABLE 4.6-7
GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTION GOALS AND ACHIEVEMENTS
Percent Emissions Reduction Below 2005 Levels
GHG Emissions Reduction Goals
Goal Origination
2020
2030
2040
2050
State Legislation (adopted)
15% (AB 32)
49% (SB 32)
State -Executive -Order
-83%{EO. S--3--G5)-
(Local Plans (Adopted)
15% (Sustainability Plan)
Trajectory Needed to Meet Goals
15%
49%
66%
83%
PLAN Hermosa
PLAN Hermosa
66%
PLAN Hermosa EIR Alternative 2
1 100%
Source: City of Hermosa Beach, 2016.
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.6-28
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.6 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
AB 32 and Climate Change Scoping Plan
AB 32 is the primary legislation that has driven GHG regulation and analysis in California. Under
AB 32, the legislature directed CARB to develop and periodically update the AB 32 Climate
Change Scoping Plan document to detail the latest scientific understanding of climate change,
describe California's motivations to address climate change and preserve the California lifestyle,
evaluate accomplishments and next steps for reducing emissions, and describe the role of
regional and local governments in achieving the State's emissions reduction goals. While AB 32
does not mandate or prescribe local governments to achieve certain emissions reduction
targets, the AB 32 Scoping Plan recognizes that local governments are essential partners to
achieving statewide goals given that local jurisdictions have a higher degree of influence and
authority over significant sources of GHG emissions.
The first AB 32 Scoping Plan, developed in 2007, suggested that local governments should aim to
reduce emissions 15 percent below current levels (2005-2008) by 2020 and assist with meeting
regional vehicle miles traveled (VMT) targets mandated by SB 375. PLAN Hermosa is consistent
with the AB 32 Scoping Plan and fulfills the recommended role of local governments in achieving
statewide goals by reducing emissions 15 percent below 2005 levels by 2020 and by meeting
VMT targets established for the Southern California Association of Governments and detailed in
the Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) (see Section 4.9,
Land Use and Planning, for discussion of consistency with the RTP/SCS).
Hermosa Beach Sustainability Plan
The Sustainability Plan adopted by the City of Hermosa Beach in 2011 describes community and
municipal GHG emissions, compares future emissions to the AB 32 emissions reduction target (15
percent below 2005 levels by 2020), and outlines a series of strategies and actions to reduce
GHG emissions. The strategies address emissions from building energy (commercial, residential,
and municipal), transportation, solid waste, and water consumption, determining that the suite
of programs could reasonably reduce emissions 15 percent below 2005 levels. As described
previously, the City of Hermosa Beach is likely to reduce emissions 23 percent below 2005 levels
by 2020 through implementation of state and local measures. PLAN Hermosa supports and is
consistent with the Hermosa Beach Sustainability Plan by incorporating and further developing
policy to reduce emissions from building energy, transportation, solid waste, and water
consumption sources. The specific policies included in PLAN Hermosa to reduce emissions from
each sector are further described under the discussion of Impact 4.6-1.
Municipal Carbon Neutral Plan
In 2015, the City of Hermosa Beach adopted a local goal to become a carbon neutral
municipal organization no later than 2020 through adoption of the Municipal Carbon Neutral
Plan. The Hermosa Beach Municipal Carbon Neutral Plan was funded by a grant from the
Southern California Association of Governments to identify and explore emissions reduction
opportunities for municipal facilities and operations. The Municipal CN Plan also identifies the
elements of setting a greenhouse gas reduction goal including the time frame, magnitude, and
scope of emissions/activities included. The Municipal Carbon Neutral Plan explored a range of
greenhouse gas reduction goals and ultimately adopted a goal to reach carbon neutrality for
municipal facilities and operations by the end of 2020.
Examples of implementation measures in the Municipal CN Plan included pursuing Community
Choice Aggregation (CCA), accelerating implementation of the Clean Fleet Policy, upgrading
street lighting to LED lighting, installing solar photovoltaic systems on municipal property, and
dedicating staff to implement employee commute reduction programs. Implementation of these
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.6-29
4.6 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
measures was projected to reduce direct municipal emissions by at least 40% by 2020. To reach a
goal of carbon neutrality, the Municipal CN Plan identified that the remaining emissions would
need to be offset by either generating additional local renewable energy or purchasing offsets,
though in 2016 Council provided direction to staff not to pursue the latter option to purchase
offsets.
Given the progress between 2005 and 2015, the projects recently completed or anticipated to
be completed in the next few years, and the previous direction from City Council not to pursue
the use of carbon credits or offsets, the City is on course to reduce municipal emissions by
approximately 58% by 2020 from 2005 levels, which exceeds the direct emissions reductions
identified in the Municipal Carbon Neutral Plan, but does not reach the carbon neutral goal for
municipal facilities by 2020.
PLAN Hermosa includes Sustainability + Conservation Element Goal 1 to meet or exceed an 80%
reduction in municipal greenhouse gas emissions from 2005 levels by 2030 through projects that
will directly reduce emissions from municipal facilities and operations (rather than through offsets).
While the goal does not commit to carbon neutrality for the municipality as previously indicated
in the Municipal Carbon Neutral Plan, Goal 1 and the associated policies will lead to a greater
level of direct, measureable reductions in greenhouse gas emissions than identified in the
Municipal Carbon Neutral Plan —Adopting Goal 1 to meet or exceed an 80% reduction in
municipal emissions by 2030, while less aggressive than a municipal carbon neutral goal, still
exceeds state goals. To further support the goal, Policies 1.1 through 1.10 speak to prioritizing
projects that provide the highest return on investment, aligning projects to reduce emissions with
the current sources of emissions, and using pilot or demonstration projects. The policies included
in PLAN Hermosa mirror the Municipal Carbon Neutral Plan recommendations to pursue a
diverse mixture of emissions reduction projects, to utilize offsets, and to evaluate the costs and
savings/benefits of various projects prior to implementing.
Conclusion
A core objective in the development of PLAN Hermosa has been to identify policies to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions and set Hermosa Beach on a path to a low- carbon future. As
described above, PLAN Hermosa is consistent with the goals of AB 32 and the Climate Change
Scoping Plan, the Hermosa Beach Sustainability Plan, and the Municipal Carbon Neutral Plan to
reduce greenhouse gas emissions. PLAN Hermosa has further been developed to serve as the
City of Hermosa Beach's Qualified Greenhouse Gas Reduction Strategy, as defined by the
CEQA Guidelines. Therefore, the impact of PLAN Hermosa would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.6-30
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.6 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
4.6.5 REFERENCES
California Association of Environmental Professionals. 2015. Beyond 2020: The Challenge of
Greenhouse Gas Reduction Planning by Local Governments in California.
http://colifaep.org/images/climate-change/AEP_White_Paper_Beyond_2020.pdf.
California State Legislature. 2016. Senate Bill 32: The California Global Warming Solutions Act:
Emissions Limit (2016).
hftps://Ieginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=20152016OSB32.
CAPCOA (California Air Pollution Control Officers). 2010. Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation
Measures. http://www.capcoa.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/1 1 /CAPCOA-
Quantification-Report-9-14-Final.pdf.
CARB (California Air Resources Board). 2014a. California Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory.
http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/inventory/data/dafa.htm; and
htfps://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/inventory/data/graph/bar/bar_2014_scopingplan.png.
2014b. First Update to the AB 32 Climate Change Scoping Plan.
http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/document/updatedscopingplan2013.htm.
2015. Cap -and -Trade Offset Verification Program.
http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/capandtrade/offsets/verification/verification.htm.
2016. California Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory Trends 2000 2014.
http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/inventory/pubs/reports/2000_2014/ghg_inventory_trends_00-
14_20160617.pdf.
City of Hermosa Beach. 2011. Hermosa Beach Sustainability Plan.
http://www.hermosabch.org/index.aspx?page=334.
2015a. City of Hermosa Beach GHG Inventory, Forecasting, Target -Setting Report for an
Energy Efficiency Climate Action Plan.
http://www.hermosabch.org/modules/showdocument.aspx?documentid=5718.
2015b. Hermosa Beach Municipal Carbon Neutral Plan.
https://docs.google.com/gview?url=http%3A%2F%2Fhermosabeach.legistarl.com%2Fher
mosabeach%2Fmeetings%2F2015%2F2%2F908_A_City_Council_15-02-
24_Meeting_Agenda.pdf&embedded=true.
2016. City of Hermosa Beach Carbon Planning Tool.
htfps://hermosabeach.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=2281885&GUID=5192A329-
FBB9-46E4-AFOE-4FBE5BC73A58.
2017. PLAN Hermosa.
n.d. Hermosa Beach Carbon Neutral Scoping Plan.
hftp://www.hermosabch.org/modules/showdocument.aspx?documentid=3379,
CNRA (California Natural Resources Agency). 2009a. 2009 California Climate Adaptation
Strategy. hffp://resources.ca.gov/docs/climate/Statewide_Adapfafion_Strategy.pdf.
2009b. Notice of Public Hearings and Notice of Proposed Amendment of Regulations
Implementing the California Environmental Quality Act.
http://resources.ca.gov/cega/docs/Adopted_and_Transmitted_Texf_of_SB97_CEQA_Gui
delines_Amendments.pdf.
City of Hermosa Beach
August 20I7
4.6-31
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.6 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
DOF (California Department of Finance). 2015. Table E-5 Population and Housing Estimates for
Cities, Counties, and the State, January 1, 201 1-2015, with a 2010 Benchmark.
EPA (US Environmental Protection Agency). 2016. US Greenhouse Gas Inventory Report 1990-
2014. https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/us-greenhouse-gas-inventory-report-1990-2014.
IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). 2014. Fifth Assessment Report.
http://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/hffp://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/http://www.ipcc.ch/repo
rt/ar5/http://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/.
NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration). 2015. Greenhouse Gas Benchmark
Reached.
http://research.noaa.gov/News/NewsArchive/LatestNews/Tabld/684/ArfMID/1768/Articl
elD/1 1 153/Greenhouse-gas-benchmark-reached-.aspx.
2016. Trends in Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide. 2016.
hftp://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/.
OPR (Governor's Office of Planning and Research). 2011. CEQA and Climate Change.
hftps://www.opr.ca.gov/s_cegaandclimatechange.php.
PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency. 2013. Trends in Global COz Emissions, 2013
Annual Report. http://edgar.jrc.ec.europa.eu/news_docs/pbl-2013-trends-in-global-co2-
emissions-2013-report-1 148.pdf.
SCAG (Southern California Association of Governments). 2015. Profile of the City of Hermosa
Beach. hffps://www.scag.ca.gov/Documents/HermosaBeach.pdf.
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.6-32
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.7 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
4.7 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
4.7.1 INTRODUCTION
This resource section evaluates the potential environmental effects related to hazards and
hazardous materials from implementation of PLAN Hermosa. Natural hazards related to flooding,
tsunamis, and sea level rise are addressed in Section 4.8, Hydrology and Water Quality, seismic
and other geotechnical hazards are addressed in Section 4.5, Geology and Soils, and hazards
related to climate change are addressed in Section 4.6, Greenhouse Gas Emissions. The analysis
includes a review of state hazardous materials databases, hazards related to schools, and
emergency response procedures related to hazardous materials. PLAN Hermosa Public Safety
Element policies and implementation actions ensure new development, businesses, and public
safety are prepared for emergencies and the potential release of hazards or hazardous materials
in the planning area.
NOP Comments: No comments were received in response to the Notice of Preparation (NOP)
addressing hazards or hazardous materials. Comments included written letters and oral comments
provided at the NOP scoping meeting.
Reference Information: Information for this chapter is based on numerous sources, including the
PLAN Hermosa Technical Background Report and other publicly available documents. The
Technical Background Report prepared for the project is attached to this EIR as Appendix C.
4.7.2 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Appendix C-10 describes the regional and local conditions related to hazards and hazardous
materials. Key findings of the environmental setting are presented below.
HAZARDOUS SITES
A hazardous material is any material that, due to its quantity, concentration, or physical or
chemical characteristics, poses a significant present or potential hazard to human health and
safety or to the environment if released. Hazardous materials include but are not limited to
hazardous substances, hazardous wastes, and any material that a business or local implementing
agency has a reasonable basis to believe would be injurious to the health and safety of persons
or would be harmful to the environment if released.
The State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) maintains the GeoTracker database, which
provides information to easily identify the location of a hazardous waste site and details regarding
the type of contamination and remediation action. In 2014, when the Technical Background
Report included in Appendix C was compiled, GeoTracker reported one leaking underground
storage tank (LUST) site in the planning area (SWRCB 2014). As of 2015, GeoTracker identified the
site's status as "completed - case closed," meaning there are no active LUST sites in the planning
area (SWRCB 2015). Including the site mentioned above, GeoTracker identifies 15 LUST sites that
have completed cleanup and monitoring activities (SWRCB 2015).
In addition to the information sources listed above, the E&B Oil Drilling and Production Project Final
Environmental Impact Report certified in 2014 identifies the City Maintenance Yard at 555 6th
Street as contaminated from historical uses, with existing lead and total petroleum hydrocarbon
(TPH) contamination in the northeast corner of the yard and extending onto the property to the
immediate north. Ten of the 73 soil samples taken at the site exceeded Regional Water Quality
Control Board guidelines for TPH. Six of the samples exceeded the US Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) Region 9 Industrial Regional Screening Levels for lead. In addition, a series of
groundwater borings conducted in 2013 found the presence of TPH, lead, barium, and arsenic in
the groundwater below the yard that exceeded the Maximum Contaminant Levels established
for drinking water by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (City of Hermosa Beach 2014).
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.7-1
4.7 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
SCHOOLS
Please refer to Section 4.13, Public Services, Community Services, and Utilities, for additional
information regarding schools in the planning area.
AIRPORT HAZARDS
No airports are located in the city. The nearest airports are Torrance Airport 5.4 miles to the
southeast, Los Angeles International Airport 5.5 miles to the north, and Hawthorne Municipal
Airport 5.9 miles to the northeast.
TRANSPORTATION OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
The California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) provides a summary of all registered
routes for transportation of hazardous material in the state. As of February 2014, there were no
registered routes in Hermosa Beach (DTSC 2015). However, the City has designated truck routes
that can be used for transportation of hazardous materials. Such major transportation include
Pacific Coast Highway (State Route 1) and portions of Pier Avenue, Valley Drive, Herondo Street,
and Artesia Boulevard. When acutely toxic hazardous materials are transported, the California
Highway Patrol must be notified; the Hermosa Beach Police Department and the Hermosa Beach
Fire Department must also be notified if city streets are used. The City does not designate specific
haul routes for hazardous materials.
FIRE HAZARDS
Public Resources Code Sections 4201-4204 and Government Code Sections 51 175-51 189 require
identification of fire hazard severity zones in California. Fire hazard severity zones are modeled
based on vegetation, topography, weather, fuel load type, and ember production and
movement within the area in question. Fire hazard severity zones are defined as moderate, high,
and very high fire hazard severity by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (Cal
Fire). Fire prevention areas considered to be under state jurisdiction are referred to as state
responsibility areas, while areas under local jurisdiction are called local responsibility areas." Cal
Fire (2007) has not identified any fire hazard severity zones in the planning area.
4.7.3 REGULATORY SETTING
Federal, state, and local laws, regulations, and policies pertain to hazards and hazardous
materials in the planning area. They provide the regulatory framework for addressing all aspects
of hazards and hazardous materials that would be affected by implementation of PLAN Hermosa.
The regulatory setting for hazards and hazardous materials is discussed in detail in Appendix C-10.
Key regulations used to reduce potential impacts of the proposed project are summarized below.
FEDERAL
• Resource Conservation and -Recovery Act: At fhe federal�evel, the principal agency
regulating the generation, transport, and disposal of hazardous substances is the EPA,
under the authority of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). The RCRA
established an all -encompassing federal regulatory program for hazardous substances
that is administered by the EPA. Under the act, the EPA regulates the generation,
transportation, treatment, storage, and disposal of hazardous substances.
• Hazardous Materials Transport Regulations: The US Department of Transportation (USDOT)
regulates transportation of hazardous materials between states. The USDOT Federal
Railroad Administration enforces the Hazardous Materials Regulations, which are
promulgated by the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration for rail
transportation. These regulations include requirements that railroads and other transporters
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.7-2
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.7 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
of hazardous materials, as well as shippers, have and adhere to security plans and also
train employees involved in offering, accepting, or transporting hazardous materials on
both safety and security matters.
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act: Congress
enacted the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act,
commonly known as Superfund, in 1980. The act established prohibitions and requirements
concerning closed and abandoned hazardous waste sites; provided for liability of persons
responsible for releases of hazardous waste at these sites; and established a trust fund to
provide for cleanup when no responsible party could be identified
Regulation of Polychlorinated Biphenyls and Lead -Based Paint: The Toxic Substances
Control Act of 1976 (Title 15, United States Code, Section 2605) banned the manufacture,
processing, distribution, and use of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB) in enclosed systems.
The EPA Region 9 PCB Program regulates remediation of polychlorinated biphenyls in
several states, including California. The Residential Lead -Based Paint Hazard Reduction
Act of 1992 amended the Toxic Substances Control Act to include Title IV, Lead Exposure
Reduction. The EPA regulates renovation activities that could create lead -based paint
hazards in target housing and child -occupied facilities and has established standards for
lead -based paint hazards and lead dust cleanup levels in most pre-1978 housing and
child -occupied facilities.
STATE
• California Hazardous Materials Release Response Plans and Inventory Law: The California
Hazardous Materials Release Response Plans and Inventory Law of 1985 (Business Plan Act)
requires hazardous materials business plans to be prepared and inventories of hazardous
materials to be disclosed, including an inventory of the hazardous materials handled,
facility floor plans showing where hazardous materials are stored, an emergency response
plan, and provisions for employee safety and emergency response training (California
Health and Safety Code, Division 20, Chapter 6.95, Article 1).
• Hazardous Waste Control Act: The Hazardous Waste Control Act is codified in California
Code of Regulations Title 26, which describes requirements for the proper management of
hazardous wastes. The act created the state's hazardous waste management program,
which is similar to but more stringent than the federal RCRA program.
• Government Code Section 65962.5 (Cortese List): The provisions of Government Code
Section 65962.5 are commonly referred to as the Cortese List. The Cortese List is a planning
document used by the state and local agencies to provide information about hazardous
materials release sites. Government Code Section 65962.5 requires the California
Environmental Protection Agency (Cal/EPA) to develop an updated Cortese List annually,
at minimum. The DTSC is responsible for a portion of the information contained in the
Cortese List. Other state and local government agencies are required to provide
additional hazardous material release information for the list.
California Emergency Response Plan: California has developed an emergency response
plan to coordinate emergency services provided by federal, state, and local governments
and private agencies. Response to hazardous material incidents is one part of this plan.
The plan is managed by the California Governor's Office of Emergency Services, which
coordinates the responses of other agencies, including Cal/EPA, the California Highway
Patrol, the Regional Water Quality Control Board, and the Los Angeles County Emergency
Services Program.
• California Coastal Act: The California Coastal Act of 1972 created the California Coastal
Commission to enact policies and standards in its coastal development permit decisions.
Among many issues, the California Coastal Commission and the coastal development
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.7-3
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.7 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
permit program protect against oil and hazardous substance spills and regulate the
disposal of hazardous substances at sea.
LOCAL
• Certified Uniform Program Agency: The Los Angeles County Fire Department Health
Hazardous Materials Division is the designated Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA)
for Hermosa Beach. The CUPA was created by the California legislature to minimize the
number of business inspections and fees imposed on businesses.
• City of Hermosa Beach Local Hazard Mitigation Plan: The City's Local Hazard Mitigation
Plan has been updated in 2017 to meet the requirements of the Disaster Mitigation Act of
2000. The act requires local governments to prepare plans that identify hazards and risks
within a community, and create appropriate mitigation. The purpose of the plan is to
integrate hazard mitigation strategies into the City's daily activities and programs.
• City of Hermosa Beach Emergency Operations Plan: The City's Emergency Operations Plan
addresses Hermosa Beach's planned response to emergencies associated with natural
disasters, technological incidents, and national security emergencies (City of Hermosa
Beach 2016). It provides an overview of operational concepts, identifies components of
the City's emergency management organization in the Standardized Emergency
Management System and National Incident Management System, and describes the
overall responsibilities of the federal, state, and county entities and the City for protecting
life and property and ensuring the overall well-being of the population.
4.7.4 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
For the purposes of the EIR, impacts on hazards and hazardous materials would be considered
significant if adoption and implementation of PLAN Hermosa would:
1) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport,
use, or disposal of hazardous materials.
2) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably
foreseeable upset and/or accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials
into the environment.
3) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances,
or waste within one -quarter mile of an existing or proposed school.
4) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled
pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, create a significant hazard
to the public or the environment
5) For a project located within an airport land use plan, result in a safety hazard for people
residing or working in the project area.
6) For a project locate within 2 miles of a private airstrip, result in a safety hazard for people
residing or working in the project area.
7) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response
plan or emergency evacuation plan.
8) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland
fires.
No sites in Hermosa Beach are included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant
to Government Code Section 65962.5. There is no airport located in the planning area, and the
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.7-4
City of Hermosa Beach
August 20I7
4.7 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
city is not in a fire hazard severity zone as identified by Cal Fire; therefore, the EIR does not evaluate
impacts 4, 5, and 6.
ANALYSIS APPROACH
The impact analysis is based on the likely consequences of PLAN Hermosa implementation
compared to existing conditions. The following analysis of impacts on hazards and hazardous
materials is qualitative and based on available hazards and hazardous materials information for
the planning area. The analysis assumes that all future and existing development in the planning
area would comply with applicable laws, regulations, design standards, and plans.
PLAN HERMOSA POLICIES AND IMPLEMENTATION ACTIONS
PLAN Hermosa policies and implementation actions that address potential hazards and
hazardous materials include the following:
Policies
Governance Element
• 7.4 Evaluation and disclosure. Require an evaluation and disclosure (e.g. Health checklists,
Health Impact Assessments) of environmental and health impacts or benefits for major
discretionary projects.
Public Safety Element
• 3.1 Hazardous material setbacks. Restrict the storage and transport of hazardous materials
only to areas where risks to residents are adequately minimized through setbacks or other
measures.
• 3.2 Hazardous material incident response. Coordinate with allied agencies to prepare for
and respond to hazardous materials incidents.
• 3.3 Use, storage, and transport. Require businesses that use, store, or transport hazardous
materials to ensure that adequate measures are taken to protect public health and safety.
• 3.4 Hazardous materials in coastal zone. Restrict the siting of new uses involving hazardous
materials in the Coastal Zone to coastal -related industrial uses in the Cypress District.
• 3.5 Safe disposal practices. Maintain City's website and other outlets with information
regarding the safe handling and disposal of household chemicals.
• 4.1 Public awareness. Increase public awareness of hazards, emergency response, and
recovery through updated evacuation routes and informational signage.
• 4.2 Promote community -based programs. Promote community -based programs in fire
safety and emergency preparedness, including neighborhood -level programs and
business programs and community volunteer groups such as CERT, Neighborhood Watch,
Volunteers in Policing and the Amateur Radio Association.
• 4.3 SEMS and NIMS training. Increase City employee capacity through the Standardized
Emergency Management System (SEMS) and the National Incident Management System
(NIMS) compliant training and Emergency Operations Center (EOC) drills to identify
hazards, and assist in emergency preparedness, response, and recovery.
• 4.4 Utilize City media resources. Maintain the City's emergency communication policy
and protocols and utilize City media resources, emergency alert notification systems, and
program advertising to provide information and communicate with the community prior
to, during, or after events posing risk to community health safety, and welfare.
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.7-5
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.7 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
• 4.5 Responsive neighborhood groups. Encourage neighborhood groups, including
Neighborhood Watch, to identify, consider, and prepare for the needs of neighbors with
access and functional needs to adequately respond to disasters.
4.6 Vulnerable populations. Incorporate procedures into emergency and hazard
mitigation plans to take care of vulnerable populations during hazardous events.
Implementation Actions
• SAFETY-16. Include updated hazardous materials considerations in regular Emergency
Operation Plan updates and work with the County of Los Angeles to update local
Hazardous Materials Area Plans on a regular basis.
• SAFETY-17. Provide information, opportunities, and incentives to the community for the
proper disposal of toxic materials to avoid environmental degradation to the air, soil, and
water resources from toxic materials contamination.
• SAFETY-18. Designate an emergency response team to monitor and respond to regional
disasters such as oil spills and other shoreline disasters. Such a team must maintain an
emergency response plan that includes coordination with other agencies and jurisdictions
in the region on initial response, aid, and recovery.
• SAFETY-24. Periodically update the emergency operations plan.
• SAFETY-25. Periodically update the Local Hazard Mitigation Plan and concurrently amend
the Public Safety Element to maintain eligibility for maximum grant funding.
• SAFETY-28. Identify hazard -specific evacuation routes and share with the public,
businesses, and other government agencies.
IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
IMPACT 4.7-1 Would PLAN Hermosa Create a Significant Hazard to the Public and Environment
Through the Transport Use, or Disposal of Hazardous Materials? Implementation
of PLAN Hermosa would guide future development in the city in a manner that
could result in the public's exposure to hazardous materials from increased
transport, use, or accidental release of hazardous materials. Compliance with
existing federal and state regulations and implementation of PLAN Hermosa
policies would reduce risks of accidents associated with the routine transport,
use, or disposal of hazardous materials to a less than significant level.
PLAN Hermosa would guide future development and reuse projects in the city. New development
could result in increased transport, use, storage, and disposal of hazardous materials in the
planning area. Of particular concern are facilities that would handle hazardous materials such as
light industrial uses, gas stations, automotive repair shops, and dry cleaners. Facilities developed
consistent with PLAN Hermosa that would use hazardous materials on -site would be required to
obtain permits and comply with appropriate regulatory agency standards designed to avoid
hazardourwraste- releases -a n-d-protect-public-health.
The transport, use, and storage of hazardous materials would be required to comply with all
applicable local, state, and federal regulations as noted above. Facilities that use hazardous
materials are required to obtain permits and comply with appropriate regulatory agency standards
designed to avoid hazardous waste releases. Federally, the Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act gives the EPA the authority to control the generation, transportation, treatment, storage, and
disposal of hazardous waste.
Additionally, the City will continue to enforce disclosure laws that require users, producers, and
transporters of hazardous materials and wastes to clearly identify the materials that they store, use,
or transport, and to notify the appropriate agencies in the event of a violation. By recognizing
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.7-6
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.7 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
these hazards and ensuring that an educated public is able to work with City officials to minimize
risks associated with hazardous materials in the urban environment, safe conditions would be
maintained throughout the planning area.
The amount of hazardous materials transported through the planning area on roadways, local
routes, and Pacific Coast Highway (State Route 1) may increase as a result of PLAN Hermosa
implementation. The US Department of Transportation governs the transportation of hazardous
materials. The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration issues regulations concerning highway
routing of hazardous materials, including hazardous materials endorsements for a commercial
driver's license, highway hazardous material safety permits, and financial responsibility
requirements for motor carriers of hazardous materials.
The following PLAN Hermosa Public Safety Element policies recognize and account for potential
risks associated with hazardous materials and support compliance with and enforcement of state
and federal hazardous materials regulations. Policy 3.1 ensures that the storage and transport of
hazardous materials is restricted only to areas where risks to residents are adequately minimized.
Policy 3.2 directs the City to coordinate with allied agencies to prepare for and respond to
hazardous materials incidents. Policy 3.3 requires businesses that use, store, or transport hazardous
materials to ensure that adequate measures are taken to protect public health and safety. Policy
3.4 directs the City to restrict the siting of new uses involving hazardous materials in the Coastal
Zone to coastal -related industrial uses in the Cypress District. Policy 3.5 directs the City to maintain
its website and other outlets with information regarding the safe handling and disposal of
household chemicals. Policy 4.1 directs the City to increase awareness of hazards, emergency
response, and recovery. Finally, implementation action SAFETY-16 directs the City to work with the
County of Los Angeles to update local Hazardous Materials Area Plans on a regular basis.
Continued compliance with and enforcement of existing federal, state, and local regulations
concerning the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials, supported by
implementation of PLAN Hermosa policies and implementation actions, would reduce potential
impacts to a less than significant level.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
IMPACT 4.7-2 Would PLAN Hermosa Create a Significant Hazard to the Public or Environment
Through Accidental Release of Hazardous Materials into the Environment?
Implementation of PLAN Hermosa would guide future development in the city in
a manner that could lead to accidental release of hazardous materials into the
environment. Compliance with existing federal and state regulations and
implementation of PLAN Hermosa policies would reduce risks associated with the
accidental release of hazardous materials. However, development of the City's
Maintenance Yard or other sites in the city could release known or unknown
hazardous materials, which would be potentially significant.
Known Contamination
As described above there is only one location of known contamination in Hermosa Beach, the
City's Maintenance Yard. The contaminated site is currently operational and is not included in the
GeoTracker database. Given the history of the site, which has been used in a similar capacity
since the late nineteenth century, potential contamination could come from a number of
activities related to the function of the site, including oil changes and fleet maintenance, storage
of materials such as paint or cleaning materials, and collection of waste or debris from sites
throughout the city. These are common activities at maintenance yards, and it is not uncommon
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.7-7
4.7 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
for these sites to be further evaluated for potential contamination. According to PLAN Hermosa,
land uses allowed on and around the City Maintenance Yard would be light industrial.
Nonetheless, any construction on the site that would entail uses for commercial or residential
purposes would require remediation and cleanup activities be implemented as outlined in 40 CFR
Part 260, Hazardous Remediation Waste Management Requirements. Because development
could potentially take place on the existing City Maintenance Yard site, impacts would be
potentially significant.
Unknown Contamination
Future development that would take place in the city under PLAN Hermosa could encounter
unknown hazardous materials contamination. PLAN Hermosa Public Safety Element policies
recognize and account for potential risks associated with accidental release of hazardous
materials into the environment. Policy 3.5 directs the City to maintain its website and other outlets
with information regarding the safe handling and disposal of household chemicals, while Policy
4.1 directs the City to increase awareness of hazards, emergency response, and recovery. Policy
4.4 would establish communication protocols and utilize City media resources to provide
information prior to, during, or after events posing risk to community health safety, and welfare,
such as exposure to unknown contaminants. Implementation action SAFETY-16 directs the City to
work with the County of Los Angeles to update local Hazardous Materials Area Plans on a regular
basis. Implementation action SAFETY-18 designates an emergency response team to monitor and
respond to regional disasters such as oil spills and other shoreline disasters.
Compliance with existing regulations concerning the upset and/or accidental release of
hazardous materials, supported by implementation of PLAN Hermosa policies, would ensure that
the general public would not be exposed to any unusual or excessive risks related to accidental
upset and/or release of hazardous materials into the environment. Nonetheless, unknown
contamination during construction activities could be discovered and this impact is potentially
significant.
Mitigation Measures
MM 4.7-2a For any development activities that would encroach upon or take place at the
City's Maintenance Yard, the City shall require the preparation and
implementation of a Human Health Risk Assessment (HHRA) and a Remedial
Action Plan (RAP) to be approved by the appropriate agencies.
MM 4.7-2b Future discretionary projects involving the use of hazardous materials that may
be accidentally released or encountered during construction shall be required
to implement the following procedures:
• Stop all work in the vicinity of any discovered contamination or release.
• Identify the scope and immediacy of the problem.
• Coordinate with responsible agencies (Department of Toxic Substances
Control, Regional Water Quality Control Board, or US Environmental
Protection Agency).
• Conduct the necessary investigation and remediation activities to resolve
the situation before continuing construction work as required by state and
local regulations.
Significance After Mitigation
Implementation of mitigation measures MM 4.7-2a and MM 4.7-2b would ensure that accidental
release of hazardous materials into the environment, either from redevelopment at the City
Maintenance Yard or from unknown contamination, would be remediated in accordance with
state and local regulations in a manner that would protect public health during construction
PLAN Hermosa City of Hermosa Beach
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report August 2017
4.7-8
4.7 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
activities and later use of the site. Project impacts would be reduced to a less than significant
level.
IMPACT 4.7-3 Emission or Handling of Hazardous or Acutely Hazardous Materials, Substances,
or Waste within One -Quarter Mile of an Existing or Proposed School. PLAN
Hermosa implementation would guide future development in the city. Such
development, which could emit or handle hazardous waste, could occur in the
proximity of new or existing schools. Compliance with existing regulations would
reduce the risk of emissions or the handling of hazardous materials near schools
to a less than significant level.
PLAN Hermosa implementation could lead to development that would emit or handle hazardous
materials within a quarter mile of a school. Schools located in the city are mostly surrounded by
residential development, and future development under PLAN Hermosa concentrates on both
residential and nonresidential development. Hazardous materials handled in residential
neighborhoods are typical of household hazardous materials like cleaners and yard maintenance
materials, and are usually in small quantities that do not pose threats to school uses.
The California Department of Education enforces school siting requirements through its School Site
Selection and Approval Guide, and based on these requirements, new school facilities would not
be constructed within one -quarter mile of facilities emitting or handling materials. CEQA
Guidelines Section 15186, School Facilities, requires that school projects, as well as projects
proposed to be located near schools, examine potential health impacts resulting from exposure
to hazardous materials, wastes, and substances. Furthermore, permitting requirements for
individual hazardous material handlers or emitters, including enforcement of Public Resources
Code Section 21151.4, would require evaluation and notification where potential hazardous
materials handling and emissions could occur in proximity to existing schools.
Compliance with existing regulations for both known and unknown contamination as well as
handling of hazardous materials, as outlined above in the Regulatory Setting subsection, would
minimize impacts from implementation of PLAN Hermosa to a less than significant level.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
IMPACT 4.7-4 Would PLAN Hermosa Cause Interference with an Adopted Emergency Response
Plan? Implementation of PLAN Hermosa would guide future development and
reuse projects in the city in a manner that would ensure conformance with
countywide emergency response programs and continued cooperation with
emergency response service providers. Therefore, this impact would be less than
significant.
PLAN Hermosa implementation could generate additional peak traffic conditions that could
interfere with emergency response and evacuation plans, while new development could create
new hazards in the city that would require emergency response personnel in case of a man-made
or natural disaster.
The Los Angeles County Fire Department (LACFD) Health Hazardous Materials Division is the
Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA) for the City of Hermosa Beach, with the Hermosa Beach
Fire Department (HBFD) authorized as a participating agency. The LACFD and the HBFD work
together to implement the City's Emergency Operations Plan that addresses Hermosa Beach's
planned response to emergencies.
The City's Local Hazard Mitigation Plan includes mitigation measures to ensure emergency
response in the city is done in a coordinated manner. For example, the plan includes measures to
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.7-9
4.7 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
continually assess emergency response operations, gather data regarding hazards in the city to
enhance emergency response plans, and continue local mutual aid agreements for emergency
response with other jurisdictions. Additionally, the City maintains an Emergency Preparedness
Advisory Commission and operates a Community Emergency Response Team to educate and
prepare the public to respond and survive in case of natural or man-made disasters.
PLAN Hermosa Public Safety Element policies and actions support implementation of the City's
Emergency Operations Plan and Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. For example, Policy 4.1 directs the
City to increase public awareness of hazards, emergency response, and recovery, while Policy 4.2
promotes community -based programs in fire safety and emergency preparedness, including
neighborhood -level programs and programs with businesses. Policy 4.3 increases City employee
capacity through SEMS- and NIMS-compliant training and EOC drills to identify hazards and assist
in emergency preparedness, response, and recovery. Policy 4.4 would establish communication
protocols and utilize City media resources to provide information prior to, during, or after events
posing risk to community health safety, and welfare. Policy 4.5 encourages neighborhood groups
to identify, consider, and prepare for the needs of neighbors with access and functional needs to
adequately respond to disasters. Implementation action SAFETY-28 directs the City to identify
hazard -specific evacuation routes and share them with the public, businesses, and other
government agencies.
Implementation of PLAN Hermosa policies and programs as outlined above and compliance with
existing federal, state, and local laws and regulations would minimize impacts on emergency
response and evacuation plans from new development. Therefore, PLAN Hermosa
implementation would result in less than significant impacts related to emergency access.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
CUMULATIVE SETTING, IMPACTS, AND MITIGATION MEASURES
The cumulative setting for hazards and human health risks associated with PLAN Hermosa includes
Hermosa Beach, surrounding cities, and the surrounding areas in Los Angeles County. Most
hazardous materials, human health, and safety impacts are site -specific and not cumulative in
nature.
IMPACT 4.7-5 Would PLAN Hermosa Contribute to a Cumulative Impact on the Transport, Use,
or Disposal of Hazardous Materials? implementation of PLAN Hermosa, along with
increased urban development in Los Angeles County, would not result in
cumulative hazards impacts. This impact would be less than cumulatively
considerable.
Potential exposure to or generation of hazardous conditions in the city is site -specific rather than
associated with the combination of other hazards in the region resulting in a significant effect. As
described in Impacts 4.7-1 and 4.7-2, adherence to existing federal, state, and local regulations
regarding the handling, transport, and disposal of hazardous materials, as well as implementation
of PLAN Hermosa policies, would minimize potential risks associated with accidental release and
exposure to hazardous materials. Therefore, this impact would be less than cumulatively
considerable.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.7-10
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.7 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
4.7.5 REFERENCES
Cal Fire (California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection). 2007. Fire Hazard Severity Zones.
City of Hermosa Beach. 2014. E&B Oil Drilling & Production Project Final Environmental Impact
Report.http://www.hermosobch.org/ftp/oil_docs/FEIR%20Hermosa%20beach%20Oil%20Pr
ojecf_AII%20Sections.pdf.
2016. City of Hermosa Beach Emergency Operations Plan. Accessed January 2014.
tt www.hermos bch.or modules showdocumenf.os x?docum ntid=7802
2017. City of Hermosa Beach 2017 Draft Local Hazard Mitigation Plan.
htir>://www.h:grmoscibch.ocqmodules showdocument.as x?documentid=9252
2017. PLAN Hermosa.
DTSC (California Department of Toxic Substances Control). 2015. Registered Hazardous Waste
Transporter Database. Accessed February 2014 and November 2015.
https://dtsc.ca.gov/dafabase/Transporters/index.cfm.
SWRCB (State Wafer Resources Control Board). 2014. GeoTracker. Accessed January 2014.
hftp://geotracker.swrcb.ca.gov/map/?CMD=runreport&myaddress= hermosabeach.
2015. GeoTracker. Accessed January 2015. http://geotracker.swrcb.ca.gov/map
/?CMD=runreport &myaddress= hermosabeach.
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.7-11
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.7 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
This page intentionally left blank.
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.7-12
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.8 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
4.8 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
4.8.1 INTRODUCTION
This resource section evaluates the potential environmental effects related to hydrology and
water quality associated with implementation of PLAN Hermosa. The analysis includes a review of
the watershed, surface water, groundwater, flooding, tsunami, wave run-up, sea level rise,
stormwater, and surface water and groundwater quality. Water supply and wastewater treatment
are discussed in Section 4.13, Public Services, Community Facilities, and Utilities. Topics including
erosion and sedimentation are discussed in Section 4.5, Geology and Soils. Issues regarding
wetlands and waters of the United States are discussed in Section 4.3, Biological Resources, and
contamination from hazardous materials is discussed in Section 4.7, Hazards and Hazardous
Materials. Policies and implementation actions from the PLAN Hermosa Infrastructure Element,
Sustainability + Conservation Element, and Public Safety Element guide development and
infrastructure practices to protect surface water and groundwater from degradation associated
with runoff and pollution, reduce water consumption, and protect against flooding hazards.
NOP Comments: No comments were received in response to the Notice of Preparation (NOP)
addressing hydrology and water quality concerns. Comments included written letters and oral
comments provided at the NOP scoping meeting.
Reference Information: Information for this resource section is based on numerous sources,
including the PLAN Hermosa Technical Background Report and other publicly available
documents. The Technical Background Report prepared for the project is attached to this EIR as
Appendix C-11.
4.8.2 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Appendix C-11 describes in detail the regional and local hydrology as well as the groundwater
hydrology of the planning area. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) flood zones
are described and mapped. Surface water and groundwater quality are also discussed. Key
findings from the Technical Background Report are summarized below.
HYDROLOGY
Watershed: The planning area is located in the Santa Monica Bay Watershed, which
overlies the West Coast subbasin of the Coastal Plain of the Los Angeles Basin. The West
Coast subbasin is adjudicated and commonly referred to as the West Coast Basin. It is
bounded on the north by the Ballona Escarpment, an abandoned erosional channel from
the Los Angeles River. It is bounded on the east by the Newport -Inglewood fault zone and
on the south and west by the Pacific Ocean and consolidated rocks of the Palos Verdes
Hills (DWR 1999). The Los Angeles River crosses the southern surface of the subbasin through
the Dominguez Gap, and the San Gabriel River crosses the subbasin through the Alamitos
Gap. Both rivers then flow into San Pedro Bay (DWR 2004). Major hydrologic inputs to the
basin include precipitation and flows from the South Lahontan Region and the Colorado
River Region. The Santa Monica Bay Watershed flows into the Pacific Ocean. The
watershed has an annual discharge of more than 30 billion gallons of stormwater and
urban runoff each year through 200 outlets, Urban runoff is caused by precipitation falling
on impermeable pavement.
Surface Water: No freshwater waterways or surface water bodies are located in the city.
Approximately 1.8 miles of the western edge of the planning area abuts the south end of
Santa Monica Bay. This area includes a 400-foot-wide sandy beach between the Pacific
Ocean and urban development. Urban runoff (stormwater) flows from inland locations
through the city to the Pacific Ocean through a network of drainage lines identified in
Figure 11-1 in Appendix C-11, and included below as Figure 4.8-1 (Stormwater Drainage
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.8-1
4.8 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Map). The network is a mix of County -owned and City -owned lines that generally run east
to west along major roads, including 16th Street, Pier Avenue, and 2nd Street. The lines
generally terminate through one of 1 1 outfalls at the west end of the city on the beach or
in the Pacific Ocean.
• Groundwater: The planning area is in the West Coast subbasin of the Coastal Plain of the
Los Angeles Basin. The water in underlying aquifers is confined throughout most of the
basin. Table 11-1 in Appendix C-11 identifies the principal aquifers in the West Coast
subbasin. The Silverado aquifer is confined, underlies most of the basin, and is the most
productive aquifer in the basin. It ranges from 100 to 500 feet thick and yields 80 to 90
percent of the groundwater extracted annually from the basin. The storage capacity of
the Silverado aquifer is estimated to be 6.5 million acre-feet (DWR 1961). Groundwater
recharge in the planning area is limited because Hermosa Beach is generally built out with
urban development, with the exception of open space areas such as parks, the Hermosa
Valley Greenbelt, and the beach.
• Floodplain: Figure 1 1-2 in Appendix C-11, included below as Figure 4.8-2 (FEMA Flood Zone
Map), illustrates FEMA's (2008) 100-year flood zone areas for Hermosa Beach. The entirety
of the city's sandy beaches (extending from offshore waters to The Strand) are identified
as a 100-year flood zone with the designation of Zone A, which means no base flood
elevations were determined. The remainder of the city is outside of the 100-year flood
zone. Because of projected sea level rise, the area inundated by 100-year floods is
expected to increase through the planning horizon; however, no regulatory maps
currently identify floodplains under projected conditions.
• Tsunami: The probability of a tsunami in the planning area is low. However, if a tsunami
should occur, the consequences would be great (City of Hermosa Beach 2005). As
illustrated in Figure 11-3 in Appendix C-11, included below as Figure 4.8-3 (Tsunami
Inundation Zone), the tsunami inundation line runs parallel with Hermosa Avenue, except
in the northern part of the planning area where it extends eastward as much as one city
block.
• Wave Run -Up: The Hermosa Beach coastline is exposed to waves generated by winter and
summer storms originating in the Pacific Ocean. It is not uncommon for these storms to
cause 15-foot swells. The occurrence of such a storm event, in combination with high
astronomical tides and strong winds, can cause a wave run-up and allow storm waves to
come in higher than at normal elevations along the coastline. Hermosa Beach has large
areas along the beachfront that are less than 15 feet above sea level. Normally, the very
wide beach will buffer these areas from the surf. During heavy storm seasons, the beach
can be eroded to such an extent that properties may be subject to wave run-up. This has
occurred during past El Nino events and during astronomical high tides. Resulting damage
has been primarily to private property, although the extent of the damage has not been
documented (City of Hermosa Beach 2005).
• Sea Level -Rise: For -the Los-,-n-gelessregion sea-level-rise-is-exprected-with-an-increase -of-0.3
inches to 2.0 feet from 2000 to 2050 and 1.3 to 5.6 feet from 2000 to 2100 (NRC 2012;
Grifman et al. 2013). As noted above, coastal flooding is exacerbated by storm surge and
high tides. Although there is variability in sea level rise projections, even a minor increase
in sea level could lead to substantial increases in coastal flooding severity and frequency.
These conditions could affect coastal infrastructure and increase the effect of flooding
from coastal -related events in the planning area. The City is conducting a project to
forecast how coastal shallow groundwater elevation and salinity may respond to project
increases in sea level rise in the sandy, low-lying coastal soils to evaluate the vulnerability
of existing storm drain outfalls that could be inundated at high tide and cause localized
flooding.
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.8-2
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.8 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
WATER QUALITY
Surface Water
There are no potable surface water resources in the city. However, Hermosa Beach and
Santa Monica Bay are designated as "water quality -limited" for impairments under federal
Clean Water Act Section 303(d), indicating that these water bodies are not reasonably
expected to attain or maintain water quality standards due to impairments without
additional regulation. Impairment is measured by Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL), the
maximum amount of a pollutant that a body of water can receive while still meeting water
quality standards. Table 11-2 in the Technical Background Report (see Appendix C-11)
identifies the listing category, pollutant, and pollutant type for Hermosa Beach and Santa
Monica Bay.
The Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and the US Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) have developed two TMDLs for Hermosa Beach: the Santa
Monica Bay Bacteria Dry Weather TMDL and the Santa Monica Bay Bacteria Wet Weather
TMDL (Los Angeles RWQCB 2002a, 2002b). The Santa Monica Bay Bacteria Dry Weather
TMDL (Resolution No. 02-004, Amendment to the Water Quality Control Plan -Los Angeles
Region) notes that elevated bacterial indicator densities were causing impairment of
water contact recreation beneficial uses at many Santa Monica Bay beaches. Dry
weather bacteriological objectives identified in the Los Angeles Region Basin Plan include
limits for total coliform density, fecal coliform density, and enterococcus density. The Santa
Monica Bay Bacteria Dry Weather TMDL sets the number of days that can be in
exceedance of the limits identified in the basin plan. Weekly shoreline monitoring is
conducted at seven sites under the Coordinated Shoreline Monitoring Plan for the Santa
Monica Bay beaches bacteria TMDL.
The City of Hermosa Beach is not aware of any significant water quality degradation in the
watershed during the latest reporting year (2014-15). Two shoreline monitoring sites
predominantly influenced by runoff from the city have maintained consistently better
water quality than the reference beach site monitoring location.' An open beach
shoreline monitoring location at the extension of 26th Street in Hermosa Beach has
historically exhibited a lower rate of exceedence than the reference beach. The nearest
storm drain outfall ends approximately 300 feet from the shoreline. TMDL bacteria
objectives for this site were not exceeded during the 2014-15 reporting year.
The City has implemented several projects to reduce and minimize pollutants in stormwater
runoff generated by land uses in the city to help protect water quality. The Hermosa Strand
Infiltration Trench is a subsurface trench approximately 1,000 feet long along The Strand
and diverts dry weather flows year-round from the 36-acre area of the Pier Avenue storm
drain. Monitoring shows that the system effectively removes bacteria load from runoff
diverted to the trench. The Pier Avenue Improvement Project is a "green" multi -benefit
streetscape improvement that retrofitted the city's main street to capture and treat
stormwater/urban runoff from residential areas and commercial development in the
downtown corridor (36-acre drainage area). The project has reduced dry weather flows
and wet weather low flows through infiltration in both subwatersheds. The City's Public
Works Department implements green streets retrofits whenever the opportunity arises as
part of capital improvement projects through installation of infiltration boxes within the
public right-of-way. A section of Hermosa Avenue has been retrofitted with this system. The
I The reference beach is Leo Carillo Beach at the outlet of Arroyo Sequit Canyon, a freshwater creek draining 12 square
miles of almost entirely undeveloped open space.
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.8-3
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.8 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
City has also installed trash filter/capture inserts on several catch basins. As part of the
infrastructure vulnerability assessment noted above, the City is assessing how projected
increases in sea level rise could affect existing and planned stormwater infiltration systems
and low -flow diversions designed to meet stormwater quality standards.
• Two additional TMDLs were approved by the Los Angeles RWQCB and the EPA after the
303(d) list: Santa Monica Bay Total Maximum Daily Loads for DDTs and PCBs (2012) and
Santa Monica Bay Nearshore and Offshore Debris TMDL (2010). As a co-permittee to the
Los Angeles MS4 NPDES Permit (see below), the City of Hermosa Beach is responsible for
meeting water quality -based effluent limitations that allow Santa Monica Bay to meet
TMDL targets identified in the Santa Monica Bay Total Daily Maximum Loads for DDTs and
PCBs and the Santa Monica Bay Nearshore and Offshore Debris TMDL.
• Stormwater runoff into Santa Monica Bay is regulated primarily through four National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits:
- The municipal separate storm sewer system (MS4) NPDES permit issued to the
municipalities in the urbanized area of Los Angeles County, except the City of Long
Beach, which has its own MS4 NPDES permit.
- A separate statewide stormwater permit specifically for the California Department of
Transportation (Caltrans)
- The statewide Construction Activities Stormwater General Permit
- The statewide Industrial Activities Stormwater General Permit
The Los Angeles MS4 permit was first issued in 1990 and includes 85 co-permittees, including
Los Angeles County and the City of Hermosa Beach. The latest revision of the permit (Order
No. R4-2012-0175) was issued on November 8, 2012, and amended by the State Water
Resources Control Board (Order No. WQ 2015-0075) on June 16, 2015.
Groundwater
• In the Silverado zone, the character of water varies considerably. In the coastal region,
the water is calcium chloride in character, transitioning into sodium bicarbonate moving
inland. Data from 45 public supply wells shows average total dissolved solids content of
720 milligrams per liter and a range of 170 to 5,510 milligrams per liter (DWR 2004).
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.8-4
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.8 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
L"wd
i7 "V % .w,
Cav
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
FIGURE 4.8-1
STORMWATER DRAINAGE MAP
4.8-5
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.8 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
FIGURE 4.8-2
FEMA FLOOD ZONE MAP
Legend
4; w, Iwo b%r xvv
Resod Zone rrw
- ii�•ean coca here
- �: d• .n� � rM 7rr.r
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.8-6
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.8 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
FIGURE 4.8-3
TSUNAMI INUNDATION ZONE
z =j�
1 7 . - ,
I
r
A ,
0 0.3 0.8 Mw"
I ..- I
Land
Ab
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.8-7
0
uwOw"w Rasa,
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.8 HYDROLOGY AND WATER
4.8.3 REGULATORY SETTING
Federal, state, and local laws, regulations, and policies pertain to hydrology and water quality in
the planning area. They provide the regulatory framework for addressing all aspects of hydrology
and water quality that would be affected by implementation of PLAN Hermosa. The regulatory
setting for hydrology and water quality is discussed in detail in Appendix C-11. Key regulations
used to reduce potential impacts of the proposed project are summarized below.
FEDERAL
Clean Water Act: The Clean Water Act (CWA) of 1972 is the primary federal law that
governs and authorizes the EPA and the states to implement activities to control water
quality. The following sections outline the various water quality elements of the CWA that
apply to PLAN Hermosa.
- Water Quality Criteria and Standards. The EPA is the federal agency with primary
authority for implementing regulations adopted under the Clean Water Act. The EPA
has delegated to the State of California the authority to implement and oversee most
of the programs authorized or adopted for CWA compliance through the State's
Porter -Cologne Act, described below. Under federal law, the EPA has published water
quality regulations under Volume 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations. Section 303
of the CWA requires states to adopt water quality standards for all surface waters of
the United States. As defined by the CWA, water quality standards consist of the
designated beneficial uses of the water body in question and criteria that protect the
designated uses. Section 304(a) requires the EPA to publish advisory water quality
criteria that accurately reflect the latest scientific knowledge on the kind and extent
of all effects on health and welfare that may be expected from the presence of
pollutants in water. Where multiple uses exist, water quality standards must protect the
most sensitive use.
- National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit Prociram. The CWA established
the NPDES permit program to regulate municipal and industrial discharges to surface
waters of the United States. A discharge from any point source is unlawful unless the
discharge is in compliance with an NPDES permit. Federal NPDES permit regulations
have been established for broad categories of point source discharges including
industrial wastewater, municipal wastewater, and point sources of stormwater runoff,
including municipal separate storm sewer systems and industrial stormwater which
includes construction sites. NPDES permits generally establish effluent and receiving
water limits on allowable concentrations and/or mass emissions of pollutants
contained in the discharge, prohibitions on discharges not specifically allowed under
the permit, and provisions that describe required actions by the discharger, including
industrial pretreatment, pollution prevention, self -monitoring, and other activities. The
City -isregulated-because -its-stormwater-is- managed -as part -of ci�arge-intercaonnec-ted
flood control system operated by the Los Angeles County Flood Control District.
Construction sites in the planning area that disturb 1 acre or more must obtain
coverage under the statewide NPDES Construction General Permit. Currently there are
no industrial facilities in the planning area that are subject to the statewide NPDES
Industrial General Permit. The RWQCBs implement the NPDES permit system (see
additional information under the State subsection below). The planning area is within
the jurisdiction of the Los Angeles RWQCB.
- Section 401 Water Quality Certification or Waiver. Under Section 401 of the CWA, an
applicant for a Section 404 permit (to discharge dredged or fill material into waters of
the United States) must first obtain a certificate from the appropriate state agency
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.8-8
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.8 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
indicating that the fill is consistent with the state's water quality standards and criteria.
In California, the nine Regional Water Quality Control Boards have the authority to
grant water quality certification or waive requirements.
- Section 303(dd) Impaired Waters List. Section 303(d) of the CWA requires states to
develop lists of water bodies that would not attain water quality objectives after
implementation of required levels of treatment by point -source dischargers
(municipalities and industries). Section 303(d) requires that the state develop a TMDL
for each of the listed pollutants. As noted previously, the TMDL is the amount of loading
that the water body can receive and still be in compliance with water quality
objectives. The TMDL can also act as a plan to reduce loading of a specific pollutant
from various sources to achieve compliance with water quality objectives. The state -
prepared TMDL must include an allocation of allowable loadings to point and nonpoint
sources, with consideration of background loadings (sources of naturally occurring
pollutants) and a margin of safety. The TMDL must also include an analysis that shows
links between loading reductions and the attainment of water quality objectives.
NPDES permit limits for listed pollutants must be consistent with the waste load
allocation prescribed in the TMDL. After implementation of a TMDL, it is intended that
the problems which led to placement of a given pollutant on the Section 303(d) list
would be remediated.
National Flood Insurance Program: FEMA administers the National Flood Insurance
Program to provide subsidized flood insurance to communities that comply with FEMA
regulations limiting development in floodplains. FEMA also issues Flood Insurance Rate
Maps (FIRMS) that identify which land areas are subject to flooding. These maps provide
flood information and identify flood hazard zones in communities. FEMA established the
design standard for flood protection in areas covered by FIRMS, with the minimum level of
flood protection for new development determined to be a 1-in-100 probability of annual
exceedance (i.e., the 100-year flood event). As developments are proposed and
constructed, FEMA is also responsible for issuing revisions to FIRMs, such as Conditional
Letters of Map Revision and Letters of Map Revision through the local agencies that work
with the National Flood Insurance Program.
US Army Corps of Engineers: The US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) is responsible for
issuing permits for the placement of fill or discharge of material into waters of the United
States. These permits are required under Clean Water Act Sections 401 and 404. Water
supply projects that involve stream construction, such as dams or other types of diversion
structures, trigger the need for these permits and related environmental reviews by the
USACE. The USACE also is responsible for flood control planning and assisting state and
local agencies with the design and funding of local flood control projects.
STATE
• California Coastal Act of 1976: The California Coastal Act of 1976 and the California
Coastal Commission, the state's coastal protection and planning agency, were
established by voter initiative in 1972 to plan for and regulate new development and to
protect public access to and along the shoreline. The Coastal Act considers water quality
and water -related public safety concerns as issues of public importance.
• State Water Resources Control Board: In California, the State Water Resources Control
Board (SWRCB) has broad authority over issues related to controlling water quality for the
state. The SWRCB is responsible for developing statewide water quality policy and exercises
the powers delegated to the state by the federal government under the Clean Water Act.
Regional authority for planning, permitting, and enforcement is delegated to the nine
Regional Water Quality Control Boards (RWQCBs). The regional boards are required to
formulate and adopt basin plans for all areas in the region and establish water quality
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.8-9
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.8 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
objectives in the plans. California water quality objectives (or "criteria" under the CWA)
are found in the basin plans adopted by the SWRCB and each of the nine regional boards.
The Los Angeles RWQCB is responsible for the Hermosa Beach planning area and the
surrounding region. In 2006, the SWRCB adopted Order Number 2006-003 establishing
General Waste Discharge Requirements for all publicly owned or operated sanitary sewer
systems in California. The Waste Discharge Requirements require owners and operators of
sewer collection systems to report sanitary sewer overflows using the California Integrated
Water Quality System and to develop and implement a Sewer System Management Plan.
The Hermosa Beach Sanitary Sewer Master Plan, adopted in 2009 and updated in 2011,
details sewer collection system operations, maintenance, repair, and funding. Section
4.13, Public Services, Community Facilities, and Utilities, of this EIR addresses wastewater
treatment issues and the state regulations that apply to the demonstration of adequate
water supply for the future water demands caused by implementation of PLAN Hermosa.
Title 22 Standards: California's drinking water quality standards are contained in Title 22 of
the California Code of Regulations. Water quality standards are enforceable limits
composed of two parts: the designated beneficial uses of water and criteria (i.e., numeric
or narrative limits) to protect those beneficial uses. Municipal and domestic supply is
among the "beneficial uses" defined in Section 13050(f) of the Porter -Cologne Act as uses
of surface water and groundwater that must be protected against water quality
degradation. Drinking water maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) directly apply to water
supply systems "at the tap" (i.e., at the point of use by consumers in, for example, their
home and office) and are enforceable by the State and the Los Angeles County
Department of Public Health. When fully health -protective, MCLs may also be used to
interpret narrative water quality objectives prohibiting toxicity to humans in water
designated as a source of drinking water in the basin plan.
Porter -Cologne Water Quality Control Act: The Porter -Cologne Act is California's statutory
authority for the protection of water quality. Under the act, the State must adopt water
quality policies, plans, and objectives that protect the state's waters for the use and
enjoyment of the people. The act sets forth the obligations of the SWRCB and the RWQCBs
to adopt and periodically update basin plans. Basin plans are the regional water quality
control plans required by both the Clean Water Act and the Porter -Cologne Act in which
beneficial uses, water quality objectives, and implementation programs are established
for each of the nine regions in California. The act also requires waste dischargers to notify
the RWQCBs of their activities through the filing of reports of waste discharge and
a iithori7et the SWRCB and the RWQCBs to issue and enforce waste discharge
requirements (WDR), NPDES permits, Section 401 water quality certifications, or other
approvals. The RWQCBs also have authority to issue waivers to reports of waste discharge
and/or WDRs for broad categories of "low threat" discharge activities that have minimal
potential for adverse water quality effects when implemented according to prescribed
terms and conditions.
Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board Basin Plan: The planning area is in the
jurisdiction of the Los Angeles RWQCB, which is responsible for the preparation and
implementation of the water quality control plan for the Los Angeles region (Los Angeles
RWQCB 1995). The basin plan defines the beneficial uses, water quality objectives,
implementation programs, and surveillance and monitoring programs for waters of the
coastal drainages in the Los Angeles region between Rincon Point on the coast of western
Ventura County and the eastern Los Angeles County line. The basin plan contains specific
numeric water quality objectives that apply to certain water bodies or portions of water
bodies. Objectives have been established for bacteria, dissolved oxygen, pH, pesticides,
electrical conductivity, total dissolved solids, temperature, turbidity, and trace elements.
Numerous narrative water quality objectives have also been established.
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.8-10
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.8 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
California Ocean Plan: Section 13170.2 of the California Water Code directs the SWRCB to
formulate and adopt a water quality control plan for California's ocean waters. The
SWRCB first adopted this plan, known as the California Ocean Plan, in 1972. The California
Water Code also requires a review of the California Ocean Plan at least every three years
to guarantee that current standards are adequate and are not allowing degradation to
indigenous marine species or posing a threat to human health. The current iteration of the
California Ocean Plan (SWRCB 2012) establishes water quality objectives for California's
ocean waters and provides the basis for regulation of wastes discharged into the state's
coastal waters.
California State Nondegradation Policy: In 1968, the SWRCB adopted a nondegradation
policy aimed at maintaining high quality for waters in California. The nondegradation
policy states that the disposal of wastes into state waters shall be regulated to achieve the
highest water quality consistent with maximum benefit to the people of the state and to
promote the peace, health, safety, and welfare of the people of California. The policy
provides as follows:
- Where the existing quality of water is better than required under existing water quality
control plans, such quality would be maintained until it has been demonstrated that
any change would be consistent with maximum benefit to the people of the state and
would not unreasonably affect present and anticipated beneficial uses of such water.
- Any activity which produces waste or increases the volume or concentration of waste
and which discharges to existing high -quality waters would be required to meet waste
discharge requirements, which would ensure (1) pollution or nuisance would not occur
and (2) the highest water quality consistent with the maximum benefit to the people
of the state would be maintained.
NPDES Permit System and Waste Discharge Requirements for Construction: The SWRCB and
the Los Angeles RWQCB have adopted specific NPDES permits for a variety of activities
that have potential to discharge wastes to waters of the State. The SWRCB General Permit
for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activities
(Order No. 2009-0009-DWQ, as amended by Order No. 2010-0014-DWQ and Order No.
2012-0006-DWQ) applies to all land -disturbing construction activities that would affect
1 acre or more. The Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board has issued a general
NPDES permit and general WDRs governing construction -related dewatering discharges in
the Los Angeles RWQCB'sjurisdictional area (Los Angeles RWQCB Order No. R4-2003-01 1 1;
NPDES No. CAG994004). The Los Angeles RWQCB may also issue site -specific WDRs, or
waivers to WDRs, for certain waste discharges to land or waters of the State. Activities
subject to the NPDES general permit for construction activity must develop and implement
a stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPPP). The SWPPP includes a site map and
description of construction activities and identifies the best management practices that
will be employed to prevent soil erosion and discharge of other construction -related
pollutants, such as petroleum products, solvents, paints, and cement that could
contaminate nearby water resources.
Municipal Stormwater Permit Program: The SWRCB Municipal Storm Water Permitting
Program regulates stormwater discharges from municipal separate storm sewer systems
(MS4s). The current MS4 permit (Order No. R4-2012-0175 [NPDES Permit No. CAS004001,
Waste Discharge Requirements for Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System [MS4]
Discharges within the Coastal Watersheds of Los Angeles County], as amended by Order
No. WQ 2015-0075) requires the discharger to develop and implement a stormwater
management plan/program with the goal of reducing the discharge of pollutants in
stormwater to the maximum extent practicable (MEP). The MEP is the performance
standard specified in federal Clean Water Act Section 402(p). The management programs
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.8-11
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.8 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
specify what best management practices will be used to address certain program areas.
The permit establishes new performance criteria for new development and
redevelopment projects in the Coastal Zone, including low impact development (LID). The
City of Hermosa Beach is a co-permittee under the MS4 permit. As a co-permittee, the City
is required to maintain adequate legal authority within its respective jurisdiction to control
pollutant discharges and to require the use of control measures to prevent or reduce the
discharge of pollutants into the MS4 to achieve water quality standards.
Recycled Wastewater Requirements: Wastewater recycling in California is regulated under
California Code of Regulations Title 22, Division 4, under the jurisdiction of the California
Department of Public Health. The intent of these regulations is to ensure protection of
public health associated with the use of recycled water. The regulations establish
acceptable levels of constituents in recycled water for a range of uses and prescribe
means for ensuring reliability in the production of recycled water. Using recycled water for
nonpotable uses is common throughout the state and is an effective means of maximizing
use of water resources. The Los Angeles RWQCB establishes water reclamation
requirements under the Title 22 regulations and is responsible for implementing wastewater
recycling projects.
REGIONAL
• Enhanced Watershed Management Plan for Beach Cities: Following adoption of the MS4
permit, the Cities of Hermosa Beach, Manhattan Beach, Redondo Beach, and Torrance,
together with the Los Angeles County Flood Control District (LACFCD), collectively referred
to as the Beach Cities Watershed Management Group (Beach Cities WMG) agreed to
collaborate on the development of an Enhanced Watershed Management Program
(EWMP) for the Santa Monica Bay and Dominguez Channel Watershed areas within their
jurisdictions (referred to as the Beach Cities EWMP Area). Under Part IV.0 of the MS4 permit
(Watershed Management Program), the permittees are afforded the flexibility to develop
watershed management programs to implement the requirements of the permit on a
watershed scale through customized strategies, control measures, and best management
practices. The Beach Cities EWMP summarizes watershed -specific water quality priorities
identified by the Beach Cities WMG; outlines the program plan, including specific
strategies, control measures, and best management practices to achieve water quality
targets; and describes the quantitative analysis completed to support target achievement
and permit compliance. A reasonable assurance analysis was prepared in conjunction
with the EWMP to demonstrate on a quantitative basis that the EWMP will achieve the
requirements of the MS4 permit for the members of the Beach Cities Watershed
Management Group. A timeline, estimated costs, and potential funding sources are also
described in the EWMP.
Currently, regional best management practices have been constructed within the Beach
Cities EWMP planning area, including two in Hermosa Beach (Pier Avenue Improvement
project and— er�Sfirand Infiltra�n—Trenc pro ecfl. Future projects proposed in
Hermosa Beach are the Hermosa Beach Infiltration Beach project, the Hermosa Beach
Greenbelt Infiltration project, and two green street projects. The projects in Hermosa Beach
have not been funded, and a schedule for implementation has not yet been developed.
The Beach Cities EWMP was approved by the Los Angeles RWQCB on April 18, 2016, under
its authority to administer the MS4 permit. The EWMP does not establish policies or
regulations that the participating cities must impose on new development or
redevelopment, nor does the program require the construction of the specific features
identified in the EWMP. However, the approach described in the EWMP, in combination
with the required LID -based best management practices that each participating city must
PLAN Hermosa City of Hermosa Beach
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report August 2017
4.8-12
4.8 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
impose on development, is anticipated to protect and potentially improve water quality
in Santa Monica Bay from pollutants in stormwater runoff.
LOCAL
• Stormwater and Urban Runoff Pollution Control Regulations: Chapter 8.44 of the Hermosa
Beach Municipal Code ensures consistency with the requirements of the federal Clean
Water Act and the California Porter -Cologne Water Quality Control Act, and acts
amendatory thereof or supplementary thereto, applicable implementing regulations, and
the Municipal NPDES Permit, and any amendment, revision, or reissuance thereof.
+ Low Impact Development Ordinance: The City has been requiring LID best management
practices for certain residential and commercial projects since 2015, when it adopted a
customized amendment to the California Green Building Code. As required by the current
MS4 permit, Hermosa Beach Municipal Code Section 8.44.095 (LID Ordinance) sets forth
low impact development requirements for new development and redevelopment
(Ordinance No. 15-1351). All new development or new building construction in Hermosa
Beach will be required to comply with the LID requirements regardless of the area of
impervious surface or acreage disturbed, which exceeds the minimum applicability
requirements of the MS4 permit. Consistent with the MS4 permit, redevelopment projects
of any type that add or replace more than 5,000 square feet of impervious surface area
will also be required to comply with the LID requirements, with the further proviso that
redevelopment projects located directly adjacent to a significant ecological area will be
subject to LID requirements if they propose addition or replacement of more than 2,500
square feet of impervious surface area.2 The City has been implementing the LID
Ordinance requirements since 2015.
• Green Street Policy: The City adopted a policy (Resolution No. 15-0013) in 2015 to
implement green street best management practices as elements of street and roadway
projects, including public works capital improvement projects, to the maximum extent
practicable. This policy is intended to demonstrate compliance with the MS4 permit. Water
quality improvement and groundwater replenishment benefits are achieved through
designs that minimize impervious area and incorporate bioretention elements (e.g.,
vegetated swales) to facilitate natural pollutant removal while allowing stormwater
retention and/or infiltration.
Floodplain Management Regulations: Hermosa Beach Municipal Code Chapter 8.52
regulates development in floodplains to minimize public and private losses due to flood
conditions through provisions designed to protect human life and health; minimize
expenditure of public money for costly flood control projects; minimize the need for rescue
and relief efforts associated with flooding and generally undertaken at the expense of the
general public; minimize prolonged business interruptions; and minimize damage to public
facilities and utilities. To accomplish these purposes, this chapter includes regulations to
restrict or prohibit uses which are dangerous to health, safety, and property due to water
or erosion hazards, or which result in damaging increases in erosion or flood heights or
velocities; require that uses vulnerable to floods, including facilities which serve such uses,
be protected against flood damage at the time of initial construction; control the
alteration of natural floodplains, stream channels, and natural protective barriers which
help accommodate or channel floodwaters; control filling, grading, dredging, and other
development which may increase flood damage; and prevent or regulate the
2 The complete text of the LID Ordinance may be found at:
http://www.codepublishing.com/CA/Hermosa Beach/#!/hermosabeach08/HermosaBeach0844.html#8.44.095
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.8-13
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.8 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
construction of flood barriers which will unnaturally divert floodwaters or which may
increase flood hazards in other areas.
4.8.4 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
For the purposes of this EIR, impacts on hydrology and water quality are considered significant if
implementation of PLAN Hermosa would:
1) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements.
2) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater
recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the
local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would
drop to a level that would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits
have been granted).
3) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the
alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial
on- or off -site erosion or siltation.
4) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the
alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of
surface runoff in a manner which would result in on- or off -site flooding.
5) 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.
6) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality.
7) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard
Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map.
8) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures that would impede or redirect flood
flows.
9) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving flooding,
including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam.
10) Result in inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow.
ANALYSIS APPROACH
The analysis of impacts is based on the likely consequences of implementation of PLAN Hermosa
compared to existing conditions. The following analysis of impacts on hydrology and water quality
is qualitative and based on available hydrologic and water quality information for the planning
area, along with a review of regional information. The analysis assumes that all future and existing
development in the planning area complies with applicable laws, regulations, and plans. An
-—rrralysis-of-currrulative�irrrlsacfs-uses-quzalitative-information-for-the-planning-area, SantaMonica
Bay, and the West Coast subbasin of the Coastal Plain of the Los Angeles Basin.
PLAN HERMOSA POLICIES AND IMPLEMENTATION ACTIONS
PLAN Hermosa policies and implementation actions that address hydrology and water quality
include the following:
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.8-14
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.8 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Policies
Public Safety Element
• 1.1 Evaluate risks. Buildings and infrastructure will be periodically evaluated for seismic, fire,
flood, and coastal storm hazard risks and identified risks will be minimized by complying
with California Building Code standards and other applicable regulations.
• 1.3 Tsunami Playbook. Work with Los Angeles County and utilize resources such as the
Tsunami Playbook in the evaluation and response of tsunami risk.
• 1.5 Minimize coastal flooding. Natural interventions, green infrastructure, and infiltration
systems will be utilized to minimize damage from coastal flooding.
• 1.6 Minimize coastal hazards. Injuries and loss of life are prevented, and property loss and
damage from coastal hazards are minimized.
• 1.7 Reduce flood vulnerability. Encourage existing structures, critical facilities, and
infrastructure to reduce flood vulnerability.
• 1.8 Reduce stormwater runoff. Reduce stormwater runoff consistent with local stormwater
permits.
• 1.11 Secure funds. Establish centralized internal procedures to coordinate efforts for
securing funds that support risk reduction measures.
• 2.1 Integrate resilience. Integrate resilience to anticipated sea level rise impacts into
project designs when repairing and replacing aging infrastructure.
■ 2.2 Mitigate impacts. Require new development and redevelopment projects to consider
and mitigate relevant sea level rise impacts.
• 2.3 Enhance awareness. Enhance local understanding of sea level rise and keep decision -
makers and the community aware of potential impacts based on best available science.
• 2.4 Provide public information. Provide public information describing new flooding risks
under a 55-inch sea level rise scenario in areas previously not affected by flooding.
2.5 Maintain beach widths. Maintain or expand current beach widths under changing sea
level conditions.
• 2.6 Consider sea level rise. Consider the combined effects of sea level rise when
evaluating potential tsunami and storm surge impacts.
2.7 Support regional approaches. Support regional approaches to sediment
management, beach replenishment, and adaptive shoreline protection to allow Hermosa
Beach to voice its needs, allow for coordination with neighboring jurisdictions, and identify
creative finance mechanisms to continue the replenishment program.
• 2.8 Identify erosion problems. Continue to monitor beach width and elevations to identify
potential erosion problems.
• 4.1 Public awareness. Increase public awareness of hazards, emergency response, and
recovery through updated evacuation routes and informational signage.
• 4.2 Promote community -based programs. Promote community -based programs in fire
safety and emergency preparedness, including neighborhood -level and business
programs and community volunteer groups such as CERT, Neighborhood Watch,
Volunteers in Policing and the Amateur Radio Association.
• 4.3 SEMS and NIMS training. Increase City employee capacity through the Standardized
Emergency Management System (SEMS) and the National Incident Management System
(NIMS) compliant training and Emergency Operations Center (EOC) drills to identify
hazards, and assist in emergency preparedness, response, and recovery.
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.8-15
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.8 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
• 4.4 City media and communication resources. Maintain the City's emergency
communication policy and protocols and utilize City media resources, emergency alert
notification systems, and program advertising to provide information and communicate
with the community prior to, during, or after events posing risk to community health safety,
and welfare.
• 4.5 Responsive neighborhood groups. Encourage neighborhood groups, including
Neighborhood Watch, to identify, consider, and prepare for the needs of neighbors with
access and functional needs to adequately respond to disasters.
• 4.6 Vulnerable populations. Incorporate procedures into emergency and hazard
mitigation plans to take care of vulnerable populations during hazardous events.
• 6.1 Regularly update plans. Regularly update disaster preparedness and emergency
response plans, in a manner that is compliant with state and federal standards.
• 6.2 Coastal incidents. Collaborate and maintain communication between the City, LA
County Lifeguards, and the United States Coast Guard concerning incidents on or near
the coast.
• 6.3 Invest in critical facilities. Dedicate funds to upgrade and maintain essential facilities
(including EOC, Police/Fire Facilities, and City Hall) to make them more resilient to the
potential impacts of natural disasters.
Infrastructure Element
• 4.8 Holistic systems planning. Develop a comprehensive approach to water infrastructure
that integrates sewer system planning with potable and recycled water systems,
stormwater systems, and increased conservation awareness.
• 5.1 Integration of stormwater best practices. Integrate stormwater infiltration best practices
when initiating streetscape redevelopment or public facility improvement projects.
• 5.2 Green infrastructure. Naturalize flood channels that enhance flood protection
capacity before employing other management solutions.
• 5.3 Natural features. Integrate natural features, such as topography, drainage, and trees,
into the design of streets and rights -of -way to capture stormwater and prevent runoff.
• 5.4 Conservation behavior. Encourage community behavior changes to reduce urban
runoff pollution by incentivizing the capture of rainwater to prevent runoff and meet on -
site water demand.
• 5.5 Stormwater system maintenance. Maintain, fund, and regularly monitor the City's
stormwater infrastructure.
• 5.6 Stormwater system repairs. Ensure that stormwater system repairs are included in
maintenance plans for other City infrastructure and that repairs and maintenance are
completed in a timely manner to prevent additional repair costs.
• 5.7 Stormwater permits. Strictly implement, enforce, and monitor MS4 NPDES Permit
requirements through stormwater ordinances.
• 5.8 Low impact development. Require new development and redevelopment projects to
incorporate low impact development (LID) techniques in project designs, including but
not limited to on -site drainage improvements using native vegetation to capture and
clean stormwater runoff.
Sustainability + Conservation Element
• 5.2 Rainwater collection. Encourage innovative water recycling techniques such as
rainwater capture, use of cisterns, and installation of greywater.
• 7.1 Permeable pavement. Require the use of permeable pavement in parking lots,
sidewalks, plazas, and other low -intensity paved areas.
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.8-16
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.8 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
• 7.2 Soil erosion. Minimize soil erosion by ensuring best practices are used in grading and
construction.
Implementation Actions
• SUSTAINABILITY-9. Maintain and periodically update the Water Efficient Landscape
Ordinance and Water Conservation and Drought Management Plan sections of the
Municipal Code to facilitate the use of new technologies or practices to conserve water.
• SAFETY-5. Evaluate tsunami preparation, evacuation, and response policies/practices to
reflect current inundation maps and design standards. Include updated information in the
periodically updated hazard mitigation plan.
• SAFETY-9. Continue working with regional partners to develop a local sea level rise model
that evaluates erosion potential, provides detailed inundation maps, and provides
combined sea level rise and tsunami maps.
• SAFETY-10. When the mean high water level exceeds 1 foot above the baseline level,
partner with FEMA as a cooperating technical partner to conduct a Hydrologic and
Hydraulic Study, and facilitate necessary revisions to applicable Flood Insurance Rate
Maps.
• SAFETY-11. Prepare for changing shoreline conditions by establishing and applying the
following development review requirements:
- Require new development or redevelopment project proposals within the designated
area subject to flooding, inundation, or erosion due to sea level rise to describe and
illustrate in site plans how the proposed project considers and mitigates potential flood
hazards during the economic lifespan of the structure. Potential flood mitigation
measures include, but are not limited to, flood proofing; increased ground floor
elevation (a minimum of 1-foot freeboard); ground -floor, flood -resistant exterior
materials; and restricting fencing or yard enclosures that cause water to pond.
- Require new development or redevelopment projects to assure stability and structural
integrity and neither create nor contribute significantly to erosion, geologic instability,
or destruction of the project site or surrounding area.
- As local flood, erosion, and tsunami data becomes more precise, amend the General
Plan and Zoning Code to establish more specific development standards and
conditions.
• SAFETY-12. Amend the Municipal Code to establish a definition of "economic lifespan" for
structural development as between 75 to 100 years, unless otherwise specified, and
provide restrictions for specific development proposals.
• SAFETY-13. Amend the Municipal Code to require flood risk disclosure and active
acknowledgment of expanded flood risk when properties subject to inundation or flooding
are developed or redeveloped.
• SAFETY-14. Continue to participate in regional sediment management planning.
• SAFETY-15. Develop a long-term adaptive shoreline management program with a strong
preference for beach replenishment over shoreline protective structures.
• INFRASTRUCTURE-1. Create a comprehensive, long-range (20-year) infrastructure plan
integrating roadway, water, wastewater, stormwater, waste disposal, and utility
infrastructure systems.
- Consider the best available science describing potential climate change impacts as
a basis for preparing the infrastructure plan.
- Use the infrastructure plan as a resource when preparing five-year Capital
Improvement Plans (CIPs) and setting and enforcing discretionary development
requirements.
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.8-17
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.8 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
- Incrementally update the infrastructure plan following the preparation of each CIP to
ensure it remains consistent with changes in growth, traffic, funding sources, climate
change impacts, and state and regional regulation.
• INFRASTRUCTURE-9. Consult with Cal Water to estimate and evaluate water supplies,
provide public information and incentives for water conservation best practices.
• INFRASTRUCTURE-10. Develop a policy for the installation of greywater systems and
rainwater collection cisterns in parks and community facilities, where appropriate and cost
effective.
• INFRASTRUCTURE-11. Support efforts by Cal Water to construct necessary pump and
storage facilities to ensure adequate water supply and proper water system balance.
• INFRASTRUCTU RE-1 2. Amend the Municipal Code to require the installation of dual water
plumbing hookups for landscaping irrigation, grading, and other non -contact uses in new
development and major redevelopment projects where recycled water is available or
expected to be available based on adopted infrastructure plans.
• INFRASTRUCTURE-13. Continue to implement the Water Conservation and Drought
Management Plan and any implementing ordinances, including imposition of fines and
other appropriate enforcement tools, for violations of water conservation rules.
• INFRASTRUCTURE-18. Continue to implement and incorporate revisions to the Clean Bay
Restaurant Program and Grease Control Ordinance.
• INFRASTRUCTURE-19. Update program requirements to integrate the latest available Best
Management Practices into the City Stormwater Management and Discharge Control
Ordinance, Low Impact Development (LID) Ordinance, and Green Street Policy and
regularly monitor results.
• INFRASTRUCTURE-20. Complete municipal demonstration projects showing residential and
business property best practices in urban runoff, green streets, and LID.
• INFRASTRUCTURE-21. Continue to require new development and redevelopment projects
to incorporate green street BMPs that address stormwater runoff from the project area
using the Green Street BMP Selection Guidelines identified in Attachment A of the City's
Green Street Policy.
• INFRASTRUCTURE-22. Continue to install educational signs or symbols on major public storm
drains.
IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
IMPACT 4.8-1 Would PLAN Hermosa Adversely Affect Water Quality Standards and Waste
Discharge Requirements? Implementation of PLAN Hermosa would provide for
future development and reuse projects that could alter existing storm water runoff
and associated pollutants. However, the potential for stormwater flows to affect
water quality would be controlled through implementation of Municipal Code
Chapter8.44 (Stormwater and Urban Runoff Pollution Control Regulations), which
includes the City's Low -Impact Development (LID) Ordinance (Municipal Code
Section 8.44.095), and the City's Green Street Policy. Construction activities
resulting from implementation of PLAN Hermosa would also temporarily increase
the amount of sediments and pollutants in stormwater runoff. However,
implementation of PLAN Hermosa policies and implementation actions and
enforcement of existing grading and erosion regulations (Municipal Code
Section 8.44.090 and NPDES Construction General Permit SWPPP requirements)
would result in a less than significant impact.
PLAN Hermosa City of Hermosa Beach
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report August 2017
4.8-18
4.8 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Water quality standards and waste discharge requirements that are applicable to PLAN Hermosa
are set forth in the Basin Plan and various NPDES permits, which are described in the Regulatory
Setting subsection. From a hydrologic perspective, the primary way in which PLAN Hermosa would
result in water quality impacts is a function of pollutants contained in stormwater runoff, which
could occur during construction and/or occupancy of projects. Hermosa Beach is generally built
out with urban development, with the exception of open space areas such as parks, vacant
parcels, the Hermosa Valley Greenbelt, and the beach. Urbanized land in Hermosa Beach is not
anticipated to substantially increase with the implementation of PLAN Hermosa because the city
is largely built out, with new development limited to infill and redevelopment where existing
impervious surfaces and developed conditions already exist. Therefore, the potential for future
development and reuse projects consistent with PLAN Hermosa to result in a substantial alteration
in existing city water quality impacts is limited.
Construction activities such as grading, excavation, and trenching may result from development
associated with implementation of PLAN Hermosa. These types of land -disturbing construction
activities result in the potential for increased soil erosion and sedimentation in stormwater runoff.
In addition, general construction activities would contribute pollutants such as construction waste,
diesel and oil from equipment, solvents, and lubricants. Sediment and contaminants could enter
the stormwater drainage system and eventually enter Santa Monica Bay. The potential increase
in soil erosion, siltation, and construction -related pollutants could degrade downstream surface
water or groundwater. However, future projects would be required to comply with NPDES
requirements. Construction activities disturbing 1 acre or more would be subject to the NPDES
Construction Activities Stormwater General Permit and would be required to eliminate or reduce
non-stormwater discharges to storm sewer systems and other waters and consider the use of post -
construction permanent best management practices. Projects over 1 acre would also be required
to develop and implement a stormwater pollution prevention plan with best management
practices that would be employed to prevent soil erosion and discharge of other construction
related pollutants, as well as a monitoring program to ensure that best management practices
are implemented appropriately and are effective at controlling discharges of pollutants related
to stormwater. Hermosa Beach Municipal Code Title 8, Chapter 8.44, Section 8.44.090 describes
requirements for sediment and erosion control best management practices and SWPPPs. Best
management practices may consist of a wide variety of measures appropriate to reduce
pollutants in stormwater.
PLAN Hermosa includes several policies and implementing actions that would apply to new
development and redevelopment. Public Safety Element Policy 1.8 directs the City to reduce
stormwater runoff consistent with local stormwater permits. Infrastructure Element Policy 4.8 directs
the City to develop a comprehensive approach to water infrastructure that integrates sewer
system planning with potable and recycled water systems, stormwater systems, and increased
conservation awareness.
The Infrastructure Element contains Policies 5.1, 5.3, 5.4, 5.5, 5.6, 5.7, and 5.8 that would further
reduce impacts to water quality. Policy 5.1 integrates stormwater infiltration best practices when
initiating streetscape redevelopment or public facility improvement projects. Policy 5.3 directs the
City to integrate natural features, such as topography, drainage, and trees, into the design of
streets and rights -of -way. Policy 5.4 encourages community behavior changes to reduce urban
runoff pollution. Policy 5.5 directs the City to maintain, fund, and regularly monitor the city's
stormwater infrastructure. Policy 5.6 ensures that stormwater system repairs are included in
maintenance plans for other city infrastructure and that repairs and maintenance are completed
in a timely manner to prevent additional repair costs. Policy 5.7 directs the City to strictly
implement, enforce, and monitor MS4 NPDES permit requirements. Policy 5.8 requires new
development and redevelopment projects to incorporate LID techniques in project designs,
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.8-19
4.8 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
including but not limited to on -site drainage improvements using native vegetation to capture
and clean stormwater runoff.
