Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
CC SR 20250617 I - Border Issues
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: 06/17/2025 AGENDA REPORT AGENDA HEADING: Consent Calendar AGENDA TITLE: Consideration to review the first biannual 2025 Border Issues report. RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION: (1) Receive and file the first biannual report on the status of Border Issues for 2025. FISCAL IMPACT: None Amount Budgeted: N/A Additional Appropriation: N/A Account Number(s): N/A ORIGINATED BY: Megan Barnes, Senior Administrative Analyst REVIEWED BY: Catherine Jun, Deputy City Manager CJ APPROVED BY: Ara Mihranian, AICP, City Manager ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: A. April 2025 George F Canyon Nature Center support letter (page A-1) B. December 10, 2024 Rolling Hills Estates City Council staff report (page B-1) C. January 2025 Rep. Barragán press release (page C-1) D. March 2025 EPA press release (page D-1) E. March 2024 Rep. Barragán press release (page E-1) F. January 2025 West Harbor comment letter (page F-1) G. June 2025 Daily Breeze article on West Harbor (page G-1) H. City Council Policy No. 34 (page H-1) BACKGROUND: According to City Council Policy No. 34 (Attachment H), twice a year, Staff presents the City Council with a report on various development projects along the City’s borders that may potentially affect residents and businesses of Rancho Palos Verdes. These “Border Issues” reports are typically presented at the second City Council meeting in June and December. This is the first biannual report on the status of Border Issues for 2025 and includes an update on the following projects: 1 Palos Verdes Estates: • Palos Verdes Drive West Corridor Project Rolling Hills: • Rancho Del Mar Affordable Housing Overlay Zone • Proposed residence at 77 Portuguese Bend Road Rolling Hills Estates: • George F Canyon Nature Center Renovation Project • The Brickwalk Residences • The Residences at Peninsula Center Los Angeles / San Pedro: • Proposed leasing of the Defense Fuel Support Point San Pedro for commercial fueling operations and ball field land transfer • Ponte Vista development on a former Navy housing site on Western Avenue • Issues and events related to the Rancho LPG butane storage facility • San Pedro Waterfront Project (West Harbor) • Proposed Starbucks drive-thru at 28110 South Western Avenue Torrance: • 248-unit Butcher Solana apartment project at Hawthorne Boulevard and Via Valmonte • Proposed 18-unit mixed-use development on Hawthorne Boulevard near Rolling Hills Road • Proposed 11-unit mixed-use residential development at 24601 Hawthorne Boulevard Intercity Projects: • Caltrans Western Avenue Bicycle Pedestrian Improvement Project • Proposed Caltrans Vincent Thomas Bridge Deck Replacement Project The full current status report and archived reports are available on the City’s website at: http://www.rpvca.gov/781/Border-Issues-Status-Report DISCUSSION: Current Border Issues Palos Verdes Drive West Corridor Project (Palos Verdes Estates) There has been no change in the status of the Palos Verdes Drive West Corridor Project, which aims to alleviate traffic congestion along the Palos Verdes Drive West corridor in the City of Palos Verdes Estates, including its intersections with Via Corta an d Palos Verdes Drive North. The city is working with Metro through the renewal process for Measure M grant funding, but the project has not been discussed by the Traffic Safety 2 Committee or City Council since 2024. With a key staff vacancy recently filled, the project is expected to return to the City Council sometime in 2025. Staff will continue to monitor this issue in future Border Issues Status Reports. Rancho Del Mar Affordable Housing Overlay Zone (Rolling Hills) There has been no change in the status of the Rancho Del Mar Affordable Housing Overlay Zone in the City of Rolling Hills, a mixed -use, multi-family overlay zone on a 31- acre site owned by the Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified School District (PVPUSD) at 38 Crest Road West, which is included in Rolling Hills’ 6th Cycle Housing Element. The overlay zone allows the addition of up to 16 multi-family units by-right, including low- and very low-income units, in an area west of the Palos Verdes Peninsula Transit Aut hority (PVPTA) facility. According to staff at the City of Rolling Hills, the city previously received informal inquiries about developing the site. However, no plans have been submitted. Staff will continue to monitor this issue in future Border Issues Status Reports. 77 Portuguese Bend Road (Rolling Hills) There has been no change in the status of the proposed residential development located at 77 Portuguese Bend Road in the City of Rolling Hills (referred to as the Shen Residence). The proposed project consists of the construction of an 8,847 -square-foot single-family residence, a 2,427-square-foot guesthouse, a 2,766-square-foot pool area, and the re- alignment and potential modification of an existing road and driveway into the easement area located between residences at 73 and 74 Portuguese Bend Road. The home would include two two-car garages, four bedrooms, four bathrooms and two half -bathrooms. Amenities would include an open central courtyard, a gym/workshop, a breakfast nook, a laundry room, and a pantry. The guesthouse would include an open pond courtyard, one bedroom, one bathroom and one half-bathroom. The pool area would include a swimming pool with a pool gate, jacuzzi, walkway, and pool deck. The proposed project would also include a 450-square-foot stable, a 550-square-foot corral, and a trash enclosure near the northern boundary of the project footprint. The City previously provided comments on a Notice of Intent (NOI) to adopt an initial study and mitigated negative declaration (IS/MND) for the project that was released by the City of Rolling Hills in December 2022. Rolling Hills planning staff previously indicated that the next step was for the applicant’s geotechnical engineer to review and prepare responses to comments. It was Staff's understanding that there was a possibility that the project notice may be reissued due to information that needed to be corrected and updated. This would give the City’s Community Development Department Staff another opportunity to provide comments. 3 Staff will continue to monitor this issue in future Border Issues Status Reports. George F Canyon Nature Center Renovation Project (Rolling Hills Estates) The City of Rolling Hills Estates continues to explore funding opportunities for the George F Canyon Nature Center Renovation Project, which calls for the demolition of the aging facility on the southwest corner of Palos Verdes Drive North and Palos Verdes Drive East and the construction of a new nature center/community center. The city now anticipates re-issuing a call for construction bids in late summer/early fall 2025 and awarding a contract at the end of 2025 or in early 2026. In April 2025, the City of Rancho Palos Verdes submitted a letter in support of the project (Attachment A) as part of the City of Rolling Hills Estates’ outreach to potential donors and grant applications. This includes an application for a $500,000 grant through the San Gabriel and Lower Los Angeles Rivers and Mountains Conservancy. The project will include a single-level, 1,750-square-foot nature center/community room building with a viewing deck, a 1,000-square-foot outdoor classroom area with a photovoltaic (PV) shade canopy, storage enclosures, a boardwalk with a canyon overlook, privacy screen, community-preferred fencing, gate, and associated parking and drop-off spaces, increasing the overall size of the facility to 3,290 square feet. The outdoor amphitheater will remain and be accessed by a new boardwalk ramp from a central cou rt between the nature center and the covered outdoor classroom area. The overall project has been downsized from a 5,500-square-foot version that was considered in 2019. Staff will continue to monitor this issue in future Border Issues Status Reports. The Brickwalk Residences (Rolling Hills Estates) There has been no change in the status of the Brickwalk Residences, a 407 -unit mixed- use development proposed for Indian Peak Road and Deep Valley Drive near Crenshaw Boulevard in Rolling Hills Estates on border with Rancho Palos Verdes. According to City of Rolling Hills Estates planning staff, a professional services agreement for environmental review-related work for this project is expected to be brought before the City Council by the end of June 2025. Proposed by property owner Rolling Hills Capital, LLC, the project calls for the demolition of existing buildings and the construction of 407 residential units (including 29 very low - income units, qualifying for a 30% density bonus) in three eight -story buildings and one six-story building on a 10.42-acre site located at 655-815 Deep Valley Drive and 924-950 Indian Peak Road, where a landslide occurred in 1997. Additionally, 3,249 square feet of retail and 503 parking spaces are proposed. An 8-acre portion of the site is identified as an Opportunity Area in the land use element of the city’s 2040 General Plan, which considers infill and redevelopment potential in five areas in the city’s Commercial District. 4 The proposed residential development, under the Opportunity Area, includes 245 one- bedroom/one-bathroom units, 83 two-bedroom/two-bathroom units, and 79 three- bedroom/three-bathroom units, all for rent. Access and improvements at the Indian Peak Road site will require coordination with the City of Rancho Palos Verdes as Indian Peak Road and Crenshaw Boulevard are within our City’s jurisdiction. To accommodate the density bonus and proposed height maximum of 96.5 feet, the developer is requesting a waiver for the site’s 44-foot height limit. Rolling Hills Capital, LLC submitted a preliminary application for the project under Senate Bill No. 330 on February 7, 2024, and a development application on August 5, 2024. Staff will continue to monitor this issue in future Border Issues Status Reports. The Residences at Peninsula Center (Rolling Hills Estates) On December 10, 2024, the Rolling Hills Estates City Council approved the Development Agreement for the Residences at Peninsula Center, a proposed 90 -unit residential development on a 2-acre portion of the Peninsula Shopping Center in Rolling Hills Estates, located at 27525 Norris Center Drive (Attachment B). According to City of Rolling Hills Estates planning staff, Phoenix-based real estate development company Vestar has not yet applied for building permits. The project calls for the demolition of an existing vacant 7,000-square-foot building (may have been used as a bank in the past) located on Norris Center Drive at a driveway entering the Peninsula Center, and the construction of 90 units in a 206,514-square-foot, five-story podium structure with a maximum overall height of 68 feet. The proposed residential development is called The Residences at Peninsula Center and all units would be for rent. This includes 57 one-bedroom units and 33 two-bedroom units, with 15% of the units reserved for moderate income households (9 units total). The project would provide a total of 240 parking spaces, with 85 spaces provided as shared public/private parking on the ground floor. Staff will continue to monitor this issue in future Border Issues Status Reports. Defense Fuel Support Point San Pedro (Los Angeles (San Pedro)) Negotiations remain ongoing for two leases for Defense Fuel Support Point San Pedro (DFSP), the sprawling, inactive U.S. Navy fuel tank farm on North Gaffey Street (which borders the City on a stretch of Western Avenue) and an 8 -acre Marine Terminal about five miles southeast in the Port of Long Beach. According to the Navy, the Marine Terminal lease is expected to be signed in fall 2025, and the signing of a Main Terminal outlease is expected in fall 2026. 5 No additional information about the leases is available due to Department of Defense solicitation regulations. Once they are signed, the Navy will be able to provide additional information. In addition to the former fuel tank farm, portions of DFSP’s Main Terminal are leased by youth sports organizations for ball fields, the Los Angeles Police Department for a shooting range, and the Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy for a native plant nursery and habitat for the endangered Palos Verdes blue butterfly. This includes a small portion of the site that falls within the boundaries of the City of Lomita. In December 2024, Rep. Nanette Barragán announced that the cities of Los Angeles and Lomita will take ownership of the ball fields after she and Rep. Ted Lieu secured language in the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) to help transfer the federal land (Attachment C). The transfer was requested by both the cities of Los Angeles and Lomita. This strategy of acquiring federal land via an act of Congress was pursued due to a change in Department of Defense policy that would have resulted in charging the lessees fair-market user fees. With the bill signed into law by then-President Joe Biden, the land transfer will happen after ongoing negotiations between the Navy and the cities are complete. Staff will continue to monitor this issue in future Border Issues Status Reports. Ponte Vista (formerly Highpark) Project (Los Angeles (San Pedro)) Home building continues at Ponte Vista, the 676-unit project on 61.4 acres of former Navy property along Western Avenue in San Pedro across from Green Hills Memorial Park, and consists of single-family homes, townhomes, and flats. According to master developer Harridge Development Group, almost all areas of Ponte Vista are in various phases of construction. Staff has requested an update on the number of homes sold and occupied and will share it as late correspondence if received pri or to tonight’s meeting. Staff will continue to monitor this issue in future Border Issues Status Reports. Rancho LPG Butane Storage Facility, Los Angeles (San Pedro) There has been no change in the status of Rancho LPG, the facility on North Gaffey Street in San Pedro, where 25 million gallons of butane are stored in two aboveground tanks. Another five horizontal storage tanks each hold 60,000 gallons of propane. Rancho LPG has long been the subject of concerns from residents of San Pedro, the Eastview area of Rancho Palos Verdes, and others about safety and the potential for a catastrophic explosion. Plains All American Pipeline, which owns the facility, has defended its safety record and procedures. 6 In March 2025, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced the agency is reconsidering the 2024 Risk Management Plan (RMP) rule, which regulates close to 12,000 facilities that make, use, or store hazardous chemicals, including Rancho LPG (Attachment D). Rep. Nanette Barragán of San Pedro and Senator Cory Booker of New Jersey had worked to strengthen the rule to include a number of new amendments to improve protections for workers, first responders, and communities living near the facilities (Attachment E). According to the EPA, the rule has raised concerns relating to national security and the value of the prescriptive requirements within the rule. It is unclear at this time what changes could be made and how they could impact oversight over Rancho LPG. No update is available on a study requested by Los Angeles City Councilmember Tim McOsker in April 2024 evaluating the cost and timeline for closing Rancho LPG, nor a City Council hearing regarding the inspection, oversight, public safety measures, and resource needs for Rancho LPG. Staff will continue to monitor this issue in future Border Issues Status Reports. San Pedro Waterfront Project (West Harbor) (Port of Los Angeles) On January 10, 2025, the City submitted a comment letter on the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (Draft SEIR) to the 2009 San Pedro Waterfront EIS/EIR for the West Harbor Modification Project (Attachment F). The project involves the development of an approximately 6,200-seat, 100,000-square-foot-amphitheater on 2.1 acres of Port property leased to West Harbor, which housed the former Ports O’ Call Village. The amphitheater would host approximately 100 paid events per year, generally from April through November. In addition to concerts, 25 offshore barge fireworks displays per year are proposed. The Draft SEIR determined that implementation of the proposed project would result in significant, unavoidable impacts related to air quality, including greenhouse gases, noise and transportation. The City’s letter noted that while favorable and unfavorable atmospheric conditions were studied, the noise-sensitive locations in the Draft SEIR were limited to the immediate surrounding area and the radius should be expanded to adequately assess noise im pacts on the Palos Verdes Peninsula. The letter also stated the City’s support for the creation of a noise complaint hotline and/or website for the amphitheater, penalties for noise violations, requirements for a noise monitoring station and sound-monitoring data reports, and a mitigation measure to replace firework displays with lighted drone displays to the extent possible. According to Port of Los Angeles staff, the Final SEIR is expected to be released this month. Construction continues on the remainder of the overall the West Harbor development, which will include 375,000 square feet of restaurants, retail, office, open space, and entertainment over 42 acres. In June 2025, the Daily Breeze reported that the 7 development is 80% leased. With new refinancing secured, West Harbor is expected to have soft openings by the end of 2025, with a grand opening celebration planned for the first or second quarter of 2026 (Attachment G). Staff will continue to monitor this issue in future Border Issues Status Reports. Starbucks Drive-Thru at 28110 South Western Avenue (Los Angeles (San Pedro)) There has been no change in the status of a proposed Starbucks drive-thru in the Garden Village Shopping Center in San Pedro on Western Avenue just north of Westmont Drive. The Kaidence Group, a Phoenix-based commercial real estate developer, previously planned to build a 2,178-square-foot Starbucks drive-thru on the site of a vacant bank building but withdrew its application in May 2023. Then, Kaidence considered the site of a vacant Coco’s restaurant space in the southwest corner of the shopping center, before exploring additional opportunities. No additional progress has been made at this time. Staff will continue to monitor this issue in future Border Issues Status Reports. Butcher Solana Residential Development Project (Torrance) According to City of Torrance planning staff, the application for the proposed Butcher Solana apartment project at the southwest corner of Hawthorne Boulevard and Via Valmonte has been withdrawn. The proposal consisted of 248 one- and two-bedroom apartments in three five-story buildings with 484 parking spaces in a six-story structure. It had been subject to concerns raised by City staff and the other Peninsula cities including traffic impacts, adequacy of parking, inconsistencies throughout the document, purportedly outdated information, and erroneous analyses. This issue will be removed from future Border Issues status reports. Mixed-Use Residential Development on Hawthorne Boulevard Near Rolling Hills Road (Torrance) According to City of Torrance planning staff, the application for a proposed 18 -unit apartment mixed-use development along the east side of Hawthorne Boulevard just north of Rolling Hills Road remains incomplete, and there are no new updates. In 2022, silhouettes went up outlining the visual impacts of the proposed project, including 5,745 square feet of office space. The site is located on seven vacant parcels within the city’s Hillside Overlay Area. It is Staff’s understanding that the project will not require an environmental review, because it meets the parameters of California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15332, meaning it is considered an “infill” development project. This exemption is intended to promote infill development, which is defined by the Governor’s 8 Office of Planning and Research as “building within unused and underutilized lands within existing development patterns, typically but not exclusively in urban areas.” Staff will continue to monitor this issue in future Border Issues Status Reports. Mixed-Use Residential Development at 24601 Hawthorne Boulevard (Torrance) According to City of Torrance planning staff, the application for a proposed mixed-use development on the northwest corner (caddy corner of the Butcher Solana project) of Hawthorne Boulevard and Via Valmonte has been withdrawn. Located at 24601 Hawthorne Boulevard, the proposal consisted of an 11 -unit, two-story multiple-family residential building over a semi-subterranean parking garage, and a three-story office building. This issue will be removed from future Border Issues status reports. Western Avenue Bicycle Pedestrian Improvement Project (Caltrans) In January 2025, Caltrans installed bicycle lanes along Western Avenue from 25th Street in San Pedro, to Palos Verdes Drive North in Harbor City, as part of the Western Avenue Bicycle Pedestrian Improvement Project. While the contractor is finishing up some work within the boundaries of the City of Los Angeles, all major work on this project has been completed. This includes all bike lanes that run through the City of Rancho Palos Verdes. Caltrans implemented this project to enhance connectivity and safety for bicyclists and pedestrians along Western Avenue from 25th Street in San Pedro, to the 405 Freeway in Torrance. In addition to installing bike lanes along this stretch of Western Avenue, the project included curb ramps compliant with Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) standards and pavement markings to create a northbound right -turn lane at Westmont Drive/Delasonde Drive. This portion of Western Avenue is owned, operated, and maintained by Caltrans as part of the state highway system. The City has no jurisdiction over Western Avenue, but can, and has, shared feedback and public concerns with Caltrans. Staff will remove this issue from future Border Issues Status Reports. Vincent Thomas Bridge Deck Replacement Project (Caltrans) With the Final Environmental Impact Report and Environmental Assessment (EIR/EA) complete and a construction staging schedule selected, Caltrans is now in the design phase of the Vincent Thomas Bridge Deck Replacement Project. The project aims to preserve the 60-year-old suspension bridge’s structural integrity and enhance overall safety by replacing the deck and upgrading barriers, railings, and seismic sensors. This work will require a 16-month full bridge closure that will result in major traffic impacts to commuters, including those traveling between the Palos Verdes Peninsula and Long Beach/Orange County. 9 Caltrans is working with its anticipated contractor to develop the project plans, specifications, and cost estimates. By the end of 2025 and prior to construction, Caltrans and the contractor will complete a series of negotiations to reach the terms and costs of the construction contract. Work on several pre-full closure construction tasks will commence thereafter, scheduled for spring-fall 2026. This work will require nighttime and weekend one-directional closures of the bridge. The full bridge closure during construction is expected starting in fall 2026 through winter 2027/2028 . Caltrans continues its community outreach efforts regarding the project meeting with various stakeholders, including a Traffic Management Plan Task Force, to receive input and develop plans to detour traffic around the closure and divert traffic onto freeways. The agency also created an email and text message notification system to keep the public informed about upcoming meetings, road closures, and traffic relating to Vincent Thomas Bridge. Notifications will be available in both English and Spanish. To regist er a phone number or email address, visit the following link: https://forms.office.com/Pages/ResponsePage.aspx?id=ZAobYkAXzEONiEVA00h1Vmo 6XSbm-UNGtWsStEZ2eptUMkxIMkI4SUFXV1oyWTZIWTNaTjVES00wMC4u Staff will continue to monitor this issue in future Border Issues Status Reports. CONCLUSION: Staff recommends the City Council receive and file this first 2025 Border Issues Status Report. ALTERNATIVES: In addition to the Staff recommendation, the following alternative actions are available for the City Council’s consideration: 1. Identify additional development projects along the City’s borders for inclusion in future Border Issues Status Reports. 2. Take other action, as deemed appropriate by the City Council. 10 April 8, 2025 Mr. Greg Grammer, City Manager City of Rolling Hills Estates 4045 Palos Verdes Drive North Rolling Hills Estates, CA 90274 SUBJECT: Letter of Support For the New Nature Center Project at George F Canyon As City Manager for the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, I am pleased to express our enthusiastic support for the proposed new Nature Center at George F Canyon. As a longtime proponent of conservation and nature education, the City of Rancho Palos Verdes looks forward to a new Nature Center that the entire Palos Verdes Peninsula, surrounding communities, and visitors can enjoy. The current Nature Center has been a treasure to our community as it provides a variety of activities and programs to ensure visitors of all ages can learn and connect with nature. The Nature Center serves everyone on the Palos Verdes Peninsula and surrounding communities, providing interactive exhibits so visitors can learn about local native plants, animals, and natural history of the canyon, while also housing small live animal exhibits to provide an up-close view of some of the local wildlife. In partnership with the City, the Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy hosts a variety of educational opportunities and programs including naturalist guided hikes, third grade educational programs, bird walks, family nature time and scout programs. A new and improved Nature Center would be a state-of-the-art facility offering larger classroom space, and outdoor nature deck area to provide enhanced opportunities to further encourage the love of our natural habit and the importance of preservation and stewardship. We look forward to seeing this project funded. Sincerely, Ara Mihranian, AICP City Manager City of Rancho Palos Verdes A-1 DATE: DECEMBER 10, 2024 TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: WHITNEY BERRY, SENIOR PLANNER SUBJECT: PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 230516 CONSIDERATION OF A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, AND AN ADDENDUM TO THE GENERAL PLAN FINAL PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE 2040 GENERAL PLAN (SCH NO. 2021050450) FOR A 90-UNIT APARTMENT PROJECT ON A 2-ACRE SITE APPLICANT: RYAN ASH ON BEHALF OF VESTAR LOCATION: 27525 NORRIS CENTER DRIVE (APN 7589-005-020) OVERVIEW The following item is a request that the City Council conduct the second reading and adopt Ordinance No. 750, approving a Development Agreement (DA-240243) for the Residences at Peninsula Center Project. BACKGROUND On October 7, 2024, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing regarding the proposed project, including a Precise Plan of Design, a Commercial District Mixed-Use Permit, a Development Agreement and an Addendum to the General Plan Final Program Environmental Impact Report (GP EIR) for a 90-unit residential apartment development. After considering public testimony and a lengthy discussion, the Planning Commission was unable to reach a majority consensus on whether to recommend approval, approval with conditions, or denial of the Project to the City Council, and consequently made no recommendation regarding the Project to the City Council. On November 12, 2024, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2388 (Attachment C), approving a Commercial District Mixed-Use Development Permit (MUD-230517) and a Precise Plan of Design (PPD-240299), and adopting the Addendum to the 2040 General Plan Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 2021050450). At the same meeting, the City Council introduced for first reading Ordinance No. 750 (Attachment A). B-1 CEQA The Project was reviewed in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code §21000 and following: “CEQA”) and the State CEQA Guidelines (14 CCR §15000 and following). The City has prepared an Addendum to the City’s 2040 General Plan Environmental Impact Report (GP EIR, SCH No. 2021050450) (Attachment B), finding that none of the conditions/circumstances warranting greater subsequent or supplemental review, as outlined in Public Resources Code §21166 and CEQA Guidelines §15162, are present. The previously certified GP EIR serves as the primary environmental compliance document for the project, and this Addendum provides minor changes and additions to the GP EIR. The environmental impacts presented by a “medium site” development project type, consisting of 60 to 125 residential units on sites of approximately two to three acres, were addressed through the GP FEIR, the Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations, and the Mitigation and Monitoring and Reporting Program, as adopted by City Council Resolution No. 2496. The proposed Project is representative of the buildout analyzed for the “medium site” development project type in the GP EIR. Based on the analysis presented in the Addendum and the previously certified GP EIR, the proposed Project would not result in substantial changes requiring major revisions to the previously certified GP EIR, would not result in any new significant environmental impacts that were not discussed in the GP EIR, and would not result in a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts. Project-level analysis in the Addendum determined that the proposed Project would contribute to, but not increase the severity of, significant and unavoidable impacts to VMT, cultural resources, and tribal cultural resources that were identified in the GP EIR. The Project will be required to implement applicable mitigation measures from the General Plan EIR as identified in Chapter 4 of the Addendum. No new mitigation measures are required as a result of implementing the proposed Project. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the City Council: 1. Take public testimony; 2. Discuss Ordinance No. 750; 3. Close the public hearing; 4. Conduct the second reading and adopt Ordinance No. 750. Attachments: A. Ordinance No. 750 B. Addendum to the General Plan Final EIR C. Resolution No. 2588 D. Link to Item 7A, City Council Meeting of November 12, 2024 B-2 CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ESTATES LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA ORDINANCE NO. 750 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ESTATES, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (DA-240243) FOR THE RESIDENCES AT PENINSULA CENTER PROJECT. APPLICANT: RYAN ASH ON BEHALF OF VESTAR; LOCATION: 27525 NORRIS CENTER DRIVE (APN 7589-005-020) The City Council of the City of Rolling Hills Estates resolves as follows: SECTION 1. Findings. The City Council finds as follows: A.Mr. Ryan Ash, on behalf of Vestar (“Applicant"), filed an application with the Community Development Department requesting a Precise Plan of Design, a Commercial District Mixed-Use Development Permit and a Development Agreement for the purposes of the new construction of a 90-unit residential development (“Project”); such an application as required by Chapter 17.30 of the Rolling Hills Estates Municipal Code (RHEMC). B.RHEMC Section 17.30.080, Section 17.30.090 and 17.30.020(A) require approval of a Development Agreement and a Precise Plan of Design for multi-family residential development applying for City Bonus Level Development for a density greater than 30 dwelling units to the acre located within the Commercial General Mixed-Use (CGMU) zoning district. C.The City of Rolling Hills Estates, California (“City”) is a municipal corporation and general law city, duly organized under the constitution and laws of the State of California. D.California Government Code sections 65864 et seq. (the “Development Agreement Law”), authorizes the City to enter into agreements for the development of real property with any person having a legal or equitable interest in such property in order to establish certain development rights. E.RHEMC Chapter 17.82, Development Agreements, implements procedures for the processing and approval of development agreements as permitted under the Development Agreement Law. F.RHEMC Chapter 17.76, Density Bonus and Other Incentives, RHEMC Section 17.30.080, Bonus Level Development, and RHEMC Section 17.30.090, Community Amenities or Benefits Required for Bonus Level Development, establish a process for providing bonus level development (i.e., greater density) in exchange for a project providing desirable community amenities and benefits. G.On October 11, 2022, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2531, approving a list of community amenities and benefits that may be provided for bonus level development under RHEMC Chapter 17.30. H.The Applicant seeks to enter into a Development Agreement (DA-240243) for the Project and filed a Commercial District Mixed-Use Development Permit application (MUD- 230517) with the Community Development Department. I.On March 12, 2024, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing regarding the Project and provided a preliminary determination that the community benefits and amenities proposed by the Applicant qualify for bonus level development pursuant to the City’s Bonus Level Development program. J.On August 5, 2024, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing regarding the Project and, after considering public testimony and a lengthy discussion, continued the public hearing to the September 3, 2024 Planning Commission meeting. K.On August 19, 2024, the Applicant submitted a request to continue the public hearing to the October 7, 2024 Planning Commission meeting. L.On October 7, 2024, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing regarding the Project and, after considering public testimony and discussion, was unable to reach ATTACHMENT A B-3 a majority consensus on whether to recommend approval, approval with conditions, or denial of the Project to the City Council , and consequently made no recommendation to the City Council regarding the Commercial District Mixed-Use Permit (MUD-230517), the Precise Plan of Design (PPD-240299), nor the adoption of this Ordinance to enter into a Development Agreement (DA- 240243) with the Applicant. M. On November 12, 2024, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on the Project and the introduction of this Ordinance approving a Development Agreement for the Project. At this hearing, the City Council considered all written and oral reports of staff and public testimony on the matter, and such other matters as are reflected in the record and approved Resolution No. 2588, approving a Commercial District Mixed-Use Permit (MUD-230517), a Precise Plan of Design (PPD-240299), and an Addendum to the City’s 2040 General Plan Final Program Environmental Impact Report, and introduced this Ordinance for a first reading. N. On December 10, 2024, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on this Ordinance approving a Development Agreement. At this hearing, the City Council considered all written and oral reports of staff and public testimony on the matter, and such other matters as are reflected in the record and adopted this Ordinance. SECTION 2. Environmental Review. The Project was reviewed in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code § 21000 et seq.: “CEQA”), and the City prepared and the City Council approved an Addendum to the General Plan Final Program Environmental Impact Report (“GP FEIR”) for the 2040 General Plan (SCH No. 2021050450), finding that none of the conditions/circumstances warranting greater subsequent or supplemental review, as outlined in Public Resources Code §21166 and CEQA Guidelines §15162, are present. The environmental impacts presented by a “medium site” development project type, consisting of 60 to 125 residential units on sites of approximately two to three acres, were addressed through the GP FEIR, the Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations, and the Mitigation and Monitoring and Reporting Program, as adopted by City Council Resolution No. 2496. The proposed Project is representative of the buildout analyzed for the “medium site” development project type in the GP FEIR. The Project will not result in new significant effects or substantial increase in the severity of a previously identified significant effects due to either a change in the project or a change in the circumstances under which the project is undertaken, and there is no new information of substantial importance that would otherwise affect the analysis in the certified GP FEIR, and thus the proposed Project does not trigger the requirements for subsequent review pursuant to Public Resources Code §21166 and CEQA Guidelines §15162. SECTION 3. Development Agreement Findings. In accordance with RHEMC Section 17.82.070(C), the City Council finds with respect to the application DA-240243 for the Development Agreement as follows: A. The agreement and the proposed Project is consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the Rolling Hills Estates 2040 General Plan. The Project is consistent with the Commercial General Mixed-Use land use classification in the General Plan because the proposed Development Agreement will further the goals and policies of the General Plan including, but not limited to, Housing Element policies and quantitative objectives for more affordable housing that meets workforce housing needs, Commercial District Area Vision Plan goals for infill development on underutilized lots and redevelopment of the Commercial District to transform the area into a vibrant, walkable, and inviting town center, and the Mobility Element goals for a safe, accessible and inviting pedestrian network. B. The agreement conforms with public convenience, general welfare and good land- use practices. C. The agreement will not be detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of persons residing in the immediate area, not be detrimental or injurious to property or persons in the general neighborhood or to the general welfare of the residents of the City as a whole because, as documented in the CEQA Addendum for the Project, mitigation measures have been included to mitigate all potential significant environmental impacts to less than significant levels. D. The agreement will not adversely affect the orderly development of property or the preservation of property values because the proposed Development Agreement includes provisions to facilitate the orderly development of the Project and provision of community benefits and amenities over the term of the agreement. E. The agreement is consistent with the Development Agreement Law (Government Code Section 65864 through 65869.5) because the proposed Development Agreement provides assurances to the Applicant regarding the ability to proceed with the multi-year Project in B-4 accordance with existing policies, rules and regulations in return for the provision of community benefits and amenities. F. The agreement is consistent with the provisions of Section 17.30 Commercial General Mixed-Use (CGMU) District, Chapter 17.76, Density Bonus and Other Incentives, Chapter 17.82, Development Agreements, and all applicable provisions of Title 17 of this Code. G. The agreement will result in the provision of economic, environmental, recreational, cultural or social benefits to the city that would not be attainable without approval of the development agreement; specifically, the applicant’s provision of community amenities and benefits in the form of public parking, affordable housing units and the construction of a public plaza with pedestrian amenities SECTION 4. Approval of Development Agreement. Based on the findings made in Sections 1-3 above, the City Council hereby approves the Development Agreement, which is attached as Exhibit A, and authorizes the Mayor to execute the Development Agreement on behalf of the City. SECTION 4. Severability. If any section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this resolution is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision will not affect the validity of the remainder of this resolution. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this resolution, and each and every section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, subdivisions, sentences, clauses, phrases, or portions thereof is declared invalid or unconstitutional. SECTION 5. Publication by Summary. This Ordinance may be published by title and summary. The approved summary of this Ordinance is attached as Exhibit B. SECTION 6. Recordation. Pursuant to California Code section 65868.5, the City will cause the Development Agreement to be recorded with the County Recorder of the County of Los Angeles within ten days after the Agreement is executed on behalf of the City and the applicant. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED December 10, 2024. ____________________________________ Velveth Schmitz, Mayor ATTEST: ________________________________ Lauren Pettit, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM ________________________________ Donald M. Davis, City Attorney B-5 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ss. CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ESTATES ) I, Lauren Pettit, City Clerk of the City of Rolling Hills Estates, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No.750, was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council on December 10, 2024, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ________________________________ Lauren Pettit, City Clerk B-6 Exhibit A Development Agreement by and between The City of Rolling Hills Estates and Vestar Peninsula Retail, LLC (Attached) B-7 4869-4289-6067 v4 RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: Cox, Castle & Nicholson, LLP 3121 Michelson Drive, Suite 200 Irvine, CA 92612 Attn: Sean Matsler, Esq. ______________________________________________________________________________ (Space Above This Line Reserved For Recorder’s Use) APN: ____________________ DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ESTATES AND VESTAR PENINSULA RETAIL, LLC B-8 1 4869-4289-6067 v4 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (“Agreement”) is entered into as of ________________, 2024, and is between the City of Rolling Hills Estates (“City”), a California general law city, and Vestar Peninsula Retail, LLC, a limited liability company (“VPR” or “Developer”). RECITALS A. To strengthen the public planning process, encourage private participation in comprehensive planning and reduce the economic risk of development, the Legislature of the State of California enacted Government Code section 65864 and following (“Development Agreement Law”), pursuant to which the City has adopted Chapter 17.82 (Development Agreements) of the Rolling Hills Estates Municipal Code (“Chapter 17.82”). The Development Agreement Law and Chapter 17.82 authorize City to enter into an agreement with any person having a legal or equitable interest in real property regarding the development of such property. B. This Development Agreement has been processed, considered and executed in accordance with the procedures and requirements of the Development Agreement Law and Chapter 17.82. C. Developer has a legal or equitable interest in certain real property consisting of approximately two acres of land commonly referred to as 27525 Norris Center Drive (“Project Site”). The Project Site is depicted on the attached Exhibit A. D. Developer intends to develop the Project Site as a multi-family residential project consisting of 90 dwelling units and ancillary uses (“Project”). A site plan depicting the Project is attached as Exhibit B. E. The City has taken several actions to review and plan for the future development of the Project. These include, without limitation, the following: 1. Environmental Impact Report Addendum. The environmental impacts of the Project, including the Project Approvals (defined below) and the Subsequent Approvals (defined below), have properly been reviewed and assessed by City pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code section 21000 et seq.; the State CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations Title 14, section 15000 et seq.; and City’s local guidelines promulgated thereunder (hereinafter collectively referred to as “CEQA”). On November 12, 2024, pursuant to CEQA and following review by, but no recommendation from, the City Planning Commission, the City Council approved an Addendum to the City’s 2040 General Plan Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 2021050450) (“Addendum”), finding that none of the conditions/circumstances warranting greater subsequent or supplemental review, as outlined in Public Resources Code section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines section 15162, are present. 2. Other Permits and Approvals. Following City Planning Commission review and consideration of the Program EIR Addendum at a duly noticed public B-9 Page 2 4869-4289-6067 v4 hearing, the City Council approved the following permits and approvals: a Commercial General Mixed-Use Development Permit, a Precise Plan of Design and this Development Agreement. The approvals and development policies described in this Recital are collectively referred to herein as the “Project Approvals” and the date approved as the “Approval Date.” Project Approvals also include those approvals listed on the attached Exhibit C. F. The Developer is seeking bonus level development pursuant to Rolling Hills Estates Municipal Code (“RHEMC”) sections 17.30.080 and 17.30.090, which authorizes increases in development in exchange for a developer providing community amenities and/or benefits. G. As a community amenity and benefit, Developer has agreed to (1) deed- restrict ten percent (10%) of the Project’s total units, or nine (9) units, for moderate-income households (“Affordable Units”); (2) deed-restrict 85 parking spaces on the ground floor for public use (“Public Parking Spaces”); and (3) increase connectivity by adding a new sidewalk and landscaped plaza at the intersection of Deep Valley Drive and Norris Center Drive (“Connectivity Plaza”) (collectively, the benefits identified in this recital are the “Project Community Benefits”). H. City has determined that the value of the Project Community Benefits are sufficient to be granted a bonus level development of a fifty percent (50%) density bonus, an increase in maximum height to 68 feet, or one (1) additional story, and a reduction in open space, based on the value of the Project Community Benefits as calculated consistent with RHEMC section 17.30.090.D. I. This Agreement will also, among other things, (1) reduce uncertainties in planning and provide for the orderly development of the Project; (2) mitigate any environmental impacts as identified in the Addendum prepared for the Project pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act; (3) provide for the redevelopment of currently underutilized land; (4) generate increased tax revenues for the City; (5) provide needed additional housing; and (6) otherwise achieve the goals and purposes for which the Development Agreement Law, Chapter 17.82, and the RHEMC’s bonus level development regulations were enacted. J. In exchange for the Project Community Benefits, together with the other public benefits that will result from the development of the Project, Developer will receive by this Agreement assurance that it may proceed with the Project in accordance with the “Applicable Law” (defined below), and therefore desires to enter into this Agreement. K. The City Council, after conducting a duly noticed public hearing, has found that this Agreement is consistent with the General Plan and has conducted all necessary proceedings in accordance with the City’s rules and regulations for the approval of this Agreement. L. Following City Council approval of the Addendum, the Commercial General Mixed-Use Development Permit, and the Precise Plan of Design, the City Council at a duly noticed public hearing adopted Ordinance No. 750, approving and authorizing the execution of this Agreement. B-10 Page 3 4869-4289-6067 v4 AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the promises, covenants and provisions set forth herein, the receipt and adequacy of which is hereby acknowledged, the Parties (defined below) agree as follows: 1.0 DEFINITIONS For all purposes of this Agreement, except as otherwise expressly provided or unless the context requires: 1.1 “Developer” means Vestar Peninsula Retail, LLC and any of their respective subsequent successors-in-interest, transferees or assignees. 1.2 “Development Regulations” means the following regulations as they are in effect as of the Approval Date and to the extent they govern or regulate the development of the Project Site: the General Plan; the Precise Plan of Design; and, to the extent not expressly superseded by the Precise Plan of Design or this Agreement, all other land use and subdivision regulations governing the permitted uses, density and intensity of use, design, improvement, and construction standards and specifications, procedures for obtaining required City permits and approvals for development, and similar matters that may apply to development of the Project on the Project Site during the Term of this Agreement. 1.3 “Parties” means Developer and the City, each of which may be referred to herein individually as a “Party.” 1.4 “Subsequent Approvals” means all discretionary development and building approvals that Developer is required to obtain to Develop the Project on and with respect to the Project Site after the Approval Date consistent with the Project Approvals, Development Regulations, and this Agreement, with the understanding that except as expressly set forth in this Agreement City will not have the right subsequent to the Approval Date and during the Term of this Agreement to adopt or impose requirements for any such Subsequent Development Approvals that do not exist as of the Approval Date. 2.0 EFFECTIVE DATE AND TERM 2.1 Effective Date. This Agreement will become effective upon the date the ordinance approving this Agreement becomes effective, consistent with law (“Effective Date”). This Agreement will be executed by the City within ten (10) days after the Effective Date and recorded as provided in Government Code section 65868.5. 2.2 Term. The term of this Agreement (“Term”) will commence upon the Effective Date and continue for the earlier of: (1) a period of ten (10) years, in addition to any extensions of the Term pursuant to Section 6.8 of this Agreement; (2) completion of the Project in accordance with the terms of this Agreement, including issuance of all required occupancy permits and City acceptance of all required dedications, if any, and the satisfaction of all B-11 Page 4 4869-4289-6067 v4 Developer obligations under this Agreement. Independent of any extensions granted pursuant to Section 6.8, Developer will also be entitled to two (2) five-year extensions, to be exercised at Developer’s discretion, if the 30-day Secured Overnight Financing Rate (SOFR) average is above 3.0 for any six-month period during (1) the last year of the initial 10-year Term or (2) the last year of any extension. The Developer must exercise an extension in a writing to the City at least 15 days prior to the expiration of this Agreement. Upon the expiration of the Term, this Agreement will terminate and be of no further effect; provided, however, such termination will not affect any right or duty of a Party arising out of any Project Approvals or Subsequent Approvals in effect on or prior to the effective date of such termination, and any right or duty arising under this Agreement that expressly survives the termination of the Agreement. 3.0 OBLIGATIONS OF DEVELOPER 3.1 Obligations of Developer Generally. Developer has the right but not the obligation to develop the Project under the terms of the Project Approvals, including this Agreement. The Parties acknowledge and agree that the City’s agreement to perform and abide by the covenants and obligations of City set forth in this Agreement is a material consideration for Developer’s agreement to perform and abide by its long term covenants and obligations, as set forth herein. The Parties acknowledge that many of Developer’s long term obligations under this Agreement are in addition to Developer’s agreement to perform all applicable mitigation measures identified in the Addendum. Developer agrees that the permitted uses of the Project Site, the density and intensity of such uses, the maximum heights and sizes of the buildings and improvements to be constructed on the Project Site, and the reservation and dedication of land for public purposes, if any, required in connection with the development of the Project are as set forth in and consistent with the Project Approvals. Developer further agrees not to cause or permit the construction of any building or improvement that exceeds the maximum density, building heights or building sizes set forth in or otherwise required by the Project Approvals or any Subsequent Approvals. 3.2 Bonus Level Development – Community Benefits Contribution. (a) Consistent with RHEMC Sections 17.30.080 and 17.30.090, which expressly permits the City Council to approve bonus level development in exchange for Developer providing the following Project Community Benefits: 1. Affordable Units. Developer agrees to deed-restrict ten percent (10%) of the Project’s total units (nine (9) deed-restricted units) for Moderate Income Households for a term of thirty-five (35) years. “Moderate Income Households” means persons and families whose gross income is greater than eighty percent (80%) and does not exceed one- hundred and twenty percent (120%) of Los Angeles County area median income, adjusted for household size for the appropriate unit, as defined by the income tables provided by the California Department of Housing and Community Development. 2. Public Parking Spaces. Developer agrees to deed-restrict eighty- five (85) parking spaces on the Project’s ground floor parking area for public use including such public uses as community organizations or events that require temporary reservation of these spaces as may be specifically identified by City from time-to-time (“Reserved Public Spaces”). B-12 Page 5 4869-4289-6067 v4 The Reserved Public Spaces may be utilized by patrons of the adjacent shopping center when not otherwise required to be available for an agreed upon public use. 3. Connectivity Plaza. Developer will construct a new sidewalk and landscaped plaza at the intersection of Deep Valley Drive and Norris Center Drive, consistent with the plans approved in conjunction with the Project Approvals. 4.0 OBLIGATIONS OF CITY 4.1 Obligations of City Generally. The Parties acknowledge and agree that Developer’s agreement to perform and abide by its covenants and obligations set forth in this Agreement is a material consideration for City’s agreement to perform and abide by the long term covenants and obligations of City, as set forth herein. 4.2 Protection of Vested Rights. To the maximum extent permitted by law, City will take such actions as may be necessary or appropriate to ensure that the vested rights provided by this Agreement can be enjoyed by Developer. City further agrees that, to the maximum extent permitted by law, City will not initiate the enactment of any City Law (defined in Section 6.5 below) that would preclude Developer from implementing the Project Approvals or any of the Subsequent Approvals. 4.3 Availability of Public Services. To the maximum extent permitted by law and consistent with its authority, City will assist and otherwise cooperate with Developer in reserving such capacity for sewer and water services as may be necessary to serve the Project; provided, however, that such assistance and cooperation is at no direct cost or expense to City other than that associated with a reasonable amount staff time. 5.0 COOPERATION - IMPLEMENTATION 5.1 Processing Application for Subsequent Approvals. By approving the Project Approvals, City has made certain final policy decisions with respect to the Project. Accordingly, City may not use its discretionary authority in considering any application for a Subsequent Approval to change the policy decisions reflected by the Project Approvals or otherwise to prevent or delay development of the Project as set forth in the Project Approvals. Instead, the Subsequent Approvals will be deemed to be tools to implement those final policy decisions and will be issued by City so long as they comply with this Agreement and Applicable Law and are not inconsistent with the Project Approvals. 5.2 Subsequent Submittals By Developer. Developer acknowledges that City cannot expedite processing Subsequent Approvals until Developer submits complete applications. Developer agrees to (i) provide to City any and all documents, applications, plans, and other information necessary for City to carry out its obligations hereunder; and (ii) cause Developer’s planners, engineers, and all other consultants to provide to City all such documents, applications, plans and other necessary required materials as set forth in the Applicable Law (defined in Section 6.3 below). It is the express intent of Developer and City to cooperate and diligently work to obtain any and all Subsequent Approvals following submittal of complete applications by Developer. B-13 Page 6 4869-4289-6067 v4 5.3 Timely Processing By City. Upon submission by Developer of a complete application and any applicable processing fee for any Subsequent Approval, City will promptly and diligently commence and complete all steps necessary to act on the Subsequent Approval application including, without limitation, (i) if legally required, providing notice and holding public hearings; and (ii) acting on any such Subsequent Approval application. 5.4 Review of Subsequent Approvals. Subject to the City’s exercise of its police power authority as specified below and in Section 6.13, City may deny an application for a Subsequent Approval only if such application does not comply with this Agreement or Applicable Law , or does not substantially comply with the Project Approvals. Developer may seek amendments to the Project Approvals, but any such amendment will be subject to approval at the sole discretion of the City Council unless such amendment is demonstrated by Developer to be necessary to effectuate the original intent of the Parties reflected in the original Project Approvals. City may approve an application for such a Subsequent Approval subject to any conditions necessary to bring the Subsequent Approval into compliance with this Agreement or Applicable Law, or is necessary to make such Subsequent Approval consistent with the Project Approvals. If City denies any application for a Subsequent Approval, City must specify in writing the reasons for such denial and may suggest a modification which could be approved. Any such specified modifications must be consistent with this Agreement, Applicable Law and the Project Approvals, and City will approve the application if it is subsequently resubmitted for City review and addresses the reason for the denial in a manner that is consistent with this Agreement, Applicable Law and the Project Approvals. In addition, nothing in this Section 5.4 precludes City from imposing further reasonable conditions or restrictions on any applicable discretionary Subsequent Approval provided that the failure to impose such conditions or restrictions would put residents of the applicable area or surrounding area in a condition dangerous to their health or safety. 5.5 Other Government Permits. At Developer’s sole discretion and in accordance with Developer’s construction schedule, and at Developer’s sole cost, Developer will apply for such other permits and approvals as may be required by other governmental or quasi- governmental entities in connection with the development of, or the provision of services to, the Project. City will cooperate with Developer in its efforts to obtain such permits and approvals and will, from time to time at the request of Developer, use reasonable efforts to assist Developer in entering into binding agreements with any such entity as may be necessary to ensure the timely availability of such permits and approvals. 6.0 STANDARDS, LAWS AND PROCEDURES GOVERNING THE PROJECT 6.1 Vested Right to Develop. Developer has a vested right to develop the Project on the Project Site in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement and the Project Approvals. Nothing in this Section may be deemed to eliminate or diminish the requirement of Developer to obtain any required Subsequent Approvals. 6.2 Permitted Uses Vested by This Agreement. The permitted uses of the Project Site; the density and intensity of use of the Project Site; the maximum height, bulk and size of proposed buildings; provisions for reservation or dedication of land for public purposes and the location of public improvements; the general location of public utilities; and other terms B-14 Page 7 4869-4289-6067 v4 and conditions of development applicable to the Project, will be as set forth in the Applicable Law , Project Approvals, and, as and when they are issued (but not in limitation of any right to develop as set forth in the Project Approvals), the Subsequent Approvals. 6.3 Applicable Law. The City’s rules, regulations, official policies, standards and specifications applicable to the Project (“Applicable Law”) are those set forth in this Agreement and the Project Approvals, and, with respect to matters not addressed by this Agreement or the Project Approvals, those rules, regulations, official policies, standards and specifications (including City ordinances and resolutions) governing permitted uses, building locations, timing of construction, densities, design, heights, and exactions, in force and effect on the Effective Date and during the Term. 6.4 Uniform Codes. City may apply to the Project, at any time during the Term, then current uniform building and construction codes (e.g., building, electric, energy, fire, green building standards, maintenance, plumbing, etc.) and City’s then current design and construction standards for road and storm drain facilities, provided any such uniform code or standard has been adopted and uniformly applied by City on a citywide basis and provided that no such code or standard is adopted for the purpose of preventing or otherwise limiting construction of all or any part of the Project. 6.5 No Conflicting Enactments. City will not initiate on its own, unless required by any applicable state or federal law, any ordinance, resolution, rule, regulation, standard, directive, condition or other measure (each individually, a “City Law”) that would have the effect of reducing the development rights or assurances provided by this Agreement. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, any City Law will be deemed to reduce the development rights under this Agreement if it would accomplish any of the following results, either by specific reference to the Project or as part of a general enactment which applies to or affects the Project: (a) Change any land use designation or permitted use of the Project Site; (b) Limit or control the availability of public utilities, services or facilities or any privileges or rights to public utilities, services, or facilities (for example, water rights, water connections or sewage capacity rights, sewer connections, etc.) for the Project; (c) Limit or control the location of buildings, structures, grading, or other improvements of the Project in a manner that is inconsistent with or more restrictive than the limitations included in the Project Approvals or the Subsequent Approvals (as and when they are issued); (d) Limit or control the rate, timing, phasing or sequencing of the approval, development or construction of all or any part of the Project in any manner; (e) Apply to the Project any City Law otherwise allowed by this Agreement that is not uniformly applied on a citywide basis to all substantially similar types of development projects and project sites; B-15 Page 8 4869-4289-6067 v4 (f) Result in Developer having to substantially delay construction of the Project or require the issuance of additional permits or approvals by the City other than those required by Applicable Law; (g) Substantially increase the cost of constructing or developing the Project or any portion thereof; (h) Establish, enact, or impose against the Project or Project Site any new fees, taxes (including without limitation general, special and excise taxes), assessments, liens or other monetary obligations other than those specifically permitted by this Agreement or such other connection fees as may be imposed by third party utilities; (i) Impose against the Project any condition, dedication or other exaction not specifically authorized by Applicable Law; or (j) Limit the processing or procuring of applications and approvals of Subsequent Approvals. To the maximum extent permitted by law, City will prevent any City Law from invalidating or reducing the development rights or assurances provided by this Agreement. The parties understand and agree that this Section applies to future City Laws, but not to the imposition of conditions on Subsequent Approvals that are discretionary approvals. The extent to which the City may impose conditions in connection with the evaluation of such Subsequent Approvals is governed by Section 5.4 and the standards set forth in Section 6.13 below. City will cooperate with Developer and will undertake such actions as may be necessary to ensure this Agreement remains in full force and effect. Developer reserves the right to challenge in court any City Law that would conflict with Applicable Law or this Agreement or reduce the development rights provided by this Agreement. Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, a City Law that conflicts with Applicable Law may be applied to the Project if consented to in writing by Developer. 6.6 Initiatives and Referenda. If any City Law is enacted or imposed by initiative or referendum, or by the City Council directly or indirectly in connection with any proposed initiative or referendum, which City Law would conflict with Applicable Law or this Agreement or reduce the development rights provided by this Agreement, the Parties acknowledge and agree that except with respect to a referendum challenging any ordinance approving or amending this Agreement, such City Law will not apply to the Project or interfere with Developer’s vested rights under this Agreement. 6.7 Environmental Mitigation. The Parties understand that the Addendum was intended to be used in connection with each of the Project Approvals and Subsequent Approvals needed for the Project. Consistent with the CEQA policies and requirements applicable to the Addendum, City agrees to use the Addendum in connection with the processing of any Subsequent Approval to the maximum extent allowed by law and not to impose on the Project B-16 Page 9 4869-4289-6067 v4 any mitigation measures or other conditions of approval other than those specifically imposed by the Project Approvals or specifically required by Applicable Law unless consented to by Developer. 6.8 Life of Subdivision Maps, Development Approvals, and Permits. The term of any subdivision map or any other map, permit, conditional use permit, rezoning or other land use entitlement approved as a Project Approval or Subsequent Approval will automatically be extended for the longer of the duration of this Agreement (including any extensions) or the term otherwise applicable to such Project Approval or Subsequent Approval if this Agreement is no longer in effect. The Term of this Agreement and any subdivision map or other Project Approval or Subsequent Approval will not include any period of time during which (i) a development moratorium (including, but not limited to, a water or sewer moratorium or water and sewer moratorium) or the actions of other public agencies that regulate land use, development or the provision of services to the land, prevents, prohibits or delays the construction of the Project, or a portion thereof, or (ii) a lawsuit involving any such Project Approvals, Subsequent Approvals, this Agreement, or any other development approvals or permits is pending that prevents, prohibits or delays the construction of the Project, or a portion thereof (collectively, a “Project Delay Period”). The Term of this Agreement will be extended automatically for the length of any such Project Delay Period. 6.9 State and Federal Law. As provided in Government Code section 65869.5, this Agreement does not preclude the application to the Project of changes in laws, regulations, plans or policies, to the extent that such changes are specifically mandated and required by changes in state or federal laws or regulations (“Changes in the Law”). In the event Changes in the Law prevent or preclude compliance with one or more provisions of this Agreement, such provisions of the Agreement will be modified or suspended, or performance thereof delayed, as may be necessary to comply with Changes in the Law, and City and Developer will take such action as may be required pursuant to this Agreement. Not in limitation of the foregoing, nothing in this Agreement precludes City from imposing on Developer any fee specifically mandated and required by state or federal laws and regulations. 