Sustainability + Conservation Element Policy 5.2 encourages innovative water recycling
techniques such as rainwater capture, use of cisterns, and installation of greywater systems.
Additionally, Policy 7.1 requires the use of permeable pavement in parking lots, sidewalks, plazas,
and other low -intensity paved areas, while Policy 7.2 would seek to minimize soil erosion by
ensuring best practices are used in grading and construction.
Infrastructure Element implementation action INFRASTRUCTURE-12 would amend the Municipal
Code to require the installation of dual plumbing to facilitate use of recycled water for
landscaping irrigation, grading, and other non -contact uses in new development and
redevelopment projects where recycled water is available or expected to be available.
INFRASTRUCTURE-18 directs the City to continue to fully implement and expand the Clean Bay
Restaurant Program and the Grease Control Ordinance. INFRASTRUCTURE-1 directs the City to
incorporate stormwater infrastructure improvements in a comprehensive, long-range (20-year)
infrastructure plan. INFRASTRUCTURE-19 updates program requirements in the City's Storm Water
Management and Discharge Control Ordinance and regularly monitors results. INFRASTRUCTURE-
20 directs the City to continue to implement the Low Impact Development Ordinance and
monitor ordinance effectiveness. INFRASTRUCTURE-21 requires new development and
redevelopment projects to incorporate green street best management practices that address
stormwater runoff from the project area using the Green Street BMP Selection Guidelines identified
in Attachment A of the City's Green Street Policy.
Implementation of these policies, in combination with continued implementation of Municipal
Code Chapter 8.44 (Stormwater and Urban Runoff Pollution Control Regulations), Municipal Code
Section 8.44.095 (Low -Impact Development (LID) Ordinance), and the City's Green Street Policy
would ensure projects developed under PLAN Hermosa would be in compliance with applicable
water quality standards (e.g., the Basin Plan) and waste discharge requirements (e.g., NPDES MS4
permit) and would offset any new development impacts to water quality. Since 2010, the City has
required LID best management practices in certain projects, and beginning in 2015-16, all projects
have been required to comply with the City's LID Ordinance, which provides greater stormwater
protection than required by the MS4 permit by requiring projects to maintain stormwater runoff
on -site, among other requirements. The City also has implemented several projects to control
pollutants in stormwater runoff that have been demonstrated to provide effective pollutant
removal and meet water quality objectives and has identified additional projects in the Beach
Cities EWMP to help further improve water quality. This EWMP is based on a Reasonable Assurance
Analysis to ensure the requirements of the MS4 permit will be met, and will be implemented during
the life of the PLAN Hermosa. The proposed PLAN Hermosa policies and implementation actions
related to hydrology and water quality are consistent with and support applicable plans and
regulations. Therefore, adoption and implementation of PLAN Hermosa would not violate water
quality-standards-or-wasto-dFs-harge requiremen#.s-andimpac-fs-would-be-less -than significant.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
IMPACT 4.8-2 Would PLAN Hermosa Deplete Groundwater Supplies or Substantially Interfere
with Groundwater Recharge? Implementation of PLAN Hermosa would provide
for future development and reuse projects that would minimally affect
groundwater recharge because existing areas of open space would be
preserved, and implementation of the City's LID Ordinance, Green Street Policy,
and PLAN Hermosa policies and implementation actions would require
permeable area in new development, redevelopment, and infrastructure
improvements, resulting in a less than significant impact.
PLAN Hermosa City of Hermosa Beach
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report August 2017
4.8-20
4.8 HYDROLOGY AND WATER
Hermosa Beach is generally built out with urban land uses and has minimal areas of vacant,
developable permeable land. Proposed PLAN Hermosa land use policies promote the
redevelopment of existing urbanized areas, and the overall net area of urbanized land is not
anticipated to substantially increase. Redevelopment would generally occur in underutilized
areas that are currently covered with impervious surfaces. Site redevelopment may provide
opportunities to create new permeable surfaces through new landscaping and use of porous
pavements, potentially reducing the amount of runoff and associated pollutants. Thus, very small
amounts of new impervious surface would result from development associated with
implementation of the plan, which would not significantly affect infiltration of water into the
ground. With incorporation of the LID requirements, development that occurs as the result of PLAN
Hermosa would have lower runoff and higher permeability than observed in baseline conditions.
The potential for groundwater recharge impacts would be further reduced through
implementation of PLAN Hermosa policies. Infrastructure Element contains policies Policy 5.1, 5.2,
5.3, 5.8, that would address potential impacts to groundwater recharge. Policy 5.1 that integrates
stormwater infiltration best practices when initiating streetscape redevelopment or public facility
improvement projects. Policy 5.2 directs the City to naturalize flood channels that enhance flood
protection capacity before employing other management solutions. Policy 5.3 directs the City to
integrate natural features, such as topography, drainage, and trees, into the design of streets and
rights -of -way. Policy 5.8 requires new development and redevelopment projects to incorporate
low impact development techniques in project designs, including but not limited to on -site
drainage improvements using native vegetation to capture and clean stormwater runoff.
Sustainability + Conservation Element Policy 5.2 encourages innovative water recycling
techniques such as rainwater capture, use of cisterns, and installation of greywater systems. Policy
7.1 requires the use of permeable pavement in parking lots, sidewalks, plazas, and other low -
intensity paved areas. Each of these policies individually and in combination would maintain and
possibly improve recharge opportunities in the subbasin.
In addition to the policies listed above, Infrastructure Element Policy 4.8 directs the City to develop
a comprehensive approach to water infrastructure that integrates sewer system planning with
potable and recycled water systems, stormwater systems, and increased conservation
awareness. PLAN Hermosa also contains implementation actions intended to increase
groundwater recharge over baseline conditions. INFRASTRUCTURE-19 directs the City to continue
to implement the Low Impact Development Ordinance and to monitor ordinance effectiveness.
INFRASTRUCTURE-21 requires new development and redevelopment projects to incorporate
green street best management practices that address stormwater runoff from the project area
using the Green Street BMP Selection Guidelines identified in Attachment A of the City's Green
Street Policy.
Because of the minimal amount of new impervious surface that would result with implementation
of PLAN Hermosa, the rate of infiltration needed to support groundwater recharge would not be
substantially decreased. Additionally, implementation of PLAN Hermosa policies and actions, in
combination with the City's LID Ordinance, Green Street Policy, and projects anticipated in the
Beach Cities EWMP, would help maintain and protect groundwater recharge resources by
ensuring infiltration potential is not reduced and that pollutants as specified in the management
plan are removed to the maximum extent practicable. Therefore, this impact would be less than
significant.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.8-21
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.8 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
IMPACT 4.8-3 Would PLAN Hermosa Alter the Existing Drainage Pattern of the Site or Area so as
to Result in Substantial On- or Off -Site Erosion or Siltation? Implementation of PLAN
Hermosa would provide for future development and reuse projects that would
minimally alter drainage patterns and the amount of stormwater runoff, which
would minimize the potential for erosion or siltation. Continued implementation
and enforcement of existing grading, erosion, and flood control regulations, in
combination with the City's LID Ordinance, Green Street Policy, and PLAN
Hermosa policies and implementation actions, would result in a less than
significant impact.
As described above in Impact 4.8-1, Hermosa Beach is generally built out with urban development
and has minimal areas of vacant permeable land, with the exception of parkland, the Hermosa
Valley Greenbelt, and the beach. The city has no natural drainage features. With only a few
vacant parcels that are small and generally not contiguous, new development would not be of
such scale that drainage patterns would be substantially altered, which would limit the potential
for increased erosion or sedimentation. For example, most recent development in the city has
included demolition and reconstruction of single-family homes, small commercial redevelopment,
or two -unit condominium projects. Development along shoreline areas, which could be
susceptible to erosion from wave and tidal action and/or sea level rise effects, would be limited
under PLAN Hermosa.
The potential for erosion or siltation impacts would be further reduced through implementation of
PLAN Hermosa policies and implementation actions. Public Safety Element Policy 1.5 directs the
City to use natural interventions, green infrastructure, and infiltration systems to minimize damage
from coastal flooding. Policy 1.8 reduces stormwater runoff consistent with local stormwater
permits. Policy 2.8 directs the City to continue to monitor beach width and elevations to identify
potential erosion problems. Infrastructure Element Policy 4.8 directs the City to develop a
comprehensive approach to water infrastructure that integrates sewer system planning with
potable and recycled water systems, stormwater systems, and increased conservation
awareness. Policy 5.1 integrates stormwater infiltration best practices when initiating streetscape
redevelopment or public facility improvement projects. Policy 5.2 directs the City to naturalize
flood channels that enhance flood protection capacity before employing other management
solutions. Policy 5.3 directs the City to integrate natural features, such as topography, drainage,
and trees, into the design of streets and rights -of -way. Policy 5.5 directs the City to maintain, fund,
and regularly monitor stormwater infrastructure. Policy 5.8 requires new development and
redevelopment projects to incorporate LID techniques in project designs, including but not limited
to on -site drainage improvements using native vegetation to capture and clean stormwater
runoff. Sustainability + Conservation Element Policy 7.1 requires the use of permeable pavement
in parking lots, sidewalks, plazas, and other low -intensity paved areas. Policy 7.2 would minimize
soil erosion by ensuring best practices are used in grading and construction.
PLAN Hermr)qa contnins implementation actions_intenAdLe-dJ�a-mitigc[te er__Qsio-ft-an-d-,edimenfcd( n
impacts. INFRASTRUCTURE-1 incorporates stormwater infrastructure improvements in a
comprehensive, long-range infrastructure plan. INFRASTRUCTURE-19 updates program
requirements in the City's Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance and
directs the City to regularly monitor results, as well as directs the City to continue to implement the
LID Ordinance and monitor its effectiveness, which is also required under the applicable NPDES
Permit. INFRASTRUCTURE-21 requires new development and redevelopment projects to
incorporate green street best management practices that address stormwater runoff from the
project area using the Green Street BMP Selection Guidelines identified in Attachment A of the
City's Green Street Policy,
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.8-22
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.8 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Existing requirements and regulations, as well as PLAN Hermosa policies and implementation
actions, would reduce the amount of surface water runoff in the planning area through measures
such as compliance with the NPDES permit requirements, flood control measures, water
conservation measures, and maintenance of pervious surfaces and through implementation of
the Enhanced Watershed Management Program. Compliance with these regulations and the
minimal amount of new surface runoff that would result from implementation of PLAN Hermosa
would minimize the potential for existing drainage patterns to be altered in a manner that could
cause increased erosion or sedimentation. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
IMPACT 4.8-4 Would PLAN Hermosa Substantially Alter the Existing Drainage Pattern of the Site
or Area so as to Result in On- or Off -Site Flooding? Implementation of PLAN
Hermosa would provide for future development and reuse projects that would
minimally alter drainage patterns and the amount of stormwater runoff, which
would minimize the potential for on- and off -site flooding. Continued
implementation and enforcement of existing grading, erosion, and flood control
regulations, in combination with the City's LID Ordinance, Green Street Policy,
and PLAN Hermosa policies and implementation actions, would result in a less
than significant impact.
Impact 4.8-3 described the potential for PLAN Hermosa to alter drainage systems or patterns. The
area's drainage systems and patterns are not anticipated to be substantially altered due to the
existing built -out conditions of the city, plans for new development to focus on infill locations, and
programs to require on -site retention and infiltration of stormwater. Because drainage patterns
would be minimally affected and the rate and amount of stormwater would be controlled
through implementation of LID requirements (see Impact 4.8-1), surface runoff would not
substantially add to an increased risk of flooding.
Existing requirements and regulations, as well as PLAN Hermosa policies and implementation
actions described in Impact 4.8-3, would reduce the amount of surface water runoff through
measures such as compliance with the NPDES permit requirements, flood control measures, LID
development standards, retention and infiltration -focused infrastructure improvements, water
conservation measures, and maintenance of pervious surfaces. Compliance with these
regulations and the minimal amount of new surface runoff that would result from implementation
of PLAN Hermosa would minimize the potential for existing drainage patterns to be altered in a
manner that could cause increased on- or off -site flooding. Therefore, this impact would be less
than significant.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
IMPACT 4.8-5 Would PLAN Hermosa Create or Contribute Runoff Water Exceeding the Capacity
of Existing or Planned Stormwater Drainage Systems or Providing Substantial
Additional Sources of Polluted Runoff? Implementation of PLAN Hermosa would
provide for future development and reuse projects that would generate
stormwater runoff that would be discharged to the storm drain system and would
contain urban pollutants. Continued implementation and enforcement of
existing grading and erosion regulations, in combination with the City's LID
Ordinance and Green Street Policy, the Beach Cities EWMP, and PLAN Hermosa
policies and implementation actions, would result in a less than significant
impact.
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.8-23
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.8 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Given the built -out nature of the planning area, most new development that would occur as the
result of PLAN Hermosa would be redevelopment. As a conservative estimate, assuming 33 acres
of vacant land are entirely converted to urban uses with impervious surfaces, the increase in newly
developed land would be approximately 5 percent. With a small change in impervious surface,
the rate and amount of stormwater runoff generated would not be expected to increase to levels
that would affect the capacity of storm drainage systems (see Impact 4.13.6-3 in Section 4.13,
Public Services, Community Facilities, and Utilities, of this EIR).
The potential for storm drainage capacity impacts would be further reduced through
implementation of several PLAN Hermosa policies. Sustainability + Conservation Element Policy 7.1
would require the use of permeable pavement in parking lots, sidewalks, plazas, and other low -
intensity paved areas. Infrastructure Element Policy 4.8 would develop a comprehensive
approach to water infrastructure that integrates sewer system planning with potable and
recycled water systems, stormwater systems, and increased conservation awareness. Policy 5.1
would integrate stormwater infiltration best practices when initiating streetscape redevelopment
or public facility improvement projects. Policy 5.3 would integrate natural features, such as
topography, drainage, and trees, into the design of streets and rights -of -way. Policy 5.4 would
encourage community behavior changes to reduce urban runoff pollution. Policy 5.5 would
maintain, fund, and regularly monitor the city's stormwater infrastructure. Policy 5.6 would ensure
that stormwater system repairs are included in maintenance plans for other city infrastructure and
that repairs and maintenance are completed in a timely manner to prevent additional repair
costs. Policy 5.7 would strictly implement, enforce, and monitor MS4 NPDES Permit requirements.
Policy 5.8 would require new development and redevelopment projects to incorporate low
impact development techniques in project designs, including but not limited to on -site drainage
improvements using native vegetation to capture and clean stormwater runoff.
Construction activities may result from development associated with implementation of PLAN
Hermosa and generate the potential for increased pollutants in runoff or provide substantial
additional sources of polluted runoff, as described in Impact 4.8-1. However, adherence to the
regulatory requirements described in Impact 4.8-1 would serve to reduce the amount of
stormwater runoff and pollutants generated during construction. Specifically, projects would be
required to comply with NPDES requirements, prepare a stormwater pollution prevention plan,
and comply with Hermosa Beach Municipal Code Section 8.44.090. Mandatory compliance with
these requirements would control construction activities and minimize, to the greatest extent
practicable, the degradation of water quality. These requirements would include best
management practices appropriate to reduce the overall discharge volume and amount of
pollutants in stormwater.
There would not be a substantial increase in pollutants in stormwater runoff as a result of PLAN
Hermosa. This would be primarily accomplished through the City's LID Ordinance. The LID
Ordinance requires new development and redevelopment projects to control pollutants and
runoff volume from-the-pr-ojecf--sit-e-by-minimizing the-imaer-vious-surf- ace -are-o t-hrou-gh-e##€c#ive
design and use of water -permeable surfaces to the extent technically feasible on not less than 50
percent of exterior surface areas, excluding building footprints, and controlling runoff through
infiltration, bioretention, and/or rainfall harvest and use. A stormwater management plan (SWMP)
that includes necessary best management practices to control pollution would be required for
each project. Prior to issuing a discretionary permit, the City must ensure the project plans include
LID features and other design requirements, and prior to issuing a certificate of occupancy, the
City must verify that the features have been constructed. The LID Ordinance also requires projects
to have an operation and maintenance plan. Implementation of PLAN Hermosa policies and
implementation actions listed in Impact 4.8-1 above, which also address water quality, would
further reduce impacts on stormwater runoff. On a citywide scale, the City would continue to
PLAN Hermosa City of Hermosa Beach
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report August 2017
4.8-24
4.8 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
implement its Green Street Policy and further its efforts toward implementing the improvements
proposed in the Beach Cities EWMP, which would help reduce pollutant loads in stormwater.
Because only small areas of new impervious surface would result from development associated
with implementation of the plan, the increased volumes or rates of discharge and associated
pollutants in runoff would be minimal. Additionally, adherence to applicable water quality
regulations and implementation of PLAN Hermosa policies and implementation actions would
minimize the potential to create or contribute runoff water that would exceed the capacity of
existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
IMPACT 4.8-6 Would PLAN Hermosa Substantially Degrade Water Quality? Implementation of
PLAN Hermosa would provide for future development and reuse projects that
would not result in substantial degradation of water quality with continued
implementation of Municipal Code Chapter 8.44 (Stormwater and Urban Runoff
Pollution Control Regulations), which includes the City's Low -Impact Design (LID)
Ordinance (Municipal Code Section 8.44.095), the City's Green Street Policy,
existing grading and erosion regulations (Municipal Code Section 8.44.090 and
NPDES Construction General Permit SWPPP requirements), participation in the
Beach Cities EWMP, and implementation of PLAN Hermosa policies and
implementation actions. This would be a less than significant impact.
Impacts 4.8-1, 4.8-3, and 4.8-5 analyze in detail the potential water quality impacts and applicable
permits, regulations, plans, and PLAN Hermosa policies and implementation actions that would
ensure no significant adverse water quality impacts would occur as a result of the plan. No
additional water quality impacts beyond those described in Impacts 4.8-1, 4.8-3, and 4.8-5 have
been identified. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
IMPACT 4.8-7 Would PLAN Hermosa Place Housing Within a 100-Year Flood Hazard Area?
Implementation of PLAN Hermosa would not place housing within a 100-year
flood hazard area. Additionally, PLAN Hermosa includes policies and
implementation actions to decrease exposure to and impacts from flood hazards
throughout the city. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.
Though most surface water is controlled by storm drainage infrastructure in the city, flooding may
occur in Hermosa Beach as a result of excessive precipitation, storm runoff, coastal flooding, or
inadequate, undersized, or unmaintained storm drainage infrastructure. As identified in Figure
4.8-2, the delineated 100-year flood hazard area is limited to the beach on the city's western
edge and does not include any housing, nor does PLAN Hermosa allow housing to be placed on
the beach.
Flooding can occur outside of delineated flood zones, typically as the result of combined heavy
precipitation, storm surge, and high tide events. PLAN Hermosa does not allow development,
residential or otherwise, in an existing 100-year flood hazard area. However, PLAN Hermosa does
include numerous policies and implementation actions to mitigate the impacts of flooding, in
addition to the stormwater management policies and programs mentioned above. Public Safety
Element Policy 1.1 requires new buildings and infrastructure to evaluate seismic, fire, flood, and
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.8-25
4.8 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
coastal storm hazard risks and comply with California Building Code standards to minimize risk.
Policy 1.5 directs the City to use natural interventions, green infrastructure, and infiltration systems
to minimize damage from coastal flooding. Policy 1.7 encourages existing structures, critical
facilities, and infrastructure to reduce flood vulnerability. Policy 2.8 directs the City to continue to
monitor beach width and elevations to identify potential erosion problems. Policy 6.3 directs the
City to invest in public and critical facilities to make them more resilient to the potential impacts
of natural disasters.
Because Hermosa Beach is a built -out community and PLAN Hermosa land use policies would not
place areas of residential development in flood hazard areas, and because all future
development would be required to comply with flood hazard development regulations and
requirements, the plan would not create risk due to the placement of housing in flood hazard
areas. Additionally, implementation of PLAN Hermosa policies and implementation actions would
minimize flooding potential and flood hazards throughout the city. Therefore, this impact would
be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
IMPACT 4.8-8 Would PLAN Hermosa Place Within a 100-Year Flood Hazard Area Structures That
Would Impede or Redirect Flood Flows? Implementation of PLAN Hermosa would
allow development or expansion of facilities to support coastal access in the 100-
year flood hazard area. However, adoption and implementation of PLAN
Hermosa policies and implementation actions and adherence to development
regulations specific to flood hazard areas would result in a less than significant
impact.
As identified in Figure 4.8-2, the delineated 100-year flood hazard area is limited to the beach on
the city's western edge. Existing development in this area is limited to coastal recreational
buildings and enhancements including the pier, restrooms, and playgrounds.
Policies and implementation actions in PLAN Hermosa could lead to the development of new or
enhanced coastal facilities, including accessible walkways onto the beach. As noted in the Land
Use + Design Element, infrastructure or amenities such as restrooms, playgrounds, and stormwater
drainages are allowed, provided they do not create visual obstructions or impede recreational
activities. New or enhanced infrastructure or amenities could impede or redirect flood flows.
However, the uses allowed by PLAN Hermosa are consistent with existing land uses and are not
expected to significantly increase the number or size of structures in the 100-year flood hazard area.
Because PLAN Hermosa would continue existing land use patterns and any new development
would be required to comply with flood hazard development regulations and requirements,
__ImpplPment_ationo} theplan would not substantially redirect or impede flood flows due to
placement of structures in flood hazard areas. Additionally, PLAN Hermosa policies and
implementation actions would minimize flooding potential and flood hazards. Therefore, this
impact would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.8-26
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.8 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
IMPACT 4.8-9 Would PLAN Hermosa Expose People or Structures to a Significant Risk of Loss,
Injury, or Death Involving Flooding? Implementation of PLAN Hermosa would not
allow habitable development in locations currently designated as 100-year flood
hazard areas, which generally precludes loss, injury, or death from flooding,
including flooding from the failure of a dam or levee. However, sea level rise is
more likely than not to expand the area exposed to flooding conditions in the
future. Adoption and implementation of PLAN Hermosa policies and
implementation actions that prepare the city forsea level rise and adherence to
development regulations specific to flood hazard areas would result in a less than
significant impact.
As described in Impact 4.8-7, implementation of PLAN Hermosa would not allow habitable
development in flood hazard areas, although, as previously mentioned, coastal recreational
supportive structures would continue to be allowed in the 100-year flood hazard area, which
could expose people or structures to the risk of loss, injury, or death involving flooding. However,
these potential impacts were found to be less than significant. Because PLAN Hermosa continues
existing land use allowances, any new development would be required to comply with applicable
regulations and building standards in flood hazard areas. Flooding hazards and risks are also
minimized through PLAN Hermosa policies and implementation actions, as previously described in
Impact 4.8-7. Thus, increased exposure to flooding hazards that might result in significant loss,
injury, or death would be minimal with implementation of the plan.
The analysis above focuses on flood exposure under current conditions. However, sea level rise
will likely expand the area of the city exposed to flooding through the planning horizon and
beyond. In Hermosa Beach, the area where a 100-year flood could cause inundation is projected
to increase by about 300 percent under a scenario of 55 inches of sea level rise (from 0.034 square
miles at present to 0.1 square miles). The projected flood zone extends beyond the sandy beach
into developed portions of the Coastal Zone (see PLAN Hermosa Figure 6.4). PLAN Hermosa
policies and implementation actions could result in development that is in a 100-year flood zone
under likely future climate conditions, which means the risk of loss, injury, or death is possible in
expanded areas of the city. However, in addition to general flood mitigation regulations,
development standards, policies, and implementation actions mentioned in Impacts 4.8-7 and
4.8-8, PLAN Hermosa contains policies and implementation actions to assess, prepare for, and
respond to the risk of loss, injury, or death involving flooding related to sea level rise. Public Safety
Element Policy 2.1 directs the City to integrate resilience to anticipated sea level rise impacts into
project designs when repairing and replacing aging infrastructure. Policy 2.2 requires new
development and redevelopment projects to consider and mitigate relevant sea level rise
impacts. Policy 2.3 directs the City to enhance local understanding of sea level rise and keep
decision -makers and the community aware of potential impacts based on best available science.
Policy 2.4 directs the City to provide public information describing new flooding risks under a 55-
inch sea level rise scenario in areas previously not affected by flooding. Policy 2.5 directs the City
to maintain current beach widths under changing sea level conditions. Policy 2.6 directs the City
to consider the combined effects of sea level rise when evaluating potential tsunami and storm
surge impacts. Policy 2.7 directs the City to support regional approaches to sediment
management, beach replenishment, and adaptive shoreline protection to allow Hermosa Beach
to voice its needs, allow for coordination with neighboring jurisdictions, and identify creative
finance mechanisms to continue the replenishment program. Policy 2.8 directs the City to
continue to monitor beach width and elevations to identify potential erosion problems.
Implementation action SAFETY-13 directs the City to amend the Municipal Code to require flood
risk disclosure and active acknowledgment of expanded flood risk in property
purchases/turnovers. SAFETY-1 1 directs the City to prepare for changing shoreline conditions by
establishing and applying specific development review listed in the implementation action.
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.8-27
4.8 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Hermosa Beach is not in a location that could be subject to flood hazards resulting from the
structural failure of a levee or dam and therefore has no risk of loss, injury, or death involving
flooding as a result of such a structure.
Adherence to applicable development requirements and regulations in flood hazard areas and
implementation of PLAN Hermosa policies related to stormwater management, flood hazard
mitigation, and sea level rise would reduce the potential for loss, injury, or death from flooding.
Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
IMPACT 4.8-10 Would PLAN Hermosa Expose People or Structures to Inundation by Seiche,
Tsunami, or Mudflow? Implementation of PLAN Hermosa would provide for future
development and reuse projects that would be in locations that may be subject
to inundation by tsunami or mudflow. However, adoption and implementation
of PLAN Hermosa policies and implementation actions would result in a less than
significant impact.
Some areas of California are exposed to seismically induced waves known as seiches that can
overtop dams and cause flooding. Because the city does not contain any surface waters, other
than the Pacific Ocean, Hermosa Beach would not be subject to inundation from a seiche.
Coastal areas of California are subject to seismically induced ocean waves known as tsunamis.
Figure 4.8-3 displays the tsunami inundation zones in the city. PLAN Hermosa would continue to
provide for development in locations that may be subject to inundation by tsunami. As mentioned
in Impacts 4.8-7, 4.8-8, and 4.8-9, development that would occur as the result of PLAN Hermosa
would be subject to building and development standards intended to mitigate general flood
hazards. Also mentioned above, PLAN Hermosa includes numerous policies and implementation
actions that would reduce or mitigate flood impacts. In addition, PLAN Hermosa includes policies
and actions related to tsunamis. Public Safety Element Policy 1.3 directs the City to utilize the Los
Angeles County Tsunami Playbook in the evaluation of and response to tsunami risk. Policy 2.6
directs the City to consider the combined effects of sea level rise when evaluating potential
tsunami and storm surge impacts. Implementation action SAFETY-5 directs the City to evaluate
tsunami preparation, evacuation, and response policies/practices to reflect current inundation
maps and design standards and include updated information in the periodically updated hazard
mitigafion plan.
A mudflow can develop when water accumulates in the ground during periods of heavy rainfall
and results in a flowing river of mud, rock, and other materials. There is no known risk of mudflow
in Hermosa Beach.
PLAN -Hermosa -would-con#inueto-allow-development-in tsunami-inundafion-zones, whi-i-could
lead to inundation. Because PLAN Hermosa policies and implementation actions provide a
comprehensive framework for addressing inundation, including preparation for and response to
a tsunami, and because all future development would be required to comply with flood hazard
development regulations and requirements, the risk of inundation above baseline conditions as a
result of adoption and implementation of PLAN Hermosa is less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.8-28
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.8 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
CUMULATIVE SETTING, IMPACTS, AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Water quality and hydrology are not confined by jurisdictional boundaries; rather, they are
dependent on the regional watershed and hydrologic conditions in surrounding areas. As
described in the Environmental Setting subsection, the planning area is located in the Santa
Monica Bay Watershed and the West Coast subbasin of the Coastal Plain, Los Angeles Basin. When
analyzing cumulative impacts to water quality and hydrology, it is necessary to consider upstream
and downstream areas and water bodies that could influence or be influenced by actions within
the planning area. Thus, the watershed and the subbasin are the general areas of influence used
in analysis of cumulative impacts for this topic.
IMPACT 4.8-11 Would PLAN Hermosa Contribute to Cumulative Effects on Water Quality, Water
Quality Standards, or Waste Discharge Requirements? Anticipated regional
growth in the Santa Monica Bay Watershed could increase the amount of
impervious surface in the watershed, thereby potentially increasing the total
volume, peak discharge rate of stormwater runoff, and associated pollutants.
Additionally, construction activities resulting from regional growth could increase
the amount of sediments and pollutants in stormwater runoff and could lead to
water quality degradation. PLAN Hermosa's contribution would be less than
cumulatively considerable because it would result in minimal changes in
stormwater flows and pollutants with implementation of PLAN Hermosa policies
and implementation actions, the City's LID Ordinance and Green Street Policy,
participation in regional plans such as the Beach Cities EWMP, and compliance
with existing regulations. This impact would be less than cumulatively
considerable.
Planned development or redevelopment under PLAN Hermosa, in addition to other cumulative
development in the watershed, could result in an increase in the amount of impervious surfaces
and increased runoff. Surface water runoff could carry increased levels of sediment and urban
contaminants from both construction and long-term operation that could affect receiving water
quality in Santa Monica Bay and other receiving water bodies. Additionally, construction and
operational activities in the region could result in impacts to water quality, water quality standards,
and waste discharge requirements.
Development in all jurisdictions whose stormwater flows to Santa Monica Bay is subject to policies
and regulations to improve water quality and minimize potential to degrade water quality, as
described in the Regulatory Setting subsection above. Federal, state, and local laws, regulations,
and permitting processes, such as the Clean Water Act, NPDES permitting requirements, and the
Porter -Cologne Water Quality Control Act, apply to all development within the watershed. Various
programs and requirements are specific to the maintenance and improvement of regional water
quality, including the Los Angeles RWQCB Basin Plan, the NPDES General Permits administered by
the SWRCB and the Los Angeles RWQCB, and the Los Angeles County Standard Urban Stormwater
Mitigation Plan. These regulations apply to all development that would take place in the city as
well as in neighboring jurisdictions.
Additionally, the Cities of Hermosa Beach, Manhattan Beach, Redondo Beach, and Torrance,
together with the Los Angeles County Flood Control District, collectively referred to as the Beach
Cities WMG, agreed to collaborate on the development of an Enhanced Watershed
Management Program (EWMP) for the Santa Monica Bay and Dominguez Channel Watershed
areas within their jurisdictions (referred to as the Beach Cities EWMP Area). The Beach Cities EWMP
summarizes watershed -specific water quality priorities identified by the Beach Cities W MG; outlines
the program plan, including specific strategies, control measures, and best management
practices to achieve water quality targets; and describes the quantitative analysis completed to
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.8-29
4.8 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
support target achievement and permit compliance. The approach described in the EWMP, in
combination with the required LID -based best management practices that each participating
city must impose on development, is anticipated to protect and potentially improve water quality
in Santa Monica Bay from pollutants in stormwater runoff.
Because development projects whose stormwaterwould flow into Santa Monica Bay must comply
with federal, state, and local regulations and requirements, the cumulative potential for increased
pollutants or runoff would be minimized. Additionally, implementation of PLAN Hermosa is
anticipated to result in minimal, and potentially positive, effects to water quality or wastewater
discharge, as described in Impacts 4.8-1, 4.8-5, and 4.8-6. Policies and implementation actions in
the plan have been developed to improve overall water quality in Hermosa Beach. For these
reasons, PLAN Hermosa's contribution to cumulative water quality violations or waste discharge
requirements would not be considerable, and the impact is considered less than cumulatively
considerable.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
IMPACT 4.8-12 Would PLAN Hermosa Contribute to Cumulative Effects on Groundwater Supply
and Recharge? Anticipated regional growth overlying the West Coast subbasin
of the Coastal Plain, Los Angeles Basin, could increase the amount of impervious
surface, thereby potentially decreasing the area available for groundwater
recharge. PLAN Hermosa's contribution would be less than cumulatively
considerable because new areas of impervious surface as a result of
implementing PLAN Hermosa would be minimal, and new development,
redevelopment, and infrastructure improvements would be required to include
more permeable surfaces than under baseline conditions. With implementation
of PLAN Hermosa policies and implementation actions, the City's LID Ordinance
and Green Street Policy, participation in regional plans such as the Beach Cities
EWMP, and compliance with existing regulations, this impact would be less than
cumulatively considerable.
Per the California Department of Water Resources, natural replenishment of the West Coast Basin's
groundwater supply is largely limited to underflow from the Central Basin through and over the
Newport -Inglewood fault zone. Water spread in the Central Basin percolates into aquifers there,
and eventually some crosses the Newport -Inglewood fault to supplement the groundwater supply
in the West Coast Basin. The West Coast Basin covers approximately 140 square miles and is
bounded on the north by the Baldwin Hills and the Ballona Escarpment (a bluff just south of the
Ballona Creek), on the east by the Newport -Inglewood fault zone, to the south by San Pedro Bay
and the Palos Verdes Hills, and to the west by Santa Monica Bay. Aquifers in the West Coast Basin
are generally confined and receive the majority of their natural recharge from adjacent
groun-dwater basins or- from —the Pacific —Ocean —(seawater intrusion)-AVtRD 2005j—.4-s such,
groundwater recharge opportunities are minimal in Hermosa Beach and surrounding jurisdictions.
Proposed development or redevelopment under PLAN Hermosa, in addition to other cumulative
development in the Santa Monica Bay Watershed, could increase the amount of impervious
surfaces and result in less pervious surface to serve as groundwater recharge areas. Nonetheless,
most of the watershed is highly urbanized. Development that would take place under PLAN
Hermosa would generally be small and located on infill sites, similar to the jurisdictions surrounding
the city. As such, future development in the watershed would likely be in existing urbanized areas,
with only small areas of infringement into currently undeveloped lands.
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.8-30
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.8 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
As described under Impact 4.8-2, implementation of PLAN Hermosa is not anticipated to create
substantial new areas of impervious surfaces, as the city is mostly built out. PLAN Hermosa policies
and implementation actions described in the discussion of Impact 4.8-2 would minimize the
amount of new impervious surface in the planning area, direct the use of more natural pervious
drainage features to absorb stormwater, and implement water conservation measures to reduce
water consumption. For these reasons, PLAN Hermosa's contribution to cumulative groundwater
recharge or supply impacts would not be considerable. The impact is considered less than
cumulatively considerable.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
IMPACT 4.8-13 Would PLAN Hermosa Contribute to Cumulative Alteration of Stormwater
Drainage Systems and Patterns Resulting in Erosion and Flooding? Anticipated
regional growth throughout the Santa Monica Bay Watershed could increase the
amount of impervious surface in the watershed, thereby potentially increasing
the total volume and peak discharge rate of stormwater runoff and the potential
for erosion and sedimentation. PLAN Hermosa's contribution would be less than
cumulatively considerable because the planning area is generally built out,
which would result in minimal changes in drainage patterns and therefore erosion
potential with implementation of PLAN Hermosa policies and implementation
actions, the City's LID Ordinance and Green Street Policy, participation in
regional plans such as the Beach Cities EWMP, and compliance with existing
regulations. This impact would be less than cumulatively considerable.
As described in Impact 4.8-1, Hermosa Beach is generally built out with urban land uses. The Santa
Monica Bay Watershed area is generally built out and mirrors Hermosa Beach in terms of available
developable land. Drainages are formalized in the watershed via culverts, stormwater drains,
gutters, channels, etc. Additionally, there is a countywide drainage system, which, due to the built -
out nature of the county and the watershed area, would not be greatly modified by new
development. Because of the developed nature of the area, new development would be mainly
infill and would be already served by adequate drainage facilities. Drainage modifications would
include increased capacity and new connections if needed.
Cumulative development in the Santa Monica Bay Watershed would be subject to regulatory
requirements designed to minimize potential erosion and flooding that may result during
construction and operational conditions. Compliance with best management practices as part
of the NPDES permit process, SWPPP and SWMP requirements (as applicable), any site -specific
waste discharge requirements issued by the Los Angeles RWQCB, and compliance with the Los
Angeles Region Basin Plan would minimize cumulative stormwater drainage effects. These
requirements are applicable to all jurisdictions in the watershed. Additionally, as discussed above,
the Beach Cities Watershed Management Group has an adopted and approved Enhanced
Watershed Management Program that would further reduce runoff, thus minimizing the possibility
of erosion and flooding from modification of drainage patterns.
PLAN Hermosa policies and implementation actions would reduce the amount of surface water
runoff through measures such as compliance with NPDES permit requirements, flood control
measures, and water conservation measures. These measures would minimize the potential for
erosion and flooding from modification of drainage patterns. Therefore, PLAN Hermosa's
contribution to cumulative impacts related to alteration of stormwater drainage that could result
in increased erosion or flooding would not be considerable. The impact is less than cumulatively
considerable.
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.8-31
4.8 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Mitigation Measures
None required.
IMPACT 4.8-14 Would PLAN Hermosa Contribute to Cumulative Exposure of People or Structures
to a Significant Risk of Loss, Injury, or Death Involving Flooding? Anticipated
regional growth throughout the Santa Monica Bay Watershed, in combination
with PLAN Hermosa, could result in development in locations designated as 100-
year flood hazard areas, which could result in loss, injury, or death from flooding,
including flooding from the failure of a dam or levee. Impacts would be site -
specific and would generally not combine to create a cumulative impact.
However, with implementation of PLAN Hermosa policies and implementation
actions and compliance with existing regulations, PLAN Hermosa's contribution
would be less than cumulatively considerable.
Flooding may occur throughout the Santa Monica Bay Watershed when streams and channels
overflow as a result of excessive precipitation, storm runoff, or inadequate, undersized, or
unmaintained storm drainage infrastructure. As described previously, FEMA mapping delineates
areas located in flood hazard zones. New development in the watershed could potentially result
in housing located within 100-year flood hazard areas, or new or redeveloped housing may
continue to be allowed in flood hazard areas in of her jurisdictions. Future development throughout
the watershed could place structures that would impede or redirect flood flows within a 100-year
flood hazard area. Generally, development is not possible in a major flood control channel;
however, development could occur in other locations designated as 100-year flood hazard areas
that may carry surface water flows during flood conditions.
However, all future projects, regardless of jurisdiction, would be required to comply with regulatory
requirements related to floodplain development. FEMA has established the design standard for
flood protection in areas covered by Flood Insurance Rate Maps, with the minimum level of flood
protection for new development determined to be within a 100-year flood hazard area. The
California Building Code also contains requirements for constructing structures in flood hazard
zones. Required compliance with these regulations and building codes would minimize risk due to
the placement of housing in flood hazard zones, thereby reducing the potential cumulative
impact.
Additionally, as described under Impact 4.8-7, PLAN Hermosa does not allow residential
development in an existing 100-year flood hazard area. Multiple PLAN Hermosa policies and
implementation actions would minimize flooding potential and reduce hazards associated with
flooding, and future development would be required to comply with flood hazard development
regulations and requirements. Therefore, PLAN Hermosa's contribution to cumulative impacts
related to the placement of housing in flood hazard areas would not be considerable, and the
impact would be less than cumulatively considerable.
Mitigation Measures
None required
IMPACT 4.8-15 Would PLAN Hermosa Contribute to Cumulative Impacts Related to Inundation by
Seiche, Tsunami, or Mudflow? Anticipated regional growth throughout the Santa
Monica Bay Watershed, in combination with PLAN Hermosa, could result in
development in locations that may be subject to inundation by tsunami or
mudflow. Impacts would be site -specific. PLAN Hermosa would not place new
land uses in locations that could be subject to inundation by a tsunami, but
existing uses could be at risk of tsunami. However, with implementation of PLAN
Hermosa policies and implementation actions and compliance with existing
PLAN Hermosa City of Hermosa Beach
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report August 2017
4.8-32
4.8 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
regulations, PLAN Hermosa's contribution would be less than cumulatively
considerable.
Impact 4.8-10 discusses the potential for a seismically induced wave, known as a seiche, that can
overtop a dam and cause flooding. Coastal areas of California are subject to seismically induced
ocean waves known as tsunamis. In the Santa Monica Bay Watershed, all coastal communities
could be exposed to a tsunami. Mudflows can develop when water accumulates in the ground
during periods of heavy rainfall and results in a flowing river of mud, rock, and other materials. The
risk of mudflow inundation is a relatively site -specific impact and is generally dependent on the
immediate development in the area and on the specific hillside. Regional growth anticipated in
the watershed could increase inundation risk associated with seiches, tsunamis, and mudflows.
However, Hermosa Beach is not located adjacent to any surface water bodies that could
experience a seiche and has no known mudslide hazards. As described above, Hermosa Beach
is exposed to tsunamis, but the land use pattern promoted by PLAN Hermosa would not place
new land uses in locations that could be subject to inundation by a tsunami. PLAN Hermosa
includes policies and implementation actions to mitigate, prepare for, and respond to tsunami -
related inundation. Therefore, PLAN Hermosa's contribution to cumulative inundation impacts
from seiches, tsunamis, and mudflows would not be considerable, and the impact would be less
than cumulatively considerable.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
4.8.5 REFERENCES
Beach Cities Watershed Management Group. 2016. Enhanced Watershed Management Program
for the Beach Cities Watershed Management Area (Santa Monica Bay and Dominguez
Channel Watersheds). Submitted to Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board.
http://www.swrcb.ca.gov/losangeles/water_issues/programs/stormwofer/municipal/wal
ershed_management/beach-cities/BeachCities_EWMP_February20l 6.pdf.
City of Hermosa Beach. 2011. City of Hermosa Beach Sanitary Sewer Master Plan.
hti p://www.hermosabch.org/mod ules/showdocument_asrax?documented=1765.
2017. City of Hermosa Beach 2017 Draft Local Hazard Mitigation Plan.
h tfA_://www, h ermosabc h .ora/mod dies/showdocument.asnx?d ocumentid-9252
2017. PLAN Hermosa.
DWR (California Department of Water Resources). 1961. Planned Utilization of the Ground Water
Basins of the Coastal Plain of Los Angeles County. Bulletin No. 104.
1999. Watermaster Service in the West Coast Basin, Los Angeles County, July 1, 1998-June
30, 1999.
2004. "Coastal Plain of Los Angeles County Groundwater Basin West Coast Subbasin."
California's Groundwater Bulletin 118. Accessed January 2014.
http://www.water.ca.gov/pubs/groundwater/bullefin_l 18/basindescriptions/4-1 1.03.pdf.
FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency). 2008. Flood Insurance Map: Los Angeles
County California and Incorporated Areas. Map number 06037CI 907F. Accessed January
2014. htfps://msc.fema.gov/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet
/MapSearchResult?storeld=10001 &catalogld=10001 &langld=-
1 &panellDs=06037C1907F$&Type=pbp&nonprinted=&unmapped.
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.8-33
4.8 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Grifman, P. M., J. F. Hart, J. Ladwig, A. G. Newton Mann, and M. Schulhof. 2013. Sea Level Rise
Vulnerability Study for the City of Los Angeles. USCSG-TR-05-2013. Accessed February 2014.
hftps://www.usc.edu/org/seagrant/research/Sea Level Rise_docs/hires_pdfs/City%20of%2
OLA%20SLR%2OVulnerability%2OStudy%20FINAL%2OSummary%2OReport%200nline%2OHype
rlinks.pdf.
Los Angeles RWQCB (Regional Water Quality Control Board). 1995. Water Quality Control Plan, Los
Angeles Region. Accessed February 2014.
http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/rwgcb4/water_issues/programs/basin_plan/electronics
-documents/bp 1 _introduction.pdf.
2002a. Attachment A to Resolution No. 02-004: Proposed Amendment to the Water Quality
Control Plan -Los Angeles Region to Incorporate the Santa Monica Bay Beaches Bacteria
TMDL. Accessed February 2014. http://63.199.216.6/larwgcb_new/bpa/docs/2002-
004/2002-004_R B_B P A . pd f.
2002b. Attachment A to Resolution No. 2002-022: Amendment to the Water Quality
Control Plan - Los Angeles Region to Incorporate Implementation Provisions for the
Region's Bacteria Objectives and to Incorporate the Santa Monica Bay Beaches Wet -
Weather Bacteria TMDL. Accessed February 2014.
http://63.199.216.6/larwgcb_new/bpa/docs/2002-022/2002-022_RB_BPA.pdf.
2012. MS4 Discharges within the Coastal Watersheds of Los Angeles County.
http://www.swrcb.ca.gov/losangeles/water_issues/programs/stormwater/municipal/la_
ms4/2012/Order%2OR4-2012-0175%20-%20A%2OFinal%200rder%20revised.pdf.
NRC (National Research Council). 2012. Sea -Level Rise for the Coasts of California, Oregon, and
Washington: Past, Present, and Future. Accessed January 2014.
www.nap.edu/catolog.php?record_id=l 3389.
SWRCB (State Water Resources Control Board). 2012. California Ocean Plan.
hftp://www.swrcb.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/ocean/docs/cop20l 2.pdf.
WRD (Water Replenishment District of Southern California). 2005. Technical Bulletin Volume 4,
Summer 2005. Accessed August 2016. http://www.wrd.org/engineering/introduction-
groundwater-basins-los-angeles.php.
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.8-34
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.9 LAND USE AND PLANNING
4.9 LAND USE AND PLANNING
4.9.1 INTRODUCTION
This section evaluates the potential environmental effects related to land use and planning from
implementation of PLAN Hermosa. The analysis includes a review of PLAN Hermosa and existing
land use regulations, like the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) Regional
Comprehensive Plan and Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy
(RTP/SCS).
NOP Comments: In response to the Notice of Preparation (NOP), one comment from SCAG
indicated that PLAN Hermosa is regionally significant and should address consistency with the
SCAG 2012-2035 RTP/SCS. The consistency comparison with the SCAG 2012-2035 RTP/SCS is
included in this resource section.
Reference Information: Information for this chapter is based on numerous sources, including the
PLAN Hermosa Technical Background Report and other publicly available documents. The
Technical Background Report prepared for the project is attached to this EIR as Appendix C.
4.9.2 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Appendix C-12 describes the existing land use conditions in Hermosa Beach, including regulations,
and key issues in the inland and Coastal Zone areas. Key findings related to the environmental
setting are presented below.
Hermosa Beach is located in southwest Los Angeles County and encompasses 1.4 square miles,
or 979 acres, with 1.8 miles of coastline along Santa Monica Bay. Manhattan Beach borders
Hermosa Beach to the north and northeast, and Redondo Beach is located to the south and east.
Pacific Coast Highway (State Route 1) runs north/south through the entirety of Hermosa Beach.
Approximately half of the city, 43 percent, lies within the Coastal Zone. The Coastal Zone boundary
is defined by the California Coastal Act. The Coastal Zone boundary spans the entire length of the
city from north to south and extends from the mean high tide line inland to roughly Ardmore
Avenue with two exclusions —the area from Hermosa Avenue to Valley Drive between Longfellow
Avenue and 31 st Place; and the area east of Park Avenue or Loma Drive between 25th Street and
16th Street. See Figure 3.0-4 (Hermosa Beach Coastal Zone).
EXISTING GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATIONS
The Land Use Element of the current Hermosa Beach General Plan establishes the distribution of
land uses, intensity of commercial and other development, and provision of other public facilities.
In addition to the land use designations and map, the Land Use Element establishes and describes
the goals, policies, and programs necessary to provide sufficient land for community needs while
preserving the environment and quality of life for Hermosa Beach residents. The General Plan Land
Use designations are identified for each parcel in Figure 3.0-4 (Hermosa Beach General Plan
Designations). Additionally, Table 4.9-1 (Hermosa Beach General Plan Land Use Designations)
identifies the number of assessor's parcels and the area of land within each land use designation.
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.9-1
4.9 LAND USE AND PLANNING
TABLE 4.9-1
HERMOSA BEACH GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATIONS
General Plan
Land Use Designation
Citywide
Inland (Excluding
Coastal Zone)
Coastal Zone
Number of
Parcels
Area
(acres)
Number of
Parcels
Area
(acres)
Number of
Parcels
Area
(acres)
Residential Land Uses
LD Low Density Residential
2,615
232.2
2,190
198.9
425
33.3
MD Medium Density Residential
1,381
118.3
500
63.5
881
54.8
HD High Density Residential
1,086
97.9
62
17.9
1,024
80.0
MHP Mobile Home Park
2
4.2
0
0.0
2
4.2
Commercial and Industrial Land Uses
NC Neighborhood Commercial
38
2.9
0
0.0
38
2.9
GC General Commercial
278
48.2
144
31.4
134
16.8
CC Commercial Corridor
132
30.4
132
30.4
0
0.0
IND Industrial
38
6.8
0
0.0
38
6.8
Institutional and Other Uses
OS Open Space
50
66.8
35
34.2
15
32.6
CR Commercial Recreation
10
0.9
0
0.0
10
0.9
SPA Specific Plan Area
10
1.1
10
1.1
0
0.0
Beach
11
63.1
0
0
11
63.1
Total
5,651
672.8
3,073
377.4
2,578
295.4
Source: City of Hermosa Beach 2014. Parcels = Assessor's Parcels.
The current development pattern in the city is one of single-family and multi -family residential, with
commercial and industrial uses, as shown in Table 4.9-2 (Hermosa Reach Existing Land Uses) rind
described below.
• Single -Family Residential: Single-family land uses are found throughout the city, with some
blocks and neighborhoods in the northeast, east, and southeast areas of Hermosa Beach
exclusively or predominantly filled with single-family uses.
• Multi -Family Residential: Multi -family housing units are predominantly found in the
southwest area of Hermosa Beach, with other multi -family housing found in the northwest
and southeast portions of the city.
• Mobile Homes: There are two mobile home areas: one located north of Pier Avenue,
between Loma Drive and Valley Drive, and the other along 10th Street between Ardmore
Avenue and Pacific Coast Highway.
• Mixed Residential and Commercial: These uses are located primarily in commercial
districts.
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.9-2
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.9 LAND USE AND PLANNING
• Commercial Uses: Commercial uses include retail stores or shopping centers, lodging
accommodations, restaurants, professional office space, auto -related uses,
entertainment uses, and personal services (salons, art studios, dry cleaning, photocopying
services, fitness studios, etc.). Commercial uses in Hermosa Beach are primarily focused
along the city's major street corridors: Pacific Coast Highway, Pier Avenue, Hermosa
Avenue, Aviation Boulevard, and Artesia Boulevard or within neighborhood commercial
areas along Hermosa Avenue and Manhattan Avenue and elsewhere throughout the city.
• Industrial Uses: Light industrial or manufacturing uses are generally located in a 4-acre
industrial area near Cypress Avenue and include light manufacturing, warehouses,
construction supply, a surfboard manufacturer, auto shops, and air conditioning and
heating manufacturing uses. One other industrial use parcel is located on Valley Drive,
adjacent to Hermosa Valley School, occupied by a telecommunications company.
Institutional and Other Uses: Institutional land uses include schools, government -owned
facilities, parks, the beach and open space, and essential operations areas such as
parking, utility buildings, the City maintenance yard and other facilities, or utility
easements.
TABLE 4.9-2
HERMOSA BEACH EXISTING LAND USES
Use
Number of
Parcels
Total Acres
Percentage
of Land Area
Residential Uses
Single -Family
3,261
263.0
39.1%
Multi -Family
1,898
186.3
27.6%
Mobile Homes
3
4.6
0.7%
Mixed Residential and Commercial
17
1.5
0.2%
Residential Subtotal
5,179
455.4
67.6%
Commercial and Light Industrial Uses
Commercial and Services
274
57.6
8.5%
General Office
40
7.9
1.1%
Industrial
26
4.1
0.6%
Mixed Commercial and Industrial
1
0.2
<0.1%
Commercial and Industrial Subtotal
341
69.8
10.2%
Institutional and Other Uses
City Facilities
46
19.6
2.9%
Education
9
16.7
2.4%
Open Space and Recreation
52
104.5
15.5%
Transportation, Communication, and Utilities
8
4.2
0.6%
Vacant
33
2.6
0.4%
Institutional and Other Subtotal
148
147.6
21.8%
Total
5,668
672.8
100%
Source: City of Hermosa Beach 2014
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.9-3
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.9 LAND USE AND PLANNING
4.9.3 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK
State, regional, and local laws, regulations, and policies pertain to land use and planning,
including general plans, specific plans, and zoning ordinances. They provide the regulatory
framework for addressing aspects of land use planning that would be affected by implementation
of PLAN Hermosa. The regulatory setting for land use is discussed in Appendix C-12. Key regulations
used to reduce environmental impacts are summarized below.
STATE
• Planning Law and Guidelines: California planning law requires cities and counties to
prepare and adopt a "comprehensive, long-range general plan" to guide development
(Government Code Section 65300). State law also specifies the content of general plans.
Current law requires seven mandated elements: land use, circulation, housing,
conservation, open space, noise, and safety.
• California Coastal Act of 1976: The California Coastal Act of 1976 and the California
Coastal Commission, the State's landmark coastal protection law and planning agency,
were established by voter initiative in 1972 to plan for and regulate new development and
to protect public access to and along the shoreline. The Coastal Act considers scenic and
visual qualities of coastal areas as a protected resource of public importance.
REGIONAL
• Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG): On April 4, 2012, SCAG adopted
the 2012-2035 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy: Towards a
Sustainable Future (RTP/SCS). SCAG has placed a greater emphasis than ever on
sustainability and integrated planning in the 2012-2035 RTP/SCS, and its vision
encompasses three principles that collectively work as the key to the region's future:
mobility, economy, and sustainability. The 2012-2035 RTP/SCS includes a strong
commitment to reduce emissions from transportation sources to comply with Senate Bill
(SB) 375,1 improve public health, and meet the national ambient air quality standards set
by the federal Clean Air Act. The 2012-2035 RTP/SCS provides a blueprint for improving
quality of life for residents by providing more choices for where they will live, work, and play
and how they will move around (SCAG 2012).
• South Coast Air Quality Management District Air Quality Management Plan: The purpose
of the 2012 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) is to establish a comprehensive and
integrated program that will bring the South Coast Air Basin into compliance with the
federal 24-hour air quality standard for fine particulate matter (PM2.5) and to provide an
update to commitments toward meeting the federal 8-hour ozone standards. The plan
also includes specific measures to further implement the ozone strategy in the 2007 AQMP
to assist attaining the 8-hour ozone standard by 2023.
• Beaoh-Cities-Livability-Plan. The-l�eac-h-Ci#ies L-iv-abi+ify-Plan-focuses on -how -to -improve
livability and well-being in Hermosa Beach, Manhattan Beach, and Redondo Beach —the
"beach cities" —through land use and transportation systems that better support active
living. The plan aims to identify and prioritize efforts that will not only improve walking and
biking in the beach cities, but when fully implemented will also improve air quality, reduce
congestion, and reduce overall travel time by automobiles along corridors. Three
strategies focused around adoption of policies, building staff for implementation, and
education and outreach for community members (Walkable and Livable Communities
Institute 201 1).
I Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008 (SB 375, Chapter 728, Statutes of 2008).
PLAN Hermosa City of Hermosa Beach
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report August 2017
4.9-4
4.9 LAND USE AND PLANNING
LOCAL
Sustainable South Bay: An Integrated Land Use and Transportation Strategy: The South Bay
Cities Council of Governments (COG) with funding from regional agencies such as SCAG,
developed the Sustainable South Bay Land Use and Transportation Strategy, to study how
the subregion uses are distributed, what its unique and not so unique characteristics are,
and suggest possible land use strategies to promote communities and improve the quality
of life. The studies have assessed the needs of the South Bay in terms of infrastructure to
support certain land uses, the economics of the area, and how to address smart growth
concepts without a robust transit system. The summary and policy document for what was
learned is the Sustainable South Bay Land Use and Transportation Strategy (South Bay Cities
COG 2009).
Hermosa Beach General Plan: The Land Use Element of the adopted Hermosa Beach
General Plan establishes the quality and character of the city's built environment by
defining the distribution of land uses, the intensity of commercial and other development,
and the provision of other public facilities. In addition to the land use designations and
map, the Land Use Element establishes and describes the goals, policies, and programs
necessary to provide sufficient land for community needs while preserving the
environment and quality of life for Hermosa Beach residents.
Local Coastal Program: The City does not have a certified Local Coastal Program, which
is required to have both a Coastal Land Use Plan and a Local Implementation Program.
The Hermosa Beach Coastal Land Use Plan (including a land use map) was adopted by
the City and certified by the California Coastal Commission in 1981 and has been
amended several times since that time. Primary goals are to (1) preserve parking and
increase where feasible, residential, commercial, and general public parking in the
Coastal Zone; (2) maintain diversified housing environment and provide policies dealing
with the replacement and protection of existing housing; (3) maintain high level of
recreational access and facilities; and (4) provide and protect the community of Hermosa
Beach as a coastal resource for the people of California. The City has not adopted a Local
Implementation Plan to date.
City of Hermosa Beach Municipal Code: The Zoning Ordinance (Title 17) implements the
General Plan, particularly the Land Use Element. While the General Plan designations are
more generalized in nature, the Zoning Ordinance and the zoning districts provide specific
controls on land use, density or intensity of development, and development standards to
implement the City's goals and policies expressed in the General Plan. Other parts of the
Municipal Code, including Title 10, Vehicles and Traffic, Title 12, Street, Sidewalks, and
Public Places, Title 15, Buildings and Construction, and Title 16, Subdivisions, are also
instrumental in carrying out policy or programs in the General Plan.
City of Hermosa Beach Sustainability Plan: The Hermosa Beach Sustainability Plan aims to
increase sustainability and reduce greenhouse gas emissions and addresses water
conservation, waste reduction, energy use, transportation, the marine environment, and
public involvement. The Sustainability Plan is also Hermosa Beach's response to the
California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (Assembly Bill [AB] 32), SB 375, and the
South Bay Cities Council of Governments' Cool Cities program.
4.9.4 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
For the purposes of the EIR, impacts on land use and planning are considered significant if
adoption and implementation of PLAN Hermosa would:
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.9-5
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.9 LAND USE AND PLANNING
1) Physically divide an established community.
2) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with
jurisdiction over the project adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect.
ANALYSIS APPROACH
The impact analysis of PLAN Hermosa implementation is based on the allowed 2040 development
capacity for the planning area compared to current conditions. The analysis assumes that all
future and existing development in the planning area complies with PLAN Hermosa and the Land
Use Designation Map. An analysis of cumulative Impacts uses qualitative information for the
planning area.
The focus of this impact analysis is whether project implementation would result in significant
physical environmental impacts associated with land use, or conflict with applicable land use
plans, policies, or regulations adopted to avoid or mitigate such impacts.
As stated in CEQA Guidelines Section 15358(b), "effects analyzed under CEQA must be related to
a physical change." CEQA Guidelines Section 15125(d) states that EIRs shall discuss any
inconsistencies between the proposed project and applicable general plans in the setting section
of the document.
Further, Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines (Environmental Checklist Form) makes explicit the
focus on environmental policies and plans, asking if the project would "conflict with any
applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation... adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating
an environmental effect." Even a response in the affirmative, however, does not necessarily
indicate the project would have a significant effect, unless a physical change would occur. To
the extent that physical impacts may result from such conflicts, such physical impacts are
analyzed elsewhere in this Draft EIR. As such, specific impacts and issues associated with
population and housing, hazards, geology and soils, hydrology and water quality, aesthetics,
recreation, cultural resources, biological resources, and public services and utilities are addressed
in each technical section, and the reader is referred to other EIR sections for detailed analyses of
other relevant environmental effects.
PLAN HERMOSA POLICIES AND IMPLEMENTATION ACTIONS
PLAN Hermosa policies and implementation actions that affect potential land use include the
following:
Policies
Governance Element
4.1 Regional governance. Play an active role in the. South Bay Cities Council of
Governments, the Southern California Association of Governments and other regional
agencies to protect and promote the interests of the City.
• 4.3 Collaboration with adjacent jurisdictions. Maintain strong collaborative relationships
with adjacent jurisdictions and work together on projects of mutual interest and concern.
• 5.1 Residential and commercial compatibility. Provide a balance between residential and
commercial uses and strive to ensure their compatibility.
■ 5.6 Revitalization incentives. Develop and provide incentives to assist developers in
revitalization and rehabilitation of existing structures, uses and properties.
PLAN Hermosa City of Hermosa Beach
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report August 20I7
4.9-6
4.9 LAND USE AND PLANNING
• 5.7 Visitor and resident balance. Recognize the desire and need to balance visitor -serving
and local -serving uses as a key to preserving character and the economic vitality of the
community.
Land Use + Design Element
• 1.1 Diverse and distributed land use pattern. Strive to maintain the fundamental pattern of
existing land uses, preserving residential neighborhoods, while providing for enhancement
or transformation of corridors and districts in order to improve community activity and
identity.
• 1.2 Focused infill potential. Proposals for new development should be directed toward the
city's commercial areas with an emphasis on developing transit -supportive land use mixes.
• 1.3 Access to daily activities. Strive to create sustainable development patterns such that
the majority of residents are within walking distance to a variety of neighborhood goods
and services, such as supermarkets, restaurants, churches, cafes, dry cleaners,
laundromats, farmers' markets, banks, personal services, pharmacies and similar uses.
• 1.5 Balance resident and visitor needs. Ensure land uses and businesses provide for the
needs of residents as well as visitors.
• 1.7 Compatibility of uses. Ensure the placement of new uses does not create or
exacerbate nuisances between different types of land uses.
• 1.8 Respond to unique characteristics. Enhance the unique character and identity of the
city's neighborhoods, districts and corridors through land use and design decisions. Allow
policies and programs to be focused on each unique character area of the city.
• 1.9 Retain commercial land area. Discourage the conversion of commercial land to
exclusively residential uses.
• 1.10 Transition between uses. Encourage new projects in non-residential areas to employ
architectural transitions to adjoining residential properties to ensure compatibility of scale
and a sense of privacy for existing residences. Such transitions could include setbacks,
gradations and transitions in building height and appropriate landscaping.
• 2.2 Variety of types of neighborhoods. Encourage preservation of existing single density
neighborhoods within the city and ensure that neighborhood types are dispersed
throughout the city.
• 2.3 Balanced neighborhoods. Within the allowed densities and housing types, promote a
range of housing to accommodate diverse ages and incomes.
• 3.1 Unique districts. Encourage the development of local and city-wide districts and
centers that address different community needs and market sectors and complement
surrounding neighborhoods.
• 3.2 Compatibility of districts. Require new development within the city's creative industrial
district to be designed for compatibility with surrounding uses to minimize impact or
nuisances (such as noise or odor) and cultivate connectivity with each district.
• 4.8 Neighborhood buffer. Encourage all commercial property owners bordering residential
areas to mitigate impacts and use appropriate landscaping and buffering of residential
neighborhoods.
• 5.6 Eclectic and diverse architecture. Seek to maintain and enhance neighborhood
character through eclectic and diverse architectural styles.
• 8.1 Coastal -dependent uses. Prioritize coastal -dependent uses over non-dependent
developments near the shoreline, unless future demand for such facilities is already
adequately provided for in the area.
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.9-7
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.9 LAND USE AND PLANNING
• 8.2 Coastal -related uses. Accommodate coastal -related uses within reasonable proximity
to the coastal -dependent uses they support.
• 8.3 Land use regulations. Encourage coastal -dependent and coastal -related commercial
uses in the Recreational Commercial and Community Commercial land use designations.
Prioritize such uses in the Recreational Commercial designation. Provide for and prioritize
coastal -related industrial uses in the Creative Industrial land use designation.
• 8.6 Amenities. Require new higher cost hotel and motel development projects to
incorporate non -overnight facilities and amenities as a component of the development
that are generally available for passive public use.
• 13.1 Restrict health -harming uses. Prohibit new land uses that harm the physical health and
well being of the community.
• 13.5 Improved livability. Encourage th
Mobility Element
e
1.1 Consider all modes. Require the planning, design, and construction of all new and
existing transportation projects to consider the needs of all modes of travel to create safe,
livable and inviting environments for all users of the system.
• 2.1 Prioritize public right-of-ways. Prioritize improvements of public right-of-ways that
provide heightened levels of safe, comfortable and attractive public spaces for all non -
motorized travelers while balancing the needs of efficient vehicular circulation.
• 3.1 Repurpose public right-of-ways. Where right-of-way clearance allows, enhance public
right-of-ways to improve connectivity for pedestrians, bicyclists, disabled persons, and
public transit stops.
• 4.2 Encourage coastal access. Ensure parking facilities and costs of such facilities are not
a barrier to beach access by the public.
• 5.5 Multimodal development features. Encourage land use features in development
projects to create compact, connected, and multimodal development supports reduced
trip generation, trip lengths, and greater ability to utilize alternative modes of travel.
Sustainability + Conservation Element
• 1.6 Demonstration and pilot projects. Utilize demonstration and pilot projects as a means
to evaluate the greenhouse gas reduction potential and cost effectiveness of projects.
• 2.5 Land use and transportation investments. Promote land use and transportation
investments that support greater transportation choice, greater local economic
opportunity, and reduced number and length of automobile trips.
• 3.2 Mobile source reductions. Support land use and transportation strategies to reduce
emissions,-h-)-CJuding_p-011ufion}ronl--c-ommerciat-an-dLpass-e ge-r�ehicJes
• 3.7 Regional air quality. When possible, collaborate with other agencies within the region
to improve air quality and meet or exceed State and Federal air quality standards through
regional efforts to reduce air pollution from mobile sources, including trucks and passenger
vehicles and other large polluters.
Parks + Open Space Element
• 6.1 Visible access points. Enhance visibility of existing public access points to and along
beaches, coastal parks, and trails.
• 6.6 Universal access. Provide resources that improve accessibility to the beach for all
visitors.
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.9-8
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.9 LAND USE AND PLANNING
• 6.7 Minimal impact to access. Require new development and substantial redevelopment
projects to minimize impacts to existing public access to and along the shoreline.
• 7.3 Recreational asset. Consider and treat the beach as a recreational asset and never as
a commercial enterprise.
• 8.7 Public access. Ensure that special events do not impede public access to the beach,
the Pier, and The Strand.
Implementation Actions
• LAND USE-]. Amend the Zoning Map to bring consistency between PLAN Hermosa Land
Use Designations and Zoning Ordinance Zoning Districts and review development
standards for non -conforming uses.
• LAND USE-2. Establish development standards within the Zoning Code to establish any new
land use designations and modify existing development standards to articulate the
appropriate building form, scale, and massing for each established character area and
the applicable density/intensity standards.
IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
IMPACT 4.9-1 Would PLAN Hermosa Physically Divide an Established Community? PLAN
Hermosa includes limited land use changes and other improvements in the city
that would allow for an increase in residential and nonresidential square footage.
However, because the proposed changes follow established land use patterns,
implementation of PLAN Hermosa would result in a less than significant impact.
Hermosa Beach is primarily built out, with a limited inventory of vacant and underutilized land.
Land use policies proposed in PLAN Hermosa are based on long-established land use patterns
and would allow for incremental intensification through the redevelopment of existing uses (see
Table 3.0-2 (PLAN Hermosa Land Use Designations) for existing and proposed land use
designations). Such incremental growth would reinforce historical patterns while accommodating
future economic and residential growth in the city. Under PLAN Hermosa, properties will gradually
transition from one use to another, and land uses and intensities will gradually shift to align with the
intent of PLAN Hermosa. Figure 4.9-1 (PLAN Hermosa Proposed Changes to Land Use Designations)
shows the proposed changes in land use patterns.
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.9-9
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.9 LAND USE AND PLANNING
FIGURE 4.9-1
PLAN HERMOSA PROPOSED CHANGES TO LAND USE DESIGNATIONS
1
1
I
�•
r
rgat st
IBM St
� 11
— _
1
Se.
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
I01h S1
Blh SI r
Ji
_6lh St 6Ms<
4.9-10
hermosa beach
■change in
designation name
■parcel change
between calegones
.2 city lints
coastal zone
o
.n
up boo N.
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.9 LAND USE AND PLANNING
PLAN Hermosa establishes an overall development capacity for the city and represents the City's
policy for determining appropriate physical development and character. Table 3.0-3 (PLAN
Hermosa Residential Development Projections) identifies anticipated residential land use changes
compared to existing conditions that would occur between 2015 and 2040 with implementation
of PLAN Hermosa, while Table 3.0-4 (PLAN Hermosa Nonresidential Development Projections)
identifies corresponding changes for nonresidential uses in the city. Table 4.9-3 (Comparison of
Land Use Densities and Floor Area Ratios) shows the difference between the existing land use
densities and floor area ratios (FAR) and the PLAN Hermosa densities and FARs.
TABLE 4.9-3
COMPARISON OF LAND USE DENSITIES AND FLOOR AREA RATIOS
Land Use Designation
Estimate of Current
General Plan
Proposed PLAN Hermosa
Minimum Maximum
Maximum
13.0 _
25.0
Low Density
2.0
13.1
13.0
25.0
Medium Density
High Density
33.0
25.1
33.0
Mobile Home
13.0
2.0
13.0
Neighborhood Commercial
1.0
0.5
1.0
Community Commercial
1.75
0.5
1.25
Recreational Commercial
2.5
1.0
1.75
Gateway Commercial
1.5
1.0
2.0
Service Commercial
1
0.25
0.5
Light Industrial Creative
0.75
0.25
1.0
Public Facilities
n/a
0.1
1.0
Open Space
n/a
0.0
0.5
City Beach
n/a
0.0
0.05
Source: City of Hermosa Beach 2015
Based on the allowed density/intensity for each designation, Hermosa Beach could
accommodate an additional 300 dwelling units and 630,400 square feet of nonresidential
development between 2015 and 2040.2 As described in Chapter 3.0, Project Description, these
projections were calculated based on specific trends in the city, including a loss of housing units
between 2010 and 2015 and the growing size of households between 2008 and 2012, among
other factors. These trends are further described in Appendix A.
Overall, this incremental redevelopment represents a relatively modest increase in the number of
dwelling units and population for the planning area. Development projections from PLAN Hermosa
implementation, as described in Chapter 3.0, Project Description, would result in an increase of
approximately 300 dwelling units (3.0 percent growth), a net population increase of approximately
661 (3.3 percent growth), and an increase of 630,400 square feet of nonresidential development
(29.9 percent growth) between 2015 and 2040.
Policies in both the Land Use + Design Element and the Mobility Element focus on increasing
connectivity and maintaining the integrity of the community's character and existing land use
designations. For example, Land Use + Design Element Policy 1,1 would maintain the fundamental
2 This information is based on growth forecasts provided in the City's letter Subject: Hermosa Beach Response to
SCAG's Integrated Growth Forecast to the Southern California Association of Governments. See Appendix A.
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.9-11
4.9 LAND USE AND PLANNING
pattern of existing land uses and preserve existing residential neighborhoods while providing
opportunities for transformation of corridors and districts to improve community identity. Policy 1.8
would promote development that would enhance the unique character and identity of the city's
neighborhoods, districts, and corridors through land use and design decisions. Policy 1.9 would
discourage the conversion of commercial land into exclusively residential uses, while Policy 2.2
would encourage preservation of existing single -density neighborhoods within the city and ensure
that neighborhood types are dispersed throughout Hermosa Beach. Policy 5.6 would maintain
and enhance the eclectic and diverse character of neighborhoods.
Additionally, implementation action LAND USE-1 requires that the City's Zoning Map be updated
to make proposed land use designations and zoning districts consistent. LAND USE-2 establishes
zoning districts and development standards to correspond with land use designations and
character areas.
The Land Use + Design Element and Mobility Element policies and implementation actions listed
above guide future development in Hermosa Beach; identify the character -defining features of
each neighborhood, corridor, or district; and provide policy guidance that supports the intended
character of each area. Therefore, implementation of PLAN Hermosa supports and enhances
existing land use and circulation patterns and would not divide a community. This impact would
be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
IMPACT 4.9-2 Would PLAN Hermosa Conflict with an Applicable Plan, Policy, or Regulation?
PLAN Hermosa proposes limited land use changes and other improvements in
the city and numerous land use policies to guide future development in Hermosa
Beach. These changes would be consistent with existing local and regional
planning documents. Therefore, the impact would be less than significant.
PLAN Hermosa would establish new General Plan land use categories by refining existing
categories and establishing new designations. The proposed land use designation and allowed
density are shown in Table 3.0-2 (PLAN Hermosa Land Use Designations). In addition, PLAN
Hermosa identifies numerous land use policies to guide development in the city for the next 25
years by balancing quality of life, economic prosperity, and environmental sustainability. The
policy direction of PLAN Hermosa is generally described in Chapter 3.0, Project Description.
Specific policies that affect land use planning are listed in the subsection titled "PLAN Hermosa
Policies and Implementation Actions" above.
Consistency with applicable regional and local plans is described below.
City of Hermosa Beach Zoning Ordinance (Municipal Code Title 17)
Title 17 of the City's Municipal Code will be the primary means of implementing PLAN Hermosa.
PLAN Hermosa includes policies and programs to amend the Zoning Ordinance to establish zoning
districts and development standards to correspond with land use designations and character
areas, as well as to better accommodate coastal -dependent and coastal -related uses. With
implementation of actions LAND USE-1 and LAND USE-2, the Zoning Ordinance and Zoning Map
will be consistent with PLAN Hermosa land use goals and policies.
California Coastal Act
PLAN Hermosa has been prepared in accordance with the requirements and intent set forth in
California Government Code Section 30603. The Hermosa Beach Coastal Land Use Plan (including
a land use map) was adopted by the City and certified by the California Coastal Commission in
1981. PLAN Hermosa includes an update to the City's Land Use Plan and Local Implementation
PLAN Hermosa City of Hermosa Beach
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report August 2017
4.9-12
4.9 LAND USE AND PLANNING
Plan, providing development standards and regulations applicable in the Coastal Zone, and
outlining an administrative process for the issuance of coastal development permits. To implement
the Coastal Land Use Plan components of PLAN Hermosa, the City will develop a series of
implementing ordinances that articulate the intent of the California Coastal Act with
consideration of local context and needs. Table 4.9-4 (Coastal Act Consistency) analyzes PLAN
Hermosa's consistency with the California Coastal Act.
The policies and programs of PLAN Hermosa implement Coastal Act requirements; therefore, the
proposed project is consistent with the California Coastal Act.
TABLE 4.9-4
COASTAL ACT CONSISTENCY
Section I Policy Project Compliance with Policy
Public Access
30211
Development shall not interfere with the
Consistent: Within the city, access to the beach is provided
public's right of access to the sea where
by 22 walk streets that run perpendicular to and connect
acquired through use or legislative
with Hermosa Avenue. PLAN Hermosa includes a number
authorization, including, but not limited to, the
of policies and implementation actions that focus on public
use of dry sand and rocky coastal beaches to
beach access. Parks + Open Space Element Policy 6.6
the first line of terrestrial vegetation.
directs the City to provide resources that improve
accessibility to the beach for all visitors. Implementation
action LAND USE-11 would require new visitor -serving
accommodations in the Coastal Zone to maintain or
improve public access to the coast. Implementation action
PARKS-18 includes measures that would protect public
access to the coast by requiring direct dedication of access
easements, and site design to ensure that the coast
remains accessible with im lementation of PLAN Hermosa.
30212
Public access from the nearest public roadway
Consistent: PLAN Hermosa provides for public beach
to the shoreline and along the coast shall be
access. Parks + Open Space Element Policy 6.6 directs the
provided in new development projects except
City to provide resources that improve accessibility to the
where: (1) it is inconsistent with public safety,
beach for all visitors. Implementation action LAND USE-11
military security needs, or the protection of
would require new visitor -serving accommodations in the
fragile coastal resources, (2) adequate access
Coastal Zone to maintain or improve public access to the
exists nearby, or (3) agriculture would be
coast. Implementation action PARKS-18 includes measures
adversely affected.
that would protect public access to the coast by requiring
direct dedication of access easements, and site design to
ensure that the coast remains accessible with
implementation of PLAN Hermosa.
30212.5
Wherever appropriate and feasible, public
Consistent: PLAN Hermosa promotes adequate parking
facilities, including parking areas or facilities,
and a balance use of land adjacent to the shoreline.
shall be distributed throughout an area so as to
Mobility Element Policy 4.2 ensures that parking facilities
mitigate against the impacts, social and
and costs of such facilities are not a barrier to beach access
otherwise, of overcrowding or overuse by the
by the public. Parks + Open Space Element Policy 7.3
public of any single area.
requires that the City treat the beach as a recreational asset
and never as a commercial enterprise. Land Use + Design
Element Policy 1.1 strives to maintain the fundamental
pattern of existing land uses, preserving residential
neighborhoods, while providing opportunities for
enhancement or transformation of corridors and districts
to improve community activity and identity.
Consistent: Implementation action LAND USE-11 requires
30213
Lower cost visitor and recreational facilities
shall be protected, encouraged, and, where
that if a hotel or motel project proposes a certain number
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.9-13
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.9 LAND USE AND PLANNING
Section
Policy
Project Compliance with Policy
feasible, provided. Developments providing
or percentage of on -site low or mid -range cost units, such
public recreational opportunities are preferred.
units shall remain available as low or mid -range cost units
for the life of the project.
Recreation
30221
Oceanfront land suitable for recreational use
Consistent: PLAN Hermosa promotes public recreational
shall be protected for recreational use and
use of oceanfront lands on the public beach. Parks + Open
development unless present and foreseeable
Space Policy 6.9 directs the City to create additional
future demand for public or commercial
parkettes, open space, and pedestrian amenities. Policy 7.3
recreational activities that could be
directs the City to consider and treat the beach as a
accommodated on the property is already
recreational asset and never as a commercial enterprise.
adequately provided for in the area.
Policy 7.5 directs the City to consider devoting certain
portions of the beach to different preferred recreational
uses while providing access for all users and meeting the
recreation needs of visitors and residents.
30222
The use of private lands suitable for visitor-
Consistent: PLAN Hermosa land use designations provide
serving commercial recreational facilities
for visitor -serving commercial recreational land uses on
designed to enhance public opportunities for
private property within the Coastal Zone. Land Use +
coastal recreation shall have priority over
Design Element Policy 8.1 prioritizes coastal -dependent
private residential, general industrial, or general
uses over non-dependent developments near the
commercial development, but not over
shoreline, unless future demand for such facilities is already
agriculture or coastal -dependent industry.
adequately provided for in the area. Policy 8.2
accommodates coastal -related uses within reasonable
proximity to the coastal -dependent uses they support.
Policy 8.3 encourages coastal -dependent and coastal -
related commercial uses to be located in the Recreational
Commercial and Community Commercial land use
designations, and prioritizes such uses in the Recreational
Commercial designation. The policy also provides for and
prioritizes coastal -related industrial uses in the Creative
Industrial land use designation. Policy 8.9 directs the City
to prioritize use of private lands suitable for visitor -serving
commercial recreational facilities that enhance public
coastal access over private local -serving residential or
commercial development or industrial development, but
not over coastal -dependent uses within the commercial
core.
30222.5
Oceanfront land that is suitable for coastal
Not applicable: No vacant land suitable for aquaculture
dependent aquaculture shall be protected for
has been identified within the city.
that use, and proposals for aquaculture facilities
located on those sites shall be given priority,
except over other coastal dependent
developments or uses.
30223
Upland areas necessary to support coastal
Consistent: PLAN Hermosa identifies existing coastal -
recreational uses shall be reserved for such
related uses. Proposed land use designations would not
uses, where feasible.
limit those uses.
30224
Increased recreational boating use of coastal
Not applicable: Hermosa Beach does not have boat
waters shall be encouraged, in accordance with
launching facilities, boat storage, or a harbor/protected
this division, by developing dry storage areas,
area that would accommodate such facilities.
increasing public launching facilities, providing
additional berthing space in existing harbors,
limiting non -water -dependent land uses that
congest access corridors and preclude boating
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.9-14
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.9 LAND USE AND PLANNING
Section
Policy
Project Compliance with Policy
support facilities, providing harbors of refuge,
and by providing for new boating facilities in
natural harbors, new protected water areas, and
in areas dredged from d land.
Marine Environment
30230
Marine resources shall be maintained,
Consistent: PLAN Hermosa includes policies that protect
enhanced, and where feasible, restored. Special
the existing marine environment. Parks + Open Space
protection shall be given to areas and species
Element Policy 9.1 calls for the preservation, protection,
of special biological or economic significance.
and improvement of remaining open space areas to the
Uses of the marine environment shall be carried
greatest extent possible to improve on existing limited
out in a manner that will sustain the biological
habitats and prevent further extirpation of species. Policy
productivity of coastal waters and that will
9.2 requires the consideration of species and habitat
maintain healthy populations of all species of
impacts and potential improvements when implementing
marine organisms adequate for long-term
beach maintenance activities. Policy 9.3 was designed to
commercial, recreational, scientific, and
ensure that beaches can function as a quality habitat for
educational purposes.
permanent and migratory species. Policy 9.4 promotes
information sharing and research regarding habitat and
wildlife with resource agencies and neighboring
jurisdictions to ensure coordinated decision -making and
management. Policy 9.5 requires the protection of coastal
and marine habitats from impacts from maintenance,
construction, recreation, and industrial activities.
30231
The biological productivity and the quality of
Consistent: PLAN Hermosa includes policies that protect
coastal waters, streams, wetlands, estuaries,
the existing marine environment through the use of water
and lakes appropriate to maintain optimum
use and water quality protection. Sustainability +
populations of marine organisms and for the
Conservation Element Policy 5.1 calls for the availability of
protection of human health shall be maintained
recycled water supply and distribution facilities are
and, where feasible, restored through, among
available throughout the city. Policy 5.3 requires the update
other means, minimizing adverse effects of
of water conservation and efficiency programs,
waste water discharges and entrainment,
requirements, and incentives on a regular basis. Policy 7.1
controlling runoff, preventing depletion of
requires the use of permeable pavement in parking lots,
ground water supplies and substantial
sidewalks, plazas, and other low -intensity paved areas.
interference with surface waterflow,
Policy 7.2 requires the minimization of soil erosion by
encouraging waste water reclamation,
ensuring best management practices are used in grading
maintaining natural vegetation buffer areas
and construction.
that protect riparian habitats, and minimizing
alteration of natural streams.
30232
Protection against the spillage of crude oil, gas,
Consistent: The use and transportation of hazardous
petroleum products, or hazardous substances
materials are governed by federal and state regulations.
shall be provided in relation to any
PLAN Hermosa further requires compliance with policies in
development or transportation of such
the plan that reduce the potential for accidental hazardous
materials. Effective containment and cleanup
materials spills. Public Safety Element Policy 3.2 directs the
facilities and procedures shall be provided for
City to coordinate with allied agencies to prepare for and
accidental spills that do occur.
respond to hazardous materials incidents. Policy 3.3
requires businesses that use, store, or transport hazardous
materials to ensure that adequate measures are taken to
protect public health and safety. Policy 3.4 directs the City
to restrict the siting of new uses involving hazardous
materials in the Coastal Zone to coastal -related industrial
uses in the Cypress District.
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.9-15
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.9 LAND USE AND PLANNING
Section
Policy
Project Compliance with Policy
30233
The diking, filling, or dredging of open coastal
Not applicable: Implementation of PLAN Hermosa would
waters, wetlands, estuaries, and lakes shall be
not result in the diking, filling, or dredging of open coastal
permitted in accordance with other applicable
waters, wetlands, estuaries, and lakes.
provisions of this division, where there is no
feasible less environmentally damaging
alternative, and where feasible mitigation
measures have been provided to minimize
adverse environmental effects, and shall be
limited to those identified in Section 30233
[added].
30234
Facilities serving the commercial fishing and
Consistent: PLAN Hermosa does not include any policies
recreational boating industries shall be
or implementation actions that would reduce existing
protected and, where feasible, upgraded.
facilities.
Existing commercial fishing and recreational
boating harbor space shall not be reduced
unless the demand for those facilities no longer
exists or adequate substitute space has been
provided. Proposed recreational boating
facilities shall, where feasible, be designed and
located in such a fashion as not to interfere with
the needs of the commercial fishing industry.
30235
Revetments, breakwaters, groins, harbor
Not applicable: PLAN Hermosa does not include any
channels, seawalls, cliff retaining walls, and
policies or implementation actions that would limit the use
other such construction that alters natural
of revetments, breakwaters, groins, harbor channels,
shoreline processes shall be permitted when
seawalls, or cliff retaining walls constructed to protect
required to serve coastal -dependent uses or to
existing structures.
protect existing structures or public beaches in
danger from erosion, and when designed to
eliminate or mitigate adverse impacts on local
shoreline sand supply. Existing marine
structures causing water stagnation
contributing to pollution problems and fish kills
should be phased out or upgraded where
feasible.
30236
Chan nelizations, dams, or other substantial
Not applicable. PLAN Hermosa does not propose any
alterations of rivers and streams shall
channelizations, dams, or other substantial alterations of
incorporate the best mitigation measures
rivers or streams.
feasible, and be limited to (1) necessary water
supply projects, (2) flood control projects where
no other method for protecting existing
-structures —in —the —flood —plain —is feasibleand-
where such protection is necessary for public
safety or to protect existing development, or (3)
developments where the primary function is the
improvement of fish and wildlife habitat.
Land Resources
30240
(a) Environmentally sensitive habitat areas shall
Consistent: PLAN Hermosa includes policies that protect
be protected against any significant disruption
the existing sensitive habitat areas. Parks + Open Space
of habitat values, and only uses dependent on
Element Policy 9.1 calls for the preservation, protection,
those resources shall be allowed within those
and improvement of remaining open space areas to the
areas.
greatest extent possible to improve on existing habitats
and prevent further extirpation of species. Policy 9.2
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.9-16
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.9 LAND USE AND PLANNING
Section
Policy
Project Compliance with Policy
(b) Development in areas adjacent to
requires the consideration of species and habitat impacts
environmentally sensitive habitat areas and
and potential improvements when implementing beach
parks and recreation areas shall be sited and
maintenance activities. Policy 9.3 is designed to ensure that
designed to prevent impacts which would
beaches can function as a quality habitat for permanent
significantly degrade those areas, and shall be
and migratory species. Policy 9.4 promotes information
compatible with the continuance of those
sharing and research regarding habitat and wildlife with
habitat and recreation areas.
resource agencies and neighboring jurisdictions to ensure
coordinated decision -making and management. Policy 9.5
requires the protection of coastal and marine habitats from
impacts from maintenance, construction, recreation, and
industrial activities.
30241
The maximum amount of prime agricultural
Not applicable: Hermosa Beach is a fully developed urban
land shall be maintained in agricultural
area. No agricultural lands exist within the city.
production to assure the protection of the
areas' agricultural economy, and conflicts shall
be minimized between agricultural and urban
land uses through all of those listed in Section
30241 [added].
30242
All other lands suitable for agricultural use shall
Not applicable: Hermosa Beach is a fully developed urban
not be converted to nonagricultural uses unless
area. No agricultural lands exist within the city.
(1) continued or renewed agricultural use is not
feasible, or (2) such conversion would preserve
prime agricultural land or concentrate
development consistent with Section 30250.
Any such permitted conversion shall be
compatible with continued agricultural use on
surroundinq lands.
30243
The long-term productivity of soils and
Not applicable: Hermosa Beach is a fully developed urban
timberlands shall be protected, and
area. No timber production lands exist within the city.
conversions of coastal commercial timberlands
in units of commercial size to other uses or their
division into units of noncommercial size shall
be limited to providing for necessary timber
processing and related facilities.
30244
Where development would adversely impact
Consistent: Certification of the EIR would require the
archaeological or paleontological resources as
adoption of mitigation measure MM 4.4.3, which is
identified by the State Historic Preservation
specifically designed to protect paleontological resources.
Officer, reasonable mitigation measures shall
be required.
Development _
30250
(a) New residential, commercial, or industrial
Consistent: All future development in the city would have
development, except as otherwise provided in
availability of adequate public services.
this division, shall be located within, contiguous
with, or in close proximity to, existing
developed areas able to accommodate it or,
where such areas are not able to accommodate
it, in other areas with adequate public services
and where it will not have significant adverse
effects, either individually or cumulatively, on
coastal resources. In addition, land divisions,
other than leases for agricultural uses, outside
existing developed areas shall be permitted
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.9-17
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.9 LAND USE AND PLANNING
Section
Policy
Project Compliance with Policy
only where 50 percent of the usable parcels in
the area have been developed and the created
parcels would be no smaller than the average
size of surrounding parcels.
(b) Where feasible, new hazardous industrial
development shall be located away from
existing developed areas.
(c) Visitor -serving facilities that cannot feasibly
be located in existing developed areas shall be
located in existing isolated developments or at
selected points of attraction for visitors.
30251
The scenic and visual qualities of coastal areas
Consistent: Parks + Open Space Element Policy 6.1 calls
shall be considered and protected as a resource
for enhancing visibility of existing public access points to
of public importance. Permitted development
and along beaches and coastal parks and trails. Land Use +
shall be sited and designed to protect views to
Design Element Policy 1.8 calls for the enhancement of the
and along the ocean and scenic coastal areas,
unique character of the city's neighborhoods, districts and
to minimize the alteration of natural land forms,
corridors through land use and design decisions.
to be visually compatible with the character of
surrounding areas, and, where feasible, to
restore and enhance visual quality in visually
degraded areas. New development in highly
scenic areas such as those designated in the
California Coastline Preservation and
Recreation Plan prepared by the Department of
Parks and Recreation and by local government
shall be subordinate to the character of its
setting.
30252
The location and amount of new development
Consistent: Land Use + Design Element Policy 8.1
should maintain and enhance public access to
prioritizes coastal -dependent uses over nondependent
the coast by (1) facilitating the provision or
developments near the shoreline, while Policy 8.2 guides
extension of transit service, (2) providing
development that accommodates coastal -related uses in
commercial facilities within or adjoining
proximity to the coastal -dependent uses that are
residential development or in other areas that
supportive of such uses. Mobility Element Policy 1.1
will minimize the use of coastal access roads, (3)
requires the planning, design, and construction of all new
providing nonautomobile circulation within the
and existing transportation projects to consider the needs
development, (4) providing adequate parking
of all modes of travel to create safe, livable and inviting
facilities or providing substitute means of
environments for all users of the system. Policy 2.1
serving the development with public
prioritizes improvements of public rights -of -way that
transportation, (5) assuring the potential for
provide heightened levels of safe, comfortable and
public transit for high intensity uses such as
attractive public spaces for all non -motorized travelers
-high=rise-office-buildings,, and -by -(&)-assuring-
-while-balancing-the-needs-of-efficient vehicular -circulation -
that the recreational needs of new residents will
Policy 3.1 requires the repurposing public rights -of -way
not overload nearby coastal recreation areas by
enhancing connectivity for pedestrians, bicyclists, and
correlating the amount of development with
public transit. Policy 4.2 ensures parking facilities and costs
local park acquisition and development plans
of such facilities are not a barrier to beach access by the
with the provision of onsite recreational
public. Policy 5.5 encourages smart growth land use
facilities to serve the new development.
features in development projects to ensure more compact,
mixed, connected, and multimodal development supports
reduced trip generation, trip lengths, and greater ability to
utilize alternative modes.
30253
New development shall do all of the following:
Consistent: PLAN Hermosa includes policies designed to
reduce risks to life and property, reduce air quality
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.9-18
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.9 LAND USE AND PLANNING
Section
Policy
Project Compliance with Polic
(a) Minimize risks to life and property in areas
emissions and vehicle miles traveled, reduce energy
of high geologic, flood, and fire hazard.
consumption, and protect the individual neighborhoods in
(b) Assure stability and structural integrity, and
the city. Public Safety Element Policy 1.1 requires the
neither create nor contribute significantly to
evaluation of new buildings and infrastructure for potential
erosion, geologic instability, or destruction of
for seismic, fire, flood, and coastal storm hazard risks and
the site or surrounding area or in any way
comply with California Building Code standards to
require the construction of protective devices
minimize risk. Policy 1.2 requires the preparation of
that would substantially alter natural landforms
geotechnical reports for new development projects in
along bluffs and cliffs.41
areas with the potential for liquefaction or landslide.
(c) Be consistent with requirements imposed by
Conservation + Sustainability Element Policy 3.7 requires
an air pollution control district or the State Air
collaboration with other agencies within the region to
Resources Board as to each particular
improve air quality and meet or exceed state and federal
development.
air quality standards through regional efforts to reduce air
(d) Minimize energy consumption and vehicle
pollution from mobile sources, including trucks and
miles traveled.
passenger vehicles. Land Use + Design Element Policy 1.8
(e) Where appropriate, protect special
directs the City to enhance the unique character and
communities and neighborhoods that, because
identity of the city's neighborhoods, districts and corridors
of their unique characteristics, are popular
through land use and design decisions. Sustainability +
visitor destination points for recreational uses.
Conservation Element Policy 3.2 requires the support of
land use and transportation strategies to reduce vehicle
miles traveled and emissions, including pollution from
commercial and passenger vehicles.
30254
New or expanded public works facilities shall be
Consistent: Implementation of PLAN Hermosa would not
designed and limited to accommodate needs
require the expansion of existing water, wastewater, or
generated by development or uses permitted
storm drainage facilities. In addition, Infrastructure Element
consistent with the provisions of this division;
Policy 1.6 requires that new infrastructure is sited in a
provided, however, that it is the intent of the
manner to minimize negative impacts to the community
Legislature that State Highway Route 1 in rural
and prioritize projects to address the greatest deficiencies.
areas of the coastal zone remain a scenic two-
lane road. Special districts shall not be formed
or expanded except where assessment for, and
provision of, the service would not induce new
development inconsistent with this division.
Where existing or planned public works
facilities can accommodate only a limited
amount of new development, services to
coastal dependent land use, essential public
services and basic industries vital to the
economic health of the region, state, or nation,
public recreation, commercial recreation, and
visitor -serving land uses shall not be precluded
by other development.
30255
Coastal -dependent developments shall have
Consistent: Land Use + Design Element Policy 8.1
priority over other developments on or near the
prioritizes coastal -dependent uses over nondependent
shoreline. Except as provided elsewhere in this
developments near the shoreline, while Policy 8.2 guides
division, coastal -dependent developments
development that accommodates coastal -related uses in
shall not be sited in a wetland. When
proximity to the coastal -dependent uses that are
appropriate, coastal -related developments
supportive of such uses.
should be accommodated within reasonable
proximity to the coastal -dependent uses they
support.
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.9-19
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.9 LAND USE AND PLANNING
Section I Policy Project Compliance with Policy
Industrial Development
30260
Coastal -dependent industrial facilities shall be
Consistent: Hermosa Beach does not have any vacant
encouraged to locate or expand within existing
industrial sites within the Coastal Zone area. The existing
sites and shall be permitted reasonable long-
light industrial sites are currently developed. Hermosa
term growth where consistent with this division.
Beach does not have any uses identified as heavy industrial.
30261
Multicompany use of existing and new tanker
Not applicable: Hermosa Beach does not have any
facilities shall be encouraged to the maximum
facilities that would include tanker operations.
extent feasible and legally permissible, except
where to do so would result in increased tanker
operations and associated onshore
development incompatible with the land use
and environmental 2oals for the area.
30262
Oil and gas development shall be permitted in
Not Applicable: Hermosa Beach does not have any areas
accordance with Section 30260, if the
identified for oil and gas development.
conditions identified in Section 30262 [added)
are met.
30263
New or expanded refineries or petrochemical
Not Applicable: Hermosa Beach does not have any areas
facilities not otherwise consistent with the
identified for refineries or petrochemical facilities
provisions of this division shall be permitted if
development.
the conditions are met as identified in Section
30263 a added].
30264
Notwithstanding any other provision of this
Not Applicable: PLAN Hermosa does not include any
division, except subdivisions (b) and (c) of
areas for thermal electric generating plants.
Section 30413, new or expanded thermal
electric generating plants may be constructed
in the coastal zone if the proposed coastal site
has been determined by the State Energy
Resources Conservation and Development
Commission to have greater relative merit
pursuant to the provisions of Section 25516.1
than available alternative sites and related
facilities for an applicant's service area which
have been determined to be acceptable
pursuant to the provisions of Section 25516.
Southern California Association of Governments 2012-2035 Regional Transportation
Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy: Towards a Sustainable Future
SCAG has placed a greater emphasis than ever before on sustainability and integrated planning
n-the-2012-2035-RegionaI-Transport #ion-PIanl-Susfainable-Communfies-Stra#e-g�(R-T-P-/SCS)- The
RTP/SCS vision encompasses three principles that collectively work as the key to the region's future:
mobility, economy, and sustainability. The RTP/SCS contains a number of policies applicable to
PLAN Hermosa. The City considered SCAG goals and policies in the formulation of PLAN Hermosa.
SCAG policies and their consistency with PLAN Hermosa are evaluated in Table 4.9-5
(Compatibility of PLAN Hermosa with the 2012-2035 RTP/SCS).
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.9-20
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.9 LAND USE AND PLANNING
TABLE 4.9-5
COMPATIBILITY OF PLAN HERMOSA WITH THE 2012-2035 RTP/SCS
SCAG RTP/
SCS Goal
SCAG Goal
Project Compliance with Goal
Goal 1
Align the plan investments
Not Applicable: This goal is specific to SCAG's funding sources and
and policies with improving
investments and is therefore not applicable at the local level.
regional economic
development and
competitiveness.
Goal 2
Maximize mobility and
Consistent: PLAN Hermosa maintains the existing roadway network and
accessibility for all people
provides mechanisms to meet the needs of local and regional transportation
and goods in the region.
and to ensure efficient mobility and accessibility. A number of regional and
local programs have informed the policies and implementation actions that
would ensure a balance of local and regional needs in the design and
operation of the transportation corridors, including:
• LA Metro First Last Mile Strategic Plan
• Los Angeles County Congestion Management Program
• Los Angeles County Long Range Transportation Plan
• SCAG RTP/SCS
• South Bay Bicycle Master Plan
• Beach Cities Livability Plan
• Aviation Boulevard Master Plan
• Pacific Coast Highway Streetscape Master Plan
The Mobility Element is a comprehensive transportation management
strategy that addresses infrastructure capacity. The Land Use + Design
Element and the Mobility Element of PLAN Hermosa both contain policies
that provide specific guidance on how to improve mobility in the city. Refer
to Section 4.14, Transportation, of this EIR, which addresses local and regional
transportation, traffic, circulation, and mobility in more detail.
Goal 3
Ensure travel safety and
Consistent: All modes (motorized and non -motorized) of public and
reliability for all people and
commercial transit throughout the city would be required to follow safety
goods in the region.
standards established by corresponding state, regional, and local regulatory
documents, standards, and regulations. For example, pedestrian walkways
and bicycle routes must follow safety precautions and standards established
by local (e.g., City of Hermosa Beach, County of Los Angeles) and regional
(e.g., SCAG, Caltrans) agencies. Additionally, pedestrian circulation systems
are required to be designed and constructed for the adaptation and use of
people with disabilities, consistent with the Americans with Disabilities Act
(ADA) and state requirements. With the city encompassing approximately 1.4
square miles, active and non -motorized transportation options for local
mobility are becoming increasingly convenient and cost-effective travel
choices among residents and visitors. As such, the PLAN Hermosa Mobility
Element encourages design and construction plans that improve sidewalk
infrastructure to safely accommodate high levels of pedestrian activity.
Through implementation of the plan, the majority of arterials and local streets
throughout the city will provide sidewalks to accommodate a moderate level
of pedestrian activities. There are 22 east —west walk streets that connect
pedestrians between the beach and surrounding neighborhoods, while the
Hermosa Valley Greenbelt and the Strand provide north —south pedestrian
connections throughout the length of the city. Mobility Element Policy 3.2
prioritizes investment in the development of a complete network of sidewalks
and pedestrian -friendly amenities. As a means of Drioritizina pedestrian
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.9-21
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.9 LAND USE AND PLANNING
SCAG RTP/
SCAG Goal
Project Compliance with Goal
SCS Goal
safety, Mobility Element policies prioritize the development of safe,
comfortable, and attractive public spaces and encourage traffic calming
strategies that will reduce vehicle speeds and reduce cut -through traffic on
residential streets. Thus, PLAN Hermosa policies would reduce design hazards
and conflicts between incompatible land uses and between all transportation
network users.
Goal 4
Preserve and ensure a
Consistent: All roadway improvements to the existing transportation
sustainable regional
networks would be assessed to determine how new development would
transportation system.
impact traffic conditions. PLAN Hermosa seeks to concentrate new and infill
development in areas that would reduce vehicle miles traveled. This will be
done by focusing on corridors that provide commercial, service, and office
uses in a cohesive and organized manner. This land use network is supported
by a connected walkable environment to easily serve local and regional retail
needs while providing efficient travel pathways and circulation. These land
use policies would serve to enhance the regional transportation system by
providing land uses in a format that supports transit thereby alleviating
roadway traffic on a regional basis. The Mobility Element seeks to implement
a multimodal system consistent with SB 375, SB 743, and the 2012-2035
RTP/SCS. Additionally, the regional plans mentioned in the analysis for
RTP/SCS Goal G2 would be applicable to the design and development of the
regional roadway network in and around the city.
PLAN Hermosa encourages regional coordination of transportation issues
and incorporates guidance and policies that help preserve and ensure a
sustainable regional transportation system.
Goal 5
Maximize the productivity
Consistent: The local and regional transportation system would be improved
of our transportation
and maintained to maximize efficiency and productivity through
system.
implementation of PLAN Hermosa. The City's Public Works Department
oversees the improvement and maintenance of the city's public rights -of -way
on a routine basis.
Future development in Hermosa Beach under PLAN Hermosa would occur
through infill and redevelopment activities primarily in the Downtown core,
the Cypress Avenue District, the Coastal Zone including The Strand, and along
Pacific Coast Highway and Aviation Boulevard. Such infill and redevelopment
would increase overall demand for transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities.
The City strives to maximize productivity of the region's public transportation
system (i.e., bus and bicycle) for residents, visitors, and workers coming into
and going out of Hermosa Beach. Existing transit facilities in Hermosa Beach
are supported by local and regional transportation authorities, providing local
mobility and access to major regional transit facilities in nearby municipalities.
PLAN -Hermosa Mobility -Element -policies -promote transit opportunities in the
city and provide opportunities to connect to regional infrastructure.
PLAN Hermosa Mobility Element policies support and reinforce the policies
of the South Bay Bicycle Master Plan by promoting bicycle facilities and
parking throughout the city to facilitate a higher level of connectivity and
access for bicycles. The City provides ample opportunities for bicycling via a
network of bikeways, bicycle parking, links to transit, and other
accommodations. PLAN Hermosa policies directly support the expansion of
pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities and support the City's goal of being
a multimodal community. Mobility Element and Land Use + Design Element
policies also support the goals and policies of the Los Angeles County Long
Range Transportation Plan and the South Bay Bicycle Master Plan.
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.9-22
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.9 LAND USE AND PLANNING
SCAG RTP/
SCAG Goal
Project Compliance with Goal
SCS Goal
Goal 6
Protect the environment
Consistent: Goals, policies, and implementation actions are proposed in the
and health of our residents
PLAN Hermosa Mobility Element to require that all development or
by improving air quality
redevelopment projects accommodate active transportation by providing
and encouraging active
connections to existing and planned pedestrian and bicycle networks and
transportation (non-
incorporating pedestrian -oriented design practices and that developments
motorized transportation,
provide facilities for non -motorized transportation; improve transit, bicycle,
such as bicycling and
pedestrian, and equestrian connections; and preserve opportunities to
walking).
maintain or expand bicycle, pedestrian, and transit systems. The Mobility
Element requires expanding the bicycle network, integrating bicycle and
transit facilities and connections, and requiring new development to
accommodate big cle and pedestrian infrastructure.
Goal 7
Actively encourage and
Consistent: Policies and implementation actions are proposed in PLAN
create incentives for energy
Hermosa's Sustainability + Conservation Element that encourage the
efficiency, where possible.
reduction of energy usage and conservation. Policies would require and
facilitate the installation of renewable energy projects on homes and
businesses and provide a retrofit program to assist home and building owners
to make efficiency improvements. PLAN Hermosa would require that large
buildings regularly report their energy use and create a sustainable building
checklist to minimize waste and maximize energy efficiency.
Goal 8
Encourage land use and
Consistent: PLAN Hermosa Mobility Element goals, policies, and
growth patterns that
implementation actions ensure that future land uses can be adequately
facilitate transit and non-
served by the planned transportation system. The Mobility Element contains
motorized transportation.
a policy to improve Hermosa Beach's alternative transportation access to local
and regional destinations through land use decisions that support
multimodal transportation. In addition, PLAN Hermosa Land Use + Design
Element contains policies to accommodate a mix of residential and
commercial land uses that enable residents to walk to work, shopping, and
transit, reduce auto use, and promote transit -oriented development and
increased density near transit opportunities.
Goal 9
Maximize the security of
Consistent: PLAN Hermosa Mobility Element goals, policies, and
the regional transportation
implementation actions strive to provide local transit service is reliable and
system through improved
safe for all users. PLAN Hermosa Public Safety Element goals, policies, and
system monitoring, rapid
implementation actions prioritize disaster preparedness, coordination of
recovery planning, and
services with other cities, and technology improvements for managing safety
coordination with other
information and response, and reducing hazards by reviewing the needs of
security agencies.
critical facilities, which includes roads.
PLAN Hermosa encourages development in a more compact way with an emphasis on
redevelopment and reuse. The project would allow additional housing and jobs to accommodate
the projected population and employment growth in the area and in the city. Further, the project
would guide growth in a sustainable manner that would emphasize a multimodal transportation
system to serve city needs. As such, PLAN Hermosa is considered to be consistent with the basic
principles identified in the RTP/SCS.
South Coast Air Quality Management District Basin Air Quality Plan
The South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) is responsible for clean air planning
in the South Coast Air Basin. The SCAQMD adopted its latest Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP)
in 2012. The 2012 AQMP mandates a variety of measures to reduce traffic congestion and improve
air quality. Local governments are responsible for developing and implementing the AQMP's
transportation and control measures. For informational purposes, the SCAQMD is in the process of
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.9-23
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.9 LAND USE AND PLANNING
developing its 2016 AQMP, which will develop integrated strategies and measures to meet 8-hour
ozone (75 ppb) by 2032 and annual PM2.5 (12 pg/m3) by 2021-2025 national ambient air quality
standards goals, among other goals.
As discussed in Section 4.14, Transportation, PLAN Hermosa goals and policies are aimed at
reducing vehicle miles traveled (VMT). The California Air Pollution Control Officers Association's
(CAPCOA) report Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures was used as a set of
guidelines for quantifying the environmental benefits of mitigation measures. The CAPCOA
guidelines were developed by conducting a comprehensive literature review of studies
documenting the effects of land use planning and transportation demand management (TDM)
strategies on reducing VMT. Using the results of this study, Fehr & Peers, the City's transportation
consultant, developed TDM+, a quick response tool that demonstrates trip reductions from
commonly used TDM strategies. The tool also accounts for the interaction among different
measures in various categories to avoid double counting. The TDM+ model was used to quantify
potential reductions in trip generation and VMT that could occur by 2040 with full buildout and
implementation of PLAN Hermosa. As described in Section 4.14, numerous PLAN Hermosa land use
and mobility strategies were modeled to demonstrate reductions in VMT, including but not limited
to land use strategies such as development of urban infill sites with transit proximity and a density,
scale, and design that can facilitate walking, biking, and other alternative travel options.
PLAN Hermosa policies include numerous measures that support transportation demand and
accessibility management. Specifically, Sustainability + Conservation Element Policy 3.2 directs
the City to support land use and transportation strategies to reduce vehicle miles traveled and
emissions, including pollution from commercial and passenger vehicles. Policy 3.7 directs the City
to consult with local, regional, and state agencies to improve air quality and limit greenhouse gas
emissions through regional efforts to reduce air pollution from mobile sources. PLAN Hermosa
would promote land use and transportation investments that support greater transportation
choice and greater local economic opportunity, and reduce the number and length of auto trips.
These and other policies support region -wide traffic and air quality management strategies that
support achievement of AQMP goals. As such, PLAN Hermosa is considered consistent with the Air
Quality Management Plan. Additional consistency analysis with the AQMP is addressed in Section
4.2, Air Quality.
Existing General Plan
PLAN Hermosa would replace the City's existing General Plan. Nonetheless, PLAN Hermosa
policies build on existing land use patterns and policies currently encouraged by the existing
General Plan.
Beach Cities Livability Plan
The Beach Cities Livability Plan was developed to improve livability and well-being in Los Angeles
County beach cities. It includes a section that provides specific recommendations for Hermosa
B-each. The-plan-strives-o-support-active-living-by-enhancing-b-oth-larrd-use-arrd-transpoffcr ro-n
systems throughout the beach cities. In order to achieve this goal, the plan highlights ways to
encourage community members to become more active in their communities. This includes a
complete network of streets and public spaces to support active living; safe, natural, and
enjoyable walking and biking conditions; and sustainable transportation choices. Strategies to
achieve this goal of healthier, happier people in the city include adopting Complete Streets
policies and incorporating Complete Streets policy language into all beach cities' planning
documents, creating and adopting street design guidelines, developing a regional pedestrian
master plan, increasing enforcement for pedestrian safety, and increasing enforcement for
pedestrian safety.
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.9-24
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.9 LAND USE AND PLANNING
PLAN Hermosa policies are intended to improve mobility in the city and promote programs to
enhance livability and the health of the community. PLAN Hermosa policies are aimed at reducing
vehicle miles traveled and thus reducing congestion and improving travel times. Specifically, Land
Use + Design Element Policy 13.5 directs the City to encourage and set aside funding for the
provision of a high level of neighborhood and community amenities and design features as a way
of balancing increased density, recognizing the desire for a very high quality, amenity -rich, livable
community. Furthermore, PLAN Hermosa Mobility Element policies set forth Complete Streets
policies and numerous strategies to support pedestrian safety. As such, PLAN Hermosa is consistent
with the Beach Cities Livability Plan.
As described above, adoption and implementation of PLAN Hermosa would be consistent with
applicable regional and local plans, resulting in a less than significant impact.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
CUMULATIVE SETTING, IMPACTS, AND MITIGATION MEASURES
The cumulative setting for land use includes existing, approved, proposed, and reasonably
foreseeable development in Hermosa Beach and the South Bay Cities COG planning area. Land
use impacts are typically isolated to a jurisdiction, except where land uses may interact or conflict
with adjacent jurisdictions.
IMPACT 4.9-3 Would PLAN Hermosa Contribute to a Cumulative Impact on Dividing a
Community or Conflicting with an Applicable Plan, Policy, or Regulation? PLAN
Hermosa, in addition to anticipated regional growth within the South Bay Cities
Council of Governments planning area, would not contribute to cumulative land
use impacts associated with the division of an established community or conflicts
with land use plans and regulations that provide environmental protection. This
impact would be less than cumulatively considerable.
Expected population and employment growth in the South Bay Cities COG planning area would
result in land use changes at the subregional level. However, new development that would occur
in Hermosa Beach as a result of PLAN Hermosa would be generally consistent with the RTP/SCS, in
that growth would be focused in areas that are already urbanized, are located in close proximity
to transit, and can accommodate additional residential and employee populations without
adversely affecting sensitive natural resources. As described in Impact 4.9-1 above,
implementation of PLAN Hermosa would not result in the division of any communities within
Hermosa Beach or in adjacent cities. As identified in Governance Element Policy 4.1, the City
would play an active role in the South Bay Cities COG, SCAG, and other regional agencies to
protect and promote the interests of the City; and as identified in Policy 4.3, the City would
maintain strong collaborative relationships with adjacent jurisdictions and work together on
projects of mutual interest and concern.
As identified in the discussion of Impact 4.9-2 above, PLAN Hermosa would not conflict with land
use plans, policies, or regulations adopted to reduce environmental impacts. PLAN Hermosa is
consistent with the SCAG Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy, the
California Coastal Act, and the 2012 South Coast Air Quality Management Plan. PLAN Hermosa
would complement the general plans of surrounding jurisdictions, as the proposed plan strives for
a regional approach to land use and transportation planning in the city and to the improvement
of regional connections. Thus, PLAN Hermosa would have a less than cumulatively considerable
contribution to regional land use impacts.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.9-25
4.9 LAND USE AND PLANNING
4.9.5 REFERENCES
City of Hermosa Beach. 1981. Hermosa Beach Local Coastal Program, Coastal Land Use Plan.
http://www.hermosabch.org/index.aspx?page=501.
2014. Existing Conditions Report (also referred to as the Technical Background Report).
2016. Hermosa Beach Municipal Code, Title 17, Zoning
http://www.hermosabch.org/index.aspx?page=395.
.2017. PLAN Hermosa.
SCAG (Southern California Association of Governments). 2012. 20122035 Regional Transportation
Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS): Towards a Sustainable Future.
http://www.scagrfp.net/download.
South Bay Cities COG (Council of Governments) 2009. Sustainable South Bay - An Integrated Land
Use and Transportation Strategy. http://www.soufhbaycifies.org/programs/land-use/south-
bay-sustainable-strategy-integrated-land-use-and-transportation-strategy.
Walkable and Livable Communities Institute. 2011. Healthwoys I Blue Zones Vitality City: Beach
Cities Livability Plan. hftps://s3.amozonaws.com/s3.vifalitycity.com/docs/community
/Vitality%20City%20Livability%20Report. pdf.
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.9-26
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.10 MINERAL RESOURCES
4.10 MINERAL RESOURCES
4.10.1 INTRODUCTION
This resource section evaluates the potential environmental effects related to mineral resources
associated with implementation of PLAN Hermosa. There are no applicable PLAN Hermosa
policies or implementation actions that address mineral resources. Further, non -fuel mineral
resources are protected in California by the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA), and
no known non -fuel mineral resources exist in the city.
NOP Comments: No comments were received in response to the Notice of Preparation (NOP)
addressing mineral resource concerns. Comments included written letters and oral comments
provided at the NOP scoping meeting.
Reference Information: Information for this section is based on numerous sources, including the
PLAN Hermosa Technical Background Report and other publicly available documents. The
Technical Background Report prepared for the project is attached to this Draft EIR as
Appendix C-13.
4.10.2 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The State Mining and Geology Board (SMGB) last updated the Southern California Mineral
Resource Zone (MRZ) maps in 1994. As mapped by the SMGB, the majority of Hermosa Beach is in
the San Fernando Valley Production -Consumption Region in Los Angeles County. A small portion
of Hermosa Beach south of 2nd Street is in the San Gabriel Valley Production -Consumption Region.
A review of the Generalized Mineral Land Classification Map of Los Angeles County - South Half
(DOC 1994) shows that the entire planning area is designated as MRZ-3 land. The MRZ-3
classification indicates areas of undetermined mineral resource significance. Although mineral
resources may be present, the presence or absence of resources is considered speculative
because of a lack of available data.
Although mineral resources may be present, the classification of this MRZ-3 area was not broken
down to the more detailed MRZ-3a or MRZ-3b categories because no mining has occurred in the
area. Additionally, the urbanized nature of Hermosa Beach effectively precludes mining activities
in the planning area.
4.10.3 REGULATORY SETTING
State regulations and policies provide a regulatory framework to protect mineral resources that
would be affected by implementation of a local government's general plan. Because mining is
effectively precluded in the planning area, PLAN Hermosa would not affect state mineral
resources. Therefore, this section includes the federal, state, and local mineral resources regulatory
framework for informational purposes.
FEDERAL
No federal plans, policies, regulations, or laws related to mineral resources apply to Hermosa
Beach.
STATE
• Surface Mining and Reclamation Act: The Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA)
of 1975 (Public Resources Code, Division 2, Chapter 9, Section 2710 et seq.) mandated the
classification of mineral lands throughout the state to help identify and protect mineral
resources in areas subject to urban expansion or other irreversible land uses that would
preclude mineral extraction. Since 1975, the SMGB has mapped areas in California that
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.10-1
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.10 MINERAL RESOURCES
contain regionally significant mineral resources. Deposits of construction aggregate
resources (sand, gravel, or crushed stone) were the initial commodity targeted for
classification by the SMGB because of their importance to the state. Once areas are
mapped, the SMGB is required to designate for future use those areas that contain
aggregate deposits which are of prime importance to meeting the region's future need
for construction quality aggregates.
The key objective of mineral lands classification under SMARA is for each jurisdiction to
develop policies that will conserve important mineral resources, if feasible, when such
resources are needed. SMARA requires that once policies are adopted, land use decisions
by the local agency must be in accordance with that local agency's management
policies for mineral resources. These decisions must also balance the mineral value of the
resource to the market region as a whole, not just their importance to the local jurisdiction.
The State Geologist developed the California Mineral Land Classification System to assist
in the implementation of SMARA. The system identifies the following types of MRZs for
mapping and reporting purposes (DOC 2010):
- MRZ-1: Areas where adequate geologic information indicates that no significant
mineral deposits are present or where it is judged that little likelihood exists for their
presence.
- MRZ-2a: Areas underlain by mineral deposits where geologic data show that significant
measured or indicated resources are present. Areas classified MRZ-2a contain
discovered mineral deposits that are either measured or indicated reserves as
determined by such evidence as drilling records, sample analysis, surface exposure,
and mine information. Land included in the MRZ-2a category is of prime importance
because it contains known economic mineral deposits.
- MRZ-2b: Areas underlain by mineral deposits where geologic information indicates that
significant inferred resources are present. Areas classified MRZ-2b contain discovered
deposits that are either inferred reserves or deposits that are presently sub -economic
as determined by limited sample analysis, exposure, and past mining history.
- MRZ-3a: Areas containing known mineral deposits that may qualify as mineral
resources, which could be considered hypothetical resources. MRZ-3a areas are
considered to have a moderate potential for the discovery of economic mineral
deposits.
- MRZ-3b: Areas containing inferred mineral deposits that may qualify as mineral
resources, which could be considered speculative resources. Land classified MRZ-3b
represents areas in geologic settings which appear to be favorable environments for
the occurrence of specific mineral deposits.
- MRZ-4: Areas where geologic information does not rule out either the presence or
absence of mineral resources. The distinction between the MRZ-1 and MRZ-4
categories is important for land use considerations. It must be emphasized that the
MRZ-4 classification does not imply that there is little likelihood for the presence of
mineral resources, but rather that there is a lack of knowledge regarding mineral
occurrence.
LOCAL
• Measure O: Oil drilling is currently banned in Hermosa Beach. A vote of the people would
be required to lift the existing ban. A recent ballot measure, Measure O, proposed to lift
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.10-2
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.10 MINERAL RESOURCES
the existing ban, but failed at a ratio of four to one. Thus, the likelihood of new oil
extractions taking place in the city is low.
4.10.4IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
For the purposes of this Draft EIR, impacts on mineral resources are considered significant if
adoption and implementation of PLAN Hermosa would:
1) 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.
2) 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.
ANALYSIS APPROACH
The analysis of impacts is based on the likely consequences of adoption and implementation of
PLAN Hermosa compared to existing conditions.
PLAN HERMOSA POLICIES AND IMPLEMENTATION ACTIONS
PLAN Hermosa does not include policies or implementation actions addressing mineral resources.
IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
IMPACT 4.10-1 Would PLAN Hermosa Result in the Loss of Availability of Mineral Resources? PLAN
Hermosa would guide future development and reuse projects in the city in a
manner that would not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource
or of a locally important mineral resource recovery site. Therefore, the project
would have no impact.
The entirety of Hermosa Beach is classified as Mineral Resource Zone 3 (MRZ-3) under the California
Mineral Land Classification System. In MRZ-3 areas, mineral resources are present, but the
significance of the resource is considered speculative because no mining has historically occurred
in the area. Additionally, since most of the area has been developed with residential and
commercial uses, and the development pattern is relatively compact with limited areas
appropriate for industrial uses, mining activities would not likely be feasible in the city. Subsurface
oil deposits are also present in Hermosa Beach; nonetheless, oil drilling is not allowed within the
city and PLAN Hermosa would not impact such deposits.
Mining activities are classified as an industrial use, and the Light Industrial land use designation in
PLAN Hermosa identifies the range of allowable light industrial uses as follows: "production uses for
light manufacturing, creative art, or design services with professional office as an allowed
accessory use." Mining and oil extraction, due to the associated equipment and potential
nuisances, would not be considered a light industrial use. Therefore, there would be virtually no
locations under PLAN Hermosa in which mining activities would be allowed. Implementation of
PLAN Hermosa would not result in the direct or indirect loss of availability of a known or locally
important mineral resource, because of the urbanization in the MRZ-3 area and limited areas in
which industrial activities would be allowed. Therefore, implementation of PLAN Hermosa would
have no impact on mineral resources.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.10-3
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.10 MINERAL RESOURCES
4.10.5 REFERENCES
DOC (California Department of Conservation). 1994. Generalized Mineral Land Classification Map
of Los Angeles County - South Half. Accessed January 2014.
ftp://ftp.consrv.ca.gov/pub/dmg/pubs/ofr/OFR_94-14/OFR_94-14_Plafel B.pdf.
2010. Guidelines for Classification and Designation of Mineral Lands. State Mining and
Geology Board. Accessed July 2014. http://www.conservafion
.ca.gov/smgb/Guidelines/Pages/guidelines.aspx.
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.10-4
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.11 NOISE AND VIBRATION
4.11 NOISE AND VIBRATION
4.11.1INTRODUCTION
This section discusses existing noise conditions in Hermosa Beach, noise standards relevant to
PLAN Hermosa, and potential noise impacts associated with buildout of the city in accordance
with the proposed Land Use Map.
NOP Comments: No comments were received in response to the Notice of Preparation (NOP)
addressing noise and vibration concerns. Comments included written letters and oral comments
provided at the NOP scoping meeting.
Reference Information: Information for this resource section is based on numerous sources,
including the PLAN Hermosa Technical Background Report (TBR) and other publicly available
documents. The TBR is attached to this document as Appendix C. Appendix F to this EIR provides
the noise modeling data used to complete this analysis.
4.11.2 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Appendix C-15 describes the basic science of acoustics and specific acoustic practices related
to environmental noise and vibration, summarizes how noise affects humans in the built
environment, and includes information on noise levels and descriptions of the existing noise
sources and sensitive receptors in the city.
FUNDAMENTALS OF SOUND AND ENVIRONMENTAL NOISE
Sound is technically described in terms of amplitude (loudness) and frequency (pitch). The
standard unit of sound amplitude measurement is the decibel (dB). The decibel scale is a
logarithmic scale that describes the physical intensity of the pressure vibrations which make up
any sound. The pitch of the sound is related to the frequency of the pressure vibration. Because
the human ear is not equally sensitive to a given sound level at all frequencies, a special
frequency -dependent rating scale has been devised to relate noise to human sensitivity. The
A -weighted decibel (dBA) scale compensates by discriminating against frequencies in a
manner approximating the sensitivity of the human ear.
Noise, on the other hand, is typically defined as unwanted sound because of its potential to
disrupt sleep, to interfere with speech communication, and to damage hearing. A typical noise
environment consists of a base of steady "background" noise that is the sum of many distant
and indistinguishable noise sources. Superimposed on this background noise is the sound from
individual local sources, which can vary from an occasional aircraft or train passing by to
virtually continuous noise from, for example, traffic on a major highway.
AMPLITUDE
Amplitude is the difference between ambient air pressure and the peak pressure of the sound
wave. Amplitude is measured in decibels on a logarithmic scale. Laboratory measurements
correlate a 10 dB increase in amplitude with a perceived doubling of loudness and establish a
3 dB change in amplitude as the minimum audible difference perceptible to the average
person.
FREQUENCY
Frequency is the number of fluctuations of the pressure wave per second. The unit of frequency
is the Hertz. One Hertz equals one cycle per second. To approximate this sensitivity,
environmental sound is usually measured in A -weighted decibels. On this scale, the normal
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.11-1
4.11 NOISE AND VIBRATION
range of human hearing extends from about 10 dBA to about 140 dBA. Common community
noise sources and associated noise levels, in dBA, are shown in Appendix C-15.
ADDITION OF DECIBELS
Because decibels are logarithmic units, sound levels cannot be added or subtracted through
ordinary arithmetic. Under the decibel scale, a doubling of sound energy corresponds to a 3 dB
increase. In other words, when two identical sources are each producing sound of the same
loudness, the resulting sound level at a given distance would be 3 dB higher than one source
under the same conditions. Under the decibel scale, three sources of equal loudness together
would produce an increase of 5 dB.
SOUND PROPAGATION AND ATTENUATION
Sound spreads (propagates) uniformly outward in a spherical pattern, and the sound level
decreases (attenuates) at a rate of approximately 6 dB for each doubling of distance from
stationary or point source. Sound from a line source, such as a highway, propagates outward in
a cylindrical pattern, often referred to as cylindrical spreading. Sound levels attenuate at a rate
of approximately 3 dB for each doubling of distance from a line source, such as a roadway,
depending on ground surface characteristics. No excess attenuation is assumed for hard
surfaces like a parking lot or a body of water. Soft surfaces, such soft dirt or grass, can absorb
sound, so an excess ground -attenuation value of 1.5 dB per doubling of distance is normally
assumed. For line sources, an overall attenuation rate of 3 dB per doubling of distance is
assumed.
Noise levels may also be reduced by intervening structures; generally, a single row of buildings
between the receptor and the noise source reduces the noise level by about 5 dBA, while a
solid wall or berm reduces noise levels by 5 to 10 dBA. The manner in which older homes in
California were constructed generally provides a reduction of exterior -to -interior noise levels of
about 20 to 25 dBA with closed windows. The exterior -to -interior reduction of newer residential
units is generally 30 dBA or more.
NOISE DESCRIPTORS
The decibel scale alone does not adequately characterize how humans perceive noise. The
dominant frequencies of a sound have a substantial effect on the human response to that
sound. Several rating scales have been developed to analyze the adverse effect of community
noise on people. Because environmental noise fluctuates over time, these scales consider that
the effect of noise on people is largely dependent on the total acoustical energy content of the
noise, as well as the time of day when the noise occurs. The Leq is a measure of ambient noise,
while the Ld" and CNEL are measures of community noise. Each is applicable to this analysis and
defined below.
• Leq, the equivalent energy noise level, is the average acoustic energy content of noise
for a stated period of time. Thus, the Leq of a time -varying noise and that of a steady
noise are the same if they deliver the same acoustic energy to the ear during exposure.
For evaluating community impacts, this rating scale does not vary, regardless of whether
the noise occurs during the day or the night.
• Ld", the Day -Night Average Level, is a 24-hour average Leq with a 10 dBA "weighting"
added to noise during the hours of 10:00 PM to 7:00 AM to account for noise sensitivity in
the nighttime. The logarithmic effect of these additions is that a 60 dBA 24-hour Leq would
result in a measurement of 66.4 dBA Ld".
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.11-2
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.11 NOISE AND VIBRATION
• CNEL, the Community Noise Equivalent Level, is a 24-hour average Leq with a 5 dBA
"weighting" during the hours of 7:00 PM to 10:00 PM and a 10 dBA "weighting" added to
noise during the hours of 10:00 PM to 7:00 AM to account for noise sensitivity in the
evening and nighttime, respectively. The logarithmic effect of these additions is that a 60
dBA 24-hour Leq would result in a measurement of 66.7 dBA CNEL.
• Lmin is the minimum instantaneous noise level experienced during a given period of time.
• Lmax is the maximum instantaneous noise level experienced during a given period of time.
• Percentile Noise Level (L") is the noise level exceeded for a given percentage of the
measurement time. For example, Lio is the noise level exceeded for 10 percent of the
measurement duration, and L50 is the noise level exceeded for 50 percent of the
measurement duration.
HUMAN RESPONSE TO NOISE
The human response to environmental noise is subjective and varies considerably from individual
to individual. Noise in the community has often been cited as a health problem, not in terms of
actual physiological damage, such as hearing impairment, but in terms of inhibiting general
well-being and contributing to undue stress and annoyance. The health effects of noise in the
community arise from interference with human activities, including sleep, speech, recreation,
and tasks that demand concentration or coordination. Hearing loss can occur at the highest
noise intensity levels.
Noise environments and consequences of human activities are usually well represented by
median noise levels during the day or night, or over a 24-hour period. Environmental noise levels
are generally considered low when the CNEL is below 60 dBA, moderate in the 60 to 70 dBA
range, and high above 70 dBA. Examples of low daytime levels are isolated, natural settings that
can provide noise levels as low as 20 dBA and quiet, suburban, residential streets that can
provide noise levels around 40 dBA. Noise levels above 45 dBA at night can disrupt sleep.
Examples of moderate -level noise environments are urban residential or semi -commercial areas
(typically 55 to 60 dBA) and commercial locations (typically 60 dBA). People may consider
louder environments adverse, but most will accept the higher levels associated with more noisy
urban residential or residential -commercial areas (60 to 75 dBA) or dense urban or industrial
areas (65 to 80 dBA). Regarding increases in A -weighted noise levels (dBA), the following
relationships should be noted for understanding this analysis:
• Except in carefully controlled laboratory experiments, a change of 1 dB cannot be
perceived by humans.
• Outside of the laboratory, a 3 dB change is considered a just -perceivable difference.
• A change in level of at least 5 dB is required before any noticeable change in
community response would be expected. An increase of 5 dB is typically considered
substantial.
• A 10 dB change is subjectively heard as an approximate doubling in loudness and would
almost certainly cause an adverse change in community response.
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Noise -Sensitive Receptors
Noise -sensitive land uses are those that may be subject to stress and/or interference from
excessive noise. Noise -sensitive land uses include schools, hospitals, churches, and museums.
Typically, residential uses are also considered noise -sensitive receptors. Industrial and
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.11-3
4.11 NOISE AND VIBRATION
commercial land uses are generally not considered sensitive to noise. In Hermosa Beach, noise -
sensitive residential uses, schools, and other institutional uses are located throughout the city,
occupying approximately 67 percent of the city's total land area.
The city has a number of noise sources that are common to urbanized communities, including
traffic on local streets, commercial/industrial activities, construction/demolition activities, refuse
collection, bars and restaurants, and public and private events and parties. Construction and
demolition operations are the only significant sources of groundborne vibration in the city,
although heavy trucks traveling over potholes or other discontinuities in the pavement can
cause vibration at sufficient levels to generate complaints from nearby residents.
A community noise survey was conducted in August 2014 to document the existing noise
environment at noise -sensitive receptors in the city. During the survey, average ambient hourly
noise levels ranged from 56.2 dBA to 72.3 dBA (Leq), 24-hour ambient noise levels ranged from
68.7 dB to 71.3 dB CNEL, and maximum noise levels ranged from 65.0 dBA to 93.5 dBA maximum
noise level (Lmax). Maximum noise levels were attributable to backup alarms, car horns, large
trucks, and motorcycles.
Traffic Noise
Traffic noise is the dominant noise source in the city, originating from major roads such as
Aviation Boulevard and Pacific Coast Highway. To document the existing traffic noise conditions,
measurements were obtained at 10 locations in the city, including along Hermosa Avenue,
Pacific Coast Highway, and Pier Avenue, to obtain a representative sample of existing noise
conditions in the city. The measurements were taken during the summer months to account for
increased visitor traffic over a continuous 24-hour period. The results of the noise measurements
are summarized in Table 4.11-1 (Summary of Noise Measurement Results).
TABLE 4.11-1
SUMMARY OF NOISE MEASUREMENT RESULTS
Location #
Location Description
Measurement Period
Average Noise
Level, dBA
CNEL, dB
1
2703 El Oeste Dr.
12:21 PM to 12:46 PM
67.1
Not measured
2
2491 Valley Dr.
11:36 AM to 12:00 PM
63.5
Not measured
3
1838 Hermosa Ave.
4:27 PM to 4:47 PM
63.6
Not measured
4
1901 Pacific Coast Hwy.
24 hours
56.2-72.3
71.3
5
237 Pier Ave.
10:59 AM to 11:21 AM
56.3
Not measured
6
1021 Bonnie Brae St.
420 Ardmore Ave.
10:18 AM to 10:40 AM
66.0
Not measured
7
1:07 PM to 1:38 PM
56.2
Not measured
8
104 Hermosa Ave.
3:52 PM to 4:14 PM
63.2
Not measured
9
540 1st St.
3:00 PM to 3:25 PM
62.7
Not measured
10
117 Prospect Ave.
24 hours
58.2-65.7
68.7
Source: City of Hermosa Beach 2014
As shown in Table 4.11-2 (Comparison of Noise Measurement Results with City's Policies), the
measured ambient noise levels are well above the City's existing policy for maximum traffic
noise levels.
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.11-4
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.11 NOISE AND VIBRATION
TABLE 4.11-2
COMPARISON OF NOISE MEASUREMENT RESULTS WITH CITY'S POLICIES
Location
#
Location Description
Zone
Measured Noise
Level, dBA
City's Policy for Maximum
Traffic Noise Level, dBA1
1
2703 El Oeste Dr.
R-1
67.1
50 or below
2
2491 Valley Dr.
R-1A
63.5
50 or below
3
1838 Hermosa Ave.
R-2
63.6
55 or below
14
1901 Pacific Coast Hwy.
R-3
56.2-72.3
60 or below
5
237 Pier Ave.
SPA-11 (used as R-1)
56.3
50 or below
6
1021 Bonnie Brae St.
C-3 (used as R-1)
66.0
50 or below
7
420 Ardmore Ave,
M-1(used as R-1)
56.2
50 or below
8
104 Hermosa Ave.
R-3
63.2
60 or below
9
540 1st St.
SPA-4 (used as R-2 or R-3)
62.7
55-60 or below
ro
117 Prospect Ave.
R-1
58.2-65.7
50 or below
Source: City of Hermosa Beach 2014
Note: The City's current General Plan states that maximum traffic noise levels should be restricted in residential areas to no more than 5
dBA above ambient standard levels. The ambient standard levels are 45 dBA or below for R-1 zones, 50 dBA or below for R-2 zones, and
55 dBA or below for R-3 zones.
The results of the noise measurements, together with data provided by the City's traffic
consultant on observed traffic counts modeled on peak traffic volumes, were used to analyze
the existing traffic noise environment in Hermosa Beach. Table 4.11-3 (Distance to Existing
Unmitigated CNEL Contour Lines) summarizes the results of the analysis. The results are presented
in terms of an unmitigated CNEL at the distance of the nearest existing receptor from the
centerline of the roadway. Also provided in the table are the distances from the roadway
centerlines to the unmitigated 60 dB, 65 dB, and 70 dB noise contour lines.
The California Building Code standards require that all multi -family residential dwellings be
designed to achieve a CNEL of 45 dB within the interior of all habitable spaces. The City of
Hermosa Beach extends this requirement to include all single-family residential dwellings.
Typically, residential construction in California provides about 20 dB of noise reduction with all
windows and doors closed. Therefore, it may be reasonably assumed that all residential
dwellings located in an area where the exterior CNEL is 65 dB or less will be exposed to an interior
CNEL of 45 dB or Less, complying -with _both the State's standard and the City's_ policies. The
existing CNEL is estimated to be 65 dB or less at the exterior of all residential dwellings adjacent
to the analyzed street segments, with the following exceptions: adjacent to Aviation Boulevard
between Pacific Coast Highway and Prospect Avenue, and adjacent to Pacific Coast Highway
between Artesia Boulevard and 2nd Street. At these locations, ambient noise levels are above
established City noise standards.
In compliance with California Government Code Section 65302(f), Figure 4.11-1 (Existing Noise
Contours in Hermosa Beach) shows the CNEL contours for the existing traffic noise environment in
Hermosa Beach. The CNEL contours on the map range from 60 dB to 70 dB in 5 dB increments.
The CNEL contours were developed utilizing SoundPLAN version 7.3 software, which uses the
prediction algorithms developed by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) for its Traffic
Noise Model.
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.11-5
4.11 NOISE AND VIBRATION
TABLE 4.11-3
DISTANCE TO EXISTING UNMITIGATED CNEL CONTOUR LINES
Distance to Unmitigated CNEL Contours
Arterial/Segment
CNEL at Nearest
from Roadway Centerline
Sensitive Receptor
60 dB
65 d6
70 dB
8th Street
57 d B
R/W
R/W
R/W
Hermosa to Valley
47 dB
R/W
R/W
R/W
PCH to Prospect
Ardmore Avenue
58 dB
R/W
R/W
R/W
16th to 11th
57 dB
R/W
R/W
R/W
8th to 2nd
Artesia Boulevard
65 dB
429'
157'
52'
PCH to Prospect
Aviation Boulevard
70 d6
358'
126'
40'
PCH to Prospect
Gould Avenue
64 dB
79'
R/W
R/W
Ardmore to PCH
Hermosa Avenue
62 dB
71'
R/W
R/W
27th to 22nd
62 dB
65'
R/W
R/W
22nd to 16th
62 dB
76'
R/W
R/W
16th to 8th
62 dB
76'
R/W
R/W
8th to Herondo
Herondo Street
65 d B
156'
50'
R/W
Hermosa to Valley
Pacific Coast Highway
72 dB
557'
214'
67'
Artesia to 16th
67 d B
419'
152'
48'
16th to Aviation
68 d B
484'
180'
57'
Aviation to 2nd
Pier Avenue
62 dB 91' R/W R/W
Hermosa to Valley
65 d6 46' R/W
1147'
Ardmore to PCH i
Prospect Avenue
59 d B R/W R/W R/W
Artesia to Aviation
63 d6 62 R/W R/W
Aviation to 2nd
Valley Drive
59 dB R/W R/W R/W
Gould to Pier
60 dB R/W R/W R/W
Pier to 8th
Note: R/W signifies that the noise contour falls within the right-of-way of the street.
Source: City of Hermosa Beach 2014
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.11-6
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
• I1k lk Hllh Irl /Ir flf �
■kiilklllflII Rr .I iar
l -- VIM
i■ �w .^.
'"a r�i._ii� AA�EI� �IIrw1
+*jii � wi►'t 1 ;1tti111= :i1�:;11.11�•tiil
•�F�IR �t 11f1� �� 1►1ti5: rwf,44:sit
,51f5111 t►w M f1►�A 1 �.
ply
kkk
.Z ± _ �I rrl ► � i' 1* west pss�ugiµ.al
4.11 NOISE AND VIBRATION
Bar and Restaurant Noise
Noise from bars and restaurants is a frequent source of complaints in Hermosa Beach. The noise
level produced by a bar or restaurant varies widely, depending on a number of factors.
Measurements indicate that average noise levels within the building can range from 75
A -weighted decibels (dBA) (with low background music or no music at all) to over 95 dBA (with
entertainment). Maximum noise levels can be up to 20 dBA higher than these average levels.
Typical building construction will reduce these noise levels by about 10 dB with windows and
doors open, or by about 20 dB with windows and doors closed. Outdoor dining areas can
produce average noise levels of 65 dBA to 70 dBA and maximum noise levels of 85 dBA to 90
dBA at a distance of 20 feet from the center of the dining area. The City of Hermosa Beach does
not have quantitative standards by which to assess the impact of noise from bars and
restaurants.
Public and Private Event and Party Noise
Hermosa Beach plays host to a number of public and private events throughout the year, as
many as 75 days of events during the summer in recent years. For the most part, the public
events take place at the beach or around the pier, with occasional events held Downtown or in
a park. Some of these public events (for example, the summer concerts at the beach) can
generate significant levels of noise that can be heard throughout much of the city. To identify
typical noise levels that can be generated by a summer concert, a measurement was obtained
on The Strand in front of the closest residence to the pier. The results of the measurement
indicated an average noise level of 73.6 dBA and a maximum noise level of 81.8 dBA.
Commercial/Industrial Activity Noise
In Hermosa Beach, industrial uses are generally concentrated along Cypress Avenue between
8th Street and South Park. These sites are occupied by various light manufacturing facilities,
warehouses, construction supply sites, a surfboard manufacturing use, auto shops, air
conditioning and heating manufacturing uses, and the City's maintenance yard. Surrounding
these industrial properties are various residential properties, commercial properties, and South
Park.
Another industrial site is located on Valley Drive adjacent to a mobile home park and Hermosa
Valley School. Commercial properties are generally concentrated along Pacific Coast Highway,
Pier Avenue, Hermosa Avenue, Aviation Boulevard, and Artesia Boulevard. Noise -sensitive
residential properties are typically located adjacent to these commercial properties.
The primary complaints associated with commercial/industrial properties relate to noise
generated by trucks and heavy equipment, loading dock operations, trucks entering and
leaving the area, and mechanical equipment located both inside and outside the buildings.
Commercial/industrial noise impacts primarily result when activities occur during noise -sensitive
times of the day (early morning, evening, or nighttime hours) or the activities occur in areas
immediately adjoining noise -sensitive land uses. The City identifies "noise tolerance standards"
for various types of land uses in the city, ranging from 45 dBA or below for R-1 zones (including
schools, hospitals, nurseries, and rest homes) to 65 dBA or below for M zones. It is likely that the
City's General Plan noise tolerance standards are currently being exceeded at many residential
properties.
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.11-8
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.11 NOISE AND VIBRATION
Construction/Demolition Activity Noise
Construction activities generate considerable amounts of noise, especially during the demolition
phase and during the construction of project infrastructure when heavy equipment is used.
Noise levels resulting from construction depend on the number and types of construction
equipment being used and the timing and duration of noise -generating activities. The highest
maximum noise levels generated by project construction would typically range from about 90 to
105 dBA at a distance of 50 feet from the noise source. Typical hourly average construction -
generated noise levels are about 81 to 89 dBA measured at a distance of 50 feet from the
center of the site during busy construction periods, such as when earth -moving equipment and
impact tools are being used.
Construction noise impacts primarily result when construction activities occur during noise -
sensitive times of the day (early morning, evening, or nighttime hours), when construction occurs
in areas immediately adjoining noise -sensitive land uses, or when construction durations last over
extended periods of time. The City of Hermosa Beach regulates noise by limiting the hours when
construction can occur. Municipal Code Section 8.24.050 limits construction activity to between
8:00 AM and 6:00 PM, Monday through Friday (except national holidays), and between 9:00 AM
and 5:00 PM on Saturdays. Construction activity is prohibited at all other hours and on Sundays
and national holidays.
Refuse Collection Noise
Trash pickup and compacting vehicles typically use hydraulic equipment to raise and lower the
trash bins and to compact their contents. Typical noise levels range from 80 to 85 dBA at 50 feet
during raising, lowering, and compacting operations. A typical trash pickup takes approximately
3 minutes, with the higher noise levels occurring during about half of the operation. While noise
associated with refuse collection is not explicitly regulated by the City of Hermosa Beach, the
City's Municipal Code regulates the times in which refuse may be collected. Refuse may not be
collected between the hours of 6:00 PM and 7:00 AM, and may not be collected in residential
areas on Saturdays or Sundays.
Construction/Demolition Vibration
The only significant vibration source in Hermosa Beach is construction equipment. Construction
activities may include demolition of existing structures, site preparation work, excavation of
below -grade levels, foundation work, pile driving, and framing. Depending on the proximity of
existing structures to each construction site, the structural soundness of the existing buildings, and
the methods of construction used, vibration levels caused by pile driving or other impact work
may be high enough to damage existing structures. Other construction activities, such as
caisson drilling, the use of jackhammers, rock drills, and other high -power or vibratory tools, and
rolling stock equipment (tracked vehicles, compactors, etc.), may also generate substantial
vibration in the immediate vicinity of the site.
Table 4.11-4 (Damage to Buildings for Continuous or Frequent Intermittent Vibration Levels)
displays reactions of people and the effects on buildings that continuous vibration levels
produce.
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.11-9
4.11 NOISE AND VIBRATION
TABLE 4.11-4
DAMAGE TO BUILDINGS FOR CONTINUOUS OR FREQUENT INTERMITTENT VIBRATION LEVELS
Velocity Level,
Human Reaction
Effects on Buildings
PPV (in/sec)
No effect
Vibration unlikely to cause damage of any type to
0.01
Barely perceptible
0.04
Distinctly perceptible
any structure
Distinctly perceptible to strongly
Recommended upper level of the vibration to which
0.08
perceptible
runs and ancient monuments should be subjected
0.01
Strongly erce tible
Virtually no risk of damage to normal buildings
Threshold at which there is a risk of damage to older
0.3
Strongly perceptible to severe
residential dwellings such as plastered walls or
ceilings
Severe — Vibrations considered
Threshold at which there is a risk of damage to newer
0.5
unpleasant
I residential structures
Source: Caltrons 2004
4.11.3 REGULATORY SETTING
Federal, state, and local laws, regulations, and policies regulate noise in the planning area. They
provide the regulatory framework for addressing all aspects of noise that would be affected by
implementation of PLAN Hermosa. The regulatory setting for noise is discussed in detail in
Appendix C-15. While federal and state guidelines outline noise requirements, specific noise
policies are enacted at the local level.
LOCAL
• City of Hermosa Beach General Plan Noise Element: The current Noise Element of the
City's General Plan was adopted in October 1979 and has the following stated goals:
• Reduce transportation noise to a level that does not jeopardize health and welfare.
• Minimize noise levels of future transportation facilities.
• Establish compatible land use adjacent to transportation facilities.
• Allocate noise mitigation costs among those who produce the noise.
• Alert the public regarding the potential impact of transportation noise.
• Protect areas that are presently quiet from future noise impact.
To achieve these goals, the existing Noise Element identifies a number of policies and
implementation programs to guide the City's actions. The existing Noise Element further
states that "City policy should be geared to the following maximum ambient noise levels."
TABLE 4-11-5
HERMOSA BEACH MAXIMUM AMBIENT NOISE LEVELS
Zoning
Maximum Ambient Noise Levels
R-1
45 or below (also schools, hospitals, nurseries and rest homes)
R-2
50 or below (also parks and playgrounds)
R-3
55 or below
C-1
55 or below
C-2/C-3
60 or below
M
65 or below
Source: City of Hermosa Beach 1979
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.11-10
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.11 NOISE AND VIBRATION
Maximum traffic noise should be restricted to no more than 5dBA above the ambient
standard levels in residential areas, and to no more than 10 dBA above the ambient
standard levels in commercial and manufacturing areas.
The Noise Element also includes a program that extends the acoustical requirements of
the California Building Code (Title 24, Part 2, of the California Code of Regulations) to
include single-family dwellings. This extension requires all single-family residential dwellings
exposed to a CNEL of 60 dB or greater to have an acoustical study performed that shows
how an interior CNEL of 45 dB or less will be achieved in habitable rooms.
City of Hermosa Beach Municipal Code: The City's Municipal Code does not provide any
quantitative noise standards. However, Municipal Code Chapter 8.24 establishes the
City's policy toward noise. The chapter's stated purpose is "to strike a balance between
normal, everyday noises that are unavoidable in an urban environment and those noises
that are so excessive and annoying that they must be curtailed in order to protect the
comfort and tranquility of all persons who live and work in the city." Chapter 8.24 uses the
following methods to achieve its purpose: (1) establishing general standards by which to
determine whether a noise is annoying and unreasonable; (2) placing limits on the
audibility of certain noise sources or on the hours during which certain noise sources may
be audible; (3) restricting the hours during which certain activities can produce noise;
(4) prohibiting the use of leaf blowers; and (5) requiring that doors and windows at
businesses on Pier Plaza be closed when amplified music is being played.
Municipal Code Chapter 9.28 establishes the City's policies regarding parties, events,
and gatherings on private property. With regard to noise, an event may not produce a
noise level that exceeds 95 dBA at the property line at any time. Such events may only
take place on weekends (from 5:00 PM on Fridays through 10:00 PM on Sundays).
Municipal Code Section 17.42.150(D) (5) states that amplified entertainment at temporary
minor special events shall be limited to the hours of 10:00 AM to 9:00 PM and may not last
more than four hours in any day. Noise levels may not exceed 80 dBA at the property line
and may not constitute a nuisance or violate the requirements of Chapter 8.24.
Additionally, the chapter states that amplified music and live entertainment shall be
permitted notwithstanding the provisions of Chapter 8.24 for a maximum duration of four
hours (start to finish) and shall cease no later than 11:45 PM on Friday and Saturday
nights, and 9:45 PM on Sundays. The event shall conclude not later than 12:00 midnight
on Friday and Saturday nights, and 10:00 PM on Sundays.
4.11.4IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
For the purposes of this EIR, a significant impact would occur if implementation of PLAN Hermosa
would:
1) Expose persons to or generate noise levels in excess of the standards established in the
City's General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, or Noise Ordinance, or applicable standards of
other agencies.
2) Expose persons or structures to or generate excessive groundborne vibration or
groundborne noise levels.
3) Create a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity
above levels existing without the project.
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.11-11
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.11 NOISE AND VIBRATION
4) Create a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project
vicinity above levels existing without the project.
5) Expose people residing or working in the project vicinity to excessive noise levels
associated with public and private aircraft operations.
There are no airports located within 5 miles of the city; therefore, impacts associated with
exposure of persons to excessive aircraft noise will not be evaluated.
ANALYSIS APPROACH
This analysis of the existing and future noise environments is based on noise prediction modeling
and empirical observations. The residential uses in the project vicinity are considered noise -
sensitive receptors, while the commercial land uses are not.
Short -Term Construction Noise
Predicted noise levels at nearby noise -sensitive land uses were calculated using typical noise
levels and usage rates associated with construction equipment, derived from representative
data obtained from similar projects. Construction noise levels were predicted assuming an
average noise attenuation rate of b dB per doubling of distance from the source.
Groundborne Vibration
Groundborne vibration levels associated with potential construction -related activities as well as
operations were evaluated using typical groundborne vibration levels associated with
construction equipment and heavy-duty trucks, obtained from the Caltrans 2004 guidelines
(Caltrans 2004). Potential groundborne vibration impacts were evaluated taking into account
the distance from construction activities to nearby structures and typically applied criteria for
structural damage.
Long -Term Traffic Noise
The project's potential to permanently increase traffic noise is addressed under the following
scenarios: the existing plus project and the cumulative plus project. The analysis of future traffic
noise levels in Hermosa Beach was conducted using data developed by Fehr & Peers for PLAN
Hermosa. Two future (Year 2040) traffic scenarios were analyzed. The first scenario assumes that
the city continues to develop based on the policies identified in the current General Plan
(October 1979), while the second scenario assumes that the city develops in the future based on
the objectives, goals, and policies outlined in PLAN Hermosa. The analysis used Sound PLAN
version 7.3 software, which uses the traffic noise prediction algorithms developed by the Federal
Highway Administration for its Traffic Noise Model.
Long -Term Operational Stationary -Source Noise
Predicted noise levels associated with on -site stationary noise sources were calculated based on
representative data obtained from existing literature and noise assessments prepared for
development projects with land uses similar to those that could be development under PLAN
Hermosa. Operational noise levels were predicted assuming an average noise attenuation rate
of b dB per doubling of distance from the source. Expected operational were used for
comparison to the City's noise standards.
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.11-12
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.11 NOISE AND VIBRATION
PLAN HERMOSA POLICIES AND IMPLEMENTATION ACTIONS
PLAN Hermosa policies and implementation actions, all from the Public Safety Element, that
address noise and vibration impacts include the following:
Policies
Public Safety Element
• 7.1 Noise standards. Adopt, maintain, and enforce planning guidelines that establish the
acceptable noise standards identified in Table 6.3 [shown in Table 4.11-6 below].
• 7.2 Noise compatibility. Utilize the Land Use/Noise Compatibility Matrix shown in Table 6.4
[shown in Table 4.11-7 below] as a guide for future planning and development decisions.
• 7.3 Noise analysis and mitigation. Require all proposed development projects and
modifications to existing developments to be compatible with the existing and future
noise levels by using the Land Use/Noise Compatibility matrix shown in Table 6.4. Where
proposed projects are not located in an area that is "clearly compatible," the City will
require that an acoustical study be prepared as a condition of building permit approval
demonstrating compliance with the noise standards shown in Table 6.3.
• 7.4 Condominium conversions. Require conversion projects from existing apartments into
condominiums submit an acoustical analysis demonstrating compliance with the State of
California Noise Insulation Standards.
• 7.5 Noise ordinance. Establish a quantitative noise ordinance based on or equivalent to
Chapter 12.08 of the Los Angeles County Code that at a minimum, addresses: traffic; bar
and restaurant; event and party; construction and light industrial noise sources.
• 8.1 Transportation facility compatibility. The City will periodically review County, regional,
and local plans for transportation facilities and new developments to minimize or avoid
land use/noise conflicts prior to project approval.
• 8.2 Alternative modes of transportation. Reduce noise impacts by encouraging the use of
walking, biking, carpooling, use of public transit, and other alternative modes of
transportation.
• 8.3 Traffic calming. Where roadway noise levels exceed the "normally compatible"
range shown in the Land Use/Noise Compatibility Matrix , consider the implementation of
traffic calming measures such as reduced speed limits or roadway design features to
reduce noise levels through reduced vehicle speeds and/or diversion of vehicular traffic.
• 8.4 Enforcement. Increase the enforcement of posted speed limits and the noise
standards included in the State's Motor Vehicle Code to reduce noise impacts from
vehicles, particularly in residential areas.
• 8.5 Public transit. Work with transit agencies to establish bus routes that meet public
transportation needs and minimize noise impacts in residential areas.
PLAN Hermosa additionally includes noise standards for interior and exterior levels, as depicted in
Table 4.11-6 (Interior and Exterior Noise Standards) and Table 4.11-7 (Land Use/Noise
Compatibility Matrix).
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.11-13
4.11 NOISE AND VIBRATION
TABLE 4.11-6
INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR NOISE STANDARDS [TABLE 6.3 IN PLAN HERMOSA]
Land Use
CNEL
Exteriors
Interiorz
Residential
65 dB
45 dB
Hotels/Motels
65 dB
45 dB
Schools, Libraries, Churches, Hospitals, Nursing Homes
65 dB
45 dB
Auditoriums, Concert Halls, Amphitheaters
65 dB
45 dB
Sports Arena, Outdoor Spectator Sports
65 dB
N/A
Playgrounds, Neighborhood Parks
70 dB
N/A
Golf Courses, Riding Stables, Water Recreation, Cemeteries
75 dB
N/A
Office Buildings, Business Commercial and Professional
70 dB
50 dB
Industrial, Manufacturing, Utilities, Agriculture
75 dB
65 dB
1. Outdoor environment limited to private yard of single-family residences; private patios of multi -family residences that are accessed
by a means of exit from inside the unit; mobile home park; hospital patio; park picnic area; school playground- and hotel and motel
recreation areas.
2. Interior environment excludes bathrooms, toilets, closets, and corridors. Noise level requirement is with windows closed. Mechanical
ventilation system or other means of natural ventilation shall be provided pursuant to the requirements of the Uniform Building Code
(UBC).
TABLE 4.11-7
LAND USE/NOISE COMPATIBILITY MATRIX [TABLE 6.41N PLAN HERMOSA]
Uses
CommunityNoise Equivalent Level (CNEL)
<55 dB
55 dB
60 dB
65 dB
70 dB
75 dB
80+ dB
Single-, multi -family
A
A
B
B
C
D
D
Mobile home
A
A
B
C
C
D
D
Hotel, motel, transient lodging
A
A
B
B
C
C
D
Retail, bank, restaurant, movie theater
A
A
A
A
B
B
C
Office building, research & development,
professional office
A
A
A
B
B
C
D
Amphitheater, concert hall, auditorium, meeting hall
B
B
C
C
D
D
D
Children's amusement park, miniature golf, go-cart
track, health club, equestrian center
A
A
A
B
B
D
D
Service station, auto dealer, manufacturing,
warehousin , wholesale, utilities
A
A
A
A
B
B
B
Hospital, church, library, school classrooms
A
A
B
C
C
D
D
Parks
A
A
A
B
C
D
D
Golf -course, nature -center, cemetery, —wildlife -reserve,
wildlife habitat
A
A
A
A
B
C
C
A riculture
A
A
I A
I A
A
A
A
Zone A, Clearly Compatible. The specified land use is satisfactory, based upon the assumption that buildings are of normal conventional
construction without any special noise insulation requirements.
Zone B, Normally Compatible. New construction or development should be undertaken only after detailed analysis of the noise
reduction requirements are made and needed noise insulation features in the design are determined. Conventional construction, with
closed windows and fresh air supply systems or air conditioning, will normally suffice.
Zone C, Normally Incompatible. New construction or development should normally be discouraged. If new construction or development
does proceed, a detailed analysis of noise reduction requirements must be made and needed noise insulation features must be included
in the design.
Zone D, Clearly Incompatible. New construction or development should generally not be undertaken.
PLAN Hermosa City of Hermosa Beach
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report August 2017
4.11-14
4.11 NOISE AND VIBRATION
Implementation Actions
• SAFETY-29. Incorporate or request from Caltrans the inclusion of soundwalls, earthen
berms, or other acoustical barriers as part of any roadway improvement project
adjacent to a residential area, school, or other sensitive land use, where necessary to
mitigate identified adverse significant noise impacts.
• SAFETY-30. Enforce and periodically evaluate truck and bus movements and routes to
reduce impacts on sensitive areas, and promote coordination between the Police
Department and the California Highway Patrol to enforce the State Motor Vehicle noise
standards, to minimize or reduce noise impacts on residential and other sensitive land
uses.
• SAFETY-31. Apply the Noise Element standards of compatibility described in PLAN
Hermosa to new development proposals. Require the mitigation of extraordinary impacts
through design features such as building orientation and acoustical barriers, to ensure
compatibility.
• SAFETY-32. Require new multi -family development, single-family development, and
condominium conversion projects to meet the California Noise Insulation Standards (Title
24 of the California Administrative Code) for interior and exterior noise levels.
• SAFETY-33. Acoustical analysis reports prepared by a qualified acoustical consultant shall
be required for new sensitive land uses within noise impact areas (i.e., those areas where
the existing or future CNEL exceeds 60 dB).
• SAFETY-34. Adopt and enforce a quantitative Noise and Vibration Ordinance to reduce
excessive noise and vibration from site -specific sources such as construction activity,
mechanical equipment, landscaping maintenance, loud music, truck traffic, loading
and unloading activities, and other sources.
• SAFETY-35. Periodically review adopted noise standards, policies and regulations
affecting noise in order to conform to changes in legislation and/or technologies.
• SAFETY-36. Comply with all state and federal OSHA noise standards, and all new
equipment purchases shall comply with state and federal noise standards.
IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
IMPACT 4.11-1 Would PLAN Hermosa Expose Persons to or Generate Noise Levels in Excess of
Standards? PLAN Hermosa would guide future development and reuse
projects in the city in a manner that may expose persons to or generate noise
levels in excess of the standards established in the General Plan, Zoning
Ordinance, or Noise Ordinance or in applicable standards of other agencies.
However, PLAN Hermosa policies and implementation actions would reduce
this impact to less than significant.
For the purpose of this analysis, a significant noise impact would be assessed if implementation
of PLAN Hermosa would expose people to construction, operational and traffic noise levels in
excess of the proposed standards listed in Table 4.11-6 (Interior and Exterior Noise Standards).
PLAN Hermosa Proposed Standards
As described above, PLAN Hermosa would include several policies proposing new noise
standards to be implemented by the City. Policy 7.1 states that the City shall adopt, maintain,
and enforce planning guidelines that establish the acceptable noise standards identified in
Table 6.3 [included as Table 4.11-6 above]. Policy 7.2 states that the City will utilize the Land
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.11-15
4.11 NOISE AND VIBRATION
Use/Noise Compatibility Matrix shown in Table 6.4 [included as Table 4.11-7 above] as a guide
for future planning and development decisions.
The existing Noise Element defines the maximum ambient noise standards as shown above in
Table 4.11-5: 45 dB for family residential (R-1); maximum 50 dB for two-family residences (R-2);
maximum 55 dB for multi -family residential and neighborhood commercial (R-3 and C-1);
maximum 60 dB for general commercial (C-2 and C-3); and maximum 65 for light manufacturing
(M). The existing Noise Element also states that maximum traffic noise should be restricted to no
more than 5 dBA above the ambient standard levels in residential areas and to no more than 10
dBA above the ambient standard levels in commercial and manufacturing areas. The existing
Noise Element was established in 1979; thus, it is not a clear reflection of the existing ambient
noise levels in the city and does not reflect city's development.
By comparing the proposed ambient (exterior) noise standards of existing and proposed
regulations, PLAN Hermosa's new noise standards would exceed current established standards.
As described above, documentation of the existing noise environment at noise -sensitive
receptors in the city showed average ambient hourly noise levels ranged from 56.2 dBA to 72.3
dBA (Leq), 24-hour ambient noise levels ranged from 68.7 dB to 71.3 dB CNEL, and maximum
noise levels ranged from 65.0 dBA to 93.5 dBA maximum noise level (Lmax). Because existing
ambient noises in the city are above existing guidelines, PLAN Hermosa would align City policies
with existing ambient noise levels and better reflect the existing ambient noise setting in the city.
Nonetheless, with implementation of Policy 7.2, uses would be placed in areas with compatible
noise sources, thus minimizing potential exposure of sensitive users in areas with excessive noise
standards. Policy 7.2 would minimize siting conflicts and potential noise impacts that would arise
from improper siting of land uses. Policy 7.3 requires proper siting of uses and the preparation of
an acoustic study when such siting is not apparent.
Additionally, PLAN Hermosa includes Policy 7.5, which directs the City to establish a quantitative
noise ordinance modeled on Chapter 12.08 of the Los Angeles County Code. The City does not
currently have a quantitative noise ordinance, as described above in the Regulatory Setting
subsection. Los Angeles County Code Chapter 12.08 establishes noise zones based on user
sensitivity, interior and exterior noise standards, and corrections for certain types of sounds. For
example, the Los Angeles County Code establishes an interior noise standard from 7 AM to 10
PM for residential land uses of 45 dB. Enacting a quantitative noise measurement would further
protect sensitive noise users from exposure to excessive noise levels.
Although PLAN Hermosa proposes policies that would allow for increases in acceptable ambient
noise levels, it also includes policies that would ensure proper siting of noise -generating uses and
noise -sensitive uses through the implementation of quantitative policies. Therefore, because the
City would establish quantitative noise regulations that would protect sensitive users, PLAN
Hermosa would have a less than significant impact due to noise in excess of regulations.
Traffic-Nc ise
As discussed in Section 4.14, Transportation, future (Year 2040) traffic scenarios were analyzed for
Hermosa Beach. The first scenario assumes that the city continues to develop based on the
policies identified in the current General Plan (October 1979), while the second scenario
assumes that the city develops in the future based on the objectives, goals, and policies
outlined in PLAN Hermosa. Figure 4.11-2 (Future (2040) Noise Contours with Implementation of
PLAN Hermosa) is a noise contour map for the PLAN Hermosa scenario.
Table 4.11-8 (Existing and Future Traffic Noise Levels at the Nearest Sensitive Receptors)
summarizes the results of the analyses for the existing and future traffic scenarios. The results are
presented in terms of unmitigated exterior CNEL at the distance to the nearest existing receptor
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental impact Report
4.11-16
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.11 NOISE AND VIBRATION
from the centerline of the roadway segment. Referring to the table, implementation of PLAN
Hermosa would not generate an exterior CNEL in excess of the existing General Plan noise
standards identified in Table 4.11-5 at most of the existing sensitive receptors adjacent to the
roadway segments considered in the noise study. Therefore, the impact is less than significant at
these locations.
While the future exterior CNEL at existing sensitive receptors adjacent to Pacific Coast Highway
appears to exceed the standards, the impact is considered to be less than significant for the
following reasons: (1) the existing CNEL at these receptors already exceeds the standards, and
(2) the future CNEL at these receptors will be the same as or lower than the existing CNEL.
Additionally, none of the projected increases are over 3 dB (a 3 dB change is perceptible to the
human ear), which would be a significant impact.
Construction Noise
Typical residential construction in California provides about 20 dB of noise reduction with all
windows and doors closed. Therefore, it may be reasonably assumed that the interior CNEL at
the existing sensitive receptors would be about 20 dB lower than the values identified in Table
4.11-8. Referring to the table, implementation of PLAN Hermosa would not generate an interior
CNEL in excess of the standards identified in Table 4.11-5 at most of the existing sensitive
receptors adjacent to the roadway segments considered in the noise study. Therefore, the
impact is less than significant at these locations.
TABLE 4.11-8
EXISTING AND FUTURE TRAFFIC NOISE LEVELS AT THE NEAREST SENSITIVE RECEPTORS
Unmiti ated Exterior CNEL
Roadway
Segment
Year 2040
Existing Year
with PLAN Hermosa
8th Street
Hermosa to Valley
57 dB
57 dB
PCH to Prospect
47 dB
45 dB
Ardmore Avenue
16th to 11th
58 dB
58 dB
8th to 2nd
57 dB
56 dB
Artesia Boulevard
PCH to Prospect
65 dB
65 dB
Aviation Boulevard
PCH to Prospect
70 dB
69 dB
Gould Avenue
Ardmore to PCH
64 dB
63 dB
27th to 22nd
62 dB
63 dB
22nd to 16th
62 dB
62 dB
Hermosa Avenue
16th to 8th
62 dB
62 dB
8th to Herondo
62 dB
63 dB
Herondo Street
Hermosa to Valley
65 dB
65 dB
Artesia to 16th
72 dB
71 dB
Pacific Coast Highway
16th to Aviation
67 dB
67 dB
Aviation to 2nd
68 dB
67 dB
Hermosa to Valley
62 dB
62 dB
Pier Avenue
Ardmore to PCH
65 dB
64 dB
Prospect Avenue
Artesia to Aviation
59 dB
60 dB
Aviation to 2nd
63 dB
63 dB
'Valley Drive
Gould to Pier
59 dB
58 dB
Pier to 8th
60 dB
59 dB
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.11-17
4.11 NOISE AND VIBRATION
While the future interior CNEL at sensitive receptors adjacent to Pacific Coast Highway appears
to exceed the standards, the impact is considered to be less than significant for the following
reasons: (1) the existing CNEL at these receptors already exceeds the standards, and (2) the
future CNEL at these receptors will be the same as or lower than the existing CNEL.
Operational Noise and Sensitive Receptors
Under PLAN Hermosa, new developments would be located adjacent to roadways. Depending
on how close these developments are to roadways, they might be exposed to excessive future
noise levels. Table 4.11-9 (Future Noise Impact Zones Adjacent to Roadways) identifies the
distances from the roadway centerlines within which various types of new development could
be exposed to noise levels exceeding the noise standards identified in Table 4.11-5. If a new
development were to occur within the distances shown in Table 4.11-9, the impact of the
roadway noise exposure could be potentially significant.
TABLE 4.11-9
FUTURE NOISE IMPACT ZONES ADJACENT TO ROADWAYS
Distance from Roadway Centerline Within Which Development May Be
Exposed to a Si nificant Impact
Residential,
Hotel, Motel,
Office Building,
Industrial,
Roadway
Segment
School, Library,
Auditorium, Concert
Auditorium,
Business
Manufacturing,
Church,
Hall, Amphitheater,
Concert Hall,
Commercial &
Utility,
Hospital,
Sports Arena,
Amphitheater
Professional,
Agriculture
Nursing Home
Outdoor Sports
Playground, Park
Hermosa to Valley
—
—
—
—
—
8th Street
PCH to Prospect
—
—
16th to 11th
—
—
—
—
—
Ardmore Avenue
8th to 2nd
—
—
—
—
Artesia Boulevard
PCH to Prospect
159 feet
159 feet
159 feet
52 feet
Aviation Boulevard
PCH to Prospect
100 feet
—
—
—
Gould Avenue
Ardmore to PCH
—
—
—
—
Hermosa Avenue
27th to Herondo
—
—
—
—
—
Herondo Street
Hermosa to Valley
45 feet
45 feet
45 feet
Artesia to 16th
186 feet
59 feet
—
—
—
Pacific Coast
16th to Aviation
130 feet
41 feet
—
—
Highway
Aviation to 2nd
142 feet
45 feet
—
—
—
Hermosa to Valley
Hermosa
—
Pier Avenue
to PCH
44 feet
—
—
,Prospect Avenue
Artesia to 2nd
—
—
—
—
—
JValley Drive
Gould to 8th
—
—
—" indicates that there is no distance within which a proposed development will experience a significant impact.
None-theless, the-P-L-AN-Hermosa-P-ublic Safet\/--E-lement includes-actions-fo-reduc-e noise -related
conflicts for new sensitive land uses located adjacent to roadways or commercial/industrial
properties. Policy 7.2 requires the Land Use/Noise Compatibility Matrix (Table 6.4 in PLAN
Hermosa [Table 4.11-7, above]) be used as a guide for future planning and redevelopment
decisions. Policy 7.3 requires all proposed development projects and modifications to existing
developments to be compatible with the existing and future noise levels by using the Land
Use/Noise Compatibility Matrix. If proposed projects are not located in an area that is "clearly
compatible" in Table 6.4 in PLAN Hermosa, the City will require that an acoustical study be
prepared as a condition of building permit approval demonstrating compliance with the noise
standards shown in Table 6.3 (Interior and Exterior Noise Standards [Table 4.1 1-6, above]) in PLAN
Hermosa.
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.11-18
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.11 NOISE AND VIBRATION
FIGURE 4.11-2
FUTURE (2040) NOISE CONTOURS WITH IMPLEMENTATION OF PLAN HERMOSA
IEL, dB
> 70
65 70
60 - 65
<_ 60
To reduce noise levels to meet the adopted standards and criteria, projects may be required to
include berms, walls, and sound -attenuating architectural design and construction methods,
and the City would only permit development if noise standards and regulations would be met.
Such decisions would be made on a case -by -case basis through project design review as
required by the City to address potential aesthetic impacts. Policy 7.3 requires all proposed
development projects and modifications to existing developments to be compatible with the
existing and future noise levels by using the Land Use/Noise Compatibility Matrix, If proposed
projects are not located in an area that is "clearly compatible" in Table 6.4 in PLAN Hermosa,
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.11-19
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.11 NOISE AND VIBRATION
the City will require that an acoustical study be prepared as a condition of building permit
approval demonstrating compliance with the noise standards shown in Table 6.3 (Interior and
Exterior Noise Standards [Table 4.11-6, above]) in PLAN Hermosa. Policy 7.5 would establish c
quantitative noise ordinance to regulate noise impacts from stationary sources.