6.10 Timing of Project Construction and Completion. (a) City and Developer expressly agree that, except as provided in this Agreement and the Project Approvals, there is no requirement that Developer initiate or complete development of the Project or any particular phase of the Project within any particular period of time, and City will not impose such a requirement on any Subsequent Project Approval. (b) In light of the foregoing and except as set forth in subsection (d) below, the Parties agree that Developer may develop in accordance with Developer’s own time schedule as such schedule may exist from time to time. In particular, and not in limitation of any of the foregoing, since the California Supreme Court held in Pardee Construction Co. v. City of Camarillo, 37 Cal.3d 465 (1984), that the failure of the parties therein to consider and expressly provide for the timing of development resulted in a later-adopted initiative restricting the timing of development to prevail over such parties’ agreement, it is the Parties’ desire to avoid that result by acknowledging that Developer has the right to develop the Project in such order and at B-17 Page 10 4869-4289-6067 v4 such rate and at such times as Developer deems appropriate within the exercise of its subjective business judgment. (c) Nothing in this Agreement exempts Developer from completing work required under any Project Approval or building permit in accordance with the terms thereof. 6.11 Development Fees. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained herein, any fee, exaction or charge that is intended to offset or reimburse the City for increased costs on the City’s public improvements due to development may be applied to the Project, as such fees, exactions or charges are imposed or adjusted from time to time, but only to the extent that any such fees, exactions or charges are applied consistently and proportionately in accordance with Applicable Law. 6.12 Police Power. In all respects not provided for in this Agreement, the City retains full rights to exercise its police power to regulate the development of the Project Site, provided, however, that the City’s discretion with respect to such actions must be exercised consistent with Developer’s vested rights under this Agreement as set forth in Section 6.1, and the City acknowledges pursuant to Government Code section 65865.2 that the conditions, terms, restrictions, and requirements for any Subsequent Approvals may not prevent development of the Project Site for the uses and to the density or intensity of development set forth in this Agreement. Moreover, nothing in this provision precludes City from attaching usual and customary conditions to such discretionary Subsequent Approvals provided such conditions (i) are applied in the same or substantially equivalent form to other similar approvals throughout the City; (ii) do not affect the use, density, or intensity of development previously approved for the Project; (iii) are not materially inconsistent with this Agreement. 7.0 AMENDMENT 7.1 Amendments Generally. This Agreement may be amended from time to time by mutual consent in writing of the Parties in accordance with Government Code section 65868 and RHEMC section 17.82.080. Such amendment will be made by an ordinance of the City Council 7.2 Operating Memoranda. The provisions of this Agreement require a close degree of cooperation between City and Developer and the refinements and further development of the Project may demonstrate that clarifications are appropriate with respect to the details of performance of City and Developer. If and when, from time to time, during the Term of this Agreement, City and Developer agree that such clarifications are necessary or appropriate, they will effectuate such clarifications through operating memoranda approved by City and Developer. No such operating memoranda will constitute an amendment to this Agreement requiring public notice or hearing. The City Attorney is authorized to make the determination whether a requested clarification may be effectuated pursuant to this Section or whether the requested clarification is of such a character to constitute an amendment pursuant to Section 7.1. The City Manager is authorized to execute any operating memoranda without City Council or Planning Commission action. B-18 Page 11 4869-4289-6067 v4 8.0 ASSIGNMENT, TRANSFER, AND ENCUMBRANCES 8.1 Assignment of Interests, Rights and Obligations. Developer may transfer or assign its interests, rights or obligations under this Agreement, the Project Approvals or Subsequent Approvals to third parties acquiring an interest or estate in the Project or any portion thereof. 8.2 Transfer Agreements. (a) In connection with the transfer or assignment by Developer of the Project (other than a transfer or assignment by Developer to an affiliated party, a Mortgagee (defined below), or a Non-Assuming Transferee (as defined below), Developer and the transferee (“Assuming Transferee”) must enter into a written agreement (“Transfer Agreement”) regarding the respective interests, rights and obligations of Developer and the transferee in and under the Agreement, the Project Approvals, and the Subsequent Approvals. Such Transfer Agreement must (i) release Developer from obligations under the Agreement, the Project Approvals, or the Subsequent Approvals that pertain to the Project being transferred, as described in the Transfer Agreement, provided that the Assuming Transferee expressly assumes such obligations and (ii) transfer to the Assuming Transferee vested rights to improve that portion of the Project being transferred, and may address any other matter deemed by Developer to be necessary or appropriate in connection with the transfer or assignment. A form of Transfer Agreement is attached hereto as Exhibit D, the form of which, if used by Developer and an Assuming Transferee, is hereby approved as to form in advance by City. (b) Developer must seek City’s prior written consent to any Transfer Agreement, which consent may not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. Failure by City to respond within 45 days to any request made by Developer for such consent will be deemed to be City’s approval of such Transfer Agreement. City may refuse to give its consent only if, in light of the proposed Assuming Transferee’s reputation, qualifications, experience, and financial resources, such Assuming Transferee would not in the City’s reasonable opinion be able to perform the obligations proposed to be assumed by such Assuming Transferee. Such determination will be made by the City Manager, and is appealable by Developer to the City Council. (c) Any Transfer Agreement will be binding on Developer, City and the Assuming Transferee. Upon recordation of any Transfer Agreement in the Official Records of Los Angeles County, Developer will automatically be released from those obligations assumed by the Assuming Transferee therein. (d) Developer will be free from all liabilities accruing on or after the date of any assignment or transfer with respect to those obligations assumed by an Assuming Transferee pursuant to a Transfer Agreement. No breach or default hereunder by any person succeeding to any portion of Developer’s obligations under this Agreement may be attributed to Developer, nor may Developer’s rights hereunder be canceled or diminished in any way by any breach or default by any such person. B-19 Page 12 4869-4289-6067 v4 8.3 Encumbrances. (a) This Agreement does not prevent or limit Developer in any manner, at its sole discretion, from encumbering the Project Site or any portion of the Project Site or any improvement on the Project Site by any mortgage, deed of trust or other security device securing financing with respect to the property or its improvements. (b) Either (i) the mortgagee of a mortgage or beneficiary of a deed of trust (“Mortgagee”) encumbering the Project Site, or any part thereof, and their successors and assigns or (ii) an equity investor of any Developer or Assuming Transferee, as the case may be (“Investor”), will, upon written request to the City, be entitled to receive from the City written notification of any default by Developer of the performance of Developer’s obligations under this Agreement which has not been cured within 60 days following the date of default. The Mortgagee or Investor will have the right, but not the obligation, to cure the default for a period of 30 days after receipt of such notice of default, or any longer period as is reasonably necessary to remedy the default(s), provided that Mortgagee or Investor must continuously and diligently pursue the remedy at all times until the default(s) is cured. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if such default is a default which can only be remedied by such Mortgagee or Investor obtaining possession of the Project Site, or any portion thereof, and such Mortgagee or Investor seeks to obtain possession, such Mortgagee or Investor will have until 30 days after the date of obtaining such possession to cure such default, or any longer period as is reasonably necessary to remedy the default(s), provided that Mortgagee or Investor must continuously and diligently pursue the remedy at all times until the default(s) is cured. Any Mortgagee or Investor who takes title to all of the Project Site, or any part thereof, pursuant to foreclosure of the mortgage or deed of trust, or a deed in lieu of foreclosure, will succeed to the rights and obligations of the Developer under this Agreement as to the Project Site or portion thereof so acquired; provided, however, in no event will such Mortgagee or Investor be liable for any defaults or monetary obligations of the Developer arising prior to acquisition of title to the Project Site by such Mortgagee or Investor, except that the Mortgagee or Investor will not be entitled to a building permit or occupancy certificate until all delinquent and current fees and other monetary or non-monetary obligations due under this Agreement for the portion of the Project Site acquired by such Mortgagee or Investor, have been satisfied. 8.4 Notices of Compliance. Within 30 days following any written request which Developer may make from time to time, City must execute and deliver to Developer (or to any party requested by Developer) a written “Notice of Compliance,” in recordable form, duly executed and acknowledged by City, that certifies: (a) This Agreement is unmodified and in full force and effect, or if there have been modifications hereto, that this Agreement is in full force and effect as modified and stating the date and nature of such modifications; (b) There are no current uncured defaults under this Agreement or specifying the dates and nature of any such default; and (c) Any other information reasonably requested by Developer. B-20 Page 13 4869-4289-6067 v4 The failure of City to deliver such Notice of Compliance or otherwise respond to the written request within such time period will constitute a conclusive presumption against City that this Agreement is in full force and effect without modification except as may be represented by the Developer and that there are no uncured defaults in the performance of the Developer, except as may be represented by the Developer. Developer will have the right at Developer’s sole discretion, to record the Notice of Compliance. 9.0 LEGAL CHALLENGES AND INDEMNIFICATION 9.1 Cooperation. (a) In the event of any administrative, legal or equitable action instituted by a third party challenging the validity of any provision of this Agreement, the procedures leading to its adoption, or the Project Approvals , Developer and City each will have the right, in its sole discretion, to elect whether or not to defend such action, to select its own counsel and to control its participation and conduct in the litigation in all respects permitted by law. If both Parties elect to defend, the Parties agree to affirmatively cooperate in defending such action and to execute a joint defense and confidentiality agreement to share and protect information, under the joint defense privilege recognized under applicable law. As part of the cooperation in defending an action, City and Developer will coordinate their defense to make the most efficient use of legal counsel and to share and protect information. Developer and City will each have sole discretion to terminate its defense at any time. If Developer elects not to defend any such third- party action, City retains the option to undertake such defense, including selecting and employing independent defense counsel at its own expense, without any Developer obligation to indemnify or defend City. If the Parties both determine to defend the action and enter into a joint defense and confidentiality agreement, Developer agrees to pay for defense counsel for City; provided, however, Developer will jointly participate in the selection of such counsel. The City agrees not to settle any third-party litigation of the Project Approvals without Developer’s consent, which consent will not be unreasonably withheld, conditioned or delayed. The Parties agree that this Section 9.1 constitutes a separate agreement entered into concurrently, and that if any other provision of this Agreement, or the Agreement as a whole, is invalidated, rendered null, or set aside by a court of competent jurisdiction, the Parties agree to be bound by the terms of this section, which will survive such invalidation, nullification or setting aside. (b) The filing of any third-party lawsuit(s) against City or Developer relating to this Agreement, the Project Approvals or other development issues affecting the Project Site will not delay or stop the development, processing or construction of the Project or approval of any Subsequent Approvals, unless the third party obtains a court order preventing the activity. City agrees not to stipulate in advance to the issuance of any such order. Developer understands the risk of proceeding with development during third-party litigation and will not seek reimbursement from the City for processing fees or other amounts expended on development during third-party litigation regardless of the outcome of that litigation. 9.2 Cure; Reapproval. (a) If, as a result of any administrative, legal or equitable action or other proceeding as described in Section 9.1, all or any portion of this Agreement, Project Approvals, B-21 Page 14 4869-4289-6067 v4 or Subsequent Approvals are set aside or otherwise made ineffective by any judgment (“Judgment”) in such action or proceeding (based on procedural, substantive or other deficiencies, hereinafter “Deficiencies”), the Parties agree to use their respective best efforts to sustain and reenact or readopt this Agreement, Project Approvals, and Subsequent Approvals that are related to the Deficiencies , as follows, unless the Parties mutually agree in writing to act otherwise: (i) If any Judgment requires reconsideration or consideration by City of this Agreement, Project Approvals, or Subsequent Approvals, then the City will consider or reconsider that matter in a manner consistent with the intent of this Agreement. If any such Judgment invalidates or otherwise makes ineffective all or any portion of this Agreement, Project Approvals, or Subsequent Approvals, then the Parties will cooperate and will cure any Deficiencies identified in the Judgment or upon which the Judgment is based in a manner consistent with the intent of this Agreement. City will then readopt or reenact this Agreement, Project Approvals, Subsequent Approvals, or any portion thereof, to which the Deficiencies relate. (ii) Acting in a manner consistent with the intent of this Agreement includes, but is not limited to, recognizing that the Parties intend that Developer may develop on the Project Site a residential community of 90 dwelling units, and adopting such ordinances, resolutions, and other enactments as are necessary to readopt or reenact all or any portion of this Agreement, Project Approvals, and Subsequent Approvals without contravening the Judgment. (b) The Parties agree that this Section 9.2 constitutes a separate agreement entered into concurrently, and that if any other provision of this Agreement, or the Agreement as a whole, is invalidated, rendered null, or set aside by a court of competent jurisdiction, the Parties agree to be bound by the terms of this section, which will survive such invalidation, nullification or setting aside. 9.3 Hold Harmless and Indemnification. In addition to Developer’s duty to defend in Section 9.1, Developer agrees to indemnify, save, and hold harmless City, and its elected and appointed representatives, boards, commissions, officers, agents, and employees (collectively, “the City” in this Section), from any and all claims, costs, and liability for any damages, personal injury or death which may arise, directly or indirectly, from Developer or Developer’s contractors, subcontractors’, agents’, or employees’ acts or operations in connection with the construction of the Project or otherwise arising under this Agreement. (collectively, “Claims”). Nothing in this Section will be construed to mean that Developer must hold the City harmless from any Claims arising from the negligent acts, or negligent failure to act, on the part of the City. The provisions of this Section 9.3 will survive the expiration or termination of this Agreement. 10.0 DEFAULT; ANNUAL REVIEW; REMEDIES; TERMINATION 10.1 Defaults. (a) Any failure by either Party to perform any term or provision of this Agreement, which failure continues uncured for a period of 30 days following written notice of B-22 Page 15 4869-4289-6067 v4 such failure from the other Party (unless such period is extended by mutual written consent), will constitute a default under this Agreement. Any notice given pursuant to the preceding sentence (“Default Notice”) must specify the nature of the alleged failure and, where appropriate, the manner in which said failure satisfactorily may be cured. If the nature of the alleged failure is such that it cannot reasonably be cured within such 30-day period, then the commencement of the cure within such time period, and the diligent prosecution to completion of the cure thereafter, will be deemed to be a cure within such 30-day period. Upon the occurrence of a default under this Agreement, the non-defaulting Party may institute legal proceedings to enforce the terms of this Agreement or, in the event of a material default, terminate this Agreement. If the default is cured, then no default will exist and the noticing Party will take no further action. 10.2 Periodic Review. (a) Conducting the Periodic Review. Annually throughout the Term, City will review the extent of Developer’s good faith compliance with the terms of this Agreement. This review (“Periodic Review”) will be conducted by the City Manager or his/her designee and will be limited in scope to compliance with the terms of this Agreement pursuant to Chapter 17.82. Developer will reimburse City for its actual costs, reasonably and necessarily incurred, to accomplish the required annual review within 30 days of the City’s mailing of an invoice for such costs. (b) Notice. At least ten days prior to the Periodic Review, and in the manner prescribed in Section 12.10 of this Agreement, City must deposit in the mail to Developer a copy of any staff reports and documents to be used or relied upon in conducting the review and, to the extent practical, related exhibits concerning Developer’s performance hereunder. Developer will be permitted an opportunity to respond to City’s evaluation of Developer’s performance, either orally at a public hearing or in a written statement, at Developer’s election. Such response must be made to the City Manager. (c) Good Faith Compliance. During the Periodic Review, the City Manager will review Developer’s good faith compliance with the terms of this Agreement. At the conclusion of the Periodic Review, the City Manager will make written findings and determinations, on the basis of substantial evidence, as to whether or not Developer has complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of this Agreement. The decision of the City Manager will be appealable by Developer to the City Council. If the City Manager finds and determines that Developer has not complied with such terms and conditions, the City Manager may recommend to the City Council that it terminate or modify this Agreement by giving notice of its intention to do so, in the manner set forth in RHEMC section 17.82.110. (d) Failure to Properly Conduct Periodic Review. If City fails, during any calendar year, to either (i) conduct the Periodic Review or (ii) notify Developer in writing of City’s determination, pursuant to a Periodic Review, as to Developer’s compliance with the terms of this Agreement and such failure remains uncured as of December 31 of any year during the Term of this Agreement, such failure will be conclusively deemed an approval by City of Developer’s compliance with the terms of this Agreement. B-23 Page 16 4869-4289-6067 v4 (e) Written Notice of Compliance. With respect to any year for which Developer has been determined or deemed to have complied with this Agreement, City must, within 30 days following request by Developer, provide Developer with a written notice of compliance, in recordable form, duly executed and acknowledged by City. Developer will have the right, in Developer’s sole discretion, to record such notice of compliance. 10.3 Enforced Delay; Extension of Time of Performance. In addition to specific provisions of this Agreement, neither Party will be deemed to be in default where delays in performance or failures to perform are due to, and a necessary outcome of, war, insurrection, strikes or other labor disturbances, walk-outs, riots, floods, earthquakes, fires, casualties, acts of God, pandemics, restrictions imposed or mandated by other governmental entities (including new or supplemental environmental regulations), enactment of conflicting state or federal laws or regulations, judicial decisions, or similar basis for excused performance which is not within the reasonable control of the Party to be excused. Litigation attacking the validity of this Agreement or any of the Project Approvals or Subsequent Approvals, or any permit, ordinance, entitlement or other action of a governmental agency other than City necessary for the development of the Project pursuant to this Agreement, or Developer’s inability to obtain materials, power or public facilities (such as water or sewer service) to the Project, will be deemed to create an excusable delay as to Developer. Upon the request of either Party, an extension of time for the performance of any obligation whose performance has been so prevented or delayed will be memorialized in writing. The term of any such extension will be equal to the period of the excusable delay, or longer, as may be mutually agreed upon. 10.4 Termination. If City elects to consider terminating this Agreement due to a material default of Developer, then City will give a notice of intent to terminate this Agreement and the matter will be scheduled for consideration and review by the City Council at a duly noticed and conducted public hearing in accordance with RHEMC section 17.82.110. Developer will have the right to offer written and oral evidence prior to or at the time of said public hearings. If the City Council determines that a material default has occurred and is continuing, and elects to terminate this Agreement, City must give written notice of termination of this Agreement to Developer by certified mail and this Agreement will thereby be terminated 30 days thereafter; provided, however, that if Developer files an action to challenge City’s termination of this Agreement within such 30-day period, then this Agreement will remain in full force and effect until a trial court has affirmed City’s termination of this Agreement and all appeals have been exhausted (or the time for requesting any and all appellate review has expired). 10.5 Cumulative Remedies. As part of the bargained for consideration for this Agreement, the Parties agree that any action of proceeding to cure, correct or remedy any default or to enforce any provision of this Agreement will be limited to the remedies provided in this Agreement. City or Developer may institute legal or equitable proceedings to cure, correct, or remedy any default, or to enforce any provision of this Agreement, enjoin any threatened or attempted violation, or enforce by specific performance, declaratory relief or writ of mandate the obligations and rights of the Parties. In no event may Developer or City, or any of their respective officers, officials, employees, agents or representatives be liable to the other Party for damages for any breach of violation of this Agreement, except with respect to Developer’s obligation to hold harmless and indemnify City under Section 9.3 of this Agreement and Developer’s obligation to pay all applicable assessments, charges, fees, taxes and other financial B-24 Page 17 4869-4289-6067 v4 obligations imposed on Developer, the Project and Project Site under this Agreement. The enforceability and validity of the above limitations on the remedies available to the Parties, including, the specific provision prohibiting the recovery of damages, is part of the bargained for, negotiated consideration for City’s consent to enter into this Agreement, and it is acknowledged that City would not have entered into this Agreement if it were to be liable in damages under this Agreement. In the event Developer or any Assuming Transferee or other successor-in-interest or assignee seeks or accepts damages in any action or proceeding brought for breach or violation of this Agreement or to enforce any provisions of this Agreement, such claim for or award of damages will destroy City’s consideration supporting City’s consent to enter into this Agreement, and will, in turn, entitle City to impose whatever terms, conditions, ordinances, fees, or exactions City deems appropriate, consistent with applicable law, and further will entitle City, at its option, to undertake to revoke any entitlements granted under this Agreement, irrespective of any provision to the contrary contained in this Agreement. 10.6 California Law; Venue. This Agreement will be construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of California. Venue for all legal proceedings related to or arising under this Agreement will be in the Superior Court for the County of Los Angeles. 10.7 Resolution of Disputes. With regard to any dispute involving development of the Project, the resolution of which is not provided for by this Agreement or Applicable Law, Developer must, at City’s request, meet with City. The parties to any such meetings will attempt in good faith to resolve any such disputes. Nothing in this Section will in any way be interpreted as requiring that Developer and City and/or City’s designee reach agreement with regard to those matters being addressed, nor will the outcome of these meetings be binding in any way on City or Developer unless expressly agreed to by the parties to such meetings. 11.0 NO AGENCY, JOINT VENTURE OR PARTNERSHIP It is specifically understood and agreed to by and between the Parties that: (i) the Project is a private development; (ii) City has no interest or responsibilities for, or duty to, third parties concerning any improvements until such time, and only until such time, that City accepts the same pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement or in connection with the various Project Approvals or Subsequent Approvals; (iii) Developer will have full power over and exclusive control of the Project herein described, subject only to the limitations and obligations of Developer under this Agreement, the Project Approvals, Subsequent Approvals, and Applicable Law; and (iv) City and Developer hereby renounce the existence of any form of agency relationship, joint venture or partnership between City and Developer and agree that nothing contained herein or in any document executed in connection herewith will be construed as creating any such relationship between City and Developer. 12.0 MISCELLANEOUS 12.1 Incorporation of Recitals and Introductory Paragraph. The Recitals contained in this Agreement, and the introductory paragraph preceding the Recitals, are hereby incorporated into this Agreement as if fully set forth herein. B-25 Page 18 4869-4289-6067 v4 12.2 Enforceability. City and Developer agree that unless this Agreement is amended or terminated pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement, this Agreement is enforceable by any Party notwithstanding any change hereafter enacted or adopted (whether by ordinance, resolution, initiative, or any other means) in any applicable general plan, specific plan, zoning ordinance, subdivision ordinance, or any other land use ordinance or building ordinance, resolution or other rule, regulation or policy adopted by City that changes, alters or amends the rules, regulations and policies applicable to the development of the Project Site at the time of the approval of this Agreement as provided by Government Code section 65866. 12.3 Findings. City hereby finds and determines that execution of this Agreement furthers public health, safety and general welfare and that the provisions of this Agreement are consistent with the General Plan. 12.4 Severability. If any term or provision of this Agreement, or the application of any term or provision of this Agreement to a particular situation, is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void or unenforceable, the remaining terms and provisions of this Agreement, or the application of this Agreement to other situations, will continue in full force and effect unless amended or modified by mutual consent of the Parties. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if any material provision of this Agreement, or the application of such provision to a particular situation, is held to be invalid, void or unenforceable, either City or Developer may (in their sole and absolute discretion) terminate this Agreement by providing written notice of such termination to the other Party. 12.5 Other Necessary Acts. Each Party agrees to execute and deliver to the other all such other further instruments and documents as may be reasonably necessary to carry out the Project Approvals, Subsequent Approvals and this Agreement and to provide and secure to the other Party the full and complete enjoyment of its rights and privileges hereunder. 12.6 Construction. Each reference in this Agreement to this Agreement or any of the Project Approvals or Subsequent Approvals will be deemed to refer to the Agreement, Project Approval or Subsequent Approval as it may be amended from time to time, whether or not the particular reference refers to such possible amendment. This Agreement has been reviewed and revised by legal counsel for both City and Developer, and no presumption or rule that ambiguities will be construed against the drafting party will apply to the interpretation or enforcement of this Agreement. 12.7 Covenants Running with the Land. All of the provisions contained in this Agreement are binding upon the Parties and their respective heirs, successors and assigns, representatives, lessees, and all other persons acquiring all or a portion of the Project Site, or any interest therein, whether by operation of law or in any manner whatsoever. All of the provisions contained in this Agreement are enforceable as equitable servitudes and constitute covenants running with the land pursuant to California law including, without limitation, Civil Code section 1468. Each covenant herein to act or refrain from acting is for the benefit of or a burden upon the Project, as appropriate, runs with the Project Site and is binding upon the owner of all or a portion of the Project Site and each successive owner during its ownership of such property. B-26 Page 19 4869-4289-6067 v4 12.8 Authority. Each person executing this Agreement represents and warrants that he or she has the authority to bind his or her respective Party to the performance of its obligations hereunder and that all necessary board of directors’, shareholders’, partners’ and other approvals have been obtained. 12.9 No Third Party Beneficiaries. The only Parties to this Agreement are the City and Developer and their successors-in-interest. There are no third party beneficiaries and this Agreement is not intended, and will not be construed, to benefit or be enforceable by any other person whatsoever. 12.10 Notices. Any notice or communication required hereunder between City or Developer must be in writing, and may be given either personally, by facsimile (with original forwarded by regular U.S. Mail) by registered or certified mail (return receipt requested), or by Federal or other similar courier promising overnight delivery. If personally delivered, a notice will be deemed to have been given when delivered to the Party to whom it is addressed. If given by facsimile transmission, a notice or communication will be deemed to have been given and received upon actual physical receipt of the entire document by the receiving Party’s facsimile machine. Notices transmitted by facsimile after 5:00 p.m. on a normal business day or on a Saturday, Sunday or holiday will be deemed to have been given and received on the next normal business day. If given by registered or certified mail, such notice or communication will be deemed to have been given and received on the first to occur of (i) actual receipt by any of the addressees designated below as the Party to whom notices are to be sent, or (ii) five days after a registered or certified letter containing such notice, properly addressed, with postage prepaid, is deposited in the United States mail. If given by Federal Express or similar courier, a notice or communication will be deemed to have been given and received on the date delivered as shown on a receipt issued by the courier. Any Party may at any time, by giving ten days written notice to the other Party, designate any other address in substitution of the address to which such notice or communication will be given. Such notices or communications must be given to the Parties at their addresses set forth below: If to City, to: City of Rolling Hills Estates 4045 Palos Verdes Drive North Rolling Hills Estates, CA 90274 Attn: City Manager With Copies to: Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP 444 S. Flower St., Suite 2400 Los Angeles, CA 90071 Attn: City Attorney for Rolling Hills Estates If to VPR, to: Vestar Peninsula Retail, LLC Attn: Ryan Ash 2415 East Camelback Road, Suite 100 Phoenix, AZ 85016 With Copies to: Cox, Castle & Nicholson LLP B-27 Page 20 4869-4289-6067 v4 3121 Michelson Drive, Suite 200 Irvine, CA 92612 Attn: Sean Matsler, Esq. 12.11 Entire Agreement, Counterparts And Exhibits. This Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which will be deemed an original, but all of which together will constitute one and the same instrument. This Agreement consists of [___] pages and [___] exhibits which constitute in full, the final and exclusive understanding and agreement of the Parties and supersedes all negotiations or previous agreements of the Parties with respect to all or any part of the subject matter hereof. All waivers of the provisions of this Agreement must be in writing and signed by the appropriate authorities of City and the Developer. The following exhibits are attached to this Agreement and incorporated herein for all purposes: Exhibit A: Depiction of Project Site Exhibit B: Project Site Plan Exhibit C: Project Approvals Exhibit D: Form of Transfer Agreement 12.12 Recordation of Agreement. Pursuant to Government Code section 65868.5, no later than ten days after City enters into this Agreement, the City Clerk will cause to be recorded an executed copy of this Agreement in the Official Records of the County of Los Angeles. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement has been entered into by and between Developer and City as of the day and year first above written. B-28 Page 21 4869-4289-6067 v4 CITY: CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ESTATES, a municipal corporation of the State of California By: Velveth Schmitz, Mayor Approved as to form: By: Donald M. Davis City Attorney Attest: By: Lauren Pettit, City Clerk [signatures continue on following page] B-29 Page 22 4869-4289-6067 v4 DEVELOPER: VESTAR PENINSULA RETAIL LLC a Delaware limited liability company By: Name: Title: By: Name: Title: B-30 Page 23 4869-4289-6067 v4 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ss: COUNTY OF _________________ ) On ______________________________, 20__ before me, ______________________(here insert name of the officer), Notary Public, personally appeared __________________________________, who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature of Notary Public STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ss: COUNTY OF _________________ ) On ______________________________, 20__ before me, ______________________(here insert name of the officer), Notary Public, personally appeared __________________________________, who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature of Notary Public B-31 Page 24 4869-4289-6067 v4 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ss: COUNTY OF _________________ ) On ______________________________, 20__ before me, ______________________(here insert name of the officer), Notary Public, personally appeared __________________________________, who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature of Notary Public STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ss: COUNTY OF _________________ ) On ______________________________, 20__ before me, ______________________(here insert name of the officer), Notary Public, personally appeared __________________________________, who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature of Notary Public B-32 Exhibit A, Page 1 4869-4289-6067 v4 EXHIBIT A DEPICTION OF PROJECT SITE (Attached) B-33 Exhibit B, Page 1 4869-4289-6067 v4 EXHIBIT B PROJECT SITE PLAN (Attached) B-34 Exhibit C, Page 1 4869-4289-6067 v4 EXHIBIT C LIST OF PROJECT APPROVALS (Attached) B-35 Exhibit D, Page 1 4869-4289-6067 v4 EXHIBIT D FORM OF TRANSFER AGREEMENT (Attached) B-36 Exhibit D, Page 2 4869-4289-6067 v4 Recording Requested by and When Recorded Return to: ___________________________ ___________________________ ___________________________ ___________________________ SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE FOR RECORDER’S USE ASSIGNMENT AND ASSUMPTION AGREEMENT - DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THIS ASSIGNMENT AND ASSUMPTION AGREEMENT (“Agreement”) is made and entered into as of _____________, 20__, by and between ______________________, a _____________ (“Assignor”), and ______________________, a _____________ (“Assignee”). RECITALS A. Assignor owns that real property located in the City of Rolling Hills Estates (“City”), County of Los Angeles, State of California, and more particularly described in Exhibit I attached hereto (the “Property”). B. On the date hereof, Assignee is acquiring approximately __ acres of the Property more particularly described in Exhibit II attached hereto (the “Assigned Property”). C. The City and Assignor entered into that certain Development Agreement dated as of _____________, 20__ and recorded against the Property on ___________ as Instrument No. ___________ in the Los Angeles County Recorder’s Office (the “Development Agreement”). D. Assignor desires to assign to Assignee all of Assignor’s rights, duties and obligations under the Development Agreement with respect to the Assigned Property only (the “Assigned Rights and Obligations”), and Assignee desires to accept and assume Assignor’s rights and obligations under the Development Agreement with respect to the Assigned Property only (the “Assumed Rights and Obligations”), such assignment and assumption to be effective on the Effective Date (as defined in Section 1.3 below). The Assigned Rights and Obligations and the Assumed Rights and Obligations are referred to collectively herein as the “Assigned Property Rights and Obligations”. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of these promises, and of the agreements, covenants and conditions contained in this Agreement and other good and valuable consideration, the parties agree as follows: B-37 Exhibit D, Page 3 4869-4289-6067 v4 1.0 ASSIGNMENT AND ASSUMPTION OF THE ASSIGNED PROPERTY RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS 1.1 Assignment. Assignor assigns to Assignee, as of the Effective Date (as defined in Section 1.3 below), all of Assignor’s rights, title and interest in and to the Assigned Property Rights and Obligations. 1.2 Assumption. As of the Effective Date, Assignee accepts Assignor’s assignment of the Assigned Rights and Obligations and assumes the Assumed Rights and Obligations. From and after the Effective Date, Assignee must keep and perform all covenants, conditions and provisions of the Development Agreement relating to the Assigned Property. 1.3 Effective Date. For purposes of this Agreement, the “Effective Date” will be the later to occur of (1) the date on which the deed from Assignor to Assignee for the Assigned Property is recorded in the Office of the Recorder of the County of Los Angeles; or (2) the date of the execution of this Agreement by all parties. 2.0 RIGHTS AND REMEDIES 2.1 Assignor’s Release; No Assignor Liability or Default for Assignee Breach. Pursuant to the Development Agreement, Assignor will be released from the Development Agreement with respect to the Assigned Property and the Assumed Rights and Obligations as of the Effective Date. Any default or breach by Assignee under the Development Agreement following the Effective Date with respect to the Assigned Property or the Assumed Rights and Obligations (“Assignee Breach”) will not constitute a breach or default by Assignor under the Development Agreement and will not result in (a) any remedies imposed against Assignor or (b) modification or termination of the Development Agreement with respect to that portion of the Property retained by Assignor after the conveyance of the Assigned Property, if any (the “Assignor Property”). 2.2 No Assignee Liability or Default for Assignor Breach. As of the Effective Date, any default or breach by Assignor under the Development Agreement prior to or after the Effective Date (“Assignor Breach”), will not constitute a breach or default by Assignee under the Development Agreement, and will not result in (a) any remedies imposed against Assignee or (b) modification or termination of the Development Agreement with respect to the Assigned Property. 3.0 PERIODIC REVIEW OF COMPLIANCE 3.1 Assignor Responsibilities. Assignor will participate in the annual review of the Development Agreement conducted pursuant to Section 65865.1 of the California Government Code with respect to the Assignor Property, and Assignee will have no responsibility therefor. 3.2 Assignee Responsibilities. Assignee will participate in the annual review of the Development Agreement conducted pursuant to Section 65865.1 of the California Government Code with respect to the Assigned Property, and Assignor will have no responsibility therefor. B-38 Exhibit D, Page 4 4869-4289-6067 v4 4.0 AMENDMENT OF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 4.1 Assignor. Assignor will not request, process or consent to any amendment to the Development Agreement that would affect the Assigned Property or the Assigned Property Rights and Obligations without Assignee’s prior written consent, which consent may not be withheld unreasonably. The foregoing notwithstanding, Assignor may process any amendment that does not affect the Assigned Property, and, if necessary, Assignee will consent thereto and execute all documents necessary to accomplish such amendment, provided that such amendment does not affect the Assigned Property or any of Assignee’s Assigned Property Rights and Obligations pursuant to the Development Agreement. 4.2 Assignee. Assignee will not request, process or consent to any amendment to the Development Agreement that would affect the Assignor Property or the Assignor’s remaining rights and obligations pursuant to the Development Agreement without Assignor’s prior written consent, which consent will not be withheld unreasonably. The foregoing notwithstanding, Assignee may process any amendment that does not affect the Assignor Property, and, if necessary, Assignor will consent thereto and execute all documents necessary to accomplish such amendment, provided that such amendment does not affect the Assignor Property or any of Assignor’s remaining rights and obligations pursuant to the Development Agreement. 5.0 GENERAL PROVISIONS 5.1 Notices. All notices, invoices and other communications required or permitted under this Agreement must be made in writing, and must be delivered either personally (including by private courier), by certified mail, postage prepaid and return receipt requested, or by nationally recognized overnight courier service to the following addresses, or to such other addresses as the parties may designate in writing from time to time: If to Assignee: with copies to: If to Assignor: with a copies to: B-39 Exhibit D, Page 5 4869-4289-6067 v4 Notices personally delivered will be deemed received upon delivery. Notices delivered by certified mail as provided above will be deemed received on actual delivery. Notices delivered by courier service as provided above will be deemed received twenty-four (24) hours after the date of deposit. From and after the Effective Date and until further written notice from Assignee to the City pursuant to the terms of the Development Agreement, Assignee hereby designates as its notice address for notices sent by the City pursuant to Section 6.15 of the Development Agreement, the notice address set forth above. 5.2 Estoppel Certificates. Within ten (10) days after receipt of a written request from time to time, either party must execute and deliver to the other, or to an auditor or prospective lender or purchaser, a written statement certifying to that party’s actual knowledge: (a) that the Development Agreement is unmodified and in full force and effect (or, if there have been modifications, that the Development Agreement is in full force and effect, and stating the date and nature of such modifications); (b) that there are no current defaults under the Development Agreement by the City and either Assignor or Assignee, as the case may be (or, if defaults are asserted, so describing with reasonable specificity) and that there are no conditions which, with the passage of time or the giving of notice, or both, would constitute a default; (c) that this Agreement is unmodified and in full force and effect (or, if there have been modifications, that this Agreement is in full force and effect, and stating the date and nature of such modifications); and (d) such other matters as may be reasonably requested. 5.3 Attorneys’ Fees. In the event of any legal or equitable proceeding in connection with this Agreement, the prevailing party in such proceeding will be entitled to recover its reasonable costs and expenses, including without limitation reasonable attorneys’ fees, costs and disbursements paid or incurred in good faith at the arbitration, pre-trial, trial and appellate levels, and in enforcing any award or judgment granted pursuant thereto. 5.4 No Waiver. No delay or omission by either party in exercising any right, remedy, election or option accruing upon the noncompliance or failure of performance by the other party under the provisions of this Agreement will constitute an impairment or waiver of any such right, remedy, election or option. No alleged waiver will be valid or effective unless it is set forth in a writing executed by the party against whom the waiver is claimed. A waiver by either party of any of the covenants, conditions or obligations to be performed by the other party will not be construed as a waiver of any subsequent breach of the same or any other covenants, conditions or obligations. 5.5 Amendment. This Agreement may be amended only by a written agreement signed by both Assignor and Assignee. 5.6 Successors and Assigns. This Agreement runs with the land and will be binding on and inure to the benefit of the parties and their respective successors and assigns. 5.7 No Joint Venture. Nothing contained herein will be construed as creating a joint venture, agency, or any other relationship between the parties hereto other than that of assignor and assignee. B-40 Exhibit D, Page 6 4869-4289-6067 v4 5.8 Severability. If any term or provision of this Agreement or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is found by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of this Agreement, or the application of such term or provision to persons or circumstances other than those as to which it is held invalid or unenforceable, will not be affected thereby, and each remaining term and provision of this Agreement will be valid and enforceable to the full extent permitted by law; provided that, if the invalidation or unenforceability would deprive either Assignor or Assignee of material benefits derived from this Agreement or make performance under this Agreement unreasonably difficult, then Assignor and Assignee will meet and confer and will make good faith efforts to modify this Agreement in a manner that is acceptable to Assignor, Assignee and the City. 5.9 Governing Law. This Agreement will be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California. 5.10 Third Party Beneficiaries. Assignor and Assignee acknowledge that the City is a third party beneficiary of the terms and conditions of this Agreement to the extent necessary for City to enforce the terms and conditions of the Development Agreement. This Agreement will not be deemed or construed to confer any rights, title or interest, including without limitation any third party beneficiary status or right to enforce any provision of this Agreement, upon any person or entity other than Assignor, Assignee, and the City. 5.11 Time of the Essence. Time is of the essence in the performance by each party of its obligations under this Agreement. 5.12 Authority. Each person executing this Agreement represents and warrants that he or she has the authority to bind his or her respective party to the performance of its obligations hereunder and that all necessary board of directors’, shareholders’, partners’ and other approvals have been obtained. 5.13 Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which will be deemed an original, but all of which together will constitute one and the same instrument. Signature pages may be detached from the counterparts and attached to a single copy of this Agreement to physically form one document. [remainder of page left intentionally blank – signature pages follow] B-41 Exhibit D, Page 7 4869-4289-6067 v4 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Assignor and Assignee have executed this Agreement by proper persons thereunto duly authorized, to be effective as of the Effective Date. “Assignor” __________________________, a ____________________________ By: Name: Title: By: Name: Title: “Assignee” __________________________, a ____________________________ By: Name: Title: By: Name: Title: B-42 Exhibit D, Page 8 4869-4289-6067 v4 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ss: COUNTY OF _________________ ) On ______________________________, 20__ before me, ______________________(here insert name of the officer), Notary Public, personally appeared __________________________________, who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature of Notary Public STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ss: COUNTY OF _________________ ) On ______________________________, 20__ before me, ______________________(here insert name of the officer), Notary Public, personally appeared __________________________________, who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature of Notary Public B-43 Exhibit D, Page 9 4869-4289-6067 v4 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ss: COUNTY OF _________________ ) On ______________________________, 20__ before me, ______________________(here insert name of the officer), Notary Public, personally appeared __________________________________, who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature of Notary Public STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ss: COUNTY OF _________________ ) On ______________________________, 20__ before me, ______________________(here insert name of the officer), Notary Public, personally appeared __________________________________, who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature of Notary Public B-44 Exhibit D, Page 10 4869-4289-6067 v4 EXHIBIT I DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY (ATTACHED) B-45 Exhibit D, Page 11 4869-4289-6067 v4 EXHIBIT II DESCRIPTION OF ASSIGNED PROPERTY (ATTACHED) B-46 Exhibit D, Page 12 4869-4289-6067 v4 EXHIBIT III CONSENT OF CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ESTATES The City of Rolling Hills Estates hereby consents to the assignment and assumption of the Assigned Rights and Obligations as set forth in this Agreement and agrees to the terms and conditions set forth herein. CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ESTATES, a Municipal corporation of the State of California By: City Manager B-47 Exhibit B Summary for Publication (Gov. Code §36933(c)(2)) Ordinance No. 750 Pursuant to Government Code section 36933(c), the following is a summary of an ordinance introduced on November 12, 2024, and scheduled for adoption on December 10, 2024 by the Rolling Hills Estates City Council. A certified copy of the full text of the ordinance is posted and available for review in the City Clerk’s Office at 4045 Palos Verdes Drive North, City of Rolling Hills Estates, California and on the City’s website at https://www.rollinghillsestates.gov. This ordinance will be effective on the 31st day following its adoption and after posting and publication as required by law. ORDINANCE NO. 750 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ESTATES, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (DA-240243) FOR THE RESIDENCES AT PENINSULA CENTER PROJECT. APPLICANT: RYAN ASH ON BEHALF OF VESTAR; LOCATION: 27525 NORRIS CENTER DRIVE (APN 7589-005-020) This ordinance adopts a development agreement pursuant Rolling Hills Estates Municipal Code Chapter 17.82, Development Agreements, for a residential apartment project. Under the development agreement, the developer agrees to provide the city with certain community amenities and benefits including nine apartments units that will be affordable to moderate income households for a period of 35 years, 85 parking spaces at the project that will be available for public use, and certain landscaped improvements. In exchange, the development agreement provides the developer with, among other things, an extended period to complete the project, if necessary, and provides certain protections from changes in city laws that may impede the development of the project. The term of the development agreement is for an initial period of ten years, with the right under specified circumstances to two, five-year extensions. AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Lauren Petit City Clerk B-48 Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update Environmental Impact Report Prepared for: City of Rolling Hills Estates Community Development Department 4045 Palos Verdes Drive North Rolling Hills Estates, CA 90274 Prepared by: 3760 Kilroy Airport Way, Suite 270 Long Beach, California 90806 July 2024 ATTACHMENT B B-49 This page intentionally left blank. B-50 Table of Contents Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hill Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page i Table of Contents CHAPTER 1: PURPOSE AND BACKGROUND ................................................................. 1-1 1.1 Applicability and Use of an Addendum ...................................... 1-1 1.2 Format of this Addendum .......................................................... 1-2 1.3 Summary of Findings ................................................................. 1-2 1.4 Lead Agency and Discretionary Approvals ................................ 1-3 CHAPTER 2: PROJECT DESCRIPTION ........................................................................... 2-1 2.1 Overview of General Plan Update and EIR ................................ 2-1 2.2 Proposed Project ....................................................................... 2-4 CHAPTER 3: EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ........................................ 3-1 1. AESTHETICS. ........................................................................... 3-3 2. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES. ............................................... 3-7 3. AIR QUALITY. ........................................................................... 3-9 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ................................................... 3-16 5. CULTURAL RESOURCES ...................................................... 3-22 6. ENERGY ................................................................................. 3-27 7. GEOLOGY AND SOILS ........................................................... 3-30 8. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS .......................................... 3-37 9. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ........................... 3-45 10. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY ................................... 3-51 11. LAND USE AND PLANNING ................................................... 3-57 12. MINERAL RESOURCES ......................................................... 3-59 13. NOISE ..................................................................................... 3-61 14. POPULATION AND HOUSING ............................................... 3-65 15. PUBLIC SERVICES................................................................. 3-67 16. PARKS AND RECREATION .................................................... 3-71 17. TRANSPORTATION ................................................................ 3-74 18. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES 19. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS—WATER SUPPLY .... 3-822 20. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS—WASTEWATER ...... 3-855 21. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS—SOLID WASTE ....... 3-877 22. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS—ENERGY AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS INFRASTRUCTURE ................... 3-900 23. WILDFIRE ............................................................................... 3-92 Environmental Determination .............................................................. 3-99 CHAPTER 4: MITIGATION MEASURES ........................................................................... 4-1 CHAPTER 5: LIST OF PREPARERS ................................................................................. 5-1 .......................................... 3-7 .......................................... 3-779 B-51 Table of Contents Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hill Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page ii List of Figures and Tables Figure 1 Project Location Map .............................................................................................. 2-6 Figure 2 Site Plan – Level 1 ................................................................................................. 2-7 Figure 3 Site Plans – Levels 2 and 3 .................................................................................... 2-8 Figure 4 Site Plans – Levels 4 and 5 .................................................................................... 2-9 Table AQ-1 Comparison Between Proposed Project And GPU EIR’s Medium Scale Representative Project ................................................................................... 3-11 Table ENE-1 Consistency With Statewide Energy Plans ..................................................... 3-29 Table GHG-1 Consistency With The 2022 Scoping Plan: AB 32 Inventory Sectors............... 3-39 Table GHG-2 Consistency With The 2020-2045 RTP/SCS ................................................... 3-40 Table GHG-3 Consistency With The Climate Action Plan ..................................................... 3-42 B-52 Table of Contents Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hill Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page iii Acronyms and Abbreviations AB Assembly Bill ADU accessory dwelling unit Air Basin South Coast Air Basin BMP Best Management Practice BMR below market rate CAL FIRE California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection CALGreen California Green Building Standards Code CAP Climate Action Plan CARB California Air Resources Board CBC California Building Code CCR California Code of Regulations CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife CDMU Commercial District Mixed-Use CEQA California Environmental Quality Act CGMU Commercial-General Mixed Use City City of Rolling Hills Estates CMP Congestion Management Program CPUC California Public Utilities Commission EIR Environmental Impact Report EV electric vehicle FTA Federal Transit Administration GHG greenhouse gas GPU Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update GPU EIR Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update Environmental Impact Report HCP Habitat Conservation Plan HMP Hazard Mitigation Plan HRA health risk assessment IS Initial Study JWPCP Joint Water Pollution Control Plant LACoFD Los Angeles County Fire Department LADOT Los Angeles Department of Transportation LASD Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department LID Low Impact Development LTS Less than Significant Impact LTS-M Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation MERV Maximum efficiency rating value Metro Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority MM mitigation measure MMRP Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program NCCP Natural Community Conservation Plan NI No Impact NPDES National Pollution Discharge Elimination System O3 ozone OPR Governor’s Office of Planning and Research OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration PM2.5 fine particulate matter 2.5 microns or less in diameter PM10 respirable particulate matter 10 microns or less in diameter PRC Public Resources Code B-53 Table of Contents Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hill Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page iv PVLD Palos Verdes Library District PVPTA Palos Verdes Peninsula Transit Authority PVPUSD Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified School District RHE City of Rolling Hills Estates RHEMC City of Rolling Hills Estates Municipal Code RTP/SCS Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy SB Senate Bill SCAG Southern California Association of Governments SCAQMD South Coast Air Quality Management District SCCIC South Central Coastal Information Center SCE Southern California Edison SoCalGas Southern California Gas Company SU Significant and Unavoidable Impact TDM Transportation Demand Management UWMP Urban Water Management Plan USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service VHFHSZ Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone VMT vehicle miles traveled B-54 Chapter 1: Purpose and Background Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 1-1 CHAPTER 1: PURPOSE AND BACKGROUND The City of Rolling Hills Estates (City) has prepared this addendum to the City’s General Plan Update (GPU) Environmental Impact Report (GPU EIR) (State Clearinghouse No. 2021050450) to address the potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed Vestar Apartments Project (Project). This addendum is prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (CEQA) (California Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 21000, et. seq., as amended) and its implementing guidelines (California Code of Regulations (CCR), Title 14, Section 15000 et. seq., 2016). This addendum has been prepared and will be processed consistent with CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15164. In 2022, the City updated the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan and prepared the GPU EIR to analyze potential citywide impacts, broad policy alternatives, and programmatic mitigation measures associated with the update of the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan. The GPU provided an update for the previous General Plan and addressed eight General Plan elements, seven of which are required by State law—Conservation, Housing, Land Use, Mobility, Noise, Open Space and Recreation, and Safety—and an additional Sustainability Element. The GPU incorporated new and updated assumptions, data, and analysis, as well as established an updated long-term vision for the City overall and the Commercial District in particular. The GPU EIR outlined potential General Plan buildout scenarios and representative projects through the horizon year of 2040. The GPU EIR is a Program EIR as defined by CEQA Guidelines Section 15161 and was prepared in compliance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15168. The City Council certified the Final GPU EIR and adopted the Findings of Fact, Statement of Overriding Considerations, and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) on April 26, 2022 (Resolution No. 2496). 1.1 Applicability and Use of an Addendum The City’s intent through preparation of this addendum is to evaluate whether the previously certified CEQA document (GPU EIR), including mitigation measures, is still adequate and valid for purposes of environmental clearance for the proposed Project. CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 through 15164 explain when subsequent or supplemental CEQA documentation is required and when an addendum to a previously certified EIR is appropriate. When considering the use of a program EIR with a later activity, “If the agency finds that pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, no subsequent EIR would be required, the agency can approve the activity as being within the scope of the project covered by the program EIR, and no new environmental document would be required.” Pursuant to the provisions of the CEQA Statute and CEQA Guidelines, the City must conduct a fact-based evaluation of proposed changes to a project in order to determine whether further environmental analysis is required, pursuant to PRC Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15162. CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15164 provide that an addendum to a certified Final EIR may be prepared if only minor technical changes or additions are necessary, and none of the following conditions calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred: · Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions to the EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; · Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR due to the involvement B-55 Chapter 1: Purpose and Background Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 1-2 of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or · New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the EIR was certified as complete, shows any of the following: o The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the EIR; o Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the EIR; o Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not be feasible would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or o Mitigation measures or alternatives that are considerably different from those analyzed in the EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponent decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164, the City, as the lead agency, has prepared this addendum to confirm that none of the conditions identified in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 and PRC Section 21166(c) have been triggered. For a proposed modified project or related activity, CEQA Guidelines Section 15164 provides that an addendum to a previously certified Final EIR may be prepared if some changes or additions are necessary but none of the conditions described in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR or negative declaration have occurred. The City must consider the whole of the data presented in the GP EIR with the information provided in this addendum and the previously adopted MMRP. 1.2 Format of this Addendum The previously certified GPU EIR serves as the primary environmental compliance document for the project, and this Addendum provides minor changes and additions to the GPU EIR. This addendum should be considered with the full text of the previously certified GPU EIR. All applicable mitigation measures from the GPU EIR would be applicable to the proposed project and, therefore, are incorporated by reference into this addendum and included in Chapter 4. This addendum relies on the use of an Environmental Checklist Form (Checklist), as suggested in CEQA Guidelines Section 15063(d)(3). Per the CEQA Guidelines, an addendum does not need to be circulated for public review but can be included in or attached to the Final EIR prior to making a decision on the project. 