With adherence to and implementation of these PLAN Hermosa policies and implementation
actions, program -level stationary noise source and land use conflict noise impacts would be less
than significant.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
IMPACT 4.11-2 Would PLAN Hermosa Expose Persons to or Generate Excessive Groundborne
Vibration or Groundborne Noise Levels? PLAN Hermosa would guide future
development and reuse projects in the city in a manner that may expose
persons to or generate excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne
noise levels. This is a potentially significant impact.
PLAN Hermosa would guide development, the construction of which could generate significant
groundborne vibration that could expose building occupants to vibration levels in excess of 0.01
inches per second. Table 4.11-10 (Typical Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment)
identifies the distance within which typical construction equipment generates a vibration
velocity level exceeding 0.01 inches per second. If equipment operates within these distances
from an occupied building, a significant impact would result.
TABLE 4.11-10
TYPICAL VIBRATION SOURCE LEVELS FOR CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT
Equipment
Vibration Velocity Level
at 25 Feet, in/sec
Distance from Equipment Within
Which the Standard is Exceeded
Pile driver (impact)
0.158
158 feet
Pile driver (sonic)
0.045
68 feet
Clam shovel drop (slurry wall)
0.050
74 feet
Hydro mill (slurry wall)
0.002-0.006
9-17 feet
Vibratory roller
0.050
74 feet
Hoe ram
0.022
43 feet
Large bulldozer
0.022
43 feet
Caisson drilling
0.022
43 feet
Loaded trucks
0.020
40 feet
Jackhammer
-0:009
-24-fee#
Small bulldozer
0.001
5 feet
Source: FTA 2006
Nonetheless, as described in PLAN Hermosa implementation action SAFETY-34, the City would
adopt and enforce a quantitative Noise and Vibration Ordinance to reduce excessive noise
and vibration from site -specific sources such as construction activity, mechanical equipment,
landscaping maintenance, loud music, truck traffic, loading and unloading activities, and other
sources. Additionally, mitigation measure MM 4.11-2 would be required to further reduce the
potential impact from groundborne vibration.
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.11-20
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.11 NOISE AND VIBRATION
Mitigation Measures
MM 4.11-2 For development located at a distance within which acceptable vibration
standards would be exceeded, the City shall require the applicant to have a
structural engineer prepare a report demonstrating the following:
• Vibration level limits based on building conditions, soil conditions, and
planned demolition and construction methods to ensure vibration levels
would not exceed acceptable levels where damage to structures using
vibration levels in Draft EIR Table 4.1 1-4 as standards.
• Specific measures to be taken during construction to ensure the specified
vibration level limits are not exceeded.
• A monitoring plan to be implemented during demolition and construction
that includes post -construction and post -demolition surveys of existing
structures that would be impacted.
Examples of measures that may be specified for implementation during
demolition or construction include but are not limited to:
• Prohibition of certain types of impact equipment.
• Requirement for lighter tracked or wheeled equipment.
• Specifying demolition by non -impact methods, such as sawing concrete.
• Phasing operations to avoid simultaneous vibration sources.
• Installation of vibration measuring devices to guide decision -making for
subsequent activities.
Significance After Mitigation
Implementation of mitigation measure MM 4.11-2 would minimize impacts on sensitive structures
from groundborne vibration to acceptable levels. Therefore, this impact would be reduced to
less than significant.
IMPACT 4.11-3 Would PLAN Hermosa Generate Substantial Permanent Increases in Ambient
Noise Levels? PLAN Hermosa would guide future development and reuse
projects in the city in a manner that would not create a substantial
permanent increase in ambient noise levels above existing levels. The impact
would be less than significant.
There are two types of noise that can lead to an increase in ambient noise levels: traffic noise
from new development and operational noise.
Traffic Noise
Implementation of PLAN Hermosa would lead to an increase of vehicular traffic on local
roadways, resulting in increased traffic noise. Traffic noise levels throughout Hermosa Beach
were modeled to determine how changes in vehicular traffic volumes would affect traffic noise
levels. Traffic noise levels were projected for the buildout year of 2040.
Noise impacts resulting from PLAN Hermosa buildout were assessed by comparing future noise
levels to the existing condition, as well as to the future condition that would result assuming that
the city continues to develop based on the policies identified in the current General Plan
(October 1979). Table 4.11-11 (Estimated Changes in Traffic Noise Levels Compared to Existing
Conditions) and Table 4.11-12 (Estimated Changes in Traffic Noise Levels Compared to Future
Without Project Conditions) compare PLAN Hermosa buildout to the existing and future without
project conditions, and provide the estimated increases in traffic noise levels that would occur
throughout the city.
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.11-21
4.11 NOISE AND VIBRATION
TABLE 4.11-11
ESTIMATED CHANGES IN TRAFFIC NOISE LEVELS COMPARED TO EXISTING CONDITIONS
Estimated CNEL at Nearest
Estimated
Sensitive Receptor
Roadway
Segment
Increase or
2014
Year 2040
Decrease in CNEL
with PLAN Hermosa
Hermosa to Valley
57 dB
57 dB
0 dB
8th Street
PCH to Prospect
47 dB
45 dB
-2 dB
16th to 11th
58 dB
58 dB
0 dB
Ardmore Avenue
8th to 2nd
57 dB
56 dB
-1 dB
Artesia Boulevard
PCH to Prospect
65 dB
65 dB
69 dB
0 dB
Aviation Boulevard
PCH to Prospect
70 dB
-1 dB
Gould Avenue
Ardmore to PCH
64 dB
63 dB
-1 dB
27th to 22nd
62 dB
63 dB
1 dB
22nd to 16th
62 dB
62 dB
0 dB
Hermosa Avenue
16th to 8th
62 dB
62 dB
0 dB
8th to Herondo
62 dB
63 dB
1 dB
Herondo Street
Hermosa to Valley
65 dB
65 dB
0 dB
Artesia to 16th
72 dB
71 dB
-1 dB
Pacific Coast Highway
16th to Aviation
67 dB
67 dB
0 dB
Aviation to 2nd
68 dB
67 dB
-1 dB
Hermosa to Valley
62 dB
62 dB
0 dB
Pier Avenue
Ardmore to PCH
65 dB
64 dB
-1 dB
Artesia to Aviation
59 dB
60 dB
1 dB
Prospect Avenue
Aviation to 2nd
63 d6
63 dB
0 d6
Gould to Pier
59 dB
58 dB
-1 dB
Valley Drive
Pier to 8th
60 dB
59 d6
-1 dB
Referring to Table 4.11-11, PLAN Hermosa would increase the CNEL by at most 1 dB and only at
existing residential properties adjacent to Hermosa Avenue between 27th and 22nd streets,
between 8th and Herondo streets, and at existing residences adjacent to Prospect Avenue
between Artesia and Aviation boulevards. However, the increase in CNEL would not be a
significant impact using established noise criteria of 3 dB over existing noise levels (a 3 dB
change in noise level is perceptible to the human ear).
Additionally, PLAN Hermosa Public Safety Element policies include actions to ensure that traffic
noise levels do not increase significantly in the future. Policy 8.2 directs the City to reduce noise
impacts by encouraging the use of alternative transportation, including walking, biking, and
public transit, to help reduce roadway noise levels. Policy 8.3 directs the City to consider
implementing traffic calming measures where roadway noise levels exceed the normally
compatible noise limits. Policy 8.5 requires working with Beach Cities Transit and MTA to establish
bus routes that minimize impacts to residential areas.
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.11-22
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.11 NOISE AND VIBRATION
TABLE 4.11-12
ESTIMATED CHANGES IN TRAFFIC NOISE LEVELS COMPARED TO FUTURE WITHOUT PROJECT CONDITIONS
Estimated CNEL at Nearest Sensitive Receptor
Estimated
Year 2040
Year 2040
Roadway
Segment
Increase or
without PLAN Hermosa
with PLAN Hermosa
Decrease in CNEL
Hermosa to Valley
57 dB
57 dB
0 dB
8th Street
PCH to Prospect
45 dB
45 dB
0 dB
16th to 11th
58 dB
58 dB
0 dB
Ardmore Avenue
8th to 2nd
57 dB
56 dB
-1 dB
Artesia Boulevard
PCH to Prospect
65 dB
65 dB
0 dB
Aviation Boulevard
PCH to Prospect
69 dB
69 dB
0 dB
Gould Avenue
Ardmore to PCH
64 dB
63 dB
-1 dB
27th to 22nd
63 dB
63 dB
0 dB
22nd to 16th
63 dB
62 dB
-1 dB
Hermosa Avenue
16th to 8th
63 dB
62 dB
-1 dB
8th to Herondo
63 dB
63 dB
0 dB
Herondo Street
Hermosa to Valley
65 dB
65 dB
0 dB
Artesia to 16th
72 dB
71 dB
-1 dB
Pacific Coast Highway
16th to Aviation
67 dB
67 dB
0 dB
Aviation to 2nd
67 dB
67 dB
0 dB
Hermosa to Valley
62 dB
62 dB
0 dB
Pier Avenue
Ardmore to PCH
65 dB
64 dB
-1 dB
Artesia to Aviation
61 dB
60 dB
-1 dB
Prospect Avenue
Aviation to 2nd
64 dB
63 dB
-1 dB
Gould to Pier
59 dB
58 dB
-1 dB
'Valley Drive
Pier to 8th
60 dB
59 dB
-1 dB
Operational Noise
Implementation of PLAN Hermosa would result in the construction of new residential and
commercial uses throughout the city. These types of uses would also be affected by stationary
noise sources. Large-scale heating, ventilating, and air conditioning (HVAC) systems would be
installed on the new residential and commercial buildings located in the city. Large HVAC
systems associated with new buildings can result in noise levels that average between 50 and
65 dBA Leq at 50 feet from the equipment. However, these HVAC units are usually mounted
within HVAC wells on the rooftops of the proposed buildings and would therefore provide a
buffer around the HVAC systems. According to the Federal Transit Administration (2006), such
screening buffers can reduce noise levels by an average of 5-10 dBA depending on the
distance to the receiver; therefore, noise levels would not impact sensitive receptors on or off
the project site. Additionally, noise from mechanical equipment associated with operation of
the project would be required to comply with California Building Code requirements pertaining
to noise attenuation and with City regulations requiring adequate buffering of such equipment.
Operation of new commercial uses that would be developed with PLAN Hermosa
implementation within the city would also involve the delivery of goods, as well as refuse pickup.
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.11-23
4.11 NOISE AND VIBRATION
Two noise sources would be identified with delivery operations: the noise of the diesel engines of
the semi -trailer trucks and the backup beeper alarm that sounds when a truck is put in reverse,
as required and regulated by the California Department of Occupational Safety and Health
(Cal/OSHA). The noise generated by idling diesel engines typically ranges between 64 and 66
dBA Leq at 75 feet. This noise would be temporary in nature, typically lasting no more than 5
minutes. Further, backup beepers are required by Cal/OSHA to be at least 5 dBA above
ambient noise levels. These devices are highly directional in nature, and when in reverse, the
trucks and the beeper alarms would be directed toward the loading area and adjacent
commercial structures. Backup beepers are, of course, intended to warn people who are
behind the vehicle when it is backing up. These noises associated with commercial operations
would be temporary and short in duration. Therefore, there would not have a lasting impact on
ambient noise levels. As such, PLAN Hermosa implementation would have a less than significant
impact on ambient noise levels.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
IMPACT 4.11-4 Would PLAN Hermosa Generate a Substantial Temporary or Periodic Increase
in Ambient Noise Levels? PLAN Hermosa would guide future development
and reuse projects, as well as temporary events on public property, in a
manner that could create a substantial temporary or periodic increase in
ambient noise levels above levels existing without the project. However,
implementation of PLAN Hermosa policies and implementation actions would
reduce this impact to less than significant.
Temporary increases in noise levels are generally associated with construction activities and with
public or private parties and events.
Construction Noise
For the purpose of this analysis, construction noise impacts were evaluated as they relate to
compliance with Hermosa Beach Municipal Code Section 8.24.050, which limits construction
activity to a period between 8:00 AM and 6:00 PM Monday through Friday (except national
holidays), and a period between 9:00 AM and 5:00 PM on Saturdays. Construction activity is
prohibited during all other hours and on Sundays and national holidays.
Development allowed under PLAN Hermosa may result in new construction activity, which could
temporarily elevate noise levels at adjacent noise -sensitive uses. As discussed above, Hermosa
Beach Municipal Code Section 8.24.050 regulates construction noise by limiting the days and
times during which construction is permitted to occur. The City considers any construction noise
that occurs during these permitted days and times to be generally acceptable. Exceptions
occur depending on the extent of project construction activity and the impact on adjoining
s-ensifive-re-cop-or-andmay-require-mifigaton-foLpLojecL-spacific—o-astruction_noise- rre,sp2ecti�te
of the Municipal Code. The City of Hermosa Beach will apply this section of the Municipal Code
to all new developments under PLAN Hermosa and enforce its compliance. Additionally,
construction impacts with prolonged noise covering more than six months will be evaluated on a
case -by -case basis under CEQA. Therefore, the impact is less than significant.
Public and Private Event Noise
The City of Hermosa Beach does not regulate the noise levels generated by public and private
events held on public property other than to require that a permit be obtained prior to the use
of sound amplification equipment. The permit application does not require the applicant to
identify the noise levels that would be generated by the equipment. In general, the Chief of
Police must approve the application and has the power to revoke such a permit if, among other
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.11-24
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.11 NOISE AND VIBRATION
things, he or she determines that issuance of the permit would substantially interfere with the
peace and quiet of the neighborhood or community.
Implementation of PLAN Hermosa is not expected to increase the number of public and private
events or parties that occur in the city. However, some of these events and parties are
generating sufficiently high noise levels to cause some residents to complain to the City and to
call the Hermosa Beach Police Department. Municipal Code Sections 9.28 and 17.42 establishes
the City's limitations on noise from parties, events, and gatherings on private property by
regulating noise levels, permitted times, and a limit on the number of hours amplified sound may
be used per day. In addition, Policy 7.5 requires the adoption of a quantitative noise ordinance
that regulates the intrusion of noise from parties and events onto sensitive land uses. It is
expected that the ordinance would establish noise standards consistent with the PLAN Hermosa
noise standards and provide further direction on acceptable noise levels for noise -sensitive hours
(e.g., nighttime hours) as well as notification and enforcement measures such as fines
and/revocation of use permits for nonresidential uses that are the noise source. With adherence
to existing Municipal Code regulations pertaining to noise and implementation of PLAN Hermosa
policies and implementation actions, program -level noise impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
CUMULATIVE SETTING, IMPACTS, AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Noise is by definition a localized phenomenon and significantly reduces in magnitude as
distance from the source increases. Consequently, only projects and growth due to occur in the
Hermosa Beach area would be likely to contribute to cumulative noise impacts. The geographic
extent of the cumulative setting for noise consists of Hermosa Beach and neighboring cities.
IMPACT 4.11-5 Would PLAN Hermosa Contribute to Cumulative Effects of Noise Sources? PLAN
Hermosa implementation, in addition to anticipated growth in the region,
would result in additional construction activity, as well as stationary and
mobile noise sources throughout the city and in adjacent jurisdictions, thereby
increasing overall ambient noise levels. Adoption and implementation of
PLAN Hermosa policies and implementation actions would reduce the effects
of increased noise levels on nearby sensitive receptors. This impact would be
less than cumulatively considerable.
Implementation of PLAN Hermosa would not generate new stationary noise sources outside of
the city and would not therefore result in cumulatively considerable noise impacts involving
stationary sources. Additionally, groundborne vibration impacts are localized and would not
result in a cumulatively considerable impact.
PLAN Hermosa implementation would generate additional traffic in Hermosa Beach and
neighboring cities. Additional traffic volumes associated with future growth in the city would
combine with regional traffic on major interjurisdictional roads and highways leading to Hermosa
Beach that would contribute to cumulative effects involving roadway noise. The level of traffic
noise attributable to Hermosa Beach -based trips that will occur outside of the city will increase
gradually over a long period of time and would not result in cumulatively considerable changes
in roadway noise levels in the context of regional traffic growth. Therefore, implementation of
PLAN Hermosa would have a less than cumulatively considerable impact on regional traffic
noise.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.11-25
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.11 NOISE AND VIBRATION
4.11.5 REFERENCES
California Department of Transportation. 2004. Department of Transportation, Noise, Vibration,
and Hazardous Waste Management Office. Transportation- and Construction -Induced
Vibration Guidance Manual.
City of Hermosa Beach. 1979. City of Hermosa Beach General Plan.
2014. Hermosa Beach General Plan Update Technical Background Report.
FTA (Federal Transit Administration). 2006. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment.
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.11-26
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.12 POPULATION AND HOUSING
4.12 POPULATION, HOUSING, AND EMPLOYMENT
4.12.1INTRODUCTION
This resource section evaluates the potential environmental effects related to population,
employment, and housing associated with implementation of PLAN Hermosa. The analysis
includes a review of the potential to induce population growth and for the displacement of
people or housing. PLAN Hermosa Land Use + Design Element policies and implementation actions
describe development and infrastructure practices that permit orderly growth while protecting
existing residential neighborhoods.
NOP Responses: In response to the Notice of Preparation (NOP), one comment relevant to
population, employment, and housing was received from the Southern California Association of
Governments (SCAG) (see Appendix B). The comment was focused on consistency with the 2012
Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) and forecast. However, it should be noted that the 2012 RTP
applies only to the existing General Plan and that the development assumptions in PLAN Hermosa
are assumed in the 2016 draft RTP forecast for 2040, so PLAN Hermosa would be consistent in terms
of regional planning. SCAG has incorporated the City of Hermosa Beach's local forecasts for the
2016 RTP as discussed below.
Reference Information: Information for this resource section is based on numerous sources,
including the PLAN Hermosa Technical Background Report, US Census Bureau data (2010),
California Department of Finance data (2015), SCAG's (2015b) Profile of the City of Hermosa
Beach and SCAG's (2015a) draft RTP projections, Hermosa Beach's (2014) annual financial report,
and other publicly available documents. The Technical Background Report prepared for the
project is attached to this document as Appendix C.
4.12.2 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
This subsection presents existing conditions in 2015 for population, housing units, and employment
in Hermosa Beach. It also summarizes 2040 estimates for growth based on regional estimates
prepared by SCAG, as well as the expected buildout of PLAN Hermosa and the resulting effects
on population, housing, and employment in the city. Key findings are summarized below.
POPULATION
The 2015 population of Hermosa Beach is 19,772. The city is a relatively small urban community in
Los Angeles County. From 2000 to 2015, Hermosa Beach's population increased 6.5 percent
overall from 18,566 to 19,772 (DOF 2015). The rate of growth slowed during the last five years to 1.5
percent. This rate was less than the growth rate of Los Angeles County during the same five-year
period (3.2 percent) (DOF 2015). Table 4.12-1 (Existing Population and Housing Conditions)
summarizes trends in population and housing since 2010, with a 2000 baseline for comparison.
TABLE 4.12=1 - -
EXISTING POPULATION AND HOUSING CONDITIONS
2000
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Population
18,566
19,506
19,536
19,617
19,689
19,758
19,772
Households
9,476
9,550
9,548
9,548
9,539
9,534
9,501
Housing Units
9,840
10,162
10,160
10,160
10,150
10,145
10,110
Persons per Household
1.99
2.04
2.05
2.05
2.06
2.07
2.08
Source: SCAG 2015b; DOF 2015
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.12-1
4.12 POPULATION, HOUSING, AND EMPLOYMENT
HOUSING
There are approximately 10,110 housing units in the planning area. These units are in residential
neighborhoods spread throughout much of Hermosa Beach, with the exception of areas directly
adjacent to major corridors, in the Downtown core, and in the Cypress Area. Detached single-
family dwellings are the predominant type of residence. Some multi -family units and
condominiums are dispersed throughout residential neighborhoods, but with greater prominence
in areas closer to the Downtown core. Several larger multi -family units are located on Pacific Coast
Highway north of Pier Avenue, with several in the southeast corner of the city. Below are additional
facts about the condition and price of housing in the city.
The number of housing units in Hermosa Beach decreased between 2010 and 2015 by 52 units or
0.5 percent (DOF 2015). Approximately 6.0 percent of housing units in Hermosa Beach were
vacant in 2015 (DOF 2015), compared to 5.8 percent countywide. According to the California
Department of Housing and Community Development (2000), a housing vacancy rate of 5.0
percent is considered normal. Vacancy rates below 5.0 percent indicate a housing shortage in a
community. Hermosa Beach's slightly higher than normal vacancy rate seems to indicate an
oversupply of housing, the presence of second/vacation homes, or housing costs that may be
higher than the surrounding region's market supply. In 2015, the city had 9,501 households (SCAG
2015b) with an average household size of 2.08 persons (DOF 2015). Household size was smaller
than in Los Angeles County as a whole (3.03 persons) (DOF 2015).
EMPLOYMENT
Detailed employment data by industry was last collected by the US Census Bureau in 2011. As of
2011, there were 16,783 persons in Hermosa Beach 16 years old and over, with 13,188 (79 percent)
of those in the labor force (eligible for employment), as shown in Table 4.12-2 (Hermosa Beach
Resident Employment by Industry, 2011). Of those in the labor force, 94 percent were employed.
The largest employment industry for Hermosa Beach residents was mainly professional, such as
financial, insurance, information, professional, scientific, and technology services. These are jobs
typically associated with higher education levels and with higher incomes. Lower -wage industries,
such as accommodation and food services, entertainment, and production, were less
represented in the Hermosa Beach labor force, each at 4 percent.
TABLE 4.12-2
HERMOSA BEACH RESIDENT EMPLOYMENT BY INDUSTRY, 2011
2011
Percentage
Employed Population, 16 and over
12,394
100
Finance, Insurance, Real Estate, Information, Prof./Tech., Exec. Mgmt.
4,729
38
Manufacturing
1,384
11
Educational Services
1,051
8
-Retail-Trade
--9
8-
Health Care and Social Assistance
904
7
Wholesale Trade, Transport, Warehousing
83S
7
Accommodation and Food Services
SS3
4
Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation
462
4
Production (Agriculture, Forestry, Resource Extraction, Utilities, and Construction)
448
4
Admin. & Support, Waste Mgmt./Remediation
394
3
Other Services (excluding Public Admin.)
327
3
Public Administration
325
3
Source: US Census Bureau 2011
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.12-2
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.12 POPULATION, HOUSING, AND EMPLOYMENT
The largest employment sector measured by number of jobs in Hermosa Beach is the
accommodation and food service industry, accounting for 31 percent of all jobs in 2011 as
summarized in Table 4.12-3 (Jobs by Industry, 2002-2011). There were 1,026 financial, information,
and professional jobs in the city; however, over 4,700 Hermosa Beach residents are employed in
this sector. This shows that residents are traveling outside of the city to work. Only 462 residents
employed in this sector live and work in Hermosa Beach.
TABLE 4.12-3
JOBS BY INDUSTRY, 2002-2011
2011
Percentage
2002-2011 Change
All Jobs
5,862
100%
628
Accommodation and Food Services
1,801
31%
445
Finance, Insurance, Real Estate, Information, Prof./Tech.,
Exec. M mt.
1,026
18%
82
Retail Trade
847
14%
8
Health Care and Social Assistance
394
390
364
7%
7%
6%
130
(7)
(182)
Other Services (excluding Public Admin.)
Admin. & Support, Waste Mgmt./Remediation
Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation
289
5%
137
Educational Services
216
4%
17
Wholesale Trade, Transport, Warehousing
206
4%
32
Public Administration
173
3%
37
Production (Agriculture, Forestry, Resource Extraction,
Utilities, and Construction)
156
3%
(71)
Source: Economic & Planning Systems, Inc., 2014 () Denotes decrease
As of 2013, there were 7,622 jobs in the city. The largest sector was the leisure sector, with 30.4 percent
of the jobs. Other large sectors included professional (14.1 percent), retail (12.6 percent), and
education (I I percent) (SCAG 2015b). As shown in Table 4.12-4 (Percentage of Jobs by Sector,
2007-2013), from 2007 to 2013, the share of leisure jobs increased from 25.5 to 30.4 percent, while
the share of most other sectors shrank, including finance, professional, and retail.
TABLE 4.12-4
PERCENTAGE OF JOBS BY SECTOR. 2007-2013
Sector
2007
2013
Leisure
25.5%
30.4%
Professional & Management
17.0%
14.1%
Retail
11.5%
12.6%
Finance
10.8%
6.7%
Public
10.7%
10.5%
Education
8.5%
11.0%
Other
5.7%
5.4%
Construction
2.6%
2.3%
Wholesale Trade
1.5%
2.1°%
_
Information
2.3%
1.9%
Manufacturing
2.2%
1.4%
Transportation
1.6%
1.3%
Agriculture
0.2%
0.1%
All Jobs
100%
100%
Source: SCAG 2015b
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.12-3
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.12 POPULATION, HOUSING, AND EMPLOYMENT
JOBS TO HOUSING RATIO
The jobs to housing ratio is a measure that can reveal whether a community is primarily an
employment center or a residential center, often referred to as a bedroom community. Jobs -rich
areas are net importers of employees from other areas because they have more jobs than resident
workers. Areas with fewer businesses, like Hermosa Beach, are exporters of employees. When a
jobs to housing ratio is especially low, it typically indicates that much of the community is
commuting longer distances than may be true in communities with a more equal balance. This
can result in the need for additional road infrastructure and many more vehicle miles traveled,
not only for work trips but other trips to services, amenities, and entertainment.
In 2015, Hermosa Beach had a jobs to housing ratio of 0.75 (7,622 jobs/10,1 10 housing units) (SCAG
2015b), meaning there were roughly three -fourths of a job for every housing unit in the city. A jobs
to housing ratio of 1.0 means one job exists for every housing unit in an area. However, a jobs to
housing ratio does not compare the type of jobs and salary to the cost of housing. So, although a
city may have an equal number of jobs and housing units, this does not mean that the persons
employed in a city can afford to live in that city.
PROJECTED POPULATION, EMPLOYMENT, AND HOUSING CONDITIONS
SCAG's 2016 Draft Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS)
provides population, households, and employment estimates for individual cities and
unincorporated areas in the region. These forecasts are based on regional trends and market
pressures as well as jurisdictions' adopted plans and policies and additional input from the
individual jurisdictions during the planning process. The 2040 draft forecasts were published in
December 2015.
SCAG's 2016 forecasts for Hermosa Beach for 2040 are presented in Table 4.12-5 (SCAG 2016 Draft
RTP Forecasts for 2040).
TABLE 4.12-5
SCAG 2016 DRAFT RTP FORECASTS FOR 2040
2040
Population
20,400
Households
9,800
Jobs
10,000
Source: SCAG 2015o
As discussed in Chapter 3.0, Project Description, PLAN Hermosa's residential unit growth forecast
estimates that approximately 300 residential units may be added in Hermosa Beach over the next
25 years based on an analysis of vacant and underutilized parcels in the low-, medium-, and high-
densify resicFe—ntial designa ions (City of Hermosa Beach 2015).
4.12.3 REGULATORY SETTING
State and local laws, regulations, and policies pertain to population, employment, and housing in
Hermosa Beach. They provide the regulatory framework for addressing all aspects of population,
employment, and housing that would be affected by implementation of PLAN Hermosa.
STATE
• Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA): The RHNA is developed by SCAG and
allocates to cities and counties their "fair share" of the region's projected housing needs
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.12-4
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.12 POPULATION, HOUSING, AND EMPLOYMENT
JOBS TO HOUSING RATIO
The jobs to housing ratio is a measure that can reveal whether a community is primarily an
employment center or a residential center, often referred to as a bedroom community. Jobs -rich
areas are net importers of employees from other areas because they have more jobs than resident
workers. Areas with fewer businesses, like Hermosa Beach, are exporters of employees. When a
jobs to housing ratio is especially low, it typically indicates that much of the community is
commuting longer distances than may be true in communities with a more equal balance. This
can result in the need for additional road infrastructure and many more vehicle miles traveled,
not only for work trips but other trips to services, amenities, and entertainment.
In 2015, Hermosa Beach had a jobs to housing ratio of 0.75 (7,622 jobs/10,1 10 housing units) (SLAG
2015b), meaning there were roughly three -fourths of a job for every housing unit in the city. A jobs
to housing ratio of 1.0 means one job exists for every housing unit in an area. However, a jobs to
housing ratio does not compare the type of jobs and salary to the cost of housing. So, although a
city may have an equal number of jobs and housing units, this does not mean that the persons
employed in a city can afford to live in that city.
PROJECTED POPULATION, EMPLOYMENT, AND HOUSING CONDITIONS
SCAG's 2016 Draft Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS)
provides population, households, and employment estimates for individual cities and
unincorporated areas in the region. These forecasts are based on regional trends and market
pressures as well as jurisdictions' adopted plans and policies and additional input from the
individual jurisdictions during the planning process. The 2040 draft forecasts were published in
December 2015.
SCAG's 2016 forecasts for Hermosa Beach for 2040 are presented in Table 4.12-5 (SCAG 2016 Draft
RTP Forecasts for 2040).
TABLE 4.12-5
SCAG 2016 DRAFT RTP FORECASTS FOR 2040
2040
Population
20,400
Households
9,800
Jobs
10,000
Source: SCAG 2015a
As discussed in Chapter 3.0, Project Description, PLAN Hermosa's residential unit growth forecast
estimates that approximately 300 residential_ units maybe added in Hermosa Beach over the next
25 years based on an analysis of vacant and underutilized parcels in the low-, medium-, and high -
density residential designations (City of Hermosa Beach 2015).
4.12.3 REGULATORY SETTING
State and local laws, regulations, and policies pertain to population, employment, and housing in
Hermosa Beach. They provide the regulatory framework for addressing all aspects of population,
employment, and housing that would be affected by implementation of PLAN Hermosa.
STATE
• Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA): The RHNA is developed by SCAG and
allocates to cities and counties their "fair share" of the region's projected housing needs
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.12-4
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.12 POPULATION, HOUSING, AND EMPLOYMENT
based on household income groupings over the planning period for the housing elements
of each specific jurisdiction. In October 2012, SCAG adopted a Final Regional Housing
Needs Assessment Allocation Plan that covers the 2013 through 2021 planning period.
Cities and counties must develop a housing element to address how they will meet their
RHNA.
Housing Element Requirements: Under California law, housing elements must analyze
existing and projected housing needs, examine special housing needs within the
population, evaluate the effectiveness of current goals and policies, identify
governmental and other constraints, determine compliance with other housing laws, and
identify opportunities to incorporate energy conservation into the housing stock. The
element must also establish goals, policies, and programs to maintain, enhance, and
develop housing.
• California Relocation Law: California Public Resources Code Section 7260(b) requires the
fair and equitable treatment of persons displaced as a direct result of programs or projects
undertaken by a public entity. The law requires agencies to prepare a relocation plan,
provide relocation payments, and identify substitute housing opportunities for any resident
who is to be displaced by a public project.
LOCAL
City of Hermosa Beach 2013-2021 Housing Element: Hermosa Beach adopted its 2013-
2021 Housing Element in September 2013. The Housing Element noted the continuing need
to develop affordable workforce housing, as well as housing for seniors, disabled residents,
and other residents with special needs. Hermosa Beach was able to accommodate its
RHNA within its existing zoning and land use designations through the replacement of
existing units and redevelopment of underutilized parcels. This demonstrates that Hermosa
Beach has sufficient sites at appropriate densities to meet legal requirements for
addressing the city's fair share of the regional housing need.
4.12.4IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
The EIR evaluates the potential environmental effects of implementation of PLAN Hermosa related
to population, employment, and housing, including a review of the potential to induce population
growth and to displace people or housing. The analysis is based on the likely consequences of
adoption and implementation of PLAN Hermosa, compared to existing conditions.
Population and Housing Thresholds
For the purposes of the EIR, impacts on population, employment, and housing are considered
�ignific-anf if-adoption-andimpleme-nfation-of-PLAN-Hermosa would:
1) Induce substantial 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).
2) Displace substantial numbers of existing homes, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere.
3) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere.
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.12-5
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.12 POPULATION, HOUSING, AND EMPLOYMENT
ANALYSIS APPROACH
The analysis of impacts is based on the likely consequences of implementation of PLAN Hermosa
compared to existing conditions. The following analysis of population, employment, and housing
impacts is qualitative and based on available demographic and economic data for Hermosa
Beach, along with a review of regional information. The analysis assumes that all future and existing
development in the city complies with applicable laws, regulations, design standards, and plans.
An analysis of cumulative impacts uses qualitative information for Hermosa Beach and the region.
PLAN HERMOSA POLICIES AND IMPLEMENTATION ACTIONS
PLAN Hermosa policies and implementation actions that address population, employment, and
housing include the following:
Policies
Land Use + Design Element
• 1.1 Diverse and distributed land use pattern. Strive to maintain the fundamental pattern of
existing land uses, preserving residential neighborhoods, while providing for enhancement
of corridors and districts in order to improve community activity and identity.
• 1.2 Focused infill potential. Proposals for new development should be directed toward the
city's commercial areas with an emphasis on developing transit -supportive land use mixes.
• 2.2 Variety of types of neighborhoods. Encourage preservation of existing single -density
neighborhoods within the city and ensure that neighborhood types are dispersed
throughout the city.
• 2.4 Single -density neighborhoods. Preserve and maintain the Hermosa Hills, Eastside,
Valley, North End, and Hermosa View neighborhoods as predominantly single-family
residential neighborhoods.
Mobility Element
• 5.5 Multimodal development features. Encourage land use features in development
projects to create compact, connected, and multimodal development supports reduced
trip generation, trip lengths, and greater ability to utilize alternative modes.
Infrastructure Element
• 1.4 Fair share assessments. Require new development and redevelopment projects to pay
their fair share of the cost of infrastructure improvements needed to serve the project, and
ensure that needed infrastructure is available prior to or at the time of project completion.
Implementation Actions
• -- LAND USE-1 Amend the -Zoning Map to -bring consistency between PLAN -Hermosa land
use designations and Zoning Ordinance zoning districts.
IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
IMPACT 4.12-1 Would PLAN Hermosa Induce Substantial Population Growth? Implementation of
PLAN Hermosa would guide future development and reuse projects in the city in
a manner that would not substantially increase population in Hermosa Beach.
Since land use designations and allowable residential densities are only altered
to bring consistency between the zoning and land use maps, the total allowable
development potential in the city would not be changed with implementation
of PLAN Hermosa. Providing for the orderly growth of Hermosa Beach is a basic
purpose of PLAN Hermosa, which would direct expected growth. This impact
would be less than significant.
PLAN Hermosa City of Hermosa Beach
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report August 2017
4.12-6
4.12 POPULATION, HOUSING, AND EMPLOYMENT
PLAN Hermosa's proposed land use plan includes the introduction and expansion of new land
commercial use designations (Recreational Commercial and Gateway Commercial) and adjusts
the allowed land use intensities —some higher, some lower —across most nonresidential land use
designations. Compared to the adopted General Plan, PLAN Hermosa alters land use
designations and zoning to focus redevelopment in certain areas and provides accommodation
for a limited increase in population and employment in Hermosa Beach.
Table 4.12-6 (PLAN Hermosa Residential Development Capacity) and Table 4.12-7 (PLAN Hermosa
Nonresidential Development Capacity) present the anticipated residential and nonresidential
land use changes and resulting increases in living units and nonresidential square footage,
respectively, with implementation of PLAN Hermosa.
TABLE 4.12-6
PLAN HERMOSA RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CAPACITY
Existing Units
New Unit Potential
Total Units
Land Use Designation
Acres
(2015)
(2015-2040)
(2040)
Tota 1
621
10,109
300
10,409
Source: City of Hermosa Beach 2015
TABLE 4.12-7
PLAN HERMOSA NONRESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CAPACITY
Land Use Designation
Acres
Existing Building
New Building Sq. Ft.
Total Building
Sq. Ft. (2015)
Potential (2015-2040)
Sq. Ft. (2040)
Total
83
2,106,400
630,400
2,736,800
Source: City of Hermosa Beach 2015
As shown in Table 4.12-8 (PLAN Hermosa Forecast for 2040), the resulting increase in
accommodated population, households, and employment is consistent with SCAG forecasts for
2040 (Table 4.12-5).1
TABLE 4.12-8
PLAN HERMOSA FORECAST FOR 2040
2015
Change (2015-2040)
City Forecast 2040
Population
19,772
661
20,433
Households
9,501
321
9,822
Jobs
7,622
2,378
10,000
Source: City of Hermosa Beach 2015
The land use plan would focus and encourage reinvestment on key underutilized properties, as
well as on access and circulation improvements. However, these investments are intended to
accommodate growth in population and jobs that would occur in Hermosa Beach through 2040.
PLAN Hermosa includes policies to manage this anticipated growth and focus it in certain infill
areas while maintaining existing density in established residential neighborhoods. The threshold of
significance for indirect growth is the development of new roads or other infrastructure. PLAN
Hermosa Land Use + Design Element Policies 1.1 and 1.2 are specifically crafted to ensure that the
fundamental pattern of existing land uses remains the some and that limited growth only occurs
in areas appropriate for infill. These infill areas can utilize existing infrastructure in the city. Therefore,
I The published SCAG data (Table 4.12-5) are rounded to the nearest 100. As such, the slight difference in forecasts (33
people and 22 households) is negligible and is accounted for in the rounded forecast.
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.12-7
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.12 POPULATION, HOUSING, AND EMPLOYMENT
the shift of population and business growth to be concentrated in certain areas is not substantial
when compared to the expected growth anticipated without the proposed project and the
availability of infrastructure and the necessary public services to serve these concentrated areas
of growth.
Adoption and implementation of PLAN Hermosa would not result in a substantial increase in
population growth since the overall development potential of land uses would not be
dramatically changed from the existing General Plan. The jobs to housing ratio would improve to
0.96 (10,000 jobs/10,409 housing units), as compared to 0.75 in 2015. The physical environmental
impact that is associated with the jobs to housing balance consists of traffic (commuting for jobs)
and the related impacts of traffic noise, air quality, and greenhouse gas emissions. These
environmental issues are addressed elsewhere in this EIR. The development potential provided by
PLAN Hermosa would be consistent with the SCAG 2040 forecast for population and employment
growth. Additional housing and commercial square footage may occur in specific infill locations
in the city, concentrating anticipated natural growth. PLAN Hermosa's Land Use + Design Element
includes Policies 1.1 and 2.2, which ensure that areas of growth are balanced with areas of
preservation. Additionally, Infrastructure Element Policy 1.4 addresses the cost and availability of
infrastructure, thus avoiding indirect inducement of population growth. This impact would be less
than significant.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
IMPACT 4.12-2 Would PLAN Hermosa Displace People or Housing? Implementation of PLAN
Hermosa would guide future development and reuse projects in the city in a
manner that would allow the construction of new residential, commercial, and
industrial uses, as well as infrastructure, public service, and recreation
improvements. However, there would be no substantial changes to the
residential designated land use areas in the city that would result in a large
displacement of existing residences or housing. This is a less than significant
impact.
PLAN Hermosa's proposed Land Use Map includes modest changes to land use designations that
would allow additional nonresidential development, generally focused in existing commercial and
industrial areas and in areas with access to transit, including in the Civic Center District, Cypress
District, and Aviation Corridor. The intent of PLAN Hermosa is to direct anticipated growth to be
orderly and meet community needs and desires. Land Use + Design Element, Mobility Element, and
Infrastructure Element policies would protect existing residential neighborhoods from encroachment
of incompatible uses (Land Use + Design Element Policy 2.4), ensure smart growth in development
project (Mobility. Element Policy 5.5), and ensure growth does not result in undue burden on
infrastructure that could increase costs for the community (Infrastructure Element Policy 1.4).
The Land Use Map and Land Use + Design Policy 5.6 encourage revitalization, land use changes,
and increases in density. Envisioned changes in land use would be indirect and incremental, and
would primarily affect existing commercial and industrial parcels. Land Use + Design Element
Policies 1.1 and 2.2 are intended to preserve existing residential neighborhoods and a variety of
housing options. Because PLAN Hermosa policies would protect existing residential neighborhoods
and do not propose substantial changes to existing residential designated areas, impacts related
to the displacement of people or housing would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
PLAN Hermosa City of Hermosa Beach
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report August 2017
4.12-8
4.12 POPULATION, HOUSING, AND EMPLOYMENT
CUMULATIVE SETTING, IMPACTS, AND MITIGATION MEASURES
The cumulative context for population, employment, and housing impacts is the South Bay Cities
Council of Governments (COG) planning area, given that its demographics are influenced by
employment and housing opportunities and constraints in this region.
IMPACT 4.12-3 Would PLAN Hermosa Contribute to a Cumulative Inducement of Population
Growth? Implementation of PLAN Hermosa's policies, in addition to anticipated
land use changes throughout the South Bay Cities COG planning area, would
increase population, both directly and indirectly (through increased
employment). However, PLAN Hermosa's contribution to this impact would be
less than cumulatively considerable.
The 2040 population projection for the South Bay Cities COG planning area (excluding the Harbor
Bay/San Pedro communities in the City of Los Angeles and County of Los Angeles Districts 2 and
4) is 823,500 people, and the 2040 employment projection is 373,400 jobs (SCAG 2015a). The PLAN
Hermosa increase in population (661) and jobs (2,378) by 2040 is less than 0.1 percent of the growth
forecast for the South Bay Cities COG planning area. In addition, as described in Impact 4.12-1,
PLAN Hermosa's population and employment would be consistent with the SCAG forecast for
2040. Therefore, PLAN Hermosa's contribution to the potential for cumulative inducement of
population growth would not be cumulatively considerable. In addition, PLAN Hermosa's policies
and programs are designed to best manage and accommodate the city's growth. The physical
environmental effects of the city's growth on the region is evaluated in the technical sections of
this EIR. Therefore, the impact is less than cumulatively considerable.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
IMPACT 4.12-4 Would PLAN Hermosa Contribute to Cumulative Impacts on Displacing People or
Housing? Adoption and implementation of PLAN Hermosa, in addition to
anticipated changes throughout the South Bay Cities COG planning area, could
directly or indirectly displace people or housing. However, PLAN Hermosa's
contribution to this impact would be less than cumulatively considerable.
Changes in the South Bay Cities COG planning area through 2040 may result in some
displacement of people or housing through expansion of nonresidential land uses, infrastructure
improvements such as roadway, utility, or transit expansion, or other changes. However, as
described in Impact 4.12-2, implementation of PLAN Hermosa would not substantially alter the
residential designated land areas of the city and thus would not displace a large number of
people or housing in Hermosa Beach; therefore, the plan would not result in a considerable
contribution. This impact would be less than cumulatively considerable.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.12-9
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.12 POPULATION, HOUSING, AND EMPLOYMENT
4.12.5 REFERENCES
California Department of Housing and Community Development. 2000. Raising the Roof:
California Housing Development Projections and Constraints, 1997 2020. Statewide
Housing Plan Update.
City of Hermosa Beach. 2014. Comprehensive Annual Financial Report 2013 2014.
http://www.hermosabch.org/index.aspx?page=209.
2015. "SCAG Integrated Forecast Response." Approved Local Forecast for the SCAG
2016-2040 RTP.
DOF (California Department of Finance). 2015. Table E-5 Population and Housing Estimates for
Cities, Counties, and the State, January 1, 201 1-2015, with a 2010 Benchmark.
Economic and Planning Systems, Inc. 2014. LEHD Census, "Hermosa Beach." Accessed
December 2014. http://www.epsys.com/.
SCAG (Southern California Association of Governments). 2015a. 2016 RTP/SCS Draft Growth
Forecast by Jurisdiction.
http://scogrtpscs.nef/Documents/2016/draft/d2016RTPSCS-DemographicsGrowthForecas
t.pdf.
2015b. Profile of the City of Hermosa Beach.
https://www.scag.co.gov/Documents/HermosaBeach.pdf.
US Census Bureau. 2010. American Community Survey. DP-1. Accessed November 2015.
hftp://factfinder2.census.gov.
2011. Economic Census. DP03. Accessed December 2015. http://factfinder2.census.gov.
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.12-10
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4,13 PUBLIC SERVICES, COMMUNITY
FACILITIES, AND UTILITIES
4.13 PUBLIC SERVICES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES, AND UTILITIES
4.13.1 INTRODUCTION
This resource section describes the public services, community facilities, and utilities that may be
impacted from implementation of PLAN Hermosa. Specifically, this section includes an
examination of fire protection and emergency medical services, law enforcement services, public
schools, parks and recreation, library facilities, water supply and service, wastewater services, solid
waste services, and energy. Each subsection includes a description of existing facilities and
infrastructure, applicable service goals, potential physical environmental impacts resulting from
anticipated changes in public service provision from implementation of PLAN Hermosa, and
cumulative impacts.
NOP Comments: In response to the Notice of Preparation (NOP), a comment was received from
the Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County, stating that the district's regional wastewater
conveyance system should be able to accommodate PLAN Hermosa (see Appendix B-2). In
addition, a comment was received from the Los Angeles County Fire Department, stating that
"the Hermosa Beach Fire Department has jurisdiction concerning the project and will be setting
conditions" (see Appendix B-2). No comments regarding police protection, schools, libraries, or
other public services were received in response to the NOP.
Reference Information: Information for this resource section is based on numerous sources,
including the Hermosa Beach Fire Department, the Hermosa Beach City School District, publicly
available documents, personal and written communication with service providers, and service
agency websites. The Technical Background Report (TBR) prepared for PLAN Hermosa is attached
to this document as Appendix C.
CITY FACILITIES STRATEGIC PLAN
Currently, the City is in the process of preparing the Civic Facilities Strategic Plan, which will address
the current and future facility needs for police, fire, the public library, the public works yard, and
City Hall functions. The current condition of each facility is described briefly below.
City Hall
The existing City Hall was under construction beginning in 1960 and underwent renovations in 2000.
City Hall is located at 1315 Valley Drive and currently includes space for the City Management,
Finance, Public Works, and Community Development departments. City Hall has been previously
identified as constrained for space and has been the subject of numerous space studies. Due to
space constraints, some services are administered from other locations and facilities.
Fire Station
The City of Hermosa Beach has one fire station, which houses three fire engines and two
ambulances. This�ire as as ion, loomed at 540-Pier venue, was originally buitt-of its cu�rr nt-locatLon
in 1959. However, the facility has been found to be structurally and operationally deficient such
that it will most likely not be able to continue operating in the event of a major earthquake. Given
the identified structural deficiency, the Fire Department dormitories were moved into temporary
facilities in 2015, and the fire tower associated with the facility was demolished. The Fire
Department dormitories will continue to be housed in temporary facilities until a facility that meets
current seismic standards for a critical facility is developed.
Police Station
The existing police station, located at 540 Pier Avenue, was initially built in conjunction with the Fire
Station in 1959 and was renovated in 2000. The Police Department also occupies space on the
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.13-1
4.13 PUBLIC SERVICES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES, AND UTILITIES
basement level of City Hall, and the Community Services Division is located at a City -owned
building adjacent to Clark Field.
Since the facility was originally built, there have been major changes in the operational requirements
of a police department, which the current facility does not efficiently support. Some of the many
changes include the needs for specific areas for evidence processing and storage, increased
record keeping storage, increases in the amount and types of protection equipment, increased
staffing, specific legal requirements for holding and processing areas, and increased numbers of
female police officers. The renovation or rebuilding of the police station into a modernized facility is
one of the elements to be considered in the City's Civic Facilities Strategic Plan.
Public Works Yard
The Public Works Yard facility comprises various operational areas and several buildings. The most
urgent upgrade item identified is the installation of a stormwater system and wash -down area with
clarifiers which is required by the State Water Resources Control Board.
The Public Works Yard is located at 555 6th Street and comprises various buildings and operational
areas. The yard provides space and equipment to maintain all of the City's buildings and facilities.
The main building (modular building) was installed circa 1976 and is in fair condition. The shop
building was constructed in the early part of the last century, is seismically unsafe, and has passed
its expected useful life. While not immediately impacting the safety and protection of the citizens
of Hermosa Beach, the replacement of this facility on the existing site is included as a part of the
long-term vision for facility planning.
City Library
The ground was broken for the library, facing Pier Avenue, on November 17, 1961, and the library
was dedicated on August 10, 1962. The Civic Facilities Strategic Plan will include
recommendations and options for library facilities in Hermosa Beach that include replacing the
library at its existing site or relocating the library to the Community Center site. The City has also
received funding from Los Angeles County to prepare a Library Needs Assessment.
Civic Facilities Strategic Plan Scenarios
The Civic Facilities Strategic Plan presents various scenarios for renovation and/or redevelopment
of City facilities. Scenarios under consideration are described below.
Scenario]
• Replace library at existing site.
• Create 2-Company Fire Station to remain on Pier Avenue.
• Close Bard Street. Create new parking structure.
• Replace City Hall (include space for Fire Administration).
• Build a modern police building at the adjacent storage site with basement parking.
• Replace the City Yard facilities at existing site with surface parking.
Scenario 2
• Relocate library to Community Center site.
• Replace fire station as a headquarters fire station at Pier Avenue.
• Build a modern police building at the adjacent storage site with basement parking.
• Renovate and expand City Hall.
• Replace the City Yard facilities at existing site with surface parking.
PLAN Hermosa City of Hermosa Beach
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report August 2017
4.13-2
4.13 PUBLIC SERVICES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES, AND UTILITIES
Scenario 3
• Relocate library to Community Center site.
• Build a modern Public Safety Center at the adjacent storage site with basement parking.
• Replace City Hall and locate it on Pier Avenue.
• Develop a new parking structure.
• Replace the City Yard facilities at existing site with surface parking.
Scenario 4
• Relocate library to Community Center site.
• Build a modern Public Safety Center at the adjacent storage site with basement parking.
• Renovate and expand City Hall without Fire Administration.
• Replace the City Yard facilities at existing site with surface parking.
• Sell Pier Avenue frontage.
Scenario 5
• Relocate library to Community Center site.
• Build a modern Public Safety Center at the adjacent storage site with basement parking.
• Relocate the City Hall functions to a leased or purchased existing office building on Pacific
Coast Highway.
• Replace the City Yard facilities at existing site with surface parking.
• Sell Pier Avenue and Valley Drive corner property.
Scenario 6
• Replace library at existing site.
• Build a modern Public Safety Center at the adjacent storage site with basement parking.
• Renovate and expand City Hall.
• Replace the City Yard facilities at existing site with surface parking.
The Civic Facilities Strategic Plan is meant to help prioritize and inform the capital improvement
decisions and potential funding alternatives that the City will need to make regarding the future
of the identified facilities. The improvement priorities are to focus on:
• Furthering the City's Net Zero goals through the replacement and/or improvements of
each of the identified facilities so that they are seismically, operationally, and functionally
improved to continue to meet the needs of the City in the future.
• Addressing the immediate need of replacing the City's Fire Station so that it is seismically
improved to remain operational in the event of major disaster while improving the
operational capability of the Fire Department to serve the expanding calls for service
within the communit-y-.
• Providing a resilient building which will be operational in the case of a major disaster and
increase the operational efficiencies of the Police Department. Achieve this goal by
providing a single seismically and operationally improved facility from which the
department can deliver modern law enforcement services to the citizens of Hermosa
Beach.
• Increasing operational efficiencies of the Public Works Field Operations by providing
replacement facilities, additional parking, and storage yard areas at the existing Yard
Operations site.
• Replacing or expanding City Hall to better accommodate the existing and future staff
(scenarios presented at this time do not include growth assumptions).
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.13-3
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.13 PUBLIC SERVICES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES, AND UTILITIES
• Developing the facilities in a manner that maximizes the use of the funds available through
phasing options or changes in operations and also considers revenue generation sources.
As noted above, several options/scenarios have been identified to improve existing City facilities.
At the time this EIR was prepared, specific recommendations or project designs have not been
determined, meaning that specific physical impacts to the environment cannot currently be
identified. However, construction activities could result in impacts related to air quality
(construction pollutant emissions), cultural resources (undiscovered resources), greenhouse gas
emissions from construction, soil stability and erosion, construction water quality, accidental
release of hazardous materials during construction, construction noise, and construction traffic
impacts. Subsequent review of project -specific facility improvements would be completed to
determine the extent of site -specific environmental review that will be required. These issues will
be programmatically evaluated in the CEQA documentation for the Civic Facilities Strategic Plan.
4.13.2 FIRE PROTECTION AND EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES
4.13.2.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Fire protection, first response emergency medical services, and natural disaster preparedness
services in Hermosa Beach are provided by the Fire Department (HBFD). The HBFD also administers
the City's Hazardous Material Plan and Emergency Preparedness Program and maintains the
City's Emergency Operations Center. Key findings from the TBR (Appendix C-16) are summarized
below.
• The HBFD consists of one fire station with a total of 18 fire suppression personnel, one
assistant fire chief, and one fire chief. Of the 18 fire suppression personnel, 16 have
paramedic status. Three platoons rotate on a 48-hour schedule. The HBFD station, located
on Pier Avenue, houses three fire engines (two front-line and one reserve) and two
ambulances.
• The HBFD has set an emergency medical services (EMS) response time standard of 5
minutes or less for 90 percent of incidents and a fire response time standard of 5 minutes
20 seconds or less for 90 percent of fire incidents. Excluding mutual aid calls, the average
response time for EMS calls was 5.0 minutes, and the average response time for fire calls
was 7.3 minutes. Ninety percent of EMS calls were responded to within 6.8 minutes, and 90
percent of fire calls were responded to within 10.8 minutes.
• Regional communications and dispatch services are provided for the HBFD by the South
Bay Regional Public Communications Authority, referred to locally as South Bay 911 or the
Regional Call Center (RCC). The HBFD received 775 calls for mutual aid requests in other
jurisdictions, of which 314 calls were cancelled (Center for Public Safety Management
2013a).
• The City has automatic aid agreements with the Manhattan Beach Fire Department and
the Redondo Beach Fire Department. This means that the dispatch of units to an incident
is handled automatically by the dispatch center; the dispatch of additional units does not
require the input of a commander on the scene. Manhattan Beach and Hermosa Beach
have the same dispatch center, while Redondo Beach has its own dispatch center. The
City of Hermosa Beach also has mutual aid agreements with the Torrance and El Segundo
fire departments. Under the mutual aid agreement, units from the County, Torrance, and
El Segundo could be dispatched to Hermosa Beach under the request of the commander
on the scene. Likewise, units from Hermosa Beach could be requested to assist in those
jurisdictions.
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.13 -4
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.13 PUBLIC SERVICES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES, AND UTILITIES
4.13.2.2 REGULATORY SETTING
Local laws, regulations, and policies pertain to fire protection and emergency medical services in
the planning area. The regulatory framework for public services is discussed in detail in Appendix
C-16. The following summarizes key regulations used to reduce the potential environmental
impacts of implementing PLAN Hermosa.
STATE
California Fire Code. The 2013 California Fire Code (Title 24, Part 9 of the California Code
of Regulations) establishes regulations to safeguard against hazards of fire, explosion, or
dangerous conditions in new and existing buildings, structures, and premises. The provisions
of the Fire Code apply to the construction, alteration, movement, enlargement,
replacement, repair, equipment, use and occupancy, location, maintenance, removal,
and demolition of every building or structure throughout California. The Fire Code includes
regulations regarding fire -resistance -rated construction, fire protection systems such as
alarm and sprinkler systems, fire services features such as fire apparatus access roads,
means of egress, and fire safety during construction and demolition,
• California Health and Safety Code. Additional state fire regulations are set forth in
Sections 13000 et seq. of the California Health and Safety Code, which include regulations
for building standards, fire protection and notification systems, fire protection devices such
as extinguishers, smoke alarms, high-rise building and child-care facility standards, and fire
suppression training.
LOCAL
California Occupational Safety and Health Administration. In accordance with the
California Code of Regulations, Title 8, Sections 1270, Fire Prevention, and 6773, Fire
Protection and Fire Fighting Equipment, the California Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (Cal/OSHA) has established minimum standards for fire suppression and
emergency medical services. The standards include but are not limited to guidelines on
the handling of highly combustible materials, fire hose sizing requirements, restrictions on
the use of compressed air, access roads, and the testing, maintenance, and use of all
firefighting and emergency medical equipment.
Hermosa Beach Municipal Code: The City's Municipal Code includes regulations and
standards related to development and operations. Title 2, Administration and Personnel,
contains bylaws and administration procedures for City advisory committees (including
Parks, Recreation and Community Resources, Emergency Preparedness), commissions
(including Planning Commission, Public Works Commission), and City departments or
divisions (Police Department Traffic Division, Emergency Services, Police Reserve Corps).
Title 15, Buildings and Construction, establishes building and construction standards to
protect the public health, safety, and welfare through fire prevention, abatement of
dangerous buildings, seismic strengthening, and enforcement of mechanical, plumbing,
and electrical codes. Chapter 15.20 is the City's Fire Prevention Code, which prescribes
regulations to ensure compliance with applicable state regulations.
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.13-5
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.13 PUBLIC SERVICES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES, AND UTILITIES
4.13.2.3 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
The impact analysis provided below is based on the following CEQA Guidelines Appendix G
standard of significance. For the purposes of this EIR, impacts on fire protection services and utilities
are considered significant if adoption and implementation of PLAN Hermosa would:
1) Create substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or
physically altered fire -related facilities or services, the construction and/or provision of
which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable
service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for fire protection and
emergency services.
ANALYSIS APPROACH
Evaluation of potential fire protection and emergency medical service impacts was based on
information provided by the Hermosa Beach Fire Department, as well as a review of the
applicable fire codes and regulations, the Hermosa Beach Municipal Code, and other relevant
literature. The focus of the analysis is whether implementation of PLAN Hermosa would require
alteration of services that necessitates the development of facilities which could result in an
impact to the physical environment.
PLAN HERMOSA POLICIES AND IMPLEMENTATION ACTIONS
The following proposed PLAN Hermosa policies and implementation actions address fire
protection and emergency medical services:
Policies
Public Safety Element
• 5.2 High level of response. Achieve optimal utilization of allocated public safety resources
and provide desired levels of response and protection within the community.
• 5.6 Adequate emergency access. Require new development to be designed to provide
adequate emergency access and to maintain current levels of emergency services.
• 5.7 Collaborate with neighboring jurisdictions. Cooperate and collaborate with
neighboring jurisdictions and social services to maximize public safety and emergency
services.
• 6.1 Regularly update plans. Regularly update disaster preparedness and emergency
response plans, in a manner that is compliant with state and federal standards,
Implementation Actions
• SAFETY-]. Continue to adopt and enforce the most up-to-date California Building
Standards Code and California Fire Code, with appropriate local amendments.
• SAFETY-8. Support community safety and fire protection standards by establishing and
applying the following development review requirements to be reviewed by HBFD and
HBPD as appropriate:
- New development and significant redevelopment projects shall coordinate with HBFD
and Cal Water to provide and maintain adequate peak flow rates for firefighting.
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.13-6
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.13 PUBLIC SERVICES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES, AND UTILITIES
- New development, significant redevelopment, and public improvement projects shall
ensure that building designs provide for adequate emergency access and that
changes to the right-of-way do not impede access for emergency responder's
apparatus or personnel.
• SAFETY-20. Establish and meet EMS and Fire response time standard of 7 minutes or less for
90% of incidents.
• SAFETY-22. Continue to support existing mutual and automatic aid agreements providing
additional fire and police resources needed during an emergency, as feasible.
IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
IMPACT 4.13.2-1 Would PLAN Hermosa Increase Demand for Fire Protection Services? Subsequent
development associated with implementation of PLAN Hermosa could increase
demand for fire protection services. PLAN Hermosa policies and implementation
actions would require that the City regularly update fire protection standards
and new development to provide adequate fire flow and emergency access.
Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.
PLAN Hermosa would guide future development and reuse projects that could result in 300
additional residential units and 660 new residents from 2015 to 2040 in the planning area, or an
approximately 3 percent increase over existing conditions. The plan could also result in an
additional 630,400 square feet of nonresidential uses. The additional structures and population
would lead to increased demand for fire protection and emergency medical response services.
Future development would be served by the Hermosa Beach Fire Department, or could be served
by Redondo Beach Fire Department or Manhattan Beach Fire Department through the existing
automatic aid agreement, if needed.
As stated previously, the City has automatic aid agreements with the Manhattan Beach and
Redondo Beach fire departments. This means that dispatching units to an incident is handled
automatically by the dispatch center, and dispatching additional units does not require the input
of a commander on the scene. Manhattan Beach and Hermosa Beach have the same dispatch
center, while Redondo Beach has its own dispatch center.
The City of Hermosa Beach also has mutual aid agreements with the Torrance and El Segundo fire
departments. Under the mutual aid agreement, units from the County, Torrance, and El Segundo
could be dispatched to Hermosa Beach under the request of the commander on the scene.
Likewise, units from Hermosa Beach could be requested to assist in those jurisdictions.
PLAN Hermosa is designed for incremental changes in population through redevelopment that
would allow for the adequate provision of services and community facilities. PLAN Hermosa
policies and implementation actions would direct the provision of adequate facilities, staffing,
equipment, and technology to meet existing and projected p�cfion service�lceman san
response times as demands grow with the increase in population.
PLAN Hermosa addresses public service provision through Public Safety Element Policy 5.1, which
would achieve optimal utilization of allocated public safety resources and provide desired levels
of response and protection in the community. Policy 5.6 would require new development to be
designed to provide adequate emergency access and to maintain current levels of emergency
services. Policy 5.7 would ensure cooperation and collaboration with neighboring jurisdictions and
social services to maximize public safety and emergency services. Policy 6.1 would require the
City to regularly update disaster preparedness and emergency response plans. Implementation
action SAFETY-1 would serve to reduce potential impacts by continuing to adopt and enforce the
most up-to-date California Building Standards Code and California Fire Code, with appropriate
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.13-7
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.13 PUBLIC SERVICES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES, AND UTILITIES
local amendments. SAFETY-22 would continue to support existing mutual and automatic aid
agreements providing additional fire and police resources needed during an emergency, as
feasible. SAFETY-8 would support community safety and fire protection standards by establishing
and applying development review requirements.
No additional facility needs that would trigger a physical impact to the environment are currently
anticipated. Thus, this impact is less than significant. Additionally, subsequent projects that are
consistent with the population, housing, and employment projections for PLAN Hermosa, and do
not propose General Plan amendments, would not increase demand for fire protection services
beyond those projected in the Civic Facilities Strategic Plan.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
CUMULATIVE SETTING, IMPACTS, AND MITIGATION MEASURES
The cumulative context for impacts discussed below includes projected regional growth in the
South Bay Cities Council of Governments (COG) planning area, as fire protection and emergency
medical services may be required from beyond the City of Hermosa Beach planning area.
IMPACT 4.13.2-2 Would PLAN Hermosa Increase Cumulative Demand for Fire Protection Services?
PLAN Hermosa, in combination with other existing, planned, proposed,
approved, and reasonably foreseeable development in the South Bay Cities
COG planning area, could increase the demand for fire protection and
emergency medical services and could require additional staffing, equipment,
and related facilities under cumulative conditions. PLAN Hermosa's contribution
to the need for expanded fire protection and emergency medical services, the
construction and operation of which could result in significant environmental
impacts, would be less than cumulatively considerable.
Development in Hermosa Beach that may result with the implementation of PLAN Hermosa, in
addition to other cumulative development in the South Bay Cities COG planning area, could
cause significant cumulative impacts on fire and emergency medical services. However, impacts
related to fire protection and emergency medical services are generally specific to the planning
area rather than regional. As indicated in Impact 4.13.2-1, implementation of PLAN Hermosa
would not result in the need for additional fire protection and emergency medical facilities. The
City is in the process of determining fire facility improvements to maintain and improve its ability
to provide services. The potential physical environmental effects of these improvements are
identified in Impact 4.13.2-1. Further, PLAN Hermosa policies and implementation actions, along
with compliance with the California Fire Code, would maintain adequate response times and
staffing ratios within the city. Therefore, the City's contribution to cumulative environmental
impacts associated with the continued provision of fire protection and emergency medical
response services would be less than cumulatively considerable.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
PLAN Hermosa City of Hermosa Beach
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report August 2017
4.13-8
4.13 PUBLIC SERVICES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES, AND UTILITIES
4.13.3 LAw ENFORCEMENT SERVICES
4.13.3.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The Hermosa Beach Police Department (HBPD) provides police protection services to preserve
peace and prevent crime and disorder by enforcing state laws and city ordinances in the
planning area. Key findings from the TBR (Appendix C-16) are summarized below.
STATIONS AND STAFFING
The HBPD has one police station, located at 540 Pier Avenue. The department has 51 staff assigned
to the station, consisting of 39 sworn personnel and 12 civilian staff. The HBPD consists of several
distinct units to which officers are assigned. These units include detectives, traffic, patrol,
backgrounds and training, internal affairs, Community Lead Program, and Narcotics K-9. The HBPD
has 12 marked vehicles, 5 motorcycles, 10 unmarked vehicles, and 2 speed trailers (City of
Hermosa Beach 2013b). According to the HBPD's Police Operations Report, which provided data
on service level benchmarks, the City provides 178 officers per 100,000 residents (Center for Public
Safety Management 2013b).1
General patrol operations for the HBPD are staffed using 12-hour shifts. Police are assigned to
beach -related events including beach volleyball, concerts on the beach, the Surf Festival, the
Hermosa Arts Fair, and the Hermosa Triathlon. The entire department is deployed on the two days
of the year which draw the largest crowds —the Fourth of July and New Year's Eve.
CALLS FOR SERVICE
Regional communications and dispatch services are provided for the HBPD by the South Bay
911 /RCC, which processes approximately 312,000 police and fire incidents annually in El Segundo,
Gardena, Hawthorne, Hermosa Beach, and Manhattan Beach. Between July 1, 2014, and June
30, 2015, HBPD officers handled 25,266 calls, which included officer -initiated calls. This averages
approximately 69 calls per day. Of those calls, approximately 27 percent (6,784 calls) were
initiated by the police and 73 percent (18,482 calls) were direct calls from the public.
Approximately 19 percent of total calls for service (5,015) were for traffic enforcement.
RESPONSE TIMES
For HBPD response, the dispatch center assigns a priority code of 1 to 4 to each call, with 1 being
the highest priority. For the one-year period between July 2014 and June 2015, the highest priority
calls were responded to within 5.48 minutes (if calculated from call initiation to on scene) or 3.67
minutes from time of dispatch to on scene.
CRIME RATES
In 2014, Hermosa Beach reported 186 Part I violent crimes per 100,000 residents, or 37 crimes, and
2,732 Part I property crimes per 100,000 residents, or 543 crimes. The reported number of violent
crimes was 53.04 percent lower than the statewide rate (396) and 49.06 percent lower than the
national rate (366). Property crime rates were 11.92 percent higher than the state average (244)
and 5.23 percent higher than the national average (2,596).
I The number of officers per 100,000 reflects a normalized calculation for purposes of the operations report; it is not
intended to represent the actual population in Hermosa Beach. The number of officers per 1,000 residents (1.78) is not a
required service level or nationally recognized standard, and the existing ratio provides a reasonable baseline against
which to estimate PLAN Hermosa impacts.
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.13-9
4.13 PUBLIC SERVICES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES, AND UTILITIES
4.13.3.2 REGULATORY SETTING
LOCAL
Local laws, regulations, and policies pertain to public safety and law enforcement services in the
planning area. The regulatory framework for public services is discussed in detail in Appendix C-16.
• Hermosa Beach Municipal Code: The City's Municipal Code includes regulations and
standards related to Health and Safety (Title 8), Public Peace, Morals and Welfare (Title 9),
and Vehicle and Traffic (Title 10).
4.13.3.3 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
The impact analysis provided below is based on the following CEQA Guidelines Appendix G
standard of significance. A law enforcement services impact is considered significant if
implementation of the proposed project would:
1) Create substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of 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 law enforcement services.
ANALYSIS APPROACH
Evaluation of potential law enforcement impacts was based on information provided by the
Hermosa Beach Police Department. The impact analysis focuses on whether those impacts would
have a significant effect on the physical environment.
PLAN HERMOSA POLICIES AND IMPLEMENTATION ACTIONS
The following proposed PLAN Hermosa policies and implementation actions address law
enforcement services:
Policies
Public Safety Element
• 5.2 High level of response. Achieve optimal utilization of allocated public safety resources
and provide desired levels of response and protection within the community.
• 5.3 Use of technology. Provide and use smart surveillance technology and communication
systems to improve crime prevention and inform the community regarding actions to take
in case of emergency.
• 5.4 Physical design standards. Reduce opportunities for criminal activity through physical
design standards and Crime Prevention through Environmental Design principles.
• 5.6 Adequate emergency access. Require new development to be designed to provide
adequate emergency access and to maintain current levels of emergency services.
• 5.7 Collaborate with neighboring jurisdictions. Cooperate and collaborate with
neighboring jurisdictions and social services to maximize public safety and emergency
services.
• 5.8 Nuisance abatement. Encourage Police Department review of uses which may be
characterized historically by high levels of nuisance (noise, nighttime patronage, and/or
rates of criminal activity); providing for conditions of control of use to prevent adverse
impacts on adjacent residences, schools, religious facilities, and similar "sensitive" uses.
PLAN Hermosa City of Hermosa Beach
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report August 2017
4.13-10
4.13 PUBLIC SERVICES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES, AND UTILITIES
• 6.1 Regularly update plans. Regularly update disaster preparedness and emergency
response plans, in a manner that is compliant with state and federal standards.
Implementation Actions
• SAFETY-21. Enhance and maintain Police Department staffing and facilities to meet
established proactive time targets and clearance rates that exceed national averages.
• SAFETY-22. Continue to support existing mutual and automatic aid agreements providing
additional fire and police resources needed during an emergency, as feasible.
IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
IMPACT 4.13.3-1 Would PLAN Hermosa Increase Demand for Law Enforcement Services?
Subsequent development associated with implementation of PLAN Hermosa
would guide future development and reuse projects in the city in a manner that
would result in an increase in population in the planning area, but it would not
result in the need for additional and/or expanded police protection facilities.
PLAN Hermosa policies and implementation actions would require the City to
continue to provide adequate staffing, facilities, equipment, and technology to
meet existing and projected service demands and response times. Therefore, this
impact would be less than significant.
PLAN Hermosa would guide future development and reuse projects that would result in an
increase in the city's population from 19,772 to 20,433 (a 3 percent increase). Assuming a ratio of
1.78 sworn officers per 1,000 residents, the HBPD would need approximately 36 sworn officers. The
department currently has 39 sworn personnel; therefore, the increase in population with PLAN
Hermosa would not require an increase in staffing beyond authorized levels that would require
additional facility space, the construction or operation of which could result in significant
environmental impacts.
As previously noted, the City is currently considering improvements to police department facilities
to address current needs and improve operations. No specific recommendations or designs have
been established so that physical impacts to the environment can be identified. However,
construction activities could result in impacts related to air quality (construction pollutant
emissions), cultural resources (undiscovered resources), greenhouse gas emissions from
construction, soil stability and erosion, construction water quality, accidental release of hazardous
materials during construction, construction noise, and construction traffic impacts. These issues
have been programmatically evaluated in this EIR. Subsequent review of project -specific facility
improvements would be completed to determine the extent of site -specific environmental review
that will be required.
PLAN Hermosa is designed to allow incremental changes in population through redevelopment
that would allow for the odequpte provision of services qd community facilities. PLAN Hermosa
policies and implementation actions would direct the provision of adequate facilities, staffing,
equipment, and technology to meet existing and projected police protection service demands
and response times as demands grow with the increase in population.
PLAN Hermosa Public Safety Element policies would ensure adequate police protection is
provided to accommodate a potential increase in the number of residents. Policy 5.1 would
achieve optimal utilization of allocated public safety resources and provide desired levels of
response and protection within the community. Policy 5.3 would provide and use up-to-date
technology to improve crime prevention and inform the community regarding actions to take in
case of emergency. Policy 5.4 would reduce opportunities for criminal activity through physical
design standards, youth programs, recreation opportunities, educational programs, and
counseling services. Policy 5.6 would require new development to be designed to provide
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.13-11
4.13 PUBLIC SERVICES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES, AND UTILITIES
adequate emergency access and to maintain current levels of emergency services. Policy 5.7
would ensure cooperation and collaboration with neighboring jurisdictions and social services to
maximize public safety and emergency services. Policy 5.8 would encourage Police Department
review of uses which may be characterized historically by high levels of nuisance (noise, nighttime
patronage, and/or rates of criminal activity), providing for conditions of control of use to prevent
adverse impacts on adjacent residences, schools, religious facilities, and similar sensitive uses.
Policy 6.1 would require the City to regularly update disaster preparedness and emergency
response plans.
Implementation action SAFETY-22 would continue to support existing mutual and automatic aid
agreements providing additional fire and police resources needed during an emergency, as
feasible. SAFETY-21 would serve to reduce potential impacts by maintaining police department
staffing and facilities to meet established proactive time targets and clearance rates that exceed
national averages.
Therefore, PLAN Hermosa policies and implementation actions would require the City to continue
to provide funding and adequate equipment, technology, and funding for the HBPD to meet
existing and projected service demands and response times. PLAN Hermosa policies and
programs would ensure that the City would meet increased demands for police protection
associated with an increase in population. Additionally, an increase in population would not
require an increase in staffing beyond authorized levels that would require additional facility
space. Thus, this impact is less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
CUMULATIVE SETTING, IMPACTS, AND MITIGATION MEASURES
The cumulative context for impacts discussed below includes projected regional growth in
surrounding cities and in Los Angeles County, as law enforcement may be required from beyond
the planning area.
IMPACT 4.13.3-2 Would PLAN Hermosa Increase Cumulative Demand for Law Enforcement
Services? PLAN Hermosa, in combination with other existing, planned, proposed,
approved, and reasonably foreseeable development in the South Bay Cities
COG service area, could increase the demand forlaw enforcement services and
could require additional staffing, equipment, and facilities under cumulative
conditions. PLAN Hermosa's contribution to the need for expanded law
enforcement services facilities, the construction and operation of which could
result in significant environmental impacts, would be less than cumulatively
considerable. --
As discussed in Impact 4.13.3-1, PLAN Hermosa would not result in the need for additional law
enforcement facilities. PLAN Hermosa policies and implementation actions would require the City
to continue to provide funding and adequate staffing, facilities, equipment, and technology to
meet existing and projected service demands and response times. Therefore, PLAN Hermosa
would not contribute to a cumulative demand for law enforcement services facilities outside of
the planning area. PLAN Hermosa's contribution to the continued provision of law enforcement
services in the cumulative setting would be less than cumulatively considerable.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
PLAN Hermosa City of Hermosa Beach
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report August 2017
4.13-12
4.13 PUBLIC SERVICES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES, AND UTILITIES
4.13.4 PUBLIC SCHOOLS
4.13.4.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The Hermosa Beach City School District (HBCSD) provides elementary school (K-8) public
education to students living in the planning area. Table 4.13-1 (Hermosa Beach School Enrollment,
2014-2015) identifies schools located in the planning area and their enrollments for the 2014-2015
school year. In addition, there are two private schools: Our Lady of Guadalupe School is a private
elementary school for grades preschool through 8, and Fusion Academy is an accredited,
nontraditional private school for grades 6-12.
TABLE 4.13-1
HERMOSA BEACH CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT ENROLLMENT, 2014-2015
School
Grades
Total Enrollment
Hermosa View
K-2
485
Hermosa Valley
3-8
991
Total
1,476
Source: CDE 2016
The current enrollment at Hermosa Valley and Hermosa View exceeds the permanent capacity
at each school and will continue to exceed the permanent capacity over the next 10 years. The
HBCSD has added portable classroom buildings and is using multipurpose rooms for temporary
classrooms. The school district estimates an enrollment projection of over 1,600 students for 2022,
which would result in additional capacity shortages. Senate Bill 837, if approved, would add
Universal Transitional Kindergarten as a new grade, open to all 4-year-olds throughout California's
public school system. The district has indicated that Universal Transitional Kindergarten will have a
serious impact on enrollment on an already overcrowded two -school district and could not be
accommodated at the district's two schools alone.
The HBCSD has prepared a Long Range Facilities Master Plan, which examines four options for
providing additional classroom and recreational facility space. Option A would shift third -graders
to Hermosa View. Options B, C, and D would involve the use of a third school (North School, which
the district currently leases to a private preschool and the Redondo Beach Unified School District)
in addition to the two existing schools (HBCSD 2014). During the June 2016 elections, voters
approved School Bond Measure S that provides $59 million for funding improvements that include
the construction of a new school on the site of North School, as well as renovations at Hermosa
Valley School and Hermosa View School. As of the date of the release of this EIR, the district has
not released an environmental review document related to these improvements.
Assumin-g-improve-men#s-w-aul-d_be-implement-ed- at tho existangschaols-or irLcombinotion-with-the
third school, the district would be responsible for preparing the necessary environmental review
documents to identify environmental impacts that may occur as a result of improvements (e.g.,
new construction or remodeling/renovation) or operation (e.g., new vehicle trips to a third school).
High school age residents attend either Mira Costa High School in Manhattan Beach (Manhattan
Beach Unified School District) or Redondo Union High School in Redondo Beach (Redondo Beach
Unified School District) (HBCSD 2009). In 2014-15, the enrollment at Mira Costa High School was
2,517 students (CDE 2016). Mira Costa High School has capacity for 3,477 students and projects
enrollment in 2024 to be only slightly higher than current enrollment. In developing its facilities
master plan, the Manhattan Beach Unified School District (MBUSD) included forecasts for
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.13-13
4.13 PUBLIC SERVICES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES, AND UTILITIES
enrollment based on HBCSD enrollment trends and other forecasting parameters, and the total
(2,740) would not exceed capacity (MBUSD 2015).
The Redondo Beach Unified School District (RBUSD) has two high schools, Redondo Union High
School and Redondo Shores (a continuation school with less than 100 students). The combined
enrollment for 2015-16 is 2,767, and the existing high school capacity is 3,088 students. The number
of high school students is expected to exceed capacity by 2017-18. The RBUSD has also projected
enrollment through 2035 and has determined the amount of facility space that will be necessary
to accommodate future enrollments. The cost for facility improvements (currently projected to be
five new classrooms [Redella 2016]) would be funded through developer fees in accordance with
Senate Bill 50, as described below (RBUSD 2016).
4.13.4.2 REGULATORY SETTING
The following state and local plans, policies, regulations, and laws pertain to public schools in the
planning area:
STATE
California Education Code: The California Education Code contains various provisions
governing the siting, design, and construction of new public schools (e.g., Education Code
Sections 17211, 17212, and 17212.5). In addition, to help focus and manage the site
selection process, the California Department of Education School Facilities and Planning
Division has developed screening and ranking procedures based on criteria commonly
affecting school selection (Education Code Section 17251 [b], Title 5 of the California Code
of Regulations, Section 14001 [c]). The foremost consideration in the selection of school sites
is safety. Certain health and safety requirements are governed by state statute and
Education Code regulations. In selecting a school site, a school district should consider
factors such as proximity to airports and railroads, proximity to high -voltage power
transmission lines, presence of toxic and hazardous substances, and hazardous air
emissions within one -quarter mile.
School Facility Fees: Education Code Section 17620 authorizes school districts to levy a fee,
charge, dedication, or other requirement against any development project for the
construction or reconstruction of school facilities, provided that the district can show
justification for levying of fees. Government Code 65995 limits the fee to be collected to
the statutory fee (Level 1) unless a school district conducts a Facility Needs Assessment
(Government Code Section 65995.6) and meets certain conditions. These fees are
adjusted every two years in accordance with the statewide cost index for Class B
construction, as determined by the State Allocation Board.
Senate Bill (SB) 50 (1998) instituted a new school facility program by which school districts
can apply for state construction and modernization funds. This legislation imposed
limitations on the power of cities and counties to require mitigation for school facility
impacts as a condition of approving new development. Proposition 1 A/SB 50 prohibits
local agencies from using the inadequacy of school facilities as a basis for denying or
conditioning approvals of any "legislative or adjudicative act, or both, involving, but not
limited to, the planning, use, or development of real property" (Government Code Section
65996[b]). Additionally, a local agency cannot require participation in a Mello -Roos district
for school facilities; however, the statutory fee is reduced by the amount of any voluntary
participation in a Mello -Roos district. Satisfaction of the Proposition 1 A/SB 50 statutory
requirements by a developer is deemed to be "full and complete mitigation."
• State Service Standards Affecting All Districts
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.13-14
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.13 PUBLIC SERVICES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES, AND UTILITIES
- The California Education Code Section 41402 states that unified school districts are
required to have 8 administrative employees per 100 teachers.
- State standards for the number of students per classroom pursuant to Chapter 407,
Statutes of 1998 (loading standards), require a maximum of 25 students per classroom
in elementary schools and 27 students per classroom in middle and high schools.
4.13.4.3 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
The impact analysis provided below is based on the following CEQA Guidelines Appendix G
standard of significance. A public schools impact is considered significant if implementation of
the proposed project would:
1) Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or
physically altered school facilities, the construction of which could cause significant
environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or
other performance objectives for schools.
ANALYSIS APPROACH
Information for the analysis was obtained through a review of facilities master plans prepared by
the school districts, which contain information about current and projected enrollment and school
capacity and consultation with district staff. District planning documents project enrollments to
the 2022-23 time frame, but they do not provide forecasts to 2040. The HBCSD does not use a
student generation rate factor (HBCSD 2015). School enrollment data were obtained from the
California Department of Education, Educational Demographics Unit (CDE 2016).
PLAN HERMOSA POLICIES AND IMPLEMENTATION ACTIONS
The following proposed PLAN Hermosa policies address public schools:
Policies
Land Use + Design Element
• 7.3 School modernization upgrades. Support Hermosa Beach City School District plans to
renovate and modernize school facilities to meet evolving educational needs in a manner
that minimizes burdens to adjacent neighborhoods.
• 7.6 Education impact fees. Coordinate with the school district(s) to assess and establish
school impact fees paid by new development projects.
Implementation Actions
• LAND -USA. Develop -an inventoryof underutilized or surplus property -that -may be
appropriate for City or School District use or purchase to serve community education and
recreational needs in the future.
• MOBILITY-18. In conjunction with the Hermosa Beach City School District, the City will
identify school access points, a proposed network, education and enforcement programs
to provide a comprehensive Safe Routes to School Program.
• PARKS-6. Continue, renew, and expand as needed, joint use agreements with the School
District to allow community use of school fields and facilities.
• PARKS-7. Partner with the School District, community groups, and neighboring communities
to identify and apply for grant opportunities to maintain, enhance, and expand park and
recreational opportunities.
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.13-15
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.13 PUBLIC SERVICES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES, AND UTILITIES
IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
IMPACT 4.13.4-1 Would PLAN Hermosa Increase Demand for Additional School Facilities? PLAN
Hermosa would guide future development and reuse projects in the city in a
manner that could result in an increase in student enrollment in public schools.
New or expanded school high school facilities would not be required, but the
addition of K-8 students in the Hermosa Beach City School District would
contribute to existing and future overcrowding in the district's two schools. The
HBCSD has identified options for providing additional capacity to address existing
and future enrollment, which would be required regardless of whether PLAN
Hermosa is adopted and implemented. Payment of applicable fees in
accordance with SB 50 would fully mitigate the impacts associated with the
development of additional school facilities. Therefore, this impact would be less
than significant.
PLAN Hermosa could increase the city's population by 660 (3 percent) compared to existing
conditions, which would result in additional students in the HBCSD and in the attendance areas of
Mira Costa and Redondo Union high schools. The two schools in the HBCSD already have
enrollments that exceed permanent classroom capacity. If all population growth were to occur
in the near term, the additional students in the HBCSD would further contribute to existing
overcrowding in the district's two schools and would add to future projected enrollment through
2023 that would exceed capacity. The overcrowded condition would exist regardless of whether
PLAN Hermosa is adopted and implemented. However, exceeding school capacity in and of itself
is not considered a physical impact under CEQA. The school district has developed a facilities
plan identifying options for providing additional facility space and will address the need for
expansion of school facilities or development of new school facilities. As noted above, School
Bond Measure S provides $59 million for funding improvements that include the construction of a
new school on the site of North School as well as renovations at Hermosa Valley School and
Hermosa View School. As of the date of the release of this EIR, the HBCSD has not released an
environmental review document related to these improvements. Potential environmental impacts
from these school improvements include air quality (construction pollutant emissions), cultural
resources (impacts to undiscovered resources during construction), greenhouse gas emissions
from construction and operation, soil stability and erosion, construction and operational water
quality, accidental release of hazardous materials during construction, construction, traffic and
operational noise, and traffic impacts from construction traffic, operational traffic and potential
safety conflicts with pedestrian and bicycle use. Future projects developed under PLAN Hermosa
would be required to pay applicable fees consistent with SB 50.
The addition of PLAN Hermosa population to existing enrollment at Mira Costa High School would
not result in enrollment levels that would exceed capacity; however,. it would contribute to
projected capacity exceedance at Redondo Union High School
California Government Code Section 65995 specifies that the environmental impact of new
development on school facilities is considered fully mitigated through the payment of required
development impact fees under SB 50. All new development proposed and approved, including
any future development allowed by PLAN Hermosa, would be required to pay applicable
development impact fees. Furthermore, any significant expansion of school facilities or
development of new school facilities would be subject to the appropriate CEQA environmental
review prepared by the respective school districts, which would identify and address any site -
specific impacts. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.