1.3 Summary of Findings Based upon the Checklist prepared for the proposed amendments and supporting responses (see Chapter 3), adoption of the proposed Project would not result in substantial changes requiring major revisions to the previously certified GPU EIR. Further, the proposed Project would not result in any new significant environmental impacts that were not discussed in the GPU EIR or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts. No new mitigation measures are required for the proposed Project. Since none of the conditions described in PRC Section 21166 or CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a-b) or Section 15163 requiring preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR have occurred, the City finds that the preparation of an addendum to the GPU EIR is the appropriate CEQA documentation for the proposed Project and that the proposed Project is within the scope of the GPU EIR. B-56 Chapter 1: Purpose and Background Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 1-3 1.4 Lead Agency and Discretionary Approvals This addendum and the previously certified GPU EIR are intended to serve as the environmental documentation for the proposed Vestar Apartments Project. The City of Rolling Hills Estates is the lead agency under CEQA and maintains authority to approve the addendum. Discretionary approvals being sought as part of the Vestar Apartments Project include the following: · Development agreement that will permit bonus level development resulting in a total of 45 dwelling units per acre, per Rolling Hills Estates Municipal Code (RHEMC) Section 17.30.080 through 17.30.090; · A Commercial District Mixed-Use Development Permit; · A Precise Plan of Design; and · Approval of this addendum to the GPU EIR. B-57 Chapter 1: Purpose and Background Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 1-4 This page intentionally left blank. B-58 Chapter 2: Project Description Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 2-1 CHAPTER 2: PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2.1 Overview of General Plan Update and EIR The Rolling Hills Estates General Plan is a guidance document that describes the City’s vision as a livable community with excellent services, a strong identity, healthy business opportunities, and a strong and efficient government. Future land use, circulation, housing, conservation, and other decisions in the City are guided by goals and policies set forth in the General Plan. The General Plan is a State-required legal document (Government Code Section 65300) that provides guidance to decision-makers regarding the conservation of resources and the future physical form and character of development in the City. It is the jurisdiction’s official statement regarding the extent and types of development of land and infrastructure that will achieve the community’s physical, economic, social, and environmental goals. The General Plan expresses the City’s goals and articulates the City’s intentions with respect to the rights and expectations of the general public, property owners, community interest groups, prospective investors, and business interests. Although the General Plan consists of individual sections, or elements, that address a specific area of concern, it also embodies a comprehensive and integrated planning approach. In 2022, the City updated the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan and prepared the GPU EIR to analyze potential citywide impacts, broad policy alternatives, and programmatic mitigation measures associated with the update of the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan. The GPU provided an update to the previous General Plan and addressed eight General Plan elements, seven of which are required by State law—Circulation, Conservation, Housing, Land Use, Noise, Open Space, and Safety—and an additional Sustainability Element. The GPU incorporated new and updated assumptions, data, and analysis, as well as established an updated long-term vision for the City overall and the Commercial District in particular. The GPU EIR outlined potential General Plan buildout scenarios and representative projects through the horizon year of 2040. The General Plan Planning Area (Planning Area) is the land area addressed by the City’s GPU, which encompasses approximately 2,378 acres, including all of the land within City limits (84 percent) and the unincorporated Sphere of Influence (SOI) (16 percent). The boundaries of the Planning Area generally follow the borders of the City. Rolling Hills Estates is essentially a built- out City with only two vacant parcels (other than those designated for open space), a low-density residential parcel and a commercial use parcel. The residential neighborhoods, as well as the parks and recreation areas, in the City are well-established and are not expected to change during the timeline of the GPU. The primary changes incorporated in the GPU included the following: · Application of a new Commercial District Mixed-Use Overlay to the City’s Commercial District that would allow for a base residential density of 30 dwelling units per acre with an opportunity for a 50-percent density bonus for projects that provide certain community benefits. · Extension of the existing Mixed-Use Overlay to the properties designated for Commercial Office. · Redesignation of the property on the northeastern corner of Highridge Road and Armaga Spring Road from Commercial Office to Neighborhood Commercial. · Redesignation of the Seahorse Riding Club parcel along Crenshaw Boulevard from Commercial Recreation to Neighborhood Commercial. B-59 Chapter 2: Project Description Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 2-2 · Revision to the allowable land uses in the Institutional designation to include affordable residential uses at 1 to 2 units per acre concentrated in small portions of Institutional properties. · Adjustment of the land use designations of several parcels to match their current uses. · Envisioned change of Silver Spur Road from a four-lane street to a two-lane street, narrowing it to a “main street” scale street, with angled parking (instead of parallel parking), buffered bike lanes, and other amenities · Envisioned removal of Bart Earle Way (replaced by a rear entry drive aisle to access parking) and provision of the roadway space for development as an addition to existing parcels along the north side of Bart Earle Way. · Envisioned reconnection of Deep Valley Drive if and when redevelopment of the Promenade Mall site occurs. The GPU was organized around Guiding Principles that were intended to preserve the unique character and identity of Rolling Hills Estates and the neighborhoods that make up the community. The Vision and Guiding Principles of the GPU, along with the City’s required housing goals, together constitute the GPU’s objectives and are as follows: Vision Rolling Hills Estates in 2040 has maintained a rural feel and equestrian identity, while becoming a more vibrant and connected community. The commercial district is an attractive and thriving destination for residents and visitors from the Palos Verdes Peninsula, providing ample opportunities for shopping, outdoor dining, entertainment, and living. Rolling Hills Estates is a model for sustainable practices and is admired for its quality local environment, natural semi-rural setting, and recreational amenities, including trails, parks, and open spaces. Residents and visitors can conveniently walk, ride horses, bike, and take transit to and within the community. Rolling Hills Estates is a family-, youth-, and senior-friendly City, with safe places for people of all ages to gather, play, and learn. Guiding Principles 1. Preserve the community’s distinctive rural character and high quality of life. 2. Improve mobility and emphasize a spectrum of transportation choices. 3. Promote a vibrant commercial district. 4. Maintain equestrian character. 5. Provide quality parks, trails, open spaces, and community facilities. 6. Enhance the public realm and promote quality design. 7. Become a more sustainable city. Housing The Housing Element states that “Meeting the housing needs established by the State of California is an important goal for the City of Rolling Hills Estates. As the population of the State continues to grow and scarce resources decline, it becomes more difficult for local agencies to create adequate housing opportunities while maintaining a high standard of living for all citizens in the community. State law recognizes that housing needs may exceed available resources and, therefore, does not require that the City's quantified objectives be identical to the identified housing needs. This recognition of limitations is critical, especially during this period of financial uncertainties in both the public and private sectors.” B-60 Chapter 2: Project Description Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 2-3 Buildout Scenarios and Representative Projects The City developed two (low and high) 2040 buildout scenarios for the Planning Area based on the proposed changes to the Land Use Map, the proposed allowable uses and densities, known development/redevelopment interest, and historical and current development trends. Table 2.5-4 of the GPU EIR presented these estimated low and high buildout scenarios. The intent of these two scenarios was to frame the anticipated 2040 buildout of the Planning Area with the low estimate being the least amount of development reasonably anticipated in the Planning Area and the high estimate being the greatest amount reasonably anticipated. These estimates were for planning and analysis purposes only and did not assume the construction or redevelopment of any specific property. The assumptions and calculations used to develop these buildout scenarios were provided in Appendix B of the GPU EIR. In consideration of the Vision Plan for the Commercial District, to provide more context and information and to allow for a more detailed evaluation of potential environmental impacts that could result from buildout of the Commercial District, the City developed three representative projects: small site project, medium site project, and hotel project. These representative projects were not intended to embody all types and scales of projects that could occur in the Commercial District over the course of implementation of the GPU or represent the worst-case or largest projects that could potentially be built. Rather, the representative projects were intended to portray some of the potentially common or anticipated types and scales of potential future projects that could be built in the Commercial District. They were intended for analysis purposes only, to aid the public and decision makers in understanding the potential environmental consequences of implementation of the GPU in general and the Commercial District Vision Plan in particular. The three representative projects are described in the following paragraphs: · Small Site Project: There are multiple parcels in the Commercial District that are less than one acre. Based on the Commercial District Area Vision Plan, market trends, and recent development applications and patterns in the City, it is conceivable that development/redevelopment of such sized parcels would consist of residential-focused mixed-use buildings with multi-family dwelling units atop of ground floor commercial space. Given the residential density and floor-area ratio limits included in the proposed CD Mixed-Use Overlay, a potential development on a 0.5- to 1-acre parcel would likely consist of 25 to 35 residential units and 2,500 to 5,000 square feet of commercial space. Such a mixed-use building would likely be two to four stories in height with subterranean, surface, and/or tuck-under parking. · Medium Site Project: In addition to various smaller parcels in the Commercial District developing individually, there is the potential for the consolidation of smaller parcels into project sites of approximately two to three acres. Similarly, some of the large parcels in the Commercial District are underutilized, with surplus land area that could accommodate a mix of uses over two to three acres. Given the market conditions and the need for housing in Southern California, medium-sized project sites could conceivably be developed primarily with multi-family residential uses complemented with commercial space at the ground floor or on a separate pad(s) on the same site (e.g., ground floor retail/restaurants, stand-alone restaurants, etc.). Considering the residential density and floor-area ratio limits included in the proposed CD Mixed-Use Overlay, a potential development on a two- to three-acre parcel would likely consist of 60 to 125 residential units (depending on the target residential market) and 5,000 to 15,000 square feet of commercial space. Building heights would likely be three to five stories for multi-family and mixed-use buildings and single story for separate retail/restaurant buildings. Parking could B-61 Chapter 2: Project Description Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 2-4 be provided in subterranean levels, tuck-under parking at the ground level, surface lots, or a combination thereof. · Hotel Project: This representative project is based on the development interest that the City has seen from the hotel industry in recent years. Given the lack of hotels on the Palos Verdes Peninsula, a boutique or select-service hotel is a potentially complimentary use to the existing mix of uses in the Commercial District and could satisfy an existing unmet demand on the Peninsula. Based on past applications/preliminary plans for such uses, a hotel project in the commercial district would likely consist of 75 to 125 rooms, with services that could include banquet facilities, conference/meeting rooms, a restaurant/bar, and various guest amenities (e.g., fitness center, pool, café, continental breakfast space, business center, etc.). Such a hotel would likely require a two- to three-acre site and would likely be three to six stories in height with subterranean and/or surface parking. 2.2 Proposed Project The City is processing an application for the development of a 90-unit apartment building on a two-acre site (Assessor Parcel Number 7589-005-020) located northwest of the Norris Center Drive and Silver Spur Road intersection. Refer to Figure 1 for a map of the Project Site and regional location. The Project Site is located within the City’s Commercial-General Mixed Use District and is currently occupied by a vacant one-story 7,000-square-foot building that would be demolished to accommodate the Project. The Project would be constructed as a 5-story podium structure, consisting of approximately 206,500 square feet. Levels 1 and 2 would feature 240 above-grade parking spaces, and Levels 3 through 5 would consist of the 90 proposed residential units. Each residential unit would include a 60-square-foot private deck. On Level 1, the Project would also provide 3,600 square feet of lobby/leasing space and 1,175 square feet of open space. In addition, Level 3 would feature the proposed podium consisting of 11,225 square feet of outdoor open space with a pool, lounge seating, dining areas, fireplaces/firepits, barbeques, and an outdoor kitchen, as well as 3,500 square feet of indoor recreational amenities. Refer to Figures 2 through 4 for level-specific site plans. Of the 90 proposed residential units, 60 units are allowed according to the base density for the zone with the remaining 30 units allowed with the bonus level development. Of the 60 proposed base density units, 15 percent (i.e., 9 units) would be below market rate (BMR) units for moderate- income households. Of the 240 parking spaces, 85 spaces on Level 1 would be shared public/private parking. The Project would also improve the connectivity around the Project Site by adding a sidewalk along the southwestern portion of the Project Site to connect the Project to the neighboring shopping center. In exchange for providing such community benefits, the project is eligible for bonus level development through the City’s Bonus Level Development Program. This Program was created through Ordinance No. 744, adopted by the City Council on October 11, 2022, which made amendments to Municipal Code Chapter 17.30 (Commercial-General District) to establish a process for providing bonus level development (i.e., greater density and potential increase and reduction in other development standards) in exchange for a project providing desirable community amenities or benefits as defined on a Council adopted list. The Project proposes a 50- percent residential density bonus of 15 units per acre based on a base density of 30 units per acre, which would result in a total density of 45 units per acre for the Project Site. The Project would include the following incentives/concessions: · Height Increase: To provide 1 additional story for a total of 5 stories; B-62 Chapter 2: Project Description Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 2-5 · Lot Coverage Increase: To exceed the maximum allowable 35-percent lot coverage for a total of 67-percent lot coverage; · Open Space Reduction: To reduce the requirement of 300 square feet of open space per unit to a total of 197.78 square feet of open space per unit. On March 12, 2024, the City Council conducted a preliminary review of the community benefits and amenities proposed by the Applicant and determined that they qualified for bonus level development under the City’s Bonus Level Development Program, thus confirming the Project description for environmental review purposes. B-63 Vestar Apartments Project Project Location Map Figure 1Source: City of Rolling Hills Estates, 2017; Dyett & Bhatia, 2017; Michael Baker International. « Project Site D 9 A — dh Palos Verdes Estates Malaga Canyon Roncho Palos Verdes Naveen XT Torrance Lomita Fur 0.25 HAWTHORNE BLVD I O "SPURRD 0.5 MILES ‘P5s Rod bn twer N0 South Coost ornic Gare ss% S ? ■ . CRENS: Uniicorporated : ■ * ‘Co^intf[ ‘ ' ' FVLC Uniocorpo rated • .County. • Werled D H © Ro Hing Hills T Eoleg Hi Cony Cut SEEE A L “T“ Fark Roe 5MIift Rancho Palos Verdes P, A L O S VERDES H I L — Rancho Palos Verdes Parks. Recreation, and Open Space f 3 Highway FC--D O 2381’J Unincorporated County J City of Rolling Hills Estates D Sphere of Influence Page 2-6 B-64 Vestar Apartments Project Site Plan – Level 1 Figure 2Source: MVE + Partners, Inc. N O R R I S C E N T E R D R I V E S I L V E R S P U R R O A D 1 0 ' - 0 " 5 ' - 0 " ± 965' ± 970' ± 966' ± 965' ± 960' ± 969' ± 965' ± 967' ± 968' ± 967' ± 963' 25 ' - 0 " 25' - 0" 25 ' - 0 " ± 965' ± 967' UP STORAGE MEP MEP MEP STORAGE RESIDENTIAL GUEST PARKING COMMERCIAL PARKING DN 5% UP 5% ± 965' COMMERCIAL ENTRY COMMERCIAL ENTRY RESIDENT/GUEST ENTRY RESIDENT/GUEST ENTRY STORAGE LEASING/AMENITY ± 962' 3 A3-1 PATIO CORNER PLAZA 20 ' - 0 " 25 ' - 0 " 20 ' - 0 " 20 ' - 0 " 25 ' - 0 " 20 ' - 0 " 9' - 0" 25' - 0" 20' - 0"25' - 0" 20 ' - 0 " 20 ' - 0 " 25 ' - 0 " 20 ' - 0 " 2 5 ' - 0 " 58' - 6" LOADING STOP SIGN RESIDENT ACCESS GATE L O A D I N G 15% IP — s .» 2 - r r * - $ 4 L (g. | r' "(0 //s el L ge’s 2s Page 2-7 B-65 POOL AMENITY 1 BD 1 BD 1 BD1 BD 1 B D 1 B D 1 B D 1 B D 1 B D 1 B D 1 B D 2 BD 2 BD 2 BD 2 B D 2 B D 2 BD 2 BD 2 B D 2 B D 2 B D 2 BD 1 BD 1 B D 1 BD 1 B D 3 A3-1 PODIUM ± 987' ROOF ± 999' PARAPET ± 1018' ROOF ± 1005' ROOF ± 986' ROOF ± 998' 1 B D 1 B D 1 BD 1 BD Vestar Apartments Project Site Plans – Levels 2 and 3 Figure 3 Level 2 Level 3 Source: MVE + Partners, Inc. STORACL POOL WELL \ RESIDENTIAL PARKING \ BELOW \ \ t I \ \ \ Page 2-8 B-66 Level 4 Level 5 Vestar Apartments Project Site Plans – Levels 4 and 5 Figure 4Source: MVE + Partners, Inc. \ \ ‘‘2 sH 1—- a 1w 1 \ I 4 STORY £E EEEP r‘1lr 8 \ V 4 STORY Page 2-9 B-67 Chapter 2: Project Description Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 2-10 2.2.1 Relationship of the Project to the General Plan and GPU EIR The Project Site is designated as Commercial General and Commercial District Mixed-Use Overlay in the General Plan and is zoned Commercial-General Mixed Use (CGMU or Commercial District). These land use designations also apply to the rest of the City’s main commercial area along Silver Spur Road. The CGMU zoning establishes a maximum floor area ratio of 2.5, desired building form of 3-5 stories, and maximum allowable residential density of 30 dwelling units per acre, plus opportunities for a density bonus up to 45 dwelling units per acre. As described in the GPU, while commercial uses remain the dominant land use in the CGMU District, the area has seen changes over the past few decades with the redevelopment of certain parcels with residential mixed-use projects. In addition to increasing market demands for residential development in this area, the City also needs to satisfy the State-mandated regional housing needs allocation (RHNA) of 191 units for the 6th Cycle Housing Element. Of this, 123 units must fall in the very low- and low-income categories. While not an obligation to build, the State mandates that the City provide an opportunity for developers to satisfy the RHNA allocation. Based on the General Plan 2040 outreach results, the Commercial District is one of the primary areas identified to absorb this residential growth. The Project’s proposed 90 residential units within the CGMU District would help the City meet its 6th Cycle RHNA allocation. The GPU’s Commercial District Area Vision Plan strives to achieve the following: · Encourage mixed-use development in the Commercial District that has neighborhood- serving retail, housing, offices, dining, hotels, entertainment, and other compatible uses to foster a walkable mixed-use district that caters to all ages and ensures there is something for everyone to enjoy. · Create a vibrant and walkable mixed-use community by reorganizing the scale and connectivity of the Commercial District to support a pedestrian-oriented environment. · Focus infill development on vacant and underutilized lots, bringing new uses with ground floor retail and several stories of housing on upper floors. Housing encourages people to remain in the area in the evenings and on weekends and support retail hours during those times as well. · Create an environment to attract desired residential and nonresidential developments by making changes to standards and providing incentives that are responsive to findings in the market and parking study. · Improve street frontages along Silver Spur Road and Deep Valley Drive to create a walkable downtown streetscape character and environment lined by mixed-uses. · Reopen Deep Valley Drive as a through street and reestablishing it as a public vehicular street, thus connecting Town and Country to the Peninsula Center. · Strive to create a more traditional block and street pattern with pedestrian paths or new streets added to connect through large blocks. · Provide pedestrian connectivity through parking areas and across streets by including continuous sidewalks lined by trees for comfort and shade and clearly demarcated crosswalks for pedestrian safety. · Create a two-sided commercial street along Silver Spur Road with shopping, dining, and residential units and both sides facing a traditional main street and ample room for people, bikes, and automobiles to use the space as well. B-68 Chapter 2: Project Description Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 2-11 · Provide a central gathering space as the hub of the Commercial District, which is programmed with public events and activities. The GPU’s Commercial District Area Vision Plan identifies five development opportunity areas, one of which includes the Project Site. Under existing conditions, the opportunity area that encompasses the Project Site has surplus parking and a high minimum parking requirement. The existing buildings in this opportunity area, minimal landscaping, and large parking lots do not support a walkable experience or provide pedestrian gathering spaces. With implementation of the Project, the opportunity area would include improved and added sidewalks, landscaping, and pedestrian gathering spaces. In addition, the Project would replace the existing structure and large surface parking areas with a building that would front the internal streets and hide parking in the building to make the street feel safer and more attractive. The proposed building and new shade trees would provide shade and act as a wall to the street, framing the space and providing pedestrians a more aesthetically-pleasing environment. This embodies one of the key characteristics of the development envisions for this opportunity area as the proposed building would frame the entrance into the development to make it walkable. Based on its proposed design and provision of affordable housing units and shared parking, the Project would be consistent with the General Plan land use designation for the site and would fulfill the vision of the Commercial District Vision Plan and the identified opportunity area. In addition, the GPU EIR’s medium site representative project would occur on a two- to three-acre parcel and would likely include 60 to 125 residential units. Building heights for multi-family buildings would likely be three to five stories, and parking could be provided in subterranean levels, tuck-under parking at the ground level, surface lots, or a combination thereof. Based on the proposed development and scale, the Project would be considered a medium site project. Based on the discussion above, the purpose of this addendum to the GPU EIR is to evaluate the environmental effects associated with the proposed Project and to determine whether these impacts are consistent with the evaluation presented in the GPU EIR in compliance with CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines. B-69 Chapter 2: Project Description Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 2-12 This page intentionally left blank. B-70 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-1 CHAPTER 3: EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS The following evaluation assesses the environmental impacts of the proposed Project in relation to the analysis provided in the GPU EIR. Determinations are made as to whether the proposed Project would result in new significant impacts or substantially more severe effects, which would trigger the need for a Subsequent or Supplemental EIR. For each threshold identified below, the following questions are addressed and discussed in the narrative for each issue area: · What is the impact conclusion of the Project? For each impact identified below, a level of significance of the impact is provided. While the criteria for determining significant impacts are unique to each issue area, the environmental analysis applies a uniform classification of the impacts based on the following definitions consistent with CEQA and its implementing CEQA Guidelines: No Impact (NI) – A designation of no impact is given when no changes in the environment would occur. Less-than-Significant Impact (LTS) – A less-than-significant impact would cause no substantial adverse change in the environment. Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation (LTS-M) – A less-than-significant impact with mitigation incorporated avoids substantial adverse impacts on the environment with adherence to identified mitigation measures. For those issue areas where the impact of the proposed project would be less than significant with the incorporation of the same mitigation measure(s) identified in the GPU EIR, the impact is identified as LTS-M(GP). The number of the mitigation measure from the GPU EIR MMRP will be referenced and summarized in Chapter 4. Significant and Unavoidable Impact (SU) – A significant unavoidable impact would cause a substantial adverse effect on the environment, and no feasible mitigation measures would be available to reduce the impact to a less than significant level. · What is the GPU EIR impact conclusion? The issues that were found to be either less than significant or were found to have no impact in the Initial Study (IS) prepared for the GPU and were, therefore, excluded from further analysis in the GPU EIR, are identified with “(IS)” after the impact conclusion. · Does the Project involve new significant impacts or substantially more severe impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? · Are there any new or changed circumstances involving new significant impacts or substantially more severe impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? · Is there any new information of substantial importance that was not and could not have been known at the time of certification of the GPU EIR that rises to the level of requiring new analysis or verification? · Are any new mitigation measures required for the Project? B-71 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-2 This page intentionally left blank. B-72 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-3 Issues and Supporting Data Sources: GPU EIR Impact Conclusion Project Impact Conclusion New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New or Changed Circumstances Involving New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New Information of Substantial Importance That Was Not and Could Not Have Been Known at the Time of Certification of the GPU EIR that Rises to the Level of Requiring New Analysis or Verification? Are Any New Mitigation Measures Required for the Project? 1. AESTHETICS. Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section 21099, would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? LTS LTS No No No No b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? NI (IS) NI No No No No c) In non-urbanized area, substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality? LTS LTS No No No No B-73 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-4 Issues and Supporting Data Sources: GPU EIR Impact Conclusion Project Impact Conclusion New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New or Changed Circumstances Involving New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New Information of Substantial Importance That Was Not and Could Not Have Been Known at the Time of Certification of the GPU EIR that Rises to the Level of Requiring New Analysis or Verification? Are Any New Mitigation Measures Required for the Project? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? LTS (IS) LTS No No No No Discussion: a) Would the Project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? As described in the GPU EIR, scenic vistas in the Planning Area consist of the scenic corridors and roadways with views of the Pacific Ocean and the Los Angeles Basin, open spaces and equestrian trails, and natural hillsides and canyons. The GPU continues to regulate development in the Planning Area and contains updated policies related to the preservation and enhancement of scenic views. Areas of land use intensification identified in the GPU would occur along the City-designated scenic corridors but are primarily in areas where development has already taken place. Accordingly, implementation of the GPU was not anticipated to result in a substantial change in views, including those related to the height, bulk, and mass of the existing development, from Silver Spur Road, Crenshaw Boulevard, and Hawthorne Boulevard. Any future development under the GPU would remain to be subject to development and planning review and must, therefore, conform to zoning and other ordinances regarding aesthetic qualities, such as landscaping, building setbacks, hillside protection, signage, and lighting. Due to the siting and nature of the proposed land use changes, and policies that guide new development to minimize impact on scenic corridors and other scenic resources, the GPU EIR determined that impacts related to scenic vista within the Planning Area would be less than significant. When considering the representative projects, there are no additional or different environmental impacts beyond those described above resulting from the overall buildout of the GPU. Since the representative projects are a subset of buildout of the proposed GPU and the total buildout of the GPU has been determined to result in a less-than-significant impact on the scenic vistas within the Planning Area, future development activity, such as the representative projects, would also result in less-than-significant impacts on scenic B-74 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-5 vistas. As described above in Section 2.2, the Project would be considered a medium size representative project; therefore, the Project would result in less-than-significant impacts on scenic vistas. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the GPU EIR. Likewise, there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. b) Would the Project substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? As determined through the Notice of Preparation/Scoping process (i.e., Initial Study) conducted prior to the preparation of the GPU EIR, there are no State scenic highways or State-designated or eligible highways in the Planning Area. Accordingly, as determined in the Initial Study, impacts related to scenic resources or State scenic highways would not occur, and no further analysis of this issue was necessary in the GPU EIR. Therefore, as with the determination in the GPU EIR, development of the proposed Project in the Planning Area would have no impact to scenic resources or State scenic highways. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or change the no impact determination identified in the Initial Study. Likewise, there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. c) In non-urbanized area, would the Project substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized area, would the Project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality? As described in the GPU EIR, implementation of the GPU does not involve substantial changes to land use or building design for most neighborhoods within the Planning Area and includes provisions to preserve or improve the existing visual character of the Planning Area. Land use designations and policies in the GPU would direct new development into under-utilized or previously developed areas, where any proposed changes in land use and physical design are intended to increase visual quality. The GPU’s policies also seek to ensure that any development or redevelopment observe design guidelines to ensure visual compatibility with the surrounding environment. Even with increased density, any future development under the GPU would be of a scale consistent with existing structures and surrounding properties (e.g., height of three to five stories and setback) and contain architectural elements that would blend with the existing buildings in the area. Any future development under the GPU would continue to be subject to the City’s development standards, as well as the City’s Precise Plan of Design regulations. Accordingly, aesthetic impacts of any future development under the GPU, particularly in the Commercial District, related to consistency with development standards and other plans, policies, and regulations would be considered less than significant. The GPU EIR also determined that the GPU would have a beneficial impact in some areas with respect to aesthetics and visual quality, particularly in the Commercial District. Therefore, the proposed Project is representative of a medium size project, which, as described in the GPU EIR, was assumed to reach heights of B-75 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-6 three to five stories. The proposed Project would be constructed to five stories and is located within one of the City’s most urbanized, commercial areas. As the GPU EIR notes, the Commercial District is currently developed and devoid of any natural features and is an urbanized area of the City. Any future development resulting from the proposed GPU would be consistent with surrounding development and similar in terms of type, height, and mass to other existing, multi-story buildings in the area. The proposed Project would result in less-than-significant impacts related to visual quality and consistency with development standards and other plans, policies, and regulations. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the GPU EIR. Likewise, there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. d) Would the Project create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? As determined through the Notice of Preparation/Scoping process (i.e., Initial Study) conducted prior to the preparation of the GPU EIR, the GPU would result in intensification of uses in certain portions of the Planning Area that would introduce new sources of nighttime illumination for architectural highlighting, parking, signage and security purposes, as well as new sources of potential glare from window glass. However, the Initial Study determined that impacts related light and glare would be less than significant as any future development would be required to comply with the lighting requirements set forth in the Rolling Hills Estates Municipal Code (RHEMC) and utilize low-reflectivity glass windows and architectural materials, and no further analysis of this issue was necessary in the GPU EIR. Therefore, the proposed Project would be required to comply with such requirements set forth in the RHEMC and, as such, light and glare impacts would be considered less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the GPU EIR. Likewise, there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. B-76 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-7 Issues and Supporting Data Sources: GPU EIR Impact Conclusion Project Impact Conclusion New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New or Changed Circumstances Involving New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New Information of Substantial Importance That Was Not and Could Not Have Been Known at the Time of Certification of the GPU EIR that Rises to the Level of Requiring New Analysis or Verification? Are Any New Mitigation Measures Required for the Project? 2. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? NI (IS) NI No No No No b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? NI (IS) NI No No No No c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code Section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code Section 4526), or timberland zoned for Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code Section 51104(g))? NI (IS) NI No No No No B-77 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-8 Issues and Supporting Data Sources: GPU EIR Impact Conclusion Project Impact Conclusion New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New or Changed Circumstances Involving New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New Information of Substantial Importance That Was Not and Could Not Have Been Known at the Time of Certification of the GPU EIR that Rises to the Level of Requiring New Analysis or Verification? Are Any New Mitigation Measures Required for the Project? d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? NI (IS) NI No No No No e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forestland to non- forest use? NI (IS) NI No No No No Discussion: As determined through the Notice of Preparation/Scoping process (i.e., Initial Study) conducted prior to the preparation of the GPU EIR, the GPU would have no impacts related to agriculture and forestry resources. The City of Rolling Hills Estates is a suburban/urban area that has limited space for productive agricultural uses, as designated in its current Land Use Element and in the Rolling Hills Estates Zoning Code. The City does not contain any land designated as farmland, Williamson Act contract land, forest lands, or forest- related resources. While the City currently has three distinct areas in the northern and eastern parts of the City that are zoned and/or designated Agricultural, the GPU did not include any changes to existing agricultural zoning. As such, any future development under the GPU would not convert or conflict with the Zoning Code for land zoned for agricultural use, land with Williamson Act contracts, farmland, timberland, or forest land, and no impact would occur. Therefore, as a future development under the GPU, the proposed Project would also result in no impact to agricultural and forestry resources. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or change the no impact determinations identified in the Initial Study. Likewise, there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. B-78 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-9 Issues and Supporting Data Sources: GPU EIR Impact Conclusion Project Impact Conclusion New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New or Changed Circumstances Involving New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New Information of Substantial Importance That Was Not and Could Not Have Been Known at the Time of Certification of the GPU EIR that Rises to the Level of Requiring New Analysis or Verification? Are Any New Mitigation Measures Required for the Project? 3. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management district or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? S-U LTS-M(GP) No No No No b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard? S-U LTS-M(GP) No No No No c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? S-U LTS-M(GP) No No No No d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people? NI (IS) LTS No No No No B-79 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-10 Discussion: a) Would the Project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? The GPU EIR concluded that the GPU would be inconsistent with the South Coast Air Quality Management District’s (SCAQMD) 2016 Air Quality Management Plan (2016 AQMP) because air pollutant emissions associated with the buildout of the City would result in higher emissions of reactive organic gases (ROG), carbon monoxide (CO), sulfur oxides (SOx), coarse particulate matter (PM10), and fine particulate matter (PM2.5) over existing conditions and would increase the City’s population and employment, which was not previously included in the regional planning projections and would potentially cause and increase the frequency or severity of the existing air quality violations. Incorporation of GPU EIR Mitigation Measures MM-AQ-1 and MM-AQ-2 into future development projects during construction and operation would contribute to reduced criteria air pollutant emissions associated with buildout of the GPU. In addition, the goals and policies included in the GPU promote increased capacity for alternative transportation modes and implementation of transportation demand management strategies. Additionally, the GPU EIR quantitively analyzed three representative projects—a small site project, a medium site project, and a hotel project—and concluded that the development of each of the representative projects, when considered individually, would not result in any exceedance of the SCAQMD thresholds that are applied to individual development projects for determining whether a project would result in a significant air quality impact. Accordingly, each of the representative projects would not contribute to any increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations, and, on an individual basis, impacts related to consistency with the 2016 AQMP or with land use planning strategies would be less than significant. However, since implementation of the GPU would introduce land use intensification in certain portions of the Planning Area, no mitigation measures are available that would reduce total air quality emissions from buildout of the GPU to a less-than-significant level. In addition, the population and employment assumptions of the 2016 AQMP would still be exceeded until such time the AQMP is revised and incorporates updated projections that consider the GPU. Therefore, air quality impacts related to the implementation of the AQMP would remain significant and unavoidable. As discussed above and detailed in GPU EIR Section 2.5.10, Buildout Scenarios And Representative Projects, the City has developed three representative projects—small site project, medium site project, and hotel project—to provide more context and information and to allow for a more detailed evaluation of potential environmental impacts that could result from buildout of the Commercial District. A medium site project, also refers to as a medium scale representative project, is described as a potential development on a two- to three-acre parcel, likely consisting of 60 to 125 residential units (depending on the target residential market) and 5,000 to 15,000 square feet of commercial space. Building heights would likely be three to five stories for multi-family and mixed-use buildings and single story for separate retail/restaurant buildings. Parking could be provided in subterranean levels, tuck-under parking at the ground level, surface lots, or a combination thereof. The Project is proposing a residential development, comprising a five-story 90-unit apartment building with above-grade parking on a two-acre site. Of the 240 parking spaces provided by the Project, 90 spaces on Level 1 would be shared public/private parking (commercial use). As such, the Project falls in the category of the medium site project as defined in the GPU EIR. Table AQ-1 includes modeling assumptions used for a medium scale representative project. B-80 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-11 Table AQ-1 Comparison Between Proposed Project And GPU EIR’s Medium Scale Representative Project As shown in Table AQ-1, the Project proposes a smaller development in terms of scale and intensity compared to the development capacity of a medium site project as analyzed in the GPU EIR. The Project would feature fewer dwelling units, fewer parking spaces, fewer daily vehicle trips, and smaller lot size, than the maximum development potential assumed for a medium scale representative project. The Project also proposes a longer construction duration; for the same development size, longer duration of construction activities would lead to lower daily emissions. Additionally, the Project would be constructed after 2024, and would utilize the latest construction equipment available during construction and operation as compared to what were assumed for the medium scale representative project (2022). As such, the air pollutant emissions would be lower than a medium scale representative project as analyzed in the GPU EIR. Furthermore, on December 2, 2022, the SCAQMD Governing Board adopted the 2022 AQMP. The 2022 AQMP incorporates the latest scientific and technical information and planning assumptions, including the latest applicable growth assumptions, and updated the emission inventory methodologies for various source categories. As such, the 2022 AQMP has incorporated the updated projections of the GPU. As the Project would be consistent with existing GPU land use designation Assumptions GPU EIR Medium Scale Representative Project1 Proposed Project2 Lot Size Three acres Two acres Land Use 556-space Unenclosed Parking with Elevator; and 125-unit mid-rise apartments. 5-story podium structure with 2 levels of above grade garage contains 240 parking spaces and 3 levels of 90 apartment units. 3,000-square-feet high turnover sit down restaurant; 5,000-square-feet quality restaurant, and 7,000 square-feet strip mall N/A Daily Trip generation 1,746 trips on Weekdays, 1,725 trips on Saturday, and 1,442 trips on Sunday 409 trips per day Demolition Quantities3 10,083 tons 893 tons Construction Duration Demolition 29 days 22 days Site Preparation 3 days N/A Grading 26 days 66 days Building Construction 220 days 440 days Paving 10 days 22 days Architectural Coating 12 days 22 days N/A= Not Applicable. Notes: 1. Information is found in the GPU EIR. 2. Information is summarized based on site plan, project description, traffic study, and construction and operation questionnaires received from the applicant. 3. Demolition quantities are estimated based on the size of the existing building on-site and CalEEMod user’s guide. B-81 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-12 (Commercial General and Commercial District Mixed-Use Overlay) and zoning (Commercial General Mixed-Use District (CGMU)) for the site, it is anticipated that the Project would be consistent with the 2022 AQMP. Furthermore, the Project would comply with GPU EIR Mitigation Measure MM-AQ-1, which would reduce criteria air pollutant emissions from construction-related activities. Specifically, Mitigation Measure MM-AQ-1 would require applicants of future development projects to control ozone precursor emissions from construction equipment vehicles by maintaining equipment engines in good condition and in proper tune per manufacturer’s specifications. It should be noted that GPU EIR Mitigation Measure MM-AQ-2 does not apply as the Project is smaller than the medium- scale representative project analyzed in the GPU EIR. Therefore, the Project would result in less-than-significant impacts regarding plan consistency similar to the impacts from a medium scale representative project as analyzed in the GPU EIR. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the significant unavoidable impacts identified in the GPU EIR. Likewise, there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. GPU EIR Mitigation Measure MM-AQ-1: The City of Rolling Hills Estate shall require applicants of future development projects that require discretionary grading approval by the Planning Commission to control ozone precursor emissions from construction equipment vehicles by maintaining equipment engines in good condition and in proper tune per manufacturer’s specification. The equipment maintenance records and equipment design specifications data sheets shall be kept on-site by the project contractor during construction activities. b) Would the Project result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard? The GPU EIR determined that construction activities associated with future development under the GPU could generate short-term emissions that exceed the SCAQMD’s significance thresholds and would cumulatively contribute to the nonattainment designations of the South Coast Air Basin (Air Basin). Implementation of GPU EIR Mitigation Measures MM-AQ-1 and MM-AQ-2 would reduce criteria pollutant emissions from construction-related activities. Specifically, Mitigation Measure MM-AQ-1 would require applicants of future development projects to control ozone precursor emissions from construction equipment vehicles by maintaining equipment engines in good condition and in proper tune per manufacturer’s specifications; Mitigation Measure MM-AQ-2 would require future development projects that are larger than the representative projects considered in the GPU EIR to conduct project-specific air emissions impacts in compliance with the latest version of the SCAQMD CEQA Guidelines and the latest version of SCAQMD’s Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology document or other appropriate methodology as determined in conjunction with SCAQMD. If such analyses identify potentially significant regional or localized air quality impacts from a future development project, such project would be required to incorporate appropriate mitigation, including the use of Tier 4 equipment during project construction. In addition, policies in the GPU’s Sustainability Element address potential air quality impacts by continuing to participate in regional efforts, reducing local contributions of airborne pollutants to the Air Basin, limiting locating sensitive receptors near pollutant emitting sources when feasible, expanding dust mitigation programs, and creating an air quality monitoring system. In addition, one of the policies of the update to the B-82 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-13 Land Use Element addresses air quality through maintenance and enhancement of the Planning Area’s open space by preserving and siting appropriate densities to maximize conservation and air quality benefits. All these policies would reduce emissions. However, since implementation of the GPU would introduce land use intensification in certain portions of the Planning Area and possibly future development projects that are larger than the representative projects considered in the GPU EIR, it cannot be determined with certainty that GPU EIR Mitigation Measures MM-AQ-1 and MM-AQ-2 would reduce impacts below SCAQMD’s thresholds in all cases. Therefore, the GPU EIR concluded that construction impacts related to the increase of criteria pollutants for which the Air Basin is non- attainment would be conservatively considered significant and unavoidable. Similarly, the GPU EIR determined that buildout of the GPU would generate long-term emissions that may exceed SCAQMD’s regional significance thresholds and cumulatively contribute to the non-attainment designations of the Air Basin. Mitigation Measure MM-AQ- 2, in addition to the consistency with the goals and policies of the GPU, would reduce air pollutant emissions to the extent feasible. Specifically, Mitigation Measure MM-AQ-2 would require future development projects that are larger than the representative projects considered in the GPU EIR to conduct project-specific air emissions impacts in compliance with the latest version of the SCAQMD CEQA Guidelines and the latest version of SCAQMD’s Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology document, or other appropriate methodology as determined in conjunction with SCAQMD. If such analyses identify potentially significant regional or localized air quality impacts from a future development project, such project would be required to incorporate appropriate mitigation, including the incorporation of energy-efficient design features beyond those required by Title 24, including the California Green Building Standards (CALGreen) Code; and application of transportation demand management (TDM) measures beyond those required by code. The measures and policies covering topics, such as expansion of the pedestrian and bicycle networks, installation of electric vehicle (EV) charging stations, and development and implementation of land use policies that promote public and active transit, would also reduce criteria pollutants within the Planning Area. In addition, as discussed above, policies in the GPU’s Sustainability Element and updated Land Use Element would also reduce emissions. However, since implementation of the GPU would introduce land use intensification in certain portions of the Planning Area and possibly future development projects that are larger than the representative projects considered in the GPU EIR, it cannot be determined with certainty that Mitigation Measure MM-AQ-2 would reduce impacts below SCAQMD’s thresholds in all cases. As a result and given the total volume of air pollutants attributable to buildout of the GPU, the GPU EIR concluded that operational impacts related to the increase of criteria pollutants for which the Air Basin is non-attainment would be conservatively considered significant and unavoidable. As shown in Table AQ-1 above, the Project would propose a smaller development in terms of scale and intensity than what was analyzed in the GPU EIR’s medium scale representative project. Therefore, the maximum daily construction emissions and operational emissions generated by the proposed Project would be lower than the medium scale representative project. As such, the proposed Project would emit less ROG, NOX, CO, SO2, PM10, and PM2.5 than what was analyzed in GPU EIR’s medium scale representative project, whose emissions were determined would not exceed SCAQMD project-specific thresholds for construction and operation. Moreover, although the Project’s construction phases are slightly different than the medium scale representative project, the proposed Project is a similar project type and, therefore, would use a similar construction equipment mix to what was assumed for the medium scale representative project to generate the maximum daily construction emissions reflected in Table 4.2-6 of the GPU EIR. Also, the dwelling units and square footage proposed by the Project is within the scope of the GPU EIR’s buildout scenarios, as analyzed in the B-83 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-14 GPU EIR. Furthermore, the Project would comply with GPU EIR Mitigation Measure MM-AQ-1, which reduce criteria pollutant emissions from construction-related activities (see discussion of Threshold (a) above). As such, the Project would result in less-than- significant impacts in this regard regarding criteria pollutant emissions during construction and operation, similar to the impacts from a medium scale representative project as analyzed in the GPU EIR. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the significant unavoidable impacts identified in the GPU EIR. Likewise, there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. c) Would the Project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? The GPU EIR determined that, since construction activities could occur close to existing sensitive receptors (e.g., residences, schools, playgrounds, childcare centers, athletic facilities, churches, long-term health care facilities, rehabilitation/convalescent centers, and retirement homes), construction emissions generated by future development projects that are larger than the representative projects considered in the GPU EIR have the potential to exceed SCAQMD localized significance thresholds (LSTs) and that it cannot be determined with certainty that GPU EIR Mitigation Measures MM-AQ-1 and MM-AQ-2 would reduce impacts below SCAQMD’s thresholds in all cases. Therefore, the GPU EIR concluded that, since construction activities associated with individual development projects under the GPU could occur close to existing sensitive receptors, localized construction emissions would potentially expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations and, therefore, would be conservatively considered significant and unavoidable. The GPU EIR determined that the new developments including residential uses, offices, retail, and restaurants under implementation of the GPU would result in very limited operational activities with potential health risks, including landscaping maintenance operations and boilers for restaurants. None of these activities would result in the generation of excessive TAC emissions or associated health risks from the individual development projects’ operation. Therefore, the GPU EIR determined that operation associated with the GPU is not anticipated to result in an elevated cancer or other health risk to nearby sensitive receptors, and impacts would be less than significant. As shown in Table AQ-1 above, the Project would propose smaller development in terms of scale and intensity considering the development capacity of a medium site project as analyzed in the GPU EIR. As such, the Project would have fewer localized emissions during construction than what was analyzed in GPU EIR’s medium-sized representative project. Also, the nearest sensitive receptors to the proposed Project Site are residential uses located approximately 240 feet away, which is a greater distance than the assumed 25 meters (approximately 82 feet) used in the GPU EIR’s analysis. The emissions would not exceed SCAQMD LST thresholds for construction. Furthermore, the Project would comply with GPU EIR Mitigation Measure MM-AQ-1, which would reduce criteria pollutant emissions from construction-related activities (see discussion of Threshold (a) above). Therefore, localized construction emissions from the proposed Project would result in less-than-significant impacts. Regarding operations, the proposed mixed-use development would result in very limited operational activities with potential health risks, including landscaping maintenance. The Project does not include uses that result in the generation of excessive TAC emissions B-84 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-15 or associated health risks from operation. As such, as with the determination in GPU EIR, operation associated with the Project is not anticipated to result in an elevated cancer or other health risk to nearby sensitive receptors, and the impact would be less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the significant unavoidable impacts identified in the GPU EIR. Likewise, there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people? As determined through the Notice of Preparation/Scoping process (i.e., Initial Study) conducted prior to the preparation of the GPU EIR, the residential development and commercial uses associated with GPU buildout do not typically generate objectionable odors that affect a substantial number of people. Accordingly, as determined in the Initial Study, no impacts related to other emissions (such as those leading to odors) would occur, and no further analysis of this issue was necessary in the GPU EIR. Land uses generally associated with odor complaints include agricultural uses (livestock and farming), wastewater treatment plants, food processing plants, chemical plants, composting operations, refineries, landfills, dairies, and fiberglass molding facilities. The Project does not include land uses typically associated with emitting objectionable odors. Potential odor sources associated with the proposed Project may result from construction equipment exhaust and the application of asphalt and architectural coatings during construction activities and the temporary storage of typical solid waste associated with the proposed Project’s (long-term operational) uses. Standard construction requirements would minimize odor impacts from construction. The construction odor emissions would be temporary, short-term, and intermittent in nature and would cease upon completion of the respective phase of construction; thus, impacts in this regard would be considered less than significant. It is expected that Project-generated refuse would be stored in covered containers and removed at regular intervals in compliance with the City’s solid waste regulations. The proposed Project would also be required to comply with SCAQMD Rule 402 to prevent occurrences of public nuisances, including odors. Therefore, impacts related to odors associated with the proposed Project construction and operations would not occur. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or change the no impact determination identified in the Initial Study. Likewise, there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. B-85 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-16 Issues and Supporting Data Sources: GPU EIR Impact Conclusion Project Impact Conclusion New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New or Changed Circumstances Involving New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New Information of Substantial Importance That Was Not and Could Not Have Been Known at the Time of Certification of the GPU EIR that Rises to the Level of Requiring New Analysis or Verification? Are Any New Mitigation Measures Required for the Project? 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? LTS-M LTS-M(GP) No No No No b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? LTS-M LTS No No No No c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? LTS-M LTS No No No No B-86 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-17 Issues and Supporting Data Sources: GPU EIR Impact Conclusion Project Impact Conclusion New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New or Changed Circumstances Involving New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New Information of Substantial Importance That Was Not and Could Not Have Been Known at the Time of Certification of the GPU EIR that Rises to the Level of Requiring New Analysis or Verification? Are Any New Mitigation Measures Required for the Project? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? LTS-M LTS-M(GP) No No No No e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? LTS LTS No No No No f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted habitat conservation plan, natural community conservation plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? LTS LTS No No No No Discussion: a) Would the Project have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? As described in the GPU EIR, candidate, sensitive, or special status species that have occurred within the City of Rolling Hills Estates are limited to the Palos Verdes blue butterfly, two avian species (coastal California gnatcatcher and least Bell’s vireo), and two plant B-87 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-18 species (aphanisma and mesa horkelia). As shown in Figure 4.3-1 of the GPU EIR, these species occur on parcels located throughout the Planning Area. While the change in vegetative land cover and habitats supporting protected species would likely be extremely minimal, there may be isolated habitat disturbance associated with future buildout of the GPU that could impact protected species or their habitat, such as the coastal California gnatcatcher in the western portion of the Planning Area or the Palos Verdes blue butterfly in the northern portion of the Planning Area. Such impacts to protected species and habitats would be reduced through implementation of goals and policies included within the GPU, such as those related to conserving the Planning Area’s natural environment and open space areas and limiting grading and development in areas containing canyons and native vegetation. Although the GPU concluded that impacts to special status species and habitats resulting from buildout of the GPU would be potentially significant, with implementation of the GPU EIR’s Mitigation Measures MM-BIO-1 through MM-BIO-3 (i.e., preparation of a biological resources assessment and nesting bird and bat surveys conducted on a project-by-project basis), buildout of the GPU would not result in significant impacts to special status species or habitats, as designated by the CDFW or USFWS. Furthermore, with such mitigation measures, impacts on the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species, established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, and native wildlife nursery sites from adoption of the GPU, which includes the representative projects, would be less than significant. The Project Site is fully developed and located within an urbanized area, and the existing landscaping is limited to ornamental vegetation. The Project would require limited grading and would not require a discretionary approval for grading. In addition, the Project Site does not include critical habitat or existing natural communities and is not identified as an area in which the Palos Verdes blue butterfly, coastal California gnatcatcher, least Bell’s vireo, aphanisma, and mesa horkelia species have occurred. As such, GPU EIR Mitigation Measures MM-BIO-1 and MM-BIO-3 would not be applicable to the Project. GPU EIR Mitigation Measure MM-BIO-2, below, would be applicable to the Project and would require that a qualified biologist conduct a pre-construction nesting bird survey and that a buffer and pause of construction activities be implemented if active nests are discovered. With such mitigation, Project impacts related to special status species or habitats and sensitive biological resources would be less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts with mitigation identified in the GPU EIR. Likewise, there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. GPU EIR Mitigation Measure MM-BIO-2: If future development projects that involve vegetation removal, and are not otherwise categorically exempt from CEQA or subject to the emergency project statutory exemption from CEQA, are unable to avoid construction activities within nesting bird season (January 1st through July 31st for raptors and February 1st through August 31st for other avian species), a qualified biologist shall conduct a pre-construction nesting bird survey for avian species to determine the presence/absence, location, and status of any active nests on or adjacent to the area proposed development area. The survey shall be conducted for active nests, eggs, and young of any bird species protected by the state or federal Endangered Species Acts, Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA), and/or the California Fish and Game Code (CFGC) Sections 3503, 3503.5, or 3511, within 200 feet of the disturbance zone for songbirds, or within 500 feet of the B-88 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-19 disturbance zone for raptors and special-status bird species. To avoid the destruction of active nests and to protect the reproductive success of birds protected by the MBTA and the CFGC, a nesting bird survey should be conducted no more than three (3) days prior to the commencement of project construction if construction occurs between January 1st and August 31st. In the event that active nests are discovered, a suitable buffer (distance to be determined by the biologist) shall be established around such active nests, and no construction activities within the buffer will be allowed, until the biologist has determined that the nest(s) is no longer active (i.e., the nestlings have fledged and are no longer dependent on the nest). b) Would the Project have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Would the Project have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? The GPU EIR acknowledged that there are no riparian or wetland habitats identified within the Commercial District, where the representative projects would be located, and it is unlikely that the representative projects would significantly impact riparian or wetland habitats. Regardless, buildout of the GPU could include sites beyond the Commercial District and, therefore, may result in significant impacts to riparian areas if such development would be located in close proximity to these resources. As such, the GPU EIR included Mitigation Measure MM-BIO-4, which requires the preparation of biological resources surveys for development projects requiring discretionary grading approval that are located within 100 feet of a riverine or wetland feature, to ensure related impacts would be less than significant. As the Project Site is located within the Commercial District and not located within 100 feet of a riverine or wetland feature, the proposed Project would not be subject to Mitigation Measure MM-BIO-4, and impacts related to riparian habitat, sensitive natural communities, and federally protected wetlands would be less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts with mitigation identified in the GPU EIR. Likewise, there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. d) Would the Project interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? According to the GPU EIR, large blocks of open space or undeveloped areas within the Planning Area, located in canyons, nature preserves, the Palos Verdes Landfill, and the South Coast Botanical Garden, may serve as wildlife corridors for common and protected wildlife species. As previously described, the GPU would concentrate future development on underutilized parcels primarily located in the Commercial District, as well as on parcels characterized by institutional and commercial land uses and previously developed parcels. The GPU would not change land use designations of parcels located in open space areas; rather, the GPU would increase B-89 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-20 land designated as open space in the canyons in the southwestern portion of the Planning Area. Nonetheless, development associated with the buildout of the GPU could result in limited vegetation removal, intrusion by humans and pets, or increases in nuisance noise, affecting wildlife movement and nesting sites in areas with known occurrences of wildlife species and habitats. As such, impacts related to interference with the movement of native resident migratory wildlife species would be potentially significant. Therefore, the GPU would require incorporation of the previously detailed Mitigation Measures MM-BIO-1 through MM-BIO-3 and the preparation of project- specific biological resources surveys and impact assessments, if applicable, as well as nesting bird surveys and bat roost surveys. With mitigation, impacts on the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species, established native resident migratory wildlife corridors, and native wildlife nursery sites from adoption of the GPU, which includes the representative projects, would be less than significant. The Project is located in the urbanized Commercial District and would not be located in an open space area. The Project would require limited grading, would not require a discretionary approval for grading, and would include the removal of existing landscaping on-site, which is limited to ornamental vegetation. As described in Threshold a) above, the Project Site does not include critical habitat or existing natural communities and is not identified as an area in which the Palos Verdes blue butterfly, coastal California gnatcatcher, least Bell’s vireo, aphanisma, and mesa horkelia species have occurred. Nonetheless, Mitigation Measure MM-BIO-2 of the GPU EIR would be applicable to the Project. Therefore, a pre-construction nesting bird survey and subsequent implementation of procedures in the event that active nests are discovered, as required by the mitigation measure, would reduce Project impacts to a less-than- significant level. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts with mitigation identified in the GPU EIR. Likewise, there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. e) Would the Project conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? While the City of Rolling Hills Estates does not have a tree protection ordinance, the GPU’s Conservation Element has a number of goals and policies that directly address protection of native plant and animal life. and includes an Ecological Resource Overlay Zone, which applies to portions of the City where highly sensitive ecological habitats are located. If development were to occur that would directly impact an SEA, then projects would be required to comply with the municipal National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit, as directed by RHEMC Section 8.38.070(A)(10). Accordingly, the GPU EIR concluded that buildout of the GPU, including the representative projects, would not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources. The Project Site does not overlap with ecological resource overlay zones, and, as such, the Project would not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the GPU EIR. Likewise, there is no new information of B-90 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-21 substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. f) Would the Project conflict with the provisions of an adopted habitat conservation plan, natural community conservation plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? As discussed in the GPU EIR, the Planning Area is not located within a Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCCP) or a Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP), and buildout of the GPU would not involve development within the County-designated SEAs located within the City. However, although the nearest areas covered by an NCCP or HCP are located in the City of Rancho Palos Verdes outside of the Planning Area, the Vista Del Norte Reserve is located on the southeast side of the Planning Area’s Commercial District. While this area would remain protected by the NCCP/HCP, buildout of the GPU within the Commercial District may result in indirect impacts on the Vista Del Norte Reserve, such as elevated dust or noise levels during construction or from increased runoff or sediment during a project’s operation. Accordingly, as discussed under Threshold (a) above, the GPU EIR’s mitigations (Mitigation Measures MM-BIO- 1 through MM-BIO-3) would be applicable to the Project to ensure impacts related to special status species or habitats and sensitive biological resources would be less than significant. Specifically, Mitigation Measure MM-BIO-1, to which future development projects under the GPU would be subject, would reduce potential impacts to off-site biological resources to less-than-significant levels. Therefore, the GPU EIR concluded that representative projects would not conflict with the provisions of an adopted HCP, NCCP, or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan, and, as such, impacts would be less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the GPU EIR. Likewise, there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. B-91 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-22 Issues and Supporting Data Sources: GPU EIR Impact Conclusion Project Impact Conclusion New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New or Changed Circumstances Involving New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New Information of Substantial Importance That Was Not and Could Not Have Been Known at the Time of Certification of the GPU EIR that Rises to the Level of Requiring New Analysis or Verification? Are Any New Mitigation Measures Required for the Project? 5. CULTURAL RESOURCES Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5? SU LTS No No No No b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5? SU SU No No No No c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? LTS (IS) LTS No No No No Discussion: a) Would the Project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5? As described in the GPU EIR, the City’s Landmark Overlay Zone includes three properties in the Planning Area: The General Store (Kelly’s Korner), the Empty Saddle Club, and the Peninsula Heritage School. In addition to these sites, other buildings and properties have the potential to meet National Register of Historic Places, California Register of Historical Resources, or local criteria for B-92 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-23 significance. The GPU EIR determined that implementation of the GPU would not directly impact any historical resources because it does not propose the demolition or alteration of any known or potential historical resource. However, future development may occur on properties that are designated historical resources and in areas that contain potential historical resources. The GPU EIR determined that site-specific project environmental review would need to be conducted at the time discretionary development projects are proposed to identify any known or potential historical resources. The GPU EIR identified mitigation measures to reduce impacts on historic resources. Specifically, Mitigation Measure MM-CUL-1 requires the preparation of a historical resources assessment report prior to the alteration, demolition, or relocation of a building or structure over 45 years old. If a property is determined to be a historical resource, Mitigation Measure MM-CUL-2 requires an analysis of how a future development project would impact the historical resource. If the City determines that significant impacts to historical resources cannot be avoided, Mitigation Measure MM-CUL-3 requires that, at a minimum, the affected historical resources be thoroughly documented before issuance of any permits and may also require additional public education efforts and/or memorialization of the historical resource. As concluded in the GPU EIR, while implementation of the mitigation measures, in addition to compliance with the GPU’s policies, provisions of the RHEMC, and State and federal regulations pertaining to historical resources, would reduce impacts of the buildout of the GPU on historical resources to the maximum extent feasible, since demolition or other material impairment of a historical resource over the course of buildout of the GPU cannot be precluded, impacts were determined to be significant and unavoidable. With respect to the proposed Project, the existing on-site building proposed for demolition was constructed in 1983 and is not over 45 years old; thus, it is not considered a potential historic resource. Therefore, Mitigation Measures MM-CUL-1 through MM-CUL-3 would not be applicable to the Project, and no impact related to historical resources would occur as a result of development of the proposed Project. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed project would occur or worsen the significant and unavoidable impacts identified in the GPU EIR. Likewise, there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. b) Would the Project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5? As detailed in the GPU EIR, the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC) cultural resources records search showed 16 previously recorded cultural resources (including 12 prehistoric archaeological resources) and three City-designated Landmark Overlay Zone properties within the Planning Area. Although the majority of the Planning Area has been developed, buried resources may remain in areas where developments required only shallow or minimal ground disturbance, in open space areas, or in undeveloped parcels. Implementation of the GPU’s Conservation Element’s goal and policies would reduce impacts to archaeological resources associated with buildout of the GPU, future development and redevelopment may result in adverse impacts to undiscovered archaeological resources. Therefore, impacts to archaeological resources resulting from the buildout of the GPU would be potentially significant. The GPU EIR identified mitigation measures to reduce impacts on archaeological resources. In particular, Mitigation Measure MM-CUL-4 requires that a site-specific project environmental review and archaeological resources assessment be conducted before ground disturbing and demolition activities are permitted to occur. Mitigation Measure MM-CUL-5 requires additional B-93 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-24 investigation if the archaeological resources assessment identifies potentially significant archaeological resources, and impacts cannot be avoided. Mitigation Measure MM-CUL-6 requires a qualified archaeologist to monitor all ground-disturbing construction and preconstruction activities in areas with previously undisturbed soil if the archaeological resources assessment does not identify archaeological resources but finds the area to be highly sensitive for archaeological resources. Mitigation Measure MM-CUL-7 requires an archaeologist, who meets the Secretary’s Standards, to be retained on call if an archaeological resources assessment does not identify potentially significant archaeological resources but the site has moderate sensitivity for archaeological resources. The GPU EIR concluded that, while mitigation and compliance with the GPU’s policies, provisions of the RHEMC, and State and federal regulations pertaining to archaeological resources would reduce archaeological resources impacts to the maximum extent feasible, the destruction of an archaeological resource over the course of buildout of the GPU cannot be precluded and would be considered significant and unavoidable. As the proposed Project’s construction activities would include grading and demolition, pursuant to Mitigation Measure MM-CUL-4, the Project would be required to undergo screening to determine whether an archaeological resources assessment is required. With implementation of this measure and subsequent mitigation provided in the GPU EIR, as applicable, Project-specific impacts related to archaeological resources would be reduced to the maximum extent feasible. However, as with the determination in the GPU EIR, the destruction of an archaeological resource during construction cannot be precluded and would be considered significant and unavoidable. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed project would occur or worsen the significant and unavoidable impacts identified in the GPU EIR. Likewise, there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. GPU EIR Mitigation Measures MM-CUL-4: To ensure identification and preservation of archaeological resources and avoid significant impacts to those resources, prior to grading approval by the Rolling Hills Estates Planning Commission, each project requiring such approval shall be screened to determine whether an Archaeological Resources Assessment report is required. Screening shall consider the type of project and whether ground disturbance will occur in native soils (i.e., previously undisturbed soils). If so, prior to grading approval by the Rolling Hills Estates Planning Commission, the City shall require an Archaeological Resources Assessment be conducted under the supervision of an archaeologist that meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards. Archaeological Resources Assessments shall include a California Historical Resources Information System records search at the South Central Coastal Information Center and a Sacred Lands File search through the Native American Heritage Commission. The records searches will determine if the proposed development area has been previously surveyed for archaeological resources, identify and characterize the results of previous cultural resource surveys, and disclose any cultural resources that have been recorded and/or evaluated. If unpaved surfaces are present within the development area, and the entire development area has not been previously surveyed within the past 10 years, a Phase B-94 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-25 I pedestrian survey shall be undertaken in proposed development areas to locate any surface cultural materials that may be present. MM-CUL-5: If the Archaeological Resources Assessment identifies potentially significant archaeological resources and impacts cannot be avoided, a Phase II Testing and Evaluation investigation shall be performed by an archaeologist who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards to determine significance prior to any ground-disturbing activities. If resources are determined significant or unique through Phase II testing and site avoidance is not possible, appropriate site-specific mitigation measures shall be undertaken. These may include a Phase III data recovery program implemented by a qualified archaeologist and performed in accordance with the California Office of Historic Preservation’s “Archaeological Resource Management Reports (ARMR): Recommended Contents and Format” (1990) and “Guidelines for Archaeological Research Designs” (1991). MM-CUL-6: If the Archaeological Resources Assessment did not identify archaeological resources but found the area to be highly sensitive for archaeological resources, a qualified archaeologist shall monitor all ground-disturbing construction and preconstruction activities in areas with previously undisturbed soil. The archaeologist shall inform all construction personnel prior to construction activities of the proper procedures in the event of an archaeological discovery. The training shall be held in conjunction with the project’s initial on-site safety meeting and shall explain the importance and legal basis for the protection of significant archaeological resources. In the event that archaeological resources (artifacts or features) are exposed during ground-disturbing activities, construction activities in the immediate vicinity of the discovery shall be halted while the resources are evaluated for significance by an archaeologist who meets the Secretary’s Standards, and tribal consultation shall be conducted in the case of a tribal resource. If the discovery proves to be significant, the long-term disposition of any collected materials shall be determined in consultation with the affiliated tribe(s), where relevant; this could include curation with a recognized scientific or educational repository, transfer to the tribe, or respectful reinternment in an area designated by the tribe. MM-CUL-7: If an Archaeological Resources Assessment does not identify potentially significant archaeological resources but the site has moderate sensitivity for archaeological resources, an archaeologist who meets the Secretary’s Standards shall be retained on call. The archaeologist shall inform all construction personnel prior to construction activities about the proper procedures in the event of an archaeological discovery. The preconstruction training shall be held in conjunction with a future development project’s initial on-site safety meeting and shall explain the importance and legal basis for the protection of significant archaeological resources. In the event that archaeological resources (artifacts or features) are exposed during ground-disturbing activities, construction activities in the immediate vicinity of the discovery shall be halted while the on-call archaeologist is contacted. The resource shall be evaluated for significance and tribal consultation shall be conducted, in the case of a tribal resource. If the discovery proves to be significant, the long-term disposition of any collected materials should be determined in consultation with the affiliated tribe(s), where relevant. B-95 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-26 c) Would the Project disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? As determined through the Notice of Preparation/Scoping process (i.e., Initial Study) conducted prior to the preparation of the GPU EIR, impacts related to human remains were determined to be less than significant through compliance with California Health and Safety Code Sections 7050.5, 7051, and 7052 and PRC Sections 5097 and 5097.98. These existing regulations address human burial remains and protect them from disturbance, vandalism, and destruction and establish procedures to be implemented if Native American remains are discovered. Accordingly, the Project would also be required to comply with such regulations, and Project impacts related to human remains would be less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the Initial Study. Likewise, there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. B-96 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-27 Issues and Supporting Data Sources: GPU EIR Impact Conclusion Project Impact Conclusion New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New or Changed Circumstances Involving New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New Information of Substantial Importance That Was Not and Could Not Have Been Known at the Time of Certification of the GPU EIR that Rises to the Level of Requiring New Analysis or Verification? Are Any New Mitigation Measures Required for the Project? 6. ENERGY Would the project: a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources during project construction or operation? LTS LTS No No No No b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency? LTS LTS No No No No Discussion: a) Result in potential significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources during project construction or operation? The GPU EIR determined that there are no unusual characteristics that would necessitate the use of construction equipment, building materials, or methods that would be less energy efficient than at comparable construction sites in the region or the State. In addition, according to the GPU EIR, the GPU Sustainability Element would help achieve the Planning Area’s goal of reducing energy consumption by increasing building energy efficiency, promoting renewable energy usage in the Planning Area, promoting better commission and monitor energy systems to increase the energy efficiency. Therefore the GPU EIR concluded that buildout of the GPU would not result in the inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary consumption of energy, and impacts would be less than significant. Furthermore, when considering the representative projects, there are no additional or different environmental impacts beyond those resulting from the overall buildout of the proposed GPU. B-97 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-28 Project Energy Consumption As shown in Table AQ-1, the Project would propose smaller development in terms of scale and intensity considering the development capacity of a medium site project as analyzed in the GPU EIR. Therefore, the Project would result in less total energy consumed during construction as compared to a medium scale representative project analyzed in the GPU EIR. As such, the Project would result in less-than-significant impacts regarding construction-related energy consumption. In regard to operational impacts, the Project proposes a smaller scale development with fewer dwelling units, fewer parking spaces, and fewer daily vehicle trips than a medium scale representative project; as such, the Project would result in less operational energy consumption than a medium scale representative project as analyzed in the GPU EIR. The Project would also be constructed pursuant to updated California Building Code requirements, which are more energy efficient than what was analyzed in the GPU EIR. The Project does not have any energy-demanding features that make it unique from the types of projects assumed in the GPU EIR. Therefore, the Project would result in less-than-significant impacts regarding operational energy consumption. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the GPU EIR. Likewise, there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency? According to the GPU EIR, the energy-efficient goals and policies contained in the GPU would help implement energy-efficient measures and would subsequently reduce energy consumption within the Planning Area. Accordingly, the GPU EIR determined that the GPU would not result in impacts related to conflict with applicable energy plans that would be less than significant. Furthermore, according to the GPU EIR, new development projects under the GPU be required to comply with applicable energy efficiency standards, such the requirements of Title 24 standards (including the CALGreen Code), applicable goals identified in Statewide energy plans, and energy-efficient goals and policies contained in the GPU and would utilize electricity provided by Clean Power Alliance that would default to 100-percent renewable energy for residential uses and 50-percent renewable energy for non-residential uses. Therefore, when considering the representative projects, the GPU EIR concluded that impacts associated with renewable energy or energy efficiency plans would be less than significant. Implementation of the GPU EIR includes mandatory compliance with applicable plans identified in Statewide energy plans, such as Title 24, including the CALGreen Code, and California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) Long Term Energy Efficiency Strategic Plan. As such, the proposed Project would also be required to comply with these plans, refer to Table ENE-1. The Project’s energy use is within the demand/use assumptions of the GPU’s conceptual buildout. The proposed Project would be consistent with the applicable Statewide Energy Plans, such as Title 24, including the CALGreen Code, and CPUC Long Term Energy Efficiency Strategic Plan. As such, impacts associated with the proposed Project’s consistency with renewable energy or energy efficiency plans would be less than significant. B-98 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-29 No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen would the less-than-significant impacts identified in the GPU EIR. Likewise, there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. Table ENE-1 Consistency With Statewide Energy Plans Programs and Policies Primary Objective Consistency California Building Energy Efficiency Standards (Title 24) Requires the design of building shells and building components to conserve energy. Consistent. The proposed Project would be required to comply with Title 24. Specifically, the proposed Project would install high-efficiency lighting and energy-efficient appliances in accordance with applicable Title 24 standards, including the CALGreen Code. California Green Building Standards (CALGreen) Code The CALGreen Code requires that new buildings employ water efficiency and conservation, increase building system efficiencies (e.g., lighting, heating/ventilation and air conditioning [HVAC], and plumbing fixtures), divert construction waste from landfills, and incorporate electric vehicles charging infrastructure. Consistent. The proposed Project would be required to comply with the CALGreen Code. Specifically, the proposed Project would provide bicycle parking and EV charging stations and utilize water-efficiency irrigation in accordance with applicable CALGreen Code requirements. California Public Utilities Commission Long Term Energy Efficiency Strategic Plan Promote energy efficiency and a reduction in greenhouse gases. The plan includes the four big bold strategies: 1. All new residential construction in California will be zero net energy by 2020. 2. All new commercial construction in California will be zero net energy by 2030. 3. Heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) will be transformed to ensure that its energy performance is optimal for California’s climate. 4. All eligible low-income customers will be given the opportunity to participate in the low- income energy efficiency program by 2020. Consistent. This plan promotes energy efficiency and a reduction in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The proposed Project would comply with the latest Title 24 standards, including the CALGreen Code, that would reduce emissions by increasing energy efficiency. Sources: 2022 California Green Building Standards Code, Title 24, Part 11; California Public Utilities Commission Energy Efficiency Strategic Plan, January 2011 Update; SB 100 California Renewables Portfolio Standard Program: emissions of greenhouse gases, September 10, 2018. B-99 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-30 Issues and Supporting Data Sources: GPU EIR Impact Conclusion Project Impact Conclusion New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New or Changed Circumstances Involving New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New Information of Substantial Importance That Was Not and Could Not Have Been Known at the Time of Certification of the GPU EIR that Rises to the Level of Requiring New Analysis or Verification? Are Any New Mitigation Measures Required for the Project? 7. GEOLOGY AND SOILS Would the project: a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? NI (IS) NI No No No No ii. Strong seismic ground shaking? LTS (IS) LTS No No No No iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? NI (IS) NI No No No No iv. Landslides? LTS LTS No No No No b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? LTS (IS) LTS No No No No B-100 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-31 Issues and Supporting Data Sources: GPU EIR Impact Conclusion Project Impact Conclusion New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New or Changed Circumstances Involving New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New Information of Substantial Importance That Was Not and Could Not Have Been Known at the Time of Certification of the GPU EIR that Rises to the Level of Requiring New Analysis or Verification? Are Any New Mitigation Measures Required for the Project? c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide? LTS LTS No No No No d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property? LTS (IS) LTS No No No No e) 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? LTS (IS) LTS No No No No f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? LTS-M LTS-M(GP) No No No No B-101 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-32 Discussion: a.i) Would the Project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving 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? As determined through the Notice of Preparation/Scoping process (i.e., Initial Study) conducted prior to the preparation of the GPU EIR, the City is not located within a designated Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. Therefore, any future development under the GPU would have no impact related to fault rupture. Accordingly, as with the determination in the Initial Study, no Project impacts related to rupture of a known earthquake fault would occur. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or change the no impact determination identified in the Initial Study. Likewise, there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. a.ii) Would the Project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving strong seismic ground shaking? As determined through the Notice of Preparation/Scoping process (i.e., Initial Study) conducted prior to the preparation of the GPU EIR, future development projects under the GPU would be constructed in accordance with the standards defined in the California Building Code (CBC) and would be subject to review by the City’s Building and Safety Department. Therefore, the Initial Study concluded that impacts related to strong seismic ground shaking would be less than significant. As the Project would also be constructed in accordance with CBC standards and City review, Project impacts related to strong seismic ground shaking would be less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the Initial Study. Likewise, there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. a.iii) Would the Project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? As determined through the Notice of Preparation/Scoping process (i.e., Initial Study) conducted prior to the preparation of the GPU EIR, with the exception of a very small portion of the Planning Area, the City is not located in a liquefaction hazard zone, and no land use change is anticipated for this small portion. Therefore, the Initial Study concluded the GPU would have no impact related to liquefaction. As the Project Site is not located in a liquefaction hazard zone, no Project impacts related to liquefaction would occur. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or change the no impact determination identified in the Initial Study. Likewise, there is no new information of B-102 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-33 substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. a.iv) Would the Project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving landslides? c) Would the Project be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on-or off-site landslide? According to the GPU EIR, the City contains numerous landslide zones, particularly along Crenshaw Boulevard, along the northern boundary of the Planning Area, and the areas south of Palos Verdes Drive North between Crenshaw Boulevard and Silver Spur Road as shown in Figure 4.6-1 of the GPU EIR. The Commercial District is underlain by the Silver Spur Landslide Complex and is in proximity to the Cabrillo Fault. As the precise location and boundaries of the Silver Spur Landslide Complex are unknown, there is potential for future developments within the Commercial District to be located on an unstable geologic unit. Furthermore, the Commercial District is located within the Hazard Management Overlay zone, which requires that all future development within the district conduct geotechnical evaluation and implementation of recommended design and safety measures. The GPU also contains goals and policies that require new construction and significant alterations to properties within potential landslide areas to be evaluated for site stability, including identification of potential impacts to adjacent properties, during project design and review. As noted on page 4.6-3 of the GPU EIR, the City’s Planning and Engineering Departments are required to review future development projects in the City (Goal 2), and the following policies are identified: discourage development adjacent to earthquake faults and other geological hazards (Policy 2.1); prohibit residential development on non-engineered fill of any kind (Policy 2.2); develop stringent site design and maintenance standards for areas with high fire hazard or soil erosion potential (Policy 2.3); regularly review the technical data on public safety and seismic safety for use in the decision-making process (Policy 2.4); continue to require preliminary investigations of tract sites by State-registered geotechnical engineers and certified engineering geologists (Chapter 70 County Building Code); and ensure regular inspection of grading operations (Policy 2.5). In addition, future developments would be required to comply with the grading standards established in the RHEMC to reduce landslide potential and ensure soil stability and requirements of the CBC and the City’s Building Code. The GPU EIR concluded that compliance with all applicable regulations and requirements would ensure that the implementation of the GPU would not directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including to risk of loss, injury, or death involving landslides and would ensure that future development under the GPU would not be located on a geologic unit that is unstable, or that would become unstable, and potentially result in landslide. Therefore, such impacts of the GPU, including the representative projects, would be less than significant. As the Project Site is located in the Commercial District and Hazard Management Overlay Zone, the Project would be required to conduct a site-specific geotechnical evaluation, implement recommended design and safety measures, and conform with RHEMC grading standards, CBC, and the City’s Building Code. With such regulatory compliance, Project impacts related to landslides and unstable geologic units or soil would be less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the GPU EIR. Likewise, there is no new information of B-103 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-34 substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. b) Would the Project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? As determined through the Notice of Preparation/Scoping process (i.e., Initial Study) conducted prior to the preparation of the GPU EIR, future development within the Planning Area would be required to comply with existing regulations to reduce erosion potential, including SCAQMD Rule 403 and the NPDES requirements. Thus, impacts related to soil erosion or loss of topsoil were determined to be less than significant in the Initial Study. Similarly, as Project construction and activities would be required to comply with such regulatory requirements, Project impacts related to soil erosion or loss of topsoil would be less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the Initial Study. Likewise, there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. d) Would the Project be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property? As determined through the Notice of Preparation/Scoping process (i.e., Initial Study) conducted prior to the preparation of the GPU EIR, since there are a number of segments of riverine wetlands running through the Planning Area, expansive soils have the potential to occur within the Planning Area. However, the design of individual structures would be subject to review by the City’s Building and Safety Department, including review by the City Geologist and the City Engineer. With the required compliance with the CBC, no future development under the GPU is expected to result in significant impacts related expansive soils. Compliance with the CBC and City Building Code would ensure that impacts related to expansive soils were determined to be less than significant in the Initial Study. Similarly, as Project construction and activities would be required to comply with such regulatory requirements, Project impacts related to expansive soil would be less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the Initial Study. Likewise, there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. e) Would the Project 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? As determined through the Notice of Preparation/Scoping process (i.e., Initial Study) conducted prior to the preparation of the GPU EIR, future development within the Planning Area would be required to connect to the existing public sewer system with the exception of the potential development of accessory dwelling units (ADU) in single-family neighborhoods that utilize existing septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems. In such cases, property owners would be required to demonstrate that their on-site system meets the capacity requirements to adequately serve the addition of an ADU on their property. Accordingly, the GPU EIR determined that impacts B-104 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-35 related to Threshold (e) were determined to be less than significant. As the Project would be developed in an urbanized area, the proposed multi-family residential development would connect to the existing public sewer system, and no impacts related to soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems would not occur. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the Initial Study. Likewise, there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. f) Would the Project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? According to the GPU EIR, the Planning Area encompasses areas that may contain fossil-bearing units and are, therefore, considered sensitive for paleontological resources. A paleontology collection records search for the locality and specimen data within the Planning Area was conducted by the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County in May 2021 and found several fossil localities from the Monterey Formation (Altamira Shale and Lomita Marl) within the Planning Area. While future development within the Planning Area would be focused in the Commercial District, which is primarily underlain by artificial fill, and infill locations that have been previously graded to accommodate the existing or previous structures and uses, there remains the possibility that fossils are present in the soil in the Planning Area and that ground disturbance by future development under the proposed GPU could damage such fossils. The GPU EIR determined that future development and redevelopment projects must be considered on a project-by-project to determine whether a full paleontological assessment is required based on previous ground disturbance at the development site, the extent of ground- disturbing activities, and depth of excavation. Ground-disturbing activities (e.g., excavation, grading, vegetation removal, and construction) associated with future development and redevelopment projects allowed under the proposed GPU, including the representative projects, would have the potential to unearth, damage, and/or destroy known or unknown paleontological resources and have the potential to result in adverse impacts. Thus, the GPU EIR determined that impacts to paleontological resources or sites or unique geologic features would be potentially significant. Accordingly, the GPU EIR identified mitigation measures to reduce impacts on paleontological resources. In particular, Mitigation Measure MM-GEO-1 requires project-specific screening and preparation of a paleontological resources assessment, if applicable. Mitigation Measure MM-GEO-2 requires that, in the event that any prehistoric subsurface paleontological resources are encountered during future construction or the course of any ground disturbance activities, all such activities shall be halted immediately, and proper notification and assessment of the find be conducted with subsequent implementation of avoidance or other appropriate measures (e.g., data recovery, excavation). With these mitigation measures, impacts of the GPU related to paleontological resources would be less than significant. As shown in Figure 4.6-3 of the GPU EIR, based on California Geological Survey’s geologic mapping, the Project Site, which is located in the Commercial District, is underlain by artificial fill. However, consistent with the GPU EIR, Project impacts related to paleontological resources cannot be precluded. Accordingly, the Project would require implementation of Mitigation Measures MM-GEO-1 and MM-GEO-2 to ensure impacts related to paleontological resources would be less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impact with mitigation identified in the GPU EIR. Likewise, there is no new B-105 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-36 information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. GPU EIR Mitigation Measures MM-GEO-1: To ensure identification and preservation of significant paleontological resources and avoid significant impacts to those resources, prior to the issuance of a grading approval by the City of Rolling Hills Estates Planning Commission, each project requiring such approval shall be screened to determine whether a full paleontological resources assessment is required. Screening shall consider whether the proposed grading activity will extend into known undisturbed fossil- bearing strata (i.e., those of the Monterey Formation, including Lomita Marl Member, Valmonte Diatomite Member, and Altamira Shale Member). If so, the City shall require a paleontological resources assessment be conducted by a paleontologist that meets Bureau of Land Management or Society of Vertebrate Paleontology standards (i.e., a qualified paleontologist) prior to the issuance of a grading approval. If the paleontological resources assessment identifies the potential for destruction of significant paleontological resources, an avoidance and/or recovery plan shall be developed and implemented under the supervision of a qualified paleontologist to the satisfaction of the City of Rolling Hills Estates. MM-GEO-2: In the event that any prehistoric subsurface paleontological resources are encountered during future construction or the course of any ground disturbance activities, all such activities shall halt immediately, at which time the applicant shall notify the City and consult with a qualified paleontologist to assess the significance of the find. In the case of discovery of paleontological resources, the assessment shall be done in accordance with the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology standards. If any find is determined to be significant, appropriate avoidance measures recommended by the consultant and approved by the City must be followed unless avoidance is determined to be unnecessary or infeasible by the City. If avoidance is unnecessary or infeasible, other appropriate measures (e.g., data recovery, excavation) shall be instituted. B-106 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-37 Issues and Supporting Data Sources: GPU EIR Impact Conclusion Project Impact Conclusion New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New or Changed Circumstances Involving New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New Information of Substantial Importance That Was Not and Could Not Have Been Known at the Time of Certification of the GPU EIR that Rises to the Level of Requiring New Analysis or Verification? Are Any New Mitigation Measures Required for the Project? 8. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS Would the project: a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? LTS LTS No No No No b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? LTS LTS No No No No Discussion: The GPU EIR determined that the GPU’s Sustainability Element would reduce GHG emissions from buildout of the Planning Area by cooperating with the State to implement SB 32, lowering the emissions caused by motor vehicles through education and outreach strategies, promoting energy-efficient building construction and operation practices, and implementing “carbon sinks” to help meet the current goal of the City’s Climate Action Plan (CAP). Accordingly, the GPU EIR concluded that the impacts from the GPU related to greenhouse gases (GHG) emissions are considered less than significant as the implementation of the GPU would result in a net reduction in the total annual GHG emissions from the Planning Area and a net reduction in the annual GHG emissions on a per-service- population basis. In addition, the GPU EIR concluded that the buildout of the GPU is consistent with the 2017 Scoping Plan, the 2020- 2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy of the Southern California Association of Governments (2020- 2045 RTP/SCS), and the City’s CAP. Furthermore, when considering the representative projects, there are no additional or different environmental impacts beyond those resulting from the overall buildout of the GPU. As such, the GHG emission impacts of the representative projects would be less than significant. B-107 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-38 Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions As shown in Table AQ-1, the Project would propose a smaller development in terms of scale and intensity considering the development capacity of a medium site project as analyzed in the GPU EIR. The Project is also within the development assumption scenarios evaluated in the GPU EIR. Therefore, the Project would result in less total GHG emissions during construction as compared to a medium scale representative project analyzed in the GPU EIR, and, as such, construction impacts would be less than significant. Regarding operational impacts, the Project proposes a smaller scale development with fewer dwelling units, fewer parking spaces, and fewer daily vehicle trips than a medium scale representative project. The Project’s dwelling units and square footage proposed by the Project are within the scope of the GPU EIR’s buildout scenarios, as analyzed in the GPU EIR. As such, the Project would result in less operational GHG emissions than a medium scale representative project as analyzed in the GPU EIR. Accordingly, the Project would result in less-than-significant impacts regarding GHG emissions. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the GPU EIR. Likewise, there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. Consistency Analysis The City has not adopted a numerical significance threshold for assessing impacts related to GHG emissions. Similarly, the SCAQMD, Office of Planning and Research (OPR), California Air Resources Board (CARB), California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA), or any other State or regional agency has not adopted a numerical significance threshold for assessing GHG emissions that is applicable to the Project. Since there is no applicable adopted or accepted numerical threshold of significance for GHG emissions, the methodology for evaluating the Project’s impacts related to GHG emissions focuses on its consistency with applicable Statewide, regional, and local GHG reduction plans and strategies. As such, a consistency analysis is provided below and describes the proposed Project’s compliance with or exceedance of performance-based standards included in the regulations outlined in the applicable portions of the 2022 Scoping Plan, 2020-2045 RTP/SCS, and the City’s CAP. It should be noted that, although the GPU EIR analyzed consistency with the 2017 Scoping Plan, CARB adopted the 2022 Scoping Plan in December 2022, which lays out the sector-by-sector roadmap for California to achieve carbon neutrality by 2045 or earlier, outlining a technologically feasible, cost-effective, and equity- focused path to achieve the State’s climate target. The 2022 Scoping Plan reflects the latest Statewide target and actions, which are more advanced than the 2017 Scoping Plan. As such, if a project would be consistent with the 2022 Scoping Plan, it would also be consistent with the 2017 Scoping Plan. Consistency with the 2022 Scoping Plan The 2022 Scoping Plan identifies reduction measures necessary to achieve the goal of carbon neutrality by 2045 or earlier. Actions that reduce GHG emissions are identified for each AB 32 inventory sector. Provided in Table GHG-1 is an evaluation of applicable B-108 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-39 reduction actions/strategies by emissions source category to determine how the proposed Project would be consistent with or exceed reduction actions/strategies outlined in the 2022 Scoping Plan. Table GHG-1 Consistency With The 2022 Scoping Plan: AB 32 Inventory Sectors Actions and Strategies Project Consistency Analysis Smart Growth / Vehicles Miles Traveled (VMT) Reduce VMT per capita to 25 percent below 2019 levels by 2030, and 30 percent below 2019 levels by 2045 Consistent. The proposed Project would provide bicycle parking stalls in accordance with Title 24 standards. Furthermore, the Project site is located within a quarter mile of several bus stops (two on Norris Center Drive, four on Silver Spur Road, and two on Hawthorne Boulevard) and is served by transit operated by the Palos Verdes Peninsula Transit Authority (PVPTA), Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro), and Los Angeles Department of Transportation (LADOT). Additionally, the Project would improve the connectivity around the Project Site by adding a sidewalk along the southwestern portion of the Project Site, as well as the addition of a pedestrian crossing at the northeastern corner of the Project Site, to connect the Project to the neighboring shopping center. Furthermore, the Project design provides for adequate pedestrian access to the existing sidewalks provided along the Project frontage on Norris Center Drive. All these features encourage the use of alternative modes of transportation, including biking, transit, and walking, which reduce VMT. Thus, the proposed Project would be consistent with the action. New Residential and Commercial Buildings All-electric appliances beginning 2026 (residential) and 2029 (commercial), contributing to 6 million heat pumps installed Statewide by 2030 Consistent. The City has not adopted an ordinance or program that requires the use of all-electric appliances in new developments or that requires an all-electric development. Thus, the proposed Project is not required to install all-electric appliances if constructed prior to 2026. However, if regulations related to all-electric development are adopted in the future prior to the issuance of the Project’s building permit, the proposed Project would comply with such regulations. Furthermore, the proposed Project would comply with Title 24 standards to reduce energy consumption. As such, the proposed Project would be consistent with this action. Construction Equipment Achieve 25 percent of energy demand electrified by 2030 and 75 percent electrified by 2045 Consistent. The City has not adopted an ordinance or program requiring electricity-powered construction equipment. However, if adopted prior to the issuance of the Project’s building permits, the proposed Project would be required to comply with such regulations. As such, the proposed Project would be consistent with this action. Non-Combustion Methane Emissions Divert 75 percent of organic waste from landfills by 2025 Consistent. Senate Bill (SB) 1383 establishes targets to achieve a 50-percent reduction in the level of Statewide organic waste disposal from 2014 levels by 2020 and a 75-percent reduction by 2025. The law establishes an additional target that not less than 20 percent of currently disposed edible food is recovered for human consumption by 2025. The proposed Project would comply with local and regional regulations and recycle or compost 75 percent of waste by 2025 pursuant to SB 1383. As such, the proposed Project would be consistent with this action. Source: California Air Resources Board, 2022 Scoping Plan, November 16, 2022. B-109 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-40 Consistency with the SCAG 2020-2045 RTP/SCS The most recent RTP/SCS (2024-2050 Regional Transportation Plan and Sustainable Communities Strategy [2024 RTP/SCS]) was adopted by SCAG’s Regional Council in April 2024. While SCAG has adopted the 2024 RTP/SCS, CARB has yet to certify the plan or approve SCAG’s GHG emissions reduction calculations. As such, this assessment analyzes the Project’s consistency with the 2020- 2045 RTP/SCS. Table GHG-2 provides a consistency analysis of the proposed Project with the five key SCS strategies identified in the regulatory framework discussion above. As shown therein, the proposed Project would be consistent with the GHG emission reduction strategies contained in the 2020-2045 RTP/SCS. Table GHG-2 Consistency With The 2020-2045 RTP/SCS Reduction Strategy Applicable Land Use Tools Project Consistency Analysis Focus Growth Near Destinations and Mobility Options · Emphasize land use patterns that facilitate multimodal access to work, educational and other destinations · Focus on a regional jobs/housing balance to reduce commute times and distances and expand job opportunities near transit and along center- focused main streets · Plan for growth near transit investments and support implementation of first/last mile strategies · Promote the redevelopment of underperforming retail developments and other outmoded nonresidential uses · Prioritize infill and redevelopment of underutilized land to accommodate new growth, increase amenities and connectivity in existing neighborhoods · Encourage design and transportation options that reduce the reliance on and number of solo car trips (this could include mixed uses or locating and orienting close to existing destinations) · Identify ways to “right size” parking requirements and promote alternative parking strategies (e.g., shared parking or smart parking) Center Focused Placemaking, Priority Growth Areas (PGA), Job Centers, High Quality Transit Areas (HQTAs), Transit Priority Areas (TPA), Neighborhood Mobility Areas (NMAs), Livable Corridors, Spheres of Influence (SOIs), Green Region, Urban Greening. Consistent. The Project Site is located within a quarter mile of several bus stops (two on Norris Center Drive, four on Silver Spur Road, and two on Hawthorne Boulevard) and is served by transit operated by the PVPTA, Metro, and LADOT. The proposed infill development is in the Commercial District and would provide housing in proximity to jobs to improve the jobs/housing balance, while reducing commute times and distances. The proposed Project would be in an urbanized area within walking and biking distance of existing residential/commercial uses and transits. As such, the Project would support first/last-mile strategies and reduce reliance on vehicle trips to contribute to the reduction in VMT and associated GHG emissions. Furthermore, the Project design provides for adequate pedestrian access to the existing sidewalks along the Project frontage on Norris Center Drive, as well as a new pedestrian crossing on the northeastern corner of the Project site. The proposed Project would also provide bicycle parking spaces and EV charging stations in accordance with the CALGreen Code. Additionally, the Project proposes to construct a residential development to replace the existing vacant building on-site. Therefore, the proposed Project would focus on growth near destinations and mobility options. The proposed Project would be consistent with this reduction strategy. B-110 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-41 Table GHG-2 (Continued) Consistency With The 2020-2045 RTP/SCS Reduction Strategy Applicable Land Use Tools Project Consistency Analysis Promote Diverse Housing Choices · Preserve and rehabilitate affordable housing and prevent displacement · Identify funding opportunities for new workforce and affordable housing development · Create incentives and reduce regulatory barriers for building context sensitive accessory dwelling units to increase housing supply · Provide support to local jurisdictions to streamline and lessen barriers to housing development that supports reduction of greenhouse gas emissions PGA, Job Centers, HQTAs, NMA, TPAs, Livable Corridors, Green Region, Urban Greening. Consistent. The Project site is currently occupied by an existing vacant building and associated parking spaces. Therefore, the proposed Project would not displace, but rather add residential uses. Of the 90 proposed residential units, 60 units are allowed according to the base density for the zone with the remaining 30 units allowed with the bonus level development. Of the 60 proposed base density units, 15 percent (i.e., 9 units) would be BMR units for moderate-income households. As such, the proposed Project would be consistent with this reduction strategy. Leverage Technology Innovations · Promote low emission technologies such as neighborhood electric vehicles, shared rides hailing, car sharing, bike sharing and scooters by providing supportive and safe infrastructure such as dedicated lanes, charging and parking/drop-off space · Improve access to services through technology—such as telework and telemedicine as well as other incentives such as a “mobility wallet,” an app-based system for storing transit and other multi-modal payments · Identify ways to incorporate “micro-power grids” in communities, for example solar energy, hydrogen fuel cell power storage and power generation HQTA, TPAs, NMA, Livable Corridors. Consistent. The proposed Project would install EV charging stations and bicycle parking spaces in accordance with the most current and applicable Title 24 standards, including the requirements of the CALGreen Code. Therefore, the proposed Project would leverage technology innovations to promote the use of alternative modes of transportation. Therefore, the proposed Project would be consistent with this reduction strategy. Support Implementation of Sustainability Policies · Pursue funding opportunities to support local sustainable development implementation projects that reduce greenhouse gas emissions · Support statewide legislation that reduces barriers to new construction and that incentivizes development near transit corridors and stations · Support local jurisdictions in the establishment of Enhanced Infrastructure Financing Districts (EIFDs), Community Revitalization and Investment Authorities (CRIAs), or other tax increment or value capture tools to finance sustainable infrastructure and development projects, including parks and open space · Work with local jurisdictions/communities to identify opportunities and assess barriers to implement sustainability strategies · Enhance partnerships with other planning organizations to promote resources and best practices in the SCAG region Center Focused Placemaking, PGA, Job Centers, HQTAs, TPA, NMAs, Livable Corridors, SOIs, Green Region, Urban Greening. Consistent. As previously discussed, the proposed Project would install EV charging stations and provide bicycle parking spaces to promote alternative modes of transportation. Further, the proposed Project would comply with the requirements of the most current and applicable Title 24 standards, including the requirements of the CALGreen Code, such as those related to the installation of high-efficiency lighting, energy- efficient appliances, and water-efficient landscaping. Thus, the proposed Project would be consistent with this reduction strategy. B-111 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-42 Consistency With the City’s Climate Action Plan The City’s CAP is a valuable tool that will lower GHG emissions across various sections in a manner that is most feasible for the Planning Area. It identifies community-wide strategies to lower GHG emissions from a range of sources within the jurisdiction, including transportation, land use, energy generation and consumption, water, and waste. The CAP identifies key energy efficiency targets and separate associated goals, policies, and actions for community and municipal activities. Table GHG-3 discusses the proposed Project’s consistency with the applicable CAP goals in each chapter. Table GHG-3 Consistency With The Climate Action Plan Chapters and Goals Project Consistency Land Use and Transportation (LUT) Goal LUT: A – Accelerate the market for EV vehicles. Goal LUT: B – Encourage ridesharing. Goal LUT: C – Encourage Transit usage. Goal LUT: G – Land Use Strategies. Consistent. In accordance with Title 24, including the CALGreen Code, the proposed Project would provide electric charging stations and bicycle parking that would promote alternative modes of transportation. The Project would encourage ridesharing by educating the residents on the benefit of ridesharing. Furthermore, The Project is located within a quarter mile of several bus stops (two on Norris Center Drive, four on Silver Spur Road, and PVPTA, Metro, and LADOT. Table GHG-2 (Continued) Consistency With The 2020-2045 RTP/SCS Reduction Strategy Applicable Land Use Tools Project Consistency Analysis Promote a Green Region · Support development of local climate adaptation and hazard mitigation plans, as well as project implementation that improves community resiliency to climate change and natural hazards · Support local policies for renewable energy production, reduction of urban heat islands and carbon sequestration · Integrate local food production into the regional landscape · Promote more resource efficient development focused on conservation, recycling and reclamation · Preserve, enhance and restore regional wildlife connectivity · Reduce consumption of resource areas, including agricultural land · Identify ways to improve access to public park space Green Region, Urban Greening, Greenbelts and Community Separators. Consistent. The proposed Project involves a residential development on a site with an existing vacant building and would not interfere with regional wildlife connectivity or affect any agricultural land. The proposed Project would be required to comply with the most current and applicable Title 24 standards, including the requirements of the CALGreen Code. Thus, the proposed Project would support a resource-efficient development that reduces energy consumption and GHG emissions. The proposed project would be consistent with this reduction strategy. Note: Source: Southern California Association of Governments, 2020-2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy – Connect SoCal, September 3, 2020. B-112 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-43 Table GHG-3 (Continued) Consistency With The Climate Action Plan Chapters and Goals Project Consistency The Project would replace the existing vacant building with a new residential development, which increases density and supports the City’s land use strategies. As such, the proposed Project would be consistent with the goals in the Land Use and Transportation Chapter. Energy Efficiency (EE) Goal EE: B – Increase energy efficiency in new residential developments. Goal EE: E – Increase energy efficiency through water efficiency. Goal EE: F – Decrease energy demand through reducing urban heat island effect. Goal EE: G – Participate in education, outreach and planning for energy efficiency. Goal EE: J – Reduce energy consumption in the long run. Consistent. The proposed Project would be consistent with the most recent Title 24 standards, including the CALGreen Code. The proposed Project would install high-efficiency lighting, energy-efficient appliances, and a water-efficiency irrigation system. As such, the proposed Project would be consistent with the goals in the Energy Efficiency Chapter. Solid Waste (SW) Goal SW: A – Increase diversion and reduction of residential waste. Consistent. As mentioned above, the proposed Project would comply with local and regional regulations and recycle or compost 75 percent of waste by 2025 pursuant to SB 1383. As such, the proposed Project would be consistent with the goals in the Solid Waste Chapter. Urban Greening (UG) Goal UG: A – Increase and maintain urban greening in the community. Consistent. The Project would propose the replacement of a vacant building and associated parking spaces with a residential building that provides residential units and parking spaces for nearby commercials. The Project would include more trees than the existing conditions on- site, increasing urban greening in the community. As such, the Project would not conflict with the goals. Energy Generation and Storage (EGS) Goal EGS: A – Support energy generation and storage in the community. Consistent. The proposed Project would be consistent with the most recent Title 24 standards, including the CALGreen Code, on solar energy requirements. The Project would be required to install solar panels if not meeting the exemption criteria per CALGreen Code. As such, the proposed Project would be consistent with the goal. Sources: City of Rolling Hills Estate, Climate Action Plan, 2017. B-113 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-44 As mentioned above, the proposed Project would be consistent with the applicable plans, and, as such, impacts would be less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the GPU EIR. Likewise, there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. B-114 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-45 Issues and Supporting Data Sources: GPU EIR Impact Conclusion Project Impact Conclusion New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New or Changed Circumstances Involving New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New Information of Substantial Importance That Was Not and Could Not Have Been Known at the Time of Certification of the GPU EIR that Rises to the Level of Requiring New Analysis or Verification? Are Any New Mitigation Measures Required for the Project? 9. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? LTS (IS) LTS No No No No b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? LTS (IS) LTS No No No No c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? LTS (IS) LTS No No No No d) Be located on a site that is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? LTS (IS) LTS No No No No B-115 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-46 Issues and Supporting Data Sources: GPU EIR Impact Conclusion Project Impact Conclusion New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New or Changed Circumstances Involving New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New Information of Substantial Importance That Was Not and Could Not Have Been Known at the Time of Certification of the GPU EIR that Rises to the Level of Requiring New Analysis or Verification? Are Any New Mitigation Measures Required for the Project? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area? NI (IS) NI No No No No f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? LTS LTS No No No No g) Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires? LTS LTS No No No No B-116 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-47 Discussion: a) Would the Project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Would the Project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? As determined through the Notice of Preparation/Scoping process (i.e., Initial Study) conducted prior to the preparation of the GPU EIR, future residential development would not result in significant impacts involving the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials or wastes; future commercial development that replaces or expands existing commercial uses could require the routine transport, use, storage, and disposal of hazardous materials, similar to existing uses. All such future development would be required to comply with existing regulations regarding the use of hazardous materials and wastes and would continue to be subject to oversight by the Los Angeles County Fire Department (LACoFD) and other regulatory agencies, as applicable. With regard to the potential for accidental releases of hazardous substances, numerous existing regulations are in place at the federal, State, and local levels to require precautionary measures in the design of vehicles that transport hazardous substances; the routes they are allowed to travel; design, operations, and monitoring of facilities that use large quantities of hazardous substances; proper disposal of hazardous materials and wastes; and oversight by federal, State, and local regulatory agencies to ensure adherence to these regulations. The GPU would have no effect on those existing regulatory standards and would not authorize any kinds of activities that are more likely than existing activities in the City to be at risk for an accidental release of hazardous substances or wastes. Therefore, with buildout of the GPU, compliance with existing regulations would ensure that impacts related to the accidental release or routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials would be less than significant. The Project would include limited use of hazardous materials that are typical of residential developments; these hazardous materials generally include, but are not limited to, cleaning solvents, painting supplies, pesticides for landscaping, and chemicals used for building maintenance, which are not considered significant hazards to the public or the environment. Project construction would likewise include limited hazardous substances, but use of those substances is also closely regulated and would be controlled. As the Project would comply with existing applicable regulations, impacts related to routine transport, use, or disposal or accidental release of hazardous materials would be less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the Initial Study. Likewise, there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. c) Would the Project emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? As determined through the Notice of Preparation/Scoping process (i.e., Initial Study) conducted prior to the preparation of the GPU EIR, future development under the GPU would not introduce any new land use that might generate hazardous or acutely hazardous air emissions, and implementation of the GPU would not change existing protocols and procedures for proper handling of hazardous or B-117 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-48 acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste. Future development under the GPU would be required to comply with federal, State, and local regulations regarding transport and handling of hazardous materials. As such, the Initial Study determined that impacts related to the generation of hazardous or acutely hazardous emissions or handling of such materials within a quarter mile of an existing school would be less than significant. The Project Site is located within 0.25 mile of one school, the private Palos Verdes Montessori Academy. The Project would include limited use of hazardous materials that are typical of residential developments. As the Project would comply with existing applicable regulations related to the transport, use, and disposal of hazardous materials, impacts would be less than significant with regard to hazardous emissions or handling of hazardous materials, substances, or waste within 0.25 mile of a school. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the Initial Study. Likewise, there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. d) Would the Project be located on a site that is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? As determined through the Notice of Preparation/Scoping process (i.e., Initial Study) conducted prior to the preparation of the GPU EIR, no sites included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to California Government Code Section 65962.5 were found active or open for investigation for the potential future development sites identified under the GPU. As identified in the Initial Study, several cases of leaking underground storage tanks were identified in the Peninsula Shopping Center/Promenade on the Peninsula areas; however, each of those cases had been remediated and closed. Furthermore, as described above, any future development under the GPU, including the Project, would be required to comply with existing regulations and applicable oversight. Therefore, Project impacts related to hazardous materials sites would be less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the Initial Study. Likewise, there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the Project result in a safety hazard excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area? As determined through the Notice of Preparation/Scoping process (i.e., Initial Study) conducted prior to the preparation of the GPU EIR, the nearest public use airport to the GPU Planning Area is Zamperini Field in the City of Torrance, which is located approximately 0.5 mile to the north. However, implementation of the GPU would not result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the Planning Area. Future development under the GPU would not introduce any new uses to the Planning Area but would result in the intensification of mixed-use and residential uses in certain portions of the Planning Area that would not interfere airport B-118 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-49 uses. Accordingly, no impact related to airport use would occur as a result of the implementation of the proposed GPU. For the Project, the Zamperini Field is located greater than 2 miles from the Project Site. Therefore, no Project impacts related to hazards and airport uses would occur. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or change the no impact determination identified in the Initial Study. Likewise, there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. f) Would the Project impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? As described in the Notice of Preparation/Scoping process (i.e., Initial Study) conducted prior to the preparation of the GPU EIR, the potential impacts related to this question were scoped for further analysis under the topic of “Wildfire” in the GPU EIR. Accordingly, Section 4.22, Wildfire, of the GPU EIR addressed the topic of emergency response plans and emergency evacuation plans. As detailed therein, and as addressed in Checklist Section 23, Wildfire, of this Addendum, because future development would be required to adhere to strict design standards regarding fire resistance and circulation, and because future development would be concentrated in the City’s Commercial District, which has comparably less grasses and vegetation that could act as wildfire fuel than most of the Planning Area, the GPU would not result in a substantial increase in the potential for wildfires to move through developed areas of the Planning Area and substantially impair the City’s emergency response and emergency evacuation plan along the Planning Area’s street network through the Multi-Jurisdictional HMP. As such, impacts of the GPU would be less than significant. As described in the GPU EIR, the representative projects themselves would not cause any potentially significant impacts on the implementation of an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. The Project, which is consistent with the parameters of a medium site representative project of the GPU, would be developed in compliance with code requirements related to fire access and circulation and would be subject to review by the City and LACoFD to determine specific fire requirements (e.g., fire flow capacities, emergency access, fuel modification plans). In addition, the proposed development would be limited to the Project Site boundaries in the urbanized Commercial District and would not encroach upon Silver Spur Road, a City-designated evacuation route. Therefore, Project impacts related to emergency response plans or emergency evacuation plans would be less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the GPU EIR. Likewise, there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. g) Would the Project expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires? As determined through the Notice of Preparation/Scoping process (i.e., Initial Study) conducted prior to the preparation of the GPU EIR, the entirety of the GPU Planning Area is located within a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ) as mapped by the California B-119 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-50 Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE). As described in the Initial Study, the potential impacts related to this question were scoped for further analysis under the topic of “Wildfire” in the GPU EIR. Accordingly, Section 4.22, Wildfire, of the GPU EIR addressed the topic of exposure of people or structure involving wildland fires. As detailed therein, and as addressed in Checklist Section 23, Wildfire, of this Addendum, since the GPU Planning Area is located within a VHFHSZ, future residential and commercial structures would be required to comply with more stringent standards to resist ignition and slow the spread of fire. Further, any changes in the circulation around a project would be designed and constructed in accordance with LACoFD standards to ensure that future development would not impede or obstruct evacuation procedures during the event of a wildfire. In addition, any future projects developed as part of the GPU that would be located in close proximity to dense vegetation or mature stands of trees would require a Fuel Modification Plan and would require installation and irrigation of non-flammable landscaping materials, as well as use of ignition- resistant building materials and roofing, consistent with LACoFD standards. By focusing development on institutional and commercial land uses and in the Commercial District, which includes the City’s most intense land uses with subregional-serving commercial centers, office buildings, and low-rise residential buildings, the GPU EIR determined that the GPU would relieve development pressure on open space and low density areas that are characterized by steep hillsides and canyons and would reduce overall wildfire risk by concentrating future development in areas that are not characterized by mature dense tree stands, or native or non-native vegetation that could fuel spread of a wildfire. As such, buildout of the GPU within already developed areas would not result in an increase in the construction of combustible structures and improvements in areas immediately surrounded by dense, flammable vegetation. The GPU would not result in a substantial increase in the potential for wildfires to move through developed areas of the Planning Area. The proposed Project would develop a low-rise residential structure located in the Commercial District, which has comparably less grasses and vegetation that could act as wildfire fuel than most of the Planning Area. Development of the Project would also be limited to the Project Site itself. As with other future development projects under the GPU, the proposed Project would be required to comply with more stringent standards to resist ignition and slow the spread of fire per LACoFD standards, and no building permit would be issued by the City until construction plans have been reviewed and determined to be in full compliance with all applicable standards for development in a VHFHSZ. Therefore, consistent with the less-than-significant impacts identified in the GPU EIR, the proposed Project would not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan, and impacts would be less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the GPU EIR. Likewise, there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. B-120 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-51 Issues and Supporting Data Sources: GPU EIR Impact Conclusion Project Impact Conclusion New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New or Changed Circumstances Involving New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New Information of Substantial Importance That Was Not and Could Not Have Been Known at the Time of Certification of the GPU EIR that Rises to the Level of Requiring New Analysis or Verification? Are Any New Mitigation Measures Required for the Project? 10. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality? LTS (IS) LTS No No No No b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin? LTS (IS) LTS No No No No c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of stream or river, in a manner, which would: i) Result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? LTS (IS) LTS No No No No ii) Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? LTS (IS) LTS No No No No B-121 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-52 Issues and Supporting Data Sources: GPU EIR Impact Conclusion Project Impact Conclusion New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New or Changed Circumstances Involving New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New Information of Substantial Importance That Was Not and Could Not Have Been Known at the Time of Certification of the GPU EIR that Rises to the Level of Requiring New Analysis or Verification? Are Any New Mitigation Measures Required for the Project? iii) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? LTS (IS) LTS No No No No iv) Impede or redirect flood flows? NI (IS) NI No No No No d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation? NI (IS) NI No No No No e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan? LTS (IS) LTS No No No No Discussion: a) Would the Project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality? As determined through the Notice of Preparation/Scoping process (i.e., Initial Study) conducted prior to the preparation of the GPU EIR, future development projects under the GPU, specifically on sites that are one acre or larger, would be subject to the requirements of the NPDES Construction General Permit and the RHEMC. Both the RHEMC and the NPDES Construction General Permit require application of erosion and sedimentation control best management practices (BMPs) during construction for proper water quality management. Any development project under one acre would be required to implement construction BMPs to minimize erosion and B-122 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-53 the discharge of pollutants off-site. Erosion control BMPs are designed to prevent erosion, whereas sediment controls are designed to trap sediment once it has been mobilized. Each development project would be required to prepare a Wet Weather Erosion Control Plan, which will identify BMPs, and be designed to prevent erosion and construction pollutants from entering the City’s storm drain and receiving waters. By requiring implementation of a Wet Weather Erosion Control Plan and BMPs during construction activities, the City ensures that these activities would not violate standards or degrade water quality. As part of its normal project approval and construction oversight activities, the City monitors compliance with these requirements. Furthermore, all construction projects with disturbed areas of one acre or greater would be required to prepare a stormwater pollution prevention plans (SWPPP). During operation of such projects during buildout of the GPU, stormwater pollution controls would also be required and provided in plans to the City. With the required compliance with the NPDES Construction General Permit and the RHEMC, future development projects under the GPU would result in less-than-significant impacts related to a violation of water quality standards or waste discharge requirements and substantial degradation of surface water or groundwater quality. As the Project would result in disturbance of greater than one acre, the Project would comply with the requirements of the NPDES Construction General Permit and the RHEMC. Accordingly, because the Project would be required to implement BMPs to control runoff consistent with applicable regulations, as discussed in the GPU EIR, the Project would also result in less-than-significant impacts related to a violation of water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or substantial degradation of surface water or groundwater quality. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the Initial Study. Likewise, there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. b) Would the Project substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin? As determined through the Notice of Preparation/Scoping process (i.e., Initial Study) conducted prior to the preparation of the GPU EIR, since the Planning Area is primarily developed with impervious surfaces, the potential for groundwater recharge through percolation of stormwater or landscaping water is currently low. Future development under the GPU would not directly use any groundwater to serve future uses and is not expected to result in a substantial depletion of groundwater resources. Moreover, the Planning Area does not source domestic water from groundwater wells. Accordingly, as determined in the Initial Study, implementation of the GPU, including development of the Project, would not substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge, and impacts would be less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the Initial Study. Likewise, there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. B-123 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-54 c.i) Would the Project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of stream or river, in a manner, which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? c.ii) Would the Project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of stream or river, in a manner, which would result in substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? c.iii) Would the Project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of stream or river, in a manner, which would 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? As determined through the Notice of Preparation/Scoping process (i.e., Initial Study) conducted prior to the preparation of the GPU EIR, construction of any future development project under the GPU may involve removal of existing structures and associated hardscape, as well as the disturbance and removal of soil. These activities have the potential to temporarily alter existing drainage patterns on construction sites and immediately surrounding areas by exposing underlying soils, modifying flow direction, and making the construction site temporarily more permeable. However, any future development project, particularly those to be developed on sites that are one acre or larger, including the proposed Project, would be subject to the requirements of the NPDES Construction General Permit, Los Angeles County Municipal Permit, and the RHEMC. In accordance with the requirements of these permits, development projects, including the proposed Project, would implement a SWPPP that specifies BMPs and erosion control measures to be used during construction to manage runoff flows and ensure that stormwater or construction watering runoff does not impact off-site drainage facilities or receiving waters. Therefore, through compliance with all NPDES Construction General Permit requirements, as well as compliance with applicable City grading permit regulations, construction activities associated with future development projects under the GPU, including the proposed Project, would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the construction site or area in a manner that would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site, flooding on- or off-site, or exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff, and impacts would be less than significant. While there may be an increase in imperviousness of a development site, this increase would not substantially increase the amount of runoff from the site. Flows would be accommodated by the existing stormwater treatment and conveyance system. In addition, implementation of Low Impact Development (LID) BMPs required by the Los Angeles County Municipal Permit would target the pollutants that could potentially be carried in stormwater runoff. Therefore, with the incorporation of LID BMPs, construction and operation of any future development project under the GPU, including the proposed Project, would not cause flooding, create runoff volumes that would exceed the capacity of existing infrastructure, or result in substantial additional sources of polluted runoff, and impacts would be less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the Initial Study. Likewise, there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. B-124 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-55 c.iii) Would the Project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of stream or river, in a manner, which would impede or redirect flood flows? As determined through the Notice of Preparation/Scoping process (i.e., Initial Study) conducted prior to the preparation of the GPU EIR, implementation of any future development project under the GPU, including the proposed Project, would not result in the placement of uses within a 100-year or 500-year flood zone to impede or redirect flood flows. Therefore, any future development project the GPU, including the proposed Project, would not result in impacts related to flood flows. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or change the no impact determination in the Initial Study. Likewise, there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, would the Project risk release of pollutants due to project inundation? As determined through the Notice of Preparation/Scoping process (i.e., Initial Study) conducted prior to the preparation of the GPU EIR, the Planning Area is not within a flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zone and, as such, would not risk release of pollutants due to inundation of any future development site. Therefore, any future development project under the GPU, including the proposed Project, would not result in impacts related to the release of pollutants due to inundation. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or change the no impact determination in the Initial Study. Likewise, there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. e) Would the Project conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan? As determined through the Notice of Preparation/Scoping process (i.e., Initial Study) conducted prior to the preparation of the GPU EIR, the storm drain system that serves the Planning Area would continue to drain into Machado Lake, Santa Monica Bay, and the Los Angeles Harbor, which are identified as impaired water bodies. Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) water quality standards have been adopted for these water bodies for trash, bacteria, nitrogen, and phosphorous. As described in the GPU EIR, the County of Los Angeles and the Los Angeles County Flood Control District, as well as the cities of Rolling Hills Estates, Palos Verdes Estates, and Rancho Palos Verdes, collaborated on the development of an Enhanced Watershed Management Program (EWMP) to address the water quality priorities for the Palos Verdes Peninsula watersheds. The EWMP for the Palos Verdes Peninsula, which was approved by the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board in 2016 and modified in 2019, continues to provide water quality goals and action items to achieve the waste discharge standards and requirements for municipal stormwater systems. Both construction and operation activities associated with future development projects under the GPU could generate additional water pollutants that could adversely affect stormwater quality and the water quality in downstream Machado Lake. Construction-related B-125 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-56 activities can release sediments from exposed soils into local storm drains. In addition, construction waste materials, such as chemicals, liquid products, and petroleum products, may make their way into local storm drains. However, future development projects would be subject to the requirements of the NPDES Permit, the Los Angeles County Municipal Permit, and the RHEMC. Pursuant to these requirements, best management practices (BMPs) would be instituted to effectively offset these potential sources of water pollution. As such, implementation of any future development project under the GPU would not introduce new pollutants or an increase in pollutants that would conflict or obstruct the EWMP or any water quality control plans for the Palos Verdes Peninsula Watershed. In addition, as discussed above, implementation of the GPU would not substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge; as such, implementation of any future development project under the GPU would not introduce new pollutants or an increase in pollutants that would conflict or obstruct a sustainable groundwater management plan. Impacts of the GPU would be less than significant. As previously described, while there may be an increase in imperviousness of a development site, this increase would not substantially increase the amount of runoff from the site. Flows would be accommodated by the existing stormwater treatment and conveyance system, and the Project would implement BMPs to target pollutants that could potentially be carried in stormwater runoff. Therefore, with the incorporation of LID BMPs, the proposed Project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan, and impacts would be less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the Initial Study. Likewise, there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. B-126 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-57 Issues and Supporting Data Sources: GPU EIR Impact Conclusion Project Impact Conclusion Any New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New or Changed Circumstances Involving New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New Information of Substantial Importance That Was Not and Could Not Have Been Known at the Time of Certification of the GPU EIR that Rises to the Level of Requiring New Analysis or Verification? Are Any New Mitigation Measures Required for the Project? 11. LAND USE AND PLANNING Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? NI (IS) NI No No No No b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? LTS LTS No No No No Discussion: a) Would the Project physically divide an established community? As determined through the Notice of Preparation/Scoping process (i.e., Initial Study) conducted prior to the preparation of the GPU EIR, land use changes proposed within the specific plan areas are intended to tie into the existing uses and surrounding neighborhoods. As such, it was concluded that the GPU would not physically divide an existing community, and no impact would occur. Similarly, as the Project would replace a vacant building and surface parking with a residential development, the Project would not physically divide an existing community, and no impact would occur. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or change the no impact determination in the Initial Study. Likewise, there is no new information of substantial B-127 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-58 importance requiring new analysis or verification. The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. b) Would the Project cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? The GPU EIR analyzed the GPU’s consistency with relevant regional transportation goals contained in the SCAG 2016-2040 RTP/SCS and 2020-2045 RTP/SCS and concluded that the GPU would support further implementation of the RTP/SCS goals, such as maximizing mobility and accessibility for all people, protecting the environment and health of residents by encouraging active transportation, and encouraging diverse housing types in areas supported by multiple transportation options. In addition, the EIR concluded that with adoption of the GPU, the GPU’s amendments to the Zoning Ordinance, including a new Mixed-Use Overlay covering the Commercial District for Commercial General-Designated land and increased density opportunities, would have less-than-significant impacts related to consistency with land use plans, policies, and regulations. Furthermore, since the GPU EIR’s representative projects are a subset of buildout of the GPU and the total buildout of the GPU was determined to not conflict with SCAG’s RTP/SCS goals and policies, as well as applicable provisions of the City’s Zoning Code, future development activity, such as the representative projects, would not result in significant impacts related to consistency with land use plans. Compliance with all applicable regulations and requirements would ensure that land use impacts of representative projects related to consistency with applicable plans, policies, and regulations would be less than significant. The proposed Project would be consistent with the new CGMU zoning and bonus level development opportunities for the Project Site in providing affordable housing, shared parking, and improved pedestrian connectivity, which are considered community benefits according to the City. Therefore, consistent with the GPU EIR, Project impacts related to consistency with land use plans and policies would be less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the GPU EIR. Likewise, there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. B-128 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-59 Issues and Supporting Data Sources: GPU EIR Impact Conclusion Project Impact Conclusion Any New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New or Changed Circumstances Involving New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New Information of Substantial Importance That Was Not and Could Not Have Been Known at the Time of Certification of the GPU EIR that Rises to the Level of Requiring New Analysis or Verification? Are Any New Mitigation Measures Required for the Project ? 12. MINERAL RESOURCES Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? NI (IS) NI No No No No b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? NI (IS) NI No No No No Discussion: As determined through the Notice of Preparation/Scoping process (i.e., Initial Study) conducted prior to the preparation of the GPU EIR, there are no mineral resource extraction or processing operations in the Planning Area. While a portion of the Planning Area is designated as Mineral Resource Zone 2, this area is no longer used for mineral extraction and has been repurposed for commercial recreation and residential uses. According to the Initial Study, it is considered extremely unlikely that there might be a future proposal to remove existing land uses in order to establish an operation to extract mineral resources. Therefore, the Initial Study determined that the GPU would not adversely affect the availability of a known mineral resource or a locally important mineral resource recovery site, and no impacts would occur. The proposed Project would be developed within the City’s Commercial District on a site currently occupied by a vacant one-story building and associated parking. Accordingly, as with the determination in the Initial Study, the proposed Project would not adversely affect the B-129 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-60 availability of a known mineral resource or a locally important mineral resource recovery site. Therefore, no impacts related to mineral resources would occur. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or change the no impact determinations identified in the Initial Study. Likewise, there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. B-130 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-61 Issues and Supporting Data Sources: GPU EIR Impact Conclusion Project Impact Conclusion Any New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New or Changed Circumstances Involving New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New Information of Substantial Importance That Was Not and Could Not Have Been Known at the Time of Certification of the GPU EIR that Rises to the Level of Requiring New Analysis or Verification? Are Any New Mitigation Measures Required for the Project? 13. NOISE Would the project result in: a) Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? LTS LTS No No No No b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? LTS-M LTS No No No No c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? NI (IS) NI No No No No B-131 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-62 Discussion: a) Would the Project result in generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? The GPU EIR analyzed impacts to noise from construction and operation of buildout of the GPU, including traffic noise, stationary noise, residential/commercial uses, parking, mechanical equipment, and landscape maintenance. The GPU EIR determined that development projects would be subject to environmental review, and specific construction noise attenuation techniques would be utilized to reduce noise generation during construction and ensure compliance with noise standards set forth in RHEMC Sections 8.32.050, 8.32.060, 8.32.070 or 8.32.085. Compliance with permitted construction hours per RHEMC Section 8.32.210 would reduce short-term construction noise impacts to less-than-significant levels. Analysis in the GPU EIR also demonstrated that when compared to existing conditions, future noise levels of the GPU’s low range and high range buildout scenarios would not increase by 3 dBA or more, and the Project is within the traffic generation and buildout assumptions of the GPU EIR; as such, long-term mobile traffic noise impacts resulting from the GPU were determined to be less than significant. To assess noise from residential uses, the GPU EIR included an analysis of two representative projects, the small site project and medium site project, which include multi-family residential uses in either mixed-use buildings or apartment/multi-family buildings. Noise sources from such multi-family residential uses could include mechanical equipment, woodworking, car repair, home repair, as well as noise from any outdoor activity areas (e.g., community/association pools, children’s play areas, rooftop decks, etc.). The potential noise impacts from such outdoor activity areas would be dependent on various factors, including the type, scale, and intensity of use of such facilities, the orientation of project in relation to the activity area, the proximity of sensitive receptors, and the background ambient noise level. The GPU EIR stated that without specific development information, quantification of potential noise levels cannot be conducted without undue speculation. However, as with all residential uses, future projects, such as the representative projects, would be required to comply with RHEMC Section 8.32.090, which prohibits any source of sound at any location exceeding the City’s exterior and interior noise standards when measured on property line. As concluded in the GPU EIR, the required compliance with the RHEMC would ensure that potential noise impacts from the representative projects would be less than significant. As previously described, the Project is considered a medium site project with multi-family residential uses. The Project would generate noise typical of such multi-family developments, including noise associated with outdoor spaces (such as the pool deck on Level 3), parking, mechanical equipment, and landscape maintenance, and would be required to comply with RHEMC noise standards. However, pursuant to Assembly Bill 1307, which was passed in September 2023, and as included in PRC Section 21085, the effects of noise generated by project occupants and their guests on human beings is not a significant effect on the environment for residential projects. Therefore, for CEQA purposes, the Project’s noise impacts during operation would be less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the GPU EIR. Likewise, there is no new information of B-132 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-63 substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. b) Would the Project result in generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? According to the GPU EIR, ground-borne vibration generated during construction activities would primarily impact existing sensitive uses that are located adjacent to or within the immediate vicinity of specific projects. Land uses considered sensitive by the State of California include residences, schools, playgrounds, hospitals, rest homes, rehabilitation centers, long-term care, and mental care facilities. As determined in the GPU EIR, vibration levels could reach up to 87 vibration decibels (VdB) for typical construction activities (and up to 104 VdB if pile driving activities were to occur) at sensitive uses located within 25 feet of construction. Sensitive uses that are located at or within 25 feet of potential project construction sites may experience vibration levels during construction activities that exceed the vibration impact threshold of 80 VdB for human annoyance established by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA). Accordingly, the GPU EIR identified mitigation measures to reduce vibration impacts related to human annoyance. In particular, Mitigation Measure MM-NOI-1 requires that a project-specific vibration impact analysis be conducted should certain construction activities take place within 25 feet of an occupied sensitive use. In addition, Mitigation Measure MM-NOI-2 would prohibit pile driving within 50 feet of historic structures and instead utilize alternative installation methods; require a preconstruction survey of all designated historic buildings within 50 feet of proposed construction activities; and require vibration monitoring prior to and during pile driving operations occurring within 100 feet of historic structures. Therefore, implementation of Mitigation Measures MM-NOI-1 and MM-NOI- 2 would reduce short-term vibration impacts of the GPU to a less-than-significant level. As there are no sensitive uses within 25 feet of the Project Site, the Project would not result in the exceedance of the vibration impact threshold for human annoyance, and thus, Mitigation Measure MM-NOI-1 would not apply to the Project. Mitigation Measure MM-NOI- 2 would require that a preconstruction survey of all eligible for listing or listed historic buildings under the National Register of Historic Places, California Register of Historic Resources, and/or local historic database(s) within 50 feet of proposed construction activities be conducted. If applicable, specific pile driving installations and vibration monitoring and limits in accordance with the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual would be required. There are no buildings within 50 feet of the proposed construction activities that are older than 45 years, and thus, MM-NOI-2 would not apply to the Project. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impact with mitigation identified in the GPU EIR. Likewise, there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public or public use airport, would the Project expose people residing or working in the Project area to excessive noise levels? As previously described, the nearest public use airport to the GPU Planning Area is Zamperini Field in the City of Torrance, which is located approximately 0.5 mile to the north. However, as determined through the Notice of Preparation/Scoping process (i.e., Initial B-133 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-64 Study) conducted prior to the preparation of the GPU EIR, implementation of the GPU would not result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the Planning Area. Implementation of the GPU would not cause any noise-related impacts from aircraft operating to or from Zamperini Field. Therefore, as determined in the Initial Study, the GPU would not expose people to excessive airport related noise and would have no associated impacts. For the Project, the Zamperini Field is located greater than 2 miles from the Project Site. Accordingly, no Project impacts related to noise and airport uses would occur. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or change the no impact determination identified in the Initial Study. Likewise, there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. B-134 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-65 Issues and Supporting Data Sources: GPU EIR Impact Conclusion Project Impact Conclusion Any New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New or Changed Circumstances Involving New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New Information of Substantial Importance That Was Not and Could Not Have Been Known at the Time of Certification of the GPU EIR that Rises to the Level of Requiring New Analysis or Verification? Are Any New Mitigation Measures Required for the Project? 14. POPULATION AND HOUSING Would the project: a) Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? LTS LTS No No No No b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? LTS NI No No No No Discussion: a) Would the Project induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? According to the GPU EIR, although buildout of the GPU would accommodate greater population and housing than SCAG’s forecast for the City, it was not considered substantial unplanned population growth. The GPU would provide the capacity and flexibility to accommodate anticipated growth, and the City is required to accommodate its share of SCAG’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) allocation. To that end, the GPU included a Commercial District Mixed-Use Overlay to allow future housing development on parcels zoned Commercial General at an increased density from the existing Overlay, which ensures the City’s ability to accommodate B-135 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-66 its RHNA allocation. The GPU EIR determined that population impacts of the GPU would be less than significant. Since the representative projects are a subset of buildout of the GPU, new development generated by the representative projects has already been accounted for in the estimated population, housing, and employment changes in the Planning Area from buildout of the GPU. As the Project would be consistent with a medium site representative project, Project impacts would similarly be less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the GPU EIR. Likewise, there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. b) Would the Project displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? According to the GPU EIR, any displacement of existing people or housing that could occur during buildout of the GPU could be replaced on land within the Planning Area that would allow for residential uses under the GPU land use designations. To that end, both the low range and high range buildout scenarios for the GPU anticipated an increase in housing in the Planning Area. Therefore, the GPU EIR determined that impacts related to the displacement of substantial numbers of existing people or housing such that the construction of replacement housing would be necessary elsewhere would be less than significant. For the Project, as demolition of the vacant, non-residential building on-site would not result in the displacement of residents or housing, Project impacts related to displacement would not occur. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or change the no impact determination identified in the GPU EIR. Likewise, there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GP EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. B-136 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-67 Issues and Supporting Data Sources: GPU EIR Impact Conclusion Project Impact Conclusion Any New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New or Changed Circumstances Involving New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New Information of Substantial Importance That Was Not and Could Not Have Been Known at the Time of Certification of the GPU EIR that Rises to the Level of Requiring New Analysis or Verification? Are Any New Mitigation Measures Required for the Project? 15. PUBLIC SERVICES Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: a) Fire protection? LTS LTS No No No No b) Police Protection? LTS LTS No No No No c) Schools? LTS LTS No No No No d) Other public facilities? LTS LTS No No No No Discussion: a) Would the Project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities (i.e., fire protection facilities), need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for fire protection services? The GPU Planning Area is served by LACoFD. According to the GPU EIR, implementation of the GPU would result in additional demand on existing fire and emergency medical services (i.e., additional staffing, equipment, expanded/new facilities) as future development projects are implemented and population increases. However, future development is assumed to occur over several years through 2040; as such, any increase in demand for fire protection services would occur gradually as additional development and associated population growth is added to the Planning Area. LACoFD would continue to monitor resources to ensure that adequate facilities and staffing are available. In addition, any future development under the GPU would be required to comply with the provisions of the California Fire and Building Codes, California Health and Safety Code, RHEMC, and applicable national standards related to B-137 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-68 fire protection and prevention, as well as all applicable fire code requirements for construction, access, water mains, fire flows, and hydrants. Individual project development plans would be reviewed by the City and LACoFD to determine specific fire requirements (e.g., fire flow capacities, emergency access, fuel modification plans) applicable to the specific development and to ensure compliance with these requirements. The GPU EIR concluded that buildout of the GPU, including the representative projects, would result in less- than-significant impacts related to fire protection and emergency medical services. The Project would be served by LACoFD Fire Station 106, which is located at 27413 Indian Peak Road, approximately 450 feet southwest of the Project Site. The Project’s residential development, which falls in the category of the medium site project, would be designed and constructed in accordance with fire protection and safety requirements and would undergo review by the City and LACoFD to ensure compliance with specific fire requirements (e.g., fire flow capacities, emergency access, fuel modification plans). The Project is within the buildout assumed by the GPU EIR and analyzed to conclude no significant fire service impacts would result. The Project would pay applicable development impact fees that would contribute to providing needed fire services in the City, as the City builds out consistent with the GPU. As with the determination in the GPU EIR, Project impacts related to fire protection and emergency medical services would be less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the GPU EIR. Likewise, there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. b) Would the Project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities (i.e., police protection facilities), need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for police protection services? The GPU Planning Area is served by the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department (LASD). According to the GPU EIR, implementation of the GPU would result in additional demand on existing police protection and law enforcement services provided by LASD as future development projects are implemented and population increases. However, as described above, future development is assumed to occur over multiple years through 2040. As such, any increase in demand for police protection and law enforcement services would occur gradually as additional development and associated population growth is added to the Planning Area. LASD would continue to monitor resources to ensure that adequate facilities and staffing are available. In addition, any future development under the GPU would be required to comply with the provisions of the RHEMC related to public safety. Individual project development plans would be reviewed by the City and LASD to determine specific design requirements related to emergency access, lighting, and public safety that are applicable to the specific development and to ensure compliance with these requirements. The GPU EIR concluded that buildout of the GPU, including the representative projects, would result in less-than-significant impacts related to police protection and law enforcement services. The Project’s residential development, which falls in the category of the medium site project, would be constructed with safety and security design measures and would undergo review by the City and LASD to ensure compliance with specific requirements. The B-138 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-69 proposed Project is within the buildout assumed by the GPU EIR and analyzed to conclude no significant police services impacts would result. The Project would pay applicable development impact fees that would contribute to providing needed police services in the City, as the City builds out consistent with the GPU. As with the determination in the GPU EIR, Project impacts related to police protection services would be less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the GPU EIR. Likewise, there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. c) Would the Project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities (i.e., school facilities), need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios or other performance objectives for schools? The GPU Planning Area is served by the Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified School District (PVPUSD). As described in the GPU EIR, buildout of the GPU could result in the development of additional residential uses, comprising of multifamily dwelling units and ADUs, that would range from 878 units to 2,158 units over existing conditions in the Planning Area. Such development would increase the student population in the PVPUSD. However, future development under the GPU is anticipated to occur gradually through 2040 and would be largely based on market demand. Thus, any increase in demand for school services would occur gradually as additional development occurs in the Planning Area. Regardless, the GPU EIR demonstrated that the estimated increase in students within the PVPUSD, when compared to student enrollment in the three school years prior to the COVID-19 pandemic remain less than the historical maximum enrollment experienced by the PVPUSD in the last two decades. Furthermore, pursuant to SB 50, payment of fees to the PVPUSD is considered full mitigation for project impacts, including impacts related to the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, or other performance objectives for school facilities. Therefore, the GPU EIR determined that buildout of the GPU would result in a less-than-significant impact on school services and facilities. While the proposed 90 residential units would be anticipated to generate a corresponding student population, the Project, as with other developments under the GPU, would be required to pay the statutory fees to allow the PVPUSD to adequately serve its student population and ensure that potential impacts to PVPUSD would remain less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the GPU EIR. Likewise, there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. d) Would the Project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities (i.e., other public facilities, such as libraries), need for new or physically altered governmental B-139 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-70 facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios or other performance objectives for libraries? The GPU Planning Area is served by the Palos Verdes Library District (PVLD), which provides library services to all four cities on the Palos Verdes Peninsula, including the City of Rolling Hills Estates, as well as a small portion of unincorporated area in Los Angeles County. The PVLD is primarily funded through property taxes, with supplemental revenue in the form of gifts and grants. In the GPU Planning Area, the Peninsula Center Library is the main library at 701 Silver Spur Road and was expanded in 1995. As previously described, future development is assumed to occur over approximately two decades through 2040, and any increase in demand for library facilities would occur gradually as additional development and associated population growth is added to the Planning Area. Furthermore, the PVLD would continue to be funded by proportional increases in property tax, charges for library services, and other funding sources, such as those provided by the Peninsula Friends of the Library, to offset impacts of new development on PVLD services in the Planning Area. As determined in the GPU EIR, new residential units developed under the buildout of the GPU are expected to be equipped to receive individual internet service to provide more accessible information and research capabilities and the PVLD’s online services. Therefore, buildout of the GPU, including the representative projects, would not be anticipated to result in substantial increase in demand that would necessitate new or physically altered library facilities, the construction of which would cause significant environmental impacts. The Project’s residential development, which falls in the category of the medium site project, would not result in substantial increase in demand for library facilities. As such, Project impacts on library facilities would be less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the GPU EIR. Likewise, there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GP EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. B-140 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-71 Issues and Supporting Data Sources: GPU EIR Impact Conclusion Project Impact Conclusion Any New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New or Changed Circumstances Involving New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New Information of Substantial Importance That Was Not and Could Not Have Been Known at the Time of Certification of the GPU EIR that Rises to the Level of Requiring New Analysis or Verification? Are Any New Mitigation Measures Required for the Project? 16. PARKS AND RECREATION Would the project: a) Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, or need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for parks? LTS LTS No No No No b) 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? LTS LTS No No No No c) Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? LTS LTS No No No No B-141 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-72 Discussion: a) Would the Project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, or need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for parks? b) Would the Project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? The GPU Planning Area includes City-owned parks and open space, trails, recreational facilities, Los Angeles County-owned parks and open spaces. Residents of the Planning Area also have the opportunity to visit private properties not managed by the City, including the Rolling Hills Country Club, the South Coast Botanic Garden (in the City’s Sphere of Influence [SOI]), and parks in the SOI. Public parks and facilities are funded by a combination of the City’s general fund, special funds, and private foundations and grants. As described in the GPU EIR, in 2020, the City had a ratio of approximately 6.6 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents, which exceeded the City’s requirement of 5 acres of park and recreational facilities per 1,000 residents as established in RHEMC Chapter 16.08. In addition, when compared to cities throughout Los Angeles County as a whole, Rolling Hills Estates provides approximately twice as much parkland per resident. Under the high-range scenario, the GPU would not meet the City’s target of 5 acres per 1,000 residents to be unmet; however, the City would still provide more parkland per resident when compared to other cities throughout Los Angeles County. Furthermore, the future development is anticipated to occur gradually through 2040, during which developers of future development projects under the GPU would be required to pay park fees or dedicate land in accordance with RHEMC requirements. Payment of fees would partially offset the deterioration of existing parks and recreation facilities by allocating these fees to the development of new or rehabilitation of existing neighborhood or community park or recreational facilities. The GPU also promotes the provision of community open space, such as plaza spaces and enhanced sidewalk space, by offering density bonuses for projects with substantial community benefit. The GPU EIR concluded that continued cooperation and coordination between the City and developers of future development projects under the GPU would ensure adequate provision and/or maintenance of parks and recreational facilities throughout the Planning Area and would result in a less-than-significant impact to parks and recreational facilities. The Project is consistent with the development assumptions and population projections of the GPU EIR, which analyzed potential impacts resulting from such increases. Also, the Project proposes 1,175 square feet of open space on Level 1, and each residential unit would include a 60-square-foot private deck. On Level 3, the Project would provide 11,225 square feet of outdoor open space with a pool, lounge seating, dining areas, fireplaces/firepits, barbeques, and an outdoor kitchen, as well as 3,500 square feet of indoor recreational amenities. In addition, as required, the Project would pay the mandatory park fees or provide land dedication to allow the City to adequately provide and/or maintain its parks and recreational facilities to serve its residents; as such, impacts of the proposed Project on parks and recreational facilities would be considered less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the GPU EIR. Likewise, there is no new information of B-142 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-73 substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. c) Would the Project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? According to the GPU EIR, the GPU would allow for and encourage development of community open spaces as part of future development projects, such as plazas and community gathering spaces, which would further contribute to the City’s existing recreational amenities and open space. For example, the scale of community open spaces and recreational amenities to be included in the representative projects and other projects developed under the GPU is expected to be commensurate with the scale of the development project and the size of the site. The potential physical effects of such facilities would be a subset of the impacts of the overall buildout of the GPU, and there would be no additional, different, or more intense environmental impacts beyond those described in the GPU EIR resulting from the overall buildout of the GPU. Therefore, the GPU EIR determined that, while the GPU would allow for and encourage development of community open spaces and recreational amenities as part of future development projects, such as the representative projects, adoption and implementation of the GPU would not result in adverse physical effects on the environment not otherwise evaluated in the GPU EIR and concluded that impacts related to parks and recreational facilities would be less than significant. As previously described, the Project would include private and public on-site open space and recreational amenities for its residents, and, as discussed throughout this addendum, potential physical effects of the Project, including impacts from construction (e.g., noise generation, air pollutant emissions, vegetation removal, ground disturbance, etc.) and impacts from operation (e.g., noise from outdoor activity and human congregation, light and glare from illumination, demand for public services, etc.), have been determined to be less than significant. Therefore, overall Project impacts related to parks and recreation would be less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the GPU EIR. Likewise, there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GP EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. B-143 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-74 Issues and Supporting Data Sources: GPU EIR Impact Conclusion Project Impact Conclusion Any New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New or Changed Circumstances Involving New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New Information of Substantial Importance That Was Not and Could Not Have Been Known at the Time of Certification of the GPU EIR that Rises to the Level of Requiring New Analysis or Verification? Are Any New Mitigation Measures Required for the Project? 17. TRANSPORTATION Would the project: a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadways, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities? LTS LTS No No No No b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b)? SU SU No No No No c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? LTS LTS No No No No d) Result in inadequate emergency access? LTS LTS No No No No B-144 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-75 Discussion: a) Would the Project conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadways, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities? As discussed in the GPU EIR, the GPU involved updates to the City’s seven General Plan Elements, including three that are related to transportation, namely the Mobility Element (formerly Transportation Element), Land Use Element, and Open Space and Recreation Element, as well as the addition of an eighth element (Sustainability Element). The purpose of the Mobility Element is to provide a safe, multimodal, efficient transportation system that meets the current and future needs of the Planning Area. Planning Area residents have a diversity of mobility needs and a desire to be able to move through the Planning Area safely and efficiently, regardless of mode choice. The goals and policies introduced in the Mobility Element are aimed at providing safe, viable alternatives to the automobile when traveling throughout the Planning area, while continuing to provide efficient automobile circulation and recognizing the distinct, rural feel of the Planning Area. The Commercial District, in particular, generally supports multimodal transportation options and would be consistent with policies, plans, and programs that support alternative transportation, as identified in the Mobility Element. The GPU is intended to minimize impacts to the public right-of-way and enhance the user experience by integrating multimodal transportation options, including on-site pedestrian infrastructure and trails connecting to the Commercial District. In addition, the GPU would encourage pedestrian and bicyclist activity because it concentrates the development near public transit and activity centers, which can be accessed by walking, biking, or using public transit. The GPU would also encourage pedestrian activity by designing locations and open space to comply with City standards to provide adequate sight distance and pedestrian movement controls to ensure pedestrian safety. The GPU would not preclude City action to fulfill or implement future projects associated with these networks but, instead, would contribute to overall walkability through enhancements to the Planning Area streetscape. Furthermore, as detailed in Section 4.8, Land Use and Planning, of the GPU EIR, the GPU would support further implementation of regional transportation goals, policies, and actions in the 2016-2040 RTP/SCS and 2020-2045 RTP/SCS. Accordingly, future development projects implemented under the GPU would not conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities, and, as such, impacts would be less than significant. The Project would be located within 0.25 mile of several bus stops (two on Norris Center Drive, four on Silver Spur Road, and two on Hawthorne Boulevard) and is served by transit operated by the PVPTA, Metro, and LADOT. Additionally, the Project would improve the connectivity around the Project Site by adding a sidewalk along the southwestern portion of the Project Site, as well as the addition of a pedestrian crossing at the northeastern corner of the Project Site, to connect the Project to the neighboring shopping center. Furthermore, the Project design provides for adequate pedestrian access to the existing sidewalks along the Project frontage on Norris Center Drive. The Project would comply with City requirements to protect pedestrian safety and circulation, and its features would encourage alternative modes of transportation including biking, transit, and walking, which reduce VMT. Therefore, as with the determination in the GPU EIR, Project impacts related to conflict with plans would be less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the GPU EIR. Likewise, there is no new information of B-145 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-76 substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. b) Would the Project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b)? The GPU EIR utilized vehicle miles traveled (VMT) as the metric to analyze the potential transportation impacts of the GPU buildout. The analysis demonstrated that the GPU’s low-range and high-range buildout scenarios would not meet the City’s significance threshold for the residential VMT per capita metric, and the low-range buildout scenario would not meet the City’s significance threshold for the work VMT per employee metric. As such, the GPU was determined to be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b), and impacts to VMT were determined to be significant. When considering the representative projects, there are no additional or different environmental impacts beyond those resulting from the overall GPU buildout. As a subset of buildout of the GPU, the representative projects themselves would also be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b) given (1) the City’s overall development pattern, (2) the likelihood for personal automobile use to remain the dominant mode of transportation choice in the City through 2040; and (3) that the City is geographically isolated from most major employment centers in the Los Angeles Area, with transit and Transportation Demand Management (TDM) options to get to places of employment being limited and often very time-intensive. The GPU included mitigation measures to reduce VMT, including Mitigation Measure MM-TRAN-1, which requires improvements to pedestrian network, construction or improvements to bike facilities, or expansion of bike networks; Mitigation Measure MM-TRAN-2, which requires expansion of car share programs, provision of ridesharing program, implementation of commute trip reduction programs); and Mitigation Measure MM-TRAN-3, which requires City coordination with neighboring cities and Metro to seek additional transit opportunities and resources in the Planning Area and on the Palos Verdes Peninsula. According to the GPU EIR, the combination of the strategies identified in Mitigation Measure MM-TRAN-1 would yield approximately a 1- to 2-percent VMT reduction for the buildout scenarios. The GPU EIR concluded that even with consideration of all viable TDM strategies, the GPU would still result in a significant and unavoidable VMT impact. In addition, as discussed in the GPU EIR, since the representative projects are a subset of buildout of the GPU, and the total buildout of the GPU has been determined to result in a significant impact related to residential VMT, the representative projects themselves would be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b). Therefore, impacts of the representative projects related to VMT would also be considered significant. As previously described, the GPU EIR identifies the Project Site as an Opportunity Site in the Land Use and Housing Elements of the GPU. The Project proposes 90 apartments on a two-acre site and would be consistent with the GPU EIR’s medium site representative project (i.e., a 60- to 125-unit multi-family residential development on an approximately two- to three-acre site). As noted above, the GPU EIR concluded that buildout of the City consistent with the GPU would result in significant and unavoidable VMT impacts. That impact determination extended to the representative projects because, as noted in the GPU EIR, the representative projects are “a subset of buildout of the proposed GPU and the total buildout of the GPU has been determined to result in significant impact[s] related to residential VMT….” The Project proposes residential development in an area well-served by local retail and public transportation, which facilitates VMT reductions. However, the Project would add residential population to the City commensurate with the planned buildout of the GPU. Because the GPU would result in a significant and unavoidable residential VMT impact, the proposed Project is assumed to result in a similar impact. Therefore, in order to reduce VMT impacts, the GPU EIR’s Mitigation Measure MM-TRAN-1, below, would apply to B-146 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-77 the Project. As the TDM measures included in Mitigation Measure MM-TRAN-2 are primarily targeted at reducing the work VMT per employee metric, such mitigation would not apply to the Project’s residential uses. In addition, Mitigation Measure MM-TRAN-3 would not apply to the Project as it is a City-scale and regional-based measure. As with the determination in the GPU EIR, even with implementation of GPU EIR’s Mitigation Measure MM-TRAN-1, Project impacts related to VMT would be significant and unavoidable. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the significant and unavoidable impacts identified in the GPU EIR. Likewise, there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. GPU EIR Mitigation Measure MM-TRAN-1: The City shall work with future developers of multi-family housing, commercial projects, and mixed-use projects to ensure they provide the following as TDM measures for mitigating VMT: · Provision of Pedestrian Network Improvements: Create a connected pedestrian network within the development and connect to nearby destinations. · Construction or Improvements to Bike Facility or Expand Bikeway Network: Enhance bicycle network Citywide (or at similar scale), such that a building entrance or bicycle parking is within 200 yards walking or bicycling distance from a bicycle network that connects to at least one of the following: at least 10 diverse uses; a school or employment center, if the project total floor area is 50 percent or more residential; or a bus rapid transit stop, light or heavy rail station, commuter rail station, or ferry terminal. c) Would the Project substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? d) Would the Project result in inadequate emergency access? As described in the GPU EIR, the City is largely built-out with limited vacant parcels, and implementation of the GPU would introduce land use intensification in certain portions of the Planning Area, primarily in the Commercial District. By focusing development in under- utilized areas of the Commercial District, the GPU relieves pressure to develop in open space and lower density areas to avoid changing the semi-rural and suburban character of well-established neighborhoods in the Planning Area or create incompatible uses. In addition, any future development that is consistent with the allowable land uses in the Commercial District would be consistent with the surrounding development and, given engineering design standards, would not create a geometric design feature or inadequate emergency access that would increase hazards in the Planning Area. Accordingly, implementation of the GPU would not result in increased hazards due to a geometric design feature or incompatible uses or inadequate emergency access. The Project would be located in the Commercial District and would construct a use that is compatible with allowed development. The Project would comply with the City’s engineering design standards for driveway and sidewalk widths, turning radii, and sight distance for pedestrians and vehicles to ensure the safety of pedestrians and users of the right-of-way and provide adequate emergency access. B-147 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-78 Therefore, Project impacts related to increased hazards due to a geometric design feature or incompatible uses or emergency access would be less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the GPU EIR. Likewise, there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. B-148 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-79 Issues and Supporting Data Sources: GPU EIR Impact Conclusion Project Impact Conclusion Any New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New or Changed Circumstances Involving New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New Information of Substantial Importance That Was Not and Could Not Have Been Known at the Time of Certification of the GPU EIR that Rises to the Level of Requiring New Analysis or Verification? Are Any New Mitigation Measures Required for the Project? 18. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is: a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k)? SU SU No No No No b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1? In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe. SU SU No No No No B-149 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-80 Discussion: As detailed in the GPU EIR, no known tribal cultural resources that are listed in or eligible for listing in the California Register or a local register of historical resources are present within the Planning Area. No tribal cultural resources that could be impacted by the GPU have been identified by the City through the SB 18 or AB 52 process with traditionally geographically affiliated California Native American tribes, or other cultural resources identification efforts. Nonetheless, because various prehistoric archaeological sites have been identified in the Planning Area, the Planning Area is considered potentially sensitive for tribal cultural resources. Accordingly, future development and redevelopment projects must be analyzed on a project-specific basis for conformance with the GPU and other local, State, and federal requirements, as ground-disturbing activities (e.g., excavation, grading, vegetation removal, and construction) associated with future development and redevelopment projects would have the potential to unearth, damage, and/or destroy known or unknown tribal cultural resources and have the potential to result in adverse impacts. Therefore, impacts of the GPU to tribal cultural resources were determined to potentially be significant, and future projects under the GPU would be subject to Mitigation Measures MM-CUL-4 through MM-CUL-7, which are also included under the archaeological resources discussion in Checklist Section 5, Cultural Resources, above. In particular, Mitigation Measure MM-CUL-4 requires that a site-specific project environmental review and archaeological resources assessment be conducted before ground disturbing and demolition activities are permitted to occur. Mitigation Measure MM-CUL-5 requires additional investigation if the archaeological resources assessment identifies potentially significant archaeological resources, and impacts cannot be avoided. Mitigation Measure MM-CUL-6 requires a qualified archaeologist to monitor all ground-disturbing construction and preconstruction activities in areas with previously undisturbed soil if the archaeological resources assessment does not identify archaeological resources but finds the area to be highly sensitive for archaeological resources. Mitigation Measure MM- CUL-7 requires an archaeologist, who meets the Secretary’s Standards, to be retained on call if an archaeological resources assessment does not identify potentially significant archaeological resources but the site has moderate sensitivity for archaeological resources. The GPU EIR concluded that, while mitigation and compliance with the applicable GPU’s policies, provisions of the RHEMC, and State and federal regulations would reduce tribal cultural resources impacts, the potential loss of tribal cultural resources may not be adequately mitigated through data recovery and collection methods, as the value of a tribal cultural resource lies in cultural values and religious beliefs of associated tribes. Since significant impacts to tribal cultural resources from future projects developed under the GPU cannot be precluded, impacts were determined to be considered significant and unavoidable. As the proposed Project’s construction activities would include grading and demolition, pursuant to Mitigation Measure MM-CUL-4, the Project would be required to undergo screening to determine whether an archaeological resources assessment is required. With implementation of this measure and subsequent mitigation provided in the GPU EIR, as applicable, Project-specific impacts related to archaeological resources would be reduced to the maximum extent feasible. However, as with the determination in the GPU EIR, since significant impacts to tribal cultural resources during construction cannot be precluded, Project impacts would be considered significant and unavoidable. B-150 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-81 No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed project would occur or worsen the significant and unavoidable impacts identified in the GPU EIR. Likewise, there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. GPU EIR Mitigation Measures Please refer to Mitigation Measures MM-CUL-4 through MM-CUL-7 identified in Checklist Section 5, Cultural Resources, above. B-151 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-82 Issues and Supporting Data Sources: GPU EIR Impact Conclusion Project Impact Conclusion Any New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New or Changed Circumstances Involving New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New Information of Substantial Importance That Was Not and Could Not Have Been Known at the Time of Certification of the GPU EIR that Rises to the Level of Requiring New Analysis or Verification? Are Any New Mitigation Measures Required for the Project? 19. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS—WATER SUPPLY Would the project: a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? LTS LTS No No No No b) Have in sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry, and multiple dry years? LTS LTS No No No No Discussion: a) Would the Project require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? According to the GPU EIR, water service is provided to the Planning Area by the California Water Service (Cal Water) and Cal Water’s Palos Verdes District. Cal Water purchases imported water for the Palos Verdes District from the West Basin Municipal Water District (WBMWD), which is a member Metropolitan Water District. As discussed in the GPU EIR, the majority of development associated with buildout of the GPU would involve intensification of land uses within the Commercial District, which is an urbanized area that is served by existing water infrastructure. As such, future development within the Commercial District would connect to existing Cal Water infrastructure and would not involve extension of water service to currently unserved areas. Furthermore, Cal Water regularly maintains B-152 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-83 and upgrades water infrastructure on the Palos Verdes Peninsula, as needed, such as replacing aging water mains and hydrants, as well as service connections. Therefore, given (1) that development associated with buildout of the GPU would occur incrementally through 2040 and would be concentrated in previously developed areas already served by water infrastructure, (2) that Cal Water regularly maintains and upgrades water infrastructure as part of their normal operations, and (3) the relatively small increase in total water demand associated with buildout of the GPU, the GPU would not require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water facilities, an impacts would be less than significant. The Project would comply with a City condition of approval to provide a modeled analysis of the existing water system in the area to determine domestic needs and fire flow needs of the Project. As the Project is located within the urbanized Commercial District, the proposed residential development would connect to the existing water infrastructure and would be required to pay connection charges to Cal Water, as appropriate. Nonetheless, the Project may be required by Cal Water and LACoFD to provide upgrades to the water infrastructure to meet the Project’s domestic and fire flow demands based on the required water system analysis. Accordingly, Project impacts related to water facilities would be less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the GPU EIR. Likewise, there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required b) Would there be insufficient water supplies available to serve the Project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry, and multiple dry years? As previously described, implementation of the GPU would introduce land use intensification in certain portions of the Planning Area, primarily in the Commercial District, where the most intense land uses and most dense development currently occur in the City. The GPU assumes that some of these commercial uses would be replaced by new multi-family/mixed-use residential development that would result in a net change in water demand in the Planning Area. As detailed in the GPU EIR, the recycling of commercial properties into mixed-use and residential development would result in a net increase in water demand in the Planning Area. Meanwhile, irrigation water demand associated with buildout of the GPU would be similar, if not less than existing conditions. In addition, it is likely that future water demand of residential land uses within the Planning Area would naturally decrease over time through home renovations, installation of water efficient appliances and fixtures by homeowners, and adherence to updated water efficiency measures. As analyzed in the GPU EIR, the GPU’s water demand, which conservatively does not account for water conservation and efficiency requirements, would represent only a small percentage of the total projected water demand for the Cal Water Palos Verdes District in 2040 (0.6 percent for the low range development scenario and 1.9 percent for the high range development scenario). Therefore, given the relatively small percentage of water demand associated with buildout of the GPU, which would occur gradually through 2040, and given the UWMP’s determination that water purchased by the Palos Verdes District will be sufficient to serve all water demand within the District through 2045 under all hydrologic conditions, there would be sufficient water supplies available to serve development associated with buildout of the GPU during normal, single dry, and multiple dry years. Further, the 2020 UWMP prepared by the WBMWD states that water supplies would be sufficient to meet projected demand under three hydrologic or rainfall conditions: an average (or normal) year, a single-dry year, and multiple-dry years. Therefore, the GPU concluded that impacts related to water supply B-153 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-84 as a result of the GPU buildout would be less than significant. Since the representative projects are a subset of buildout of the GPU, water demand associated with the representative projects has already been accounted for in the estimated water demand increase in the Planning Area from buildout of the GPU. As the proposed Project is within the assumed total buildout of the GPU, which has been determined to result in a less-than-significant impact on water supplies, the proposed Project would not cause any potentially significant impacts on water supplies. Accordingly, as the Project is consistent with the parameters of a medium site representative project of the GPU, Project impacts related to water supplies would also be less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the GPU EIR. Likewise, there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. B-154 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-85 Issues and Supporting Data Sources: GPU EIR Impact Conclusion Project Impact Conclusion Any New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New or Changed Circumstances Involving New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New Information of Substantial Importance That Was Not and Could Not Have Been Known at the Time of Certification of the GPU EIR that Rises to the Level of Requiring New Analysis or Verification? Are Any New Mitigation Measures Required for the Project? 20. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS—WASTEWATER Would the project: a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded wastewater treatment facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? LTS LTS No No No No b) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it does not have adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments? LTS LTS No No No No Discussion: The Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts (LACSD) owns, operates, and maintains the large trunk sewers that form the backbone of the regional wastewater conveyance system. Local collector and/or lateral sewer lines are the responsibility of the jurisdiction in which they are located. The Planning Area is located within the jurisdictional boundaries of LACSD’s South Bay Cities Sanitation District and District No. 5. Wastewater generated by existing uses in the GPU Planning Area is then treated at the Joint Water Pollution Control Plant (JWPCP) located in the City of Carson. As discussed in the GPU EIR, the majority of development associated with buildout of the GPU would involve intensification of land uses within the Commercial District, where the most intense land uses and B-155 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-86 most dense development currently occur in the City, with subregional-serving commercial centers and existing structures, and where the larger sewer lines (i.e., 15-inch lines) are located to accommodate the land use intensification. The GPU assumes that some of these commercial uses would be replaced by new multi-family/mixed-use residential development that would result in a net change in wastewater generation in the Planning Area. As detailed in the GPU EIR, under the low range scenario and high range scenario, wastewater generation within the Planning Area would increase by approximately 99,789 gallons per day and 312,735 gallons per day, respectively. However, future development under the GPU is anticipated to occur gradually through 2040 and would be largely based on market demand. Thus, any increase in wastewater generation would occur gradually as additional development occurs in the Planning Area. Furthermore, the analysis of the GPU showed that the increases would only represent a small percentage of the JWPCP’s remaining capacity: 0.07 percent for the low range scenario and 0.21 percent for the high range scenario. In addition, developers of future development projects under the GPU would be required to pay sewer construction permit fees and connection charges. Such fees support, in part, the capacity determination and facilities. Accordingly, buildout of the GPU would not result in a determination by the City, the LACSD, or the JWPCP that there would be inadequate capacity to serve the projected wastewater treatment demands or require the construction of new or expanded wastewater treatment facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects. Since the representative projects are a subset of buildout of the GPU, wastewater generation associated with the representative projects has already been accounted for in the estimated increase in the Planning Area from buildout of the GPU. As the proposed Project is consistent with the assumed total buildout of the GPU, which has been determined to result in a less-than-significant impact on wastewater facilities, the proposed Project would not cause any potentially significant impacts on wastewater facilities. Accordingly, as the Project is consistent with the parameters of a medium site representative project of the GPU and would pay the required connection fees, Project impacts related to wastewater facilities would also be less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the GPU EIR. Likewise, there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. B-156 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-87 Issues and Supporting Data Sources: GPU EIR Impact Conclusion Project Impact Conclusion Any New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New or Changed Circumstances Involving New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New Information of Substantial Importance That Was Not and Could Not Have Been Known at the Time of Certification of the GPU EIR that Rises to the Level of Requiring New Analysis or Verification? Are Any New Mitigation Measures Required for the Project? 21. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS—SOLID WASTE Would the project: a) Generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals? LTS LTS No No No No b) Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste? LTS LTS No No No No Discussion: a) Would the Project generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals? The projected net growth in the Planning Area would generate an annual total of 403.14 tons per year under the low range scenario or 8,419 tons per year under the high range scenario over existing conditions. The majority of the City’s solid waste was delivered by Waste Management (WM), the City’s exclusive waste hauler, to El Sobrante in Riverside County. The El Sobrante Landfill has an estimated remaining capacity of approximately 142 million tons as of December 2019. Conservatively assuming that the maximum amount of solid waste that could be generated by the implementation of the GPU under the high range scenario would be taken to the El Sobrante Landfill, the total amount of 8,419 tons per year would represent less than 0.006 percent of its remaining capacity. In addition, it is likely that WM would distribute the City’s solid waste to other landfills listed on Table 4.20-1 in Section 4.20, Utilities and B-157 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-88 Service Systems—Solid Waste, of the GPU EIR. These landfills, including El Sobrante Landfill, have a total remaining capacity of approximately 697 million tons, which would be more than sufficient to accommodate the City’s additional 8,419 tons per year. Furthermore, future development under the GPU is anticipated to occur gradually through 2040 and would be largely based on market demand. Thus, any increase in solid waste generation would occur gradually as additional development occurs in the Planning Area. The City also continues to comply with waste diversion and requirements pursuant to State laws regulating solid waste management, reduction, recycling, and reuse, including AB 341, AB 939, AB 1826, AB 1327, and SB 1374, as described in the GPU EIR. In addition, the RHEMC includes requirements related to recyclables and organic waste disposal, as well as solid waste containers and the use and placement of containers. Therefore, buildout of the GPU would not generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of the landfills serving the City, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals. As such, impacts of the GPU related to solid waste would be less than significant. Since the representative projects are a subset of buildout of the GPU, solid waste generation associated with the representative projects has already been accounted for in the estimated increase in the Planning Area from buildout of the GPU. As the total buildout of the GPU has been determined to result in a less-than-significant impact on solid waste, the representative projects themselves would not cause any potentially significant impacts on solid waste. Accordingly, as the Project is consistent with the parameters of a medium site representative project of the GPU and would comply with waste and recycling requirements, Project impacts related to solid waste would also be less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the GPU EIR. Likewise, there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. b) Would the Project comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste? As discussed in the GPU EIR, the City’s future per capital disposal rate is expected to be in compliance with the 50-percent diversion requirement mandated by AB 939. In addition, future development proposed under the GPU would be required to comply with the RHEMC, including Sections 8.20.260, Section 8.20.70, Section 8.24, and Chapter 15.04. Compliance with RHEMC would ensure that implementation of the GPU complies with AB 341, AB 939, AB 1826, AB 1327, and CALGreen Code. Furthermore, the GPU contains goals and policies that address solid waste management and diversion to ensure that State and local solid waste reduction goals are met. Therefore, the GPU would comply with federal, State, local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste. As such, impacts of the GPU would be less than significant. Since the representative projects are a subset of buildout of the GPU and the total buildout of the GPU has been determined to result in a less-than-significant impact related to compliance with solid waste management and reduction regulations, the representative projects would also result in a less-than-significant impact. Accordingly, as the Project is consistent with the parameters of a medium site representative project of the GPU and would comply with waste and recycling requirements, Project impacts related to compliance with solid waste management and reduction regulations would also be less than significant. B-158 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-89 No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the GPU EIR. Likewise, there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. B-159 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-90 Issues and Supporting Data Sources: GPU EIR Impact Conclusion Project Impact Conclusion Any New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New or Changed Circumstances Involving New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New Information of Substantial Importance That Was Not and Could Not Have Been Known at the Time of Certification of the GPU EIR that Rises to the Level of Requiring New Analysis or Verification? Are Any New Mitigation Measures Required for the Project? 22. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS—ENERGY AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS INFRASTRUCTURE Would the project: a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded electrical power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? LTS LTS No No No No Discussion: As previously described, implementation of the GPU would introduce land use intensification in certain portions of the Planning Area, primarily in the Commercial District, where the most intense land uses and most dense development currently occur in the City, with subregional-serving commercial centers. The GPU assumes that some of these commercial uses would be replaced by new multifamily/mixed-use residential development that would result in a net increase in electricity and natural gas consumption (detailed in Section 4.5, Energy, of the GPU EIR) and use of telecommunications facilities in the Planning Area. However, future development under the GPU is anticipated to occur gradually through 2040 and would be largely based on market demand. Thus, any net increase in electricity and natural gas consumption and use of telecommunications facilities (provided by Cox Communications, AT&T and DIRECTV, Frontier, Viasat, HughesNet, Spectrum, and several cellular towers managed by private telecommunications service providers) in the Planning Area would occur gradually as additional development occurs in the Planning Area. Both Southern California Edison (SCE) and Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas) regularly maintain and upgrade their transmission lines and equipment to ensure that electricity and natural gas pipeline connections withstand natural hazards, such as seismic events and wildfires. As discussed above, SCE is already implementing capital improvements, including public safety upgrades and circuit B-160 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-91 reliability upgrades, to adequately serve its existing and future customers. Any work that may affect services to the existing electricity, natural gas, and telecommunication lines would be coordinated with service providers and the City, as applicable. Future development projects under the GPU would be expected to incorporate energy conservation features and comply with applicable regulations, including the CALGreen Code and State energy standards under Title 24. Therefore, buildout of the GPU would not be anticipated to require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded electrical power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects. As such, the GPU’s impact on electrical power, natural gas, or telecommunications infrastructure would be less than significant. Since the representative projects are a subset of buildout of the GPU and the total buildout of the GPU has been determined to result in a less-than-significant impact related to electrical power, natural gas, or telecommunications infrastructure, the representative projects themselves would also result in a less-than-significant impact. Accordingly, as the Project is consistent with the parameters of a medium site representative project of the GPU, Project impacts related to electrical power, natural gas, or telecommunications infrastructure would also be less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the GPU EIR. Likewise, there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. B-161 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-92 Issues and Supporting Data Sources: GPU EIR Impact Conclusion Project Impact Conclusion Any New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New or Changed Circumstances Involving New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New Information of Substantial Importance That Was Not and Could Not Have Been Known at the Time of Certification of the GPU EIR that Rises to the Level of Requiring New Analysis or Verification? Are Any New Mitigation Measures Required for the Project? 23. WILDFIRE If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project: a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? LTS LTS No No No No b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of wildfire? LTS LTS No No No No c) Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment? LTS LTS No No No No B-162 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-93 Issues and Supporting Data Sources: GPU EIR Impact Conclusion Project Impact Conclusion Any New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New or Changed Circumstances Involving New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New Information of Substantial Importance That Was Not and Could Not Have Been Known at the Time of Certification of the GPU EIR that Rises to the Level of Requiring New Analysis or Verification? Are Any New Mitigation Measures Required for the Project? d) Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes? LTS LTS No No No No Discussion: a) If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the Project substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? According to the GPU EIR, the entirety of the GPU Planning Area is located within a VHFHSZ as mapped by CAL FIRE. The Multi- Jurisdiction Hazard Mitigation Plan (HMP) for the Cities of Rolling Hills Estates and Rancho Palos Verdes, as approved by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, includes a series of mitigation actions related to wildfire that address the HMP’s goals of protecting life and property, enhancing public awareness, preserve natural systems, encourage partnerships and implementation, and strengthen emergency services. Additionally, the HMP identifies the County-designated evacuation routes within the Planning Area, which include Hawthorne Boulevard and Crenshaw Boulevard, as well as City-designated evacuation routes, which include Highridge Road, Silver Spur Road, Palos Verdes Drive North, and Palos Verdes Drive East. The majority of sites envisioned for potential intensification through buildout of the GPU are located on underutilized parcels that are characterized by suburban development. By focusing development on institutional and commercial land uses and in the Commercial District, the GPU would relieve development pressure on open space and low density areas that are characterized by steep hillsides and canyons. This would reduce overall wildfire risk by concentrating future development in areas that are not characterized by mature dense tree stands, or native or non-native vegetation that could fuel spread of a wildfire. Further, the GPU would not result in land use B-163 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-94 changes that would convert open space to other development uses. As such, buildout of the GPU within already developed areas would not result in an increase in the construction of combustible structures and improvements in areas immediately surrounded by dense, flammable vegetation. However, as the Planning Area is located within a VHFHSZ, future residential and commercial structures would be required to comply with more stringent standards to resist ignition and slow the spread of fire. Further, any changes in the circulation around a project would be designed and constructed in accordance with LACoFD standards to ensure that future development would not impede or obstruct evacuation procedures during the event of a wildfire. In addition, any future projects developed as part of the GPU that would be located in close proximity to dense vegetation or mature stands of trees would require a Fuel Modification Plan and would require installation and irrigation of non-flammable landscaping materials, as well as use of ignition- resistant building materials and roofing, consistent with LACoFD standards. Future development is assumed to occur over multiple years through 2040; as such, any impacts associated with an increase in population and, thus, an increase in the number of residents in a given area using evacuation routes during a wildfire emergency, would occur gradually. In addition, any future development under the GPU would be required to comply with the provisions of the California Fire and Building Codes for fire access and circulation. As discussed above in the Checklist Section 15, Public Services, discussion regarding fire protection, individual project development plans would be reviewed by the City and LACoFD to determine specific fire requirements (e.g., fire flow capacities, emergency access, fuel modification plans) applicable to the specific development and to ensure compliance with these requirements. Further, in the event of a future wildfire event that requires evacuation, emergency responders would assess local conditions in an ongoing manner and identify locations and severity of threats to people, homes, businesses. Therefore, because future development would be required to adhere to strict design standards regarding fire resistance and circulation, and because future development would be concentrated in the City’s Commercial District, which has comparably less grasses and vegetation that could act as wildfire fuel than most of the Planning Area, the GPU would not result in a substantial increase in the potential for wildfires to move through developed areas of the Planning Area and substantially impair the City’s emergency response and emergency evacuation plan along the Planning Area’s street network through the Multi-Jurisdictional HMP. As such, impacts of the GPU would be less than significant. As described in the GPU EIR, the representative projects themselves would not cause any potentially significant impacts on the implementation of an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. The Project, which is consistent with the parameters of a medium site representative project of the GPU, would be developed in compliance with code requirements related to fire access and circulation and would be subject to review by the City and LACoFD to determine specific fire requirements (e.g., fire flow capacities, emergency access, fuel modification plans). In addition, the proposed development would be limited to the Project Site boundaries in the urbanized Commercial District and would not encroach upon Silver Spur Road, a City-designated evacuation route. Therefore, Project impacts related to emergency response plans or emergency evacuation plans would be less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the GPU EIR. Likewise, there is no new information of B-164 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-95 substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. b) If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the Project, due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of wildfire? As described above, the entirety of the GPU Planning Area is located within a VHFHSZ. The majority of sites envisioned for potential intensification through buildout of the GPU are located on underutilized parcels that are characterized by suburban development, thus, reducing overall wildfire risk by concentrating future development in areas that are not characterized by mature, dense tree stands, or native or non-native vegetation that could fuel spread of a wildfire. If future development were to occur near areas that are characterized by dense tree canopies and vegetation that could provide fuel for a wildfire, such development would be required to adhere to the design standards identified above for construction within a VHFHSZ regarding traffic circulation and the use of flammable materials and landscaping, as regulated by the City and the LACoFD. Such requirements would limit wildfire risks and, therefore, reduce the risk of exposing Planning Area inhabitants to pollutants released by wildfires. Additionally, as future development would consist primarily of commercial and residential development, future development is not expected to store, use, or dispose of significant quantities of hazardous materials. While a future commercial development could include development of a gas station, which would handle and store automotive fuels, such uses would be required to adhere to federal, State, and local regulations for the safe storage and handling of such materials, which would be adequate to ensure that wildfire impacts would be less than significant. For other retail commercial, office, or residential uses anticipated through buildout of the GPU, there would be no significant sources of hazardous materials that could add to the fuel load and potential pollutant burden in the event of an on-site fire. Therefore, buildout of the GPU would not substantially exacerbate wildfire risks, and impacts would be less than significant. The Project is consistent with the parameters of a medium site representative project of the GPU, and the proposed residential uses would not require significant sources of hazardous materials that could exacerbate an on-site fire. The proposed Project is also located in a developed, commercial area of the City, not in an area with abundant trees/foliage. The developed nature of the area limits wildfire potential, and the proposed Project would not introduce construction that would exacerbate wildfire risk. Therefore, Project impacts related to wildfire risks and pollutants exposure would also be less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the GPU EIR. Likewise, there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. c) If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the Project require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment? B-165 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-96 As described above, the entirety of the GPU Planning Area is located within a VHFHSZ. However, the majority of sites envisioned for potential intensification through buildout of the GPU are located on properties are characterized by existing suburban development and predominantly include impervious surfaces and managed landscaping areas with minimal areas of native and non-native grasses. These areas are also characterized by existing roadways and utilities infrastructure (including pressurized water systems). Future development would connect to existing electricity sources and utility lines for water and sewer service. Further, these utilities are predominantly located underground, further reducing the risk of wildfire. Other individual projects that would be constructed near open space or canyon areas would need to comply with fuel modification requirements, such as including vegetation removal and irrigation management. No building permits would be issued by the City until construction plans have been reviewed and determined to be in full compliance with all applicable standards for development in a VHFHSZ (e.g., sprinkler systems, water flow pressures for fire hydrants, adequate internal circulation, and emergency site access). Therefore, buildout of the GPU would not exacerbate fire risks or result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment related to the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure, and impacts would be less than significant. As described in the GPU EIR, the representative projects themselves would not require the installation or maintenance of infrastructure that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment. The Project, which is consistent with the parameters of a medium site representative project of the GPU, would be located in an urbanized area comprising primarily impervious surfaces and managed landscaping. The Project would construct a multi-family development that would connect to existing utilities and would not require the installation or maintenance of infrastructure such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities. Therefore, Project impacts related to infrastructure and wildfire risks would be less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the GPU EIR. Likewise, there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. d) If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the Project expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes? As described above, the entirety of the GPU Planning Area is located within a VHFHSZ. As discussed in the GPU EIR and above in Checklist Section 7, Geology and Soils, the Planning Area contains numerous landslide zones, particularly along Crenshaw Boulevard, along the northern boundary of the Planning Area, and the areas south of Palos Verdes Drive North between Crenshaw Boulevard and Silver Spur Road. The Commercial District is underlain by the Silver Spur Landslide Complex and is in proximity to the Cabrillo Fault. The precise location and boundaries of the Silver Spur Landslide Complex is unknown; however, there is potential for future developments within the Commercial District to be located on an unstable geologic unit. In addition, infill developments within the Planning Area that result from buildout of the GPU could also be located on steep slopes. These potential landslide areas are included within the Hazard Management Overlay zone, and any future development within this overlay zone would require geotechnical evaluation and implementation of recommended design and safety measures. As such, the GPU also included goals and policies that require new construction and significant alterations to properties within potential landslide areas to be evaluated for site stability, B-166 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-97 including identification of potential impacts to adjacent properties, during project design and review. In addition, future developments would be required to comply with the grading standards established in the RHEMC to reduce landslide potential and ensure soil stability and requirements of the CBC and the City’s Building Code. The majority of future development associated with buildout of the GPU would be located within the Commercial District, which has comparably less grasses and vegetation that could act as wildfire fuel than most of the Planning Area. In the event that future development were to occur in close proximity to sloped areas characterized by flammable vegetation, such development would be required to adhere to strict design guidelines, such as fuel modification activities required by LACoFD, which would remove some of the flammable vegetation in close proximity to a proposed combustible structure and replace it with irrigated and/or fire-resistant vegetation. In addition, as determined through the Notice of Preparation/Scoping process (i.e., Initial Study) and as discussed in Checklist Section 10, Hydrology and Water Quality, through compliance with all NPDES Construction General Permit requirements, as well as compliance with applicable City grading permit regulations, construction activities associated with future development projects under the GPU, including the proposed Project, would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the construction site or area in a manner that would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site, flooding on- or off-site. The GPU EIR concluded that buildout of the GPU would not expose people or structures to significant risks associated with post-fire slope instability or drainage changes, and impacts would be less than significant. As the Project Site is located in the Commercial District and Hazard Overlay Zone, the Project would be required to conduct a site- specific geotechnical evaluation, implement recommended design and safety measures, and conform with RHEMC grading standards, CBC, and the City’s Building Code to reduce Project impacts related to landslides. In addition, as discussed in Checklist Section 10, Hydrology and Water Quality, with adherence to NPDES Construction General Permit requirements and LID BMPs the Project would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern in a manner that would result in substantial erosion, siltation, or flooding. Therefore, the Project would not expose people or structures to significant risks associated with post-fire slope instability or drainage changes, and impacts would be less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the GPU EIR. Likewise, there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification. The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR, and no new mitigation measures are required. B-167 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-98 This page intentionally left blank. B-168 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-99 Environmental Determination Based upon the evidence in light of the whole record documented in the attached environmental checklist explanation, cited incorporations and attachments, the City finds that the Project: Has previously been analyzed as part of an earlier CEQA document (which either mitigated the project or adopted impacts pursuant to findings) adopted/certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines. The proposed project is a component of the whole action analyzed in the previously adopted/certified CEQA document. Has previously been analyzed as part of an earlier CEQA document (which either mitigated the project or adopted impacts pursuant to findings) adopted/certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines. Changes and additions to the earlier CEQA document are needed to make the previous documentation adequate to cover the project which are documented in this Addendum (CEQA Guidelines §15164). However, none of the conditions described in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 that would require the preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred. Has previously been analyzed as part of an earlier CEQA document (which either mitigated the project or adopted impacts pursuant to findings) adopted/certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines. However, there is important new information and/or substantial changes have occurred requiring the preparation of an additional CEQA document (Negative Declaration or EIR) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 through 15163. _______________________ ________ _______________________ ________ Prepared By Date Reviewed By Date _______________________ _______________________ Printed Name Printed Name Addendum approved on: ______________________ Approval attested to by: _______________________ ________ Signature Date ________________________________ Printed Name B-169 Chapter 3: Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-100 This page intentionally left blank. B-170 Chapter 4: Mitigation Measures Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 4-1 CHAPTER 4: MITIGATION MEASURES A listing of applicable mitigation measures from the General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report is presented below. The mitigation measures listed are the same as the measures in the Final EIR and would be applicable to the proposed Project. No new mitigation measures are required as a result of implementing the proposed Project. The City, as the CEQA lead agency, is responsible for monitoring the implementation of the adopted mitigation measures. Air Quality MM-AQ-1: Prior to issuance of any grading permit, the City’s Community Development Department shall confirm that the grading plans, building plans, and specifications require that ozone precursor emissions from construction equipment vehicles shall be controlled by maintaining equipment engines in good condition and in proper tune per manufacturer’s specifications. The equipment maintenance records and equipment design specifications data sheets shall be submitted to the City and verified by the City’s Community Development Department, and shall be kept on site by the project contractor during construction activities. Biological Resources MM-BIO-2: If future development projects that involve vegetation removal, and are not otherwise categorically exempt from CEQA or subject to the emergency project statutory exemption from CEQA, are unable to avoid construction activities within nesting bird season (January 1st through July 31st for raptors and February 1st through August 31st for other avian species), a qualified biologist shall conduct a pre-construction nesting bird survey for avian species to determine the presence/absence, location, and status of any active nests on or adjacent to the area proposed development area. The survey shall be conducted for active nests, eggs, and young of any bird species protected by the state or federal Endangered Species Acts, Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA), and/or the California Fish and Game Code (CFGC) Sections 3503, 3503.5, or 3511, within 200 feet of the disturbance zone for songbirds, or within 500 feet of the disturbance zone for raptors and special-status bird species. To avoid the destruction of active nests and to protect the reproductive success of birds protected by the MBTA and the CFGC, a nesting bird survey should be conducted no more than three (3) days prior to the commencement of project construction if construction occurs between January 1st and August 31st. In the event that active nests are discovered, a suitable buffer (distance to be determined by the biologist) shall be established around such active nests, and no construction activities within the buffer will be allowed, until the biologist has determined that the nest(s) is no longer active (i.e., the nestlings have fledged and are no longer dependent on the nest). Cultural Resources MM-CUL-4: To ensure identification and preservation of archaeological resources and avoid significant impacts to those resources, prior to grading approval by the Rolling Hills Estates Planning Commission, each project requiring such approval shall be screened to determine whether an Archaeological Resources Assessment report is required. Screening shall consider the type of project and whether ground disturbance will occur in native soils (i.e., previously undisturbed soils). If so, prior B-171 Chapter 4: Mitigation Measures Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 4-2 to grading approval by the Rolling Hills Estates Planning Commission, the City shall require an Archaeological Resources Assessment be conducted under the supervision of an archaeologist that meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards. Archaeological Resources Assessments shall include a California Historical Resources Information System records search at the South Central Coastal Information Center and a Sacred Lands File search through the Native American Heritage Commission. The records searches will determine if the proposed development area has been previously surveyed for archaeological resources, identify and characterize the results of previous cultural resource surveys, and disclose any cultural resources that have been recorded and/or evaluated. If unpaved surfaces are present within the development area, and the entire development area has not been previously surveyed within the past 10 years, a Phase I pedestrian survey shall be undertaken in proposed development areas to locate any surface cultural materials that may be present. MM-CUL-5: If the Archaeological Resources Assessment identifies potentially significant archaeological resources and impacts cannot be avoided, a Phase II Testing and Evaluation investigation shall be performed by an archaeologist who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards to determine significance prior to any ground- disturbing activities. If resources are determined significant or unique through Phase II testing and site avoidance is not possible, appropriate site-specific mitigation measures shall be undertaken. These may include a Phase III data recovery program implemented by a qualified archaeologist and performed in accordance with the California Office of Historic Preservation’s “Archaeological Resource Management Reports (ARMR): Recommended Contents and Format” (1990) and “Guidelines for Archaeological Research Designs” (1991). MM-CUL-6: If the Archaeological Resources Assessment did not identify archaeological resources but found the area to be highly sensitive for archaeological resources, a qualified archaeologist shall monitor all ground-disturbing construction and preconstruction activities in areas with previously undisturbed soil. The archaeologist shall inform all construction personnel prior to construction activities of the proper procedures in the event of an archaeological discovery. The training shall be held in conjunction with the project’s initial on-site safety meeting and shall explain the importance and legal basis for the protection of significant archaeological resources. In the event that archaeological resources (artifacts or features) are exposed during ground-disturbing activities, construction activities in the immediate vicinity of the discovery shall be halted while the resources are evaluated for significance by an archaeologist who meets the Secretary’s Standards, and tribal consultation shall be conducted in the case of a tribal resource. If the discovery proves to be significant, the long-term disposition of any collected materials shall be determined in consultation with the affiliated tribe(s), where relevant; this could include curation with a recognized scientific or educational repository, transfer to the tribe, or respectful reinternment in an area designated by the tribe. MM-CUL-7: If an Archaeological Resources Assessment does not identify potentially significant archaeological resources but the site has moderate sensitivity for archaeological resources, an archaeologist who meets the Secretary’s Standards shall be retained on call. The archaeologist shall inform all construction personnel prior to construction activities about the proper procedures in the event of an B-172 Chapter 4: Mitigation Measures Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 4-3 archaeological discovery. The preconstruction training shall be held in conjunction with a future development project’s initial on-site safety meeting and shall explain the importance and legal basis for the protection of significant archaeological resources. In the event that archaeological resources (artifacts or features) are exposed during ground-disturbing activities, construction activities in the immediate vicinity of the discovery shall be halted while the on-call archaeologist is contacted. The resource shall be evaluated for significance and tribal consultation shall be conducted, in the case of a tribal resource. If the discovery proves to be significant, the long-term disposition of any collected materials should be determined in consultation with the affiliated tribe(s), where relevant. Geology and Soils MM-GEO-1: To ensure identification and preservation of significant paleontological resources and avoid significant impacts to those resources, prior to the issuance of a grading approval by the City of Rolling Hills Estates Planning Commission, each project requiring such approval shall be screened to determine whether a full paleontological resources assessment is required. Screening shall consider whether the proposed grading activity will extend into known undisturbed fossil- bearing strata (i.e., those of the Monterey Formation, including Lomita Marl Member, Valmonte Diatomite Member, and Altamira Shale Member). If so, the City shall require a paleontological resources assessment be conducted by a paleontologist that meets Bureau of Land Management or Society of Vertebrate Paleontology standards (i.e., a qualified paleontologist) prior to the issuance of a grading approval. If the paleontological resources assessment identifies the potential for destruction of significant paleontological resources, an avoidance and/or recovery plan shall be developed and implemented under the supervision of a qualified paleontologist to the satisfaction of the City of Rolling Hills Estates. MM-GEO-2: In the event that any prehistoric subsurface paleontological resources are encountered during future construction or the course of any ground disturbance activities, all such activities shall halt immediately, at which time the applicant shall notify the City and consult with a qualified paleontologist to assess the significance of the find. In the case of discovery of paleontological resources, the assessment shall be done in accordance with the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology standards. If any find is determined to be significant, appropriate avoidance measures recommended by the consultant and approved by the City must be followed unless avoidance is determined to be unnecessary or infeasible by the City. If avoidance is unnecessary or infeasible, other appropriate measures (e.g., data recovery, excavation) shall be instituted. Transportation MM-TRAN-1: The City shall work with future developers of multi-family housing, commercial projects, and mixed-use projects to ensure they provide the following as TDM measures for mitigating VMT: · Provision of Pedestrian Network Improvements: Create a connected pedestrian network within the development and connect to nearby destinations. · Construction or Improvements to Bike Facility or Expand Bikeway Network: Enhance bicycle network Citywide (or at similar scale), such that a building B-173 Chapter 4: Mitigation Measures Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 4-4 entrance or bicycle parking is within 200 yards walking or bicycling distance from a bicycle network that connects to at least one of the following: at least 10 diverse uses; a school or employment center, if the project total floor area is 50 percent or more residential; or a bus rapid transit stop, light or heavy rail station, commuter rail station, or ferry terminal. B-174 Chapter 5: List of Preparers Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 5-1 CHAPTER 5: LIST OF PREPARERS LEAD AGENCY City of Rolling Hills Estates Community Development Department 4045 Palos Verdes Drive North Rolling Hills Estates, CA 90274 Jeannie Naughton, Community Development Director Whitney Berry, Senior Planner PREPARED BY Michael Baker International 3760 Kilroy Airport Way, Suite 270 Long Beach, California 90806 John Bellas – Principal-in-Charge/Project Advisor Madonna Marcelo – Project Director, Principal Environmental Planner Frankie Tong – Project Manager, Senior Environmental Planner Eddie Torres – Technical Manager, Air Quality & Noise Zhe Chen – Technical Specialist II, Air Quality & Noise Tina Yuan – Environmental Associate, Air Quality & Noise Winnie Woo – Environmental Associate B-175 Chapter 5: List of Preparers Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 5-2 This page intentionally left blank. B-176 CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ESTATES LOS ANGELES COUNTY,CALIFORNIA RESOLUTION NO.2588 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ESTATES APPROVING A PRECISE PLAN OF DESIGN (PPD-240299)A COMMERCIAL DISTRICT MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT (MUD-230517), AND ADOPTION OF AN ADDENDUM TO THE GENERAL PLAN FINAL PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE 2040 GENERAL PLAN (SCH NO.2021050450)FOR THE RESIDENCES AT PENINSULA CENTER PROJECT.APPLICANT:RYAN ASH ON BEHALF OF VESTAR;LOCATION: 27525 NORRIS CENTER DRIVE (APN 7589-005-020) The City Council of the City of Rolling Hills Estates resolves as follows: SECTION 1.General Findings.The City Council finds as follows: Mr.Ryan Ash, on behalf of Vestar (“applicant”),filed an application with the Community Development Department requesting a Precise Plan of Design,a Commercial District Mixed-Use Development Permit and a Development Agreement for the purposes of the new construction of a 90-unit residential development (“Project”);such an application is required by Chapter 17.30 of the Rolling Hills Estates Municipal Code (RHEMC). A. RHEMC Section 17.30.080,Section 17.30.090 and 17.30.020(A)require approval of a Development Agreement and a Precise Plan of Design for multi-family residential development applying for City Bonus Level Development for a density greater than 30 dwelling units to the acre located within the Commercial General Mixed-Use (CGMU)zoning district. California Government Code sections 65864 et seq.(the “Development Agreement Law”),authorizes the City to enter into agreements for the development of real property with any person having a legal or equitable interest in such property in order to establish certain development rights. B. C. RHEMC Chapter 17.82,Development Agreements,implements procedures for the processing and approval of development agreements as permitted under the Development Agreement Law. D. RHEMC Section 17.30.080,Bonus Level Development,and Section 17.30.090, Community Amenities or Benefits Required for Bonus Level Development,establish a process for providing bonus level development (i.e.,greater density)in exchange for a project providing desirable community amenities and benefits. On October 11,2022,the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2531, approving alistofcommunityamenitiesandbenefitsthatmaybeprovidedforbonusleveldevelopmentunder RHEMC Chapter 17.30. E. F. On March 12,2024,the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing regarding the Project and provided a preliminary determination that the community benefits and amenities proposed by the Applicant qualify for bonus level development pursuant to the City’s Bonus Level Development program. G. The City caused to be prepared with respect to the environmental review of the Project Addendum No.1 to the General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report for the 2040 General Plan (SCH No.2021050450). H. On August 5,2024,the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing regarding the Project and,after considering public testimony and a lengthy discussion,continued the public hearing to the September 3,2024 Planning Commission meeting. On August 19,2024,the Applicant submitted a request to continue the public hearing to the October 7,2024 Planning Commission meeting. On October 7,2024,the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing regarding the Project and,after considering public testimony and discussion,was unable to reach I. J. K. ATTACHMENT C B-177 a majority consensus on whether to recommend approval,approval with conditions,or denial of the Project to the City Council,and consequently made no recommendation regarding the Project to the City Council. The City Council conducted a duly noticed public hearing on November 12,2024. All interested parties were given full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence. L. SECTION 2.Approval of CEQA Addendum. The City Council finds that the Project was reviewed in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code §21000 et seq.:“CEQA”),and the City prepared and the City Council approved an Addendum (Exhibit A)to the General Plan Final Program Environmental Impact Report (“GP FEIR”)for the 2040 General Plan (SCH No. 2021050450),finding that none of the conditions/circumstances warranting greater subsequent or supplemental review,as outlined in Public Resources Code §21166 and CEQA Guidelines §15162,are present.The environmental impacts presented by a “medium site”development project type,consisting of 60 to 125 residential units on sites of approximately two to three acres, were addressed through the GP FEIR,the Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations,and the Mitigation and Monitoring and Reporting Program,as adopted by City Council Resolution No.2496.The proposed Project is representative of the buildout analyzed for the “medium site”development project type in the GP FEIR.The Project will not result in new significant effects or substantial increase in the severity of a previously identified significant effects due to either a change in the project or a change in the circumstances under which the project is undertaken,and there is no new information of substantial importance that would otherwise affect the analysis in the certified GP FEIR,and thus the proposed Project does not trigger the requirements for subsequent review pursuant to Public Resources Code §21166 and CEQA Guidelines §15162 A. Based on the foregoing findings,the City Council exercises its independent judgement and finds that Addendum No.1 to the GP FEIR (Exhibit A)has been completed in compliance with CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines,and hereby approves Addendum No.1. SECTION 3.Commercial District Mixed-Use Development and Precise Plan of Design Findings.The City Council finds as follows with respect to the application for MUD-230517 and PPD-240299: B. All provisions of the Zoning Code are complied with because the Project conforms to the provisions of the Zoning Code and the development standards for residential and residentialmixed-use projects within the Commercial General Mixed-Use ("CGMU”)district (Table 30-C, Chapter 17.30).The building has a minimum setback of 5 feet from the property line along NorrisCenterDrive,the primary street,and a minimum setback of 45 feet from the property line along Silver Spur Road,the secondary street.The Applicant has requested an increase to the allowableheightintheCGMUdistrict,and the building would be 5 stories with an overall maximum heightof68feet.Variation in fagade materials and upper story articulation will minimize the appearance of bulk and mass.The Project has a 67%lot coverage which is less than the maximum 75%lot coverage allowed within the CGMU district.The Project exceeds the parking requirements in the RHEMC and provides 85 parking spaces for public use. The development is designed such that all the considerations outlined in RHEMC Section 17.58.030.B have been accounted for through the arrangement and style of the building and other improvements on the site.The building is designed in a Spanish architectural style with terra cotta tile roofs,stucco walls,and curved forms in arched windows and arcades.The overhangs,balconies,arcades and windows soften the appearance of large massing and indicate a human scale.In conformance with the City’s setback requirements,the building is sited close to the sidewalk,thereby reducing the perceived scale of the street.The upper floors of the building are setback which reduces the appearance of high density in spite of the building’s dense form. Landscaping on the site will provide shade,privacy,and screening of outdoor equipment areas and storage,as well as provide focal points within the development.The Project has four points of entry for vehicles,with two driveways for residents only and two entries situated at the rear of the site for public parking stalls on the ground floor.The proposed development is five stories with a maximum overall height of 68 feet,which is one (1)additional story beyond the four (4)story maximum permitted by right in the CGMU district.The City’s Bonus Level Development Program permits the applicant to seek an increase in the building height by providing community amenities or benefits. The Project has been designed to meet all the development standards of the City and is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Designations of Commercial General and Commercial District Mixed-Use Overlay.The Project would further the goals and policies of the City’s General Plan including,but not limited to.Housing Element policies and quantitative A. B. C. B-178 objectives for more affordable housing that meets workforce housing needs,Commercial District Area Vision Plan goals for infill development on underutilized lots,and redevelopment of the Commercial District to transform the area into a vibrant,walkable,and inviting town center. SECTION 4.Approval of Commercial District Mixed-Use Development Permit MUD- 230517 and Precise Plan of Design PPD-240299.The foregoing facts and findings constitute sufficient grounds for the approval of IVlUD-230517 and PPD-240299 as set forth in Exhibit B. These approvals are granted subject to the following conditions,which must be met at all times, unless otherwise stated,in order to enjoy the use of the subject property for any and all uses permitted by the granting of the requested approvals. General Conditions 1.That all improvements hereafter constructed or installed on the land which is the subject of this approval must be located substantially as shown on Exhibit B and are subject to terms of the Development Agreement DA-240243 adopted as Ordinance No.750. Improvements must be constructed of materials indicated on the materials and color board,and/or as required under the Municipal Code and/or as required in these conditions. 2.The Precise Plan of Design and Commercial District Mixed-Use Development permits are being granted for a 90-unit residential apartment building and site improvements as located substantially as shown on Exhibit B.Any minor changes in the operational characteristics may be approved by the Community Development Director,while major modifications will require review and approval by the Planning Commission. 3.That all applicable requirements of the State.County,City,and other governmental entities must be met,and that prior to commencing any work and prior to applying for a building or grading permit,a zone clearance must be obtained from the Community Development Department. That any substantial modification including,but not limited to,exterior building elevations, site plan design,and landscaping,must receive prior approval of the Planning Commission:minor modifications may be approved by the Community Development Director. 4, 5.That in the event of one or more violations of these conditions,the City Manager will have enforcement capability to remedy such violations and/or revoke the approvals following the applicable procedures of the RHEMC or the Development Agreement. That,unless the use is inaugurated or construction of the project is commenced and being diligently pursued prior to the expiration or termination of the term of the DevelopmentAgreement,including any extensions,the approvals will automatically expire on that date. The applicant must defend,hold harmless and indemnify at its own expense the City,its agents,officers and employees,from any claim,action,or proceeding,to attack,set aside, void or annul the approval granted in this resolution and must reimburse the City,its agents,officers and employees for any damages,court costs and attorney’s fees incurred as a result of such action.The City at its sole discretion may participate in the defense of any such action but such participation will not relieve applicant of its obligation under this condition. 6. 7. Planning 8.PRIOR TO CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY,the applicant must enter into a recorded agreement with the City of Rolling Hills Estates for the eighty-five (85)parking spaces reserved on the ground floor for public use.This agreement will include,but not be limited to,the number and size of the stalls;the operation and maintenance of the stalls;and procedures for the temporary reservation of the stalls for public uses such as communityorganizationsorevents as identified by the City from time-to-time. PRIOR TO CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY,the applicant must submit a more detailed parking management plan to include,but not limited to;expanded provisions for the publicparkingstalls,short-term and long-term bicycle parking,electric vehicle charging stalls, off-site parking arrangements,determine appropriate parking stalls to be designated as “Visitor Only’’.The parking management plan must include a maximum number of parking stalls available for resident use;a corresponding procedure for implementation of a waiting list must be provided,should the maximum number of resident vehicles be reached.The Project must comply with Electric Vehicle (EV)Charging requirements for new 9. B-179 construction according to California Green Building Standards Code (CGBSC)2022 edition.The parking management plan will be subject to approval by the Community Development Director prior to issuance of building permit.The Community Development Department will conduct periodic reviews of the parking management plan and may require revisions to the plan to reduce or avoid parking-related impacts from the Project. PRIOR TO CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY,the applicant must enter into a recorded agreement with the City of Rolling Hills Estates for the nine (9)units reserved for moderate-income households.The nine affordable units will be located throughout the development and must be substantially similar in size and quality to the market-rate units. This agreement wili include,but not be limited to,the number,style and size of ail affordable units;the required income levels of those units;how affordable rents will be calculated;a provision for income certification and screening;record keeping;reporting and monitoring. As delineated in the Development Agreement (DA-240299),the nine units must be reserved for households with moderate income levels for a term no less than thirty-five years. PRIOR TO CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY,the applicant must provide a final landscape plan that illustrates compliance with Rolling Hills Estates Municipal Code Chapter 17.59,Water Efficient Landscapes.The landscape plan will be subject to third party review and approval,and an installation inspection must be conducted to ensure the landscaping areas have been installed according to plan,prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS,the applicant must submit a detailed site lighting plan to the Community Development Director.Site lighting must be directed downward to protect adjacent residential neighborhoods from glare yet provide safety for residents utilizing common walkways and open space areas. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS,the applicant must submit the proposed complementary color palette for all site retaining walls,fences,gates,and trellis structures to the Community Development Director that is compatible with the proposed improvements. The applicant will be subject to full compliance with Order No.R4-2021-0105,Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4)NPDES Permit CAS004004 for Coastal Watershed of Los Angeles County,as well as the requirements of Rolling Hills Estates Municipal Code Chapter 8.38,Stormwater and Urban Runoff Pollution Controi. Any roof-mounted equipment must be in conformance with Rolling Hills Estates Municipal Code 17.30.040(D)(2),Mechanical Equipment on Rooftops,and must be screened from view to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. Any site signage must be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director prior to issuance of a building permit.The signage must be minimal and compatible with the colors and materials proposed for the Project. PRIOR TO CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY,the proposed landscaping improvements in the Public Right of Way are subject to review and approval by the Park and Activities Commission.Landscaping improvements in the public right of way will be required on the perimeter of the project.Street trees must be provided within the public right of way in alinearrowpatternatanintervalbetween20to40feetalongstreetfacades.The location of trees may not impede the minimum width of the public sidewalk required pursuant to the Americans with Disability Act and must be in compliance with provisions of RHEMC Chapter 17.59 and Chapter 12.20. During construction activities,all construction-related vehicles must be parked on-site or at a designated off-site location to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director.Off-site parking and queuing of trucks In adjacent residential neighborhoods is strictly prohibited.Off-site parking and queuing of trucks on Indian Peak or Norris Center Drive may be permitted through submittal of a traffic control plan and issuance of encroachment permits through the Public Works Department,on a limited basis. Any similar arrangement for Silver Spur Road, which is within the jurisdiction of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes adjacent to the Project site,will be subject to the requirements of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes Public Works Department. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. B-180 The applicant must identify the construction staging area to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. 19. 20,The construction site and adjacent public and private properties and streets must be kept free of all loose materials resembling trash and debris in excess of that material used for immediate construction purposes.Such excess material may include,but not be limited to;the accumulation of debris,garbage,lumber,scrap metal,concrete asphalt,piles of earth,salvage materials,abandoned or discarded furniture,appliances or other household fixtures. 21.If sidewalks are closed during construction activities,the project applicant will advise pedestrians of the closure with signage and may be required to construct a temporary protected walkway to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. All construction sites must be maintained in a secure,safe,neat and orderly manner,to the satisfaction of the City’s Building Official.All construction waste and debris resulting from a construction,alteration or repair project must be removed on a weekly basis by the contractor or property owner.Existing or temporary portable bathrooms must be provided during construction.Portable bathrooms must be placed in a location that will minimize disturbance to the surrounding property owners,to the satisfaction of the City’s BuildingOfficial. 22. 23.Construction projects that are accessible from a street right-of-way or an abutting propertyandwhichremaininoperationorexpecttoremaininoperationforover30calendardaysmustprovidetemporaryconstructionfencing,as defined in Rolling Hills Estates Municipal Code Section 17.56.050(C).Unless required to protect against a safety hazard,temporaryconstructionfencingmaynotbeerectedsoonerthan15daysprior to commencement of construction. 24.Hours of construction must be in conformance with Rolling Hills Estates Municipal CodeSection8.32.210,and as follows:Monday through Friday 7:00 AM and 5:00 PM andSaturday9:00 AM and 5:00 PM daily.Construction activities are not allowed at any timeonSundaysandholidays.No queuing of trucks or arrival of construction materials and/or workers to a construction site is permitted outside the above listed construction hours and days. Ail deliveries of commercial goods and supplies:trash pick-up (including the use of parkinglottrashsweepers);and the operation of machinery or mechanical equipment that emitsnoiselevelsinexcessof65dBAisonlyallowedbetweenthehoursof7:00 AM and 7:00 PM daily. Per Rolling Hills Estates Municipal Code Section 8.20.120,the City of Rolling Hills EstatesmaintainsanexclusivefranchiseagreementwithWasteManagement,for the collectionof solid waste,recycling,and green waste services for residential and non-residential properties,as well as for the collection of construction-relate d generated waste forresidentialandnon-residential projects.Ail bins maintained on private property and/or anybinsplacedinthePublicRightofWay,with benefit of an encroachment permit duringconstructionactivities,must be contracted through Waste Management.Service may becoordinatedbycontactingWasteManagementat(800)774-0222. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF ANY GRADING PERMIT,the applicant will submit gradingplans,building plans,and specifications to the City’s Community DevelopmentDepartmentthatrequirethatozoneprecursoremissionsfromconstructionequipmentvehiclesmustbecontrolledbymaintainingequipmentenginesingoodconditionandinpropertunepermanufacturer’s specifications.The equipment maintenance records and equipment design specifications data sheets must be submitted to the City and verified bytheCity's Community Development Department,and must be kept on site by the projectcontractorduringconstructionactivities(MM-AQ-1). For construction activities that occur during the nesting bird season (January 1st throughJuly31stforraptorsandFebruary1stthroughAugust31stforother avian species),theapplicantwillsubmitapre-construction nesting bird survey to the City’s CommunityDevelopmentDepartmentPRIORTOPROJECTCONSTRUCTION.The pre-constructionnestingbirdsurveymustbeconductedbyaqualifiedbiologistforavianspeciestodeterminethepresence/absence,location,and status of any active nests on or adjacenttotheareaproposeddevelopmentarea.The survey must be conducted for active nests,eggs,and young of any bird species protected by the state or federal Endangered SpeciesActs,Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA),and/or the California Fish and Game Code 25. 26. 27. 28. B-181 (CFGC)Sections 3503,3503.5,or 3511,within 200 feet of the disturbance zone for songbirds,or within 500 feet of the disturbance zone for raptors and special-status bird species.To avoid the destruction of active nests and to protect the reproductive success of birds protected by the MBTA and the CFGC,a nesting bird survey should be conducted no more than three (3)days prior to the commencement of project construction if construction occurs between January 1st and August 31st.In the event that active nests are discovered,a suitable buffer (distance to be determined by the biologist)must be established around such active nests,and no construction activities within the buffer will be allowed,until the biologist has determined that the nest(s)is no longer active (i.e.,the nestlings have fledged and are no longer dependent on the nest)(MM-BIO-2). That ail applicable Mitigation Measures from the General Plan Final Environmental Report, as identified in the attached Addendum (Exhibit A),must be completed to the satisfaction of the responsible Department/agency. 29. Public Works PRIOR TO CONDUCTING WORK IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY ON NORRIS DRIVE,such as for curb cuts,dumpsters,temporary improvements and/or permanent improvements,the applicant must obtain an encroachment permit from the Public Works Director. Silver Spur Road is within the City of Rancho Palos Verdes’jurisdiction at this locationadjacenttotheprojectsite.PRIOR TO CONDUCTING WORK IN THE PUBLIC RIGHTOFWAYONSILVERSPUR,the applicant must obtain the appropriate permits from the City of Rancho Palos Verdes for work in the Silver Spur public right of way. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF ANY GRADING AND/OR BUILDING PERMIT,whichever occurs first,haul route plan must be approved by the Public Works Department. The applicant must construct a street overlay of rubberized asphalt,minimum of 2",and street striping/markings on Norris Center Drive to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director. The applicant must repair and/or relocate public utilities in the public right of way,including the traffic signal infrastructure at the intersection of Deep Valley Drive and Norris Center Drive. The applicant must work with the City Engineer to revise signal timing at the intersection of Norris Center Drive and Deep Valley Drive,as well as Norris Center Drive and Silver Spur Road,to allow adequate time for crossing both intersections,in accordance with California MUTCD speed for older or disabled persons. Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)compliant ramps and truncated domes are required where dictated by the California Building Code and the federal ADA,including but not limited to the Norris Center Drive and Deep Valley Drive intersection. Any damage to sidewalks,curbs,gutters and/or streets as a result of construction willneedtoberepairedorreplacedtothesatisfactionofthePublicWorksDirector. All curb,gutter and sidewalks adjacent to the project on Norris Center Drive must bereplacedtothesatisfactionofthePublicWorksDirector. The south driveway on Norris Center must provide right-in/right-out access only. For a project that will disturb more than one acre of land,PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OFBUILDINGORGRADINGPERMITS,the applicant must provide proof that a State Construction Activity Permit has been obtained.The Project WDID number must beprominentlyplacedonthegradingplanandthefoundationplanfortheProject.A copy oftheStormwaterPollutionPreventionPlan(SWPPP)for the Project must be submitted to the City Engineer for review prior to the start of construction at the site.The applicant must enroll electronically through the SMARTS program to comply with the State of California General Construction Permit. This Project is a priority project under the terms of the City of Rolling Hills Estates adoptedNPDESMS4Permit.PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMITS the applicant’s engineer must prepare a Low Impact Development Plan (LID)for the Project addressingpollutantsgeneratedbytheprojectandspecifyingthetreatmentmethodsproposedtothosepollutantstotheMaximumExtentPracticable.Once approved by the City 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. remove B-182 of Rolling Hills Estates,a copy of the maintenance covenant must be recorded with the County Recorder’s Office. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF A GRADING AND/OR BUILDING PERMIT,the applicant must post a security bond In an amount to be determined by the City in an amount sufficient to pay for repairs caused by any damage to public streets or other facilities.Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy,the applicant will also be responsible for repair of any broken or damaged curb,street,gutter or other utility or public improvements or demolition permits resulting from any construction activity. 42. 43.PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A GRADING PERMIT,the applicant must submit a surety grading improvement bond with the valuation to be determined by the City Engineer upon submittal of the engineering cost estimate of grading and installation of the drainage devices,as described in the approved plan. A Geotechnical Study Report must be prepared for review and approval by a Soils Engineer and is required PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF STRUCTURAL CONSTRUCTION. 44. 45.Pad certification by the Design Civil Engineer and Soil Engineer is required PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF STRUCTURAL CONSTRUCTION. A final compaction report prepared by a qualified Soil Engineer must be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF STRUCTURAL CONSTRUCTION. 46. 47.All grading and excavation must be observed and documented by the project Geotechnical Engineer,who must verify that the excavation,grading,subdrainage,backfill,compaction, and related operations are executed by the site construction personnel in conformance with the provisions of the approved Geotechnical Report.Any deficiencies noted must be brought to the attention of the grading contractor and the City Engineer.Such observations,verifications,related tests,and other pertinent documentation must be submitted in writing to the City Engineer. The applicant must provide a Hydrology Report prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer that shows no increase in flow for a 24-hour,25-year storm (50-year storm in sumps) between existing and proposed conditions.The report must meet the requirements of the latest Los Angeles County Hydrology Manual. The applicant must submit Improvement Plans prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer for public works (off-site)improvements,and on-site improvements.Plan check fees must be paid in advance. 48. 49. 50.An on-site Grading and Drainage Plan must be prepared and submitted to the City Engineer for approval.The Plan must be a minimum 24"x 36"with elevations to the nearest 0.01-foot,minimum scale 1”=20’.The Plan must be prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer.Public works improvements may be shown on this Plan.Plan check fees must be paid in advance. 51.The horizontal and vertical alignment for the Project’s access driveway must satisfy requirements of the County of Los Angeles Fire Department and the City Engineer.The applicant must obtain all applicable permits from County of Los Angeles Fire Department. At the northwest corner of Norris Center Drive and Deep Valley Drive,the applicant must dedicate sufficient right-of-way at the corner to accommodate the curb ramp and traffic signal appurtenances. 52. Fire 53.Access must comply with Section 503 of the Fire Code,which requires all weather access. All weather access may require paving. Vehicular access must be provided and maintained serviceable throughout construction to all required fire hydrants.All required fire hydrants must be installed,tested and accepted prior to construction. 54. 55.This property is located within the area described by the Fire Department as "Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone”(formerly Fire Zone 4).A “Fuel Modification Plan”must be submitted and approved prior to final map clearance.(Contact the Fuel Modification unit. B-183 Fire Station #32,605 North Angeleno Avenue,Azusa,CA 91702-2904,Phone (626)969- 5205,for details) Provide Fire Department or City approved street signs and building access numbers prior to occupancy. 56. County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS,the applicant must submit an area study to the LA County Sanitation District to determine if capacity is available in the proposed and existing sewerage system servicing this Project.If the system is found to have insufficient capacity,upgrade of the proposed and existing sewerage system is required to the satisfaction of LA County Sanitation District.As part of the area study,the applicant must obtain a Will Serve letter from the Los Angeles County Sanitation District for the discharge of sewer into the sewers trunk line. All costs associated with any necessary sewer infrastructure improvements required to serve the development will be borne by the applicant. 57. 58. California Water Service The applicant must provide modeled analysis of the existing water system in the Project area to determine;(a)if the system can provide the domestic needs of the Project;and (b)if the system can provide the fire flow required by the Fire Code.California Water Systems (Cal Water) has current information for the water system in the Project vicinity. All costs associated with the development of the analysis will be borne by the applicant. The applicant must provide a completed Cal Water Form 1318 to assist in determining whether system upgrades will be required to serve the Project. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF ANY BUILDING PERMIT,the applicant must obtain a Will Serve letter from the California Water Service. All costs associated with any necessary water infrastructure improvements required to serve the development will be borne by the applicant. 59. 60. 61. Southern California Edison PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF ANY BUILDING PERMIT,the applicant must obtain a Will Serve letter from Southern California Edison. All costs associated with any necessary electrical infrastructure improvements required to serve the development will be borne by the applicant. 62. 63. Southern California Gas PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF ANY BUILDING PERMIT,the applicant must obtain a Will Serve letter from Southern California Gas. All costs associated with any necessary natural gas infrastructure improvements required to serve the development will be borne by the applicant. 64. 65. SECTION 5.Severability.If any section,subsection,subdivision,sentence,clause,phrase, portion of this resolution is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction,such decision will not affect the validity of the remainder of thisresolution.The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this resolution,and each and every section,subsection,subdivision,sentence,clause,phrase,or portion thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections,subsections,subdivisions,sentences,clauses,phrases, or portions thereof is declared invalid or unconstitutional. SECTION 6.Certification and Record of Proceedings.The City Clerk is directed to certify the adoption of this Resolution and to keep a copy of same along with such other documents and records of proceedings as may be designated by the City Manager. or ADOPTED this 12th day of November 2024. B-184 SCHMITZ,MayorVELVE ATTEST: LAUF^EN PE'ITIT,CiT^f CLERK 1 HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution No.2588 was adopted by the City Council of the City of Rolling Hills Estates at a regular meeting held thereof on the 12th day of November 2024, by the following vote: AYES:BROWN SCHACHTER,HUFF,SCHMITZ,STEGURA,ZERUNYAN NOES:NONE ABSENT:NONE ABSTAIN:NONE caCAJcM^- LAUREN PETTIT,CITY CLERK B-185 B-186 Vestar Apartments Project Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update Environmental Impact Report Prepared for: City of Rolling Hills Estates Community Development Department 4045 Palos Verdes Drive North Rolling Hills Estates,CA 90274 Prepared by: Michael Baker INTERNATIONAL 3760 Kilroy Airport Way,Suite 270 Long Beach,California 90806 July 2024 B-187 This page intentionally left blank. B-188 Vestar Apartments ProjectTableofContents Table of Contents 1-1CHAPTER1;PURPOSE AND BACKGROUND Applicability and Use of an Addendum Format of this Addendum Summary of Findings Lead Agency and Discretionary Approvals 1-11.1 1-21.2 1-21.3 1-31.4 2-1CHAPTER2:PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2-1OverviewofGeneralPlanUpdate and EIR2.1 2-42.2 Proposed Project 3-1CHAPTER3:EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AESTHETICS AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES AIR QUALITY BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES CULTURAL RESOURCES ENERGY GEOLOGY AND SOILS GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY LAND USE AND PLANNING MINERAL RESOURCES NOISE POPULATION AND HOUSING PUBLIC SERVICES PARKS AND RECREATION TRANSPORTATION TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS—WATER SUPPLY....3-822 3-855 3-877 3-31. 3-72. 3-93. 3-164. 3-225. 3-276. 3-307. 3-378. 3-459. 3-5110. 3-5711. 3-5912. 3-6113. 3-6514. 3-6715. 3-7116. 3-7417. 3-7918. 19. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS—WASTEWATER UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS—SOLID WASTE . UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS—ENERGY AND TELECOMMUNICATIONSINFRASTRUCTURE 20. 21. 22. 3-900 3-9223.WILDFIRE Environmental Determination 3-99 4-1CHAPTER4:MITIGATION MEASURES 5-1CHAPTER5:LIST OF PREPARERS July 2024AddendumtotheRollingHillEstatesGeneralPlanUpdate EIR Page I B-189 Table of Contents Vestar Apartments Project List of Figures and Tables Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Project Location Map Site Plan -Level 1 Site Plans -Levels 2 and 3 Site Plans -Levels 4 and 5 2-6 2-7 2-8 2-9 Table AQ-1 Comparison Between Proposed Project And GPU EIR’s Medium Scale Representative Project Consistency With Statewide Energy Plans Consistency With The 2022 Scoping Plan:AB 32 Inventory Sectors Consistency With The 2020-2045 RTP/SCS Consistency With The Climate Action Plan 3-11 Table ENE-1 Table GHG-1 Table GHG-2 Table GHG-3 3-29 3-39 3-40 3-42 Addendum to the Rolling Hill Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page ii B-190 Vestar Apartments ProjectTableofContents Acronyms and Abbreviations Assembly Bill accessory dwelling unit South Coast Air Basin Best Management Practice below market rate California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection California Green Building Standards Code Climate Action Plan California Air Resources Board California Building Code California Code of Regulations California Department of Fish and Wildlife Commercial District Mixed-Use California Environmental Quality Act Commercial-General Mixed Use City of Rolling Hills Estates Congestion Management Program California Public Utilities Commission Environmental Impact Report electric vehicle Federal Transit Administration greenhouse gas Rolling Hills Estates General Plan UpdateRollingHillsEstatesGeneralPlanUpdate Environmental Impact Report Habitat Conservation Plan Hazard Mitigation Plan health risk assessment initial Study Joint Water Pollution Control Plant Los Angeles County Fire Department Los Angeles Department of Transportation Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department Low Impact Development Less than Significant Impact Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Maximum efficiency rating value Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority mitigation measure Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Natural Community Conservation Plan No Impact National Pollution Discharge Elimination System ozone Governor’s Office of Planning and Research Occupational Safety and Health Administrationfineparticulatematter2.5 microns or less in diameter respirable particulate matter 10 microns or less in diameter Public Resources Code AB ADU Air Basin BMP BMR CAL FIRE CALGreen CAP CARB CBC CCR CDFW CDMU CEQA CGMU City CMP CPUC EIR EV FTA GHG GPU GPU EIR HCP HMP HRA IS JWPCP LACoFD LADOT LASD LID LTS LTS-M MERV Metro MM MMRP NCCP Nl NPDES O3 OPR OSHA PM2.5 PM10 PRC July 2024AddendumtotheRollingHillEstatesGeneralPlanUpdate EIR Page iii B-191 Table of Contents Vestar Apartments Project PVLD PVPTA PVPUSD Palos Verdes Library District Palos Verdes Peninsula Transit Authority Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified School District City of Rolling Hills Estates City of Rolling Hills Estates Municipal Code Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy Senate Bill Southern California Association of Governments South Coast Air Quality Management District South Central Coastal Information Center Southern California Edison Southern California Gas Company Significant and Unavoidable Impact Transportation Demand Management Urban Water Management Plan U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone vehicle miles traveled RHE RHEMC RTP/SCS SB SCAG SCAQMD SCCIC SCE SoCalGas SU TDM UWMP USFWS VHFHSZ VMT Addendum to the Rolling Hill Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page iv B-192 Vestar Apartments ProjectChapter1:Purpose and Background CHAPTER 1: PURPOSE AND BACKGROUND The City of Rolling Hills Estates (City)has prepared this addendum to the City’s General Plan Update (GPU)Environmental Impact Report (GPU EIR)(State Clearinghouse No.2021050450) to address the potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed Vestar Apartments Project (Project).This addendum is prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (CEQA)(California Public Resources Code (PRC)Section 21000,et.seq.,as amended)and its implementing guidelines (California Code of Regulations (CCR),Title 14, Section 15000 et.seq.,2016).This addendum has been prepared and will be processed consistent with CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15164. In 2022,the City updated the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan and prepared the GPU EIR to analyze potential citywide impacts,broad policy alternatives,and programmatic mitigation measures associated with the update of the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan.The GPU provided update for the previous General Plan and addressed eight General Plan elements,seven of which are required by State law—Conservation,Housing,Land Use,Mobility,Noise,Open Space and Recreation,and Safety—and an additional Sustainability Element.The GPU incorporated new and updated assumptions,data,and analysis,as well as established an updated long-term vision forthe City overall and the Commercial District in particular.The GPU EIR outlined potential General Plan buildout scenarios and representative projects through the horizon year of 2040. The GPU EIR is a Program EIR as defined by CEQA Guidelines Section 15161 and was prepared in compliance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15168.The City Council certified the Final GPU EIR and adopted the Findings of Fact,Statement of Overriding Considerations,and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)on April 26,2022 (Resolution No. 2496). 1.1 Applicability and Use of an Addendum The City’s intent through preparation of this addendum is to evaluate whether the previously certified CEQA document (GPU EIR),including mitigation measures,is still adequate and valid for purposes of environmental clearance for the proposed Project.CEQA Guidelines Sections15162through15164explainwhensubsequentorsupplementalCEQAdocumentationis required and when an addendum to a previously certified EIR is appropriate.When considering the use of a program EIR with a later activity,“If the agency finds that pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, no subsequent EIR would be required,the agency can approve the activity as being within the scope of the project covered by the program EIR,and no new environmental document would be required.” Pursuant to the provisions of the CEQA Statute and CEQA Guidelines,the City must conduct a fact-based evaluation of proposed changes to a project in order to determine whether further environmental analysis is required,pursuant to PRC Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15162.CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15164 provide that an addendum to a certified Final EIR may be prepared if only minor technical changes or additions are necessary, and none of the following conditions calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred: ●Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions to the EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects: ●Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR due to the involvement an July 2024AddendumtotheRollingHillsEstatesGeneralPlanUpdateEIR Page 1-1 B-193 Chapter 1:Purpose and Background Vestar Apartments Project of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or ●New information of substantial importance,which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the EIR was certified as complete,shows any of the following: o The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the EIR; o Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the EIR; o Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not be feasible would in fact be feasible,and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project,but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative;or o Mitigation measures or alternatives that are considerably different from those analyzed in the EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment,but the project proponent decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164,the City,as the lead agency,has prepared this addendum to confirm that none of the conditions identified in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 and PRC Section 21166(c)have been triggered.For a proposed modified project or related activity,CEQA Guidelines Section 15164 provides that an addendum to a previously certified Final EIR may be prepared if some changes or additions are necessary but none of the conditions described in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR or negative declaration have occurred.The City must consider the whole of the data presented in the GP EIR with the information provided in this addendum and the previously adopted MMRP. 1.2 Format of this Addendum The previously certified GPU EIR serves as the primary environmental compliance document for the project,and this Addendum provides minor changes and additions to the GPU EIR.This addendum should be considered with the full text of the previously certified GPU EIR.All applicable mitigation measures from the GPU EIR would be applicable to the proposed project and,therefore,are incorporated by reference into this addendum and included in Chapter 4.This addendum relies on the use of an Environmental Checklist Form (Checklist),as suggested in CEQA Guidelines Section 15063(d)(3).Per the CEQA Guidelines,an addendum does not need to be circulated for public review but can be included in or attached to the Final EIR prior to making a decision on the project. 1.3 Summary of Findings Based upon the Checklist prepared for the proposed amendments and supporting responses (see Chapter 3),adoption of the proposed Project would not result in substantial changes requiring major revisions to the previously certified GPU EIR.Further,the proposed Project would not result in any new significant environmental impacts that were not discussed in the GPU EIR or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts.No new mitigation measures are required for the proposed Project.Since none of the conditions described in PRC Section 21166 or CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a-b)or Section 15163 requiring preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR have occurred,the City finds that the preparation of an addendum to the GPU EIR is the appropriate CEQA documentation for the proposed Project and that the proposed Project is within the scope of the GPU EIR. Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 1-2 B-194 Vestar Apartments ProjectChapter1:Purpose and Background 1.4 Lead Agency and Discretionary Approvals This addendum and the previously certified GPU EIR are intended to serve as the environmental documentation for the proposed Vestar Apartments Project.The City of Rolling Hills Estates is the lead agency under CEQA and maintains authority to approve the addendum.Discretionary approvals being sought as part of the Vestar Apartments Project include the following: ●Development agreement that will permit bonus level development resulting in a total of 45 dwelling units per acre,per Rolling Hills Estates Municipal Code (RHEMC)Section 17.30.080 through 17.30.090; ●A Commercial District Mixed-Use Development Permit; ●A Precise Plan of Design;and ●Approval of this addendum to the GPU EIR. July 2024AddendumtotheRollingHillsEstatesGenera!Plan Update EIR Page 1-3 B-195 Chapter 1:Purpose and Background Vestar Apartments Project This page intentionally left blank. Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 1-4 B-196 Vestar Apartments ProjectChapter2:Project Description CHAPTER 2: PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2.1 Overview of General Plan Update and EIR The Rolling Hills Estates General Plan is a guidance document that describes the City’s vision as a livable community with excellent services,a strong identity,healthy business opportunities,and a strong and efficient government.Future land use,circulation,housing,conservation,and other decisions in the City are guided by goals and policies set forth in the General Plan.The General Plan is a State-required legal document (Government Code Section 65300)that provides guidance to decision-makers regarding the conservation of resources and the future physical form and character of development in the City.It is the jurisdiction’s official statement regarding the extent and types of development of land and infrastructure that will achieve the community’s physical,economic,social,and environmental goals.The General Plan expresses the City’s goals and articulates the City’s intentions with respect to the rights and expectations of the general public,property owners,community interest groups,prospective investors,and business interests.Although the General Plan consists of individual sections,or elements,that address a specific area of concern,it also embodies a comprehensive and integrated planning approach. In 2022,the City updated the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan and prepared the GPU EIR to analyze potential citywide impacts,broad policy alternatives,and programmatic mitigationassociatedwiththeupdateoftheRollingHillsEstatesGeneralPlan.The GPU provided an update to the previous General Plan and addressed eight General Plan elements,seven of which are required by State law—Circulation,Conservation,Housing,Land Use,Noise,Open Space,and Safety—and an additional Sustainability Element.The GPU incorporated new and updated assumptions,data,and analysis,as well as established an updated long-term vision for the City overall and the Commercial District in particular.The GPU EIR outlined potential General Plan buildout scenarios and representative projects through the horizon year of 2040. The General Plan Planning Area (Planning Area)is the land area addressed by the City's GPU, which encompasses approximately 2,378 acres,including all of the land within City limits (84 percent)and the unincorporated Sphere of Influence (SOI)(16 percent).The boundaries of the Planning Area generally follow the borders of the City.Rolling Hills Estates is essentially a built- out City with only two vacant parcels (other than those designated for open space),a low-density residential parcel and a commercial use parcel.The residential neighborhoods,as well as the parks and recreation areas,in the City are well-established and are not expected to change during the timeline of the GPU. The primary changes incorporated in the GPU included the following: ●Application of a new Commercial District Mixed-Use Overlay to the City’s Commercial District that would allow for a base residential density of 30 dwelling units per acre with an opportunity for a 50-percent density bonus for projects that provide certain community benefits. ●Extension of the existing Mixed-Use Overlay to the properties designated for Commercial Office. ●Redesignation of the property on the northeastern corner of Highridge Road and Armaga Spring Road from Commercial Office to Neighborhood Commercial. ●Redesignation of the Seahorse Riding Club parcel along Crenshaw Boulevard from Commercial Recreation to Neighborhood Commercial. measures July 2024AddendumtotheRollingHillsEstatesGeneralPlanUpdateEIR Page 2-1 B-197 Chapter 2:Project Description Vestar Apartments Project ●Revision to the allowable land uses in the Institutional designation to include affordable residential uses at 1 to 2 units per acre concentrated in small portions of Institutional properties. ●Adjustment of the land use designations of several parcels to match their current uses. *Envisioned change of Silver Spur Road from a four-lane street to a two-lane street, narrowing it to a “main street”scale street,with angled parking (instead of parallel parking), buffered bike lanes,and other amenities ●Envisioned removal of Bart Earle Way (replaced by a rear entry drive aisle to access parking)and provision of the roadway space for development as an addition to existing parcels along the north side of Bart Earle Way. ●Envisioned reconnection of Deep Valley Drive if and when redevelopment of the Promenade Mall site occurs. The GPU was organized around Guiding Principles that were intended to preserve the unique character and identity of Rolling Hills Estates and the neighborhoods that make up the community. The Vision and Guiding Principles of the GPU,along with the City’s required housing goals, together constitute the GPU’s objectives and are as follows: Vision Rolling Hills Estates in 2040 has maintained a rural feel and equestrian identity,while becoming a more vibrant and connected community.The commercial district is an attractive and thriving destination for residents and visitors from the Palos Verdes Peninsula,providing ample opportunities for shopping,outdoor dining,entertainment,and living.Rolling Hills Estates is a model for sustainable practices and is admired for its quality local environment,natural semi-rural setting,and recreational amenities,including trails,parks,and open spaces.Residents and visitors can conveniently walk,ride horses,bike,and take transit to and within the community. Rolling Hills Estates is a family-,youth-,and senior-friendly City,with safe places for people of all ages to gather,play,and learn. Guiding Principles 1.Preserve the community’s distinctive rural character and high quality of life. 2.Improve mobility and emphasize a spectrum of transportation choices. 3.Promote a vibrant commercial district. 4.Maintain equestrian character. 5.Provide quality parks,trails,open spaces,and community facilities. 6.Enhance the public realm and promote quality design. 7.Become a more sustainable city. Housing The Housing Element states that “Meeting the housing needs established by the State of California is an important goal for the City of Rolling Hills Estates.As the population of the State continues to grow and scarce resources decline,it becomes more difficult for local agencies to create adequate housing opportunities while maintaining a high standard of living for ail citizens in the community.State law recognizes that housing needs may exceed available resources and, therefore,does not require that the City's quantified objectives be identical to the identified housing needs.This recognition of limitations is critical,especially during this period of financial uncertainties in both the public and private sectors.” Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 2-2 B-198 Vestar Apartments ProjectChapter2:Project Description Buildout Scenarios and Representative Projects The City developed two (low and high)2040 buildout scenarios for the Planning Area based on the proposed changes to the Land Use Map,the proposed allowable uses and densities,known development/redevelopment interest,and historical and current development trends.Table 2.5-4 of the GPU EIR presented these estimated low and high buildout scenarios.The intent of these two scenarios was to frame the anticipated 2040 buildout of the Planning Area with the low estimate being the least amount of development reasonably anticipated in the Planning Area and the high estimate being the greatest amount reasonably anticipated.These estimates were for planning and analysis purposes only and did not assume the construction or redevelopment of any specific property. The assumptions and calculations used to develop these buildout scenarios were provided in Appendix B of the GPU EIR.In consideration of the Vision Plan for the Commercial District,to provide more context and information and to allow for a more detailed evaluation of potential environmental impacts that could result from buildout of the Commercial District,the City developed three representative projects:small site project,medium site project,and hotel project. These representative projects were not intended to embody all types and scales of projects that could occur in the Commercial District over the course of implementation of the GPU or represent the worst-case or largest projects that could potentially be built.Rather,the representative projects were intended to portray some of the potentially common or anticipated types and scales of potential future projects that could be built in the Commercial District.They were intended for analysis purposes only, to aid the public and decision makers in understanding the potential environmental consequences of implementation of the GPU in general and the Commercial District Vision Plan in particular.The three representative projects are described in the following paragraphs: ●Small Site Project:There are multiple parcels in the Commercial District that are less than one acre.Based on the Commercial District Area Vision Plan,market trends,and recent development applications and patterns in the City,it is conceivable that development/redevelopment of such sized parcels would consist of residential-focused mixed-use buildings with multi-family dwelling units atop of ground floor commercial space.Given the residential density and floor-area ratio limits included in the proposed CD Mixed-Use Overlay,a potential development on a 0.5-to 1-acre parcel would likely consist of 25 to 35 residential units and 2,500 to 5,000 square feet of commercial space. Such a mixed-use building would likely be two to four stories in height with subterranean, surface,and/or tuck-under parking. ●Medium Site Project:In addition to various smaller parcels in the Commercial District developing individually,there is the potential for the consolidation of smaller parcels into project sites of approximately two to three acres.Similarly,some of the large parcels in the Commercial District are underutilized,with surplus land area that could accommodate a mix of uses over two to three acres.Given the market conditions and the need for housing in Southern California,medium-sized project sites could conceivably be developed primarily with multi-family residential uses complemented with commercial space at the ground floor or on a separate pad(s)on the same site (e.g.,ground floor retail/restaurants,stand-alone restaurants,etc.).Considering the residential density and floor-area ratio limits included in the proposed CD Mixed-Use Overlay,a potential development on a two-to three-acre parcel would likely consist of 60 to 125 residential units (depending on the target residential market)and 5,000 to 15,000 square feet of commercial space.Building heights would likely be three to five stories for multi-family and mixed-use buildings and single story for separate retail/restaur ant buildings.Parking could July 2024AddendumtotheRollingHillsEstatesGeneralPlanUpdate EIR Page 2-3 B-199 Chapter 2:Project Description Vestar Apartments Project be provided in subterranean levels,tuck-under parking at the ground level,surface lots, or a combination thereof. ●Hotel Project:This representative project is based on the development interest that the City has seen from the hotel industry in recent years.Given the lack of hotels on the Palos Verdes Peninsula,a boutique or select-service hotel is a potentially complimentary use to the existing mix of uses in the Commercial District and could satisfy an existing unmet demand on the Peninsula.Based on past applications/preliminary plans for such uses,a hotel project in the commercial district would likely consist of 75 to 125 rooms,with services that could include banquet facilities,conference/meeti ng rooms, a restaurant/bar, and various guest amenities (e.g.,fitness center,pool, cafe,continental breakfast space, business center,etc.).Such a hotel would likely require a two-to three-acre site and would likely be three to six stories in height with subterranean and/or surface parking. 2.2 Proposed Project The City is processing an application for the development of a 90-unit apartment building on a two-acre site (Assessor Parcel Number 7589-005-020)located northwest of the Norris Center Drive and Silver Spur Road intersection.Refer to Figure 1 for a map of the Project Site and regional location.The Project Site is located within the City's Commercial-General Mixed Use District and is currently occupied by a vacant one-story 7,000-square-foot building that would be demolished to accommodate the Project. The Project would be constructed as a 5-story podium structure,consisting of approximately 206,500 square feet.Levels 1 and 2 would feature 240 above-grade parking spaces,and Levels 3 through 5 would consist of the 90 proposed residential units.Each residential unit would include a 60-square-foot private deck.On Level 1,the Project would also provide 3,600 square feet of lobby/leasing space and 1,175 square feet of open space.In addition.Level 3 would feature the proposed podium consisting of 11,225 square feet of outdoor open space with a pool,lounge seating,dining areas,fireplaces/firepits,barbeques,and an outdoor kitchen,as well as 3,500 square feet of indoor recreational amenities.Refer to Figures 2 through 4 for level-specific site plans. Of the 90 proposed residential units,60 units are allowed according to the base density for the zone with the remaining 30 units allowed with the bonus level development.Of the 60 proposed base density units,15 percent (i.e.,9 units)would be below market rate (BMR)units for moderate- income households. Of the 240 parking spaces,85 spaces on Level 1 would be shared public/private parking.The Project would also improve the connectivity around the Project Site by adding a sidewalk along the southwestern portion of the Project Site to connect the Project to the neighboring shopping center. In exchange for providing such community benefits,the project is eligible for bonus level development through the City’s Bonus Level Development Program.This Program was created through Ordinance No.744,adopted by the City Council on October 11,2022,which made amendments to Municipal Code Chapter 17.30 (Commercial-General District)to establish a process for providing bonus level development (i.e.,greater density and potential increase and reduction in other development standards)in exchange for a project providing desirable community amenities or benefits as defined on a Council adopted list.The Project proposes a 50- percent residential density bonus of 15 units per acre based on a base density of 30 units per acre,which would result in a total density of 45 units per acre for the Project Site.The Project would include the following incentives/concessions: ●Height Increase:To provide 1 additional story for a total of 5 stories; July 2024AddendumtotheRollingHillsEstatesGeneralPlanUpdate EIR Page 2-4 B-200 Vestar Apartments ProjectChapter2:Project Description ●Lot Coverage Increase;To exceed the maximum allowable 35-percent lot coverage for a total of 67-percent lot coverage; ●Open Space Reduction;To reduce the requirement of 300 square feet of open space per unit to a total of 197.78 square feet of open space per unit. On March 12,2024,the City Council conducted a preliminary review of the community benefits and amenities proposed by the Applicant and determined that they qualified for bonus level development under the City’s Bonus Level Development Program,thus confirming the Project description for environmental review purposes. Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 2-5 B-201 MILES Vestar Apartments Project Project Location IVIap Figure 1Source:City of Rolling Hills Estates,2017; Dyett &Bhatia,2017;Miciiael Baker International- Page 2-6 B-202 Vestar Apartments Project Site Plan -Level 1 Source:MVE +Partners,Inc.Figure 2 IIPage2-7 B-203 Vestar Apartments Project Site Plans -Levels 2 and 3 Figure 3Source:MVE +Partners,Inc. Page 2-8 B-204 Vestar Apartments Project Site Plans -Levels 4 and 5 Source:MVE +Partners,Inc.Figure 4 Page 2-9 B-205 Vestar Apartments ProjectChapter2:Project Description Relationship of the Project to the General Plan and GPU EIR The Project Site is designated as Commercial General and Commercial District Mixed-Use Overlay in the General Plan and is zoned Commercial-General Mixed Use (CGMU or Commercial District).These land use designations also apply to the rest of the City’s main commercial area along Silver Spur Road.The CGMU zoning establishes a maximum floor area ratio of 2.5,desired building form of 3-5 stories,and maximum allowable residential density of 30 dwelling units per acre,plus opportunities for a density bonus up to 45 dwelling units per acre. As described in the GPU,while commercial uses remain the dominant land use in the CGMU District,the area has seen changes over the past few decades with the redevelopment of certain parcels with residential mixed-use projects.In addition to increasing market demands for residential development in this area,the City also needs to satisfy the State-mandated regional housing needs allocation (RHNA)of 191 units for the 6th Cycle Housing Element.Of this,123 units must fall in the very low-and low-income categories.While not an obligation to build,the State mandates that the City provide an opportunity for developers to satisfy the RHNA allocation. Based on the General Plan 2040 outreach results,the Commercial District is one of the primary areas identified to absorb this residential gro\Arth.The Project’s proposed 90 residential units within the CGMU District would help the City meet its 6*^Cycle RHNA allocation. The GPU’s Commercial District Area Vision Plan strives to achieve the following: ●Encourage mixed-use development in the Commercial District that has neighborhood serving retail,housing,offices,dining, hotels,entertainment,and other compatible uses to foster a walkable mixed-use district that caters to all ages and ensures there is something for everyone to enjoy. ●Create a vibrant and walkable mixed-use community by reorganizing the scale and connectivity of the Commercial District to support a pedestrian-oriented environment. ●Focus infill development on vacant and underutilized lots,bringing new uses with ground floor retail and several stories of housing on upper floors.Housing encourages people to remain in the area in the evenings and on weekends and support retail hours during those times as well. ●Create an environment to attract desired residential and nonresidential developments by making changes to standards and providing incentives that are responsive to findings in the market and parking study. ●Improve street frontages along Silver Spur Road and Deep Valley Drive to create a walkable downtown streetscape character and environment lined by mixed-uses. ●Reopen Deep Valley Drive as a through street and reestablishing it as a public vehicular street,thus connecting Town and Country to the Peninsula Center. ●Strive to create a more traditional block and street pattern with pedestrian paths or new streets added to connect through large blocks. ●Provide pedestrian connectivity through parking areas and across streets by including continuous sidewalks lined by trees for comfort and shade and clearly demarcated crosswalks for pedestrian safety. ●Create a two-sided commercial street along Silver Spur Road with shopping,dining,and residential units and both sides facing a traditional main street and ample room for people, bikes,and automobiles to use the space as well. 2.2.1 July 2024AddendumtotheRollingHillsEstatesGeneralPlanUpdateEIR Page 2-10 B-206 Chapter 2:Project Description Vestar Apartments Project ●Provide a central gathering space as the hub of the Commercial District,which is programmed with public events and activities. The GPU’s Commercial District Area Vision Plan identifies five development opportunityoneofwhichincludestheProjectSite.Under existing conditions,the opportunity area thatencompassestheProjectSitehassurplus parking and a high minimum parking requirement.Theexistingbuildingsinthisopportunityarea,minimal landscaping,and large parking lots do notsupportawalkable experience or provide pedestrian gathering spaces.With implementation oftheProject,the opportunity area would include improved and added sidewalks,landscaping,andpedestriangatheringspaces.In addition,the Project would replace the existing structure andlargesurfaceparkingareaswithabuilding that would front the internal streets and hide parkinginthebuildingtomakethe street feel safer and more attractive.The proposed building andshadetreeswouldprovideshadeandactasawalltothestreet,framing the space and providingpedestriansamoreaesthetically-pleasing environment.This embodies one of the keycharacteristicsofthedevelopmentenvisionsforthisopportunityareaastheproposedbuildingwouldframetheentranceintothedevelopmenttomakeitwalkable.Based on its proposed designandprovisionofaffordablehousingunitsandsharedparking,the Project would be consistent withtheGeneralPlanlandusedesignationforthesiteandwouldfulfillthevisionoftheCommercial District Vision Plan and the identified opportunity area, in addition,the GPU EIR’s medium site representative project would occur on a two-to three-acreparcelandwouldlikelyinclude60to125residentialunits.Building heights for multi-familybuildingswouldlikelybethreetofivestories,and parking could be provided in subterranean levels,tuck-under parking at the ground level,surface lots,or a combination thereof.Based the proposed development and scale, the Project would be considered a medium site project. Based on the discussion above,the purpose of this addendum to the GPU EIR is to evaluate the environmental effects associated with the proposed Project and to determine whether theseimpactsareconsistentwiththeevaluationpresentedintheGPUEIRincompliancewithCEQAandtheStateCEQAGuidelines. areas new on Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 2-11 B-207 Vestar Apartments ProjectChapter2:Project Description This page intentionally left blank. July 2024AddendumtotheRollingHillsEstatesGeneralPlanUpdateEIR Page 2-12 B-208 Chapters:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project CHAPTERS: EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS The following evaluation assesses the environmental impacts of the proposed Project in relationtotheanalysisprovidedintheGPUEIR.Determinations are made as to whether the proposedProjectwouldresultinnewsignificantimpactsorsubstantiallymoresevereeffects,which wouldtriggertheneedforaSubsequentorSupplementalEIR. For each threshold identified below, the following questions are addressed and discussed in thenarrativeforeachissuearea: ●What is the impact conclusion of the Project? For each impact identified below,a level of significance of the impact is provided.Whilethecriteriafordeterminingsignificantimpactsareuniquetoeachissuearea,theenvironmentalanalysisappliesauniformclassificationoftheimpactsbasedonthefollowingdefinitionsconsistentwithCEQAanditsimplementingCEQAGuidelines: No Impact (NI)- A designation of no impact is given when no changes in theenvironmentwouldoccur. Less-than-Significant Im pact (LTS)- A less-than-significant impact wouldsubstantialadversechangeintheenvironment. Less-than-Significant Impact with Mitigation (LTS-M)- A less-than-significantimpactwithmitigationincorporatedavoidssubstantialadverseimpactsontheenvironmentwithadherencetoidentifiedmitigationmeasures.For those issue areas where the impact of the proposed project would be less than significant with theincorporationofthesamemitigationmeasure(s)identified in the GPU EIR,the impactisidentifiedasLTS-M(GP).The number of the mitigation measure from the GPU EIR MMRP will be referenced and summarized in Chapter 4. Significant and Unavoidable Impact (SU)- A significant unavoidable impact wouldcauseasubstantialadverseeffectontheenvironment,and no feasible mitigationmeasureswouldbeavailabletoreducetheimpacttoalessthansignificantlevel. ●What is the GPU EIR impact conclusion? The issues that were found to be either less than significant or were found to have impact in the Initial Study (IS)prepared for the GPU and were,therefore,excluded fromfurtheranalysisintheGPUEIR,are identified with “(IS)"after the impact conclusion. ●Does the Project involve new significant impacts or substantially more severe impactsthanthose analyzed in the GPU EIR? ●Are there any new or changed circumstances involving new significant impacts orsubstantiallymoresevere impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? ● Is there any new information of substantial importance that was not and could not have been known at the time of certification of the GPU EIR that rises to the level of requiringnewanalysisorverification? ●Are any new mitigation measures required for the Project? cause no no Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-1 B-209 Vestar Apartments ProjectChapter3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts This page intentionally left blank. July 2024AddendumtotheRollingHillsEstatesGeneralPlanUpdateEIR Page 3-2 B-210 Chapter 3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Any New Information of Substantial Importance That Was Not and Could Not Have Been Known at the Time of Certification of the GPU EIR that Rises to the Level of Requiring New Analysis or Verification? Any New or Changed Circumstances Involving New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Are Any New Mitigation Measures Required for the Project? GPU EIR Impact Conclusion Issues and Supporting Data Sources: Project Impact Conclusion 1.AESTHETICS. Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section 21099,would the project: a)Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?LTS LTS No No No No b)Substantially damage scenic resources,including,but not limited to,trees,rock outcroppings,and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? Nl (IS)Nl No No No No c)In non-urbanized area, substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings?(Public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage point).If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality? LTS LTS No No No No Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-3 B-211 I Vestar Apartments ProjectChapter3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Any New Information of Substantial Importance That Was Not and Could Not Have Been Known at the Time of Certification of the GPU EIR that Rises to the Level of Requiring New Analysis or Verification? Any New or Changed Circumstances Involving New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Are Any New Mitigation Measures Required for the Project? GPU EIR Impact Conclusion Issues and Supporting Data Sources: Project Impact Conclusion d)Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? NoNoNoNoLTSLTS(IS) Discussion: a)Would the Project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? As described in the GPU EIR.scenic vistas in the Planning Area consist of the scenic corridors and roadways with views of the Pacific Ocean and the Los Angeles Basin,open spaces and equestrian trails,and natural hillsides and canyons.The GPU continues to regulate development in the Planning Area and contains updated policies related to the preservation and enhancement of scenic views.Areas of land use intensification identified in the GPU would occur along the City-designated scenic corridors but are primarily where development has already taken place.Accordingly,implementation of the GPU was not anticipated to result in ainareas substantial change in views,including those related to the height,bulk,and mass of the existing development,from Silver Spur Road, Crenshaw Boulevard,and Hawthorne Boulevard.Any future development under the GPU would remain to be subject to development and planning review and must,therefore,conform to zoning and other ordinances regarding aesthetic qualities,such as landscaping, building setbacks,hillside protection,signage,and lighting.Due to the siting and nature of the proposed land use changes,and policies that guide new development to minimize impact on scenic corridors and other scenic resources,the GPU EIR determined that impacts related to scenic vista within the Planning Area would be less than significant. When considering the representative projects,there are no additional or different environmental impacts beyond those described above resulting from the overall buildout of the GPU.Since the representative projects are a subset of buildout of the proposed GPU and the total buildout of the GPU has been determined to result in a less-than-significant impact on the scenic vistas within the Planning Area,future development activity,such as the representative projects,would also result in less-than-siqnificant impacts on scenic July 2024AddendumtotheRollingHillsEstatesGeneralPlanUpdate EIR Page 3-4 B-212 Chapter 3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project vistas.As described above in Section 2.2,the Project would be considered a medium size representative project;therefore,the Projectwouldresultinless-than-significant impacts on scenic vistas. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposedProjectwouldoccurorworsentheless-than-signifIcant impacts identified in the GPU EIR.Likewise,there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification.The Project does not propose substantial changes that require majorrevisionstotheGPUEIR,and no new mitigation measures are required, b)Would the Project substantially damage scenic resources,including,but not limited to,trees,rock outcroppings,andhistoricbuildingswithinastatescenichighway? As determined through the Notice of Preparation/Scoping process (i.e..Initial Study)conducted prior to the preparation of the GPU EIR,there are no State scenic highways or State-designated or eligible highways in the Planning Area.Accordingly,as determined intheInitialStudy,impacts related to scenic resources or State scenic highways would not occur,and no further analysis of this issue was necessary in the GPU EIR.Therefore,as with the determination in the GPU EIR,development of the proposed Project in thePlanningAreawouldhavenoimpacttoscenicresourcesorStatescenichighways. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposedProjectwouldoccurorchangethenoimpactdeterminationidentifiedintheInitialStudy.Likewise,there is no new information ofsubstantialimportancerequiringnewanalysisor verification.The Project does not propose substantial changes that require majorrevisionstotheGPUEIR,and no new mitigation measures are required, c)In non-urbanized area,would the Project substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views ofthesiteanditssurroundings?