PLAN Hermosa City of Hermosa Beach
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report August 2017
4.13-16
4.13 PUBLIC SERVICES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES, AND UTILITIES
Mitigation Measures
None required.
CUMULATIVE SETTING, IMPACTS, AND MITIGATION MEASURES
School facilities impacts are associated with a specific district, each of which defines its own
attendance boundaries. Although a school may have an attendance boundary that
encompasses more than one jurisdiction, the cumulative effect would be limited to the district
itself. Thus, the cumulative context for impacts discussed below is the HBCSD for grades K-8 and
the Manhattan Beach and Redondo Beach unified school districts for grades 9-12.
IMPACT 4.13.4-2 Would PLAN Hermosa Cumulatively Increase Demand for Schools? Population
growth associated with implementation of PLAN Hermosa, in combination with
other existing, planned, proposed, approved, and reasonably foreseeable
development in the Hermosa Beach City Unified School District, Manhattan
Beach Unified School District, and Redondo Beach Unified School District, could
result in a cumulative increase in student enrollment, which could result in the
need for new or expanded public school facilities. PLAN Hermosa's contribution
to the need for new or expanded school facilities would be less than
cumulatively considerable.
Cumulative development in the three districts would result in increased enrollments. For the
HBCSD, the increase would only be attributable to PLAN Hermosa because the district's
attendance boundary corresponds to the city jurisdictional boundary. There would be no
additional impact beyond that described in Impact 4.13.4-1, which was determined to be less
than significant.
It would be speculative for the City to forecast 2040 enrollments for all high schools in the districts
because the schools are not operated by the City, and the City is not involved in school planning.
Further, enrollments may fluctuate on a short-term basis, based on changes to demographic and
economic conditions. For the two high school districts, student enrollment projections are not
available for 2040. The City has relied on enrollment projections provided by the school districts
and has disclosed publicly available information. However, it is reasonable to assume that future
enrollments in 2040 in the two school districts will be a function of population changes and
changes to land use plans which may increase population. Using projections developed by the
Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) for Manhattan Beach and Redondo
Beach combined, there would be an additional 8,800 people and 4,800 households, respectively
over the next 25 years. This growth can be expected to increase enrollment in the high schools.
(Students from outside these cities may also attend high schools in the districts, though they would
not represent a substantial portion of enrollment.)
PLAN Hermosa's contribution to combined population and household growth of the three -city
area would represent approximately 6 percent. New or expanded facilities that the individual
districts may determine are necessary to accommodate students by 2040 would be subject to
environmental review and any necessary mitigation, which would be the responsibility of the
school districts, and the cities would levy SB 50 fees for such development. Based on the foregoing,
and given the provisions of SB 50, PLAN Hermosa's contribution to cumulative impacts on the need
for new or expanded school facilities is less than cumulatively considerable.
If a new or expanded high school facility is later determined by either the MBUSD or the RBUSD to
be required to accommodate student enrollment conditions in the year204O and beyond, it could
result in physical environmental effects associated with construction (e.g., air quality, special -
status species and habitats, cultural resources, geological resources, greenhouse gases, water
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.13-17
4.13 PUBLIC SERVICES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES, AND UTILITIES
quality and drainage, noise) as well as operational impacts (e.g., air quality, greenhouse gases,
water quality, land use, noise, public services and utilities), depending on the location of the new
facilities. Because those improvements are not known, it would be speculative to determine the
exact extent of those impacts, if any, at this time. Additional evaluation is not required, as provided
under CEQA Guidelines Section 15145 pertaining to speculation.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
4.13.5 PARKS AND RECREATION
4.13.5.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Appendix C-16 describes the regional and local conditions related to parks and recreation in
Hermosa Beach. Key findings of the environmental setting are presented below.
PARK FACILITIES
The City owns, operates, and maintains many developed park and recreation facilities providing
green space, picnic facilities, a skateboard park, tennis courts, lawn bowling, and space for
sporting events, as well as a community garden. The Strand and the Greenbelt offer city -long
paths. Following a ballot initiative (Measure O in 1986), voter approval is required for redesignation
of parkland designated Open Space in the General Plan to any other use.
The Hermosa Beach Community Resources Department administers the City's recreation
programs, which offer a variety of recreational activities for participants of all ages, and facilitates
the rental of City facilities for private events. Figure 4.13-1 (Parks and Public Facilities) identifies
locations of public services and spaces in the planning area, including parks. Three facilities —
Valley Park, Clark Stadium, and South Park —support activities and sport leagues for both youth
and adult participants. Clark Stadium also includes space for lawn bowling. The Clark Building,
located at 861 Valley Drive, has a multipurpose hall and lighted sports fields. A farmers market is
held at South Park and at Pier Plaza. South Park, located at 425 Valley Drive, includes lawn areas,
a play area, and a community garden.
Hermosa Beach includes approximately 42.3 acres of parkland and 63.4 acres of public beaches
(see Table 4.13-2 [Parks and Community Facilities in Hermosa Beach]). The City does not have an
established goal or standard for open space or parkland. With 19,772 residents in 2015 and 105.7
acres of accessible open space or parkland in Hermosa Beach, the City provides approximately
5.3 acres of parkland and public beaches per 1,000 residents. This ratio is above the goal or
standard of 4 acres set by many cities in Los Angeles County and above the standard of 3 acres
per 1,000 residents required under the Quimby Act.
The Hermosa Valley Greenbelt/Trail, located between Valley Drive and Ardmore Avenue, runs the
length of the planning area and connects to Redondo Beach and Manhattan Beach. The
Greenbelt provides a walking and jogging trail. Also located in the planning area are Ardmore
Park (491 Ardmore Avenue) and Bicentennial Park (Valley Drive and 4th Street).
The Community Center and Hermosa Beach Community Theater are located at 710 Pier Avenue,
at the intersection of Pacific Coast Highway and Pier Avenue. This complex includes a community
center with meeting rooms, senior center, large and small theaters, gymnasium, skate park, tennis
courts, and the Hermosa Beach Museum. The P.A.R.K. (Positive Active Recreation for Kids) Program
is an after -school program offered at the Hermosa Beach Community Center and South Park for
Hermosa Beach residents, emphasizing active recreation for children in first through eighth grades.
PLAN Hermosa City of Hermosa Beach
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report August 2017
4.13-18
4.13 PUBLIC SERVICES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES, AND UTILITIES
TABLE 4.13-2
PARKS AND COMMUNITY FACILITIES IN HERMOSA BEACH
Park Name
Address
Park Type
Size (acres)
1
Shaffer Park
Ingleside Ave & 33rd Place
Parkette
<0.1
2
Valley Park
Valley Dr & Gould Ave
Park
8.8
3
Valley Greenbelt
Trail/Open Space
19
4
Sea View Park
Prospect Ave & 19th St
Park
0.3
5
Scout Parkette
Prospect Ave & 14th St
Parkette
<0.1
6
Greenwood Park
PCH & Aviation Blvd
Park
0.5
7
Fort Lots-o-Fun
Prospect Ave & 6th St
Park
0.2
8
Edith Rodaway Friendship Park
Prospect Ave
Park
0.8
9
Oceanview Parkette
3rd St
Parkette
<0.1
10
Moondust Parkette
2nd St
Parkette
<0.1
11
City Beach, Strand Pier
Trail/Open Space
63.4
12
Noble Park
1400 The Strand
Park
0.8
13
Clark Stadium/Lawn Bowling Green
861 Valley Dr
Park
6.6
14
8th & Valley Parkette
8th St & Valley Dr
Parkette
<0.1
15
South Park
425 Valley Dr
Park
4.5
16
Ardmore Park
491 Ardmore Park
Park
0.2
17
Bicentennial Park
Valley Dr & 4th St
Park
0.4
18
Kay Etow Parkette
Herondo St
Parkette
<0.1
19
Seawright Sandhill Parkette
Manhattan Ave & Loma Dr
Parkette
< 0.1
Total
105.5
Facility Name
Address
Park Type
Size (acres)
20
Hermosa Beach Community Center
710 Pier Ave
Community Center
4.8
21
View School
1800 Prospect Ave
School
4.6
22
Valley School
1645 Valley Dr
School
8.8
23
North School
417 25th St
School
1.8
24
Prospect Avenue Building
1006 61h St
Public Building
0.2
Total
20.2
Source: City of Hermosa Beach 2015b
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.13-19
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.13 PUBLIC SERVICES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES, AND UTILITIES
FIGURE 4.13-1
PARKS AND PUBuc FACILITIES
r-• �- -� hermasa beach
i parks + public facilities
1.
j city limits
coastal zone 0 shaffer park
� `AVe ? valley park
/ valley greenbelt
r;m
/ sea view park
scout parkette
_ greenwood park
d tort lots -of -fun park
ti ® edith rodaway park
1 its+ oceanview parkette
f, moondust parkette
sin i 4 st city beach, strand, pier
I-A� noble park
` \ ® dark stadium
i Sth + valley parkette
1\5. 11 south park
j 1+1h s1 ® ardmore park
G l ® bi-centennial park
kay etow parkette
seawright sandhill
r j parkette
s1 community center +
14 I skate park
6M g 24 r ® view school
"- s j valley school
north school
2 9
I ® prospect ave building
10
a
_J
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.13-20
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.13 PUBLIC SERVICES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES, AND UTILITIES
LIFEGUARD AND BEACH MANAGEMENT
The City of Hermosa Beach owns 63.4 acres of public beaches, including 1.8 miles of shoreline and
the Hermosa Pier. With annual beach attendance of 3.8 million visitors in fiscal year 2010-11,
ocean protection and lifeguard services are important public services to protect public safety
along the city's beaches and coastal areas. The City contracts with the Los Angeles County Fire
Department's Lifeguard Division for these services. The Lifeguard Division consists of 150 full-time
and 700 seasonal lifeguards throughout Los Angeles County.
The Lifeguard Division operates out of four sectional headquarters, one of which is located in
Hermosa Beach. The Hermosa Beach sectional headquarters staffs a 24-hour emergency medical
technician response unit and is connected to the 911 system.
BEACHES
Hermosa Beach is known for its beach, surfing, and The Strand, a paved path that parallels the
beach, connecting Hermosa Beach to neighboring beach cities. The City owns the wide beach
that runs the length of the planning area and serves both locals and visitors. The Strand is also part
of the statewide California Coastal Trail system.
As a beach community, Hermosa Beach experiences a high visitor population. During fiscal year
2010-11, monthly beach attendance ranged from a low of 94,300 in December 2010 to a high of
939,000 in July 2010 (Los Angeles County Fire Department 2012). Total beach attendance in fiscal
year 2010-1 1 was up 18.5 percent from fiscal year 2009-10 to 3,763,700.
The total number of residents and visitors on a weekday afternoon is 48,600 people, approximately
2.5 times the total city population. On a weekday evening, the number is just over 60,000 people,
and on a weekend afternoon, approximately 108,000 people, or 5.5 times the total city
population. Most of the visitors come from 10 miles away or less (Fehr & Peers 2014). The Hermosa
Pier is 1,228 feet long and offers year-round fishing. The pier contains the Surfer's Walk of Fame,
where surfing legends from Hermosa Beach are commemorated with bronze plaques embedded
in the pier's walking surface. In addition to surfing, recreational beach activities include volleyball,
skating and skateboarding, jogging, and bicycling. Special events throughout the year are
primarily focused on the beach, the adjacent Pier Plaza, and the Downtown area.
4.13.5.2 REGULATORY SETTING
The following state and local plans, policies, regulations, and laws pertain to public services and
recreation in the planning area.
STATE
• Quimby Act: As -part of- approval -ofa final traet-or-parcel-maps-he-Quimby-Ac-t allows-0
city to require dedication of land, the payment of in -lieu fees, or a combination of both to
be used for the provision of parks and recreational services. Cities can require land or in -
lieu fees for a minimum of 3 acres per 1,000 residents, with the possibility of increasing the
requirement to a maximum of 5 acres per 1,000 residents if the city already provides more
than 3 acres per 1,000 residents.
California Coastal Act: The California Coastal Act of 1976 and the California Coastal
Commission, the state's coastal protection and planning agency, were established by
voter initiative in 1972 to plan for and regulate new development, and create strong
policies to protect public access to and along the shoreline. To ensure that maximum
public access to the coast and public recreation areas is provided, the Coastal Act directs
each local government lying within the Coastal Zone to prepare a Local Coastal Program
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.13-21
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.13 PUBLIC SERVICES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES, AND UTILITIES
(LCP) consistent with Section 30501 of the Coastal Act, in consultation with the Coastal
Commission and with public participation. Provisions of the Coastal Act related to public
services, utilities, and recreation are summarized below.
Until an LCP has been adopted by the local jurisdiction and certified compliant with the
Coastal Act, the Coastal Commission retains permitting authority within the local
jurisdiction. A coastal development permit is required for development in the Coastal Zone
that results in changes to the density or intensity of the use of land, changes in water use,
and impacts to coastal access.
- Section 30210. Access; recreational opportunities; posting. In carrying out requirements
of Section 4 of Article X of the California Constitution, maximum access, which shall be
conspicuously posted, and recreational opportunities shall be provided for all of the
people consistent with public safety needs and the need to protect public rights, rights
of private property owners, and natural resource areas from over use.
- Section 30212.5. Public Facilities; distribution. Wherever appropriate and feasible,
public facilities, including parking areas or facilities, shall be distributed throughout an
area so as to mitigate against the impacts, social and otherwise, of overcrowding or
overuse by the public of any single area.
- Section 30221. Oceanfront land; protection for recreational use and development.
Oceanfront land suitable for recreational use shall be protected for recreational use
and development unless present and foreseeable future demand for public or
commercial recreational activities that could be accommodated on the property is
already adequately provided for in the area.
- Section 30252. Maintenance and enhancement of public access. The location and
amount of new development should maintain and enhance public access to the
coast by (1) facilitating the provision or extension of transit service, (2) providing
commercial facilities within or adjoining residential development or in other areas that
will minimize the use of coastal access roads, (3) providing nonautomobile circulation
within the development, (4) providing adequate parking facilities or providing
substitute means of serving the development with public transportation, (5) assuring
the potential for public transit high intensity uses such as high-rise office buildings, and
by (6) assuring that the recreational needs of new residents will not overload nearby
coastal recreation areas by correlating the amount of development with local park
acquisition and development plans with the provision of on -site recreational facilities
to serve the new development.
LOCAL
• Hermosa Beach Municipal Code: The City's Municipal Code includes regulations and
standards related to development and operations. Title 12, Street, Sidewalks and Public
Places, establishes development and operations standards for public spaces in the
planning area (e.g., parks, sidewalks, the beach).
• Hermosa Beach Comprehensive Parks and Recreation Master Plan: The Comprehensive
Parks and Recreation Master Plan was adopted in 1990 and provides guidance for the
management and orderly development of parks, recreation, and open space facilities
and programs in Hermosa Beach. The plan identifies the long-term goals of the community
to be a steward of existing park and recreational spaces, provide recreational resources,
programs, and activities, and promote preservation and interpretation of historical
resources, cultural resources, and natural environments. These goals are supported by
specific policies associated with parkland acquisition, classification of parklands, design
and development standards, program and service policies, operation and maintenance
objectives, and economic performance policies.
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.13-22
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.13 PUBLIC SERVICES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES, AND UTILITIES
Hermosa Beach Local Coastal Program: The LCP consists of the Coastal Land Use Plan
(general plan -level policies and maps) and a Local Implementation Program (coastal
zoning code, zoning maps, and implementing ordinances). The Hermosa Beach Coastal
Land Use Plan component, adopted by the City and certified by the California Coastal
Commission in 1981, addresses public access and recreation considerations in the Coastal
Zone. The Local Implementation Program of the LCP has not yet been certified and
therefore the City does not have a certified LCP. The Coastal Commission retains the
authority to review and issue coastal development permits in the Coastal Zone.
The Coastal Land Use Plan includes a statement of philosophy and supporting goals,
policies, and programs to "maintain [Hermosa Beach's] current high level of recreational
access to the coast and its recreational facilities to be consistent with maintaining the
beach in its most natural state" by maximizing access, maintaining availability of low-cost
visitor facilities, and establishing and enforcing building and development standards with
priority for recreational and visitor -serving uses.
4.13.5.3 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
The impact analysis provided below is based on the following CEQA Guidelines Appendix G
standards of significance. A parks and recreation impact is significant if implementation of PLAN
Hermosa would:
1) 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.
2) Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational
facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment.
ANALYSIS APPROACH
Evaluation of PLAN Hermosa was based on review of the current facilities, the City's Municipal
Code, and other relevant literature. This material was compared to the proposed project's
specific parks and recreation service -related impacts. The impact analysis below focuses on
whether those impacts would have a significant effect on the physical environment.
PLAN HERMOSA POLICIES AND IMPLEMENTATION ACTIONS
The following proposed PLAN Hermosa policies and implementation actions address parks and
recreation facilities and services:
Policies
Parks + Open Space Element
1.1 Facility upgrades. Improve and update park and open space facilities on a regular
basis.
■ 1.2 Lighting and visibility. Provide appropriate lighting and visibility within park facilities
while avoiding adverse impacts to adjacent properties.
• 1.3 CPTED principles. Utilize "Crime Prevention through Environmental Design" (CPTED)
principles in the design and renovation of new and existing parks and open space facilities.
• 1.4 Low -maintenance design. Promote environmentally sustainable and low -maintenance
design principles in the renovation, addition, or maintenance of parks and recreation
facilities.
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.13-23
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.13 PUBLIC SERVICES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES, AND UTILITIES
• 2.1 Diverse programs and facilities. Offer diverse recreational facilities to meet the needs
of seniors, youth, families, and persons with disabilities.
• 2.2 Park fees. Require new discretionary development to contribute fees, consistent with
State law, for expanded park space when publicly accessible open space is not provided
on -site.
• 2.3 Creative parks and open space. Encourage creativity and innovation the
development and provision of additional open space or parks, rooftop gardens, and park
space integrated into parking structures.
• 2.4 Park expansion opportunities. Consider the purchase or re -use of City -owned surplus
property to create additional parks and open space as opportunities arise to expand
existing parks or create new parks.
• 2.5 Shared use agreements. Work with adjacent jurisdictions, the school district, and
private facilities to offer recreational opportunities or activities not available at Hermosa
Beach facilities.
• 3.1 Community -friendly events. Encourage, permit, and support community group, non-
profit, or business organized events on City property that support physical activity, beach
culture, and family -friendly social interactions.
• 3.2 Social and cultural events. Design and program parks and open space to
accommodate unique social and cultural events to foster connectedness and interaction.
• 3.3 Commercial use of facilities. Regulate and enforce commercial use of City parks and
open spaces to ensure activities do not impact general use and enjoyment.
• 3.4 Balance space needs. Balance the space needs and demand on public resources of
formal and informal events.
• 3.5 Health and physical activity. Increase the availability of space and activities that
promote community health and physical activity such as community gardens, fitness
stations/equipment, and fields/courts.
• 4.1 Close proximity to parks. Provide a variety and distribution of parks, open space, and
recreational facilities to ensure close proximity and easy access to all residents.
• 4.2 Enhanced access points. Increase and enhance access to parks and open space,
particularly across major thoroughfares, as well as access points that promote physical
activity such as pedestrian- and bike -oriented access points.
• 4.3 Safe and efficient trail network. Develop a network of safe and efficient trails, streets,
and paths that connect residents, visitors, and neighboring communities to the beach,
parks, and activity centers.
• 4.4 ADA accessible park access. Install ADA and universally accessible amenities and
equipment so that all parks, beach, and trail networks are accessible to all persons.
Implementation Actions
• LAND USE-5. Develop an inventory of underutilized or surplus property that may be
appropriate for City or School District use or purchase to serve community education and
recreational needs in the future.
• MOBILITY-13. Install and maintain transportation amenities such as bicycle parking and
electric vehicle charging stations so that they are available at each commercial district or
corridor, park, and public facility.
• PARKS-1. Conduct needs assessments and evaluate recreational program offerings to
ensure community needs and priorities are being met. Conduct regular updates to the
Parks and Recreation Master Plan.
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.13-24
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.13 PUBLIC SERVICES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES, AND UTILITIES
• PARKS-2. Conduct periodic assessments of public facilities and maintain a list of priority
replacement or new facilities projects.
• PARKS-3. Establish parks level of service and level of access standards to prioritize the
development, upgrade, and renovation of parks and open space facilities.
• PARKS-4. Update City standards and fees related to the provision of parks and open space
and sustainable funding source for providing high quality and well maintained facilities.
• PARKS-5. Where appropriate, construct parkettes, open space, and pedestrian amenities
at street ends as they intersect with The Strand.
• PARKS-6. Continue, renew, and expand as needed, joint use agreements with the School
District to allow community use of school fields and facilities.
• PARKS-7. Partner with the School District, community groups, and neighboring communities
to identify and apply for grant opportunities to maintain, enhance, and expand park and
recreational opportunities.
IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
IMPACT 4.13.5-1 Would PLAN Hermosa Increase Demand for Additional Park Facilities? PLAN
Hermosa would guide future development and reuse projects in the city in a
manner that could increase demand for parks and recreation services. Existing
park acreage would continue to meet the Quimby Act standard of 3 acres per
7,000 residents. PLAN Hermosa policies and implementation actions would
require the provision of new parks and recreation facilities and ongoing parkland
maintenance to prevent deterioration of existing facilities. Therefore, this impact
would be less than significant.
Impacts to Existing Facilities
An increase in population resulting from implementation of PLAN Hermosa may place greater
demands on existing parks or recreational facilities in the planning area such that deterioration of
these facilities could occur or be accelerated. Development consistent with PLAN Hermosa would
result in about 660 new residents, a 3 percent increase in potential park users.
PLAN Hermosa Parks + Open Space Element policies and implementation actions would ensure
that adequate parks and recreational facilities are provided to accommodate the anticipated
increase in new residents. Policy 2.1 would offer diverse recreational facilities to meet the needs
of seniors, youth, families, and persons with disabilities. Policy 2.4 would consider the purchase of
property to create additional parks and open space as opportunities arise to expand existing
parks or create new parks. Policy 1.1 would improve and update park and open space facilities
on a regular basis. In addition, implementation actions would ensure that adequate parks and
recreational facilities are provided to accommodate the anticipated increase in new residents.
P-ARK-S-6-v-0uld-se-rv-&-to-r duce-potential-impac,ts-b-y-continu-ingT r--newing- and -expanding as -
needed, joint use agreements with the school district to allow community use of school fields and
facilities.
Potential Need for New Facilities
The planning area includes approximately 42 acres of parkland and 63 acres of public beaches
(see Table 4.13-2). Hermosa Beach does not have an established goal or standard for open space
or parkland. With 19,772 residents in 2015 and 105.7 acres of accessible open space or parkland
in Hermosa Beach, the City provides approximately 5.3 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents. This
ratio is above the goal of 4 acres per 1,000 residents set by many cities in Los Angeles County and
above the standard of 3 acres per 1,000 residents required under the Quimby Act. With PLAN
Hermosa, the ratio would be approximately 5.2 acres per 1,000 residents. Although there would
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.13-25
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.13 PUBLIC SERVICES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES, AND UTILITIES
be a decrease, the ratio would remain above the Quimby Act standard. The existing parkland in
the city is adequate, as it currently exceeds the amount of parkland required by the Quimby Act.
The adoption and implementation of PLAN Hermosa and the associated increase in population
would not trigger the need for new parks. Therefore, there would not be physical impacts resulting
from the creation of new or expanded parks or park facilities.
PLAN Hermosa Parks + Open Space Element policies and implementation actions would ensure
that adequate parks and recreational facilities are provided to accommodate the anticipated
increase in new residents. Policy 1.1 would improve and update park and open space facilities
on a regular basis. Policy 2.1 would offer diverse recreational facilities to meet the needs of seniors,
youth, families, and persons with disabilities. Policy 2.2 would require new discretionary
development to contribute fees, consistent with state law, for expanded park space when
publicly accessible open space is not provided on -site. Policy 2.4 would consider the purchase of
property to create additional parks and open space as opportunities arise to expand existing
parks or create new parks. In addition, implementation actions would ensure that adequate parks
and recreational facilities are provided to accommodate the anticipated increase in new
residents. PARKS-9 would install accessible walkways onto the beach while minimizing or avoiding
negative effects on the aesthetics and ecology of the beach environment. PARKS-6 would serve
to reduce potential impacts by continuing, renewing, and expanding as -needed, joint -use
agreements with the school district to allow community use of school fields and facilities.
Implementation of the above proposed policy provisions could result in environmental impacts
associated with construction (e.g., air quality, special -status species and habitats, cultural
resources, geological resources, greenhouse gases, water quality and drainage, noise) as well as
operational impacts (e.g., air quality, greenhouse gases, water quality, land use, noise, public
services and utilities) depending on the location of new recreation facilities. This EIR
programmatically evaluates development and improvements in the city associated with
implementation of PLAN Hermosa. Subsequent review of project -specific park projects would be
completed to determine the extent of site -specific environmental review that will be required.
PLAN Hermosa policies and implementation actions would maintain existing parks and recreation
facilities for residents, including maintenance to prevent deterioration of existing parks. Therefore,
impacts on parks and recreation facilities and services would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
CUMULATIVE SETTING, IMPACTS, AND MITIGATION MEASURES
The cumulative setting for parks impacts includes existing, approved, proposed, and reasonably
foreseeable development in Hermosa Beach and the South Bay Cities Council of Governments
(COG) planning area.
IMPACT 4.13.5-2 Would PLAN Hermosa Cumulatively Increase Demand for Parks and Recreation
Facilities? Implementation of PLAN Hermosa, along with other existing, planned,
proposed, approved, and reasonably foreseeable development in the South
Bay Cities COG planning area, could increase the use of existing parks and
require additional park and recreation facilities in the cumulative setting, the
provision of which could have an adverse physical effect on the environment.
However, PLAN Hermosa would continue to provide adequate parks and
recreation facilities within the city to accommodate existing and future demand
and would not result in the need to construct new or expanded facilities. This
impact would be less than cumulatively considerable.
PLAN Hermosa City of Hermosa Beach
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report August 2017
4.13-26
4.13 PUBLIC SERVICES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES, AND UTILITIES
Development in Hermosa Beach that may result with the implementation of PLAN Hermosa, as
well as development in nearby cities in the South Bay Cities COG planning area, would increase
the population of the area, thereby potentially increasing the need for additional or expanded
parkland and recreational facilities. Residents of other cities or unincorporated areas lacking in
parkland or recreation facilities may travel to an adjacent city to use such facilities, thereby
increasing the use and furthering deterioration of those facilities, or resulting in the need for new
or expanded facilities. However, PLAN Hermosa would not contribute to this potential impact
because there would be sufficient parks and community facilities in the city to serve the future
population, as indicated in Impact 4.13.5-1. Therefore, PLAN Hermosa would have a less than
cumulatively considerable impact on parks and regional recreation facilities and services.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
4.13.6 LIBRARY FACILITIES
4.13.6.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The Hermosa Beach Public Library, operated by the County of Los Angeles Public Library, is 6,496
square feet and contains six public computers, two children's computers, two early literacy
computers, and free Wi-Fi. The library has a children's area, teen space, and a book drop that is
accessible 24 hours. The online collection and research tools are available 24 hours a day.
4.13.6.2 REGULATORY SETTING
No federal, state, and local plans, policies, regulations, and laws pertain to library services in the
planning area.
4.13.6.3 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
The impact analysis provided below is based on the following CEQA Guidelines Appendix G
standard of significance. A library impact is considered significant if implementation of the
proposed project would:
1) Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of 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 library services.
ANALYSIS APPROACH
The analysis of library impacts is based on information presented in the Technical Background
Report about xi ting—llbYary--corrditro-ns—and a qua itafive assessment as t-o whether the
approximately 3 percent increase in city population would result in the need for new or expanded
library facilities.
PLAN HERMOSA POLICIES AND IMPLEMENTATION ACTIONS
PLAN Hermosa does not include policies or implementation actions addressing library services.
IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
IMPACT 4.13.6-1 Would PLAN Hermosa Increase Demand for Additional Library Facilities? PLAN
Hermosa would guide future development and reuse projects in the city in a
manner that could increase the demand for library services. However, the City
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.13-27
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.13 PUBLIC SERVICES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES, AND UTILITIES
would not need to expand or construct library facilities to meet recommended
standards. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.
With the slight increase in population (around 3 percent over 20 years) and new development
and redevelopment anticipated with implementation of PLAN Hermosa, minimal additional
demands would be placed on library services. The. Hermosa Beach Public Library is 6,496 square
feet and contains multiple public computers. Development consistent with PLAN Hermosa would
not induce population growth that would require the provision of additional library space.
Additionally, the City, in conjunction with Los Angeles County, has initiated a community needs
assessment to determine the physical space and service offerings needed to adequately serve
the community of Hermosa Beach. The impact would be less than significant.
As noted above, the City is considering improvements to the library. No specific recommendations
or designs have been established so that specific physical impacts to the environment can be
identified. However, construction activities could result impacts related to air quality (construction
pollutant emissions), cultural resources (undiscovered resources), greenhouse gas emissions from
construction, soil stability and erosion, construction water quality, accidental release of hazardous
materials during construction, construction noise, and construction traffic impacts. These issues
have been programmatically evaluated in this EIR. Subsequent review of project -specific facility
improvements would be completed to determine the extent of site -specific environmental review
that will be required.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
CUMULATIVE SETTING, IMPACTS, AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Although there is no defined boundary for cumulative impacts to library facilities, residents of a
city lacking in library facilities may travel to an adjacent city to use such facilities, thereby
increasing the use and furthering deterioration of those facilities. Development in Hermosa Beach
that may result with the implementation of PLAN Hermosa, as well as existing, approved,
proposed, and reasonably foreseeable development in nearby cities in Los Angeles County,
would increase the population of the area, thereby increasing the need for additional or
expanded library facilities.
IMPACT 4.13.6-2 Would PLAN Hermosa Cumulatively Increase Demand for Library Facilities?
Population growth associated with implementation of PLAN Hermosa, in
combination with other existing, planned, proposed, approved, and reasonably
foreseeable development in the cumulative setting, would not result in a
cumulative increase in demand for library services. This would be less than
cumulatively considerable impact.
With the slight increase in population and new development and redevelopment anticipated
with implementation of PLAN Hermosa, minimal additional demands would be placed on library
services. Additionally, while future growth in nearby cities could also result in use of the Hermosa
Beach Library, the library, as well as all public libraries in the county, are operated by the Los
Angeles County Public Library. The Los Angeles County library system has over 90 public libraries.
A cumulative increase in use at these facilities may in fact result in a need for new or expanded
facilities. However, as discussed in Impact 4.13.6-1, the Hermosa Beach Public Library would have
adequate space for additional demands with implementation of PLAN Hermosa. Therefore,
cumulative impacts on library facilities would be less than cumulatively significant.
PLAN Hermosa City of Hermosa Beach
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report August 2017
4.13-28
4.13 PUBLIC SERVICES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES, AND UTILITIES
Mitigation Measures
None required.
4.13.7 WATER SUPPLY AND SERVICE; WASTEWATER SERVICE; STORM DRAINAGE
4.13.7.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Appendix C-16 describes the regional and local conditions related to water supply, wastewater,
and drainage in Hermosa Beach. Key findings of the environmental setting are presented below.
WATER
Hermosa Beach is located in the California Water Service Company's (Cal Water) Hermosa -
Redondo District. The service area encompasses the cities of Hermosa Beach and Redondo
Beach and a portion of Torrance. The district supplies are a combination of surface water,
groundwater, and recycled water. Purchased water from the West Basin Municipal Water District
(WBMWD), one of 27 member agencies of the Metropolitan Water District (MWD) of Southern
California, satisfies 85 to 90 percent of the district's water demand. The MWD operates five water
treatment plants. The Robert B. Diemer Treatment Plant, which provides treated surface water to
coastal Los Angeles County and areas of Orange County, has a treatment capacity of 520 million
gallons per day. Groundwater extracted from the West Coast Basin Silverado aquifer comprises
10 to 15 percent of the district's water demand. Cal Water's adjudicated right of the safe yield of
the groundwater basin is 4,070 acre-feet per year (afy). However, Cal Water does not currently
have the ability to sustain production and delivery of this quantity and only normally produces
approximately 2,000 afy. Recycled water generally makes up approximately 1 percent of the total
water supplied to customers in the district (Cal Water 2011).
Cal Water has an Imported Water Purchase Agreement with the WBMWD. The agreement
establishes base, tier allocations, and purchase commitment requirements. Under the latest
agreement, Cal Wafer's Tier 1 maximum allocation is 70,000 afy. The Hermosa -Redondo District
shares in the combined allocations with three other Cal Water service districts. The Hermosa -
Redondo allocation is 16,800 afy.
Table 4.13-3 (Hermosa -Redondo District Water Supply and Demand 2010 through 2040)
summarizes water supply sources and demand for the period 2010 through 2040, as presented in
the district's 2010 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP). The 2010 UWMP estimated future water
demand for the service area through 2040 based on district -estimated population and a per
capita demand factor.2 Groundwater and recycled water are available in all hydrologic years in
the amounts shown in Table 4.13-3. As demand increases, Cal Water purchases water from the
WBMWD to provide the balance of supply to meet customer demands. As shown, as demand
increases, the supply is adjusted to meet the demand. Cal Water has determined that no supply
deficiencies are expected and supplies will be reliable for its service area through the planning
horizon of the 2010 UWMP under normal year, single dry -year, and multiple dry-yearscenarios (Cal
Water 2011).
2 Specific demand by jurisdiction is not identified in the UWMP. The UWMP also compared its projections to population
estimates for 2035 developed by SCAG. At the time the 2010 UWMP was prepared, the 2008 RTP was the most current
adopted growth forecast, and the service area population was forecast at approximately 102,000. Based on draft 2016
RTP projections, the service area population for 2040 (which includes PLAN Hermosa) would be 102,790. However, the 2010
UWMP reflects the higher population developed by the district for projecting population -based water demand.
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.13-29
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.13 PUBLIC SERVICES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES, AND UTILITIES
TABLE4.13-3
HERMOSA-REDONDO DISTRICT SUPPLY AND DEMAND. 2010-2040 [ACRE-FEET PFR VFnRI
Supply and Demand
2015
2020
2025 2030 2035
2040
Supply and Demand Comparison - Normal Year
WBMWD
10,850
10,291
10,680
11,080
11,489
11,910
Groundwater
3,500
4,070
4,070
4,070
4,070
4,070
Recycled
155
159
162
166
169
173
Total Supply
14,506
14,519
14,912
15,315
15,728
16,152
Total Demand
14,506
14,519
14,912
15,315
15,728
16,152
Supply and Demand Comparison - Single Dry Year
WBMWD
11,304
10,475
11,147
11,559
11,981
12,415
Groundwater
3,500
4,070
4,070
4,070
4,070
4,070
Recycled
155
159
162
166
169
173
Total Supply
14,960
14,974
15,379
15,795
16,221
16,658
Total Demand
14,960
14,974
1 15,379
15,795
16,221
16,658
Supply and Demand Comparison - Multiple Dry Year 1
WBMWD
10,200
9,640
10,011
10,393
10,784
-
Groundwater
3,500
4,070
4,070
4,070
4,070
-
Recycled
155
159
162
166
169
-
Total Supply
13,855
13,868
14,244
14,628
15,023
-
Total Demand
13,855
1 13,868
1 14,244
14,628
15,023
-
Supply and Demand Comparison - Multiple Dry Year 2
WBMWD
10,350
9,862
10,240
10,626
11,024
--
Groundwater
3,500
4,070
4,070
4,070
4,070
-
Recycled
156
159
163
166
170
-
Total Supply
14,006
14,092
14,472
14,863
15,264
--
Total Demand
14,006 1
14,092
14,472 1
14,863
15,264
-
Supply and Demand Comparison - Multiple Dry Year 3
WBMWD
9,710
9,288
9,649
10,021
10,401
-
Groundwater
3,500
4,070
4,070
4,070
4,070
-
Recycled
157
160
163
166
171
-
Total Supply
13,367
13,518
13,883
14,258
14,642
-
Total Demand
13,367
13,518
13,883
14,258
14,642
-
2010 UWMP Population Projections
District -Estimated Total Service
Area Population
99,050
101,740
104,500
107,320
110,230
113,200
Not projected in 2010 UWMP
Source: Cal Water 2011, Table 2.2-2, Tables 5.2-4 through 5.2-6
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.13-30
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.13 PUBLIC SERVICES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES, AND UTILITIES
WASTEWATER
The City of Hermosa Beach provides wastewater collection services in the planning area. The
sanitary sewer system network comprises approximately 37 miles of sewer lines. Much of the system
is believed to have been installed in the late 1920s, although confirmation of this is difficult. The
majority of the original system is concrete, with recent replacements of clay pipe. The system is
primarily a gravity flow system, with the exception of two pump stations. The effluent collected by
sewer lines is discharged into the Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County (LACSD) trunk lines,
which flow north -northwesterly toward Manhattan Beach (City of Hermosa Beach 2011 b).
The LACSD trunk lines flow to the Joint Water Pollution Control Plant (JWPCP), located in Carson.
The JWPCP is one of the largest wastewater plants in the world and is the largest of the LACSD
wastewater treatment plants. The facility provides both primary and secondary treatment and
has a total permitted capacity of 400 million gallons per day (mgd).3 The plant serves a population
of approximately 3.5 million people throughout Los Angeles County. Treated discharge from the
plant is transported to the Pacific Ocean through a network of outfalls, which extend 1.5 miles off
the Palos Verdes Peninsula, to a depth of 200 feet (LACSD 2013). The JWPCP currently processes
an average flow of 254.1 mgd (LACSD 2015; LACSD 2017). The projected flow to the JWPCP in its
service area for 2050 is 359 mgd.4
STORM DRAINAGE
Hermosa Beach is part of the Santa Monica Bay Watershed, which has an annual discharge of
more than 30 billion gallons of stormwater and urban runoff each year through 200 outlets. Urban
runoff is caused by precipitation falling on impermeable pavement.
Urban runoff (stormwater) flows from inland locations through the city to the Pacific Ocean
through a network of underground drainage pipes identified in Figure 4.8-1 in Section 4.8,
Hydrology and Water Quality. The network is a mix of County -owned and City -owned lines that
generally run east to west along major roads, including 16th Street, Pier Avenue, and 2nd Street.
The underground storm drain system is discontinuous, and in some areas of the city storm runoff
flows on the surface of streets. Minor localized street flooding is common throughout many areas
of the city. This existing condition is the result of a combination of the city's flat topography and
smaller, frequent storm events in which runoff flows into inlets, drains, and sumps where there is
insufficient capacity to contain the runoff until the storm subsides. In some locations, where there
is neither storm drain nor gutter, runoff is not always contained within the street. Most of the
deficiencies are in the western part of the city: the Valley Drive/Ardmore Drive area, along
Hermosa Avenue, and the Gould Avenue/27th Street area. The City has implemented some
improvements to improve capacity, and additional capacity improvements will be constructed
as funding allows.
---The-storm- drain -sys-t-em-generally terminates -through-1-1-ou-#alls-at t-he west end-of-the-cif-yon-44iie
beach or directly into the Pacific Ocean. Severe storm events combined with high tides and/or
obstruction of the mouth of storm drain outfalls by sand has caused flooding at private properties
along The Strand. The underlying cause of this condition, at least in part, is the increased width of
the sandy beach over time, leading to periodic burial of the outfall openings. The City's Public
3 The JWPCP operates under National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit CA 0053813 issued by the Los
Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board (Order No. R4-201 1-0151).
4 Estimates of future flows as presented in the Clearwater Program Final Facilities Master Plan (LACSD 2012, p. 4-20), which
assumes a per capita generation of 83 gallons per capita per day and the current conveyance system configuration.
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.13-31
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.13 PUBLIC SERVICES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES, AND UTILITIES
Works Department routinely maintains the opening of beach outfalls through a memorandum of
understanding with the County.
The City of Hermosa Beach and the County of Los Angeles are co-permittees on a Municipal
Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Permit in the planning area. The City is responsible for the
development, implementation, and enforcement of stormwater runoff and drainage
requirements to protect local and coastal water quality. As noted in Section 4.8, Hydrology and
Water Quality, future projects proposed in Hermosa Beach under the Beach Cities Enhanced
Watershed Management Plan include the Hermosa Beach Infiltration Trench project, the Hermosa
Beach Greenbelt Infiltration project, and two green street projects. While the focus of these future
projects is water quality protection, controlling the rate and volume of runoff into these features is
a key component of their effectiveness.
4.13.7.2 REGULATORY SETTING
The following federal, state, and local plans, policies, regulations, and laws pertain to water and
wastewater services in the planning area.
FEDERAL
Clean Water Act and National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES): Authorized
by the Clean Water Act in 1972, the NPDES permit program controls water pollution by
regulating point sources that discharge pollutants into waters of the United States. Any
industrial, municipal, or other facility which discharges directly to surface waters must
obtain permits through the authorized states. In California, the State Water Resources
Control Board (SWRCB) serves as the authorized agency to issue NPDES permits.
STATE
• Sewer System Management Plan: The SWRCB adopted new policies in December 2004
requiring wastewater collection providers to report sanitary sewer overflows and to
prepare and implement sewer system management plans (SSMP). SSMP requirements are
modeled on proposed federal capacity, management, operations, and maintenance
plans. The SSMP policy requires dischargers to provide adequate capacity in the sewer
collection system, take feasible steps to stop sewer overflows, identify and prioritize system
deficiencies, and develop a plan for disposal of grease, among other requirements. In
addition, wastewater providers must now report sanitary sewer overflows to the Los
Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board, keep internal records of these overflows,
and produce an annual report on overflows. Overflows from laterals on private property,
if caused by an owner, are not required to be reported.
• Senate Bill 610: SB-610 (Section 21 151.9-of the Public Resources Code and Section 10910 et
seq. of the California Water Code) requires the preparation of water supply assessments
for large developments (e.g., for projects of 500 or more residential units; 500,000 square
feet of retail commercial space; or 250,000 square feet of office commercial space).
• Urban Water Management Planning Act: The California Urban Water Management Planning
Act of 1983 requires that each urban water supplier providing water for municipal purposes
either directly or indirectly to more than 3,000 customers or supplying more than 3,000 acre-
feet of water annually prepare, update, and adopt its urban water management plan
(UWMP) at least once every five years on or before December 31, in years ending in 5 and
0. The plan describes and evaluates sources of water supply, projected water needs,
conservation, implementation strategy, and schedule. The Hermosa -Redondo District of the
California Water Service Company, the City's water supplier, adopted its 2010 UWMP in 2011.
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.13-32
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.13 PUBLIC SERVICES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES, AND UTILITIES
REGIONAL
Enhanced Watershed Management Plan for Beach Cities (EWMP): Following adoption of
the MS4 permit, the Cities of Hermosa Beach, Manhattan Beach, Redondo Beach, and
Torrance, together with the Los Angeles County Flood Control District, collectively referred
to as the Beach Cities Watershed Management Group (Beach Cities WMG) agreed to
collaborate on the development of an Enhanced Watershed Management Program
(EWMP) for the Santa Monica Bay and Dominguez Channel Watershed areas within their
jurisdictions (referred to as the Beach Cities EWMP Area). Under Part IV.0 of the MS4 permit
(Watershed Management Program), the permittees are afforded the flexibility to develop
watershed management programs to implement the requirements of the permit on a
watershed scale through customized strategies, control measures, and best management
practices. The Beach Cities EWMP summarizes watershed -specific water quality priorities
identified by the Beach Cities WMG; outlines the program plan, including specific
strategies, control measures, and best management practices to achieve water quality
targets; and describes the quantitative analysis completed to support target achievement
and permit compliance. A timeline, estimated costs, and potential funding sources are
also described in the EWMP. Currently, regional best management practices have been
constructed within the Beach Cities EWMP planning area, including two in Hermosa Beach
(Pier Avenue Improvement project and Hermosa Strand Infiltration Trench project). Future
projects proposed in Hermosa Beach are the Hermosa Beach Infiltration Trench project,
the Hermosa Beach Greenbelt Infiltration project, and two green street projects. The
projects in Hermosa Beach have not been funded, and a schedule for implementation
has not been developed. The Beach Cities EWMP was approved by the Los Angeles
RWQCB on April 18, 2016, under its authority to administer the MS4 permit. The EWMP does
not establish policies or regulations that the participating cities must impose on new
development or redevelopment, nor does the program require the construction of the
specific features identified in the EWMP. However, the approach described in the
Enhanced Watershed Management Program, in combination with the required low
impact development -based best management practices that each participating city
must impose on development, is anticipated to protect and potentially improve water
quality in Santa Monica Bay from pollutants in stormwater runoff.
LOCAL
• Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County: The LACSD serves approximately 5.7 million
people in Los Angeles County through 24 independent special districts. The service area
includes approximately 820 square miles in 78 cities and unincorporated areas in the
county. Approximately 1,400 miles of main trunk sewers and 11 wastewater treatment
facilities serve the area. The 23 independent special districts are governed by boards of
directors, consisting of the mayors of each city in the districts and the chair of the County
Board of Supervisors for unincorporated territories. The Hermosa Beach planning area is
within the South Bay Cities District of the LACSD.
• Los Angeles Regional Agency (LARA): LARA was approved by the California Integrated
Waste Management Board in 2004 to assist its 14 member cities to achieve Assembly Bill
(AB) 939 recycling goals through a Joint Powers Agreement on a regional basis. The City
of Hermosa Beach is a member of LARA, which assists member cities in complying with
recycling requirements.
• Hermosa Beach Capital Improvement Program (CIP): The CIP is a budget for the upcoming
fiscal year, as well as a projection of revenue and desire projects for the next five years.
The City's current CIP is a product of extensive public outreach and reflects the spending
priorities of the community including street and highway improvements, sewer/storm drain
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.13-33
4.13 PUBLIC SERVICES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES, AND UTILITIES
improvements, parks improvements, and public buildings and grounds improvements. The
commitment for FY 2014-15 was just over $6 million.
Hermosa Beach Sanitary Sewer Master Plan: The Sanitary Sewer Master Plan provides an
overview of existing conditions and recommends a rehabilitation program for Hermosa
Beach's sanitary sewer infrastructure. The Master Plan estimates that the entire sanitary
sewer system has a replacement value of $40 million. It recommends that the City invest
$7.5 million (present value), plus 20 percent equal to $1.5 million for design and
administration to rehabilitate approximately 95,000 linear feet of sanitary sewer pipes
through year 2021 (City of Hermosa Beach 2011 b). The City adopted a sanitary sewer fax
in 2015 to implement the master plan.
Hermosa Beach Municipal Code: The City's Municipal Code includes regulations and
standards related to development and operations. Title 8, Health and Safety, includes
standards and procedures to protect the health and safety of residents, businesses, and
visitors regarding garbage collection and disposal, hazardous materials, nuisances,
sewage and industrial waste, stormwater and urban runoff pollution, and water
conservation and drought management. Title 13, Public Services, identifies fees associated
with sewer connections and the process to establish underground utility districts. Title 15,
Buildings and Construction, establishes building and construction standards to protect the
public health, safety, and welfare through fire prevention, abatement of dangerous
buildings, seismic strengthening, and enforcement of mechanical, plumbing, and
electrical codes. Title 16, Subdivisions, identifies standards and procedures for subdividing
land in the planning area consistent with the Subdivision Map Act, including park and
recreation area dedication and fees.
Low Impact Development Ordinance: The City has been requiring low impact
development (LID) best management practices for certain residential and commercial
projects since 2010, when it adopted a customized amendment to the California Green
Building Code. As required by the current MS4 permit, Municipal Code Section 8.44.095
(LID Ordinance) sets forth low impact development requirements for new development
and redevelopment (Ordinance No. 15-1351). All new development or new building
construction in Hermosa Beach will be required to comply with the LID requirements
regardless of the area of impervious surface or acreage disturbed, which exceeds the
minimum applicability requirements of the MS4 permit. Consistent with the MS4 permit,
redevelopment projects of any type that add or replace more than 5,000 square feet of
impervious surface area will also be required to comply with the LID requirements, with the
further proviso that redevelopment projects located directly adjacent to a significant
ecological area will be subject to LID requirements if they propose the addition or
replacement of more than 2,500 square feet of impervious surface area.5 The City began
implementing the LID Ordinance requirements in fiscal year 2015-2016.
Green Street Policy: The City adopted a policy (Resolution No. 15-0013) in 2015 to
implement green street best management practices as elements of street and roadway
projects, including public works capital improvement projects, to the maximum extent
practicable. This policy is intended to demonstrate compliance with the MS4 permit. Water
quality improvement and groundwater replenishment benefits are achieved through
designs that minimize impervious area and incorporate bioretention elements (e.g.,
vegetated swales) to facilitate natural pollutant removal while allowing stormwater
retention and/or infiltration.
5 The complete text of the LID Ordinance may be found at:
hftp://www.codepublishing.com/CA/HermosaBeach/#!/hermosabeach08/HermosaBeachO844.html#8.44.095
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.13-34
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.13 PUBLIC SERVICES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES, AND UTILITIES
4.13.7.3 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
The impact analysis provided below is based on the following CEQA Guidelines Appendix G
standards of significance. A utilities impact is considered significant if implementation of the
proposed project would:
1) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality
Control Board.
2) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or
expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant
environmental effects.
3) Require or result in the construction of new stormwater drainage facilities or expansion of
existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects.
4) Have insufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements
and resources, or would require new or expanded entitlements.
5) Have inadequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand for wastewater
treatment, in addition to the provider's existing commitments.
ANALYSIS APPROACH
Evaluation of PLAN Hermosa was based on review of the current facilities, the City's Municipal
Code, and other relevant literature. This material was compared to the plan's water supply and
use -related impacts, as well as impacts related to wastewater. The impact analysis below focuses
on whether those impacts would have a significant effect on the physical environment.
PLAN HERMOSA POLICIES AND IMPLEMENTATION ACTIONS
The following PLAN Hermosa policies and implementation actions address water supply and use
and wastewater:
Policies
Sustainability + Conservation Element
• 5.1 Recycled water facilities. Increase the availability of recycled water supply (i.e. purple
pipes) and facilitate the installation of distribution facilities throughout the city to conserve
potable water use.
• 5.2 Rainwater collection. Encourage innovative water recycling techniques such as
rainwater capture and use of cisterns for outdoor watering purposes.
• 53 Water-conservation-programs.—Update-and-improv-e-w-at€r-conservation-and-e-fficie-nc-y
programs, requirements, and incentives on a regular basis.
• 5.4 Conservation behavior. Maximize water conservation and efficiency upgrades through
education, regulation, and incentives covering every aspect of water use.
7.1 Permeable pavement. Require the use of permeable pavement in parking lots,
sidewalks, plazas, and other low -intensity paved areas.
Public Safety Element
• 1.8 Reduce stormwater runoff. Reduce stormwater runoff consistent with local stormwater
permits.
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.13-35
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.13 PUBLIC SERVICES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES, AND UTILITIES
Infrastructure Element
• 4.8 Holistic systems planning. Develop a comprehensive approach to water infrastructure
that integrates sewer system planning with potable and recycled water systems,
stormwater systems, and increased conservation awareness.
• 5.1 Integration of stormwater best practices. Integrate stormwater infiltration best practices
when initiating streetscape redevelopment or public facility improvement projects.
• 5.3 Natural features. Integrate natural features, such as topography, drainage, and trees,
into the design of streets and rights -of -way.
• 5.4 Conservation behavior. Encourage community behavior changes to reduce urban
runoff pollution by incentivizing the capture of rainwater to prevent runoff and meet on -
site water demand.
• 5.5 Stormwater system maintenance. Maintain, fund, and regularly monitor the City's
stormwater infrastructure.
• 5.6 Stormwater system repairs. Ensure that stormwater system repairs are included in
maintenance plans for other City infrastructure and that repairs and maintenance are
completed in a timely manner to prevent additional repair costs.
• 5.7 Stormwater permits. Strictly implement, enforce, and monitor MS4 National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination Systems (NPDES) permit requirements through stormwater
ordinances.
• 5.8 Low impact development. Require new development and redevelopment projects to
incorporate low impact development (LID) techniques in project designs, including but
not limited to on -site drainage improvements using native vegetation to capture and
clean stormwater runoff and minimize impervious surfaces.
Implementation Actions
• SUSTAINABILITY-8. Develop and market a program to offer incentives such as rebates, fee
waivers, or permit streamlining to facilitate the installation of renewable energy, energy
efficient, or water conservation equipment.
• SUSTAINABILITY-9. Maintain and periodically update the Water Efficient Landscape
Ordinance and Water Conservation and Drought Management Plan sections of the
Municipal Code to facilitate the use of new technologies or practices to conserve water.
• INFRASTRUCTURE-]. Create a comprehensive, long-range (20-year) infrastructure plan
integrating roadway, water, wastewater, stormwater, waste disposal, and utility
infrastructure systems.
- Consider the best available science describing potential climate change impacts as
a basis for preparing the infrastructure plan.
- Use the infrastructure plan as a resource when preparing five-year Capital
Improvement Plans (CIPs) and setting and enforcing discretionary development
requirements.
- Incrementally update the infrastructure plan following the preparation of each CIP to
ensure it remains consistent with changes in growth, traffic, funding sources, climate
change impacts, and state and regional regulation.
• INFRASTRUCTURE-8. Improve the environmental compatibility of utility and infrastructure
facilities by establishing and applying the following standards to new development and
redevelopment projects involving utility installation or relocation:
- New utilities must be located away from, or constructed in a manner compatible with,
critical habitat areas, resources, and the shoreline. Physical and service constraints
may not allow relocation away from or full compatibility with such areas and resources.
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.13-36
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.13 PUBLIC SERVICES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES, AND UTILITIES
• INFRASTRUCTURE-9. Consult with Cal Water to estimate and evaluate water supplies,
provide public information and incentives for water conservation best practices.
• INFRASTRUCTURE-10. Develop a policy for the Installation of greywater systems and
rainwater collection cisterns in parks and community facilities, where appropriate and cost
effective.
• INFRASTRUCTURE-11. Support efforts by Cal Water to construct necessary pump and
storage facilities to ensure adequate water supply and proper water system balance.
• INFRASTRUCTURE-12. Amend the Municipal Code to require the installation of dual water
plumbing hookups for landscaping irrigation, grading, and other non -contact uses in new
development and redevelopment projects where recycled water is available or expected
to be available based on adopted infrastructure plans.
• INFRASTRUCTURE-13. Continue to implement the Water Conservation and Drought
Management Plan and any implementing ordinances, including imposition of fines and
other appropriate enforcement tools, for violations of water conservation rules.
• INFRASTRUCTURE-14. Ensure adequate and resilient sewer system capacity by establishing
and applying the following development review requirements:
- New development or redevelopment projects involving construction of 8-inch
diameter or larger sewers that connect directly or indirectly to the Los Angeles County
Sanitation Districts' sewersystem must prepare a sewer plan identifying that the existing
sewer collection and treatment systems have available capacity to support such an
increase, or provide for necessary system upgrades as part of the proposed project.
• INFRASTRUCTURE-16. Implement a financing plan, including use of the adopted sewer fee
and loans, to ensure that resources are available for investment in annual rehabilitation
projects to improve sanitary sewer pipes.
• INFRASTRUCTURE-17. Prepare an annual report for City Council documenting sewer system
operations, actions to minimize overflows, incidents of overflows, and their impacts on
receiving waters and public health and safety.
IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
IMPACT 4.13.7-1 Would PLAN Hermosa Cause Wastewater Treatment Facilities to Exceed Influent
Flows Beyond Permitted Capacity? PLAN Hermosa would guide future
development and reuse projects in the city in a manner that could increase the
amount of wastewater conveyed to and treated by the Joint Water Pollution
Control Plant. However, the volume of flows would not cause the plant's
permitted capacity to be exceeded, and the influent flows would continue to
be domestic sewage, which would not change the quality of the influent
compared to existing conditions. Therefore, this impact would be less than
significant.
The increased population resulting from implementation of PLAN Hermosa could generate
additional wastewater flows that would be treated by the Joint Water Pollution Control Plant
located in Carson. The LACSD has estimated wastewater flows generated by the additional 300
residential units and 630,400 square feet of nonresidential development to be approximately
251,680 gallons per day (or 0.252 mgd) of wastewater (LACSD 2015).6 Currently, the JWPCP treats
6 The estimate provided by LACSD was calculated as follows: 300 residential units x 156 gallons/unit/day + 630,400 square
feet nonresidential x 325 gallons/1,000 square feet/day. The LACSD assumed the Shopping Center rate (325 gallons/1,000
square feet) from its "Table 1, Loadings for Each Class of Land Use" as a proxy for the nonresidential uses. Specific land
uses such as retail stores and offices have lower rates (e.g., 100 gpd/1,000 square feet and 200 gpd/1,000 square feet,
respectively).
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.13-37
4.13 PUBLIC SERVICES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES, AND UTILITIES
an average of 254.1 mgd, which includes flows from Hermosa Beach. The addition of flows from
PLAN Hermosa (0.252 mgd) would increase treated flows to approximately 254.4 mgd, which
would not exceed the current 280-mgd primary and secondary treatment capacity or the 400-
mgd permitted capacity of the JWPCP. PLAN Hermosa's additional flows would represent less
than an approximately 0.1 percent contribution to flows.
Existing flows are typical domestic sewage from residential, retail, office, light industrial, and other
commercial uses. Although implementation of PLAN Hermosa would allow additional residential
units and an increase in nonresidential square footage, the overall chemical and physical
characteristics of the sewage flows would not change because the land uses are generally the
same. In addition, any new development or redevelopment of commercial uses would be
required to demonstrate compliance with the City's sewer disposal requirements (Municipal Code
Chapter 8.36) to ensure the sewage flows would not violate applicable standards.
PLAN Hermosa implementation action INFRASTRUCTURE-16 would ensure that resources are
available for investment in annual rehabilitation projects to improve sanitary sewer pipes.
INFRASTRUCTURE-8 would serve to reduce any potential impacts from implementation of PLAN
Hermosa by improving the environmental compatibility of utility and infrastructure facilities by
establishing and applying specific standards to new development and redevelopment projects
involving utility installation or relocation. INFRASTRUCTURE-17 requires documentation of sewer
system operations to minimize overflows, a record of incidents of overflows, and their impacts on
receiving waters and public health and safety. These actions would ensure the quality of
wastewater flows generated in the city that are conveyed to the JWPCP would not change
substantially compared to existing conditions, and some improvement may be realized.
Therefore, implementation of PLAN Hermosa would not result in an exceedance of the JWPCP's
permitted capacity or change the quality of influent from the city relative to existing conditions
such that the quality of treated water discharged by the JWPCP would be affected by PLAN
Hermosa's contribution. PLAN Hermosa would have a less than significant impact with regard to
compliance with wastewater treatment requirements.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
IMPACT 4.13.7-2 Would PLAN Hermosa Increase Demand for New or Expanded Water or
Wastewater Treatment Facilities? PLAN Hermosa would guide future
development and reuse projects in the city in a manner that could increase the
demand for potable water and would generate wastewater. However, the
demand would not result in the need for the construction or expansion of water
or wastewater treatment facilities that would result in significant environmental
effects because the demand is within existing planned capacity projections of
the utility providers. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.
PLAN Hermosa could increase the demand for potable water, which would be provided by the
Cal Wafer Hermosa -Redondo District. The primary source of supply to the district is treated water
from the MWD. Potential demand through implementation of PLAN Hermosa would generate
demand that is within the 2010 UWMP projections, and the district has determined that existing
and planned supplies are sufficient for its service area through 2040 (see Impact 4.13.7-4, below).
Therefore, PLAN Hermosa would not result in new or expanded water treatment facilities.
As described in Impact 4.13.7-1, PLAN Hermosa's residential and nonresidential uses would
generate an additional 0.252 mgd of wastewater, which would be conveyed to the JWPCP. The
flows can be accommodated within the plant's existing treatment capacity. The LACSD has
PLAN Hermosa City of Hermosa Beach
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report August 2017
4.13-38
4.13 PUBLIC SERVICES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES, AND UTILITIES
indicated that the regional wastewater conveyance system should be able to accommodate
the additional uses proposed in PLAN Hermosa (LACSD 2015). The City has developed a Sanitary
Sewer Master Plan that describes a rehabilitation program for Hermosa Beach's sanitary sewer
infrastructure, and in 2015 adopted a sanitary sewer tax.
Numerous PLAN Hermosa implementation actions would help reduce water consumption and
wastewater flow. INFRASTRUCTURE-9 would require consultation with Cal Water to provide public
information and incentives for water conservation best practices. INFRASTRUCTURE-10 would
require installation of greywater systems and rainwater collection cisterns in parks and community
facilities. INFRASTRUCTURE-1 would serve to reduce potential impacts by creating a
comprehensive, long-range (20-year) infrastructure plan integrating roadway, water, wastewater,
stormwater, waste disposal, and utility infrastructure systems. The infrastructure plan would be used
as a resource when preparing five-year Capital Improvement Plans and when setting and
enforcing discretionary development requirements and would serve to improve current flooding
issues in the city. Each Capital Improvement Plan would be updated as needed to ensure it
remains consistent with changes in growth, traffic, funding sources, climate change impacts, and
state and regional regulation. INFRASTRUCTURE-1 1 directs City support for Cal Wafer's efforts to
construct necessary pump and storage facilities to ensure adequate water supply and proper
water system balance. INFRASTRUCTURE-16 would implement a financing plan, including use of a
sewer tax and loans, to ensure that resources are available for investment in annual rehabilitation
projects to improve sanitary sewer pipes. INFRASTRUCTURE-8 would improve the environmental
compatibility of utility and infrastructure facilities by establishing and applying specific standards
to new development and redevelopment projects involving utility installation or relocation.
In addition, the following Sustainability + Conservation Element policies would reduce water
consumption and wastewater flow, which would reduce the demand on conveyance
infrastructure. Policy 4.2 would require large buildings to report their energy and water use on a
regular basis. Policy 5.1 would ensure recycled water supply and distribution facilities are available
throughout the city. Policy 5.3 would update and improve water conservation and efficiency
programs, requirements, and incentives on a regular basis. Policy 5.4 would maximize water
conservation and efficiency upgrades through education, regulation, and incentives covering
every aspect of water use.
Therefore, implementation of PLAN Hermosa would not result in the need for the construction or
expansion of water orwastewater treatment facilities that would result in significant environmental
effects. Impacts on water and wastewater treatment facilities would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
IMPACT 4.13.7-3 Would PLAN Hermosa Increase Demand for Stormwater Drainage Facilities? PLAN
Hermosa would guide future development and reuse projectsin the city in a
manner that could result in redevelopment in the planning area but would
generally not increase the amount of impervious surface. PLAN Hermosa policies
and implementation actions would direct construction of development projects
to include on -site drainage improvements, which would reduce the impact on
existing stormwater drainage facilities. Therefore, this impact would be less than
significant.
There are minor localized flooding problems in some areas of the city due to inadequacies in the
storm drain system capacity. However, implementation of PLAN Hermosa would not exacerbate
the problem because it would not substantially increase the amount of current impervious
surfaces in the city. In fact, as shown in Table 4.9-2 in Section 4.9, Land Use and Planning, the entire
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.13-39
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.13 PUBLIC SERVICES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES, AND UTILITIES
�:• city has only 2.6 vacant acres. This limited amount of vacant land, in combination with the
requirements of the City's Low -Impact Development (LID) Ordinance and Green Streets Policy,
would reduce the potential for a substantial increase in impervious surfaces.
Stormwater that runs over streets and sidewalks can pick up debris and pollutants, which are
carried, untreated, into the ocean. To help reduce the amount of pollution from contaminated
stormwater, the City has adopted the LID Ordinance and a Green Streets Policy. The LID
Ordinance uses landscape design to retain or filter stormwater runoff, using development
techniques such as rain gardens, permeable pavers, and bioswales. As the Green Streets Policy is
implemented, low impact development will add to the existing fabric of stormwater infrastructure
in Hermosa Beach. Additionally, the Beach Cities Enhanced Watershed Management Plan
summarizes watershed -specific water quality priorities identified by the Beach Cities. The
approach described in the EWMP, in combination with the required LID -based best management
practices, is anticipated to protect and potentially improve water quality in Santa Monica Bay
from pollutants in stormwater runoff.
New residential and nonresidential development will occur primarily through infill and
redevelopment activities that would occur in areas which are already urbanized. Redevelopment
activities may provide opportunities to create new pervious surfaces to facilitate groundwater
infiltration through new greenspace, landscaping, or use of porous pavements. Incorporation of
stormwater management facilities, such as retention basins, swales, or vegetation planted for
evapotranspiration, would reduce drainage loads through the stormwater system. The LID
Ordinance requires these types of pervious surfaces for qualifying projects. Qualifying projects
include the following:
• All redevelopment projects, including single- or multifamily residential projects, adding or
replacing more than 5,000 square feet of impervious surface area
• Industrial parks or sites with 5,000 square feet or more of surface area
• Commercial malls or sites with 5,000 square feet or more of surface area
• Automotive service facilities (SIC 5013, 5014, 5511, 5541, 7532-7534, and 7536-7539) with
5,000 square feet or more of surface area
• Retail gasoline outlets with 5,000 square feet or more of surface area
• Restaurants (SIC 5812) with 5,000 square feet or more of surface area
• Parking lots with 5,000 square feet or more of impervious surface area or with 25 or more
parking spaces (cumulative on the project site)
• Any redevelopment project located in or directly adjacent to or discharging directly into
a significant ecological area (as defined herein), where the development will:
a) Discharge stormwater and dry weather runoff that is likely to impact a sensitive
biological species or habitat; and
b) Create 2,500 square feet or more of impervious surface area
Further, PLAN Hermosa Public Safety Element Policy 1.8 would serve to reduce stormwater runoff
consistent with local stormwater permits. Sustainability + Conservation Element Policy 7.1 would
require the use of permeable pavement in parking lots, sidewalks, plazas, and other low -intensity
paved areas. In addition, the following Infrastructure Element policies would serve to reduce
potential impacts. Policy 4.8 would develop a comprehensive approach to water infrastructure
that integrates sewer system planning with potable and recycled water systems, stormwater
systems, and increased conservation awareness. Policy 5.1 would integrate stormwater infiltration
best practices when initiating streetscape redevelopment or public facility improvement projects.
Policy 5.3 would integrate natural features, such as topography, drainage, and trees, into the
design of streets and rights -of -way. Policy 5.4 would encourage community behavior changes to
PLAN Hermosa City of Hermosa Beach
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report August 2017
4.13-40
4.13 PUBLIC SERVICES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES, AND UTILITIES
reduce urban runoff pollution. Policy 5.5 would maintain, fund, and regularly monitor the city's
stormwater infrastructure. Policy 5.6 would ensure that stormwater system repairs are included in
maintenance plans for other city infrastructure and that repairs and maintenance are completed
in a timely manner to prevent additional repair costs. Policy 5.7 would strictly implement, enforce,
and monitor MS4 NPDES permit requirements. Policy 5.8 would require new development and
redevelopment projects to incorporate low impact development techniques in project designs,
including but not limited to on -site drainage improvements using native vegetation to capture
and clean stormwater runoff.
Implementation action INFRASTRUCTURE-1 would serve to reduce potential impacts by creating a
comprehensive, long-range (20-year) infrastructure plan integrating roadway, water, wastewater,
stormwater, waste disposal, and utility infrastructure systems. The infrastructure plan would be used
as a resource when preparing five-year Capital Improvement Plans and setting and enforcing
discretionary development requirements. Each Capital Improvement Plan would be updated to
ensure it remains consistent with changes in growth, traffic, funding sources, climate change
impacts, and state and regional regulation. Therefore, with implementation of PLAN Hermosa
policies and implementation actions, impacts on stormwater drainage facilities would be less than
significant.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
IMPACT 4.13.7-4 Would PLAN Hermosa Increase Demand for Water Supplies Beyond Projections?
PLAN Hermosa would guide future development and reuse projects in the city in
a manner that could increase the demand for potable water. However, the
demand is within the 2010 Urban Water Management Plan supply -demand
projections adopted by the Cal Water Hermosa -Redondo District, and no new
entitlements would be needed. Therefore, this impact would be less than
significant.
Development associated with future land uses consistent with PLAN Hermosa would result in a
total of 660 new residents from 2015 to 2040 in the planning area, for a total population of 20,400.
When combined with the SCAG-forecasted population for 2040 for Redondo Beach and the
portion of Torrance in the Cal Water Hermosa -Redondo District service area, the total estimated
population for 2040, based on new forecasts, is approximately 102,790, which only slightly exceeds
the estimate developed by the district based on SCAG forecasts. The combined population in the
service area, with PLAN Hermosa, would also be well under the district's service area population
estimate of 113,200. Because PLAN Hermosa's water demand is within the supply -demand
projections presented in the 2010 U WMP through 2040, additional water supply entitlements would
not be required for the project.
PLAN Hermosa would reduce the current and future demand for water supply with the following
Sustainability + Conservation Element policies. Policy 5.1 would ensure recycled water supply and
distribution facilities are available throughout the city. Policy 5.2 would encourage innovative water
recycling techniques such as rainwater capture, use of cisterns, and installation of greywater
systems. Policy 5.3 would update and improve water conservation and efficiency programs,
requirements, and incentives on a regular basis. Policy 5.4 would maximize water conservation and
efficiency upgrades through education, regulation, and incentives covering every aspect of water
use. In addition, Infrastructure Element Policy 4.8 would develop a comprehensive approach to
water infrastructure that integrates sewer system planning with potable and recycled water systems,
stormwater systems, and increased conservation awareness.
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.13-41
4.13 PUBLIC SERVICES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES, AND UTILITIES
Implementation action INFRASTRUCTURE-12 would amend the Municipal Code to require the
installation of dual water plumbing infrastructure so that recycled water for landscaping irrigation,
grading, and other non -contact uses may be utilized in new development and redevelopment
projects where recycled water is available or expected to be available. INFRASTRUCTURE-9 would
ensure consultation with Cal Water to estimate and evaluate water supplies specifically for Hermosa
Beach through 2040. INFRASTRUCTURE-1 1 directs City support for Cal Water's efforts to construct
necessary pump and storage facilities to ensure adequate water supply and proper water system
balance. INFRASTRUCTURE-1 would create a comprehensive, long-range (20-year) infrastructure
plan integrating roadway, water, wastewater, stormwater, waste disposal, and utility infrastructure
systems. The infrastructure plan would be used as a resource when preparing five-year Capital
Improvement Plans and setting and enforcing discretionary development requirements. Each
Capital Improvement Plan would be updated to ensure it remains consistent with changes in
growth, traffic, funding sources, climate change impacts, and state and regional regulation.
The City of Hermosa Beach adopted a Water Conservation and Drought Management Plan
Ordinance in 2010 as requested by West Basin/Metropolitan to address water conservation and
provide a mechanism for mandating water conserving methods. The City's continued
conservation efforts will help it sustain low water use in accordance with the requirements of the
California Water Conservation Bill of 2009 (Senate Bill X7-7), which requires urban water suppliers
to reduce per capita water use 20 percent by 2020.
Therefore, impacts related to water supply would be less than significant because the projected
water demand from PLAN Hermosa buildout is within the demands forecast in the 2010 UWMP,
which demonstrates that supply meets the demand in Hermosa Beach. Furthermore, buildout
would not result in any new or expanded water supplies or facilities beyond those planned and
assumed in the 2010 UWMP. Impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
IMPACT 4.13.7-5 Would PLAN Hermosa Cause the JWPCP to Exceed Capacity for Wastewater
Treatment? PLAN Hermosa would guide future development and reuse projects
in the city in a manner that could result in the need for additional wastewater
treatment from increased flows. However, the anticipated increase in
wastewater generated would not exceed the capacity of the JWPCP or result in
the need for the construction or expansion of wastewater treatment facilities.
Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.
As described under Impact 4.13.7-1, wastewater from the city's system is collected and treated
at the Joint Water Pollution Control Plant, which has a permitted capacity of 400 mgd. Current
flows are approximately 254.1 mgd, well below the facility's design capacity. It is anticipated that
with implementation of PLAN Hermosa, wastewater generation would increase by approximately
0.252 mgd, although the actual amount may be less due to continued water conservation efforts
and the use of recycled water. The JWPCP has capacity to treat the anticipated increase in
wastewater attributable to the land use changes and population growth proposed in PLAN
Hermosa. Therefore, impacts on wastewater treatment facilities would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.13-42
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.13 PUBLIC SERVICES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES, AND UTILITIES
CUMULATIVE SETTING, IMPACTS, AND MITIGATION MEASURES
The cumulative setting for water supply impacts is the Cal Water Hermosa -Redondo District service
area. The cumulative setting for wastewater impacts is the Joint Water Pollution Control Plant in
Carson and wastewater conveyance lines operated by the County that discharge to the JWPCP.
IMPACT 4.13.7-6 Would PLAN Hermosa Cause Cumulative Water Supply Impacts? Implementation
of PLAN Hermosa, in combination with other existing, planned, proposed,
approved, and reasonably foreseeable development in the Cal Water Hermosa -
Redondo District service area, would increase the demand for water supply.
However, PLAN Hermosa water demand is within the district's population -based
supply/demand assumptions, and additional supplies would not be required. This
impact would be less than cumulatively considerable.
Table 4.13-3, above, identifies cumulative water demand and supply through 2040. The Cal Water
Hermosa -Redondo District has determined that sufficient and reliable supply will be available for
its service area under all water year scenarios, as described in Impact 4.13.7-4. PLAN Hermosa's
demand is within the population -based demand projections developed by the district, and would
not result in the need for new or expanded supplies to meet cumulative demand. Therefore, the
project's contribution would be less than cumulatively considerable.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
IMPACT 4.13.7-7 Would PLAN Hermosa Cause Cumulative Wastewater Impacts? Implementation
of PLAN Hermosa, in combination with other existing, planned, proposed,
approved, and reasonably foreseeable development in the service area of the
JWPCP, would increase the demand for wastewater treatment. There is sufficient
capacity at the JWPCP for projected future demand, which includes flows from
Hermosa Beach, and new or expanded facilities would not be required. PLAN
Hermosa's contribution would be less than cumulatively considerable.
Cumulative development in the service area for the Joint Water Pollution Control Plant would
result in an estimated future average dry weather flow of 359 mgd (LACSD 2012), which would not
exceed the plant's permitted design capacity of 400 mgd. PLAN Hermosa's additional
contribution (0.252 mgd) would represent less than 0.07 percent of the future demand, which
would be less than cumulatively considerable, and would not result in the need for new or
expanded facilities.
Mitigation Measures
N one—r-eq u ir-e-d .
4.13.8 SOLID WASTE
4.13.8.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Hermosa Beach is within the planning area for the County of Los Angeles Countywide Integrated
Waste Management Plan, which is administered by the Los Angeles County Department of Public
Works. Solid waste is disposed of at in -county and out -of -county landfills. There are several
transfer/processing facilities where solid waste collected from the jurisdictions is initially processed,
which reduces the amount of solid waste placed into landfills. In 2014, the total amount of solid
waste disposed of at in -county landfills, transformation facilities, and out -of -county landfills was
nearly 9 million tons. Approximately 52 percent of solid waste was delivered to in -county landfills,
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.13-43
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.13 PUBLIC SERVICES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES, AND UTILITIES
and of those in -county landfills nearly 85 percent of the solid waste was disposed of at the Sunshine
Canyon City/County Landfill, Chiquifa Canyon Landfill, and Antelope Valley Landfill. The County
does not anticipate a shortfall in permitted solid waste disposal capacity within the county in the
next 15 years (LACDPW 2015). The primary out -of -county facilities are the Mid -Valley Sanitary
Landfill and San Timoteo Sanitary Landfill.
Solid waste disposal services in Hermosa Beach are provided by a commercial vendor, Athens
Services, pursuant to an agreement for integrated solid waste management services dated
May 24, 2013 (City of Hermosa Beach 2013c). Athens Services provides collection service,
including recycling, to both residential and commercial properties in the planning area. The
agreement includes a guaranteed 50 percent diversion rate or higher, through the
implementation of a "pay as you throw" system as well as a single stream waste recovery and
disposal system. After implementation of the new franchise agreement, December 2013 records
showed that Hermosa Beach reached a 50.3 percent diversion rate (City of Hermosa Beach
2013e). Athens Services also provides street sweeping and cleaning services, while Los Angeles
County provides beach cleaning services.
Solid waste is hauled to the Athens United Waste Materials Recovery Facility in the City of Industry,
where it is sorted and recycled in compliance with AB 341. The facility has a permitted daily
capacity of 5,000 tons per day. Waste materials are then transported to a variety of landfills
identified in the Integrated Solid Waste Management agreement. In 2014, approximately 11,236
tons of solid waste from Hermosa Beach was landfilled (LACDPW 2016). This amount represents
approximately 0.1 percent of the approximately 9 million tons of countywide disposals at landfills
in 2014. Data for the entire year of 2015 are not available at this time.
The City does not make the determination as to which landfill is used for solid waste generated in
Hermosa Beach. Some of the landfills are in Los Angeles County and some are outside the county.
The amount of solid waste generated in Hermosa Beach and delivered by Athens Services to
landfills has shifted in the last few years to more out -of -county disposal. For example, in 2012 and
2013, nearly all of the solid waste generated (approximately 13,000-14,000 tons) was disposed of
in -county, primarily at the Sunshine Canyon City/County Landfill. However, in 2014, of the
approximately 11,000 tons of landfilled solid waste from Hermosa Beach, over 8,000 tons
(approximately 72 percent) was delivered out -of -county for disposal (LACDPW 2016). The
California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (Cal Recycle) calculates per capita
disposal by population and per capita disposal by employee rates for jurisdictions in California.?
The targets and actual rates are jurisdiction -specific indicators of progress toward meeting a 50
percent disposal per capita requirement. CalRecycle generally uses the per resident disposal rate
for most jurisdictions when evaluating progress toward meeting targets, unless business disposal is
the primary source of solid waste.
Hermosa Beach disposals are aggregated with many other jurisdictions under the Los Angeles
Area Integrated Waste Management Authority. For the aggregated jurisdictions, the per capita
residential target is 7.1 pounds per person per day of landfilled solid waste. In 2014, the
aggregated jurisdictions achieved an actual disposal rate of 4.8 pounds per person per day
(CalRecycle 2016). This exceeds (i.e., is better than) the target. Although CalRecycle does not
provide specific rates for Hermosa Beach, using CalRecycle's online disposal rate calculator and
population for 2014, the estimated rate for Hermosa Beach was 3.1 pounds per day per person,
which exceeds (i.e., is better than) the aggregated jurisdictions' targets and actual rates.
7 In CalRecycle's program, the term "jurisdictions" comprises counties, cities, unincorporated county areas, and regional
waste management entities.
PLAN Hermosa City of Hermosa Beach
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report August 2017
4.13-44
4.13 PUBLIC SERVICES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES, AND UTILITIES
Residential hazardous waste disposal is available at a facility located in Playa Del Rey and operated
by the City of Los Angeles Bureau of Sanitation. The facility is open on Saturdays and Sundays.
CalRecycle certifies used oil recycling collection centers to encourage recycling of motor oil.
4.13.8.2 REGULATORY SETTING
The following state local plans, policies, regulations, and laws pertain to solid waste in the planning
area.
California Integrated Waste Management Act: To minimize the amount of solid waste that
must be disposed of by transformation and land disposal, the California Legislature passed
the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (AB 939, Statutes of 1989),
effective January 1990. According to this act, all cities and counties were required to divert
25 percent of all solid waste from landfill facilities by January 1, 1995, and 50 percent by
January 1, 2000. To help in the increase of diversion rates, each jurisdiction is required to
create an integrated waste management plan. Each city plan must demonstrate
integration with the relevant county plan. The plans must promote source reduction,
recycling and composting, and environmentally safe transformation and land disposal.
Elements of the plans must be updated every five years.
AB 939 established the California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB; now
CalRecycle) to oversee integrated waste management planning and compliance. The
bill's passage led to the refinement of a statewide system of permitting, inspections,
maintenance, and enforcement for waste facilities in California, and also required the
CIWMB to adopt minimum standards for waste handling and disposal to protect public
health and safety and the environment. The CIWMB is responsible for approving permits
for waste facilities, approving local agencies' diversion rates, and enforcing the planning
requirements of the law through local enforcement agencies. The agencies are
responsible for enforcing laws and regulations related to solid waste management, issuing
permits to solid waste facilities, ensuring compliance with state -mandated requirements,
coordinating with other government agencies on solid waste -related issues, and
overseeing corrective actions at solid waste facilities. Local enforcement agencies inspect
facilities, respond to complaints, and conduct investigations into various aspects of solid
waste management.
Chapter 476, Statutes of 2011 (Chesbro, AB 341), declared that by 2020 California will
source reduce, recycle, or compost no less than 75 percent of solid waste generated.
4.13.8.3 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
ANALYSIS APPROACH
The following analysis is both quantitative and qualitative and is based on available information
for services provided in the planning area. The potential amount of solid waste requiring landfill
disposal was based on the current rate of 3.1 pounds per day per person and an increase in
population of 660. The analysis assumes that all future and existing development in the planning
area complies with applicable laws, regulations, standards, and plans. An analysis of cumulative
impacts uses quantitative and qualitative information for the planning area and applicable
broader service areas.
PLAN HERMOSA POLICIES AND IMPLEMENTATION ACTIONS
The following PLAN Hermosa policies and implementation actions address solid waste:
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.13-45
4.13 PUBLIC SERVICES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES, AND UTILITIES
Policies
Sustainability + Conservation Element
• 6.1 Franchise agreements. Ensure waste franchise agreements and program offerings
provide progressively higher rates of waste diversion.
• 6.2 Food waste collection. Ensure food waste collection is available and convenient for all
residents, businesses, and organizations.
• 6.3 Multi -family and commercial recycling. Require the provision of convenient recycling
options in multi -family residential and commercial uses, until single -stream services make it
unnecessary to separate recycling from other materials.
• 6.4 Material source reduction. Support and enforce requirements to minimize the use of
non -recyclable materials or materials commonly found on the beach, such as plastic bags
and polystyrene.
• 6.5 Recycled materials. Encourage and support the sale of products that minimize
packaging or are made from recycled materials.
• 6.6 Composting programs. Provide composting equipment at community facilities and
events and encourage home and commercial composting.
• 6.7 Green purchasing. Evaluate "green purchasing" options across all City departments
and consider the life -cycle effects of purchases.
• 6.8 Recycled building materials. Where cost effective and structurally feasible, maximize
the use of recycled building materials in new construction projects.
• 6.9 Building salvage. Maximize building salvage and deconstruction in remodeling or
building demolition projects.
Implementation Actions
• SUSTAINABILITY-10. Create and adopt a Zero Waste Action Plan to maximize waste
diversion from landfills.
• SUSTAINABILITY-11. Amend the Municipal Code to require that all commercial facilities
make full -service recycling available for both customer use and business use, placing
attractive and convenient bins in clear locations.
• SUSTAINABILITY-12. Consistent with State law, require that all multi -family residential uses
provide an adequate number of attractive and convenient recycling bins to serve the
number of units in the complex.
• SUSTAINABILITY-13. Require that all restaurants use compostable single -use items like
takeout boxes.
• SUSTAINABILITY-14. Create an informational packet to be distributed to development
project applicants on the use of recycled materials in new development and
redevelopment projects.
THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
The impact analysis provided below is based on the following CEQA Guidelines Appendix G
standards of significance. A solid waste impact is considered significant if implementation of the
proposed project would:
1) Be served by a landfill with insufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's
solid waste disposal needs.
2) Not comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste.
PLAN Hermosa City of Hermosa Beach
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report August 2017
4.13-46
4.13 PUBLIC SERVICES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES, AND UTILITIES
IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
IMPACT 4.13.8-1 Would PLAN Hermosa Increase Demand for Solid Waste Disposal? PLAN Hermosa
would guide future development and reuse projects in the city in a manner that
could result in additional solid waste disposal needs. Adequate capacity exists in
the landfills receiving waste generated in Hermosa Beach to accommodate
these additional needs. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.
New development and population growth with implementation of PLAN Hermosa could increase
demand for solid waste collection services and disposal capacity. The increase in population
would result in increased solid waste disposal demand of approximately 1 ton per day (374 tons
per year), which would represent an approximately 3 percent increase compared to 2014 levels.
The amount of solid waste requiring landfill disposal would be expected to be reduced through
several PLAN Hermosa implementation actions and policies. For example, implementation action
SUSTAIN ABILITY-10 would create and adopt a Zero Waste Action Plan to maximize waste diversion.
This program would further decrease impacts to solid waste and landfill capacity.
In addition, the following policies would decrease the demand for solid waste disposal. Policy 6.1
would ensure waste franchise agreements and program offerings provide progressively higher
rates of waste diversion. Policy 6.2 would ensure food waste collection is available and convenient
for all residents, businesses, and organizations. Policy 6.3 would require the provision of convenient
recycling options in multi -family residential and commercial uses. Policy 6.4 would support and
enforce requirements to minimize the use of nonrecyclable materials or materials commonly
found on the beach, such as plastic bags and polystyrene. Policy 6.5 would encourage and
support the sale of products that minimize packaging or are made from recycled materials. Policy
6.6 would provide composting equipment at community facilities and events and encourage
home and commercial composting. Policy 6.7 would evaluate "green purchasing" options across
all City departments and consider the life -cycle effects of purchases. Policy 6.8 would maximize
the use of recycled building materials in new construction projects. Policy 6.9 would maximize
building salvage and deconstruction in remodeling or building demolition projects.
Historically, Hermosa Beach solid waste was landfilled in -county, but in 2014, there was a shift to
out -of -county facilities. It is unknown whether that trend will continue. The City does not make the
decision as to where solid waste generated from development under PLAN Hermosa would be
disposed. However, the small amount of solid waste generated under PLAN Hermosa, when
added to 2014 disposal (approximately 11,236 tons), would be approximately 11,610 tons. This
would represent less than a 0.1 percent increase in solid waste delivered to in -county and out -of -
county landfills, which would not affect current permitted and remaining capacities. Additionally,
records show that Hermosa Beach meets it diversion requirements, and nothing in PLAN Hermosa
would reverse that trend. In fact, plan policies are aimed at achieving higher diversion rates, as
explairreb-above.
Because PLAN Hermosa policies and implementation actions would further reduce the amount of
waste generated by the community and would not result in the need for new or expanded solid
waste facilities, impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
IMPACT 4.13.8-2 Would PLAN Hermosa Comply with Solid Waste Disposal Regulations? PLAN
Hermosa would guide future development and reuse projects in the city in a
manner that could result in additional solid waste disposal needs. The City would
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.13 -47
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.13 PUBLIC SERVICES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES, AND UTILITIES
continue current programs and policies that result in a per capita disposal rate is
better than target amounts. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.
The estimated per capita disposal rate in Hermosa Beach is 3.1 tons per day, which exceeds (i.e.,
is better than) the CalRecycle aggregated jurisdiction target of 7.1 pounds per day per person
and the actual aggregated rate of 4.8 pounds per day per person. This indicates the City is in
compliance with existing regulations that require 50 percent diversion. PLAN Hermosa policies and
implementation actions identified in the discussion of Impact 4.13.8-1 would further ensure
compliance with solid waste disposal regulations, specifically the AB 341 requirement for 75
percent diversion by 2020.
Therefore, with implementation of PLAN Hermosa policies and implementation actions, impacts
related to compliance with solid waste regulations would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
CUMULATIVE SETTING, IMPACTS, AND MITIGATION MEASURES
The cumulative impact area for solid waste is the Los Angeles Integrated Solid Waste
Management Authority planning area for solid waste.
IMPACT 4.13.8-3 Would PLAN Hermosa Cause Cumulative Solid Waste Impacts? Implementation
of PLAN Hermosa, in combination with other existing, planned, proposed,
approved, and reasonably foreseeable development in the Los Angeles
Integrated Solid Waste Management Authority planning area, would increase
the demand for solid waste facilities. PLAN Hermosa's contribution to the need
for expanded solid waste services would be considered less than cumulatively
considerable.
The Los Angeles County Department of Public Works (LACDPW) has estimated an annual landfill
disposal demand for the aggregated jurisdictions for the period 2014-2029. The estimate is based
on its population projections, per capita solid waste generation, current (60 percent) and future
(75 percent) diversion, and availability of transformation and alternative technology facilities.
Although the population and amount of solid waste generated would increase, the amount of
solid waste landfilled is expected to decrease. In its 2014 annual report, the LACDPW (2015)
determined that the cumulative need for Class III landfill disposal capacity, approximately 99.8
million tons, will not exceed the 2014 remaining permitted Class III landfill capacity of 112 million
tons. PLAN Hermosa's contribution to that cumulative demand would be approximately 0.0004
percent, which is negligible. Although the LACDPW has not developed a forecast for 2040, given
that PLAN Hermosa's contribution would not be cumulatively considerable in 2029, the impact
would be less than cumulatively considerable in 2040.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.13-48
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.13 PUBLIC SERVICES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES, AND UTILITIES
4.13.9 ENERGY
4.13.9.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Appendix C-8 describes the regional and local conditions related to energy in Hermosa Beach.
Key findings of the environmental setting are provided below.
ENERGY SOURCES
Energy generation occurs across the state from many different sources. Tracking the specific
source of energy used in any one place can be difficult. Energy that is not generated at a facility
by an energy provider can be purchased from other producers and transmitted to the energy
user through transmission networks. Energy sources used in Hermosa Beach may include
hydroelectric, waste-fo-energy, transformation, geothermal, solar, wind, coal, natural gas, and
nuclear. The following paragraphs describe the existing sources of electricity and natural gas for
Hermosa Beach.
Electricity
Southern California Edison (SCE) supplies electricity to customers in Hermosa Beach. Over the past
15 years, electricity generation in California has undergone a transition. Historically, California has
relied heavily on oil- and gas -fired plants to generate electricity. Spurred by regulatory measures
and tax incentives, California's electrical system has become more reliant on renewable energy
sources, including cogeneration, wind energy, solar energy, geothermal energy, biomass
conversion, transformation plants, and small hydroelectric plants. Unlike petroleum production,
generation of electricity is usually not tied to the location of the fuel source and can be delivered
great distances via the electrical grid.
The generating capacity of a unit of electricity is expressed in megawatts (MW). One MW provides
enough energy to power 1,000 average California homes per day. Net generation refers to the
gross amount of energy produced by a unit, minus the amount of energy the unit consumes.
Generation is typically measured in megawatt -hours (MWh), kilowatt-hours (kWh), or gigawaft-
hours (GWh).
Natural Gas
Natural gas is a hydrocarbon fuel found in reservoirs beneath the earth's surface and is composed
primarily of methane (CH4). It is used for space and wafer heating, process heating and electricity
generation, and as transportation fuel. The Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas) supplies
natural gas in Hermosa Beach.
Use of natural gas to generate electricity is expected to increase in coming years because it is a
relatively clean alternative to other fossil fuels like oil and coal. In California and throughout the
western United States, many new electrical generation plants that are fired by natural gas are
being brought online. Thus, there is great interest in importing liquefied natural gas from other parts
of the world. As of 2012, 43 percent of the electricity consumed in California was generated using
natural gas (CEC 2013).
While the supply of natural gas in the United States and production in the lower 48 states has
increased greatly since 2008, California produces little, and imports 90 percent of its natural gas.
Most imports are delivered via interstate pipelines from the Southwest, Rocky Mountains, and
Canada (CPUC 2013).
EXISTING ENERGY USE
As of 2012, California ranked second in the United States in total energy consumption of natural
gas, petroleum, and retail electricity sales, following only Texas in each category (EIA 2014a) .
Despite being a large consumer of energy, in particular transportation energy, California's per
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.13-49
4.13 PUBLIC SERVICES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES, AND UTILITIES
capita consumption rate for all these energy sources combined is one of the lowest in the country
(49th). This is largely because of California's proactive energy efficiency programs and mild
weather, which reduces energy demands for heating and cooling (EIA 2014b).
Residential and nonresidential (businesses, industrial processes, government operations) activities
in Hermosa Beach such as building heating and cooling, lighting, and appliance operation require
electricity and natural gas. Table 4.13-4 (Energy Use by Sector and Fuel Type) presents an overview
of the electricity, natural gas, and transportation fuel consumed in the city in 2015; more detailed
information by fuel source is provided below.
TABLE 4.13-4
ENERGY USE BY SECTOR AND FUEL TYPE - 2015
Type Total Percentage of Total
Electricity Use (kWh)
Residential Energy
49,778,500
54.7%
Nonresidential Energy
41,191,800
45.3%
Total
90,970,300
100.0%
Natural Gas Use (therms)
Residential Energy
3,364,400
79.3%
Nonresidential Energy
876,000
20.7%
Total
4,240,400
100.0%
Transportation Fuel
Vehicle Miles Traveled
133,808,700
Average Fleet Fuel Efficiency
22
Transportation Fuel (gallons)
6,194,800
EV Electricity Use (kWh)
Source: City of Hermosa Beach 2015a
ALTERNATIVE AND RENEWABLE ENERGY SOURCES
Wind Energy
Wind energy systems convert the kinetic energy in the wind into mechanical or electrical energy
that can be used for practical purposes. Wind electric turbines generate electricity for homes and
businesses and for sale to utilities. Wind electricity can be generated on a small residential scale
with small turbines (typically a few kilowatts [kW] or less in capacity, but some as large as 30 kW),
or on a utility scale via large wind farms.
Wind energy plays an integral role in California's electricity portfolio. According to the California
Energy Commission (CEC), in 2004, turbines in wind farms in California generated about 1.5
percent of the state's total electricity resource, enough to light a city the size of San Francisco. This
production increased to represent 8.1 percent or 23,913 GWh in 2014 (CEC 2015). Hermosa Beach
has adopted regulations for small wind energy systems, and one application for a small residential
wind energy system was recently submitted and withdrawn. This energy source is expected to
have minimal potential in Hermosa Beach due to existing density and height restrictions and
potential aesthetic concerns.
Solar Energy
Solar power can be harnessed for several applications, including heating, cooling, and electricity
generation. The most common method to produce energy uses photovoltaic (PV) cells, which
convert sunlight directly into electricity. Large-scale use of solar energy represents a major
PLAN Hermosa City of Hermosa Beach
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report August 2017
4.13-50
4.13 PUBLIC SERVICES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES, AND UTILITIES
potential energy resource in the Southern California climate. In general, large-scale solar power
plants are very land intensive compared to conventional power plants, requiring acres of
reflectors, pipelines, and transmission lines. No large-scale solar power plants exist in Hermosa
Beach, although small-scale solar generation facilities are used on individual properties.
The State of California has emphasized developing solar -produced energy by developing the
California Solar Initiative in 2006. The initiative provides incentives to help increase the amount of
solar energy generated in California. One such incentive is to encourage solar energy to be used
in new homes. The incentive program is known as the New Solar Homes Partnership. Overall, the
California Solar Initiative has a goal to provide 1,750 MW of solar -generated energy by 2016 (CEC
2013). In 2014, California produced 10,557 GWh, which represented 5.3 percent of the total
electricity produced in the state (CEC 2015). Residents and businesses in Hermosa Beach have
invested nearly $3 million to install approximately 378 kW of solar through this program, consisting
of 74 residential PV systems and 6 nonresidential PV systems (Go Solar California 2014). The City
waives building permit fees.
Biomass
According to the CEC, biomass electricity is drawn from combusting or decomposing organic
matter. There are about 132 waste -to -energy plants in California, with a total capacity of almost
1,000 megawatts. These plants power homes and businesses with electricity from waste matter
that would have been released into the atmosphere, added fuel to forest fires, and burdened
landfills. Using biomass to produce electricity reduces the reliance on fossil fuels, the nation's
primary energy sources for electricity, and the largest contributors to air pollution and greenhouse
gases.
In 2015, 6,280 gigawatt-hours of electricity in homes and businesses were produced from biomass:
burning forestry, agricultural, and urban biomass; converting methane -rich landfill gas to energy;
and processing wastewater and dairy biogas into useful energy. Biomass power plants produced
3.43 percent of the total electricity in California (CEC 2016a).
Geothermal
Geothermal energy is produced by the heat of the earth and is often associated with volcanic or
seismically active regions. California, with its location on the Pacific "Ring of Fire," has 25 Known
Geothermal Resource Areas, 14 of which have temperatures of 300 degrees Fahrenheit or greater.
The most developed of the high -temperature geothermal resource areas in the state is the
Geysers. Located north of San Francisco, the Geysers was first tapped as a geothermal resource
to generate electricity in 1960. It is one of only two locations in the world where a high -
temperature, dry steam resource is found that can be directly used to move turbines and
generate electricity (the other being in Larderello, Italy) (CEC 2016b).
Electricity can be generated from high temperature geothermal resources by using the thermal
(heated) -water -and -sham to -move -turbines -that in turn-run-elec-t-ic-a�-genera#-ors-ond-preduc�
electricity. Several types of geothermal power plants can be used to generate electricity,
including dry steam, flash or double flash, and binary cycle power plants.
In 2015, geothermal energy in the state produced 11,994 gigawatt-hours of electricity. Combined
with another 700 GWh of imported geothermal power, geothermal energy produced 6.13 percent
of the state's total system power. There are a total of 44 operating geothermal power plants in
California with an installed capacity of 2,716 megawatts (CEC 2016b).
4.13.9.2 REGULATORY SETTING
The following state and local plans, policies, regulations, and laws pertain to energy.
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.13-51
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.13 PUBLIC SERVICES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES, AND UTILITIES
STATE
California Public Utilities Commission: The California Public Utilities Commission has
authority to set electric rates, regulate natural gas utility service, protect consumers,
promote energy efficiency, and ensure electric system reliability. California Public Utilities
Commission General Order 131-D (adopted by Decision 94-06-014 and modified by
Decision 95-08-038) contains the rules for the planning and construction of new
transmission facilities, distribution facilities, and substations. This decision requires utility
companies to obtain permits to construct certain power line facilities or substations if the
voltage would exceed 50 kilovolts (kV) or if the substation would require the acquisition of
land or an increase in voltage rating above 50 kV. Utilities do not need to comply with this
decision for distribution lines and substations with voltage less than 50 kV; however, they
must obtain any nondiscretionary local permits required for the construction and
operation of these projects. Compliance with CEQA is required for construction of facilities.
The California Public Utilities Commission also has jurisdiction over the siting of natural gas
transmission lines.
• Renewables Portfolio Standard: California's Renewables Portfolio Standard (RIPS),
established in 2002 by Senate Bill 1078 (Sher, Chapter 516, Statutes of 2002), originally
required retail electricity providers to increase procurement by at least 1 percent per year
of their electricity supplies from renewable resources to achieve a 20 percent renewable
mix by no later than 2017. Since then, the CEC, the California Public Utilities Commission,
and the California Power Authority approved the first Energy Action Plan in 2003, which
accelerated the 20 percent target date to 2010. A second Energy Action Plan was
adopted in 2005, which provided updates in energy policy. Senate Bill 107 (Smitian and
Perata, Chapter 464, Statutes of 2006) adopted the revised 2010 target date into law. A
third update was adopted in 2008, which "examines the state's ongoing actions in the
context of global climate change" (CEC 2009). Executive Order S-14-08 expands the
state's renewable energy standard to set a target of 33 percent renewable power by 2020.
Executive Order S-21-09 directs the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to adopt
regulations increasing California's RPS to 33 percent by 2020. Most recently, Governor
Edmund G. Brown Jr. signed into legislation Senate Bill 350 in October 2015, which requires
retail sellers and publicly owned utilities to procure 50 percent of their electricity from
eligible renewable energy resources by 2030.
• California Green Building Standards: Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations is a
statewide standard applied by local agencies through building permits. It includes
requirements for the structural, plumbing, electrical, and mechanical systems of buildings
and for fire and life safety, energy conservation, green design, and accessibility in and
around buildings. Part 6 (the California Energy Code) and Part 11 (the California Green
Building Standards Code) include prescriptive and performance -based standards to
reduce electricity and natural gas use in every new building constructed in California.
These standards are regularly updated every three years to incorporate new market -ready
technologies and design techniques to further reduce energy use from the built
environment. The most recent update to these standards went into effect January 1, 2017.
• California Environmental Quality Act: CEQA Guidelines Appendix F, Energy Conservation,
requires consideration of project impacts on energy and focuses particularly on avoiding
or reducing inefficient, wasteful, and unnecessary consumption of energy (Public
Resources Code Section 21100[b][3]). The potentially significant energy implications of a
project must be considered in an EIR to the extent relevant and applicable to the project.
LOCAL
• City of Hermosa Beach Municipal Code: Section 15.48.020 of the City's Municipal Code
modifies the California Energy Code, requiring new residential and nonresidential buildings
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.13-52
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.13 PUBLIC SERVICES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES, AND UTILITIES
to be 15 percent more energy efficient than California Energy Code requirements. The
section also includes requirements for cool roofs or roofs with high levels of solar
reflectance, energy -efficient appliances, and energy -efficient heating, ventilation, and
air conditioning systems.
Permit Processing and Rebates: The City provides building permit and planning fee
rebates for eligible green building, energy efficiency, and renewable energy projects.
Eligible projects include those obtained through Energy Upgrade California or the HERO
program, as well as projects certified through Leadership in Energy and Environmental
Design (LEED) or Build If Green. Renewable energy projects (including wind and solar) are
also eligible for rebates.
Hermosa Beach Sustainability Plan: The Hermosa Beach Susfainability Plan was accepted
by the City Council in 2011. Chapter 5 of the plan focuses on building energy and includes
measures and projects to reduce energy use at municipal facilities and encourage the
installation of renewable energy projects at homes and businesses.
Hermosa Beach Energy Efficiency Climate Action Plan: The City of Hermosa Beach, in
concert with the South Bay Cities Council of Governments (COG), is committed to
providing a more livable, equitable, and economically vibrant community and subregion
through the implementation of energy efficiency measures. By using energy more
efficiently, it is the City's objective to keep dollars in the local economy, create new green
jobs, and improve the community's quality of life. The Energy Efficiency Climate Action
Plan contains goals and policies that incorporate energy use reduction into the City's daily
management of its community and municipal operations.
4.13.9.3 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
ANALYSIS APPROACH
The following analysis is quantitative and is based on available information for energy services
provided in the planning area. The impact analysis focuses on the three sources of energy that
are relevant to the proposed project: electricity, natural gas, and transportation fuel.
The analysis of impacts is based on the likely consequences of adoption and implementation of
PLAN Hermosa compared to existing conditions. This analysis uses the energy information provided
in the 2015 City of Hermosa Beach GHG Inventory, Forecasting, Target -Setting Report for an Energy
Efficiency Climate Action Plan (2015 GHG Inventory Report) and the local growth projections
determined based on available land capacity (see Chapter 3.0, Project Description) as the basis
for projecting future energy use in the city.
PLAN HERMOSA POLICIES AND IMPLEMENTATION ACTIONS
The following PLAN Hermosa policies and implementation actions address energy demand and
onservatlon-.Other-policies-and-!mplemenfation-actions-t-hof would -have -an-e#€c-f-0n-,&ner-gy
demand would include greenhouse gas emissions reduction policies and actions, approaches to
wafer conservation and wastewater reductions, and planning concepts that reduce vehicle miles
traveled, which are listed in Sections 4.6, 4.8, and 4.14, respectively.
Policies
GOVERNANCE ELEMENT
• 4.4 Regional transportation and infrastructure decisions. Actively support regional
transportation and infrastructure projects and investment decisions that benefit the City
and the region.
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.13-53
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.13 PUBLIC SERVICES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES, AND UTILITIES
LAND USE + DESIGN ELEMENT
• Land Use Designations - The range and diversity of uses allowed within each land use
designation plays a role in the number of trips a use generates and the mode of
transportation chosen to make that trip. The more diversity in uses (between commercial,
office/professional, residential, etc.) in a given area, combined with a safe transportation
network, results in shorter trips that can be made by driving, walking, biking, or transit.
• 1.1 Diverse and distributed land use pattern. Strive to maintain the fundamental pattern of
existing land uses, preserving residential neighborhoods, while providing for enhancement
and transformation of corridors and districts in order to improve community activity and
identity.
• 1.2 Focused infill potential. Proposals for new development should be directed toward the
city's commercial areas with an emphasis on developing transit -supportive land use mixes.
• 1.3 Access to daily activities. Strive to create sustainable development patterns such that
the majority of residents are within walking distance to a variety of neighborhood goods
and services, such as supermarkets, restaurants, churches, cafes, dry cleaners, laundry
mats, farmers' markets, banks, personal services, pharmacies and similar uses.
• 1.4 Diverse commercial areas. Promote the development of diversified and unique
commercial districts with locally owned businesses and job- or revenue -generating uses.
• 4.2 Employment centers. Encourage the development and co -location of additional
office space and employment centers along corridors, preferably above ground -floor
commercial uses on second or third floors.
• 4.7 Access to transit. Support the location of transit stations and enhanced stops near the
intersection of Aviation Blvd and Pacific Coast Highway, and adjacent to Gateway
Commercial uses to facilitate and fake advantage of transit service, reduce vehicle trips
and allow residents without private vehicles to access services.
• 4.10 Pedestrian access. For all new development, encourage pedestrian access, and
create strong building entries that are primarily oriented to the street.
• 6.2 Streetscaping. Proactively beautify existing sfreetscapes with street trees, landscaping
and pedestrian -scaled lighting.
• 6.3 Green open space network. Establish an interconnected green infrastructure network
throughout Hermosa Beach that serves as a network for active transportation, recreation
and scenic beauty and connects all areas of the city. In particular, connections should be
made between the beach, parks, the Downtown, neighborhoods, and other destinations
within the city. Consider the following components when designing and implementing the
green/open space network:
- Preserved open space areas such as the beach and the Greenbelt
- Living streets with significant landscaping and pedestrian and bicycle amenities
- Community and neighborhood parks, and schools
• 6.5 Provision of sidewalks. Encourage pedestrian -friendly sidewalks on both sides of streets
in neighborhoods.
• 6.7 Pedestrian -oriented design. Eliminate urban form conditions that reduce walkability by
discouraging surface parking and parking structures along walkways, long blank walls
along walkways, and garage -dominated building facades.
• 6.8 Balance pedestrian/vehicular circulation. Require vehicle parking design to consider
pedestrian circulation. Require the following of all new development along corridors:
- Where parking lots front the street, the City will work with existing property owners to
add landscaping between the parking lot and the street.
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.13-54
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.13 PUBLIC SERVICES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES, AND UTILITIES
- Parking lots should be landscaped to create an attractive pedestrian environment and
reduce the impact of heat islands.
- The number of curb cuts and other intrusions of vehicles across sidewalks should be
minimized.
- When shared parking supply options are not available, encourage connections
between parking lots on adjacent sites.
- Above -ground parking structures should be designed according to the same urban
design principles as other buildings.
- Encourage the use of systems to increase parking lot efficiency, such as mechanical
lift systems or occupancy sensors.
9.1 Ocean -based energy resources. Encourage and support research and responsible
development of renewable ocean -based energy sources. Renewable energy sources
appropriate to Hermosa Beach could include wave, tidal, solar, and wind sources that
meet the region's and state's need for affordable sources of renewable energy.
13.3 Fresh food offerings. Encourage the continuation and expansion of fresh food
offerings including farmers' markets, community gardens, and edible landscapes in
Hermosa Beach.
MOBILITY ELEMENT
• 1.1 Consider all modes. Require the planning, design, and construction of all new and
existing transportation projects to consider the needs of all modes of travel to create safe,
livable and inviting environments for all users of the system.
2.5 Require sustainable practices. Incorporate environmental sustainability practices into
designs and strategic management of road space and public right-of-ways, prioritizing
practices that can serve multiple infrastructure purposes.
• 3.2 Complete pedestrian network. Prioritize investment in designated priority sidewalks to
ensure a complete network of sidewalks and pedestrian -friendly amenities that enhances
pedestrian safety, access opportunities and connectivity to destinations.
• 3.3 Active transportation. Require commercial development or redevelopment projects
and residential projects with four or more units to accommodate active transportation by
providing on -site amenities, necessary connections to existing and planned pedestrian
and bicycle networks, and incorporate people -oriented design practices.
• 3.4 Access opportunities. Provide enhanced mobility and access opportunities for local
transportation and transit services in areas of the city with sufficient density and intensity of
uses, mix of appropriate uses, and supportive bicycle and pedestrian network connections
that can reduce vehicle trips within the city's busiest corridors.
• 3.5 Incentivize other modes. Incentivize local shuttle/trolley services, rideshare and car
share programs, and developing infrastructure that support low speed, low carbon (e.g.
electric) vehicles.
• 3.6 Complete bicycle network. Provide a complete bicycle network along all designated
roadways while creating connections to other modes of travel including walking and
transit.
• 4.1 Shared parking. Facilitate park -once and shared parking policies among private
developments that contribute to a shared parking supply and interconnect with adjacent
parking facilities.
• 4.4 Preferential parking program. Periodically study and evaluate the current inventory of
public parking supply and update the preferential parking program.
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.13-55
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.13 PUBLIC SERVICES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES, AND UTILITIES
• 4.5 Sufficient bicycle parking. Require a sufficient supply of bicycle parking to be provided
in conjunction with new vehicle parking facilities by both public and private
developments.
• 4.6 Priority parking. Provide priority parking and charging stations to accommodate the
use of Electric Vehicles (EVs), including smaller short -distance neighborhood electric
vehicles.
• 4.9 Encourage TDM strategies. Encourage use of transportation demand management
strategies and programs such as carpooling, ride hailing, and alternative transportation
modes as a way to reduce demand for additional parking supply.
• 5.1 Prioritize development of infrastructure. Prioritize the development of roadway and
parking infrastructure that encourages private electric and other low carbon vehicle
ownership and use throughout the city.
• 5.2 Local transit system. Develop a local transit system that facilitates efficient transport of
residents, hotel guests, and beachgoers between activity centers, and to Downtown
businesses and the beach.
• 5.3 Incentivize TDM strategies. Incentivize the use of Transportation Demand Management
(TDM) strategies as a cost effective method for maximizing existing transportation
infrastructure to accommodate mobility demands without significant expansion to
infrastructure.
• 5.5 Multimodal development features. Encourage land use features in development
projects to create compact, connected, and multimodal development that supports
reduced trip generation, trip lengths, and greater ability to utilize alternative modes of
travel.
• 6.1 Regional network. Work with government agencies and private sector companies to
develop a comprehensive, regionally integrated transportation network that connects the
community to surrounding cities.
• 6.3 Support programs. Facilitate greater local and regional mobility through programs for
shared equipment or transportation options such as car sharing and bike sharing.
• 6.6 Greater utilization of BCT. Consider exploring opportunities for greater utilization of the
Beach Cities Transit system for improved mobility along major corridors and as a potential
means of improved regional transit connections.
SUSTAINABILITY + CONSERVATION ELEMENT
• 2.5 Land use and transportation investments. Promote land use and transportation
investments that support greater transportation choice, greater local economic
opportunity, and reduced number and length of automobile trips.
• 3.2 Mobile source reductions. Support land use and transportation strategies to reduce
emissions, including pollution from commercial and passenger vehicles.
• 3.3 Fuel efficient fleets. Promote fuel efficiency and cleaner fuels for vehicles as well as
construction and maintenance equipment by requesting that City contractors provide
cleaner fleets.
• 4.1 Renewable energy generation. Support and facilitate the installation of renewable
energy projects on homes and businesses.
• 4.2 Retrofit program. Provide an energy retrofit program and incentives to assist home and
building owners to make efficiency improvements.
• 4.3 Rental efficiency. Adopt a financing program to incentivize rental efficiency retrofits
that benefit both the owner and tenant.
• 4.4 Municipal facilities. Utilize renewable energy sources at City facilities
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.13-56
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.13 PUBLIC SERVICES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES, AND UTILITIES
4.5 Sustainable building standards. Use sustainable building checklists to minimize or
eliminate waste and maximize recycling in building design, demolition, and construction
activities.
PARKS + OPEN SPACE ELEMENT
4.2 Enhanced access points. Increase and enhance access to parks and open space,
particularly across major thoroughfares, as well as access points that promote physical
activity such as pedestrian- and bike -oriented access points.
• 4.3 Safe and efficient trail network. Develop a network of safe and efficient trails, streets,
and paths that connect residents, visitors, and neighboring communities to the beach,
parks, and activity centers.
• 6.4 Transit access. Coordinate with regional agencies and neighboring jurisdictions to
improve regional and local transit access to beach access points.
• 6.5 Wayfinding and coastal access. Maximize all forms of access and safety getting to and
around the Coastal Zone through infrastructure and wayfinding improvements.
• 6.12 Comprehensive bike and pedestrian network. Prioritize completion of proposed South
Bay Bike Master Plan improvements in the Coastal Zone that connect to other bike routes
and paths throughout the city and to the surrounding region.
INFRASTRUCTURE ELEMENT
• 2.4 Sidewalk improvements. Consider innovative funding strategies, such as cost -sharing,
ADA accessibility grants, or sidewalk dedications, to improve the overall condition, safety,
and accessibility of sidewalks.
2.5 Active transportation dedications. Require new development and redevelopment
projects to provide land or infrastructure necessary to accommodate active
transportation, such as widened sidewalks, bike racks, and bus stops, in compliance with
ADA accessibility standards.
• 2.6 Traffic signal coordination. Maintain and operate the traffic signal system with
advanced technologies to manage traffic operations and maintain traffic signal
infrastructure.
6.4 Innovative and renewable technology. Encourage the exploration and establishment
of innovative and renewable utility service technologies. Allow the testing of new
alternative energy sources that are consistent with the goals and policies of PLAN Hermosa
and comply with all relevant regulations.
• 6.5 Renewable energy facilities. Unless a renewable energy facility would cause an
unmitigatable impact to health or safety, allow them by right.
• 6.6 Renewable energy procurement. Collaborate with nearby local and regional agencies
to provide greater renewable energy choices to the community.
Implementation Actions
• MOBILITY-12. Maintain and periodically update the Transportation Demand Management
(TDM) Ordinance with activities that will reduce auto trips associated with new
development.
• MOBILITY-13. Install and maintain transportation amenities such as bicycle parking and
electric vehicle charging stations so that they are available at each commercial district or
corridor, park, and public facility.
• SUSTAINABILITY-7. Concurrent with new State Building Code adoptions, periodically update
or amend Green Building Standards and conduct cost effectiveness studies to incorporate
additional energy -efficiency and energy production features.
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.13-57
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.13 PUBLIC SERVICES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES, AND UTILITIES
• SUSTAINABILITY-8. Develop and market a program to offer incentives such as rebates, fee
waivers, or permit streamlining to facilitate the installation of renewable energy, energy
efficient, or water conservation equipment.
• INFRASTRUCTURE-23. Develop a process for identifying sites deemed appropriate for
alternative renewable energy power generation facilities, and provide such information
to utility providers and potential developers.
• INFRASTRUCTURE-24. Continue to implement energy -efficient lighting throughout City
facilities.
• INFRASTRUCTURE-25. Survey all streetlights periodically for functionality and create a
response protocol to respond to reports of streetlight outages within a 24-hour time period.
THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
The impact analysis below is based on CEQA Guidelines Appendix F pertaining to energy
conservation. An energy impact is considered significant if implementation of the proposed
project would result in a wasteful, inefficient, and unnecessary use of direct or indirect energy. For
purposes of the analysis, "wasteful" and "inefficient" are circumstances in which the project would
conflict with applicable state or local energy legislation, policies, and standards, or result in
increased per capita energy consumption.
IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
IMPACT 4.13.9-1 Would PLAN Hermosa Increase Demand for Additional Energy Resources? PLAN
Hermosa would guide future development and reuse projects in the city that
would not result in the use of fuel or energy in a wasteful manner. Therefore, this
impact would be less than significant.
Electricity and Natural Gas Consumption
As shown in Table 4.13-5 (Historic Energy Consumption), overall electricity consumption was
reduced by 8.7 percent between 2005 and 2012. However, this reduction was based on the
reduction of electrical consumption from commercial/industrial customers. Residential electrical
consumption increased by 4.0 percent during this time, while natural gas consumption increased
by 1.0 percent.
TABLE 4.13-5
HISTORIC ENERGY CONSUMPTION
2005
2012
Percentage Change
Electricity Consumption (kWh)
Residential Enerqy
47,843,200
49,778,500
4.0%
Nonresidential Energy
51,741,500
41,191,800
-20.4%
Total
99,584,700
90,970,300
-8.7%
Natural Gas Consumption (therms)
Residential Energy
3,339,800
3,364,400
0.7%
Nonresidential Energy
857,700
876,000
2.1%
Total
4,197,500
4,240,400
1.0%
Source: City of Hermosa Beach 2015o
In 2015, the City of Hermosa Beach, in concert with the South Bay Cities Council of Governments,
collected data on existing energy use and greenhouse gas emissions (GHG). Additionally, the City
has projected future energy consumption in the city based on growth projections and a business -
as -usual (BAU) scenario, essentially assuming no new regulations are put in place to reduce energy
PLAN Hermosa City of Hermosa Beach
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report August 2017
4.13-58
4.13 PUBLIC SERVICES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES, AND UTILITIES
consumption or reduce greenhouse gas emissions (see Section 4.6, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, for
a discussion of GHG and climate change). Table 4.13-6 (Energy Consumption Associated with the
Future Development Potential under Plan Hermosa) provides an estimate of electricity and natural
gas use under the BAU scenario. As shown in Table 4.13-6, electricity and natural gas consumption
will continue to rise through 2040 under the BAU scenario. However, full implementation of PLAN
Hermosa would reduce energy consumption by 19.2 percent for electricity and 15.1 percent for
natural gas between 2015 and 2040.
TABLE 4.13-6
ENERGY CONSUMPTION ASSOCIATED WITH THE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL UNDER PLAN HERMOSA
BAU
Plan
Implementation
Change
Between 2015
2015
2020
2030
2040
2040
and 2040
Electricity Use (kWh)
Residential Energy
49,778,500
50,759,000
52,730,200
54,696,400
33,363,500
-33.0%
Nonresidential Energy
41,191,800
43,984,400
49,561,600
55,142,800
40,102,000
-2.6%
Total
90,970,300
94,743,400
102,291,800
109,839,200
73,465,500
-19.2%
Natural Gas Use (therms)
Residential Energy
3,364,400
3,430,700
3,563,900
3,696,800
2,953,000
-12.2%
Nonresidential Energy
876,000
935,400
1,054,000
1,172,700
648,200
-26.0%
Total
4,240,400
4,366,100
4,617,900
4,869,500
3,601,200
-15.1%
Source: City of Hermosa Beach 2015a
As shown in Table 4.13-6, the future development potential through 2040 under a BAU scenario
could result in the additional consumption of 18,868,900 kilowatt-hours and 629,100 therms over
current conditions. However, this consumption does not take into account the energy savings to
be gained through the implementation of PLAN Hermosa's policies and implementation actions.
Implementation of PLAN Hermosa's energy consumption policies and implementation actions
would support further reductions in energy use, and would result in a reduction in the consumption
of electricity and natural gas in the city. Thus, implementation of PLAN Hermosa would not conflict
with or obstruct City goals intended to reduce the consumption of electricity and natural gas
resources.
Furthermore, the future development allowed under PLAN Hermosa would be required to comply
with Title 24 Building Energy Efficiency Standards, which establish minimum efficiency standards
related to various building features, including appliances, water and space heating and cooling
equipment, building insulation and roofing, and lighting. Implementation of the Title 24 standards
significantly reduces energy usage.
Automotive Fuel Consumption
As shown in Table 4.13-7 (Fuel Consumption Associated with the Future Development Potential
under PLAN Hermosa), increases in fuel economy and the overall reduction in vehicle miles
traveled is expected to decrease the amount of fuel consumed between 2015 and 2040 under
the BAU scenario.
Implementation of PLAN Hermosa's proposed policies and implementation actions that are
designed to promote pedestrian, bicycle, and transit forms of transportation would further reduce
dependency on fossil fuels. As shown in Table 4.13-7, under PLAN Hermosa, the amount of
transportation fuels consumed would be reduced to approximately 1.4 million gallons or almost
77 percent when compared to existing (2015) conditions, but would also increase electricity
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.13-59
4.13 PUBLIC SERVICES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES, AND UTILITIES
consumption due to the increase in use of electric vehicles. The reduction of transportation fuel
consumed by 2040 compared to 2015 (77 percent) is a result of greater fuel efficiency from
conventionally fueled vehicles, a reduction in overall vehicle miles traveled through land use
changes, and a greater shift to electric vehicles or fossil -free vehicles. By 2040 it is estimated that
approximately 75 percent of new vehicles in Hermosa Beach will be electric or fossil -free vehicles,
compared to approximately 5 percent in 2015. This information, along with all other assumptions
associated with the calculation of energy or fuel use and greenhouse gas reductions, is presented
in Appendix E-1.
TABLE 4.13-7
FUEL CONSUMPTION ASSOCIATED WITH THE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL UNDER PLAN HERMOSA
2015
BAU
2020 2030
2040
Plan Implementation
2040
-Transportation
Vehicle Miles Traveled
133,808,700
126,238,300
128,574,500
130,910,800
107,737,700
Avera a Fleet Fuel Efficiency
22 mpg
34 mpg
44 mpg
55 mpg
55 mpg
Transportation Fuel (gallons)
6,194,800
3,702,000
2,908,900
2,402,000
1,428,600
EV Electricity Use (kWh)
—
—
—
—
9,959,700
Source: City of Hermosa Beach 2015a
The data in Table 4.13-7 have been developed using the same assumptions used for the
greenhouse gas emissions analysis in Section 4.6, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, which concludes that
PLAN Hermosa will reduce emissions locally by at least 66 percent by 2040.
As discussed above, implementation of PLAN Hermosa's policies and implementation actions
would reduce the consumption of electricity, natural gas, and transportation fuels. Therefore, this
impact would be less than significant.
CUMULATIVE SETTING, IMPACTS, AND MITIGATION MEASURES
The cumulative impact area for energy consumption is Los Angeles County.
IMPACT 4.13.9-2 Would PLAN Hermosa Have Cumulative Energy Consumption Impacts?
Implementation of PLAN Hermosa, in combination with other existing, planned,
proposed, approved, and reasonably foreseeable development in Los Angeles
County, would increase the demand for energy resources. PLAN Hermosa's
contribution to the need for expanded energy resources would be less than
cumulatively considerable.
According to the California Energy Consumption Data Management System, residential and
nonresidential land uses in Los Angeles County consumed approximately 70 billion kWh of
electricity and about 3 billion therms of natural gas in 2014 (the latest year of existing data) (CEC
2014). In addition, about 1 1 million gallons of automotive fuel was consumed daily in the county
in 2015 (roughly 4 billion gallons annually).
Energy consumption associated with PLAN Hermosa in comparison to Los Angeles County is
summarized in Table 4.13-8 (Plan Hermosa Energy Consumption Plus Cumulative Conditions).
Under the BAU scenario, electricity consumption in the city will increase by about 19 million kWh.
This increase represents an increase in total electricity use (when compared to 2014 statistics) in
Los Angeles County of 0.03 percent, while natural gas consumption represents an increase of 0.02
percent. Implementation of PLAN Hermosa's policies and implementation actions would result in
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.13-60
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.13 PUBLIC SERVICES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES, AND UTILITIES
the reduction of electricity use in the city by about 18 million kWh and natural gas use by about
600,000 therms. As shown, this decrease would reduce the amount of electricity and natural gas
consumption in Los Angeles County by 0.03 percent and 0.02 percent, respectively. The reduction
in automotive fuel use would decrease use in the county by 0.01 percent for both scenarios.
TABLE 4.13-8
PLAN HERMOSA ENERGY CONSUMPTION PLUS CUMULATIVE CONDITIONS
2040 Percentage
Hermosa Beach
Difference Countywide
Difference
Difference
Energy Type
Los Angeles County
2015-2040
2015-2040 PLAN
Plan
BAU Annual
Implementation
BAU
Implementation
Energy
Annual Energy
Consumption
Consumption
Electricity
69,997,000,000 kWh
18,868,900 kWh
-17,504,800 kWh
0.03
-0.03
Consumption'
Natural Gas
2,857,000,000 therms
629,100 therms
-639,200 therms
0.02
-0.02
Consum tionl
Automotive Fuel
3,986,603,000 gallons
9
-3,792,800 gallons
9
-4,766,200 gallons
-0.01
-0.01
Consumption 2
Sources: City of Hermosa Beach 2015a; CEC 2014
Note: The project increases in electricity and natural gas consumption are compared with all of the residential and nonresidential
buildings in Los Angeles County in 2014. The project increases in automotive fuel consumption are compared with the countywide
fuel consumption in 2015.
The increase in electricity and natural gas consumption over existing conditions under the BAU
scenario would be negligible. Improvements in energy use would result with PLAN Hermosa
implementation. As such, PLAN Hermosa would not place a substantial demand on regional
energy supply or require significant additional capacity, or significantly increase peak and base
period electricity demand, or cause wasteful, inefficient, and unnecessary consumption of energy
during subsequent project construction, operation, and/or maintenance, or preempt future
energy development or future energy conservation. Therefore, this impact would be less than
cumulatively considerable.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.13-61
4.13 PUBLIC SERVICES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES, AND UTILITIES
4.13.10 REFERENCES
California Department of Social Services. 2012. Community Care Licensing Division Facility
Search List. Accessed February 20, 2014.
hftp://www.ccld.ca.gov/docs/ccld_search/ccld_search.aspx.
California Environmental Protection Agency. 2014. National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System. http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water-issues/programs/npdes/.
CalRecycle (California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery). 2016. Jurisdiction Per
Capita Disposal Trends: Los Angeles Area Integrated Waste Management Authority
[aggregated jurisdictions].
http://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/LGCentral/Reports/Jurisdiction/ReviewReports.aspx.
Cal Water (California Water Service Company). 201 1 . 2010 Urban Water Management Plan,
Hermosa -Redondo District.
http://www.water.ca.gov/urbanwatermanagement/2010uwmps/CA%20Water%20Servic
e%20Co%20-%20Hermosa%20Redo ndo%20District/.
CDE (California Department of Education, Educational Demographics Unit). 2016. Enrollment
data for 2014-15 for Hermosa Beach City School District, Mira Costa High School, and
Redondo Beach Union High School. Accessed March 7, 2016.
http://datal.cde.ca.gov/dataquesf/.
CEC (California Energy Commission). 2009. State of California Energy Action Plan.
hftp://www.energy.ca.gov/energy_action_plan/index.html.
2013. California's Major Energy Sources. Accessed February 2014.
http://energyalmanac.ca.gov/overview/ energy_sources.html.
2014. California Energy Consumption Data Management System (ECDMS).
hftp://www.ecdms.energy.ca.gov/gasbycounfy.aspx.
2015. 2014 Total System Power in Gigawatt Hours. Accessed September 10, 2015,
http://energyalmanac.ca.gov/electricity/total_system_power.html.
2016a. Waste to Energy & Biomass in California. Accessed May 4, 2016.
http://www.energy.ca.gov/biomass/index.hfml.
2016b. Geothermal Energy in California. Accessed May 4, 2016.
http://www.energy.ca.gov/geothermal/background.html.
Center for Public Safety Management. 2013a. Data Analysis Report, Fire and Emergency
Medical Services, Hermosa Beach, California.
hffp://www.hermosabch.org/Modules/ShowDocumenf.aspx?documenfID=3314.
2013b. Police Operations Report, Hermosa Beach, California.
http://www.hermosabch.org/modules/showdocument.aspx?documentid=3556.
City of Hermosa Beach. 2010. Hermosa Beach Stormwater Program and Water Quality Issues.
Accessed February 20, 2014.
http://www.hermosabch.org/modules/showdocument.aspx?documentid=669.
2011 a. City of Hermosa Beach Sustainability Plan.
http://hermosabeach.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=4&clip_id=l471 &meta_id
=91633.
PLAN Hermosa City of Hermosa Beach
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report August 2017
4.13-62
4.13 PUBLIC SERVICES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES, AND UTILITIES
2011 b. City of Hermosa Beach Sanitary Sewer Master Plan.
http://www.hermosabch.org/modules/showdocument.aspx?documentid=l 765.
2013a. Leader's Guide 2013.
http://www.hermosabch.org/modules/showdocument.aspx?documentid=2675.
2013b. Police Department Web Page. Accessed February 19, 2014.
http://www.hermosabch.org/index.aspx?page=178.
2013c. Agreement between City of Hermosa Beach and Arokelian Enterprises DBA
Athens Services, for Integrated Waste Management Services.
2013d. Geographic Information Systems Database.
2013e. Athens Services Monthly Solid Waste Tonnage Report.
2015a. GHG Inventory, Forecasting, Target -Setting Report for on Energy Efficiency
Climate Action Plan.
. 2016. Strategic Plan Draft Report - City of Hermosa Beach.
2017. PLAN Hermosa.
City of Los Angeles. 2006. L.A. CECQA Thresholds Guide.
http://www.environmenfla.org/programs/Thresholds/Complete%20Threshold%2OGuide%
202006.pdf.
CPUC (California Public Utilities Commission). 2013. California Public Utilities Commission California
Solar Initiative Program Handbook.
http://www.gosolarcalifornia.ca.gov/documents/CSI_HANDBOOK.PDF.
EIA (Energy Information Administration). 2014a. Table C11. Energy Consumption by Source,
Ranked by State, 2012. Accessed July 2014.
http://www.eia.gov/state/seds/sep-sum/html/pdf/rank use-source.pdf.
2014b. State Energy Profiles, California. Accessed March 2014.
http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/state/state_energy_profiles.cfm?sid=CA.
EPA (US Environmental Protection Agency). 2009. National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System. Accessed February 20, 2014. http://cfpub.epa.gov/npdes/.
Fehr & Peers. 2014. Hermosa Beach Beach Access and Parking Study Existing Conditions - Initial
Findings.
Go Solar California. 2014. California Solar Initiative Working Data Set. Accessed March 2014.
htips://www.colifom'iasolarstatisiics.co.gov/search`/.
HBCSD (Hermosa Beach City School District). 2009. Project Forward: Hermosa Beach Schools.
Accessed February 29, 2014. http://www.hbcsd.org/view/5202.pdf.
2014. Long Range Facilities Master Plan.
2015. Phone conversation with District Clerk Paula Montalbo. December 2.
HBFD (Hermosa Beach Fire Department). 2014. Annual Report of Calendar Year 2014.
http://www:hermosabch.org/Modules/ShowDocument.aspx?documentlD=5892.
LACDPW (Los Angeles County Department of Public Works). 2015. County of Los Angeles
Countywide Integrated Waste Management Plan 2014 Annual Report.
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.13-63
4.13 PUBLIC SERVICES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES, AND UTILITIES
2016. Public Works Department. Solid Waste Information Management System, 2014
Yearly In -County Jurisdictions Solid Waste Disposal Report (including exports), Reporting
Period: 2014. http://dpw.lacounty.gov/epd/swims/OnlineServices/reports.aspx.
LACSD (Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County). 2012. Clearwater Program Final Master
Facilities Plan.
2013. Wastewater Facilities.
http://www.lacsd.org/wastewater/wwfacilities/default.asp#map.
2015. Plan Hermosa: City of Hermosa Beach General Plan and Local Coastal Program
Update [comment letter on Notice of Preparation dated September 8, 2015, included in
Appendix B]
2017. Response to DEIR for the PLAN Hermosa: City of Hermosa Beach General Plan and
Local Coastal Program Update [comment letter on Draft EIR dated January 5, 2017,
included in Section 2.0, Responses to Comments, in the Final EIR].
Los Angeles County Fire Department. 2012. Los Angeles County Fire Department Strategic Plan.
http://www.fire.lacounty.gov/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/LACFD_Strategic-
Plan_2012_web.pdf.
MBUSD (Manhattan Beach Unified School District). 2015. 2015 Manhattan Beach Unified School
District Facilities Master Plan.
RBUSD (Redondo Beach Unified School District). 2016. Residential Development School Fee
Justification Study.
Redella, Janet. 2016. Assistant Superintendent Administrative Services, Redondo Beach Unified
School District. Personal communication. March 14.
SoCalGas (Southern California Gas Company). 2010. Natural Gas Use Report for City of Hermosa
Beach.
Southern California Edison. 2011 a. Electricity Use Report for City of Hermosa Beach, 2010.
2011 b. Electricity Use Report for City of Hermosa Beach, 2010.
2013a. Electricity Use Report for City of Hermosa Beach, 2012.
2013b. Electricity Use Report for City of Hermosa Beach, 2011.
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.13-64
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.14 TRANSPORTATION
el.
4.14 TRANSPORTATION
4.14.1 INTRODUCTION
This resource section evaluates the potential environmental impacts related to transportation
systems from PLAN Hermosa implementation. The analysis includes a review of the vehicular,
transit, bicycle, and pedestrian components of the circulation system. PLAN Hermosa policies
and implementation actions presented in the Mobility Element provide a framework to evaluate,
manage, and improve transportation infrastructure and practices to address increased
congestion and serve all modes of transportation.
NOP Responses: No comments were received in response to the NOP related to transportation.
Comments included written letters and oral comments provided at the NOP scoping meeting.
Reference Information: Information for this resource section is based on numerous references,
including the PLAN Hermosa Technical Background Report (Appendix C-17), US Census Bureau
data (2010), California Department of Finance data (2015), the Southern California Association
of Governments' (2015) Profile of the City of Hermosa Beach and (2012) draft Regional
Transportation Plan projections, Hermosa Beach's (2014) annual Financial Report, and other
publicly available documents. The Technical Background Report prepared for the project is
attached to this document as Appendix C-17, which describes the existing transportation system
classifications and functionality. Key findings from the Technical Background Report are
summarized below.
4.14.2 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM
The transportation system in Hermosa Beach features diverse elements that include an extensive
network of roadways comprising arterials, collectors, and local streets, 5.1 miles of bicycle
facilities, an extensive network of developed pedestrian facilities, and a public transit system
providing both local and regional bus service. These facilities support a multimodal
transportation network that connects multiple neighborhoods to nearby communities and to the
greater surrounding region.
Roadway Network
The existing Hermosa Beach General Plan Circulation, Transportation, and Parking Element
(1990) designates three different roadway types in the city. Table 4.14-1 (Hermosa Beach
Roadway Functional Classifications) summarizes street classification and performance
characteristics, and Table 4.14-2 (Hermosa Beach Roadways) outlines the classified facilities in
the city. Primary roadways include Pacific Coast Highway (PCH or State Route 1), Ardmore
Avenue/Valley Drive, Artesia Boulevard (State Route 91), Aviation Boulevard, and Herondo
Street, as illustrated in Figure 4.14-1 (Hermosa Beach Street Classification). Regional access is via
by the San Diego Freeway (Interstate 405) located approximately 3 miles east of the city border.
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.14-1
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.14 TRANSPORTATION
TABLE 4.14-1
HERMOSA BEACH ROADWAY FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATIONS
Roadway Type
Accommodation for Movement of Traffic
Level of Property Access
Arterial
Primary roadway for movement of traffic at
Driveways and other curb cuts along arterials are
city level; prioritizes traffic movement; can
limited to minimize disruption to traffic flow.
also provide regional connectivity.
Collector
Circulation of traffic between residential
Access is prioritized similarly to a local street with
neighborhoods and arterial streets. Collectors
more considerations for traffic flow and visibility.
typically provide intracity and some intercity
access, but no regional access.
Local
Designed to serve adjacent residential land
Local streets provide the highest level of property
uses only and provide the lowest
access. Driveways are closely spaced, and there are
accommodation for traffic movement.
few access limitations.
'Walk Street
Provide no vehicular access.
Walk streets provide high levels of pedestrian- and
bic cle-onl ro er access.
Source: City of Hermosa Beach 1990
TABLE 4.14-2
HERMOSA BEACH ROADWAYS
Classification
Streets
Arterial Streets
Artesia Boulevard
Aviation Boulevard
Hermosa Avenue from 14th Street to south ci limit
Pacific Coast hwa
Hi
Pier Avenue from Pacific Coast Hi hwa to Ardmore Avenue
Collector Streets
2nd Street from Pacific Coast Highway to Hermosa Avenue
5th Street from Pacific Coast Highway to Pros ect Avenue
8th Street from Pacific Coast Highway to Hermosa Avenue
25th Street
27th Street
Ardmore Avenue from Pier Avenue to north city limit
Gould Avenue
Manhattan Avenue from 27th Street to north ci limit
Monterey Boulevard
Pier Avenue from west of Ardmore Avenue
Prospect Avenue
Valley Drive from Pier Avenue to south city limit
Local Roads
All others
Source: City of Hermosa Beach 1990
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.14-2
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.14 TRANSPORTATION
Source: City of Hermosa Beach 2015
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
FIGURE 4.14-1
HERMOSA BEACH STREET CLASSIFICATION
4.14-3
n,Ar, fks*' i
IV
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.14 TRANSPORTATION
Transit
Transit service in Hermosa Beach is provided by three transportation agencies —Beach Cities
Transit, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro), and the Los
Angeles Department of Transportation (LADOT)—and includes a demand -responsive paratransit
service. Transit services in the city are shown in Figure 4.14-2 (Existing Transit Network).
Beach Cities Transit provides local transit service for the Los Angeles Beach Cities. Daily weekday
and weekend transit services are served by two routes: Transit Lines 102 (service in Redondo
Beach only) and 109. Line 109 runs north -south along the coast through Manhattan Beach,
Hermosa Beach, and Redondo Beach, traversing a route between Riviera Village in Redondo
Beach and the Los Angeles Airport City Bus Center. Connection to regional transit, the Metro
Green Line, is served by two stops: the Aviation/LAX Station and the Douglas Station. Routes
operated by Beach Cities Transit are summarized in Table 4.14-3.
TABLE4.14-3
BEACH CITIES TRANSIT RoUTFS
Line
From
To
Weekday
Headway
Weekend
Headway
102
Redondo Beach Pier
Redondo Beach Green Line Station
30-45 min
30-45 min
109
Redondo Beach Riviera Village
Los Angeles Airport City Bus Center
30-50 min
60 min
Source: Beach Cities Transit 2015
Metro operates several bus routes and rail lines that offer regional transit service. Metro Line 130
provides east -west coverage between the Beach Cities and the Harbor Gateway Transit Center
in Gardena. North -south transit coverage is served by Metro Line 232. This route travels along
Pacific Coast Highway between downtown Long Beach and the Los Angeles Airport City Bus
Center and provides direct connection to the Metro Blue and Green lines. Metro's Green Line
provides regional east -west light rail service to the South Bay area and the Gateway Cities
communities of Lynwood, Downey, Bellflower, and Norwalk. This rail line has direct connections
to north -south rail via the Metro Blue Line. Routes operated by Metro that directly serve Hermosa
Beach are summarized in Table 4.14-4 (Los Angeles County Metro Transit Services).
TABLE 4.14-4
Los ANGELES COUNTY METRO TRANSIT SERVICES
Route
Type
Direction
Service to/from
Weekday
Weekend
Headway
Headway
130
Local
E-W
Redondo Beach, Hermosa Beach, Los Angeles via Gateway
50-60
Cities
30 min
Downtown Long Beach to Los Angeles Airport City Bus
min
232
Local
N-S
30-60
Center
20 min
min
Source: Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority 2015; Los Angeles Department of Transportation 2015
LADOT's Commuter Express provides one bus route (Commuter Express Route 438) with express
service during peak commute periods between the Beach Cities area and downtown Los
Angeles via the Century and Harbor freeways. This line makes local stops in Redondo Beach,
Hermosa Beach, Manhattan Beach, and El Segundo. The route operated by LADOT that directly
serves Hermosa Beach is summarized in Table 4.14-5 (Los Angeles Department of Transportation
Transit Services).
PLAN Hermosa City of Hermosa Beach
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report August 2017
4.14-4
4.14 TRANSPORTATION
TABLE 4.14-5
1 ekc ANr.Fi Fc ng:PARTMFNT nF TRANSPORTATION TRANSIT SERVICES
Weekday Peak -Hour
Route
Type
Service to/from
Trips
438
Express
Redondo Beach, Hermosa Beach, Manhattan Beach, El Segundo,
AM = 6 inbound trips
and Los Angeles
PM = 8 outbound trips
Source: Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority 2015, Los Angeles Department of Transportation 2015
The WAVE Dial -A -Ride program offers demand -responsive paratransit service for senior and
disabled passengers for travel in Hermosa Beach. Paratransit is an alternative mode of flexible
passenger transportation that does not follow fixed routes or schedules. Citywide WAVE
operations provide same -day, curb -to -curb transit to anyone who meets qualification
conditions. The standard fare for service in Hermosa Beach, Redondo Beach, or any area south
of El Segundo Boulevard, west of Crenshaw Boulevard, and north of Pacific Coast Highway is
$1.00. Travel outside these boundaries is subject to an additional meter charge.
FIGURE 4.14-2
EXISTING TRANSIT NETWORK
.YP...'rr s
Source: City of Hermosa Beach 2015
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.14-5
s-1
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.14 TRANSPORTATION
Bicycle Facilities
Hermosa Beach currently has 5.1 miles of existing bicycle facilities that include the Class I Marvin
Braude Bikeway on The Strand and Class 11, Class III, and Class IV bicycle facilities on Hermosa
Avenue (see Table 4.14-6 (Hermosa Beach Bicycle Facilities) and Figure 4.14-3 (Existing Bicycle
Network)). Brief descriptions of each bikeway class follow.
• Class I Bikeway. Often referred to as a bike path, this facility provides for bicycle travel on
a paved right-of-way completely separated from any street or highway,
• Class II Bikeway. Often referred to as a bike lane, this facility provides a striped and
stenciled lane for one-way travel on a street or highway.
• Class III Bikeway. Often referred to as a bike route, this facility provides for shared use with
pedestrian or motor vehicle traffic and is identified only by signage.
• Class IV Bikeway. Often referred to as a separated bikeway, this facility provides for
bicycle -only travel in a facility physically separated from through vehicular traffic.
TABLE 4.14-6
HERMOSA BEACH BICYCLE FACILmr-r.
Class
Street/Path
From
To
I
Marvin Braude Bike Trail (The Strand)
35th Street
Herondo Street
IV
Hermosa Avenue
35th Street
28th Street
II
Hermosa Avenue
28th Street
24th Street
II
Herondo Street
Hermosa Avenue
Valley Drive
III
Hermosa Avenue
24th Street
Herondo Street
Source: City of Hermosa Beach 2015
Pedestrian Environment
The city's pedestrian infrastructure is along most arterial and local streets interconnected by a
network of sidewalks and striped crosswalks. While many streets in the city include pedestrian
facilities, a number of locations have noncontiguous sidewalk coverage and lack adequate
curb ramps, cross steep driveway entrances, and include sidewalk obstructions that block travel
along a number of the city's narrow sidewalks.
In Hermosa Beach's Downtown area, pedestrian facilities offer a range of amenities that include
public spaces, shopping, dining, beach access, and shade cover supplied by the city's tree
network and sfreefscape design strategies. Protected pedestrian facilities are common
throughout the city along pedestrian -only walk streets and off-street pedestrian paths. The
Hermosa Valley Greenbelt provides north -south connections away from the beach. The Strand,
Southern California's famous beachside pedestrian walkway and bicycle path (Marvin Braude
Bikeway), also serves the Hermosa Beach community on its way between Torrance and Malibu.
PLAN Hermosa City of Hermosa Beach
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report August 2017
4.14-6
4.14 TRANSPORTATION
Nermo," 9rwh
Source: City of Hermosa Beach 2015
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
FIGURE 4.14-3
EXISTING BICYCLE NETWORK
4.14-7
4r
Manhattan Beach
Is
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.14 TRANSPORTATION
LEVEL OF SERVICE
The performance of a roadway system is measured in terms of level of service (LOS), a
standardized methodology describing the efficiency of a roadway circulation system in relation
to the quality of traffic operations and flow. LOS is ranked by a letter grade that represents the
overall condition of travel through an intersection or road segment, based on number of
seconds of delay for vehicles. These grades range from A (minimal delay) to F (excessive
congestion). LOS E represents at -capacity operations. LOS definitions for intersections are shown
in Table 4.14-7 (Level of Service Definitions).
TABLE 4.14-7
LEVEL OF SERVICE DEFINITIONS
LOS
I Definition
A
EXCELLENT. No vehicle waits longer than one red light and no approach phase is fully used.
B
VERY GOOD. An occasional approach phase is fully utilized; many drivers begin to feel somewhat restricted within
groups of vehicles.
C
GOOD. Occasionally drivers may have to wait through more than one red light; backups may develop behind turning
vehicles.
D
FAIR. Delays may be substantial during portions of the rush hours, but enough lower volume periods occur to permit
clearing of developing lines, preventing excessive backups.
E
POOR. Represents the most vehicles intersection approaches can accommodate; may be long lines of waiting vehicles
throu h several signal cycles.
E
FAILURE. Backups from nearby locations or on cross streets may restrict or prevent movement of vehicles out of the
intersection approaches. Tremendous delays with continuously increasing queue lengths.
Source: Transportation Research Board 1980
Studied Intersections
Thirteen intersections and 20 street segments were selected for study. These study locations are
shown in Figure 4.14-4 (Study Intersections) and Figure 4.14-5 (Study Roadway Segments).
Studied intersections, intersection control type, and responsible agencies for each study location
are shown in Table 4.14-8 (Study Intersections). Studied street segments and their
accompanying functional classification, number of lanes, and estimated daily capacities from
the existing General Plan Circulation, Transportation, and Parking Element are shown in Table
4.14-9 (Study Roadway Segments).
TABLE4.14-8
STUDY INTERSECTIONS
Intersection
Intersection Control
Jurisdiction
1. Hermosa Avenue & 13th Street
Signal
Hermosa Beach
2. Hermosa Avenue & Pier Avenue
Signal
Hermosa Beach
3. Pacific Coast Highway & Artesia Boulevard
Signal
Hermosa Beach/Caltrans/CMP
4. Pacific Coast Highway & Aviation Boulevard
Signal
Hermosa Beach/Caltrans
5. Pacific Coast Highway & Pier Avenue
Signal
Hermosa Beach/Caltrans
6. Pacific Coast Highway & 2nd Street
Signal
Hermosa Beach/Caltrans
7. Pacific Coast Highway & 16th Street
Signal
Hermosa Beach/Caltrans
8. Pacific Coast Highway & 21st Street
Signal
Hermosa Beach/Caltrans
9. Prospect Avenue & Artesia Boulevard
Signal
Hermosa Beach
10. Prospect Avenue & Aviation Boulevard
Signal
Hermosa Beach
11. Prospect Avenue & Anita Street
Si nal
Hermosa Beach
12. Manhattan Avenue & 27th Street
All -Way Stop Control
Hermosa Beach
13. Valley Drive & Gould Avenue
All -Way Stop Control
Hermosa Beach
Source: City o/ Hermosa Beach 2015
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.14-8
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.14 TRANSPORTATION
". Mri 0%4 00,xh
Source. City of Hermosa Beach 2015
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
FIGURE 4.14-4
STUDY INTERSECTIONS
1�
Manl+sttan Hlwch
:rw ✓
c Ly
.. � RActattda Hnmwh
z
i a
i
P- I Ave
F�
4.14-9
M
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.14 TRANSPORTATION
TABLE 4.14-9
STUDY ROADWAY SEGMENTS
Segment
Location
Functional
Classification
Lanes
Daily
Capacity
1. Hermosa Avenue
27th Street to 22nd Street
Collector
4
22,000
2. Hermosa Avenue
22nd Street to 16th Street
Collector
4
22,000
3. Hermosa Avenue
16th Street to 8th Street
Arterial
4
29,000
4. Hermosa Avenue
8th Street to Herondo Street
Arterial
4
29,000
5. Valley Drive
Gould Avenue to Pier Avenue
Local
2
15,000
6. Valley Drive
Pier Avenue to 8th Street
Collector
2
15,000
7. Ardmore Avenue
16th Street to 11th Street
Local
2
15,000
8. Ardmore Avenue
8th Street to 2nd Street
Local
2
15,000
9. Pacific Coast Highway
Artesia Boulevard to Aviation Boulevard
Arterial
6
44,000
10. Pacific Coast Highway
Aviation Boulevard to 2nd Street
Arterial
6
44,000
11. Prospect Avenue
Artesia Blvd to Aviation Boulevard
Collector
2
15,000
12. Prospect Avenue
Aviation Boulevard to 2nd Street
Collector
2
15,000
13. Artesia Boulevard
Pacific Coast Highway to Prospect Avenue
Arterial
4
29,000
14. Aviation Boulevard
Pacific Coast Highway to Prospect Avenue
Arterial
4
29,000
15. Pier Avenue
Hermosa Avenue to Valley Drive
Collector
4
29,000
16. Pier Avenue
Ardmore Avenue to Pacific Coast Highway
Arterial
4
29,000
17. Gould Avenue
Ardmore Avenue to Pacific Coast Highway
Collector
4
22,000
18. 8th Street
Hermosa Avenue to Valley Drive
Collector
2
15,000
19. 8th Street
Pacific Coast Highway to Prospect Avenue
Local
2
2,500
20. Herondo Street
Hermosa Avenue to Valley Drive
Arterial
2
13,000
Source: City of Hermosa Beach 1990
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.14-10
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.14 TRANSPORTATION
FIGURE 4.14-5
STUDY ROADWAY SEGMENTS
0
oto
e
Source: City of Hermosa Beach 2015
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.14-11
ly
4)
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.14 TRANSPORTATION
i' Traffic study guidelines published by the City of Hermosa Beach (in the existing Circulation,
Transportation, and Parking Element [1990]), by the California Department of Transportation
(Caltrans), and in the Los Angeles County Congestion Management Program were used to
analyze the operation of each study location under Existing (2015) traffic conditions as detailed
below.
City of Hermosa Beach
Level of service standards for intersections in Hermosa Beach are outlined in the existing City of
Hermosa Beach Circulation, Transportation, and Parking Element (1990). The City maintains a
policy of LOS C or better for both signalized and unsignalized intersections during weekday
morning peak and evening peak hours. Traffic study guidelines established by the City of
Hermosa Beach require the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) methodology for LOS analyses
of signalized intersections. The ICU method measures the volume -to -capacity (V/C) ratio (rated
on a scale of 0 to 1.000) on a critical lane basis and determines level of service associated with
each critical V/C ratio. For unsignalized intersections, LOS is calculated using the Highway
Capacity Manual (HCM) methodology. The HCM method determines the average control delay
(in seconds per vehicle) and determines level of service based on the average intersection
delay for all vehicles. Table 4.14-10 (Level of Service Thresholds) shows level of service thresholds
for both the ICU and HCM methodologies,
TABLE 4.14-10
LEVEL OF SERVICE THRESHOLDS
Level of Service
WC Ratio
(ICU Signalized)
Control Delay in Seconds
(HCM Signalized)
Control Delay in Seconds
(HCM Unsignalized)
A
0.00to0.60
0.0to10.0
0.0to10.0
B
0.61to0.70
10.1to20.0
10.1to15.0
C
0.71 to 0.80
20.1 to 35.0
15.1 to 25.0
D
0.81to0.90
35.1to55.0
25.1to35.0
E
0.91 to 1.00
55.1 to 80.0
35.1 to 50.0
F
1.01 or greater
80.1 or greater
50.1 or greater
Source: Transportation Research Board 2010
For the analysis of roadway segments, the City maintains a policy of LOS D for arterial mid -block
segments that are based on average daily traffic volumes. Level of service is determined based
on a V/C ratio calculated using daily capacities (Table 4.14-9) and applies LOS thresholds that
are consistent with the criteria for signalized intersections in Hermosa Beach.
California Department of Transportation
Caltrans (2002) developed the Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies to establish
standards and guidelines for the analysis of traffic impacts generated by local development
and land use change proposals that affect traffic along state highway facilities. LOS siandards
for intersections under the jurisdiction of Caltrans require State-controlled intersections to be
under the target threshold of LOS D as measured using the HCM methodology.
Congestion Management Program
The Los Angeles County Congestion Management Program (CMP) is a State -mandated
program administered by Metro that provides a mechanism for coordinating regional land use
and development decisions in conjunction with the California Environmental Quality Act
PLAN Hermosa City of Hermosa Beach
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report August 2017
4.14-12
4.14 TRANSPORTATION
(CEQA). The CMP requires arterial intersection analysis at CMP monitoring locations where the
proposed project will add 50 or more peak -hour vehicle trips. Intersections are analyzed using
ICU methodology and require a minimum level of service of LOS E. Only one study intersection in
Hermosa Beach, Pacific Coast Highway and Artesia Boulevard, is a CMP monitoring location.
CMP guidelines for roadway analysis require freeway mainline analysis at monitoring locations
where the proposed project will add 150 or more peak -hour vehicle trips. The CMP identifies a
minimum level of service requirement of LOS E. The closest freeway mainline monitoring location
is Interstate 405.
Existing (2015) Level of Service Results
The existing peak -hour traffic volumes shown in Appendix C-17 were analyzed using the analysis
methodologies described above to determine the existing operating conditions at the selected
intersections for analysis under existing conditions. LOS calculation worksheets are included in
Appendix G. Of the 13 intersections, 12 operate at LOS C or better under Existing (2015) peak -
hour traffic conditions (Table 4.14-11 (Existing (2015) Intersection Level of Service: City of
Hermosa Beach) and Figure 4.14-6 (Existing (2015) Intersection Level of Service)). Only one
intersection currently operates at LOS D, below the adopted standard: Manhattan Avenue and
27th Street (AM peak hour).
TABLE 4.14-11
EXISTING (2015) INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH
Intersection
Peak
Existing
Intersection
Control
Hour
WC or Delay (sec)
LOS
AM
0.302
A
1. Hermosa Avenue & 13th Street
Signal
PM
0.335
A
AM
0.384
A
2. Hermosa Avenue & Pier Avenue
Signal
PM
0.324
A
AM
0.732
C
3. Pacific Coast Highway & Artesia Boulevard
Signal
PM
0.767
C
4. Pacific Coast Highway & Aviation Boulevard
Signal
AM
0.777
C
PM
0.743
C
AM
0.565
A
S. Pacific Coast Highway & Pier Avenue
Signal
PM
0.703
C
AM
0.678
B
6. Pacific Coast Highway & 2nd Street
Signal
PM
0.696
B
AM
0.526
A
7. Pacific Coast Highway & 16th Street
Signal
PM
0.636
B
AM
0.590
A
8. Pacific Coast Highway & 21st Street
Signal
PM
0.668
B
9. Prospect Avenue & Artesia Boulevard
Signal
AM
0.709
C
PM
0.749
C
AM
0.691
B
10. Prospect Avenue & Aviation Boulevard
Signal
PM
0.763
C
11. Prospect Avenue & Anita Street
Signal
AM
0.727
C
PM
0.645
B
All -Way
AM
27.6
C
12. Manhattan Avenue & 27th Street/Greenwich Village
Stop Control
PM
16.1
B
All -Way
AM
21.2
C
13. Valley Drive & Gould Avenue
Stop Control
PM
24.2
C
Source: City of Hermosa Beach 2015 (see Appendix G)
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.14-13
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.14 TRANSPORTATION
FIGURE 4.14-6
EXISTING (2015) INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE
(D M
•
0
Source: City of Hermosa Beach 2015
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.14-14
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.14 TRANSPORTATION
Six study intersections along Pacific Coast Highway also require analysis under Caltrans
operating standards. Under Existing (2015) traffic conditions, all analyzed intersections currently
operate at or above the target LOS D standard, as shown in Table 4.14-12 (Existing (2015)
Intersection Level of Service: Caltrans).
TABLE 4.14-12
EXISTING (2015) INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: CALTRANS
Intersection
Existing
Intersection
Control
Peak Hour
Delay (sec)
LOS
AM
54.3
D
3. Pacific Coast Highway & Artesia Boulevard
Signal
PM
52.7
D
AM
25.8
C
4. Pacific Coast Highway & Aviation Boulevard
Signal
PM
36.4
D
AM
17.6
B
5. Pacific Coast Highway & Pier Avenue
Signal
PM
22.0
C
AM
10.9
B
6. Pacific Coast Highway & 2nd Street
Signal
PM
11.4
B
AM
28.8
28.5
C
7. Pacific Coast Highway & 16th Street
Signal
PM
D
AM
11.
11.7
B
8. Pacific Coast Highway & 21st Street
Signal
PM
A
Source: City of Hermosa Beach 2015 (see Appendix G)
Level of service results for highways and roadways are shown in Table 4.14-13 (Existing (2015)
Roadway Segment Level of Service). Since the publication of the City's Circulation,
Transportation, and Parking Element in 1990, the AM and PM peak period configurations of
Pacific Coast Highway have changed due to parking restrictions, and the daily capacity values
have been updated to reflect these changes. The configurations of all other segments are
consistent with the existing 1990 element.
Of the 20 selected street segments, 15 currently operate at LOS D or better, as shown in Figure
4.14-7 (Existing (2015) Roadway Segment Level of Service). Five street segments currently
operate at LOS E and/or LOS F, below the adopted standard:
• Pacific Coast Highway between Artesia Boulevard and Aviation Boulevard
• Pacific Coast Highway between Aviation Boulevard and 2nd Street
• Artesia Boulevard between Pacific Coast Highway and Prospect Avenue
• Aviation Boulevard between Pacific Coast Highway and Prospect Avenue
• Herondo Street between Hermosa Avenue and Valley Drive
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.14-15
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.14 TRANSPORTATION
TABLE 4.14-13
EXISTING (2015) ROADWAY SEGMENT LEVEL OF SERVICE
Street Segment
Lanes
Capacity
Volume
Daily
Volume
WC
LOS
1. Hermosa Avenue from 27th Street to 22nd Street
4
22,000
8,374
0.381
A
2. Hermosa Avenue from 22nd Street to 16th Street
4
22,000
8,007
0.364
A
3. Hermosa Avenue from 16th Street to 8th Street
4
29,000
11,128
0.384
A
4. Hermosa Avenue from 8th Street to Herondo Street
4
29,000
9,077
0.313
A
5. Valley Drive from Gould Avenue to Pier Avenue
2
15,000
5,044
0.336
A
6. Valley Drive from Pier Avenue to 8th Street
2
15,000
6,509
0.434
A
7. Ardmore Avenue from 16th Street to 11th Street
2
15,000
4,226
0.282
A
8. Ardmore Avenue from 8th Street to 2nd Street
2
15,000
3,005
0.200
A
9. Pacific Coast Highway from Artesia Boulevard to Aviation Boulevard
6
44,000
43,854
0.997
E
10. Pacific Coast Highway from Aviation Boulevard to 2nd Street
6
44,000
51,437
1.169
F
11. Prospect Avenue from Artesia Boulevard to Aviation Boulevard
2
15,000
6,177
0.412
A
12. Prospect Avenue from Aviation Boulevard to 2nd Street
2
15,000
11,924
0.795
C
13. Artesia Boulevard from Pacific Coast Highway to Prospect Avenue
4
29,000
26,354
0.909
E
14. Aviation Boulevard from Pacific Coast Highway to Prospect Avenue
4
29,000
25,721
0.887
D
15. Pier Avenue from Hermosa Avenue to Valley Drive
4
29,000
13,352
0.460
A
16. Pier Avenue from Ardmore Avenue to Pacific Coast Highway
4
29,000
14,314
0.494
A
17. Gould Avenue from Ardmore Avenue to Pacific Coast Highway
4
22,000
13,256
0.603
B
18. 8th Street from Hermosa Avenue to Valley Drive
2
15,000
2,616
0.174
A
19. 8th Street from Pacific Coast Highway to Prospect Avenue
2
2,500
350
0.140
A
20. Herondo Street from Hermosa Avenue to Valley Drive
2
13,000
11,263
0.866
D
Source: City of Hermosa Beach 2015 (see Appendix G)
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.14-16
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.14 TRANSPORTATION
FIGURE 4.14-7
EXISTING (2015) ROADWAY SEGMENT LEVEL OF SERVICE
'1
k-
•
•
9!
0
doe
Ile
Ile
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
E7
4.14-17
-H
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.14 TRANSPORTATION
4.14.3 REGULATORY SETTING
Federal, state, regional, and local laws, regulations, and policies provide the regulatory
framework for addressing the aspects of transportation planning and infrastructure that would
be affected by implementation of PLAN Hermosa. The regulatory setting is used to inform
decision -makers about the regulatory agencies and policies that affect transportation in the city
and is detailed below.
FEDERAL
• Americans with Disabilities Act: Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requires
that all public programs, services, and amenities be accessible for persons of all abilities.
Governments must adopt ADA Standards for Accessible Design as technical
requirements for new constructions, alterations, and architectural changes in order to
achieve accessibility goals.
STATE
Assembly Bill 417: Assembly Bill (AB) 417 creates a statutory exemption from CEQA for
bicycle transportation plans for an urbanized area in certain instances. Specifically, the
bill exempts the following types of bicycle transportation plans or projects prepared
pursuant to Streets and Highways Code Section 891.2 for an urbanized area if those
projects have been described at a reasonably high level of detail: restriping of streets
and highways, bicycle parking and storage, signal timing to improve street and highway
intersection operations, and related signage for bicycles, pedestrians, and vehicles. It
does not exempt all potential impacts of a bike plan, such as a new path through a
natural area, for example. Prior to determining that a bicycle plan is exempt, the lead
agency is required to do both of the following: (1) hold properly noticed public hearings
in areas affected by the bicycle transportation plan to hear and respond to public
comments, and (2) include measures in the bicycle transportation plan to mitigate
potential bicycle and pedestrian safety and traffic impacts.
Assembly Bill 1358: The Complete Streets Act of 2008 (AB 1358) requires cities and
counties to include Complete Streets policies in their general plan circulation elements.
The act requires the consideration of multiple users of the transportation system, including
children, adults, seniors, and the disabled, and designing and building streets so that
people of all ages and abilities can travel easily, safely, and by all modes.
California Coastal Act: The California Coastal Act of 1976 dictates certain policies related
to shoreline resources, including transportation issues related to state shorelines. While the
act does not include a section specifically regarding transportation issues, it does state
how development must maintain access to coastal resources and maintain or distribute
parking supply or adequate public transportation so as to minimize adverse impacts.
Senate Bill 375 - California Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act: Passed
in 2008 by the California legislature, Senate Bill (SB) 375 requires the state's metropolitan
planning organizations to develop a sustainable communities strategy (SCS) to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions from automobiles and light trucks through integrated
transportation, land use, housing, and environmental planning. The Southern California
Association of Governments (SCAG) is the metropolitan planning organization with
jurisdiction in Hermosa Beach and the region.
Senate Bill 743: SB 743 creates a process to change the way transportation impacts are
analyzed under CEQA. The law will require the potential elimination or de-emphasizing of
auto delay, level of service, and other similar measures of vehicular capacity or traffic
congestion as a basis for determining significant transportation impacts in CEQA analysis
in transportation priority zones. To implement this intent, SB 743 contains amendments to
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.14-18
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.14 TRANSPORTATION
current congestion management law that allows cities and counties to effectively opt
out of the LOS standards that would otherwise apply in areas where Congestion
Management Plans are still used. The California Governor's Office of Planning and
Research (OPR) has released draft recommendations that level of service and other
delay -based metrics be potentially replaced with other transportation metrics including
but not limited to vehicle miles traveled (VMT), vehicle trips generated, VMT per capita,
and vehicle trips per capita. SB 743 does not prevent a city or county from continuing to
analyze delay or LOS as a check of consistency with adopted plans (i.e., the general
plan), studies, or ongoing network monitoring, but these metrics may no longer constitute
the basis for determining CEQA transportation impacts.
State Transportation Improvement Program: Caltrans provides for the mobility of people,
goods, services, and information. The agency renders administrative support for
transportation programming decisions made by the California Transportation Commission
and Caltrans. The State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) is a multiyear capital
improvement program that sets priorities and funds transportation projects envisioned in
long-range transportation plans. STIP programming generally occurs every two years. The
STIP is a resource management document to assist state and local entities to plan and
implement transportation improvements and to use available resources in a cost-
effective manner. The STIP lists all capital improvement projects that are expected to
receive an allocation of state transportation funds from the California Transportation
Commission during the following five years. The STIP consists of two broad programs: the
regional program is funded using 75 percent of new STIP funding, while the interregional
program is funded using 25 percent of the same source. The 75 percent regional
program is further subdivided by formula into county shares.
REGIONAL
• LA Metro First Last Mile Strategic Plan: The goal of the First Last Mile Strategic Plan is to
extend the reach of transit services in order to increase transit ridership. The policy
ensures that access to Metro transit facilities is easy, safe, and efficient and fosters a high
level of connectivity among various transit services and among bicycle and pedestrian
facilities.
• Los Angeles County Congestion Management Program: State statute requires that a
congestion management program be developed, adopted, and updated biennially for
every county that includes an urbanized area. The CMP, administered by the Los
Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, is a mechanism for coordinating
land use and development decisions that addresses the impact of local growth on the
regional transportation system. Statutory elements of the CMP include highway and
roadway system monitoring, multimodal system performance analysis, the Transportation
Demand Management Program, the Land Use Analysis Program, and local
conformance for all the county's jurisdictions.
• Los Angeles County Long Range Transportation Plan: Metro, the State -designated
transportation planning and programming agency for Los Angeles County, developed
the Long Range Transportation Plan as a long-range vision for the transportation system
that reflects both regional needs and local concerns. The 2009 plan is the guiding policy
behind funding decisions on subsequent transportation projects and programs in Los
Angeles County. The plan reflects Metro's mobility priorities for regional, state, and
federal governments to qualify for transportation funds. Metro's long-range priorities
coincide with the SCAG Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy.
Consistency between these planning efforts ensures that transportation priorities are
eligible for federal funding.
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.14-19
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.14 TRANSPORTATION
LOCAL
SCAG Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy: In April 2012,
SCAG adopted the 2012-2035 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities
Strategy (RTP/SCS). The plan involves stakeholders from six counties in Southern California
with a shared vision for the region's sustainable future. The RTP/SCS is a regional
transportation plan that is driven by a strong commitment toward reducing emissions
from transportation sources set forth by SB 375 and meeting the national ambient air
quality standards for compliance with the federal Clean Air Act. The plan focuses on the
interconnected components of economic, social, and transportation investments
required to improve public health and achieve a sustainable regional multimodal
transportation system.
South Bay Bicycle Master Plan: The South Bay Bicycle Master Plan (SBBMP) was funded by
the Los Angeles County Department of Health's RENEW grant initiative in 2010 to
facilitate more cycling and bike infrastructure in seven participating cities in the South
Bay region. The City of Hermosa Beach adopted the SBBMP in 2011 and proposes an
additional 9.2 miles of bicycle facilities within the city that include connections with other
SBBMP facilities in Manhattan Beach and Redondo Beach. The plan prioritizes
investments in bicycle infrastructure and incorporates a comprehensive implementation
program for the planning of routes and facilities into the circulation network.
Aviation Boulevard Master Plan: This plan focuses on the transformation of Aviation
Boulevard into a thriving corridor that will act as a gateway into Hermosa Beach and
prioritize the development of pedestrian -oriented facilities.
Beach Cities Livability Plan: The Beach Cities Livability Plan, fostered by the Healthways
Blue Zones (Vitality City) Initiative, focuses on how to improve livability and well-being in
Hermosa Beach, Manhattan Beach, and Redondo Beach through land use and
transportation systems that better support active living. The plan was adopted by each
city and includes recommendations to (1) develop a regional pedestrian master plan,
(2) adopt and implement the SBBMP, and (3) improve and enhance Safe Routes to
School programs.
City of Hermosa Beach Coastal Land Use Plan: The Coastal Land Use Plan (CLUP)
addresses parking supply and protection in the Coastal Zone. Policies under the CLUP
require that access to coastal resources be accessible to all through the implementation
of various parking management strategies. Specific CLUP policies include a prohibition
against the elimination of existing on- or off-street parking within the Coastal Zone, the
control of congestion through the granting of preferential parking permits, and the
separation of short- and long-term parkers in the immediate area around the beach.
City of Hermosa Beach Downtown Core Revitalization Strategy: The Downtown Core
Revitalization Strategy is a comprehensive approach to increasing the vitality of
Downtown. The strategy requires public and private initiatives including capital
improvement projects, changes to parking and zoning, and parking requirements
involving private development.
City of Hermosa Beach Living Streets Policy: The goal of the City's Living Streets Policy is to
promote the health and mobility of all Hermosa Beach residents and visitors through
provision of high quality pedestrian, bicycling, and transit access to destinations across
the city. The policy provides a checklist of procedures that evaluate street projects
through a comprehensive "sustainability" lens. It ensures that the various segments of the
community —not just vehicle drivers —are considered when determining how to use and
improve the public right-of-way.
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.14-20
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.14 TRANSPORTATION
• City of Hermosa Beach Municipal Code: The Municipal Code includes regulations and
standards governing traffic, parking and loading, encroachments on the public right-of-
way, and development.
• City of Hermosa Beach Sustainability Plan: Section 3 of the City's Sustainability Plan
addresses transportation through policies and infrastructure improvements that
encourage bicycling, walking, and other alternative modes of transportation as part of
the City's greenhouse gas emissions reduction goals and Complete Streets policy.
• City of Hermosa Beach Emergency Operations Plan: The City's Emergency Operations
Plan seeks to identify emergency evacuation protocols in order to establish a
comprehensive, all -hazards approach to natural, man-made, and technological
disasters.
• Pacific Coast Highway Streetscape Master Plan: The Master Plan was implemented in
2013 to improve economic development through the revitalization of Downtown and
entry corridors along Pacific Coast Highway.
PLAN HERMOSA POLICIES AND IMPLEMENTATION ACTIONS
PLAN Hermosa is the City of Hermosa Beach's integrated General Plan update and Coastal
Land Use Plan for the guidance of development and land use projects into the buildout year
2040. In addition to the Mobility Element, PLAN Hermosa's Sustainability + Conservation, Parks +
Open Space, and Infrastructure elements all incorporate aspects of sustainable transportation
development. The elements include policies intended to effectively manage and maintain the
city's circulation system with the goal of minimizing congestion, increasing local and regional
access opportunities, and enhancing traffic circulation by reducing vehicle trips and increasing
access to non -motorized and low -carbon transportation options such as walking, bicycling, and
transit. PLAN Hermosa policies and implementation actions that address transportation include
the following.
Policies
Mobility Element
1.1 Consider all modes. Require the planning, design, and construction of all new and
existing transportation projects to consider the needs of all modes of travel to create
safe, livable and inviting environments for all users of the system.
1.2 Street classification design standards. Create context -sensitive street classification
design standards that will provide the City and adjacent land uses with consistent
designs that accommodate multiple modes of travel.
• 2.1 Prioritize public right-of-ways. Prioritize improvements of public right-of-ways that
provide heightened levels of safe, comfortable and attractive public spaces for all non-
moterazed-fr-av2ler-s while --balancing the needs-of-eaf#icientve-hicular_circulation.
• 2.2 Encourage traffic calming. Encourage traffic calming policies and techniques to
improve the efficient movement of people and along residential areas and highly
trafficked corridors.
2.5 Require sustainable practices. Incorporate environmental sustainability practices into
designs and strategic management of road space and public right-of-ways, prioritizing
practices that can serve multiple infrastructure purposes.
3.1 Enhance public right-of-ways. Where right-of-way clearance allows, enhance public
right-of-ways to improve connectivity for pedestrians, bicyclists, and public transit.
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.14-21
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.14 TRANSPORTATION
• 3.2 Complete pedestrian network. Prioritize investment in designated priority sidewalks to
ensure a complete network of sidewalks and pedestrian -friendly amenities that
enhances pedestrian safety, access opportunities and connectivity to destinations.
• 3.3 Active transportation. Require commercial development or redevelopment projects
and residential projects with four or more units to accommodate active transportation by
providing on -site amenities, necessary connections to existing and planned pedestrian
and bicycle networks, and incorporate people -oriented design practices.
• 3.4 Access opportunities. Provide enhanced mobility and access opportunities for local
transportation and transit services in areas of the city with sufficient density and intensity
of uses, mix of appropriate uses, and supportive bicycle and pedestrian network
connections that can reduce vehicle trips within the city's busiest corridors.
• 3.5 Incentivize other modes. Incentivize local shuttle/trolley services, rideshare and car
share programs, and developing infrastructure that support low speed, low carbon (e.g.
electric) vehicles.
• 3.6 Complete bicycle network. Provide a complete bicycle network along all designated
roadways while creating connections to other modes of travel including walking and
transit.
• 3.8 Encourage shared streets. Encourage the concept of shared streets on low volume
streets with limited right-of-ways.
• 4.1 Shared parking. Facilitate park -once and shared parking policies among private
developments that contribute to a shared parking supply and interconnect with
adjacent parking facilities.
• 4.5 Sufficient bicycle parking. Require a sufficient supply of bicycle parking to be
provided in conjunction with new vehicle parking facilities by both public and private
developments.
• 4.6 Priority parking. Provide priority parking and charging stations to accommodate the
use of Electric Vehicles (EVs), including smaller short -distance neighborhood electric
vehicles.
• 4.8 Ensure commercial parking. Ensure that prime commercial parking spaces are
available for customers and other short-term users throughout the day.
• 4.9 Encourage TDM strategies. Encourage use of transportation demand management
strategies and programs such as carpooling, ride hailing, and alternative transportation
modes as a way to reduce demand for additional parking supply.
• 5.1 Prioritize development of infrastructure. Prioritize the development of roadway and
parking infrastructure that encourages private electric and other low carbon vehicle
ownership and use throughout the city.
5.2 Local transit system. Develop a local transit system that facilitates efficient transport
of residents, hotel guests, and beachgoers between activity centers and to Downtown
businesses and the beach.
• 5.3 Incentivize TDM strategies. Incentivize the use of Transportation Demand
Management (TDM) strategies as a cost effective method for maximizing existing
transportation infrastructure to accommodate mobility demands without significant
expansion to infrastructure.
• 5.4 Evaluate projects. Ensure the evaluation of projects for transportation and traffic
impacts under CEQA consider local and statewide goals related to infill development,
the promotion of healthy and active lifestyles through active transportation, and the
reduction of greenhouse gases, in addition to traditional congestion management
impacts.
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.14-22
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.14 TRANSPORTATION
• 5.5 Multimodal development features. Encourage land use features in development
projects to create compact, connected, and multimodal development supports
reduced trip generation, trip lengths, and greater ability to utilize alternative modes of
travel.
• 6.1 Regional network. Work with government agencies and private sector companies to
develop a comprehensive, regionally integrated transportation network that connects
the community to surrounding cities.
• 6.2 Regional travel patterns. Consider regional travel patterns when collaborating on
regional. transit and transportation projects to ensure investments facilitate greater
mobility and access for residents, businesses, and visitors to and from Hermosa Beach.
• 6.3 Transportation sharing programs. Facilitate greater local and regional mobility
through access to shared equipment or transportation options such as car -sharing and
bike sharing.
• 6.4 Coordinate with agencies. Coordinate with regional transportation agencies and
surrounding cities to improve local access and connections to region -wide public transit
services.
• 6.5 Coordinate with surrounding cities. Coordinate with surrounding cities to prioritize non -
motorized and pedestrian connections to regional facilities and surrounding cities.
• 6.6 Greater utilization of BCT. Consider exploring opportunities for greater utilization of the
Beach Cities Transit system for improved mobility along major corridors and as a potential
means of improved regional transit connections.
• 7.1 Safe public right-of-ways. Encourage that all public right-of-ways are safe for all users
at all times of day where users of all ages and ability feel comfortable participating in
both motorized and non -motorized travel.
• 7.2 Manage speeds. Monitor vehicle speeds through traffic controls, speed limits, and
design features with the intended purpose of minimizing vehicle accidents, creating a
pedestrian and bicycle environment, and discouraging cut -through traffic.
• 7.3 Provide street lighting. Provide pedestrian -oriented street lighting for enhanced
pedestrian and bicycling safety on all minor and major arterial streets.
■ 7.4 Traffic safety programs. Prioritize traffic safety programs oriented towards safe access
to schools and community facilities that focus on walking, biking, and driving in school
zones.
• 7.5 Appropriate sidewalk widths. Encourage design and construction plans that
incorporate sidewalks that are consistent in width to match pedestrian activity.
• 7.6 Pro -active traffic enforcement. Conduct pro -active traffic enforcement along streets
where high collision rates, high speeds, and other unsafe behaviors are reported.
Sustainabilit + Conservation .Element
1.2 Highest return on investment. Prioritize the implementation of greenhouse gas
reduction projects that simultaneously reduce ongoing operational costs to the City.
• 1.6 Demonstration and pilot projects. Utilize demonstration and pilot projects as a means
to evaluate the greenhouse gas reduction potential and cost effectiveness of projects.
2.2 Health and economic benefits. Prioritize the implementation of greenhouse gas
reduction projects that simultaneously provide the greatest economic and health
benefits to the community.
2.3 Grants and incentives. Seek additional sources of funding to support implementation
of greenhouse gas reduction projects for the City, as well as residents and businesses.
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.14-23
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.14 TRANSPORTATION
• 2.4 Diversify GHG reduction strategies. Pursue a diverse mixture of greenhouse gas
reduction strategies across the transportation, energy, waste sectors, commensurate with
their share of the community's greenhouse gas emissions.
• 2.5 Land use and transportation investments. Promote land use and transportation
investments that support greater transportation choice, greater local economic
opportunity, and reduced number and length of automobile trips.
• 2.6 Greenhouse gas thresholds. Establish greenhouse gas emissions thresholds for use in
evaluating non-exempt discretionary projects consistent with the California
Environmental Quality Act and require projects above that threshold to substantially
mitigate all feasible greenhouse gas emissions, and locally offset the remainder of
greenhouse gas emissions produced to meet annual thresholds.
• 3.1 Stationary and mobile sources. Seek to improve overall respiratory health for residents
through regulation of stationary and mobile sources of air pollution, as feasible.
• 3.2 Mobile source reductions. Support land use and transportation strategies to reduce
emissions, including pollution from commercial and passenger vehicles.
• 3.3 Fuel efficient fleets. Promote fuel efficiency and cleaner fuels for vehicles as well as
construction and maintenance equipment by requesting that City contractors provide
cleaner fleets.
• 3.4 Landscape equipment. Discourage the use of landscape equipment with two-stroke
engines and publicize the benefits and importance of alternative technologies.
• 3.5 Clean fuels. Support increased local access to cleaner fuels and cleaner energy by
encouraging fueling stations that provide cleaner fuels and energy to the community.
• 3.7 Regional air quality. When possible, collaborate with other agencies within the region
to improve air quality and meet or exceed state and federal air quality standards
through regional efforts to reduce air pollution from mobile sources, including trucks and
passenger vehicles and other large polluters.
Parks + Open Space Element
• 4.2 Enhanced access points. Increase and enhance access to parks and open space,
particularly across major thoroughfares, as well as access points that promote physical
activity such as pedestrian- and bike -oriented access points.
• 4.3 Safe and efficient trail network. Develop a network of safe and efficient trails, streets,
and paths that connect residents, visitors, and neighboring communities to the beach,
parks, and activity centers.
• 6.3 Safe and accessible connections. Ensure public access points provide safe and
accessible connections to The Strand and shoreline, including access for persons with
disabilities.
• 6.4 Transit access. Coordinate with regional agencies and neighboring jurisdictions to
improve regional and local transit access to beach access points.
• 6.5 Wayfinding and coastal access. Maximize all forms of access and safety getting to
and around the Coastal Zone through infrastructure and wayfinding improvements.
• 6.6 Universal access. Provide resources that improve accessibility to the beach for all
visitors.
• 6.8 High -quality connections. Support high -quality connections to adjacent jurisdictions
along The Strand to promote safe and efficient circulation of pedestrians, bicyclists, and
other non -motorized uses.
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.14-24
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.14 TRANSPORTATION
• MOBILITY-10. Set utilization and turnover rate goals and implement dynamically adjusted
(demand -based) pricing strategies for public parking supplies.
4 MOBILITY-1 1. Develop o smart technology street parking system in the Coastai Znne the,'
includes but is not limited to the following features:
• Variable -cost parking linked to demand;
• Smart phone opplicaticn identifying available metered spaces; and
• Parking pay -by -card and pay -by -phone programs.
3 MOBILITY-12. Maintain and periodically update the Transportation Demand
Management (TDM) Ordinance with activities that will reduce auto trips associated with
new development,
• MOBILITY-13. Install and maintain transportation amenities such as bicycle parking and
electric vehicle charging stations so Thai they are available at each commercial district
or corridor, park, and public facility.
• MOBILITY-14, Periodically review the South Bay Bicycle Master Plan to consider new or
modified facilities and opportunities.
• MOBILITY-15. Facilitale the operation of bicycle rental concessions in the Coastal Zone.
• MOBILITY-16, Install additional bicycle parking facilities and wayfinding signage near the
beach, the Pier, and The Sirond,
• MOBILITY-17. Identify access improvements including, but inot limited to, additional bus
stop pullouts, bus parking locations, a seasonal shuffle system, and drop off/pick up
areas, and prioritize- these improvements in the five --year Capital Improvement Program.
• MOBILITY-18. In conjunction with the Hermosa Beach City School Districi, the City will
identify school access points, a proposed network, education and enforcement
programs to provide a comprehensive- Safe Routes to School Program.
• MOBILITY-19. Develop congestion management performance measures and significant
impact thresholds that are in accordance with the California Environmental Qualify Act
(CEQA) and Senate Bill 743 (SB 743) requirements for roadway segments and
intersections,
• MOBILITY-20. Establish and maintain a comprehensive alternative fuel vehicle policy that
annually identifies current and future charging infrastructure, evaluates installation and
operational costs, and identifies funding opportunilies, rebates, and incentives To support
alternotive fuel vehicle deployment.
• SUSTAINABILITY-6. Implement the Cily's clean fleet policy Through the purchase or lease
of vehicles and equipment Thal reduce greenhouse gas emissions and improve air
quality,
9 PARKS-8- identify and evaluate The ADA. compliance of parks, public facilities, and
coastal public access points.
PARKS-9. Install accessible walkways al parks and onto The beach while minimizing or
avoiding negative effects on The aesthetics and ecology of the- beach environment.
PAR KS-1 S. Develop and implement a uniform coastal access sign program to assist the
public t0 locate and use coastal access points, Consider, adding signs To walk streets thole
inlersecT bvilh I iermoso Avenue,
* PARKS-16, ideiitiiy and remove any Ui'aUihor!Zed/Unpermltied slrucTures, including signs
ai',d fe! ices iha'i Inhibit visibility of public eoaslai cc -es- poli�is,
11 PA10 y-! 7, Amer, all the !.-ocdl In oieme i I otion Plat;/27onii �g Cede io requite a"ppllccrlis `Oi
SU m Mtn" !Y'�marid! s�ii'✓ diia ��i.rwr
PLAIN Hermosa City of Hermosa Reach
Revised Draft Environmental impact Report ALigust 2027
4.14-26
4.14 TRANSPORTATION
Infrastructure Element
• 2.1 Preventive street maintenance. Maintain streets, sidewalks and other public rights -of -
way to provide a reliable network for circulation through a proactive preventive
maintenance program.
• 2.3 Street and sidewalk standards. Require the use of standardized roadway, sidewalk,
parkway, curb and gutter designs to ensure continuity and consistency as property
redevelops over time.
• 2.4 Sidewalk improvements, Consider innovative funding strategies, such as cost -sharing,
ADA accessibility grants, or sidewalk dedications, to improve the overall condition,
safety, and accessibility of sidewalks.
• 2.5 Active transportation dedications. Require new development and redevelopment
projects to provide land or infrastructure necessary to accommodate active
transportation, such as widened sidewalks, bike racks, and bus slops, in compliance with
ADA accessibility standards.
Implementation Actions
• GOVERNANCE-4. Continue to participate and partner with neighboring cities and
regional organizations to implement projects and achieve goals that enhance the
livability of Hermosa Beach.
• MOBILITY-]. Conduct an inventory and assessment of the City's sidewalk network to
identify gaps, assess ADA accessibility, and prioritize improvements within the Capital
Improvement Program.
• MOBILITY-2. Evaluate City right-of-ways and establish or update width and design
standards for the construction or maintenance of sidewalks, curbs, gutters, and
parkways.
• MOBILITY-3. Add definitions to the Municipal Code for street classifications, pedestrian
facilities, bicycle and multi -use facilities, and transportation amenities.
• MOBILITY-4. Install new signage and instructions for accessing transit locations, local and
regional bicycle routes, and parking meters/machines in the Coastal Zone where existing
meters and machines have been shown to cause confusion for visitors.
• MOBILITY-5. Evaluate operations in local neighborhood streets with considerations to
speed management strategies and Traffic calming measures to increase safety for all
people using the sireeT.
• MOBILITY-6. Install Traffic calming devices in areas appropriate to mitigate an identified
and documented Traffic concern, as determined by the City Public Works Director or
designee. Potential traffic calming applications include clearly marked and/or protected
bike and pedestrian zones, bike boulevards, bulb outs, median islands, speed humps:
Traffic -circus, speed -ladies -raised -crosswalks signalize -crosswalks -cr anes, c-honer ,
raised intersections, realigned intersections, and Textured pavements, among other
effective enhancements.
• MOBILITY-7. Work with commercial property owners To conduct an assessment for
utilization of private parking supplies to supplemenT private and public parking needs
and evaluate the potential for shared use agreements or MOUs.
• MOBIL iTY-o. Impie,mem o contingency -based overflow parking plan to address seasonal
and event- based parking demands.
MOSILiiY-9. Flerlodically conduCi a clty-uvlde parking study '`O analyze existing parklllg
infrastructure in Order To effecTlvely address and monage current and future parking
needs,
City of Hermosa Reach
August 2027
4.14-25
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental .impact Report
4.14 TRANSPORTATION
Day with greater than 1,000 participants to provide and advertise predetermined shuttle
services and bicycle corrals.
10 INFRASTRUCTURE-6. Aggressively seek regional, state, and federal funds to leverage local
money earmarked for projects listed in the CIP.
INFRASTRUCTURE-7. Periodically review, and if needed revise, the development fee
schedule to ensure it is adequate and reflective of proposed projects' impacts and
required services.
4.14.4 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
For the purposes of this EIR, impacts on transportation are considered significant if adoption and
implementation of PLAN Hermosa would:
1) Conflict with the adopted Circulation, Transportation, and Parking Element, which
establishes LOS C as the performance standard for signalized and unsignalized
intersections and LOS D as the performance standard for roadway segments in addition
to Caltrans traffic study guidelines.
2) Conflict with the Los Angeles County Congestion Management Program.
3) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a
change in location that results in substantial safety risks.
4) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses.
5) Result in inadequate emergency access.
6) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or
pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities.
Applicable policies, plans, and programs include but are not limited to the Los Angeles
County Long Range Transportation Plan, the South Bay Bicycle Master Plan, and the
Hermosa Beach Downtown Core Revitalization Strategy.
These thresholds of significance were used to assess significant transportation impacts at the
studied signalized intersections and roadway segments.
ANALYSIS SCENARIOS
The operating conditions of Hermosa Beach's circulation system were analyzed based on a
comprehensive evaluation of programs and policies to be adopted and implemented under
PLAN Hermosa. With the guidance of federal, state, regional, and local transportation and land
use policies, the plan's potential for significant transportation impacts was evaluated under the
scenarios described below. Impacts for PLAN Hermosa's horizon year of 2040 were analyzed
using SCAG's 2012-2035 RTP/SCS scenario.
Transportation and Traffic
Existing (2015)
The Existing (2015) scenario was developed using new peak -hour and daily traffic counts
collected at PLAN Hermosa study intersections and along PLAN Hermosa study segments for the
express purpose of this analysis.
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.14-27
4.14 TRANSPORTATION
Future without PLAN Hermosa
The Future without Project [PLAN Hermosa] scenario is consistent with land use growth forecasts
and transportation improvement projects from the SCAG Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). The
2012 RTP assumed a conservative increase of 300 residents and 900 employees in Hermosa
Beach between 2008 and 2035. By 2015, due to a variety of demographic and economic
factors, Hermosa Beach had already exceeded the 2035 population projections. Respectively,
these represent a 2 percent and a 16 percent increase in population and employment from
2015 estimates. In addition to the regional transportation improvements included in the 2012 RTP,
Caltrans has proposed the removal of a travel lane in each direction along Pacific Coast
Highway in Hermosa Beach. This redesign will allow for the following design features at various
points along the route: new bicycle lanes, wider sidewalks, new landscaped medians, wider
vehicle travel lanes, and additional left turn lanes. CEQA requires the evaluation of the existing
condition compared to the proposed project and does not require a comparison of two future
scenarios. However, for additional context, level of service results for the Future without Project
scenario are provided in this study for informational purposes, but are not used to determine
whether traffic impacts are considered significant.
Future PLAN Hermosa
The PLAN Hermosa scenario includes implementation of the plan's programs and policies,
regional transportation improvement projects from the 2012 SCAG Regional Transportation Plan,
and a land use growth forecast which allows for greater nonresidential development and
employment than assumed in the 2012 SCAG RTP. In addition to the regional transportation
improvements included in the 2012 RTP, Caltrans has proposed the removal of a travel lane in
each direction along Pacific Coast Highway in Hermosa Beach. This redesign will allow for the
following design features at various points along the route: new bicycle lanes, wider sidewalks,
new landscaped medians, wider vehicle travel lanes, and additional left turn lanes. With a
limited inventory of vacant and underutilized land, future development under PLAN Hermosa
would occur through infill and redevelopment activities primarily in the Downtown core, the
Cypress Avenue District, the Coastal Zone including The Strand, and along Pacific Coast
Highway and Aviation Boulevard.
PLAN Hermosa assumes an increase of approximately 300 housing units and 1,500 employees by
2040. These figures represent a 3 percent and a 26 percent increase in population and
employment, respectively, from existing estimates. Since the SCAG 2040 RTP model was not
available at the time this report was prepared, the adjusted growth projections were added to
the 2035 SCAG RTP forecast to identify projections for 2040. No additional transportation
improvement projects that would add or remove vehicle capacity beyond the proposed
changes to Pacific Coast Highway are assumed under the PLAN Hermosa scenario.
Bicycle Network
The City of Hermosa Beach adopted the South Bay Bicycle Master Plan (SBBMP) in 2011 with
funding provided under the Los Angeles County Department of Health's RENEW grant initiative.
The plan seeks to facilitate more bicycle infrastructure in seven participating cities in the South
Bay region. The SBBMP proposed bicycle network for Hermosa Beach includes an additional 9.2
miles of bicycle facilities in the city and connects with other SBBMP-recommended networks in
Manhattan Beach and Redondo Beach. Implementation of the SBBMP facilities has already
begun. With some modifications to further enhance bicycle facility quality, the remaining
planned bicycle facilities are assumed to be developed as part of PLAN Hermosa and are
shown in Table 4.14-14 (Planned Hermosa Beach Bicycle Facilities).
PLAN Hermosa City of Hermosa Beach
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report August 2017
4.14-28
4.14 TRANSPORTATION
TABLE 4.14-14
PLANNED HERMOSA BEACH BICYCLE FACILITIES
Class I Street/Path From To
Proposed Class I and IV Facilities
I
Marvin Braude Bike Trail ( The Strand)
North City Limits
South City Limits
IV
Prospect Avenue
Artesia Boulevard
South City Limits
IV
Hermosa Avenue
North City Limits
26th Street
Proposed Class II and Class III Facilities
II
Aviation Boulevard
Pacific Coast Highway
Harper Avenue
II
Artesia Boulevard
Pacific Coast Highway
Harper Avenue
IIAII
Hermosa Avenue
North City Limits
South City Limits
IIAII
27th Street/Gould Avenue
Hermosa Avenue
Pacific Coast Highway
III
Pier Avenue
Hermosa Avenue
Pacific Coast Highway
III
16th Street
Hermosa Avenue
Prospect Avenue
III
Longfellow Avenue
Hermosa Avenue
Valley Drive
III
Valley Drive
Longfellow Avenue
Herondo Street
III
Mornin side Drive
35th Street
26th Street
III
5th Street/6th Street
Hermosa Avenue
Prospect Avenue
III
loth Street
The Strand
Prospect Avenue
III
22nd Street/Monterey Boulevard
The Strand
Herondo Street
III
21st Street
Ardmore Avenue
Prospect Avenue
Source: City of Hermosa Beach 2015
ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY
The analysis of potential transportation impacts at the study locations was based on forecast
demand volumes from the 2012 SCAG RTP travel demand model, a trip -based four -step model.
No modifications to the model's traffic analysis zone system or roadway network were
implemented beyond those changes described above, which were necessary to model the
Future without Project and PLAN Hermosa scenarios. The methods used are documented in
Appendix G-5.
Although the SCAG regional model can quantify the benefits of broad changes in land use
development patterns that would increase density and improve network connectivity, the
model is not able to accurately predict trip generation for mixed -use and urban infill sites with
transit proximity and a density, scale, and design that can facilitate walking, biking, and other
alternative travel options. In order to reflect the benefits of smaller -scale improvements included
in PLAN Hermosa, the City's traffic consultant used the TDM+ model to quantify potential
reductions in trip generation and VMT that could occur by 2040 with full buildout and
implementation of PLAN Hermosa.
Fehr & Peers worked with the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) to
develop the transportation section of the report Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation
Measures. This report is now used as a set of guidelines for quantifying the environmental benefits
of mitigation measures. The CAPCOA guidelines were developed by conducting a
comprehensive literature review of studies documenting the effects of transportation demand
management (TDM) strategies on reducing VMT. Using the results of this study, Fehr & Peers
developed TDM+, a quick response tool that demonstrates trip reductions from commonly used
TDM strategies. The tool also accounts for the interaction among different measures in various
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.14-29
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.14 TRANSPORTATION
categories to avoid double counting. The following strategies were selected from the TDM+ tool
to model the changes that could occur with implementation of PLAN Hermosa.
• Traffic Calming: Based on Mobility Element Policies 2.2 and 7.2, traffic calming measures
encourage people to walk or bike instead of using a vehicle. Roadways will be designed
to reduce motor vehicle speeds and encourage pedestrian and bicycle trips with traffic
calming features. TDM+ estimates up to a 0.3 percent reduction in VMT in response to
traffic calming programs.
• Car -Sharing Programs: Based on Mobility Element Policies 4.9 and 6.3, implementing a
car -sharing program will allow people to have on -demand access to a shared fleet of
vehicles on an as -needed basis. Car -sharing programs may be grouped into three
general categories: residential- or citywide -based, employer -based, and transit station -
based. TDM+ estimates up to a 1.0 percent reduction in VMT in response to establishing
car -sharing programs.
• Parking Management: Based on Mobility Element Policies 4.1, 4.5, 4.6, and 4.8, parking
management strategies include changing parking requirements to encourage smart
growth development and alternative transportation choices by residents and employees
in the city. These could include reduction of minimum parking requirements, creation of
maximum parking requirements, provision of shared parking, or market -based pricing
strategies to encourage park -once behavior. TDM+ estimates up to a 10.5 percent
reduction in VMT in response to establishing parking management programs.
• Commute Trip Reduction Programs: Based on Mobility Element Policies 2.5, 3.4, 4.9, and
6.3, commute trip reduction strategies include City facilitation of a SchoolPool in which
parents of local schoolchildren living near one another are matched to transport
students to school in a carpool, and expansion of walking school bus services to
accommodate any local schoolchild whose parents wish to use the walking school bus
program. TDM+ estimates up to a 14.7 percent reduction in VMT in response to
establishing these programs.
The combined benefit of the PLAN Hermosa strategies as estimated through the TDM+ tool is a
12.9 percent reduction in the number of vehicle trips generated and VMT compared with the
demand estimates from the SCAG RTP model. These reductions have been applied to the
vehicle demand forecasts for the project scenario, and the methods and empirical research
used to estimate VMT reductions are documented in Appendix G-6.
SENATE BILL 743
The California Governor's Office of Planning and Research released SB 743 guidelines in a
document entitled Updating Transportation Impacts Analysis in the CEQA Guidelines in August
2014. At the time of the time of the drafting of this report, a revised set of draft guidelines have
been published and OPR is reviewing public comment, which closed in early 2016, and
adoption is anticipated in early 2017. The revised CEQA Guidelines will establish new potential
criteria for determining the significance of transportation impacts and define alternative metrics
to replace LOS in transit priority areas. The legislation does not preclude the application of local
general plan policies, zoning codes, conditions of approval, or any other planning requirements
in a non-CEQA context.
Under SB 743, OPR proposes to replace level of service with VMT and provides guidance on
potential significance thresholds for the analysis of transportation impacts related to
development projects, land use plans, and transportation infrastructure projects in transit priority
areas. Outside of transit priority areas, lead agencies may elect to be governed by the new
guidelines once they go into effect. Since SB 743 implementation is still evolving and will change
over time, a defined set of analysis steps to meet all aspects of the law cannot be defined at this
PLAN Hermosa City of Hermosa Beach
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report August 20I7
4.14-30
4.14 TRANSPORTATION
time. The City of Hermosa Beach does not have adopted thresholds for evaluating a project's
VMT. Since new analysis metrics and thresholds of significance are still under development, the
evaluation of vehicle miles traveled conducted for this EIR is strictly an informative exercise and
will not be compared to any impact guidelines.
The 2012 SCAG RTP model was used to estimate VMT by isolating trips that start or end within the
city boundaries, also known as the Origin -Destination Method. The estimates include all VMT for
Mips that begin and end in the city, but only half of the VMT for trips that only begin or end in the
city. VMT for trips that pass through the city without stopping are not included. VMT estimates for
the Existing (2015), Future without Project, and PLAN Hermosa scenarios are shown in Table
4.14-15 (Daily Citywide Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) and Vehicle Trips (VT) Generated). VMT per
capita and vehicle trips per capita estimates are also provided using the sum of population and
employment as the capita basis.
TABLE 4.14-15
DAILY CITYWIDE VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED (VMT) AND VEHICLE TRIPS (VT) GENERATED
Avg. Trip
VMT/
Scenario
Population
Employment
Capita
VMT
Length (miles)
VT
Capita
ita
Capita
2015 Existing
19,800
5,700
25,500
363,000
9.4
38,700
14.2
1.52
2040 Future
20,100
6,600
26,700
356,000
9.6
37,200
13.3
1.39
without Project
2040 PLAN
20,400
7,200
27,600
326,000
9.4
34,200
11.8
1.25
Hermosa
Source: City of Hermosa Beach 2015
City of Hermosa Beach
The existing Circulation, Transportation, and Parking Element (1990) maintains a policy of LOS C
or better for both signalized and unsignalized intersections during weekday morning and
evening peak hours. City standards do not specify a particular analysis methodology or
significance criteria to be used when evaluating unsignalized intersections or roadway
segments, nor do they specify level of service requirements beyond LOS D. The impact criteria
shown in Table 4.14-16 (Hermosa Beach Signalized Intersection Impact Criteria), Table 4.14-17
(Hermosa Beach Unsignalized Intersection Impact Criteria), and Table 4.14-18 (Hermosa Beach
Roadway Segment Impact Criteria) have been established for signalized intersections,
unsignalized intersections, and roadway segments.
TABLE 4.14-26
HERMOSA BEACH SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION IMPACT CRITERIA
Level of Service
Impact Threshold
LOS A, B, or C
Degrades to LOS D, E, or F
LOS D
Increase in V/C ratio greater than or equal to 0.02, or degrades to LOS E or F
LOS E
Increase in V/C ratio greater than or equal to 0.05, or degrades to LOS F
LOS F
Increase in V/C ratio greater than or equal to 0.05
Source: City of Hermosa Beach 1990
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.14-31
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.14 TRANSPORTATION
TABLE 4.24-17
HERMOSA BEACH UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION IMPACT CRITERIA
Level of Service Impact Threshold
LOS A, B, or C Degrades to LOS D, E, or F
LOS D, E, or F Increase in intersection traffic volume greater than or equal to 10%
Source: City of Hermosa Beach 1990
TABLE 4.14-18
HERMOSA BEACH ROADWAY SEGMENT IMPACT CRITERIA
Level of Service Impact Threshold
LOS A, B, or C Degrades to LOS D, E, or F
LOS D Increase in V/C ratio greater than or equal to 0.02, or degrades to LOS E or F
LOS E Increase in V/C ratio greater than or equal to 0.05, or degrades to LOS F
LOS F Increase in V/C ratio greater than or equal to 0.05
Source: City of Hermosa Beach 1990
California Department of Transportation
The impact criteria for signalized intersections under Caltrans jurisdiction are shown in Table
4.14-19 (Caltrans Signalized Intersection Impact Criteria), which establishes a target of LOS D
and significance criteria defined as maintaining the existing level of service when the target LOS
is exceeded.
TABLE 4.14-19
CALTRANS SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION IMPACT CRITERIA
Level of Service Impact Threshold
LOS A, B, C, or D Degrades to LOS E or F
LOS E Degrades to LOS F
LOS F Any increase in average control delay
Source: Caltrans 2002
Congestion Management Program
The CMP statute requires establishment of LOS standards to measure congestion on the system
and identifies a minimum level of service requirement of LOS E for analysis of studied
intersections and roadway segments. Significant impacts are identified if there is an increase in
V/C ratio greater than or equal to 0.02 and the LOS degrades to F or is already at F. The impact
criteria for CMP arterial monitoring locations are shown in Table 4.14-20 (Congestion
Management Program Impact Criteria).
TABLE 4.14-20
CONGESTION MANAGEMENT PROGRAM IMPACT CRITERIA
Level of Service Impact Threshold
LOS A, B, C, D, or E Increase in V/C ratio greater than or equal to 0.02 and degrades to LOS F
LOS F Increase in V/C ratio greater than or equal to 0.02
Source: Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority 2010
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.14-32
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.14 TRANSPORTATION
IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
IMPACT 4.14-1 Would PLAN Hermosa Cause an Exceedance of LOS Performance Standards?
PLAN Hermosa would guide future development and reuse projects in the city
in a manner that would not increase overall demand for travel within
Hermosa Beach. Both the City's and Caltrans's existing level of service
standards for intersections and roadway segments would be maintained at
the majority of intersections and segments analyzed. Three intersections and
one segment would experience a significant impact.
Table 4.14-21 (Future (2040) Intersection Level of Service: City of Hermosa Beach) compares the
intersection level of service for the Existing (2015) and 2040 PLAN Hermosa scenarios. Figure
4.14-8 (PLAN Hermosa (2040) Intersection Level of Service) shows the level of service for the 2040
PLAN Hermosa scenario. Despite reduced vehicle miles traveled overall and per capita that
would result with implementation of PLAN Hermosa, changes in vehicular travel patterns result in
three of the 13 studied intersections under the PLAN Hermosa scenario operating below the
LOS C standard during the AM and/or PM peak hours.
• Pacific Coast Highway and Artesia Boulevard (AM and PM peak hour)
• Pacific Coast Highway and Aviation Boulevard (AM peak hour)
• Manhattan Avenue and 27th Street (AM peak hour)
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.14-33
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.14 TRANSPORTATION
TABLE 4.14-21
FUTURE (2040) INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH
Existing
2040 without
PLAN
Existing vs.
Inter-
Peak
PLAN Hermosa
Hermosa
PLAN Hermosa
Intersection
section
Hou
Control
r
WC
LOS
WC
LOS
WC
LOS
Change
Sig.
in WC
Impact
1. Hermosa Ave
AM
0.302
A
0.347
A
0.319
A
0.017
NO
Signal
& 13th St
PM
0.335
A
0.388
A
0.357
A
0.022
NO
2. Hermosa Ave
AM
0.384
A
0.457
0.414
A
0.030
NO
Signal
& Pier Ave
PM
0.324
A
0.391
0.928
A
E
0.356
A
0.032
NO
3. Pacific Coast
AM
0.732
C
0.809
D
0.077
YES
Hwy & Artesia
Signal
Blvd
PM
0.767
C
0.969
E
0.851
D
0.084
YES
4. Pacific Coast
AM
0.777
C
0.987
E
0.870
D
0.093
YES
Hwy & Aviation
Signal
Blvd
PM
0.743
C
0.762
C
0.681
B
-0.062
NO
5. Pacific Coast
AM
0.565
A
0.703
C
0.619
B
0.054
NO
Signal
Hwy & Pier Ave
PM
0.703
C
0.838
D
0.741
C
0.038
NO
6. Pacific Coast
AM
0.678
B
0.825
D
0.744
C
0.066
NO
Signal
Hwy & 2nd St
PM
0.696
B
0.807
D
0.732
C
0.036
NO
7. Pacific Coast
AM
0.526
A
0.623
B
0.561
A
0.035
NO
�^N
H & 16th St
Signal
PM
0.636
B
0.751
C
0.670
B
0.034
NO
8. Pacific Coast
AM
0.590
A
0.682
B
0.610
B
0.020
NO
Signal
Hwy& 21st St
PM
0.668
B
0.822
D
0.729
C
0.061
NO
9. Prospect Ave
AM
0.709
C
0.844
D
0.740
C
0.031
NO
Signal
& Artesia Blvd
PM
0.749
C
0.856
D
0.751
C
0.002
NO
10. Prospect Ave
AM
0.691
B
0.785
C
0.691
B
0.000
NO
Signal
& Aviation Blvd
PM
0.763
C
0.838
D
0.737
C
-0.026
NO
11. Prospect Ave
AM
0.727
C
0.769
C
0.690
B
-0.037
NO
Signal
& Anita St
PM
0.645
B
0.750
C
0.672
B
0.027
NO
12. Manhattan
All-Way
AM
27.6
C
45.1
D
38.2
D
10.6
YES
Stop
p
Ave & 27th St
Control
PM
16.1
B
38.6
D
21.2
C
5.1
NO
13. Valley Drive
All-Way
AM
21.2
C
29.9
C
18.1
C
-3.1
NO
& Gould Ave
Stop
Control
PM
24.2
C
39.7
D
20.8
C
-3.4
NO
Source: City of Hermosa Beach 2015
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.14-34
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.14 TRANSPORTATION
FIGURE 4.14-8
PLAN HERMOSA (2040) INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE
®
M
O
Source: City of Hermosa Beach 2015
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
k.
4.14-35
Mdr�t�atta+i ^��h
G!
ti
L A—
A
1 A
t - JC`s�r3 �ifs�ti
2
0
D1
L]
0
210
M
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.14 TRANSPORTATION
Table 4.14-22 (Future (2040) Intersection Level of Service: Caltrans) presents a comparison of
future intersection level of service along Pacific Coast Highway, analyzed using the HCM
methodology. One of the six studied intersections under the PLAN Hermosa scenario is
anticipated to operate below the LOS D standard during the AM and/or PM peak hours.
• Pacific Coast Highway and Artesia Boulevard (PM peak hour)
TABLE 4.14-22
FUTURE (2040) INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE: CALTRANS
Inter-
Peak
Existing
g
2040 without
PLAN Hermosa
Existing vs.
PLAN Hermosa
PLAN Hermosa
Intersection
section
Hou
Control
r
Delay
LOS
Delay
LOS
Delay
LOS
Change
Sig.
in WC
Impact
3. Pacific Coast
Hwy & Artesia
Signal
AM
54.3
D
63.4
E
52.6
D
-1.7
NO
Blvd
PM
52.7
D
88.0
F
66.9
E
14.2
YES
4. Pacific Coast
AM
25.8
C
65.5
E
50.7
D
24.9
NO
H
Hwy &Aviation
Signal
Blvd
PM
36.4
D
30.2
C
27.7
C
-8.7
NO
5. Pacific Coast
AM
17.6
B
22.4
C
21.8
C
4.2
NO
Hwy & Pier Ave
Signal
PM
22.0
C
26.3
C
24.4
C
2.4
NO
6. Pacific Coast
AM
10.9
B
11.0
B
10.3
B
-0.6
NO
Hwy & 2nd St
Signal
PM
11.4
B
11.6
B
11.0
B
-0.4
NO
7. Pacific Coast
AM
28.8
C
34.6
C
30.9
C
2.1
NO
Hwy & 16th St
Signal
PM
35.5
D
50.3
D
37.3
D
1.8
NO
8. Pacific Coast
AM
11.7
B
15.0
B
12.7
B
1.0
NO
Hwy & 21st St
Signal
PM
5.3
A
7.3
A
6.4
A
1.1
NO
Source: City of Hermosa Beach 2015
Table 4.14-23 (Future (2040) Roadway Segment Level of Service) compares the roadway
segment level of service results for the future scenarios. Figure 4.14-9 (PLAN Hermosa (2040)
Roadway Segment Level of Service) illustrates 2040 roadway segment level of service for the
PLAN Hermosa scenario. While four of the 20 analyzed street segments are anticipated to
operate below the LOS D standard under PLAN Hermosa traffic conditions, just one segment,
Prospect Avenue between Aviation Boulevard and 2nd Street, represents a significant impact
because three of the segments already operate at LOS D or below.
While the following roadway segments currently operate at LOS D or below, PLAN Hermosa is
projected to maintain or improve the volume -to -capacity ratio by 2040 compared to 2015
conditions:
• Pacific Coast Highway between Artesia Boulevard and Aviation Boulevard
• Pacific Coast Highway between Aviation Boulevard and 2nd Street
• Artesia Boulevard between Pacific Coast Highway and Prospect Avenue
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.14-36
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.14 TRANSPORTATION
TABLE 4.14-23
FUTURE (2040) ROADWAY SEGMENT LEVEL OF SERVICE
2040 w/o
PLAN
Existing vs.
Existing
PLAN
Hermosa
PLAN Hermosa
Hermosa
Segment
Location
Chang
Sig
WC
LOS
WC
LOS
WC
LOS
a Impact
in V/C
1. Hermosa Avenue
27th Street to 22nd Street
0.381
A
0.473
A
0.414
A
0.033
NO
2. Hermosa Avenue
22nd Street to 16th Street
0.364
A
0.455
A
0.400
A
0.036
NO
3. Hermosa Avenue
16th Street to 8th Street
0.384
A
0.459
A
0.400
A
0.016
NO
4. Hermosa Avenue
8th Street to Herondo Street
0.313
A
0.386
A
0.338
A
0.025
NO
5. Valley Drive
Gould Avenue to Pier Avenue
0.336
A
0.340
A
0.300
A
-0.036
NO
6. Valley Drive
Pier Avenue to 8th Street
0.434
A
0.453
A
0.393
A
-0.041
NO
7. Ardmore Avenue
16th Street to 11th Street
0.282
A
0.293
A
0.253
A
-0.029
NO
8. Ardmore Avenue
8th Street to 2nd Street
0.200
A
0.213
A
0.187
A
-0.013
NO
9. Pacific Coast
Artesia Boulevard to Aviation
0.997
E
1.147
F
0.997
E
0.000
NO
Highway
Boulevard
10. Pacific Coast
Aviation Boulevard to 2nd Street
1.169
F
1.219
F
1.067
F
-0.102
NO
Highway
11. Prospect Avenue
Artesia Boulevard to Aviation
0.412
A
0.533
A
0.453
A
0.041
NO
Boulevard
12. Prospect Avenue
Aviation Boulevard to 2nd Street
0.795
C
0.980
E
0.853
D
0.058
YES
13. Artesia Blvd
Pacific Coast Highway to Prospect
0.909
E
1.024
F
0.876
D
-0.033
NO
Avenue
14. Aviation Blvd
Pacific Coast Highway to Prospect
0.887
D
0.790
C
0.683
B
-0.204
NO
Avenue
15. Pier Avenue
Hermosa Avenue to Valley Drive
0.460
A
0.462
A
0.407
A
-0.053
NO
Ardmore Avenue to Pacific Coast
0.494
A
0.500
A
0.445
A
-0.049
NO
16. Pier Avenue
Highway
17. Gould Avenue
Ardmore Avenue to Pacific Coast
0.603
B
0.550
A
0.486
A
-0.117
NO
Highway
18. 8th Street
Hermosa Avenue to Valley Drive
0.174
A
0.167
A
0.160
A
-0.014
NO
19. 8th Street
Pacific Coast Highway to Prospect
0.140
A
0.080
A
0.080
A
-0.060
NO
Avenue
NO
20. Herondo Street
Hermosa Avenue to Valley Drive
0.866
D
0.854
D
0.746
C
-0.120
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.14-37
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.14 TRANSPORTATION
SOURCE: CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 2O15 FIGURE 4.14-9
PLAN HERMOSA (2040) ROADWAY SEGMENT LEVEL OF SERVICE
.1
AI
Source: City of Hermosa Beach 2015
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
U
'v
4.14-38
4�1
City of Hermosa Beach
August 20I7
4.14 TRANSPORTATION
Per PLAN Hermosa implementation action MOBILITY-12, the City will conduct a periodic update
of a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Ordinance. However, based on the above
discussion and despite implementation action MOBILITY-12, implementation of PLAN Hermosa
will conflict with the existing intersection and segment operational standards identified in
Hermosa Beach's 1990 Circulation, Transportation, and Parking Element, which would be a
significant impact.
Intersections
Pacific Coast Highway and Artesia Boulevard
The intersection at Pacific Coast Highway and Artesia Boulevard would be significantly
impacted by PLAN Hermosa -related traffic in both the morning and evening peak periods.
Opportunities for physical mitigations are limited by alignment issues and Caltrans's plan to
remove a travel lane in each direction on Pacific Coast Highway, as well as a major change in
roadway characteristics, east to west, from Artesia Boulevard to Gould Avenue. Additionally,
physical mitigations would conflict with the SBBMP Class III bicycle facility planned for Gould
Avenue, as well as PLAN Hermosa Mobility Element Policies 1.1, 2.1, 3.6, 7.2, and 7.5.
Due to the above -mentioned conflicts between physical mitigations and PLAN Hermosa and
adopted plans, the significant transportation impacts on traffic operations at the intersection of
Pacific Coast Highway and Artesia Boulevard cannot be mitigated to a less than significant
level. Therefore, this impact would be significant and unavoidable.
Pacific Coast Highway and Aviation Boulevard
The intersection at Pacific Coast Highway and Aviation Boulevard is significantly impacted by
PLAN Hermosa -related traffic in the morning peak period. Opportunities for physical mitigations
are limited by Caltrans's plan to remove a travel lane in each direction on Pacific Coast
Highway and improvement plans for the intersection included in the Aviation Boulevard Master
Plan, including enhanced crosswalks and repurposing of public right-of-way for parkettes,
pedestrian space, or a crossing refuge. Additionally, physical mitigations would conflict with the
SBBMP Class II bicycle facility planned for Aviation Boulevard, as well as PLAN Hermosa Mobility
Element Policies 1.1, 2.1, 3.6, 7.2, and 7.5.
Due to the above -mentioned conflicts between physical mitigations to improve level of service
and PLAN Hermosa and adopted plans, the significant transportation impacts to traffic operations
at the intersection of Pacific Coast Highway and Aviation Boulevard cannot be mitigated to a less
than significant level. Therefore, this would be a significant and unavoidable impact.
Manhattan Avenue and 27th Street
T1�e intersection —at Manhattan Avenue —and 27th Street is signific-anfly impact e-d b-y PLAN --
Hermosa -related traffic in the morning peak period. Opportunities for physical mitigations are
limited by existing narrow roadway widths. Additionally, physical mitigations would conflict with
the SBBMP Class III bicycle facility planned for 27th Street, as well as PLAN Hermosa Mobility
Element Policies 1.1, 2.1, 3.6, 7.2, and 7.5.
Due to the above -mentioned conflicts between physical mitigations to improve level of service
and PLAN Hermosa policies and adopted plans, the significant transportation impacts to traffic
operations at the intersection of Manhattan Avenue and 27th Street cannot be mitigated to a
less than significant level. Therefore; this impact would be significant and unavoidable.
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.14-39
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.14 TRANSPORTATION
Roadway Segments
Prospect Avenue from Aviation Boulevard to 2nd Street
Through implementation of PLAN Hermosa, the roadway segment on Prospect Avenue from
Aviation Boulevard to 2nd Street would be degraded from its current operation at LOS C to
LOS D by 2040. While this is improved from the projected LOS E that would be experienced under
the 2040 scenario without PLAN Hermosa, it still represents a significant impact.
In order to reduce the projected level of service impacts along Prospect Avenue, the City would
need to consider expanding the roadway to accommodate additional vehicles or consider
policies that reduce the number of vehicles traveling along the corridor. However, the
opportunities for expanding Prospect Avenue to reduce the impacts to level of service are
limited by the narrow roadway and the presence of on -street parking. Additionally, physical
mitigations to expand roadway capacity along Prospect Avenue would conflict with the intent
of SB 743 and many of the proposed PLAN Hermosa policies. Under SB 743 Section 21099(b) (2),
vehicular capacity and traffic congestion would no longer be eligible as considerations of
significant impact under CEQA. Guidelines established for the implementation of SB 743 further
state that roadway capacity expansions in a congested corridor are presumed to cause a
significant impact under CEQA due to their effects on induced travel. Physical mitigations would
also conflict with the SBBMP bicycle -friendly street bicycle facility planned for Prospect Avenue
and with PLAN Hermosa Mobility Element Policies 1.1, 2.1, 3.6, 7.2, and 7.5. Due to the above -
mentioned conflicts between capacity expansion mitigations and SB 743, the SBBMP, and PLAN
Hermosa policies, the significant transportation impact to traffic operations along the segment
of Prospect Avenue from Aviation Boulevard to 2nd Street cannot be mitigated to a less than
significant level. Therefore, this impact would be significant and unavoidable.
Mitigation Measures
Opportunities for physical mitigation measures, such as restriping of intersection approaches to
add turn lanes, were investigated. The emphasis was on identifying physical improvements that
could be implemented efficiently and maintain consistency with PLAN Hermosa goals. Mitigation
measures were reviewed for compliance or conflict with PLAN Hermosa goals and policies, as
well as adopted policies, plans, and programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian
facilities. Mitigations that decrease the performance or safety of such facilities were not
considered. No mitigation measures could be applied to significantly impacted locations
without creating a conflict with PLAN Hermosa goals or other adopted plans. This impact
remains significant and unavoidable.
IMPACT 4.14-2 Would PLAN Hermosa Conflict with the Los Angeles County Congestion
Management Program? Adoption and implementation of PLAN Hermosa
would maintain the level of service standard for the intersection located at
Pacific Coast Highway and Artesia Boulevard and comply with the CMP. This
would result in a less than significant impact.
The intersection of Pacific Coast Highway and Artesia Boulevard is a CMP-designated
intersection. CMP guidelines require arterial intersection analysis at monitoring locations where
the proposed project will add 50 or more peak -hour vehicle trips. Forecast traffic growth at the
intersection of Pacific Coast Highway and Artesia Boulevard from Existing (2015) to the future
PLAN Hermosa scenario is anticipated to not exceed the CMP threshold for analysis. Therefore,
the regional impact on transportation would be less than significant.
PLAN Hermosa City of Hermosa Beach
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report August 2017
4.14-40
4.14 TRANSPORTATION
Mitigation Measures
None required.
IMPACT 4.14-3 Would PLAN Hermosa Alter Air Traffic Patterns? PLAN Hermosa would guide
future development and reuse projects in the city in a manner that would not
modify the planning or operations of Los Angeles International Airport or
introduce land use patterns that may cause substantial safety risks to or from
air operations. Thus, this impact would be less than significant.
Los Angeles International Airport is located approximately 5 miles north of the city. PLAN Hermosa
policies and programs related to land use, mobility, and structural heights would not influence air
traffic patterns by creating either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in
substantial safety risks. Therefore, the impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
IMPACT 4.14-4 Would PLAN Hermosa Introduce or Create Roadway Design Hazards? PLAN
Hermosa would guide future development and reuse projects in the city in a
manner that would not increase hazards due to design or incompatible uses.
Thus, implementation would result in a less than significant impact.
Traffic generated by infill and redevelopment from PLAN Hermosa implementation, as
addressed in Impact 4.14-1, would not increase hazards due to design features or incompatible
uses. Hermosa Beach's adoption of Living Streets, Complete Streets, and Vision Zero policies
prioritizes safety by way of design as a means to encourage increased use of active and other
non -motorized travel options and improve mobility for pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit users
across the city. The following implementation actions support safe design features: MOBILITY-5
will evaluate operations along local neighborhood streets in regard to safety and vehicle
speeds; MOBILITY-6 will evaluate and implement traffic calming measures and other safety
enhancement features; and PARKS-8 ensures ADA compliance of public access points in future
developments in Hermosa Beach.
Mobility Element Policy 1.1 requires that all transportation developments consider the needs of
all modes of travel to create safe, livable, and inviting environments for all users; Policy 3.3
requires that all development or redevelopment projects accommodate active transportation
by providing connections to existing and planned pedestrian and bicycle networks and
incorporating pedestrian -oriented design practices; and Policy 7.1 ensures that public rights -of -
way are safe for all users at all times of day. To address safety issues regarding conflicts between
incompatible users and poorly designed streets, Mobility Element Policy 1.2 supports the
--development of content-s-ensitive-st-reef c-lassi#ic-afion-design--standards thGt- vifbe-tter fit th
needs of an increasing preference for multimodal travel options and behaviors. Policy 7.2 seeks
to discourage pass -through traffic on local neighborhood streets by means of traffic controls,
speed limitations, and design features that create a pedestrian- and bicycle -friendly
environment and minimize potential vehicle collisions. Additionally, Policy 7.4 prioritizes programs
oriented toward safe access to schools and community facilities that focus on walking,
bicycling, and driving in school zones.
With the city encompassing approximately 1.4 square miles, active and non -motorized
transportation options for local mobility can be convenient and cost-effective travel choices for
residents and visitors. As such, Mobility Element Policy 7.5 encourages design and construction
plans that improve sidewalk infrastructure to safely accommodate high levels of pedestrian
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.14-41
4.14 TRANSPORTATION
activity. Thus, PLAN Hermosa policies, particularly in the Mobility Element, are designed to
reduce design hazards and conflicts between incompatible land uses and between all
transportation network users. The impact would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
IMPACT 4.14-5 Would PLAN Hermosa Result in Inadequate Emergency Access? PLAN
Hermosa would guide future development and reuse projects in the city that
could result in inadequate emergency access. However, PLAN Hermosa
policies would reduce emergency access program -level impacts to a less
than significant level.
Emergency vehicles in the city take the fastest and most expedient routes in case of an
emergency. In the event of an evacuation, the primary routes used, if available, are Artesia
Boulevard, Aviation Boulevard, Herondo Street, and Pacific Coast Highway. PLAN Hermosa
policies include a variety of actions aimed at ensuring emergency response readiness,
specifically in the Public Safety Element, which ensures that law enforcement, fire
protection/emergency medical services, and lifeguard services are adequately provided for
Hermosa Beach residents and visitors as well as to maximize emergency services across
neighboring jurisdictions. Working within that framework, Public Safety Element Policy 6.1 requires
that the City regularly update disaster preparedness and emergency response plans, and Public
Safety Policy 5.4 requires that new development provide adequate emergency access in
addition to maintaining current levels of emergency services.
Implementation of current state and federal regulations, combined with PLAN Hermosa policies,
would reduce the potential impacts on emergency preparedness and emergency access in
Hermosa Beach. Therefore, the impact would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
IMPACT 4.14-6 Would PLAN Hermosa Support the Maintenance and Expansion of Public
Transit, Bicycle, and Pedestrian Facilities? PLAN Hermosa would guide future
development and reuse projects in the city in a manner that supports the
maintenance and expansion of transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities
consistent with adopted local and regional plans. Thus, implementation
would result in a less than significant impact.
PLAN Hermosa policies and implementation actions intended to reduce transportation impacts
are oriented toward the development of a safe, multimodal, and sustainable transportation
system that directly encourages healthy lifestyle choices among Hermosa Beach residents and
visitors. Policies under PLAN Hermosa are intended to provide a wide range of transportation
options, allowing travelers the flexibility in choosing the transportation option that best fits their
needs. Mobility Element Policies 3.1 and 3.4 repurpose public rights -of -way to enhance
connectivity among pedestrians, bicyclists, and public transit facilities with the objective of
reducing total vehicle trips, while Policy 6.1 incentivizes the development of a comprehensive,
regionally integrated transportation network among neighboring communities. In coordination
with related policies adopted by the City and surrounding municipalities, the Mobility Element
would improve transit, bicycle, and pedestrian connections with the goal of developing a well-
balanced circulation system.
PLAN Hermosa City of Hermosa Beach
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report August 2017
4.14-42
4.14 TRANSPORTATION
The majority of arterials and local streets throughout the city include sidewalks to accommodate
a moderate level of pedestrian activities. Specific key corridors are the 22 walk streets that
connect pedestrians between neighborhoods, the Downtown core, and the beach, while
walking paths on the Hermosa Valley Greenbelt offer north -south pedestrian connections
throughout the length of the city. Mobility Element Policy 3.2 prioritizes investment in the
development of a complete network of sidewalks and pedestrian -friendly amenities. As a means
of prioritizing pedestrian safety, Mobility Element Policies 2.1 and 2.2 prioritize the development of
safe, comfortable, and attractive public spaces and encourage traffic calming strategies that
will reduce vehicle speeds and reduce cut -through traffic on residential streets.
Implementation of policies under PLAN Hermosa would be consistent with the goals of the South
Bay Bicycle Master Plan (SBBMP). Mobility Element policies support and reinforce SBBMP policies
by promoting bicycle facilities and parking throughout the city to provide a higher level of
connectivity and access for bicycles. In close coordination with the SBBMP, Mobility Element
Policy 3.6 would provide a complete bicycle network along designated roadways in the city
and create connections to other sustainable modes of travel. To further promote bicycle
circulation, Policy 3.8 encourages shared streets along low volume roadways with limited rights -
of -way, and Policy 4.5 requires a sufficient supply of bicycle parking facilities that can support
increasing bicycle ridership.
Implementation of PLAN Hermosa would be consistent with the goals of the Los Angeles County
Long Range Transportation Plan. Existing transit facilities in Hermosa Beach are supported by
local and regional transportation authorities, with local mobility and access to major regional
transit facilities in nearby municipalities. Mobility Element policies promote transit opportunities
within the city and opportunities to connect to regional infrastructure. Specifically, Mobility
Element Policies 6.2 and 6.4 encourage coordination with regional transportation agencies and
surrounding cities and require the consideration of regional travel patterns when prioritizing
regional transit and transportation projects that will improve local access and connections to
region -wide transit services. On the local level, Policy 5.2 proposes the development of a local
transit system that facilitates efficient transport between key activity centers, including the
Downtown core and the beach. To further support a robust transit system locally and regionally,
Infrastructure Element Policy 2.5 requires new developments and redevelopment projects to
provide the land or infrastructure necessary to accommodate active transportation, such as
sidewalks, bike racks, and bus stops. Therefore, PLAN Hermosa policies directly support and are
consistent with the Los Angeles County Long Range Transportation Plan.
PLAN Hermosa policies directly support the expansion of pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities
and support the City's goal of being a multimodal community. Mobility Element and Land Use +
Design Element policies also support the goals and policies of the Los Angeles County Long
Range Transportation Plan and the South Bay Bicycle Master Plan. Therefore, impacts to
pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
CUMULATIVE SETTING, IMPACTS, AND MITIGATION MEASURES
The traffic analysis included in this EIR addresses cumulative impacts to the regional
transportation system. A regional traffic model was used to analyze impacts of PLAN Hermosa at
buildout, along with projected regional growth. The regional traffic model already assumes a
level of growth for other nearby jurisdictions based on all reasonably foreseeable and probable
future projects in the region, including the Redondo Beach waterfront, as these sites are likely to
be developed at some point in the future, and on population and employment projections. In
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
4.14-43
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.14 TRANSPORTATION
sum, all scenarios studied in this section of the EIR are considered cumulative in nature because
anticipated land use forecasts for other areas are already included in the traffic model.
IMPACT 4.14-7 Would PLAN Hermosa Cumulatively Contribute to Exceedance of LOS
Performance Standards? PLAN Hermosa would guide future development
and reuse projects in the city in a manner that would not increase overall
demand for travel within Hermosa Beach. Both the City's and Caltrans's
existing level of service standards for intersections and roadway segments
would be maintained at the majority of intersections and segments analyzed.
Nonetheless, three intersections and one segment would experience a
cumulatively considerable impact.
Regional population and employment growth will not result in increased vehicular travel
demand. Policies and implementation actions in PLAN Hermosa would maintain levels of service
at a majority studied intersections and two street segments in the buildout year, as discussed in
Impact 4.14-1. PLAN Hermosa includes various policies aimed at developing an integrated
multimodal transportation system with opportunities for travel by alternative modes, including
walking, bicycling, and transit, and is supported by implementation actions such as MOBILITY-12
intended to reduce vehicle auto trips associated with new developments; MOBILITY-5 evaluating
improvements to pedestrian amenities and safety; MOBILITY-4 that will improve transit access
and services; and PARKS-9 and PARKS-22 that will improve bicycle facilities and services
citywide.
As discussed above in Impact 4.14-1, three studied intersections and one street segment under
PLAN Hermosa would have a significant impact to level of service standards. Because mitigation
measures are not viable at these intersections, given the state laws directing jurisdictions to
move away from expanding roadway capacity based on LOS analysis, PLAN Hermosa
implementation would have a cumulatively considerable impact at three intersections and one
roadway segment.
Mitigation Measures
None feasible.
IMPACT 4.14-8 Would PLAN Hermosa Contribute to a Cumulatively Considerable Conflict with
the Los Angeles County Congestion Management Program? Adoption and
implementation of PLAN Hermosa would maintain the level of service
standard for the intersection at Pacific Coast Highway and Artesia Boulevard
and would comply with the CMP. This would result in a less than cumulatively
considerable impact.
As discussed under Impact 4.14-2, adoption and implementation of PLAN Hermosa would not
conflict with the Los Angeles County Congestion Management Program. Therefore,
implementation and adoption of PLAN Hermosa would have less than cumulatively
considerable impacts on the CMP.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
IMPACT 4.14-9 Would PLAN Hermosa Contribute to a Cumulative Effect on Air Traffic Patterns?
Adoption and implementation of PLAN Hermosa in addition to anticipated
cumulative growth in the region would not modify the planning or operations
of Los Angeles International Airport or introduce land use patterns that may
PLAN Hermosa City of Hermosa Beach
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report August 2017
4.14-44
4.14 TRANSPORTATION
cause substantial safety risks to or from air operations. This impact would be
less than cumulatively considerable.
As discussed under Impact 4.14-3, implementation of PLAN Hermosa would not influence air
traffic patterns by creating either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results
in substantial safety risks. Therefore, the impacts on air traffic patterns would be less than
cumulatively considerable.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
IMPACT 4.14-10 Would PLAN Hermosa Contribute to Cumulative Roadway Design Hazards?
Adoption and implementation of PLAN Hermosa in addition to anticipated
regional growth would not increase hazards due to design or incompatible
uses. This would result in a less than cumulatively considerable impact.
As discussed under Impact 4.14-4, traffic generated by infill and redevelopment under PLAN
Hermosa would not increase hazards due to design features or incompatible uses. Development
policies from surrounding jurisdictions in combination with PLAN Hermosa policies would reduce
design hazards and conflicts between incompatible land uses and between all transportation
network users. Therefore, impacts would be less than cumulatively considerable.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
IMPACT 4.14-11 Would PLAN Hermosa Cumulatively Contribute to Inadequate Emergency
Access? Adoption and implementation of PLAN Hermosa policies in addition
to anticipated regional growth would not result in inadequate emergency
access. The impact would be less than cumulatively considerable.
As discussed in Impact 4.14-5, emergency vehicles take the fastest and most expedient routes to
access an emergency. In some cases, emergency vehicles may travel through multiple
jurisdictions to respond to a mutual aid call. PLAN Hermosa policies would ensure emergency
response readiness and address emergency preparedness impacts, including maintaining
emergency response plans and establishing designated emergency response and evacuation
routes. Implementation of current state and federal regulations, combined with PLAN Hermosa
policies and adjacent jurisdictions' emergency response plans, would reduce potential
cumulative impacts on emergency preparedness and emergency access. The impact would be
less than cumulatively considerable.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
IMPACT 4.14-12 Would PLAN Hermosa Cumulatively Contribute to the Maintenance and
Expansion of Public Transit, Bicycle, and Pedestrian Facilities? PLAN Hermosa
supports the maintenance and expansion of transit, bicycle, and pedestrian
facilities consistent with adopted local and regional plans. Thus,
implementation of PLAN Hermosa and additional development would result in
a less than cumulatively considerable impact.
Future growth into the buildout year (2040) would increase the demand for transit, bicycle, and
pedestrian facilities. The majority of arterials and local streets, including specific key corridors
throughout the city and in surrounding communities, include sidewalks to accommodate
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.14-45
4.14 TRANSPORTATION
pedestrians. Many streets currently are impacted by issues regarding sidewalk quality and
continuity, and many are not in compliance with ADA standards. PLAN Hermosa includes plans
to improve sidewalk connectivity citywide and will bring sidewalks into ADA compliance. Bicycle
paths (Class I), lanes (Class II), and routes (Class III) are in the general north -south direction along
The Strand and Hermosa Avenue and are connected to surrounding communities.
Implementation of PLAN Hermosa and other multimodal plans would ensure the maintenance
and expansion of transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities. Therefore, the impact on transit,
bicycle, and pedestrian facilities would be less than cumulatively considerable.
Mitigation Measures
None required.
4.14.5 REFERENCES
Beach Cities Transit. 2015. BCT website. Accessed December 11.
http://www.redondo.org/depfs/hbf/transit/beach_cities_transit/default.asp.
California Department of Finance. 2015. Table E-5 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities,
Counties, and the State, January 1, 201 1-2015, with a 2010 Benchmark.
Caltrans (California Department of Transportation). 2002. Guide for the Preparation of Traffic
Impact Studies.
CAPCOA (California Air Pollution Control Officers Association). 2010. Quantifying and Mitigating
Greenhouse Gas Emissions. http://www.capcoa.org/wp-
content/uploads/2010/1 1 /CAPCOA-Quantification-Report-9-14-Final.pdf.
City of Hermosa Beach. 1990. Hermosa Beach General Plan Circulation, Transportation, and
Parking Element.
2014. Comprehensive Annual Finance Report. Accessed December 11.
hftp://www.hermosabch.org/Modules/ShowDocument.aspx?documentlD=6718
2015. PLAN Hermosa Technical Background Report (Appendix C-17).
Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority. 2010. 2010 Congestion Management
Plan for Los Angeles County.
2015. Metro Line 130 Schedule. Accessed December 11.
hftp://media.metro.net/riding_metro/bus_overview/images/I 30.pdf.
Los Angeles Department of Transportation. 2015. LADOT's Commuter Express 438 Schedule.
Accessed December 11. http://www.ladottransif.com/comexp/routes/438/ce438.pdf.
SCAG (Southern California Association of Governments). 2015. Profile of the City of Hermosa
Beach. hffps://www.scag.ca.gov/Documents/HermosoBeach.pdf.
2012. Regional Transportation Plan 2012-2035 Sustainable Communities Strategy.
hffp://rlpscs.scag.ca.gov/Documents/2012/pfinal/SR/2012pfRTP_GrowthForecast.pdf
Transportation Research Board. 1980. Interim Materials on Highway Capacity (Circular 212).
2010. Highway Capacity Manual.
US Census Bureau. 2010. 2010 US Census Hermosa Beach. Accessed December 11.
http://www.census.gov/quickfacts/table/PST045215/0633364
PLAN Hermosa City of Hermosa Beach
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report August 2017
4.14-46
5.0 OTHER CEQA-REQUIRED
CONSIDERATIONS
5.0 OTHER CEQA-REQUIRED CONSIDERATIONS
This section discusses significant unavoidable impacts, growth -inducing impacts, and significant
irreversible changes associated with the project.
5.0.1 INTRODUCTION
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15126 requires that all aspects of
a project must be considered when evaluating its impact on the environment, including planning,
acquisition, development, and operation. As part of this analysis, the EIR must also identify
(1) significant environmental effects of the proposed project, (2) significant environmental effects
that cannot be avoided if the proposed project is implemented, (3) significant irreversible
environmental changes that would result from implementation of the proposed project, and
(4) growth -inducing impacts of the proposed project. It should be noted that although growth
inducement itself is not considered an environmental effect, it could potentially lead to
foreseeable physical environmental effects, which are discussed under growth -inducing impacts
below.
5.0.2 SIGNIFICANT AND UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS
CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.2(b) requires that an EIR describe significant impacts that cannot
be avoided, even with implementation of feasible mitigation measures. In addition, CEQA
Guidelines Section 15093(a) allows the decision -making agency to determine whether the
benefits of a project outweigh its unavoidable adverse environmental impacts. The City can
approve a project with unavoidable adverse impacts if it prepares a Statement of Overriding
Considerations setting forth the specific reasons for making such a judgment.
The following project impacts, which have been recognized as significant and unavoidable in
either the project or cumulative context, are specifically identified in Section 4.2, Air Quality;
Section 4.4, Cultural Resources; and Section 4.14, Transportation, of this Draft EIR. All other
thresholds of significance have been identified as having either no impact, a less than significant
impact, or a less than significant impact with mitigation.
Air Quality
Impact 4.2-2 Short -Term Construction Emissions. PLAN Hermosa would guide future development
and reuse projects in the city in a manner that would generate air pollutant emissions from short-
term construction.
Impact 4.2-7 Cumulative Construction and Operational Emissions. PLAN Hermosa in addition to
anticipated growth in the South Coast Air Basin would increase the amount of construction -
related air pollutant emissions occurring within the basin, thereby affecting the region's ability to
attain ambient air quality standards.
Cultural Resources
Impact 4.4-4 Substantial Change in the Significance of a Historical Resource. PLAN Hermosa would
provide for future development and reuse projects in the city in a manner that could cause a
substantial change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in CEQA Guidelines
Section 15064.5.
Impact 4.4-8 Cumulative Effects on Historical Resources. PLAN Hermosa in addition to anticipated
future development in the South Bay Cities COG planning area could cause a substantial change
in the significance of a historical resource.
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
5.0-1
5.0 OTHER CEQA-REQUIRED CONSIDERATIONS
PLAN Hermosa would result in incremental change to the city with an estimated 0.29 percent
growth in both residential and nonresidential square footage. However, this incremental increase
would be accomplished in a manner that would limit urban development in areas not already
developed. Operations associated with future uses would also consume fossil fuels, water, natural
gas, and electrical energy, and would create GHG emissions. These unavoidable consequences
of urban growth are described throughout Chapter 4.0 of this EIR. These consequences do not
constitute an adverse effect on the environment.
Resources that would be permanently and continually consumed with implementation of PLAN
Hermosa include water, electricity, natural gas, and fossil fuels; however, the amount and rate of
consumption of these resources would not result in the inefficient or wasteful use of such resources.
Future construction activities related to implementation of PLAN Hermosa would result in the
irretrievable commitment of nonrenewable energy resources, primarily in the form of fossil fuels
(including fuel oil), natural gas, and gasoline for automobiles and construction equipment.
However, compliance with all applicable building codes, as well as with PLAN Hermosa policies,
standard conservation features, and current City programs, would ensure that natural resources
are conserved to the maximum extent possible and would not be used in a wasteful manner.
5.0.4 GROWTH -INDUCING IMPACTS
CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.2(d) requires that an EIR evaluate a project's growth -inducing
impacts. A growth -inducing impact is defined by the CEQA Guidelines as:
The way in which a proposed project could foster economic or population growth, or the
construction of additional housing, either directly or indirectly, in the surrounding environment.
Included in this are projects which would remove obstacles to population growth.
A project can have direct and/or indirect growth inducement potential. For example, direct
growth inducement potential would result if a project involved construction of new housing. A
project would have indirect growth inducement potential if it established substantial new
permanent employment opportunities or if it involved a construction effort with substantial short-
term employment opportunities that would indirectly stimulate the need for additional housing
and services to support the new employment demand (Napo Citizens for Honest Government v.
Napa County Board of Supervisors). Similarly, a project would indirectly induce growth if it
removed an obstacle to additional growth and development, such as removing a constraint on
a required public service. A project providing an increased water supply in an area where water
service historically limited growth could be considered growth -inducing.
The CEQA Guidelines further explain that the environmental effects of induced growth are
considered indirect impacts of a project. These indirect impacts or secondary effects of growth
may result in significant, adverse environmental impacts. Potential secondary effects of growth
include increased demand on other community and public services and infrastructure, increased
traffic and noise, and adverse environmental impacts such as degradation of air and water
quality, degradation or loss of plant and animal habitat, and conversion of agricultural and open
space land to developed uses.
Growth inducement may constitute an adverse impact if the growth is not consistent with, or
accommodated by, the land use plans and growth management plans and policies for the area
affected. Local land use plans establish land use development patterns and provide growth
policies that allow the orderly expansion of urban development supported by adequate urban
public services, such as water supply, roadway infrastructure, sewer service, and solid waste
service.
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
5.0-3
5.0 OTHER CEQA-REQUIRED CONSIDERATIONS
Transportation
Impact 4.14-1 Exceedance of LOS Performance Standards. PLAN Hermosa would guide future
development and reuse projects in the city in a manner that would not increase overall demand
for travel within Hermosa Beach. Both the City's and Caltrans's existing level of service standards
for intersections and roadway segments would be maintained at the majority of intersections and
segments analyzed, except at three intersections and on one roadway segment.
Impact 4.14-7 Cumulative Contribution to Exceedance of LOS Performance Standards. PLAN
Hermosa would guide future development and reuse projects in the city in a manner that would
not increase overall demand for travel within Hermosa Beach. Both the City's and Caltrans's
existing level of service standards for intersections and roadway segments would be maintained
at the majority of intersections and segments analyzed, with the exception of three intersections
and one roadway segment.
5.0.3 SIGNIFICANT IRREVERSIBLE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.2(c) requires a discussion of any significant irreversible
environmental changes that would be caused by the proposed project. Section 15126.2(c) states:
Uses of nonrenewable resources during the initial and continued phases of the project may be
irreversible, since a large commitment of such resources makes removal or nonuse thereafter
unlikely. Primary impact and, particularly, secondary impacts (such as highway improvement
which provides access to a previously inaccessible area) generally commit future generations to
similar uses. Also, irreversible damage can result from environmental accidents associated with
the project. Irretrievable commitments of resources should e evaluated at assure that such current
consumption is justified.
Generally, a project would result in significant irreversible environmental changes if:
• The primary and secondary impacts would generally commit future generations to similar
uses;
• The project would involve uses in which irreversible damage could result from any potential
environmental accidents associated with the project;
• The project would involve a large commitment of nonrenewable resources; or
• The proposed consumption of resources is not justified (e.g., the project involved the
wasteful use of energy).
PLAN Hermosa would allow and continue urban development in the city. Returning Hermosa
Beach to a less urban and developed condition would not be feasible given the degree of
disturbance, the urbanization of the area, long-term historical urban use, and the level of capital
investment. PLAN Hermosa would protect historic resources, open space, and other resources to
limit the commitment of nonrenewable resources to urbanized areas.
The CEQA Guidelines also require a discussion of the potential for irreversible environmental
damage caused by an accident associated with the project. While implementation of PLAN
Hermosa would result in the use, transport, storage, and disposal of hazardous wastes, as
described in Section 4.7, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, all activities would comply with
applicable state and federal laws related to hazardous materials transport, use, and storage,
which significantly reduces the likelihood and severity of accidents that could result in irreversible
environmental damage.
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
5.0-2
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
5.0 OTHER CEQA-REQUIRED CONSIDERATIONS
DIRECT AND INDIRECT GROWTH IMPACTS
PLAN Hermosa does not include any development proposals and as such, all potential induced
growth would be indirect as a result of the plan's implementation. Potential indirect impacts from
PLAN Hermosa implementation are discussed throughout this Draft EIR. For example, Section 4.2,
Air Quality, discusses the air quality impacts if land uses allowed under PLAN Hermosa policies are
implemented in the city. Further, Section 4.12, Population and Housing, describes the expected
population growth from proposed policies' implementation.
The purpose of a general plan is to guide growth and development in a community. Accordingly,
PLAN Hermosa assumes that growth will take place. The focus of PLAN Hermosa is to provide a
framework where growth can be managed in a sustainable way that would meet the needs of
the community. PLAN Hermosa provides direction for new development and redevelopment
projects by establishing the desired mix and relationship between land use types. Because
Hermosa Beach is a built -out city that is surrounded by other built -out communities and the Pacific
Ocean, continued growth in the city would not remove obstacles to growth beyond its borders.
As outlined in PLAN Hermosa, growth would mainly take place through infill and intensification of
uses. As such, allowing for continued growth in urbanized areas reduces development pressure in
undeveloped peripheral areas regionally. Therefore, although the proposed plan would remove
obstacles to growth in Hermosa Beach, it would not represent a significant adverse impact.
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
5.0-4
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
6.0 ALTERNATIVES
6.0 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT
6.0.1 INTRODUCTION
Section 15126.6(a) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines requires
environmental impact reports (EIRs) to describe "a range of reasonable alternatives to the project,
which would feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project but would avoid or
substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project, and evaluate the comparative
merits of the alternatives."
An EIR need not consider every conceivable alternative to a project. Rather, it must consider a
reasonable range of potentially feasible alternatives that will foster informed decision -making and
public participation. An EIR is not required to consider alternatives which are infeasible.
The lead agency is responsible for selecting a range of project alternatives for examination and
must publicly disclose its reasoning for selecting those alternatives. There is no ironclad rule
governing the nature or scope of the alternatives to be discussed, other than the rule of reason.
CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(b) describes the purpose of the alternatives analysis as follows:
Because an EIR must identify ways to mitigate or avoid the significant effects that
a project may have on the environment (Public Resources Code Section 21002.1),
the discussion of alternatives shall focus on alternatives to the project or its location
which are capable of avoiding or substantially lessening any significant effects of
the project, even if these alternatives would impede to some degree the
attainment of the project objectives, or would be more costly.
The CEQA Guidelines suggest that alternatives should be compared to the proposed project's
environmental impacts and that the "no project" alternative be considered (CEQA Guidelines
Section 15126.6[e]). In defining feasibility (e.g., "feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the
project"), CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(f)(1) states, in part:
Among the factors that may be taken into account when addressing the feasibility
of alternatives are site suitability, economic viability, availability of infrastructure,
general plan consistency, other plans or regulatory limitations, jurisdictional
boundaries (projects with a regionally significant impact should consider the
regional context), and whether the proponent can reasonably acquire, control or
otherwise have access to the alternative site (or the site is already owned by the
proponent). No one of these factors establishes a fixed limit on the scope of
reasonable alternatives.
In determining what alternatives should be considered in the EIR, it is important to acknowledge
the project's objectives, significant effects, and unique considerations. These factors are crucial
to the development of alternatives that meet the criteria specified in CEQA Guidelines Section
15126.6(a).
For the purposes of this EIR, the proposed project is the draft of PLAN Hermosa and is designed to
achieve the following objectives:
1) Preserve the city's small beach town character through policies and design standards that
maintain buildings at an appropriate scale and size with existing ones (including potentially
historic buildings) and recognize the unique features of the city's eclectic residential
neighborhoods.
2) Enhance and support a strong, diverse, and vibrant local economy through policies that
stimulate sustainable businesses and jobs, enhance safe and beautiful commercial
corridors, articulate clear and consistent standards for new businesses, and provide
convenient services to residents, employees, and visitors.
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
6.0-1
- r .... .� � �_ � ... ..
6.0 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT
3) Promote healthy and active lifestyles through land use and transportation improvements
that enhance pedestrian, transit, and bike safety and access to a variety of destinations
in the city.
4) Provide a safe and clean natural environment —including clean air and water —and
stewardship of our ocean resources, open space, and other natural resources.
5) Achieve a low or no carbon future through the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions by
reducing fuel consumption, diverting solid waste from landfills, conserving water, and
improving the efficiency of energy use and utilizing renewable energy sources.
6.0.2 ALTERNATIVES EVALUATED
Project alternatives are intended to reduce or eliminate the potentially significant adverse
environmental effects of PLAN Hermosa while attempting to meet most of the project objectives.
An EIR is required to contain a discussion of a reasonable range of alternatives to the project, or
to the location of the project, that could feasibly attain the basic objectives of the project (CEQA
Guidelines Section 15126.6[a]). The comparative merits of the alternatives should also be
presented. CEQA also provides the following guidelines for considering alternatives to the project:
• If an alternative would cause one or more significant environmental effects in addition to
those that would be caused by the project, the significant effects of the alternatives shall
be discussed, but in less detail than the significant effects of the project (CEQA Guidelines
Section 1 5126.6[d]).
• The "no project" alternative shall be evaluated. If the environmentally superior alternative
is the no project alternative, the EIR shall also identify an environmentally superior
alternative among the other alternatives (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6[e]).
• The range of alternatives required by an EIR is governed by the rule of reason that requires
the EIR to set forth only those alternatives necessary to permit a reasoned choice. The key
issue is whether the selection and discussion of alternatives fosters informed decision -
making and informed public participation. An EIR need not consider an alternative whose
effect cannot be ascertained and whose implementation is remote and speculative
(CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6[f]).
POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF PLAN HERMOSA
• Since the project alternatives should be designed to reduce or eliminate potentially
adverse effects of the proposed project, it is important to identify where the proposed
project may have significant adverse environmental effects. The potentially significant
adverse environmental effects of PLAN Hermosa, as analyzed and identified in this EIR, are
noted in Table 6.0-1 (Potentially Significant Adverse Effects of PLAN Hermosa).
TABLE 6.0-1
POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE EFFECTS OF PLAN HERMOSA
Issue Area
Proposed Project
Without With
Miticiiation Mitigation
4.1 Aesthetics and Visual Resources _
4.1-1 Scenic Vistas and Viewsheds
LTS
LTS
4.1-2 Scenic Resources within a State Scenic Highway
LTS
LTS
4.1-3 Visual Character
LTS
LTS
4.1-4 Shade and Shadow
LTS
LTS
4.1-5 Light or Glare
LTS
LTS
4.1-6 Cumulative Visual Resources
LTCC
LTCC
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
6.0-2
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
6.0 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT
Propose Project
Issue Area Without With
Mitigation Mitigation
4.2 Air Quality
.4.2-1 Applicable Air Quality Plan
LTS
LTS
4.2-2 Violate Air Quality Standards - Short -Term Impacts
PS
SU
4.2-3 Violate Air Quality Standards - Long -Term Impacts
LTS
LTS
.4.2-4Increase in Criteria Pollutants - CO Hot Spots
LTS
LTS
.4.2-5 Toxic Air Contaminants
LTS
LTS
4.2-6 Odors
LTS
LTS
4.2-7 Cumulative Air Quality Impacts
CC
CC/SU
4.3 Biological Resources
4.3-1 Special -Status Species
PS
LTS
4.3-2 Sensitive Biological Communities or Riparian Habitat
NI
NI
4.3-3 Wetlands
LTS
LTS
4.3-4 Movement or Migration of Wildlife Species
LTS
LTS
4.3-5 Conflict with Species Protection Policies or Ordinances
LTS
LTS
4.3-6 Cumulative Effects on Biolo ical Resources
LTCC
LTCC
4.4 Cultural Resources
4.4-1 Archaeological Resources
LTS
LTS
4.4-2 Disturbance of Human Remains
LTS
LTS
4.4-3 Paleontological Resource, Site, or Geologic Feature
PS
LTS
4.4-4 Historical Resources
PS
SU
4.4-5 Cumulative Effects on Archaeological Resources
LTCC
LTCC
4.4-6 Cumulative Effects on Human Remains
LTCC
LTCC
4.4-7 Cumulative Effects on Paleontological Resources
CC
LTCC
4.4-8 Cumulative Effects on Historical Resources
CC
CC/SU
4.5 Geolgo and Soils
4.5-1 Fault Rupture and Seismic Hazards
LTS
LTS
4.5-2 Soil Erosion or Loss of Topsoil
LTS
LTS
,4.5-3 Unstable and Expansive Soils
LTS
LTS
4.5-4 Cumulative Geologic and Soil Hazards
LTCC
LTCC
.4.6 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
.4.6-1 Generate GHG Emissions
PS
LTS
.4.6-2 Conflict with an Applicable Plan, Policy, or Re ulation
LTS
LTS
.4.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
4.7-1 Transport, Use, or Disposal of Hazardous Materials
LTS
LTS
4.7-2 Accidental Release of Hazardous Materials
PS
LTS
4.7-3 Emission or Handling of Hazardous Materials Near Schools
LTS
LTS
4-.7=4ikd0 ted Emergency Response Plan
---LT-S
--LT-S
4.7-5 Cumulative Effects of Hazardous Materials
LTCC
LTCC
4.8 Hydrology and Water Quality
4.8-1 Water Quality Standards and Waste Discharge Requirements
LTS
LTS
4.8-2 Groundwater Supplies or Recharge
LTS
LTS
4.8-3 Surface Hydrology and Draina e - Off -Site Erosion or Siltation
LTS
LTS
4.8-4 Surface Hydrology and Drainage - On- or Off -Site Flooding
LTS
LTS
4.8-5 Surface Hydrology and Drainage - Water Runoff
LTS
LTS
4.8-6 Water Quality
LTS
LTS
4.8-7 Housing within Flood Hazard Area
LTS
LTS
4.8-8 Impede or Redirect Flood Flows
LTS
LTS
4.8-9 Risk of Loss, Injury, or Death Involvin2 Flooding
LTS
LTS
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
6.0-3
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
6.0 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT
Issue Area
Propose Project
Without
Mitigation
With
Mitigation
4.8-10 Inundation by Seiche, Tsunami, or Mudflow
LTS
LTS
4.8-11 Cumulative Effects on Water Quality Standards and Waste Discharge Requirements
LTCC
LTCC
4.8-12 Cumulative Effects on Groundwater Supp)y or Recharge
LTCC
LTCC
4.8-13 Cumulative Effects on Surface Hydrology and Flooding
LTCC
LTCC
4.8-14 Cumulative Effects on Risk of Loss, Injury, or Death Involving Flooding
LTCC
LTCC
4.8-15 Cumulative Effects of Inundation by Seiche, Tsunami, or Mudflow
LTCC
LTCC
4.V Lana use ana manning
4.9-1 Physically Divide an Established Community
LTS
LTS
4.9-2 Conflict with an Applicable Plan, Policy, or Regulation
LTS
LTS
4.9-3 Cumulative Impact on Dividing a Community or Conflicting with a Plan
LTCC
LTCC
4.10 Mineral Resources
4.10-1 Result in the Loss of Availability of Mineral Resources
NI
NI
4.11 Noise and Vibration
4.11-1 Noise Levels in Excess of Standards
LTS
LTS
4.11-2 Groundborne Vibration or Groundborne Noise Levels
PS
LTS
4.11-3 Permanent Increase in Ambient Noise Levels
LTS
LTS
4.11-4 Temporary or Periodic Increase in Ambient Noise Levels
LTS
LTS
4.11-5 Cumulative Effects of Noise Sources
LTCC
LTCC
4.ic ro maxion ana nousm
4.12-1 Induce Substantial Population Growth
LTS
LTS
4.12-2 Displace People or Housing
LTS
LTS
4.12-3 Cumulative Inducement of Population Growth
LTCC
LTCC
4.12-4 Cumulative Impacts on Displacing Pe❑ le or Housing
LTCC
LTCC
4.23 Public Services, Communi Facilities, and Utilities
4.13.2-1 Demand for Fire Protection Services
LTS
LTS
4.13.2-2 Cumulative Demand for Fire Protection Services
LTCC
LTCC
4.13.3-1 Demand for Law Enforcement Services
LTS
LTS
4.13.3-2 Cumulative Demand for Law Enforcement Services
LTCC
LTCC
4.13.4-1 Demand for Additional School Facilities
LTS
LTS
4.13.4-2 Cumulative Demand for Additional School Facilities
LTCC
LTCC
4.13.5-1 Demand for Additional Park Facilities
LTS
LTS
4.13.5-2 Cumulative Demand for Parks and Recreation Facilities
LTCC
LTCC
4.13.6-1 Demand for Additional Library Facilities
LTS
LTS
4.13.6-2 Cumulative Demand for Library Facilities
LTCC
LTCC
4.13.7-1 Wastewater Treatment Facilities Exceeding Influent Flows Beyond Permitted
('annrih.
LTS
LTS_
4.13.7-2 Demand for New or Expanded Water or Wastewater Treatment Facilities
LTS
LTS
4.13.7-3 Demand for Stormwater Drainage Facilities
LTS
LTS
4.13.7-4 Demand for Water Supplies Beyond Projections
LTS
LTS
4.13.7-5 Exceed Capacity for Wastewater Treatment
LTS
LTS
4.13.7-6 Cumulative WaterSupjy Impacts
LTCC
LTCC
4.13.7-7 Cumulative Wastewater Impacts
LTCC
LTCC
4.13.8-1 Demand for Solid Waste Disposal
LTS
LTS
4.13.8-2 Compliance with Solid Waste Disposal Regulations
LTS
LTS
4.13.8-3 Cumulative Solid Waste Impacts
LTCC
LTCC
4.13.9-1 Demand for Additional Energy Resources
LTS
LTS
4.13.9-2 Cumulative Energy Consumption Impacts
LTCC
LTCC
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
6.0-4
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
6.0 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT
Issue Area
Propose Project
Without
Mitigation
With
Mitigation
4.14 Transportation
,4.14-1 Exceedance of LOS Performance Standards
4.14-1a Intersections
10/13 LTS
10/13 LTS
1. Hermosa Ave & 13th St
LTS
LTS
2. Hermosa Ave & Pier Ave
LTS
LTS
3. Pacific Coast Hwy & Artesia Blvd
PS
SU
4. Pacific Coast Hwy & Aviation Blvd
PS
SU
5. Pacific Coast H & Pier Ave
LTS
LTS
6. Pacific Coast Hwy & 2nd St
LTS
LTS
7. Pacific Coast Hw & 16th St
LTS
LTS
8. Pacific Coast Hwy & 21st St
LTS
LTS
9. Prospect Ave & Artesia Blvd
LTS
LTS
10. Prospect Ave & Aviation Blvd
LTS
LTS
11. Prospect Ave & Anita St
LTS
LTS
12. Manhattan Ave & 27th St
PS
SU
13. Valley Drive & Gould Ave
LTS
LTS
4.14-1b Roadway Segments
19/20 LTS
19/20 LTS
1. Hermosa Avenue (27th Street to 22nd Street)
LTS
LTS
2. Hermosa Avenue (22nd Street to 16th Street)
LTS
LTS
3. Hermosa Avenue (16th Street to 8th Street)
LTS
LTS
4. Hermosa Avenue (8th Street to Herondo Street)
LTS
LTS
5. Valley Drive (Gould Avenue to Pier Avenue)
LTS
LTS
6. Valley Drive (Pier Avenue to 8th Street)
LTS
LTS
7. Ardmore Avenue (16th Street to 11th Street)
LTS
LTS
8. Ardmore Avenue (8th Street to 2nd Street)
LTS
LTS
9. Pacific Coast Highway (Artesia Boulevard to Aviation Boulevard)
LTS
LTS
10. Pacific Coast Highway (Aviation Boulevard to 2nd Street)
LTS
LTS
11. Prospect Avenue (Artesia Boulevard to Aviation Boulevard)
LTS
LTS
12. Prospect Avenue (Aviation Boulevard to 2nd Street)
PS
SU
13. Artesia Blvd (Pacific Coast Highway to Prospect Avenue)
LTS
LTS
14. Aviation Blvd (Pacific Coast Highway to Prospect Avenue)
LTS
LTS
15. Pier Avenue (Hermosa Avenue to Valley Drive)
LTS
LTS
16. Pier Avenue (Ardmore Avenue to Pacific Coast Highway)
LTS
LTS
17. Gould Avenue (Ardmore Avenue to Pacific Coast Highway)
LTS
LTS
18. 8th Street (Hermosa Avenue to Valle D(ve)
LTS
LTS
19. 8th Street (Pacific Coast Highway to Prospect Avenue)
LTS
LTS
20. Herondo Street (Hermosa Avenue to Valley Drive)
LTS-
-LTS
4.14-2 Conflict with the LA County Congestion Management Program
LTS
LTS
4.14-3 Air Traffic Patterns
LTS
LTS
4.14-4 Roadway Design Hazards
LTS
LTS
4.14-5 Adequate Emergency Access
LTS
LTS
4.14-6 Public Transit, Bicycle, and Pedestrian Facilities
LTS
LTS
4.14-7 Cumulative Exceedance of LOS Performance Standards
CC
CC
4.14-8 Cumulative Impact on LA County Congestion Management Program
LTCC
LTCC
4.14-9 Cumulative Effect on Air Traffic Patterns
LTCC
LTCC
4.14-10 Cumulative Roadway Design Hazards
LTCC
LTCC
4.14-11 Cumulative Effect on Emergeng Access
LTCC
LTCC
4.14-12 Cumulative Effect on Public Transit, Bicycle, and Pedestrian Facilities
LTCC
LTCC
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
6.0-5
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
6.0 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT
Definition
LTS
Less Than Significant— if impacts were identified as less than significant in the technical analysis
PS
Potentially Significant — if impacts were identified as potentially significant
NI
No Impact— if no impacts were identified in the technical analysis
CC
Cumulatively Considerable — if impacts, cumulative in nature, were determined to be significant
LTCC
Less Than Cumulatively Considerable — if impacts, cumulative in nature, were determined to be less than
significant
SU
Significant and Unavoidable — if impacts, after feasible mitigation measures were identified, remained a
significant impact and determined unavoidable in the technical analysis
The City of Hermosa Beach considered a range of land use alternatives when formulating PLAN
Hermosa. The previous public discussion of land use alternatives is distinct from the alternatives
analysis presented in this EIR, although there may be overlap with certain concepts presented
earlier. The purpose of the EIR alternatives is primarily to identify means to reduce or avoid
significant environmental effects of the project. For this EIR, the following three alternatives to PLAN
Hermosa are evaluated:
• Alternative 1 - Retain Existing General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan (No Project Alternative)
• Alternative 2 - Achieve Carbon Neutrality by 2030 (2030 Carbon Neutral Alternative)
• Alternative 3 - Stronger Retention of Visual and Cultural Resources (Character Retention
Alternative)
Each alternative —with the exception of the CEQA-required No Project Alternative —was
formulated to provide rational and meaningful modifications to proposed land uses that would
reduce environmental impacts while still achieving most project objectives. CEQA Guidelines
Section 15126.6(a) allows the City to select alternatives that would result in reduction of any
significant effects of the project, but does not require reduction of all impacts to a less than
significant level. Project alternatives are not required to reduce specific individual impacts of PLAN
Hermosa, as long as the City has established a reasonable range of feasible alternatives that
address the significant effects of the project. Each alternative is described briefly below.
Alternative 1- Retain Existing General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan (No Project Alternative)
This alternative assumes that PLAN Hermosa would not be implemented and that future
development would proceed as indicated in the existing General Plan and Coastal Land Use
Plan. Hermosa Beach would continue to grow and develop consistent with currently allowable
land uses according to the existing 1980 Land Use Element (Figure 3-3). However, redevelopment
patterns would be expected to be similar to PLAN Hermosa because the same infill properties
would be vacant or available for redevelopment, resulting in increased intensity of development
in an identical development footprint as PLAN Hermosa. Table 6.0-2 (Comparison of
Allow/Estimated Density and Intensity) provides an estimate of what density or intensity of
development is anticipated to be allowed under the adopted General Plan, compared to the
proposed densities and intensities of PLAN Hermosa. Note that the existing General Plan does not
include floor area ratios (FAR) but has setback and height requirements which can be used to
calculate an estimate of FAR allowed based on recently approved or constructed projects.
PLAN Hermosa City of Hermosa Beach
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report August 2017
6.0-6
6.0 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT
TABLE 6.0-2
COMPARISON OF ALLOWED/ESTIMATED DENSITY AND INTENSITY
No Project
Alternative
Proposed under PLAN
Hermosa
Allowed Density/Intensity
Comparison of No Project
to PLAN Hermosa
Land Use Designation
Maximum
Minimum
Maximum
Low Density (DU/AC)
13.0
2.0
13.0
Similar
Medium Density (DU/AC)
25.0
13.1
25.0
Similar
High Density (DU/AC)
33.0
25.1
33.0
Similar
Mobile Home (DU/AC)
13.0
2.0
13.0
Similar
Neighborhood Commercial (FAR)
1.0
0.5
1.0
Similar
Community Commercial (FAR)
1.75
0.5
1.25
Greater
Recreational Commercial (FAR)
2.5
1.0
1.75
Greater
Gateway Commercial (FAR)
1.5
1.0
2.0
Lesser
Service Commercial (FAR)
1.0
0.25
0.5
Greater
Li ht Industrial Creative (FAR)
0.75
0.25
1.0
Lesser
Public Facilities (FAR)
n/a
0.1
1.0
Similar
Open Space (FAR)
n/a
0.0
0.1
Similar
City Beach (FAR)
n/a
0.0
0.05
Similar
DU/AC = dwelling units per acre; FAR = floor area ratio.
Information on du/acre and FAR from the public review draft of PLAN Hermosa (City of Hermosa
Beach 2015). Italicized lines indicate new or altered land use designations introduced through
PLAN Hermosa.
This alternative is analyzed in this EIR, as it is required under CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(e).
According to CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(e) (2), the "no project" analysis shall discuss "what
is reasonably expected to occur in the foreseeable future if the project were not approved, based
on current plans and consistent with available infrastructure and community services."
As shown in Table 6.0-2, the No Project Alternative would allow similar levels of residential
development as PLAN Hermosa. For nonresidential development, the No Project Alternative
would allow greater levels of development in the Community Commercial, Recreational
Commercial, and Service Commercial designations, and lesser levels of development in the
Gateway Commercial and Light Industrial Creative designations than proposed under PLAN
Hermosa. All other nonresidential or institutional categories propose similar levels of allowed
development intensity for both PLAN Hermosa and the No Project Alternative.
Additionally, as shown in Table 6.0-3 (No Project/Existing General Plan Vehicle Miles Traveled
(VMT) and Vehicle Trips Generated), Alternative 1 would result in 30,000 more VMT per day and
2,600 more daily vehicle trips compared to PLAN Hermosa.
TABLE 6.0-3
No PROJECT/EXISTING GENERAL PLAN VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED (VMT) AND VEHICLE TRIPS GENERATED
Scenario
Daily Vehicle Miles Traveled
Daily Vehicle Trips
2040 No Project Alternative
356,000
37,200
2040 PLAN Hermosa
326,000
34,600
Source: City of Hermosa Beach Traffic Study 2015
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
6.0-7
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
6.0 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT
Alternative 2 — Achieve Carbon Neutrality by 2030 (2030 Carbon Neutral Alternative)
This alternative would be focused on achieving a community -wide goal of carbon neutrality by
2030. Carbon neutrality is the state of achieving net zero carbon emissions, generally by balancing
a measured amount of carbon released with an equivalent amount sequestered or offset by the
community. There are two primary differences between this alternative and the proposed draft of
PLAN Hermosa, which currently includes a goal to achieve carbon neutrality no later than the
year 2040:
1) Expediting achievement of a carbon neutral goal by 10 years from 2040 to 2030.
2) Bypassing the use of carbon credits to offset carbon emissions that could not be
eliminated.
Changing these two parameters would have a number of effects. While the total levels of local
reductions needed to achieve a carbon neutral goal by 2030 or 2040 are virtually identical, the
number of years to achieve the goal would be reduced from 24 years to 14. A 2030 goal would
necessitate the implementation of new policies and programs each year to reduce emissions at
a rate of 6,750 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalents (MTCO2e) per year, compared to annual
reductions of 3,975 MTCO2e per year for a 2040 goal.
To do this, the following steps would be taken to modify PLAN Hermosa to increase and accelerate
the rate of carbon emissions reductions from the energy, waste, and transportation sectors:
• Require on -site renewable energy generation and zero net energy as part of all new
construction and major building renovations.
• Mandate retrofits to existing buildings to improve energy efficiency at time of sale, through
rental inspections, and prior to issuance of building permits.
• Eliminate the use of natural gas within the city through the installation of biogas
technologies and electrification of heating and cooking appliances and fixtures within the
building stock.
• Participate in a Community Choice Aggregation program or other similar program, and
procure or generate renewable energy to account for 100 percent of the energy portfolio
by increasing the rate of installation for local renewable energy generation sources or
procuring long-term renewable energy contracts for sources outside of the city.
• Modify land use designations to facilitate mixed -use development and increase
commercial and residential densities within the Community Commercial and Gateway
Commercial designations to facilitate shorter trip lengths and increase the number of trips
captured internally.
• Mandate public and private clean fuel and electric vehicle infrastructure to facilitate
deployment of electric vehicles, neighborhood electric vehicles, and/or clean fuel
vehicles.
• Modify parking standards and programs to disincentivize conventionally fueled
automobile use, and incentivize alternative modes of transportation and zero -emission
vehicle use through programs that include, but are not limited to, increases in the cost of
public parking, elimination of parking minimums and establishment of maximums for new
development, elimination of practices to assign parking spaces to particular uses, and
changes to the preferential parking permit program.
• Pursue regional transportation projects and infrastructure to facilitate carbon -free regional
travel options.
• Mandate transportation demand management (TDM) programs for institutions and
businesses.
PLAN Hermosa City of Hermosa Beach
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report August 20I7
6.0-8
6.0 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT
• Accelerate the implementation of pedestrian and bicycle network investments, electric
vehicle and alternative fuel infrastructure, programs to achieve zero waste, and net zero
energy requirements.
The 2030 Carbon Neutral Alternative with the added or modified policies would result in greater
levels of emissions reductions compared to the policies and programs proposed in PLAN Hermosa,
as noted in Table 6.0-4 (Comparison of Emissions Reduction Scenarios 2030 vs. 2040).
TABLE 6.0-4
COMPARISON OF EMISSIONS REDUCTION SCENARIOS 2030 v5. 2040
2030 Scenario
2040 Scenario
Share of
Carbon
Reductions
(%)
Annual
Carbon
Reduction
(MTCO2e)
Share of
Carbon
Reductions
(%)
Annual
Carbon
Reduction
(MTCO2e)
Baseline 2005 Emissions
137,160
137,160
2012 Emissions
-7.7%
126,610
-7.7%
126,610
BAU Emissions (2040)
+1.2%
128,290
+5.0%
133,430
State Programs (2040)
-24.6%
33,750
-27.7%
38,010
Local Remaining Emissions to be Reduced
94,540
1
95,420
Building Efficiency
New Construction Residential Efficiency
-0.8%
1,090
-1.3%
1,810
Existing Buildings Residential Efficiency
-4.4%
6,100
-4.4%
6,100
New Construction Nonresidential Efficiency
-1.2%
1,690
-2.0%
2,810
Existing Buildings Nonresidential Efficiency
-2.0%
2,770
-2.0%
2,770
Subtotal
-8.5%
11,650
-9.8%
13,490
Renewable Energy Generation
Rooftop Solar
-5.8%
8,020
-5.9%
8,100
Community Solar
-27.0%
36,990
-0.4%
550
Renewable Energy Procurement
-7.5%
10,290
-7.3%
10,010
Purchased Renewables (Green Rate)
-0.0%
0
-0.0%
0
Subtotal
-40.3%
55,300
-13.6%
18,660
Transportation + Land Use
Land Use & Transportation Alternatives
-8.1%
11,130
-4.0%
5,500
Additional Transportation Strategies
-3.2%
4,450
-1.9%
2,560
Electric Vehicles
-5.7%
7,750
-7.4%
1G10G-
Subtotal
-17.0%
23,330
-13.0%
18,160
Other Sectors + Offsets
Waste + Recycling
-2.5%
3,430
-2.5%
3,480
Water + Wastewater
-0.6%
840
-0.2%
330
Purchase Offsets
-0.0%
0
-30.1%
41,310
Subtotal
-3.1%
4,270
-32.9%
45,120
TOTAL
-100.0%
94,540
-100.0%
95,420
Source: City of Hermosa Beach 2016
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
r-1 1 •
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
6.0 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT
Alternative 3 — Stronger Retention of Visual and Cultural Resources (Character Retention
Alternative)
This alternative would focus on implementing additional policies or implementation actions that
would facilitate greater retention of visual and cultural resources in Hermosa Beach. While PLAN
Hermosa includes several goals and policies to address community character, historic buildings,
and scenic views, they largely do so in a manner that encourages rather than mandates the
protection of these resources. To facilitate greater retention of the existing visual and cultural
resources in Hermosa Beach, the steps taken to modify PLAN Hermosa would include:
• Reduction in density or establishment of floor area ratios (FAR) for medium- and high -
density residential (reduce capacity to encourage retention of existing buildings that
contribute to the character of residential neighborhoods).
• Establishment of an overall cap or reduction in development intensity for the Community
Commercial and Recreational Commercial land use designations to limit the scale and
amount of additional development or increased redevelopment within those areas.
• Addition of a mixed -use designation to allow limited residential development, in
conjunction with commercial uses, accommodating the projected population growth
reduced through changes to medium- and high -density designations.
• Development of design standards (as opposed to guidelines) to address the compatibility
of building scale, design aesthetics, and community character for residential and
commercial neighborhoods.
• Addition of historic resource protection policies, including City initiation of historic landmark
designation of potentially eligible historic resources.
• Achievement as a Certified Local Government (CLG) by the California Office of Historic
Preservation, including establishment of an historic preservation commission.
• Development of a historic preservation plan, historic context statement, and/or historic
preservation element of the General Plan.
• Establishment of view protection ordinances and development standards to physically
depict building form/massing in the evaluation of a project's impact on views.
• Revision of the issuance of a demolition permit from a ministerial action to a discretionary
action for those properties that have been identified as a potentially eligible historic
resource.
The Character Retention Alternative, with the added or modified policies, would result in greater
levels of certainty that cultural and visual resources would be retained, compared to the policies
and programs proposed in PLAN Hermosa. However, the policies in this alternative may also
discourage the redevelopment, reuse, or renovation of existing buildings and structures that will
be necessary to improve energy efficiency and reduce carbon emissions.
6.0.3 IMPACTS OF EACH ALTERNATIVE
In the following discussion, the impacts of PLAN Hermosa for each environmental topic area
considered in this EIR are described. This is followed by a description of how impacts for each
alternative would differ from PLAN Hermosa, including whether impacts would be greater, lesser,
or similar to the proposed project and why the alternative would result in different impacts to the
proposed project. Table 6.0-5 (Comparison of Environmental Impacts of Alternatives to PLAN
Hermosa) summarizes the impact comparison.
AESTHETICS AND VISUAL RESOURCES
Impacts of PLAN Hermosa related to adverse effects on scenic vistas, degradation of existing
visual character, creation of shadows, and creation of new sources of light or glare that would
PLAN Hermosa City of Hermosa Beach
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report August 2017
6.0-10
6.0 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT
adversely affect nighttime views are less than significant. No designated scenic highways are
located in the planning area, so there is no impact to scenic highways. PLAN Hermosa would result
in new development that could alter views and the visual character, and add new sources of
shadow, light, and glare in the planning area. However, policies and actions applicable to new
development would reduce these impacts to a less than significant level.
Alternative 1
The No Project Alternative would generally have similar effects on degradation of existing visual
character, creation of shadows, and creation of new sources of light or glare as PLAN Hermosa.
The existing General Plan has similar policies related to the preservation of aesthetic resources,
especially the beaches, shoreline, and the Santa Monica Bay viewshed. However, the existing
General Plan does not identify specific scenic vistas associated with the beaches, shoreline, and
the Santa Monica Bay viewshed, nor does it identify the character defining features of the city's
mix of neighborhoods, corridors, and districts. In the absence of these identified vistas and public
viewing areas, and the absence of descriptors to identify the visual character, impacts to scenic
vistas and visual character would be greater under this alternative than with PLAN Hermosa. This
would potentially be a new significant impact and may cause greater cumulative impacts to
visual resources.
Alternative 2
The 2030 Carbon Neutral Alternative would include similar policies to PLAN Hermosa to identify the
locations and public viewing areas for scenic vistas and viewsheds. This alternative would also
include similar descriptions of the community's character -defining features and similar policies
addressing scenic resources within a state scenic highway. However, this alternative could
increase the amount of renewable energy installations in Hermosa Beach by an order of
magnitude (34 megawatts [MW] in PLAN Hermosa compared to 166 MW in this alternative)
compared to the projections used in the draft of PLAN Hermosa, potentially in the form of solar,
wind, or ocean -based renewable energy development. These renewable energy resources have
the potential to create new sources of light or glare or be placed in areas adjacent to high quality
scenic viewing areas or within the Santa Monica Bay viewshed. Thus, impacts to aesthetics could
be greater than those of PLAN Hermosa.
Alternative 3
The Character Retention Alternative would incorporate additional development standards to
address compatibility of building scale, design aesthetics, and community character as well as
the consideration of scenic views. While this alternative would incorporate descriptions of the
community's character -defining features, similar to PLAN Hermosa, it would take additional steps
to further protect scenic vistas and visual character by incorporating development standards and
a design review process. These design standards would guide and evaluate new construction or
redevelopment projects to design buildings and structures in a manner that minimizes impacts to
vsual-resnurcarand-provide- guidance -to-ensure-new-buildings-are-consis-fent—i#h the form,, scale, -
and orientation of existing buildings. This alternative would also identify specific vistas and key
public viewpoints of the identified vistas. The Character Retention Alternative would also
potentially have lesser impacts on shade and shadow, by establishing intensities or floor area ratios
for residential development, thereby facilitating greater variation of building forms to avoid
creating shadow impacts. Thus, this alternative would have lesser impacts than PLAN Hermosa.
AIR QUALITY
Air pollutants are generated from the combustion of fuels for automobiles and small engines
powering equipment for activities such as landscaping and construction. Impacts of PLAN
Hermosa related to consistency with air quality plans, long-term operational emissions, carbon
monoxide (CO) hot spots, toxic air contaminants, and odors are less than significant. PLAN
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
6.0-11
6.0 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT
Hermosa would result in potentially significant impacts related to short-term construction emissions.
These impacts would remain significant and unavoidable even after implementation of PLAN
Hermosa policies and implementation actions.
Alternative 1
The No Project Alternative results in similar amounts of residential and commercial development
as PLAN Hermosa; however, this alternative would result in an increase of approximately 30,000
daily vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and 2,600 daily vehicle trips (VT). Fuel consumption from vehicle
trips is a primary determinant in the emittance of several air quality pollutants, and contributes to
CO hot spots and toxic air contaminants. Therefore, this alternative would result in relatively
greater impacts related to violating long-term air quality standards, CO hot spots, and toxic air
contaminants compared to PLAN Hermosa. Similarly, due to the greater VMT and VT, this
alternative would be potentially inconsistent with the South Coast Air Quality Management
District's (SMAQMD) Air Quality Management Plan and would have greater cumulative impacts
on air quality. Since this alternative would result in similar levels of construction compared to the
proposed project, it would have similar air quality impacts related to short-term emissions and
would have similar impacts on odors.
Alternative 2
Under the 2030 Carbon Neutral Alternative, the quantity of internal combustion engines in the city
would be reduced at a greater rate and would be replaced with electric equipment and vehicles
at a greater rate. Thus, because the decrease would occur more quickly and there would be a
greater rate of conversion, there would be fewer transportation -related pollutants generated
locally, resulting in lesser impacts related to consistency with the Air Quality Management Plan,
long-term operational emissions, CO hot spots, and toxic air contaminants. Since this alternative
would result in greater levels of construction compared to PLAN Hermosa, it would have higher air
quality impacts related to short-term construction -related emissions and would have similar
impacts on odors.
Alternative 3
The Character Retention Alternative proposes to reduce density or establish floor area ratios (FAR)
for medium- and high -density residential to encourage the retention of existing buildings that
contribute to the character of residential neighborhoods. This would in effect discourage
redevelopment of existing parcels, which would reduce the amount of emissions generated by
construction equipment, resulting in fewer impacts from or a lower likelihood of violating air quality
standards on a short-term basis. This alternative would otherwise have similar mobility and
transportation policies, resulting in similar impacts to PLAN Hermosa related to consistency with
the Air Quality Management Plan, long-term operational emission, CO hot spots, toxic air
contaminants, and odors. This would result in similar cumulative air quality impacts compared to
PLAN Hermosa.
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
PLAN Hermosa was evaluated to determine whether its adoption and implementation would
cause adverse effects to special -status species, sensitive natural communities, and wildlife
movement. The majority of the planning area is urbanized, and limited areas of habitat are
focused along the beach and shoreline, where no change in the developed footprint is planned.
The Draft EIR has found that, after mitigation, no significant biological impacts would occur.
Alternative 1
Although the existing General Plan lacks some of the specific policies and programs requiring
consideration of biological resources in development decisions, the current General Plan does
not envision development or changes to existing open space areas along the beach and
PLAN Hermosa City of Hermosa Beach
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report August 2017
6.0-12
6.0 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT
shoreline that would potentially affect biological resources. By retaining existing open spaces
along the beach and shoreline, Alternative 1 would have impacts to sensitive biological
communities, wetlands, movement or migration of wildlife, and conflicts with species protection
policies, similar to those identified for PLAN Hermosa. However, impacts to special -status species
have been identified as a potentially significant impact under PLAN Hermosa, but lowered to a
less than significant impact with a mitigation measure to require any construction on the beach
proposed to occur during the summer months to conduct preconstruction surveys for western
snowy plovers or California least terns, and not allowing any construction on the beach to occur
if the surveys identify these species as roosting. Since this alternative proposes a continuation of
existing adopted policy, there is no discretionary action and associated environmental review
required to implement mitigation of this impact. Thus, the impacts on special -status species would
be potentially greater under the No Project Alternative.
Alternative 2
The 2030 Carbon Neutral Alternative would follow the same general footprint of development and
policies as PLAN Hermosa. However, this alternative may introduce additional renewable energy
resources —including solar, wind, or ocean -based renewable energy sources —each of which may
have varying adverse effects on special -status species, sensitive natural communities, and wildlife
migration. While the potential impacts to California least terns and western snowy plovers could
be mitigated with similar measures identified for PLAN Hermosa, the potential introduction of
ocean -based renewable energy sources may cause impacts to other special -status species,
particularly marine mammals such as cetaceans (whales, dolphins, and porpoises), pinnipeds
(seals and sea lions), and sea otters, which are protected under the Marine Mammal Protection
Act. Additionally, both ocean- and land -based renewable energy resources have been known
to alter or impact the movement and migration of wildlife species. Since the location, size,
technology, and design of any new renewable energy resources cannot be identified at this time,
further study of the potential impacts and additional mitigation measures or implementation
actions may be needed to protect sensitive biological habitats and wildlife movement or
migration and to reach a less than significant impact related to biological resources for this
alternative. Thus, impacts to special -status species, movement and migration of wildlife species,
and cumulative effects on biological resources may be greater than those of PLAN Hermosa.
Alternative 3
The Character Retention Alternative would include similar policies related to biological resources
and generally follows the same development footprint or urbanized area as PLAN Hermosa.
Additionally, this alternative does not envision development or changes to existing open space
areas along the beach and shoreline that could potentially affect biological resources. While a
potentially significant impact to special -status species has been identified for PLAN Hermosa, this
alternative could similarly incorporate a mitigation measure to require any construction on the
beach proposed to occur during the summer months to conduct preconstruction surveys for
western snowy-ploverss or-California-le-ast-terris ,-anrl-not-allow any -construction -on -the -beach -to
occur if the surveys identify these species as roosting. Therefore, biological resources impacts with
this alternative would be similar to PLAN Hermosa.
CULTURAL RESOURCES
Impacts of PLAN Hermosa related to archaeological, paleontological, cultural, and historic
resources are considered potentially significant. With the application of mitigation measures, the
impacts to archaeological and paleontological resources would be reduced to less than
significant. PLAN Hermosa, with application of mitigation measures, would still be considered a
significant and unavoidable impact causing substantial change to the significance of a historical
resource. With redevelopment and reuse of existing properties, as opposed to development of
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
6.0-13
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
6.0 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT
vacant land, as the primary means to reinvestment in Hermosa Beach in the future, the risk of
potentially historic buildings or structures being demolished or substantially modified is high.
Alternative 1
The No Project Alternative would retain the policies and programs of the existing General Plan.
Such policies related to cultural and historic resources are included in the Urban Design Element,
but do not preclude property owners from demolishing or significantly altering older buildings and
identified potentially historic resources. Since PLAN Hermosa includes an inventory of potentially
historic resources, additional policies, and a set of implementation actions, this alternative would
result in potentially greater impacts to historic resources than the plan. Additionally, impacts to
archaeological and paleontological resources are less than significant because of the inclusion
of specific implementation actions to require archaeological investigations for future projects
involving ground -disturbing activities in areas that have not been previously surveyed and/or
determined sensitive for cultural resources. Since this alternative proposes a continuation of
existing adopted policy, there is no discretionary action or associated environmental review
required to implement mitigation measures to reduce impacts. Thus, the impacts on
archaeological and paleontological resources would be potentially greater under this alternative.
On a cumulative basis, this alternative would likely cause greater impacts to cultural resources
than PLAN Hermosa.
Alternative 2
Potential impacts to archaeological or paleontological resources and disturbance of human
remains would be similar to PLAN Hermosa under this alternative because Alternative 2 would
have similar implementation actions to address future ground -disturbing activities.
However, this alternative would likely result in greater alterations or demolitions to the existing
building stock to increase the installation of solar panels on the majority of rooftops in Hermosa
Beach, achieve deep energy renovations of existing buildings, and result in a greater number of
buildings being torn down and rebuilt as zero net energy and high-performance buildings. While
the installation of energy -efficient equipment or renewable energy technology would not
necessarily damage or alter designated or potentially historic resources, additional guidance and
technical information would be needed to describe how historic properties can incorporate
sustainable practices to reduce energy consumption, while maintaining those characteristics that
make historic properties significant. Unless additional policies are identified to prohibit the
demolition or significant alteration of potentially historic resources, impacts to historical resources
would still be expected to be significant and unavoidable and would likely be somewhat greater
under this alternative given the level of alterations to building stock needed to achieve higher
energy performance. Potential impacts to historical resources on a cumulative basis, which is
identified as a significant and unavoidable impact with PLAN Hermosa, would also be somewhat
greater under this alternative.
Alternative 3
The Character Retention Alternative would incorporate similar implementation actions as PLAN
Hermosa to address archaeological and paleontological resources, and therefore would have
similar impacts on those resources. However, this alternative would incorporate additional policies
and programs to directly or indirectly address cultural and specifically historic resources.
Additional policies or implementation actions under this alternative would include:
• Addition of historic resource protection policies, including City initiation of historic landmark
designation of potentially eligible historic resources.
• Achievement as a Certified Local Government (CLG) by the California Office of Historic
Preservation, including establishment of an historic preservation commission.
PLAN Hermosa City of Hermosa Beach
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report August 2017
6.0-14
6.0 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT
• Development of a historic preservation plan, historic context statement, and/or historic
preservation element of the General Plan.
• Reduction in density or establishment of floor area ratios (FAR) for medium- and high -
density residential (reduce capacity to encourage retention of existing buildings that
contribute to the character of residential neighborhoods).
• Revision of the issuance of a demolition permit from a ministerial action to a discretionary
action for those properties that have been identified as a potentially eligible historic
resource.
These specific additions proposed for this alternative are intended to provide additional oversight
and information or regulation to preserve both designated historic resources and potentially
eligible resources. Thus, the impacts and cumulative effects on historic resources, under this
alternative, would be lesser than with PLAN Hermosa, although the impact may not necessarily
be reduced to a less than significant level.
GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Implementation of PLAN Hermosa, including future land uses consistent with the Land Use Map,
would provide for construction of new uses in areas potentially subject to seismic ground shaking,
soil liquefaction and ground failure, and earthquake -induced landslides. New land uses would
also potentially be exposed to erosion hazards and to expansive and collapsible soils. However,
PLAN Hermosa policies and implementation actions require enforcement of regulations,
programs, and building code requirements. All geology and soils impacts of PLAN Hermosa would
be less than significant.
Alternative 1
The No Project Alternative would result in similar amounts of residential and commercial
development as PLAN Hermosa and would follow the same general footprint of development;
therefore, the number of people and structures subject to potential geological hazards would be
similar. The same regulations and building code requirements would apply to new development
under this alternative. Thus, impacts related to geology and soils, including fault rupture, soil
erosion, and unstable expansive soils, would be similar to those with PLAN Hermosa.
Alternative 2
The 2030 Carbon Neutral Alternative would result in similar amounts of residential and commercial
development as PLAN Hermosa and would follow the same general footprint of development;
therefore, the number of people and structures subject to potential geological hazards would be
similar. The same regulations and building code requirements would apply to new development
under this alternative. Thus, impacts related to geology and soils, including fault rupture, soil
erosion, and unstable expansive soils, would be similar to those with PLAN Hermosa.
Alternative 3
The Character Retention Alternative would result in similar amounts of residential and commercial
development as PLAN Hermosa and would follow the same general footprint of development;
therefore, the number of people and structures subject to potential geological hazards would be
similar. The same regulations and building code requirements would apply to new development
under this alternative. Thus, impacts related to geology and soils, including fault rupture, soil
erosion, and unstable expansive soils, would be similar to those with PLAN Hermosa.
GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
PLAN Hermosa includes numerous policies and implementation actions to address and
dramatically reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. While the generation of GHG emissions is
identified as a potentially significant impact with the proposed project, the mitigation measures
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
6.0-15
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
6.0 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT
establish interim GHG reduction goals and requirements to evaluate progress a minimum of every
five years, and to adjust policies or programs if Hermosa Beach is not on track to achieve long-
term targets. The policies and actions identified in PLAN Hermosa are designed to comply with
local GHG reduction planning efforts and policies, including the 2011 Hermosa Beach
Sustainability Plan and the Municipal Carbon Neutral Goal for 2020, and are consistent with the
State's long-term GHG reduction targets articulated under Assembly Bill (AB) 32, Senate Bill (SB)
32, and the AB 32 Scoping Plan. With these mitigation measures, PLAN Hermosa would result in less
than significant impacts related to GHG emissions and would not conflict with any applicable
plans, policies, or regulations.
Alternative 1
Impacts related to the generation of GHG emissions have been identified as potentially significant
under PLAN Hermosa, but are lowered to a less than significant impact with mitigation measures
to establish interim GHG reduction goals and requirements to evaluate progress a minimum of
every five years, and to adjust policies or programs if Hermosa Beach is not on track to achieve
long-term targets. Since this alternative proposes a continuation of existing adopted policy, there
is no discretionary action and associated environmental review required and therefore no
mitigation measures.
This alternative would result in similar amounts of residential and commercial development as
PLAN Hermosa; however, because of the location and distribution of uses allowed, this alternative
would result in an increase of approximately 30,000 VMT per day and 2,600 additional daily vehicle
trips. Additionally, Alternative 1 would not include the policies and implementation actions
identified in PLAN Hermosa that would reduce operational emissions from other sources such as
energy use, waste disposal, and water consumption. Therefore, this alternative would result in
greater impacts related to GHG emissions compared to PLAN Hermosa. Similarly, this alternative
would not include policies and actions that reduce GHG emissions to the levels identified by the
City's 2011 Sustainability Plan and the Municipal Carbon Neutral Goal for 2020. Therefore, impacts
related to consistency with applicable GHG reduction plans would be greater.
Alternative 2
Under the 2030 Carbon Neutral Alternative, a greater quantity of emissions would be reduced by
2030. The key policies incorporated into this alternative include:
• Require on -site renewable energy generation and zero net energy as part of all new
construction and major building renovations.
• Mandate retrofits to existing buildings to improve energy efficiency at time of sale, through
rental inspections, and prior to issuance of building permits.
• Eliminate the use of natural gas within the city through the installation of biogas
technologies and electrification of heating and cooking appliances and fixtures within the
building stock.
• Participate in a Community Choice Aggregation program or other similar program and
procure or generate renewable energy to account for 100 percent of the energy portfolio
by increasing the rate of installation for local renewable energy generation sources or
procuring long-term renewable energy contracts for sources outside of the city.
• Modify land use designations to facilitate mixed -use development and increase
commercial and residential densities within the Community Commercial and Gateway
Commercial designations to facilitate shorter trips lengths and increase the number of trips
captured internally.
• Mandate public and private clean fuel and electric vehicle infrastructure to facilitate
deployment of electric vehicles, neighborhood electric vehicles, and/or clean fuel
vehicles.
PLAN Hermosa City of Hermosa Beach
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report August 2017
6.0-16
6.0 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT
• Modify parking standards and programs to disincentivize conventionally fueled
automobile use, and incentivize alternative modes of transportation and zero -emission
vehicle use through programs that include, but are not limited to, increases in the cost of
public -parking, elimination of parking minimums and establishment of maximums for new
development, elimination of practices to assign parking spaces to particular uses, and
changes to the preferential parking permit program.
• Pursue regional transportation projects and infrastructure to facilitate carbon -free regional
travel options.
• Mandate transportation demand management (TDM) programs for institutions and
businesses.
• Accelerate the implementation of pedestrian and bicycle network investments, electric
vehicle and alternative fuel infrastructure, programs to achieve zero waste, and net zero
energy requirements.
However, the certainty in which emissions could be reduced when relying, even if to a lesser extent
than PLAN Hermosa, on voluntary and incentive -based measures remains. Therefore, similar
mitigation measures to ensure emissions reductions were achieved by the identified target years
would be required. More aggressive implementation of programs and policies to achieve a goal
of community -wide carbon neutrality by 2030 rather than 2040 would set the City of Hermosa
Beach up to exceed state greenhouse gas reduction targets earlier, and therefore would have
lesser impacts related to GHG emissions than PLAN Hermosa. This alternative would similarly
include policies and actions that reduce GHG emissions to levels that meet or exceed local plans
such as the 2011 Hermosa Beach Sustainability Plan and the Municipal Carbon Neutral Goal for
2020 and would therefore have a similar impact on applicable plans, policies, or regulations
compared to PLAN Hermosa.
Alternative 3
The Character Retention Alternative proposes to reduce density or establish floor area ratios (FAR)
for medium- and high -density residential to encourage the retention of existing buildings that
contribute to the character of residential neighborhoods. This would in effect discourage
redevelopment of existing parcels, which would result in lower construction -related emissions, but
would also discourage the development of higher -performance buildings or the installation of
renewable energy systems, a key strategy to reducing GHG emissions. The mobility policies and
implementation actions in this alternative would mirror those proposed in PLAN Hermosa, resulting
in similar levels of transportation -related reductions in GHG emissions. Waste reduction, water
conservation, and some energy efficiency measures, similar to PLAN Hermosa, would still be
implemented under Alternative 3.
Given that energy -related emissions account for 41 percent of the emissions profile for Hermosa
Beach and that this alternative may decrease the GHG reduction potential from energy sources,
the-GHGjmpcf-ts- under -this-attemativewould-be-greater than with-PLAN-He-rmosa-How�ver, t-he-
implementation of policies and actions related transportation, waste, and water/wastewater and
the incorporation of similar mitigation measures to PLAN Hermosa means that Alternative 3 may
not necessarily result in a significant impact. Similarly, this alternative would have similar impacts,
compared to PLAN Hermosa, related to consistency with applicable GHG reduction plans,
policies, and regulations.
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Implementation of PLAN Hermosa could result in increased routine use, transport, and disposal of
hazardous materials, including the potential for hazardous materials handling near schools and
development on sites included on the Cortese List. However, compliance with existing hazardous
materials regulations and PLAN Hermosa policies and implementation actions would result in less
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
6.0-17
6.0 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT
than significant impacts related to the transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials, emission
or handling of hazardous materials near schools, and consistency with adopted emergency
response plans.
As it relates to the accidental release of hazardous materials into the environment, PLAN Hermosa
has been identified to have a potentially significant impact due to the known contamination at
the City of Hermosa Beach Maintenance Yard and the potential for unknown contamination at
other sites throughout the city. To mitigate the potential impacts, this EIR includes mitigation
measures to require the development and implementation of a Human Health Risk Assessment
and Remedial Action Plan for any development activities at the City Maintenance Yard, and
requirements for future projects involving hazardous materials to stop work, identify the scope,
coordinate with the appropriate agencies, and conduct the necessary remediation. With these
measures, the impacts related to the accidental release of hazardous materials is mitigated to a
less than significant level.
Alternative 1
The No Project Alternative results in similar amounts and the same general footprint of residential
and commercial development as PLAN Hermosa; therefore, the volume of materials used and
transported, and the number of people subject to potential hazards through routine use and
transport of materials, would be similar. The use and transportation of hazardous materials would
be subject to the same federal, state, and local regulations as identified for PLAN Hermosa.
Impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials would be similar.
Alternative 2
The 2030 Carbon Neutral Alternative would result in similar amounts and the same general
footprint of residential and commercial development as PLAN Hermosa; therefore, the volume of
material used and transported, and the number of people subject to potential hazards through
routine use and transport of materials, would be similar. The use and transportation of hazardous
materials would be subject to the same federal, state, and local regulations as identified for PLAN
Hermosa. Impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials would be similar with this
alternative.
Alternative 3
The Character Retention Alternative would result in slightly less but the same general footprint of
residential and commercial development as PLAN Hermosa; therefore, the volume of material
used and transported, and the number of people subject to potential hazards through routine use
and transport of materials, would be similar. The use and transportation of hazardous materials
would be subject to the same federal, state, and local regulations as identified for PLAN Hermosa.
Impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials would be similar.
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Development under PLAN Hermosa would result in infill development and a slight increase in
impervious surfaces in a largely built -out environment. Development would not result in increased
erosion. Development under PLAN Hermosa would not significantly affect water quality or flooding
potential and hazards. Implementation of PLAN Hermosa policies and implementation actions
and compliance with existing regulations would result in less than significant impacts to water
quality, groundwater recharge, and stormwater drainage patterns related to erosion. Similarly,
PLAN Hermosa identifies policies, programs, and implementation actions that would reduce
impacts related to flooding from anticipated sea level rise to less than significant.
Alternative 1
Compliance with the existing General Plan and enforcement of existing regulations would result
in similar water quality and flood hazard impacts, including impacts related to seiche or mudflow.
PLAN Hermosa City of Hermosa Beach
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report August 2017
6.0-18
6.0 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT
The No Project Alternative includes a similar development footprint, resulting in similar impacts
related to stormwater flows (including erosion and flooding) and groundwater recharge. While
the existing General Plan does not include policies to address the current standards or regulations
related to water quality, groundwater recharge, surface hydrology, and flood hazard areas, the
City's existing code requirements related to stormwater compliance and use of low impact
development standards to reduce stormwater runoff would ensure that impacts related to these
topics are less than significant.
This alternative would not include the policies, programs, and actions related to resiliency and the
mitigation of potential sea level rise. Current sea level rise projections identify that the 100-year
flood zone could be expanded up to 300 percent —from approximately 22 acres currently to 64
acres in Hermosa Beach —by the end of the twenty-first century with 55 inches of sea level rise. In
Hermosa Beach, there are currently no structures or roadways located within the 100-year flood
zone, but with 55 inches of sea level rise, approximately 200 existing buildings and nearly 1,000
residents could be located in an expanded flood zone and thereby exposed to loss, injury, or
death involving flooding. Therefore, Alternative 1 would have greater impacts related to
hydrology and water quality, specifically as it relates to impacts involving flood hazard areas.
Alternative 2
The 2030 Carbon Neutral Alternative includes a similar development footprint, resulting in similar
impacts related to stormwater flows (including erosion and flooding) and groundwater recharge.
This alternative would also include the policies, programs, and actions related to resiliency and
the mitigation of potential sea level rise. Therefore, Alternative 2 would have similar impacts
related to hydrology and water quality.
Alternative 3
The Character Retention Alternative includes a similar development footprint, resulting in similar
impacts related to stormwater flows (including erosion and flooding) and groundwater recharge.
This alternative would also include the policies, programs, and actions related to resiliency and
the mitigation of potential sea level rise. Therefore, Alternative 3 would have similar impacts
related to hydrology and water quality.
LAND USE AND PLANNING
The environmental analysis for PLAN Hermosa examined potential impacts related to consistency
with applicable local and regional land use regulations including the Hermosa Beach Zoning
Ordinance, California Coastal Act, Southern California Association of Governments' (SCAG)
Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS), South Coast Air Quality
Management Plan, and Beach Cities Livability Plan. The review included a detailed assessment of
consistency with the California Coastal Act and SCAG's RTP/SCS and found that PLAN Hermosa is
consistent with the goals and policies of these applicable regulations and plans and therefore
woLfld-have-aJess-tharisignEcant impaci
The proposed land use changes identified in PLAN Hermosa follow established land use patterns
and would not divide an existing community, resulting in a less than significant impact requiring
no mitigation measures. Implementation of PLAN Hermosa policies and implementation actions
would result in less than significant impacts related to the division of existing communities and
consistency with applicable land use plans.
Alternative 1
The No Project Alternative would not divide existing communities because it would continue to
allow development in conformance with the established land use patterns in the community. The
existing General Plan, which would be continued under this alternative, is generally consistent with
SCAG's 2012-2035 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy and with air
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
6.0-19
6.0 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT
quality plans. Although the existing General Plan's policies and programs meet many of the goals
of the RTP/SCS, it does not have the same emphasis on sustainability and a reduction in vehicle
miles traveled as PLAN Hermosa. Additionally, the existing Coastal Land Use Plan, which would be
continued under this alternative, does not address certain topics of the California Coastal Act —
including public access, low-cost visitor and recreational facilities, and flood hazards —at a level
that meets today's standards or expectations. As a result, this alternative would have a greater
impact related to consistency with other plans.
Alternative 2
Under the 2030 Carbon Neutral Alternative, the proposed land use mix would be adjusted,
allowing mixed -use and professional office uses, and would allow additional neighborhood -
serving uses in some neighborhoods. This would be done with the express intent to reduce vehicle
miles traveled, improve the jobs -housing balance, and allow a greater percentage of residents to
reach daily goods and services on bike or foot or by electric vehicle. Under this alternative, the
City's land use plan would be aligned with the intent of the RTP/SCS. Alternative 2 would also
incorporate policies and implementation actions, similar to PLAN Hermosa, to address the
California Coastal Act. Therefore, the impacts would be similar to PLAN Hermosa.
Alternative 3
With the Character Retention Alternative, some land use designations would be adjusted to
discourage redevelopment of medium- and high -density residential uses and instead allow some
residential development to occur within a mixed -use designation. This alternative would have a
similar amount of overall allowable development and would identify sufficient land area in which
redevelopment may occur to be consistent with SCAG's 2012-2035 Regional Transportation
Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy and with air quality plans. This alternative would retain a
similar emphasis on sustainability policies and policies to reduce vehicle miles traveled as PLAN
Hermosa. The alternative would also incorporate policies and implementation actions similar to
PLAN Hermosa to address the California Coastal Act. Therefore, Alternative 3 would have a similar
impact related to consistency with other plans.
MINERAL RESOURCES
The entirety of Hermosa Beach is classified as Mineral Resource Zone 3 (MRZ-3) under the California
Mineral Land Classification System. In MRZ-3 areas, mineral resources are present, but the
significance of the resource is considered speculative because no mining has historically occurred
in the area. Additionally, the City of Hermosa Beach currently prohibits drilling for oil within the city.
A vote of the people would be required to lift the existing ban. A ballot measure in 2015, Measure
O, proposed to lift the existing ban, but failed at a rate of four to one. Therefore, PLAN Hermosa
would have no impact on mineral resources, and each alternative would similarly have no impact
because these resources can no longer be feasibly extracted.
NOISE AND VIBRATION
The environmental analysis for PLAN Hermosa examined potential noise and vibration impacts
associated with future transportation levels and land use activities. Evaluated noise and vibration
sources include transportation sources, bars and restaurants, events and parties, commercial and
industrial activities, construction and demolition activity, and refuse collection. These noise and
vibration sources were found to have a less than significant impact on noise standards, periodic
and permanent increases in ambient noise levels, and cumulative effects of noise sources.
However, the Draft EIR has found that groundborne vibration and noise levels with the
implementation of PLAN Hermosa could have a potentially significant impact. To mitigate this
impact, new development that may cause exceedance of groundborne vibration and noise
standards would be required to have a report prepared by a structural engineer identifying the
PLAN Hermosa City of Hermosa Beach
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report August 2017
6.0-20
6.0 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT
vibration limits and specifying measures and a monitoring plan to mitigate the site -specific
impacts. With the incorporation of this mitigation measure, all noise -related impacts from PLAN
Hermosa would be considered less than significant.
Alternative 1
The No Project Alternative would result in similar amounts of residential and commercial
development as PLAN Hermosa, resulting in similar impacts to temporary or periodic increases in
ambient noise levels. This alternative would, however, result in an increase of approximately 30,000
VMT and 2,600 VT, and would subsequently generate additional sources of transportation -related
noise that could exceed noise standards or create a permanent increase in ambient noise levels
causing impacts that are greater than PLAN Hermosa.
Additionally, impacts related to groundborne noise and vibration levels have been identified as
a potentially significant impact under PLAN Hermosa, but lowered to a less than significant impact
with a mitigation measure to require the preparation of a report by a structural engineer
identifying the vibration limits and specifying measures and a monitoring plan to mitigate the site -
specific impacts for new development projects. Since this alternative proposes a continuation of
existing adopted policy, there is no discretionary action or associated environmental review
required and therefore no mitigation measures. Thus, the impacts to groundborne noise and
vibration standards would be potentially greater under Alternative 1.
Alternative 2
The 2030 Carbon Neutral Alternative would result in similar amounts of residential and commercial
development as PLAN Hermosa, resulting in similar impacts to temporary or periodic increases in
ambient noise levels and groundborne noise or vibration sources. This alternative would similarly
incorporate a mitigation measure applied to new development projects to reduce impacts
related to groundborne noise and vibration sources.
This alternative would also lower VMT by an additional 12 percent, compared to PLAN Hermosa
(25 percent in Alternative 2 compared to 13 percent in PLAN Hermosa). With automobile use a
primary contributor to ambient noise levels, a reduction in vehicle trips would also result in a
reduction in automobile -related noise to a lesser impact than with PLAN Hermosa. Thus, this
alternative would overall have lesser impacts on noise levels than PLAN Hermosa due to the
reduction in transportation noise.
Alternative 3
With the Character Retention Alternative, the goals, policies, and implementation actions related
to transportation, events, and commercial activity would largely mirror PLAN Hermosa. These
sources of noise would have a similar effect to the proposed project; however, there would
potentially be fewer sources of construction/demolition noise and vibration and temporary
increases in ambient noise levels due to reduced construction activity compared to PLAN
-He-rmOscr-0Ve7all—,th1s alternative -would -have lesser impacts to noisee arrd-vibration, defending
on the source of noise.
POPULATION AND HOUSING
The environmental analysis examined the potential of PLAN Hermosa to induce population growth
or to displace people or housing. PLAN Hermosa provides accommodation for a limited increase
in population (660 residents), housing (300 units), and employment (2,400jobs) in Hermosa Beach
over the next 25 years. PLAN Hermosa includes policies to manage this anticipated growth and
focus it in certain infill areas while maintaining existing density in established residential
neighborhoods. Therefore, the Draft EIR has found that PLAN Hermosa would have a less than
significant impact related to the displacement of people or housing, nor would the plan induce
population growth directly or indirectly.
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
6.0-21
6.0 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT
Alternative 1
The No Project Alternative would follow the same general footprint of development and housing -
related policies and allow similar amounts of residential and commercial development as PLAN
Hermosa, generating a modest level of growth in population, housing, and employment over the
next 25 years. This alternative would have a similar impact on population and housing as PLAN
Hermosa.
Alternative 2
The 2030 Carbon Neutral Alternative would follow the same general footprint of development and
housing -related policies; thus, impacts would be largely the same as those of PLAN Hermosa.
Generally, the same amount of residential growth would be expected with this alternative.
Nonresidential growth would be similar in magnitude, but different in type, with less regional -
serving commercial development and more professional office development. Thus, the impacts
of Alternative 2 related to population growth and displacement would be similar to PLAN
Hermosa.
Alternative 3
The Character Retention Alternative would reduce the development capacity in medium- and
high -density residential land uses, and correspondingly introduce a new designation to allow
limited residential development as part of a mixed -use development. These two actions under
Alternative 3 would have the same amount of residential development capacity of approximately
300 units, which would accommodate roughly the same population as the proposed project.
Nonresidential development capacity and policies to create additional employment
opportunities would mirror those of PLAN Hermosa. Thus, the impacts of this alternative related to
population growth and displacement would be similar to PLAN Hermosa.
PUBLIC SERVICES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES, AND UTILITIES
The environmental analysis examined the potential impacts of PLAN Hermosa on fire protection
and emergency medical services, law enforcement services, public schools, parks and recreation,
library facilities, water supply and service, wastewater services, solid waste services, and energy.
PLAN Hermosa would have less than significant impacts related to the provision of fire protection,
law enforcement, school, park, library, wastewater conveyance and treatment, stormwater
drainage, water supply, and solid waste generation facilities and services.
Alternative 1
The No Project Alternative would result in similar amounts of residential and commercial
development as PLAN Hermosa. However, the current General Plan, which would be continued
under this alternative, does not include the same focus on conservation of resources and
sustainability policies and programs that are contained in PLAN Hermosa. A lesser focus on
resource conservation policies would generally result in greater consumption or disposal of water,
wastewater, solid waste, and energy, which could contribute to greater impacts on wastewater
treatment facilities, water supply, solid waste facilities, and energy consumption on an individual
and cumulative basis. Therefore, impacts related to the provision of public services and utilities
would be greater.
Alternative 2
The 2030 Carbon Neutral Alternative would follow the same general footprint of development and
public services -related policies; thus, demand for public services would be largely the same as
those with PLAN Hermosa. However, this alternative would require significant public investment to
be implemented, and additional City spending might ultimately impact funding for public
services. Thus, the impacts of Alternative 2 are expected to be similar to PLAN Hermosa as long as
PLAN Hermosa City of Hermosa Beach
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report August 2017
6.0-22
6.0 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT
funding for public services is not significantly diverted for emissions reduction projects and
programs.
Alternative 3
The Character Retention Alternative would follow the same general footprint of development and
would include similar public services -related policies as PLAN Hermosa. This alternative would also
include similar sustainability and resource conservation policies as the plan. Thus, demand for
public services would be largely the same as those of PLAN Hermosa, and impacts to public
services under this alternative are expected to be similar to the plan.
TRANSPORTATION
The environmental analysis of the proposed project examined direct and cumulative impacts
related to congestion and level of service (LOS) standards, conflicts with the Los Angeles County
Congestion Management Program, conflicts to air traffic patterns, creation of design hazards,
impacts to emergency vehicle access, and impacts to transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities.
Impacts related to conflict with the Congestion Management Program, design hazards,
emergency access, and public transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities would be less than
significant.
As it relates to LOS standards, PLAN Hermosa was evaluated for potential impacts to 13
intersections and 20 roadway segments in Hermosa Beach. Based on the analysis of volume -to -
capacity ratios for these study intersections and roadway segments, three intersections and one
roadway segment would operate at a reduced level of service compared to existing conditions,
thereby causing a potentially significant impact. The three intersections where level of service
would be LOS D or lower are Pacific Coast Highway and Artesia Boulevard; Pacific Coast Highway
and Aviation Boulevard, and Manhattan Avenue and 27th Street.
Opportunities to apply physical mitigations at these intersections to improve LOS were
investigated, but were ultimately deemed infeasible because they would conflict with other
impact areas, potentially adding roadway hazards or decreasing safety for other modes of
transportation. Therefore, impacts to these three intersections would be considered a significant
and unavoidable impact.
Through implementation of PLAN Hermosa, the roadway segment on Prospect Avenue from
Aviation Boulevard to 2nd Street would be degraded from its current operation at LOS C to LOS D
by 2040. While this operation is improved from the projected LOS E that would be experienced
under the 2040 scenario without PLAN Hermosa, it still represents a potentially significant impact.
Opportunities to expand roadway volume on this segment through physical changes to the street
were explored but were ultimately deemed infeasible. In order to mitigate this impact, Prospect
Avenue would need to be widened to accommodate an additional lane of travel in each
direction, which would require removal of on -street parking and/or expansion of the street right-
ofwa�This-would additionally conffict-with other -impact areas potentially -adding -roadway
hazards or decreasing safety for other modes of transportation. Therefore, the impacts to this
roadway segment would be considered a significant and unavoidable impact.
Alternative 1
The No Project Alternative would generate similar amounts of residential and commercial
development as PLAN Hermosa; however, this alternative would result in an increase of
approximately 30,000 daily VMT and 2,600 daily VT. Alternative 1 was evaluated specifically for
impacts to the 13 study intersections and 20 roadway segments. The analysis identified that nine
of the 13 study intersections would have greater impacts, including greater impacts to all three
intersections identified as significant and unavoidable impacts, and that five of the 20 roadway
segments would experience greater impacts than with PLAN Hermosa. Therefore, this alternative
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
6.0-23
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
6.0 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT
would result in greater impacts related to level of service performance standards compared to
the plan.
Additionally, the No Project Alternative would not include the policies and implementation actions
that would balance the need for complete streets and alternative modes of transportation with
efficient movement of vehicles. Therefore, impacts related to conflict with the Congestion
Management Program, design hazards, emergency access, and public transit, bicycle, and
pedestrian facilities would also be greater compared to PLAN Hermosa.
Alternative 2
Under the 2030 Carbon Neutral Alternative, a suite of additional land use and transportation
measures would be implemented with the express intent of reducing vehicle miles traveled by
shortening trip lengths, eliminating trips, and shifting trips from conventionally fueled automobiles
to electric vehicles powered by renewable energy sources. The policies to reduce total vehicle
miles traveled would reduce VMT by an additional 13 percent, which would reduce the
congestion burden on the road network. This alternative would support improvements to the level
of service at the three intersections identified as having significant and unavoidable impacts
under PLAN Hermosa, though may not necessarily mitigate impacts to a level that is less than
significant. For roadway segments, this alternative would improve LOS performance of four
roadway segments, although it may not mitigate impacts to a less than significant level for
impacted roadway segments.
Additionally, Alternative 2 would include similar policies and implementation actions that would
balance the need for complete streets and alternative modes of transportation with efficient
movement of vehicles. Therefore, impacts related to conflict with the Congestion Management
Program, design hazards, and emergency access would be similar compared to PLAN Hermosa,
while impacts to public transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities would be lesser than with the plan
due to greater implementation of TDM measures and pursuit of regional transportation options.
Alternative 3
The Character Retention Alternative would generate similar amounts of residential and
commercial development as PLAN Hermosa. Additionally, this alternative would retain
transportation and mobility goals, policies, and implementation actions that mirror PLAN Hermosa
to balance the need for complete streets and alternative modes of transportation with the
efficient movement of vehicles. Therefore, impacts related to conflict with the Congestion
Management Program, design hazards, emergency access, and public transit, bicycle, and
pedestrian facilities would be similar to the plan.
6.0.4 SUMMARY OF IMPACTS OF EACH ALTERNATIVE COMPARED TO PLAN HERMOSA
The factors that may be used to eliminate alternatives from detailed consideration in an EIR
include (1) failure to meet most of the basic project objectives, (2) infeasibility of implementation,
or (3) inability to lessen or avoid significant environmental effects (CEQA Guidelines Section
15126.6[c]). A summary of how each alternative compares to these factors is provided following
Table 6.0-5 (Comparison of Environmental Impacts of Alternatives to PLAN Hermosa), which
summarizes the environmental impacts of each alternative and compares these relative impacts
to the environmental impacts of PLAN Hermosa.
PLAN Hermosa City of Hermosa Beach
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report August 2017
6.0-24
u
W
w
a
c
W
O
a
w
a
0
H
W
Z
a
z
Q:
W
J
a
O C
N O
V r.
,
•
'
'
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•L`
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
'
•
•
•
N
'1
Y
u w
C
a`
r
r
N
1
•
•
•
1
1
/
1
/
/
/
•
►
d
1
•
•
/
•
I
d
•
•
•
1
•
•
•
1
J
t7
t7
C
a
E
`
•,
u
�o
C
o.
WM
1
•
1
•
•
1
M
1
•
1
1
/
•
1
1
•
•
•
•
•
1
•
1
1
/
•
1
1
a`
o
Q
z
C
O
.
VL
I—
VL
Ln
VI
VL
U
V)
H
V1
H
V)
H
V)
H
V1
H
�
V)
In
H
Z
Vl
H
VL
F
V1
H
U
V)
In
V1
Ln
u
a
u
�
�
OJ
JH
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
U
M
do
0
CL
o
O'
wn
in
H
H
N
H
Ln
H
n
H
U
U
H
N
v,
U
a
in
N
U
U
H
ut
H
v,
a
N
a
V
V
U
U
U
d
Y
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
U
J
J
J
J
J
J
V
V
V
3
Y
Q)
U
V
U
L
CL
E
[a
=
N
aJ
LL
a)V
`
O
f6
V1
O
N
U
=O
O
0
N
Q
N
o
U
L`O.J
y
2
u
aJ
aJ
O
a
v
a
O
O
,n
c
tY
�0
C-+
2
O
VL
.v
a)
0
U
V
0
to
N
w
aJ
O
c
p
O
�
O
—
a�
N
to
CS
"O
C
f6
N
O
Oaf
O
LL
vi
Ln
c
. YEn
m
y
0
c
u
7
VL
N
aJ
c-2
'E
c
rVp
=
,�
O
u
O
E
._
ut
M
L
M
E
p
w
O
Na1
ai
c
=O
a-0-0?
1a
r6
ate-•
E
c
Y
2
p
m
vL
u
°C
u
a
2
Li
2
3
v
m
m
O
v
c
aVi
O
V
c
=
c
c
c
c
t�
�
_
VL
V,
a
m
v,
u
,o
v
O
o
f°
O
o
0
0
o
.LA
>
-6
3
3
O
0
io
=
—
ro
.c
=
O'
•
aJ
Q
io
.�
u
aJ
v
vL
N
aJ
LY
_
2
u
u
u
u
u
>
fD
v
-p
=
a
m
is
ro
Y
O
V)
v
O
n•
Ln
o
=
0
a,
a�
v
C
=
u
u
L
In
a1
L�o1
i
`__
a
o'
d
u
c
¢
y
a=+
O
L
W
O
O
.0
01
p
V
._
W
LJJ
W
uJ
m
ro
v
>
aJ
�_
c
1pJ
>
+°
00
c
>
d
O
c
•Y
'Y
'Y
N
V
i
aJ
L
V
C
N
V
LO
'Y
• =
a
a
L
'Y
10
V)
a)
aJ
'Y
p
(0
O
1O
U
(O
ra
rp
t6
+�
u
u
aJ
m
=
m
m
V
aJ
Y
Y
N
ro
Q
_
U
•—
16
=
C
ra
E
aJ
U
—
=
m
m
�
>
r
E
E
E
d
-
ro
o
.X
p
E
O
aui
*'
aJ
>
0O
E
7
u
v
o
E
E
E
E
F.
n
'>
L
=
O
O
'>
u
p
O
=
Q
aJ
O==
m
y
V)
V)
V1
J
V
a
i
S
o
U
ut
VL
U
U
a
a
2
V
0
0
0
V1
LD
Q
—i
N
M
V1
.o
r,
m
.--I
N
M
I;T
Ln
lO
u
-1
[V
M
Ln
LD
I-
W
r•I
e-i
r-I
r-I
r-I
rl
.--I
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
t
V
V
V
-�T
v
V
t
�
V.11
1 CT
qV
�t
V
ct
u
d
m
H
u
W
w
a
0
W
CA
A
w
a
W
2
H
0
V1
W
Q
Z
w
W
J
L C
i+ O
L
L
L
m
L
m
L
C
•
Cc
1
•
'g
•
•
•
•
•
'�
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
• •
• • • '� • •
>
t N
{A
V1
{n
N
m
C
u
L
r
Q
+'
O
a+ nn
M
'�
L
10
m
L
CN
•
•
•
•
•
'�
•
•
•
•
•
'�
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
• •
• • • '� • •
E
`m
••
u
C
Yd
u
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
O
Z
Vl
l7
iA
L7
L
l7
c
0
V)in
Ln
U
V)
in
L/)
V)
in
U
L/)
V)
in
V)
LA
N
v,
V)
N
in
u u
UUUU
V u u
a`
a
d
a
O
°
O
J
Ln
J
V)
J
U
LL
in
J
V)
(1
V)
J
in
J
U
V)
v ,
v,
Ln
Ln
V)
in
N
V)
v,
u u
U U
u u u N N
U U U
a
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
3�
C
•--�
J J
J J J
c
CN
C
N
6
K
cu
C
a
°0 o
O
C
vu
O
cr
v
v
_
+�
—+°
Nd
v CU
OEm
O
cr0
O
O
LL
c>
'S
v
U
CC
c
O
u
v
_O
0 Lcr +Oc�
n —m c
mcu
�
N
Z
N
O
N
0
C
�^ 0-0
p �n 7
-❑ HCP
i
O
-
N
fO
w
C
7
oC
-am
O
Q
o
7
�n
m
•
(U
,n
u
Y
o
O
o
LL
❑
CY
a
N
-
fu
Vl
++ ]
o N
N
N
rm-
c
C
❑ O
•LL
m
U
R m
O�
i o U
2❑
`-^
•p
a
a+
O-2
N
C
-a
-❑
u
c
c
c
-0
O
fO
v j
m O 'o t o
12
m
o=
0
Cl
m
7
v
p
p
p
m
o
v
l7
V) or c c
>
m
o
a
❑
a
=
p+a
c
=
O
p
c C
c C 0 m
u
O
•C
u
c
h
•N
O
c
O
L
G0
m
-0
a)
_
m
m
m
-0
O
O O
U
O O O O w
'�
_n
O
J
E
W
w
0.CL
¢
t0
O
v
❑
C
+'
to
m
O
U
d
V
U U U m CL
❑ Q
'�
rCp
O❑
W
N
N
C
d+
lj
❑
O
❑
C
❑
t� ``
f0
w �
VI
v
(�
tJ_=
=
u�i
N
2
0
w'0
D
D
O
�
N��
w w
w w a�
m>
v
U
ce
O
a�
ro
ny
in
p +r
c
O
2-0
ro
O
M
O
w
ru
a
0
v
w
O>>>>>
6
v +�
+'
w
gym+
A
EC
t
N
C
W
,�
N
•o
a.+
_m
O
0
fl
N
O
v
m
a�
m
w
m
N
=
5n
❑
N
O
� =
'v 4-
O
y
m
w
O
lJ
l7
o
V
r0
t~o
L
F
u
¢
w¢
A
C
U
L
m
O`
C7
"
t
Ln
t
to
2
L
c
V U
V U V � O
C
l7
-1
N
m
V
l7
-4
N
=
-4
N
M
Ln
i
-1
N
M
'T
L!1
"0
n
00
01
O
-,
r-I N
-, -,
M V V1 m [.L U
-, r-I .--1 J -, N
u+
Li
�n
�n
�o
io
'L
n
r;
rn
r;
rn
ao
00
00
06
06
00
o0
00
00
06
00
00 00
Co eo 0o C+ a, a�
a
01
H
u
W
ce
a
c
W
Vf
O
a
w
a
W
2
H
0
IA
W
H
Q
Z
w
W
J
L
W O
L
L
L
L
vi
r
•
'E
•
•
►
•
/
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
>
Z
U ce
C
L
r
a`
a+
p
a+ te
d M
N
•
t_`o
•
►
•
►
•
►
'�
•
•
•
•
'�
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
►
►
►
►
►
►
►
a
0
E
`
u
..
m
C
C
0
r
V
L
O
N
l7
%n
l7
Z
C
O
v
v
u
u
�
v
�
�
u
u
d
�
�
�
�
�
�
a
�
N
C
ao
o
O
s m
u
u
z
�n
in
in
u
u
in
�tuu
,n
u
U
,n
t]utur-urutu�
u
in
u
,n
u
V,
U
N
U
���-�UU
�„
,n
N
U
U
a
LM
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
3�
a,
E
0-
0-
0
>
f6
m
-
C
L
in
a1
3
O
lJ
c
u
j
>
01
U
O
J
^
O
Z
—u
+a+
C
O
a)N
Z
��,
to
m
LL
c
.0
p)
O
0
Z
OL
a1
(U
cu
in
O
—
O
Q
C
>
E
c
c
v
Qi
s
c
—
O
o
Y
u
w
—
.*'
I
V)
a)
V
v
,+_
'y
—
V
W
°
'u
m
m
v
Q
a
,�
d
U
_
U
m
m
W
O
C
a1
Y1
°
'O
-O
°
Z
c
U
O
m
Z
*O
a�
Ln
LL
c
O
'U
m
LL
�`
v
m
O~
U
...
U
m
O
�Q
c
3
7
L7
7
CL
c
W
v'
n
C
W
O
'+
m
y
_
C
m
aJ
m
C2
m
°
o
°
c
O
2
E
v
3°
Y
`�
�_
3
E
a
Ln
E
m
°
CL
`°
7a
_
O
Q
°
c
+'
aJ
O
O
w
m
o
,�
m
O
,�
m
O
,�
c
a)
xLA
w
-
0
e
v
+J
>
Q
N
c
o
c
Z
C
,N
p_
o°
C
v
C
o
a-.
o
O
c
o
C
O
c
c
o
E
o
3
to
7
vi
m
3
O
O
c
c}a
aJ
�O
O
O
a=
E;
a
c�
W
co
m
:'=
m
:*'
m
m
E
aai
°
acu
V
cn
IV
p
of
o
jr
x
W
�_
o
N
'�
N
d—
U
o
S
ro
'++
o
°;
=
'6
u
Q
v
LL
E
a)
3
J
E-O
a)
Q
E
aJ
a
Q
E
al
v
Q
E
aJ
v
v
Z
p
to
m
O.
`
O
`
C
l.J
N
ma)
ON
°
0
N
vv
>
>
da)
>
>
(v
>
m
>
w
>E
aJ
C
-0
>
C
M
O
In
N
v
m
m
N
�^
m
7
m
7
m
7
m
7
m
7
N
+-�
m
m
m
N
7
7
a
7
m
u
m
7
7
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
m
E
E
E
W
E
E
�
L
°'
z3
y
,v1
7
°
E'
7
_0LA>
E
E
V
aJ
000UOUouou
7
aJ
7
aJ
7
a)
7
a1
7
aJ
aooWvu
W
w
x==
E
�,
�O
O
Z
a,
aE,
0
>
U
M
V1
tD
Il
7
U
CCC
G
OC
-i
Z
ri
lj
N
d
m
H
U
I.II
O
4.
.C.
r-I
N
U
M
d
r-I
N
N
N
.--I
M
N
M�
.--I
N
r-I
Lf1
N
I.l1
.--I
l0
N
l0
.--I _
I� U
N
f\
n
n
m
O
p
ri
r-I
rl
ri
ri
r-I
N
N
N
N
N
M
m
m
M
m
m
M
M
M
M
m
m m
M
M
M
M
M
M
�
v
v
cf
v
�
V
v
r-I
' !
r l
v
ri
r i
r i
ri
c
ra
ra
.--I
v
ri
r-I
r-I �p
V
r-I
v
cf
v
v
N
i
0
Q0
� C
O O
Y �+
�
IA
• • • • •
•C
•
• f, i� t G C
41
N
m
V ce
C
C
O
a) M
`
CN
ILMM
`
w
O T
J
CL
f0
C
�
y
"
G7
a°
a
�
Z
c
O
V) V) LJ V) V
Ln V)
� �
J V) V) V) In V) V) V) V) V) V) J In V) V) V) V) V) V) V) V) V) V)
O
J J J J J
\ J J V) V) J J J J J J J V) J
O J F- F-J J J F-J J J J
a`
o
0')
a
d
O
O m
s
U lJ
lJ lJ
-' V) to V) in V) in V) V) V)
m 0- Vt
J V) V) V) V) v) v) LA to in N in
d
�-
� F- F- F- F- F- F- F- F-
0-J J J J J J J a.J
o F- F- F- F- F- F- F- F- F- F- F-
\ J J J J J J J J J J J
O
p�
F-
V
W
O
ce
a
In
W
H
O
a
O
w
a
W
O
H
H
W
F�-
Q
Z
w
W
H
J
00
N
O
QD
H
u
W
a
c
W
tA
a
ce
IL
W
O
LU
W
F-
a
z
O:
W
J
a`+ c
o
„
Y1
` c
:
ram..
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
W
M
u ce
c
a`
0
QJ M
CN
-
M-
C
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
O >+
C
o.
E
V
c
N
V
y
a
a
1•
1
1
1
1
1•
1
O
z
c
O
V
r 10 rd
N
V)
V)
V)
VI
V)
In
In
V)
V)
In
V)
V)
In
U
U
U
U
U
U
V
0
3
V1
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
a
o
O •'
in
Vi
Ln
Ln
Vi
Ln
in
in
LA
V)
in
N
U
U
U
U
u
u
U
U
U
U
u
0
t Of
a
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
u
J
J
d
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
3
E
E
o
rLLo
a
Y
I_
o
aci
+
Z,
v
>
m
L
a
Y
-0a)
E
aci
3
L
Z)
(U
-0
m
m
a°1
aY^j
>
Q
Q
2
>
v
_
>
V)
.
a
a)
N
O
Y
p
�
.P
a)
Q
a)
mp
o
V
O
>
D
O
U
>
>
(a
•u
vi
v1
a
N
N
O
O
a
a
p
p
v
U�
V
:c
U
m
p
Q
o>
N
m
C
o
CO
-
c
M
E
O
N
c
`
v
2
c
u
u
m
H
0
0
'u
a
a
o
m
t
U
ro
Q
C
rNi
ra
3
m>
a
O
Y
r6
�'
'''
N
d
ra
d
N
U
ro
°
m>
m
o
�
,may
r
co
L
au
a)
c
3
L
v
v
)
OJ
o�
CT
'rn
N
Li
t
c
c>
Q�
aJ
'�
U
p
Yi
...
v,
m>>
aJ
a�
Q
7
c
2
N
c
0
v,
u
Q
ca
p
a�
a`
a�
p
U,
a
ro
O
Q
Q
v>
n
O
o
U
ro
u
c
Q
c
c
,m
>
U
v
u
m
al
O
E
Q
ro
0
E
Q
u
c
c
-O
O
Y
c
O
f6
O
Y
o
Y
g
»�
0
E
0
E
-
m
U
a,
N=
(,
U,
a
u
u
(U
'u
ro
a`,
-v
Q
O
E
U=
Y
w
°1
C
v
C°
u
n
t
�°
w
w
�'°�=Q_
m
_
cu
'�
a)
L
m
a�i
E
w
LU
(,
au
0)
Q>
c
c>
a)
Y
N
3
m
o
ro
o
ra
v
ro
:
o>>
Q
v
°o
ro
cr
H
.0
_o
==
_m
Z3
E
E
E
Q
Q
Ln
V)
c
c
m
v
_5
E
E
E>>>
a
s
,m
°
o
O-0
=
=
=
n
u
u
u
d
Q
Q
d
d
l7
a0
00
2
lJ
N
Q
K
Q
a
U
u
u
O
-I
N
N
rri
V
V1
l0
I�
00
01
C)
V
Vq.
q.V
V
V
N
r-I
v
r•-I
v
r-I
v
.--I
v
.--I
vI;r
.--I
r-I
v
r-I
v
'--I
v
.--I
v
.--I
It
G
Q)
Z
0
°
N
c
O
+.
t
C
dv
°
U
N
i
°
_
c
�
V
a
°
°
4
.�
°
a
C
�
i
o
d
a�Q
v•
Q)
N
v
O
u
v
ar
a
'
t
1
Q)Q,
d
3
0
c
•�
C
❑
;,
ai
�
U
)
b
!�
o
a'
°
o
E
c
O
c
�
C
i
• �
a•''
o
c
U
°
d
.�
H
N
O
N
ar
°
°
°�'
t
0
�
2
z
c
t
01
D_
=gIn
U
a
a
n
•
3
V
4+
p
a
v
d
V
u
O
z
?
O
°
°
°
c
c
a
v
E
0
9
v
O
u
t
Ln
=.1
m
6.0 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT
No Project Alternative
Project Objectives
The No Project Alternative would only partially meet the project objectives established for PLAN
Hermosa, The existing General Plan and Coastal Land Use Plan can reasonably achieve project
objectives to enhance and support a strong, diverse, and vibrant local economy (Objective 2)
and provide a safe and clean natural environment (Objective 4) by relying on the existing policies
and programs related to economic development and resource conservation. Additionally, the
existing General Plan contains an Urban Design Element; however, it fails to establish various
character areas and identify the unique characteristics of each area, making it difficult to
effectively achieve project Objective 1, to preserve the city's small beach town character. Finally,
while the existing General Plan and Coastal Land Use Plan contain policies and programs to
reduce vehicle miles traveled and expand alternative modes of transportation, these documents
do not identify promoting healthy and active lifestyles (Objective 3) and achieving a low or no
carbon future (Objective 5) as the primary motivation for including such policies, nor do the
mobility policies and programs contained in the existing General Plan advance the reduction in
VMT sufficiently to claim that they can effectively achieve Objectives 3 and 5.
Comparison of Environmental Impacts
The No Project Alternative would not lessen any environmental impacts compared to PLAN
Hermosa. Instead, it would have greater impacts to aesthetics and visual resources, air quality,
greenhouse gas emissions, hydrology and water quality, land use and planning, noise and
vibration, public services, community facilities, and utilities, and transportation.
Carbon Neutral by 2030
Project Objectives
The 2030 Carbon Neutral Alternative has the ability to substantially support each of the project
objectives. Implementation of this alternative would prioritize the achievement of a low or no
carbon future (Objective 5), while also providing a safe and clean natural environment (Objective
4) and promoting healthy and active lifestyles through land use and transportation investments
(Objective 3) by reducing air quality and transportation impacts compared to PLAN Hermosa. This
alternative would also meet Objective 2, to enhance and support a strong, diverse, and vibrant
local economy, as many of the land use and transportation policies that reduce vehicle miles
traveled do so by providing a greater range of daily services and employment opportunities in
closer proximity so that residents may reasonably choose alternative modes of transportation.
While this alternative could cause greater impacts to cultural resources, and thereby potentially
conflict with Objective 1, to preserve the city's small beach town character, additional mitigation
measures and design standards could provide direction that minimizes the impacts associated
with this alternative on cultural resources and aesthetics.
Comparison of Environmental Impacts
Alternative 2 could pose greater impacts to aesthetics and biological resources due to increased
use of renewable energy systems such as solar, wind, or ocean -based renewable energy sources,
and greater impacts to cultural resources due to greater alteration or demolition of designated
or potentially eligible historic resources to construct high energy performance buildings. While the
impacts to aesthetics, biological resources, and cultural resources may be greater than with PLAN
Hermosa, it is unknown whether they would rise to the level of being considered a significant
impact, because the specific design and location of additional renewable energy projects
cannot be determined at this time.
This alternative would also have far-reaching environmental benefits for Hermosa Beach by
decreasing impacts related to air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, noise and vibration, and
transportation. Air pollutants associated with the burning of fuel for building energy and
PLAN Hermosa City of Hermosa Beach
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report August 2017
6.0-30
6.0 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT
transportation uses would be reduced. Noise levels would likely be somewhat lower, as the primary
source of noise in Hermosa Beach is automobile use. Reduced automobile use and an increase
in electric vehicles, which are quieter than gasoline- and diesel -powered vehicles, would reduce
noise levels. Transportation impacts would also likely be decreased because this alternative would
result in a reduction in vehicle trips and vehicle miles traveled.
Character Retention Alternative
Project Objectives
The Character Retention Alternative prioritizes achievement of Objective 1, to preserve the city's
small beach town character, and Objective 2, to enhance and support a strong, diverse, and
vibrant local economy through safe and beautiful commercial corridors, but would not conflict or
prevent the achievement of the other project objectives. This alternative would provide similar
policies and implementation actions to PLAN Hermosa related to the mobility network,
transportation enhancements, and resource conservation, meaning it would equally achieve
project Objective 3, to promote healthy and active lifestyles, and Objective 4, to provide a safe
and clean environment including clean air and water.
While this alternative may have a slightly greater impact on greenhouse gas emissions, it would
carry forward similar policies to PLAN Hermosa related to reducing emissions from transportation
sources, water conservation, and diverting solid waste from landfills to support a reduction in
greenhouse gas emissions partially consistent with Objective 5, to achieve a low or no carbon
future. Additional mitigation measures and design standards could provide direction to implement
energy efficiency and renewable energy projects consistent with standards for the treatment of
historical resources to minimize the impacts associated with this alternative on greenhouse gas
emissions while retaining the historical significance of designated landmarks and the eligibility of
potentially historic resources.
Comparison of Environmental Impacts
This Character Retention Alternative would pose greater impacts to greenhouse gas emissions
compared to PLAN Hermosa. The challenge of renovating or constructing high energy
performance buildings in a manner that does not diminish the significance of a historical resource
or cause potentially eligible historic resources to become ineligible due to alterations that are
inconsistent with standards for the treatment of historical resources is presented in this alternative.
This alternative would also reduce impacts associated with aesthetics and visual resources, air
quality, and cultural resources, where construction -related air quality impacts and the
significance of a historical resource are both considered significant and unavoidable impacts
under implementation of PLAN Hermosa. However, it is unknown whether this alternative would
lessen these impacts to levels that are considered less than significant.
6.0.5 ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVE
CEQA requires a lead agency to identify the "environmentally superior alternative." Based on the
alternative analysis, both the 2030 Carbon Neutral Alternative and the Character Retention
Alternative would reduce several of the categories listed as potentially significant or significant
and unavoidable under PLAN Hermosa. The No Project Alternative would have potentially greater
impacts to several categories, including aesthetics and visual resources, air quality, cultural
resources, greenhouse gas emissions, hydrology and water quality, land use and planning, noise
and vibration, public services, and transportation. The 2030 Carbon Neutrality Alternative would
also have potentially greater impacts to aesthetics and visual resources, biological resources, and
cultural resources, while the Character Retention Alternative would only cause potentially greater
impacts to one category, greenhouse gas emissions. For this reason, the Character Retention
Alternative is considered the environmentally superior alternative.
City of Hermosa Beach PLAN Hermosa
August 2017 Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
6.0-31
6.0 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT
6.0.6 REFERENCES
City of Hermosa Beach. 2015. PLAN Hermosa (public review draft).
2016. City of Hermosa Beach Carbon Planning Tool.
https://hermosabeach.legisfar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=2281885&GUID=5192A329-FBB9-
46E4-AFOE-4FBE5BC73A58.
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental impact Report
6.0-32
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
7.0 REPORT PREPARERS
7.0 REPORT PREPARERS
LEAD AGENCY
CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH
Lead Agency Contact: Ken Robertson, Community Development Director
Kim Chafin, AICP, LEED-AP, Senior Planner
Lauren Langer, Consulting City Attorney
Ed Almanza, CEQA Consultant
PROGRAM CONSULTANTS
RAIMI + ASSOCIATES
MattRaimi..........................................................................................................................Project Director
MattBurris........................................................................................................................ Project Manager
LeeanneSingleton............................................................................................................. Senior Planner
EIR CONSULTANTS
MICHAEL BAKER INTERNATIONAL
JeffHenderson..................................................................................................................Project Director
TadStearn....................................................................................................................EIR Project Director
PatAngell ....... .............................. .......... ...........................................................EIR Project Director
DarcyKremin............................................................................................................ EIR Project Manager
Florentina Craciun.....................................................................................EIR Deputy Project Manager
JulianCapata..................................................................................................................... Senior Planner
SethMyers............................................................................................................................ Senior Planner
AliceTackett....................................................................................................................... Senior Planner
MichaelMartin.................................................................................................................... Senior Planner
AdamGrace.................................................................................................................................Graphics
SuzanneWirth...................................................................................................................Technical Editor
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
7.0-1
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
C--.'�' .... • • .. .� .. • - ..� �
7.0 REPORT PREPARERS
TECHNICAL CONSULTANTS
FEHR & PEERS, TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION
Jeremy Klop
Rachel Neumann
ESA PCR, CULTURAL RESOURCES, AIR QUALITY
Heidi Rous
Everest Yon
Margarita Jerabek
Kyle Garcia
Amanda Kainer
Chris Taylor
WEILAND ACOUSTICS, NOISE
David L. Wieland
PLAN Hermosa
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report
7.0-2
City of Hermosa Beach
August 2017
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH
I, Elaine Doerfling, City Clerk of the City of Hermosa Beach, California, do
hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 17-7094 was duly and regularly passed,
approved and adopted by the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach at a Regular
Meeting of said Council at the regular place thereof on August 22, 2017.
The vote was as follows:
AYES: Armato, Duclos, Fangary, Petty, Mayor Massey
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: None
Dated August 23, 2017
Elaine Doerfling, City k
•�.
�• .i.• _ � .y 1. • � - ... • - -