(Public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage point).If theprojectIs in an urbanized area,would the Project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governingquality? As described in the GPU EIR,implementation of the GPU does not involve substantial changes to land use or building design for mostneighborhoodswithinthePlanningAreaandincludesprovisionstopreserveorimprovetheexistingvisualcharacterofthePlanningArea.Land use designations and policies in the GPU would direct new development into under-utilized or previously developedwhereanyproposedchangesinlanduseandphysicaldesignareintendedtoincreasevisualquality.The GPU’s policies also seek to ensure that any development or redevelopment observe design guidelines to ensure visual compatibility with the surroundingenvironment.Even with increased density,any future development under the GPU would be of a scale consistent with existingstructuresandsurroundingproperties(e.g,,height of three to five stories and setback)and contain architectural elements that would blend with the existing buildings in the area.Any future development under the GPU would continue to be subject to the City’sdevelopmentstandards,as well as the City’s Precise Plan of Design regulations.Accordingly,aesthetic impacts of any futuredevelopmentundertheGPU,particularly in the Commercial District,related to consistency with development standards and otherplans,policies,and regulations would be considered less than significant.The GPU EiR also determined that the GPU would have a beneficial impact in some areas with respect to aesthetics and visual quality,particularly in the Commercial District.Therefore,the proposed Project is representative of a medium size project,which,as described in the GPU EIR,was assumed to reach heights of scenic areas Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-5 I B-213 I Vestar Apartments ProjectChapters:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts three to five stories.The proposed Project would be constructed to five stories and is located within one of the City’s most urbanized, commercial areas.As the GPU EIR notes,the Commercial District is currently developed and devoid of any natural features and is an urbanized area of the City.Any future development resulting from the proposed GPU would be consistent with surrounding development and similar in terms of type,height,and mass to other existing,multi-story buildings in the area.The proposed Project would result in less-than-significant impacts related to visual quality and consistency with development standards and other plans, policies,and regulations. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the GPU EIR.Likewise,there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification.The project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR,and no new mitigation measures are required, d)Would the Project create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views In the area? As determined through the Notice of Preparation/Scoping process (i.e..Initial Study)conducted prior to the preparation of the GPU EIR,the GPU would result in intensification of uses In certain portions of the Planning Area that would introduce new sources of nighttime illumination for architectural highlighting,parking,signage and security purposes,as well as new sources of potential glare from window glass.However,the Initial Study determined that impacts related light and glare would be less than significant as any future development would be required to comply with the lighting requirements set forth in the Rolling Hills Estates Municipal Code (RHEMC)and utilize low-reflectivity glass windows and architectural materials,and no further analysis of this issue was necessary in the GPU EIR.Therefore,the proposed Project would be required to comply with such requirements set forth in the RHEMC and,as such,light and glare impacts would be considered less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the GPU EIR.Likewise,there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification.The project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR,and no new mitigation measures are required. July 2024AddendumtotheRollingHillsEstatesGeneralPlanUpdateEIR Page 3-6 B-214 Chapter 3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Any New Information of Substantial Importance That Was Not and Could Not Have Been Known at the Time of Certification of the GPU EIR that Rises to the Level of Requiring New Analysis or Verification? Any New or Changed Circumstances Involving New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Are Any New Mitigation Measures Required for the Project? GPU EIR Impact Conclusion Issues and Supporting Data Sources: Project Impact Conclusion 2.AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a)Convert Prime Farmland,Unique Farmland,or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland),as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency,to non-agricultural use? Nl (IS)Nl No No No No b)Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use,ora Williamson Act contract? Nl (IS)Nl No No No No c)Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of,forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code Section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code Section 4526), or timberland zoned for Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code Section 51104(g))? Nl (IS)Nl No No No No Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-7 B-215 I Vestar Apartments ProjectChapters:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Any New Information of Substantial Importance That Was Not and Could Not Have Been Known at the Time of Certification of the GPU EIR that Rises to the Level of Requiring New Analysis or Verification? Any New or Changed Circumstances Involving New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed In the GPU EIR? New Significant impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Are Any New Mitigation Measures Required for the Project? GPU EIR Impact Conclusion Issues and Supporting Data Sources: Project Impact Conclusion d)Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? No NoNl(IS)Nl No No e)Involve other changes in the existing environment which,due to their location or nature,could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forestland to non forest use? No NoNl(IS)Nl No No Discussion: As determined through the Notice of Preparation/Scoping process (i.e.,Initial Study)conducted prior to the preparation of the GPU EIR,the GPU would have no impacts related to agriculture and forestry resources.The City of Rolling Hills Estates is a suburban/urban area that has limited space for productive agricultural uses,as designated in its current Land Use Element and in the Rolling Hills Estates Zoning Code.The City does not contain any land designated as farmland,Williamson Act contract land,forest lands,or forest- related resources.While the City currently has three distinct areas in the northern and eastern parts of the City that are zoned and/or designated Agricultural,the GPU did not include any changes to existing agricultural zoning.As such,any future development under the GPU would not convert or conflict with the Zoning Code for land zoned for agricultural use, land with Wlliamson Act contracts, farmland,timberland,or forest land,and no impact would occur.Therefore,as a future development under the GPU,the proposed Project would also result in no impact to agricultural and forestry resources. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or change the no impact determinations identified in the Initial Study.Likewise,there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification.The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR,and no new mitigation measures are required. July 2024AddendumtotheRollingHillsEstatesGeneralPlanUpdateEIR Page 3-8 B-216 Chapter 3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Any New Information of Substantial Importance That Was Not and Could Not Have Been Known at the Time of Certification of the GPU EIR that Rises to the Level of Requiring New Analysis or Verification? Any New or Changed Circumstances Involving New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Are Any New Mitigation Measures Required for the Project? Issues and Supporting Data Sources: GPU EIR Impact Conclusion Project Impact Conclusion 3.AIR QUALITY. Where available,the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management district or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations.Would the project: a)Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? S-U LTS-M(GP)No No No No b)Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard? S-U LTS-M(GP)No No No No c)Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? S-U LTS-M(GP)No No No No d)Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people? Nl (IS)LTS No No No No Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates Genera!Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-9 I1 B-217 Vestar Apartments ProjectChapter3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Discussion: a)Would the Project conflict with or obstruct Implementation of the applicable air quality plan? The GPU EIR concluded that the GPU would be inconsistent with the South Coast Air Quality Management District’s (SCAQMD)2016 Air Quality Management Plan (2016 AQMP)because air pollutant emissions associated with the buildout of the City would result in higher emissions of reactive organic gases (ROG),carbon monoxide (CO),sulfur oxides (SOx),coarse particulate matter (PMio),and fine particulate matter (PM2.5)over existing conditions and would increase the City’s population and employment,which was not previously included in the regional planning projections and would potentially cause and increase the frequency or severity of the existing air quality violations. Incorporation of GPU EIR Mitigation Measures MM-AQ-1 and MM-AQ-2 into future development projects during construction and operation would contribute to reduced criteria air pollutant emissions associated with buildout of the GPU.In addition,the goals and policies included in the GPU promote increased capacity for alternative transportation modes and implementation of transportation demand management strategies.Additionally,the GPU EIR quantitively analyzed three representative projects—a small site project, a medium site project,and a hotel project—and concluded that the development of each of the representative projects,when considered individually,would not result in any exceedance of the SCAQMD thresholds that are applied to individual development projects for determining whether a project would result in a significant air quality impact.Accordingly,each of the representative projects would not contribute to any increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations,and,on an individual basis, impacts related to consistency with the 2016 AQMP or with land use planning strategies would be less than significant.However,since implementation of the GPU would introduce land use intensification in certain portions of the Planning Area,no mitigation measures are available that would reduce total air quality emissions from buildout of the GPU to a less-than-significant level.In addition,the population and employment assumptions of the 2016 AQMP would still be exceeded until such time the AQMP is revised and incorporates updated projections that consider the GPU.Therefore,air quality impacts related to the implementation of the AQMP would remain significant and unavoidable. As discussed above and detailed in GPU El R Section 2.5.10,Buildout Scenarios And Representative Projects,the City has developed three representative projects—small site project,medium site project,and hotel project—to provide more context and information and to allow for a more detailed evaluation of potential environmental impacts that could result from buildout of the Commercial District.A medium site project,also refers to as a medium scale representative project,is described as a potential development on a two-to three-acre parcel,likely consisting of 60 to 125 residential units (depending on the target residential market)and 5,000 to 15,000 square feet of commercial space.Building heights would likely be three to five stories for multi-family and mixed-use buildings and single story for separate retail/restaurant buildings.Parking could be provided in subterranean levels,tuck-under parking at the ground level,surface lots,or a combination thereof. The Project is proposing a residential development,comprising a five-story 90-unit apartment building with above-grade parking on a two-acre site.Of the 240 parking spaces provided by the Project,90 spaces on Level 1 would be shared public/private parking (commercial use).As such,the Project falls in the category of the medium site project as defined in the GPU EIR.Table AQ-1 includes modeling assumptions used for a medium scale representative project. July 2024AddendumtotheRollingHillsEstatesGeneralPlanUpdate EIR Page 3-10 B-218 Chapter 3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Table AQ-1 Comparison Between Proposed Project And GPU EIR’s Medium Scale Representative Project GPU EIR Medium Scale Representative Project^Proposed Project^Assumptions Lot Size Three acres Two acres 5-story podium structure with 2 levels of above grade garage contains 240 parking spaces and 3 levels of 90 apartment units. 566-space Unenclosed Parking with Elevator;and 125-unit mid-rise apartments. Land Use 3,000-square-feet high turnover sit down restaurant;5.000-square-feet quality restaurant,and 7,000 square-feet strip mall 1.746 trips on Weekdays,1,725 trips on Saturday,and 1,442 trips on Sunday N/A Daily Trip generation 409 trips per day Demolition Quantities^10,083 tons 893 tons Demolition 29 days 22 days Site Preparation 3 days N/A Construction Duration Grading 26 days 66 days Building Construction 220 days 440 days 22 daysPaving10days Architectural Coating 12 days 22 days N/A=Not Applicable. Notes; 1.Information is found in the GPU EIR. 2,Information is summarized based on site plan, project description,traffic study,and construction and operation questionnaires received from the applicant. 3.Demolition quantities are estimated based on the size of the existing building on-site and CalEEMod user's guide. As shown in Table AQ-1,the Project proposes a smaller development in terms of scale and intensity compared to the development capacity of a medium site project as analyzed in the GPU EIR.The Project would feature fewer dwelling units,fewer parking spaces, fewer daily vehicle trips,and smaller lot size,than the maximum development potential assumed for a medium scale representative project.The Project also proposes a longer construction duration;for the same development size,longer duration of construction activities would lead to lower daily emissions.Additionally,the Project would be constructed after 2024,and would utilize the latest construction equipment available during construction and operation as compared to what were assumed for the medium scale representative project (2022).As such,the air pollutant emissions would be lower than a medium scale representative project as analyzed in the GPU EIR.Furthermore,on December 2,2022,the SCAQMD Governing Board adopted the 2022 AQMP.The 2022 AQMP incorporates the latest scientific and technical information and planning assumptions,including the latest applicable growth assumptions,and updated the emission inventory methodologies for various source categories.As such,the 2022 AQMP has incorporated the updated projections of the GPU.As the Project would be consistent with existing GPU land use designation Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-11 I B-219 I Vestar Apartments ProjectChapter3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts {Commercial General and Commercial District Mixed-Use Overlay)and zoning (Commercial General Mixed-Use District (CGMU))for the site,it is anticipated that the Project would be consistent with the 2022 AQMP.Furthermore,the Project would comply with GPU EIR Mitigation Measure MM-AQ-1,which would reduce criteria air pollutant emissions from construction-related activities.Specifically, Mitigation Measure MM-AQ-1 would require applicants of future development projects to control ozone precursor emissions from construction equipment vehicles by maintaining equipment engines in good condition and in proper tune per manufacturer’s specifications.It should be noted that GPU EIR Mitigation Measure MM-AQ-2 does not apply as the Project is smaller than the medium- scale representative project analyzed in the GPU EIR.Therefore,the Project would result in less-than-significant impacts regarding plan consistency similar to the impacts from a medium scale representative project as analyzed in the GPU EIR. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the significant unavoidable impacts identified in the GPU EIR.Likewise,there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification.The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR,and no new mitigation measures are required. GPU EIR Mitigation Measure MM-AQ-1:The City of Rolling Hills Estate shall require applicants of future development projects that require discretionary grading approval by the Planning Commission to control ozone precursor emissions from construction equipment vehicles by maintaining equipment engines in good condition and in proper tune per manufacturer’s specification.The equipment maintenance records and equipment design specifications data sheets shall be kept on-site by the project contractor during construction activities, b)Would the Project result In a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard? The GPU EIR determined that construction activities associated with future development under the GPU could generate short-term emissions that exceed the SCAQMD’s significance thresholds and would cumulatively contribute to the nonattainment designations of the South Coast Air Basin (Air Basin).Implementation of GPU EIR Mitigation Measures MM-AQ-1 and MM-AQ-2 would reduce criteria pollutant emissions from construction-related activities.Specifically,Mitigation Measure MM-AQ-1 would require applicants of future development projects to control ozone precursor emissions from construction equipment vehicles by maintaining equipment engines in good condition and in proper tune per manufacturer’s specifications;Mitigation Measure MM-AQ-2 would require future development projects that are larger than the representative projects considered in the GPU EIR to conduct project-specific air emissions impacts in compliance with the latest version of the SCAQMD CEQA Guidelines and the latest version of SCAQMD’s Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology document or other appropriate methodology as determined in conjunction with SCAQMD.If such analyses identify potentially significant regional or localized air quality impacts from a future development project,such project would be required to incorporate appropriate mitigation,including the use of Tier 4 equipment during project construction.In addition,policies in the GPU’s Sustainability Element address potential air quality impacts by continuing to participate in regional efforts,reducing local contributions of airborne pollutants to the Air Basin,limiting locating sensitive receptors near pollutant emitting sources when feasible. expanding dust mitigation programs,and creating an air quality monitoring system.In addition,one of the policies of the update to the July 2024AddendumtotheRoilingHillsEstatesGeneralPlanUpdate EIR Page 3-12 B-220 Chapter 3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Land Use Element addresses air quality through maintenance and enhancement of the Planning Area’s open space by preserving and siting appropriate densities to maximize conservation and air quality benefits.All these policies would reduce emissions.However, since implementation of the GPU would introduce land use intensification in certain portions of the Planning Area and possibly future development projects that are larger than the representative projects considered in the GPU EIR,it cannot be determined with certaintythatGPUEIRMitigationMeasuresMM-AQ-1 and MM-AQ-2 would reduce impacts below SCAQMD’s thresholds in all cases. Therefore,the GPU EIR concluded that construction impacts related to the increase of criteria pollutants for which the Air Basin is non attainment would be conservatively considered significant and unavoidable. Similarly,the GPU EIR determined that buildout of the GPU would generate long-term emissions that may exceed SCAQMD’s regional significance thresholds and cumulatively contribute to the non-attainment designations of the Air Basin.Mitigation Measure MM-AQ- 2,in addition to the consistency with the goals and policies of the GPU,would reduce air pollutant emissions to the extent feasible. Specifically,Mitigation Measure MM-AQ-2 would require future development projects that are larger than the representative projects considered in the GPU EIR to conduct project-specific air emissions impacts in compliance with the latest version of the SCAQMD CEQA Guidelines and the latest version of SCAQMD’s Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology document,or other appropriate methodology as determined in conjunction with SCAQMD.if such analyses identify potentially significant regional or localized air quality impacts from a future development project,such project would be required to incorporate appropriate mitigation, including the incorporation of energy-efficient design features beyond those required by Title 24,including the California Green Building Standards (CALGreen)Code;and application of transportation demand management (TDM)measures beyond those required bycode.The measures and policies covering topics,such as expansion of the pedestrian and bicycle networks,installation of electric vehicle (EV) charging stations,and development and implementation of land use policies that promote public and active transit,would also reduce criteria pollutants within the Planning Area.In addition,as discussed above,policies in the GPU’s Sustainability Element and updated Land Use Element would also reduce emissions.However,since implementation of the GPU would introduce land use intensification in certain portions of the Planning Area and possibly future development projects that are larger than the representativeprojectsconsideredintheGPUEIR,it cannot be determined with certainty that Mitigation Measure MM-AQ-2 would reduce impacts below SCAQMD’s thresholds in all cases.As a result and given the total volume of air pollutants attributable to buildout of the GPU, the GPU EIR concluded that operational impacts related to the increase of criteria pollutants for which the Air Basin is non-attainment would be conservatively considered significant and unavoidable. As shown in Table AQ-1 above,the Project would propose a smaller development in terms of scale and intensity than what wasanalyzedintheGPUEIR’s medium scale representative project.Therefore,the maximum daily construction emissions and operational emissions generated by the proposed Project would be lower than the medium scale representative project.As such,the proposed Project would emit less ROG,NOx,CO,SO2,PM10,and PM project,whose emissions were determined would not exceed SCAQMD project-specific thresholds for construction and operation. Moreover,although the Project’s construction phases are slightly different than the medium scale representative project,the proposed Project is a similar project type and,therefore,would use a similar construction equipment mix to what was assumed for the medium scale representative project to generate the maximum daily construction emissions reflected in Table 4.2-6 of the GPU EIR.Also,the dwelling units and square footage proposed by the Project is within the scope of the GPU EiR’s buildout scenarios,as analyzed in the than what was analyzed in GPU EIR's medium scale representative2.5 Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-13 II B-221 I I Vestar Apartments ProjectChapter3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts GPU EIR.Furthermore,the Project would comply with GPU EIR Mitigation Measure MM-AQ-1,which reduce criteria pollutant emissions from construction-related activities (see discussion of Threshold (a)above).As such,the Project would result in less-than- significant impacts in this regard regarding criteria pollutant emissions during construction and operation,similar to the impacts from a medium scale representative project as analyzed in the GPU EIR. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the significant unavoidable impacts identified in the GPU EIR.Likewise,there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification.The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR,and no new mitigation measures are required, c)Would the Project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? The GPU EIR determined that,since construction activities could occur close to existing sensitive receptors (e.g.,residences,schools, playgrounds,childcare centers,athletic facilities,churches,long-term health care facilities,rehabilitation/conva lescent centers,and retirement homes),construction emissions generated by future development projects that are larger than the representative projects considered in the GPU EIR have the potential to exceed SCAQMD localized significance thresholds (LSTs)and that it cannot be determined with certainty that GPU EIR Mitigation Measures MM-AQ-1 and MM-AQ-2 would reduce impacts below SCAQMD’s thresholds in all cases.Therefore,the GPU EIR concluded that,since construction activities associated with individual development projects under the GPU could occur close to existing sensitive receptors,localized construction emissions would potentially expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations and,therefore,would be conservatively considered significant and unavoidable. The GPU EIR determined that the new developments including residential uses,offices,retail,and restaurants under implementation of the GPU would result in very limited operational activities with potential health risks,including landscaping maintenance operations and boilers for restaurants.None of these activities would result in the generation of excessive TAG emissions or associated health risks from the individual development projects’operation.Therefore,the GPU EIR determined that operation associated with the GPU is not anticipated to result in an elevated cancer or other health risk to nearby sensitive receptors,and impacts would be less than significant. As shown in Table AQ-1 above,the Project would propose smaller development in terms of scale and intensity considering the development capacity of a medium site project as analyzed in the GPU EIR.As such,the Project would have fewer localized emissions during construction than what was analyzed in GPU EIR’s medium-sized representative project.Also,the nearest sensitive receptors to the proposed Project Site are residential uses located approximately 240 feet away, which is a greater distance than the assumed 25 meters (approximately 82 feet)used in the GPU EIR’s analysis.The emissions would not exceed SCAQMD LST thresholds for construction.Furthermore,the Project would comply with GPU EIR Mitigation Measure MM-AQ-1,which would reduce criteria pollutant emissions from construction-related activities (see discussion of Threshold (a)above).Therefore,localized construction emissions from the proposed Project would result in less-than-significant impacts. Regarding operations,the proposed mixed-use development would result in very limited operational activities with potential health risks,including landscaping maintenance.The Project does not include uses that result in the generation of excessive TAG emissions July 2024AddendumtotheRollingHillsEstatesGeneralPlanUpdate EIR Page 3-14 B-222 Chapter 3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project or associated health risks from operation.As such,as with the determination in GPU EIR,operation associated with the Project is not anticipated to result in an elevated cancer or other health risk to nearby sensitive receptors,and the impact would be less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the significant unavoidable impacts identified in the GPU EIR.Likewise,there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification.The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EiR,and no new mitigation measures are required, d)Result In other emissions (such as those leading to odors)adversely affecting a substantial number of people? As determined through the Notice of Preparation/Scoping process (i.e..Initial Study)conducted prior to the preparation of the GPU EIR,the residential development and commercial uses associated with GPU buildout do not typically generate objectionable odors that affect a substantial number of people.Accordingly,as determined in the Initial Study,no impacts related to other emissions (such as those leading to odors)would occur,and no further analysis of this issue was necessary in the GPU EIR. Land uses generally associated with odor complaints include agricultural uses (livestock and farming),wastewater treatment plants,food processing plants,chemical plants,composting operations,refineries,landfills,dairies,and fiberglass molding facilities.The Project does not include land uses typically associated with emitting objectionable odors.Potential odor sources associated with the proposed Project may result from construction equipment exhaust and the application of asphalt and architectural coatings during construction activities and the temporary storage of typical solid waste associated with the proposed Project’s (long-term operational) uses.Standard construction requirements would minimize odor impacts from construction.The construction odor emissionswould be temporary,short-term,and intermittent in nature and would cease upon completion of the respective phase of construction;thus, impacts in this regard would be considered less than significant.It is expected that Project-generated refuse would be stored in covered containers and removed at regular intervals in compliance with the City’s solid waste regulations.The proposed Project would also be required to comply with SCAQMD Rule 402 to prevent occurrences of public nuisances,including odors.Therefore,impacts related to odors associated with the proposed Project construction and operations would not occur. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or change the no impact determination identified in the Initial Study.Likewise,there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification.The Project does not propose substantial changes that require majorrevisionstotheGPUEIR,and no new mitigation measures are required. Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-15 I B-223 Vestar Apartments ProjectChapter3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Any New Information of Substantial Importance That Was Not and Could Not Have Been Known at the Time of Certification of the GPU EIR that Rises to the Level of Requiring New Analysis or Verification? Any New or Changed Circumstances Involving New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Are Any New Mitigation Measures Required for the Project? issues and Supporting Data Sources: Project impact Conclusion GPU EIR Impact Conclusion 4.BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Would the project: a)Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications,on any species identified as a candidate,sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans,policies,or regulations,or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? NoNoNoLTS-M(GP)NoLTS-M b)Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans,policies, regulations,or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? NoNoNoNoLTSLTS-M c)Have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including,but not limited to,marsh,vernal pool,coastal, etc.)through direct removal,filling, hydrological interruption,or other means? NoNoNoLTSNoLTS-M July 2024AddendumtotheRollingHillsEstatesGeneralPlanUpdate EIR Page 3-16 B-224 Chapter 3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Any New Information of Substantial Importance That Was Not and Could Not Have Been Known at the Time of Certification of the GPU EIR that Rises to the Level of Requiring New Analysis or Verification? Any New or Changed Circumstances Involving New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed In the GPU EIR? New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Are Any New Mitigation Measures Required for the Project? Issues and Supporting Data Sources: GPU EIR Impact Conclusion Project Impact Conclusion d)Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors,or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? LTS-M LTS-M(GP)No No No No e)Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources,such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? LTS LTS No No No No f)Conflict with the provisions of an adopted habitat conservation plan natural community conservation plan,or other approved local, regional,or state habitat conservationplan? LTS LTS No No No No Discussion: a)Would the Project have a substantial adverse effect,either directly or through habitat modifications,on any speciesidentifiedas a candidate,sensitive,or special status species in local or regional plans,policies,or regulations,or by theCaliforniaDepartmentofFishandWildlife or U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service? As described in the GPU EIR,candidate,sensitive,or special status species that have occurred within the City of Rolling Hills Estatesarelimited to the Palos Verdes blue butterfly,two avian species (coastal California gnatcatcher and least Bell’s vireo),and two plant Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-17 I B-225 Vestar Apartments ProjectChapter3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts species (aphanisma and mesa horkelia).As shown in Figure 4.3-1 of the GPU EIR,these species occur on parcels located throughout the Planning Area.While the change in vegetative land cover and habitats supporting protected species would likely be extremely minimal,there may be isolated habitat disturbance associated with future buildout of the GPU that could impact protected species or their habitat,such as the coastal California gnatcatcher in the western portion of the Planning Area or the Palos Verdes blue butterfly in the northern portion of the Planning Area.Such impacts to protected species and habitats would be reduced through implementation of goals and policies included within the GPU,such as those related to conserving the Planning Area’s natural environment and open space areas and limiting grading and development in areas containing canyons and native vegetation.Although the GPU concluded that impacts to special status species and habitats resulting from buildout of the GPU would be potentially significant,with implementation of the GPU EIR’s Mitigation Measures MM-BIO-1 through MM-BIO-3 (i.e.,preparation of a biological resources assessment and nesting bird and bat surveys conducted on a project-by-project basis),buildout of the GPU would not result in significant impacts to special status species or habitats,as designated by the CDFW or USFWS.Furthermore,with such mitigation measures,impacts on the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species,established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors,and native wildlife nursery sites from adoption of the GPU,which includes the representative projects,would be less than significant. The Project Site is fully developed and located within an urbanized area,and the existing landscaping is limited to ornamental vegetation.The Project would require limited grading and would not require a discretionary approval for grading.In addition,the Project Site does not include critical habitat or existing natural communities and is not identified as an area in which the Palos Verdes blue butterfly,coastal California gnatcatcher,least Bell’s vireo,aphanisma,and mesa horkelia species have occurred.As such,GPU EIR Mitigation Measures MM-BlO-1 and MM-BIO-3 would not be applicable to the Project.GPU EIR Mitigation Measure MM-BIO-2,below, would be applicable to the Project and would require that a qualified biologist conduct a pre-construction nesting bird survey and that a buffer and pause of construction activities be implemented if active nests are discovered.With such mitigation.Project impacts related to special status species or habitats and sensitive biological resources would be less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts with mitigation identified in the GPU EIR.Likewise,there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification.The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR,and no new mitigation measures are required. GPU EIR Mitigation Measure If future development projects that involve vegetation removal,and are not otherwise categorically exempt from CEQA subject to the emergency project statutory exemption from CEQA,are unable to avoid construction activities within nesting bird season (January 1st through July 31st for raptors and February 1st through August 31st for other avian species),a qualified biologist shall conduct a pre-construction nesting bird survey for avian species to determine the presence/absence,location,and status of any active nests on or adjacent to the area proposed development area.The survey shall be conducted for active nests,eggs,and young of any bird species protected by the state or federal Endangered Species Acts,Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA),and/or the California Fish and Game Code (CFGC) Sections 3503,3503.5,or 3511.within 200 feet of the disturbance zone for songbirds,or within 500 feet of the MM-BIO-2: or July 2024AddendumtotheRollingHillsEstatesGeneralPlanUpdateEIR Page 3-18 B-226 Chapter 3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project disturbance zone for raptors and special-status bird species.To avoid the destruction of active nests and to protect thereproductivesuccessofbirdsprotectedbytheMBTAandtheCFGC,a nesting bird survey should be conductedmorethanthree(3)days prior to the commencement of project construction if construction occurs between January 1 stand August 31st.In the event that active nests are discovered,a suitable buffer (distance to be determined by thebiologist) shall be established around such active nests,and no construction activities within the buffer will be allowed,until the biologist has determined that the nest(s)is no longer active (i.e.,the nestlings have fledged and are no longer-dependent on the nest), b)Would the Project have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identifiedinlocalorregionalplans,policies,regulations,or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and WildlifeService? c)Would the Project have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including,but not limited to,marsh,vernal pool,coastal,etc.)through direct removal,filling,hydrological interruption,or other means? The GPU EIR acknowledged that there are no riparian or wetland habitats identified within the Commercial District,where therepresentativeprojectswouldbelocated,and it is unlikely that the representative projects would significantly impact riparian or wetlandhabitats.Regardless,buildout of the GPU could include sites beyond the Commercial District and,therefore,may result in significantimpactstoriparianareasifsuchdevelopmentwouldbelocatedincloseproximitytotheseresources.As such,the GPU EIR includedMitigationMeasureMM-BIO-4,which requires the preparation of biological resources surveys for development projects requiringdiscretionarygradingapprovalthatarelocatedwithin100feetof a riverine or wetland feature,to ensure related impacts would be lessthansignificant. As the Project Site is located within the Commercial District and not located within 100 feet of a riverine or wetland feature,the proposedProjectwouldnotbesubjecttoMitigationMeasureMM-BIO-4,and impacts related to riparian habitat,sensitive natural communities,and federally protected wetlands would be less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposedProjectwouldoccurorworsentheless-than-significant impacts with mitigation identified in the GPU EIR.Likewise,there is no newinformationofsubstantialimportancerequiringnewanalysisorverification.The Project does not propose substantial changes thatrequiremajorrevisionstotheGPUEIR,and no new mitigation measures are required, d)Would the Project interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species orwithestablishednativeresidentormigratorywildlifecorridors,or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? According to the GPU EIR,large blocks of open space or undeveloped areas within the Planning Area,located in canyons,naturepreserves,the Palos Verdes Landfill,and the South Coast Botanical Garden,may serve as wildlife corridors for common and protectedwildlifespecies.As previously described,the GPU would concentrate future development on underutilized parcels primarily located intheCommercialDistrict,as well as on parcels characterized by institutional and commercial land uses and previously developedparcels.The GPU would not change land use designations of parcels located in open space areas;rather,the GPU would increase no Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-19 B-227 Vestar Apartments ProjectChapter3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts land designated as open space in the canyons in the southwestern portion of the Planning Area.Nonetheless,development associated with the buildout of the GPU could result in limited vegetation removal,intrusion by humans and pets,or increases in nuisance noise, affecting wildlife movement and nesting sites in areas with known occurrences of wildlife species and habitats.As such,impacts related to interference with the movement of native resident migratory wildlife species would be potentially significant.Therefore,the GPU would require incorporation of the previously detailed Mitigation Measures MM-BIO-1 through MM-BIO-3 and the preparation of project- specific biological resources surveys and impact assessments,if applicable,as well as nesting bird surveys and bat roost surveys. With mitigation,impacts on the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species,established native resident migratory wildlife corridors,and native wildlife nursery sites from adoption of the GPU,which includes the representative projects, would be less than significant. The Project is located in the urbanized Commercial District and would not be located in an open space area.The Project would require limited grading,would not require a discretionary approval for grading,and would include the removal of existing landscaping on-site, which is limited to ornamental vegetation.As described in Threshold a)above,the Project Site does not include critical habitat or existing natural communities and is not identified as an area in which the Palos Verdes blue butterfly,coastal California gnatcatcher, least Bell’s vireo,aphanisma,and mesa horkelia species have occurred.Nonetheless,Mitigation Measure MM-BIO-2 of the GPU EIR would be applicable to the Project.Therefore,a pre-constructio n nesting bird survey and subsequent implementation of procedures in the event that active nests are discovered,as required by the mitigation measure,would reduce Project impacts to a less-than- significant level. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts with mitigation identified in the GPU EIR.Likewise,there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification.The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR,and no new mitigation measures are required, e)Would the Project conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources,such as a tree preservation poiicy or ordinance? While the City of Rolling Hills Estates does not have a tree protection ordinance,the GPU’s Conservation Element has a number of goals and policies that directly address protection of native plant and animal life,and includes an Ecological Resource Overlay Zone, which applies to portions of the City where highly sensitive ecological habitats are located.If development were to occur that would directly impact an SEA,then projects would be required to comply with the municipal National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)permit,as directed by RHEMC Section 8.38.070(A){10).Accordingly, the GPU EiR concluded that buildout of the GPU, including the representative projects,would not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources. The Project Site does not overlap with ecological resource overlay zones,and,as such,the Project would not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the GPU EIR.Likewise,there is no new information of July 2024AddendumtotheRollingHillsEstatesGeneralPlanUpdateEIR Page 3-20 B-228 Chapters:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification.The Project does not propose substantial changes that require majorrevisionstotheGPUEIR,and no new mitigation measures are required, f)Would the Project conflict with the provisions of an adopted habitat conservation plan,natural community conservationplan,or other approved local,regional,or state habitat conservation plan? As discussed in the GPU EIR,the Planning Area is not located within a Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCCP)or a HabitatConservationPian(HCP),and buildout of the GPU would not involve development within the County-designated SEAs located withintheCity.However,although the nearest areas covered by an NCCP or HCP are located in the City of Rancho Palos Verdes outsideofthePlanningArea,the Vista Del Norte Reserve is located on the southeast side of the Planning Area's Commercial District.WhilethisareawouldremainprotectedbytheNCCP/HCP,buildout of the GPU within the Commercial District may result in indirect impactsontheVistaDelNorteReserve,such as elevated dust or noise levels during construction or from increased runoff or sediment duringaproject’s operation.Accordingly,as discussed under Threshold (a)above,the GPU EIR's mitigations (Mitigation Measures MM-BfO-1 through MM-BIO-3)would be applicable to the Project to ensure impacts related to special status species or habitats and sensitivebiologicalresourceswouldbelessthansignificant.Specifically,Mitigation Measure MM-BiO-1,to which future development projectsundertheGPUwouldbesubject,would reduce potential impacts to off-site biological resources to less-than-significan t levels.Therefore,the GPU EIR concluded that representative projects would not conflict with the provisions of an adopted HCP,NCCP,orotherapprovedlocal,regional,or State habitat conservation plan,and,as such,impacts would be less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposedProjectwouldoccurorworsentheless-than-significant impacts identified in the GPU EIR.Likewise,there is no new information ofsubstantialimportancerequiringnewanalysisorverification.The Project does not propose substantial changes that requirerevisionstotheGPUEIR,and no new mitigation measures are required. major Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-21 B-229 I Vestar Apartments ProjectChapters:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Any New Information of Substantial Importance That Was Not and Could Not Have Been Known at the Time of Certification of the GPU EIR that Rises to the Level of Requiring New Analysis or Verification? Any New or Changed Circumstances Involving New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Are Any New Mitigation Measures Required for the Project? issues and Supporting Data Sources: Project Impact Conclusion GPU EIR Impact Conclusion 5.CULTURAL RESOURCES Would the project: a)Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5? NoNoNoNoLTSsu b)Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5? NoNoNoNoSUSU c)Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? NoNoNoNoLTSLTS(IS) Discussion: a)Would the Project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5? As described in the GPU EIR,the City’s Landmark Overlay Zone includes three properties in the Planning Area:The General Store (Kelly’s Korner),the Empty Saddle Club,and the Peninsula Heritage School.In addition to these sites,other buildings and properties have the potential to meet National Register of Historic Places,California Register of Historical Resources,or local criteria for July 2024AddendumtotheRollingHillsEstatesGeneralPlanUpdate EIR Page 3-22 B-230 Chapter 3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Significance.The GPU EIR determined that implementation of the GPU would not directly impact any historical resources because itdoesnotproposethedemolitionoralterationofanyknownorpotentialhistoricalresource.However,future development mayonpropertiesthataredesignatedhistoricalresourcesandinareasthatcontainpotentialhistoricalresources.The GPU EIR determined that site-specific project environmental review would need to be conducted at the time discretionary development projects are proposedtoidentifyanyknownorpotentialhistoricalresources.The GPU EIR identified mitigation measures to reduce impacts on historicresources.Specifically,Mitigation Measure MM-CUL-1 requires the preparation of a historical resources assessment report prior tothealteration,demolition,or relocation of a building or structure over 45 years old.If a property is determined to be a historical resource.Mitigation Measure MM-CUL-2 requires an analysis of how a future development project would impact the historical resource,if theCitydeterminesthatsignificantimpactsto historical resources cannot be avoided,Mitigation Measure MM-CUL-3 requires that,at aminimum,the affected historical resources be thoroughly documented before issuance of any permits and may also require additionalpubliceducationeffortsand/or memorialization of the historical resource.As concluded in the GPU EIR,while implementation of themitigationmeasures,in addition to compliance with the GPU’s policies,provisions of the RHEMC,and State and federal regulationspertainingto historical resources,would reduce impacts of the buildout of the GPU on historical resources to the maximum extentfeasible,since demolition or other material impairment of a historical resource over the course of buildout of the GPU cannot be precluded,impacts were determined to be significant and unavoidable. With respect to the proposed Project,the existing on-site building proposed for demolition was constructed in 1983 and is not over 45 years old;thus,it is not considered a potential historic resource.Therefore,Mitigation Measures MM-CUL-1 through MM-CUL-3 wouldnotbeapplicabletotheProject,and no impact related to historical resources would occur as a result of development of the proposedProject. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposedprojectwouldoccurorworsenthesignificantandunavoidableimpactsidentifiedintheGPUEIR.Likewise,there is no new informationofsubstantialimportancerequiringnewanalysis or verification.The project does not propose substantial changes that require majorrevisionstotheGPUEIR,and no new mitigation measures are required, b)Would the Project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to CEQAGuidelinesSection15064.5? As detailed in the GPU EIR,the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC)cultural resources records search showed 16previouslyrecordedculturalresources(including 12 prehistoric archaeological resources)and three City-designated LandmarkOverlayZonepropertieswithinthePlanningArea.Although the majority of the Planning Area has been developed,buriedmayremaininareaswheredevelopmentsrequired only shallow or minimal ground disturbance,in open space areas,or in undevelopedparcels.Implementation of the GPU’s Conservation Element’s goal and policies would reduce impacts to archaeologicalassociatedwithbuildoutoftheGPU,future development and redevelopment may result in adverse impacts to undiscoveredarchaeologicalresources. Therefore,impacts to archaeological resources resulting from the buildout of the GPU would be potentiallysignificant.The GPU EIR identified mitigation measures to reduce impacts on archaeological resources.In particular.MitigationMeasureMM-CUL-4 requires that a site-specific project environmental review and archaeological resources assessment be conductedbeforegrounddisturbinganddemolitionactivitiesare permitted to occur.Mitigation Measure MM-CUL-5 requires additional occur resources resources Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-23 I B-231 Vestar Apartments ProjectChapter3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts investigation if the archaeological resources assessment identifies potentially significant archaeological resources,and impacts cannot be avoided.Mitigation Measure MM-CUL-6 requires a qualified archaeologist to monitor all ground-disturbing construction and preconstruction activities in areas with previously undisturbed soil if the archaeological resources assessment does not identify archaeological resources but finds the area to be highly sensitive for archaeological resources.Mitigation Measure MM-CUL-7 requires an archaeologist,who meets the Secretary’s Standards,to be retained on call if an archaeological resources assessment does not identify potentially significant archaeological resources but the site has moderate sensitivity for archaeological resources.The GPU EIR concluded that,while mitigation and compliance with the GPU’s policies,provisions of the RHEMC,and State and federal regulations pertaining to archaeological resources would reduce archaeological resources impacts to the maximum extent feasible, the destruction of an archaeological resource over the course of buildout of the GPU cannot be precluded and would be considered significant and unavoidable. As the proposed Project’s construction activities would include grading and demolition,pursuant to Mitigation Measure MM-CUL-4, the Project would be required to undergo screening to determine whether an archaeological resources assessment is required.With implementation of this measure and subsequent mitigation provided in the GPU EIR,as applicable,Project-specific impacts related to archaeological resources would be reduced to the maximum extent feasible.However,as with the determination in the GPU EIR,the destruction of an archaeological resource during construction cannot be precluded and would be considered significant and unavoidable. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed project would occur or worsen the significant and unavoidable impacts identified in the GPU EIR.Likewise,there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification.The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR,and no new mitigation measures are required. GPU EIR Mitigation Measures To ensure identification and preservation of archaeological resources and avoid significant impacts to those resources, prior to grading approval by the Rolling Hills Estates Planning Commission,each project requiring such approval shall be screened to determine whether an Archaeological Resources Assessment report is required.Screening shall consider the type of project and whether ground disturbance will occur in native soils (i.e.,previously undisturbed soils). If so, prior to grading approval by the Rolling Hills Estates Planning Commission,the City shall require an Archaeological Resources Assessment be conducted under the supervision of an archaeologist that meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards. Archaeological Resources Assessments shall include a California Historical Resources Information System records search at the South Central Coastal Information Center and a Sacred Lands File search through the Native American Heritage Commission.The records searches will determine if the proposed development area has been previously surveyed for archaeological resources,identify and characterize the results of previous cultural resource surveys,and disclose any cultural resources that have been recorded and/or evaluated.If unpaved surfaces are present within the development area,and the entire development area has not been previously surveyed within the past 10 years,a Phase MM-CUL-4: July 2024AddendumtotheRollingHillsEstatesGeneralPlanUpdateEIR Page 3-24 B-232 Chapter 3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project I pedestrian survey shall be undertaken in proposed development areas to locate any surface cultural materials thatmaybepresent. If the Archaeological Resources Assessment identifies potentially significant archaeological resources and impactscannot be avoided,a Phase II Testing and Evaluation investigation shall be performed by an archaeologist who meetstheSecretaryoftheInterior’s Standards to determine significance prior to any ground-disturbing activities.IfaredeterminedsignificantoruniquethroughPhaseIItestingandsiteavoidanceisnot possible,appropriate site-specificmitigationmeasuresshallbeundertaken.These may include a Phase III data recovery program implemented by aqualifiedarchaeologistandperformedinaccordancewiththeCaliforniaOfficeofHistoricPreservation’s "ArchaeologicalResourceManagementReports(ARMR):Recommended Contents and Format”(1990)and “Guidelines forArchaeologicalResearchDesigns”(1991). If the Archaeological Resources Assessment did not identify archaeological resources but found the area to be highlysensitiveforarchaeologicalresources,a qualified archaeologist shall monitor all ground-disturbing construction andpreconstructionactivitiesinareaswithpreviouslyundisturbedsoil.The archaeologist shall inform all constructionpersonnelprior to construction activities of the proper procedures in the event of an archaeological discovery.Thetrainingshallbeheldinconjunctionwiththeproject’s initial on-site safety meeting and shall explain the importance andlegalbasisfortheprotectionofsignificantarchaeologicalresources.In the event that archaeological resources (artifactsorfeatures)are exposed during ground-disturbing activities,construction activities in the immediate vicinity of thediscoveryshallbehaltedwhiletheresourcesareevaluatedforsignificance by an archaeologist who meets theSecretary’s Standards,and tribal consultation shall be conducted in the case of a tribal resource.If the discovery provestobesignificant,the long-term disposition of any collected materials shall be determined in consultation with the affiliated tribe(s),where relevant;this could include curation with a recognized scientific or educational repository,transfer to the tribe,or respectful reinternment in an area designated by the tribe. If an Archaeological Resources Assessment does not identify potentially significant archaeological resources but thesitehasmoderatesensitivity for archaeological resources,an archaeologist who meets the Secretary’s Standards shallberetainedoncall.The archaeologist shall inform all construction personnel prior to construction activities about theproperproceduresintheeventofanarchaeologicaldiscovery.The preconstruction training shall be held in conjunctionwithafuturedevelopmentproject’s initial on-site safety meeting and shall explain the importance and legal basis for theprotectionofsignificantarchaeologicalresources.In the event that archaeological resources (artifacts or features)exposed during ground-disturbing activities,construction activities in the immediate vicinity of the discovery shall behaltedwhiletheon-call archaeologist is contacted.The resource shall be evaluated for significance and tribalconsultationshallbeconducted,in the case of a tribal resource.If the discovery proves to be significant,the long-termdispositionofanycollectedmaterialsshouldbedeterminedinconsultationwiththeaffiliatedtribe(s),where relevant. MM-CUL-5: resources MM-CUL-6: MM-CUL-7: are Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-25 I B-233 Vestar Apartments ProjectChapter3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts c)Would the Project disturb any human remains,including those Interred outside of formal cemeteries? As determined through the Notice of Preparation/Scoping process (i.e.,Initial Study)conducted prior to the preparation of the GPU EIR,impacts related to human remains were determined to be less than significant through compliance with California Health and Safety Code Sections 7050.5,7051,and 7052 and PRC Sections 5097 and 5097.98.These existing regulations address human burial remains and protect them from disturbance,vandalism,and destruction and establish procedures to be implemented if Native American discovered.Accordingly, the Project would also be required to comply with such regulations,and Project impacts relatedremainsare to human remains would be less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the Initial Study.Likewise,there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification.The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR,and no new mitigation measures are required. July 2024AddendumtotheRollingHillsEstatesGeneralPlanUpdate EIR Page 3-26 B-234 Chapters:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Any New Information of Substantial Importance That Was Not and Could Not Have Been Known at the Time of Certification of the GPU EIR that Rises to the Level of Requiring New Analysis or Verification? Any New or Changed Circumstances Involving New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Are Any New Mitigation Measures Required for the Project? Issues and Supporting Data Sources:GPU EIR Impact Conclusion Project Impact Conclusion 6.ENERGY Would the project: a)Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful,inefficient,or unnecessary consumption of energy resources during project constructionor operation? LTS LTS No No No No b)Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency? LTS LTS No No No No Discussion: a)Result in potential significant environmental impact due to wasteful,inefficient,or unnecessary consumption of energyresourcesduringprojectconstructionoroperation? The GPU EIR determined that there are no unusual characteristics that would necessitate the use of construction equipment,buildingmaterials,or methods that would be less energy efficient than at comparable construction sites in the region or the State.In additionaccordingtotheGPUEIR,the GPU Sustainability Element would help achieve the Planning Area’s goal of reducing energyconsumptionbyincreasingbuildingenergyefficiency,promoting renewable energy usage in the Planning Area,promoting bettercommissionandmonitorenergysystemstoincreasetheenergyefficiency.Therefore the GPU EIR concluded that buildout of the GPUwouldnotresultintheinefficient,wasteful,or unnecessary consumption of energy,and impacts would be less than significant.Furthermore,when considering the representative projects,there are no additional or different environmental impacts beyond thoseresultingfromtheoverallbuildoutoftheproposedGPU. Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-27 I 1 B-235 Vestar Apartments ProjectChapter3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Project Energy Consumption As shown in Table AQ-1,the Project would propose smaller development in terms of scale and intensity considering the development capacity of a medium site project as analyzed in the GPU EIR.Therefore,the Project would result in less total energy consumed during construction as compared to a medium scale representative project analyzed in the GPU EIR.As such,the Project would result in less-than-significant impacts regarding construction-related energy consumption. In regard to operational impacts,the Project proposes a smaller scale development with fewer dwelling units,fewer parking spaces, and fewer daily vehicle trips than a medium scale representative project;as such,the Project would result in less operational energy consumption than a medium scale representative project as analyzed in the GPU EIR.The Project would also be constructed pursuant to updated California Building Code requirements,which are more energy efficient than what was analyzed in the GPU EIR.The Project does not have any energy-demanding features that make it unique from the types of projects assumed in the GPU E!R. Therefore,the Project would result in less-than-significant impacts regarding operational energy consumption. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the GPU EIR.Likewise,there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification.The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR,and no new mitigation measures are required, b)Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency? According to the GPU EIR,the energy-efficient goals and policies contained in the GPU would help implement energy-efficient measures and would subsequently reduce energy consumption within the Planning Area.Accordingly,the GPU EIR determined that the GPU would not result in impacts related to conflict with applicable energy plans that would be less than significant.Furthermore,according to the GPU EIR,new development projects under the GPU be required to comply with applicable energy efficiency standards,such the requirements of Title 24 standards (including the CALGreen Code),applicable goals identified in Statewide energy plans,and energy-efficient goals and policies contained in the GPU and would utilize electricity provided by Clean Power Alliance that would default to 100-percent renewable energy for residential uses and 50-percent renewable energy for non-residential uses.Therefore,when considering the representative projects,the GPU EIR concluded that impacts associated with renewable energy or energy efficiency plans would be less than significant. Implementation of the GPU EIR includes mandatory compliance with applicable plans identified in Statewide energy plans,such as Title 24,including the CALGreen Code,and California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC)Long Term Energy Efficiency Strategic Plan.As such,the proposed Project would also be required to comply with these plans,refer to Table ENE-1.The Project’s energy use is within the demand/use assumptions of the GPU’s conceptual buildout. The proposed Project would be consistent with the applicable Statewide Energy Plans,such as Title 24,including the CALGreen Code, and CPUC Long Term Energy Efficiency Strategic Plan.As such,impacts associated with the proposed Project’s consistency with renewable energy or energy efficiency plans would be less than significant. July 2024AddendumtotheRollingHillsEstatesGeneralPlanUpdate EIR Page 3-28 B-236 Chapter 3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project No new significant impacts and no substantial Increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposedProjectwouldoccurorworsenwouldtheless-than-significant impacts identified in the GPU EIR.Likewise,there is no new informationofsubstantialimportancerequiringnewanalysisorverification.The Project does not propose substantial changes thatrevisionstotheGPUEIR,and no new mitigation measures are required.require major Table ENE-1 Consistency With Statewide Energy P ans Programs and Policies Primary Objective ConsistencyCalifornia Building Energy EfficiencyStandards(Title 24)Requires the design of building shells and building components to conserve energy.Consistent.The proposed Project would be required to comply with Title 24.Specifically,the proposed Project would install high-efficiencylightingandenergy-efficient appliances inaccordancewithapplicableTitle24standards, including the CALGreen Code. California Green Building Standards (CALGreen)Code The CALGreen Code requires that new buildings employ water efficiency andconservation,increase building system efficiencies (e.g.,lighting,heating/ventilation and air conditioning [HVAC],and plumbingfixtures),divert construction waste from landfills,and incorporate electric vehicles charging infrastructure. Promote energy efficiency and a reduction in greenhouse gases.The plan includes the four big bold strategies: 1,All new residential construction in California will be zero net energy by 2020. 2.All new commercial construction in California will be zero net energy by 2030. 3.Heating,ventilation,and air conditioning(HVAC)will be transformed to ensure that its energy performance is optimal for California's climate. 4,All eligible low-income customers will be given the opportunity to participate in the low- income energy efficiency program by 2020. Sources.2022 California Green Building Standards Code,Title 24, Part 11;California Public Utilities Commission Energy Efficiency Strategic Plan,January 2011Update:SB 100 California Renewables Portfolio Standard Program:emissions of greenhouse gases,September 10.2018. Consistent.The proposed Project would be required to comply with the CALGreen Code. Specifically,the proposed Project would provide bicycle parking and EV charging stations andutilizewater-efficiency irrigation in accordance with applicable CALGreen Code requirements. California Public Utilities Commission LongTermEnergyEfficiencyStrategicPlan Consistent.This plan promotes energyefficiencyandareductioningreenhousegas (GHG)emissions.The proposed Project wouldcomplywiththelatestTitle24standards, including the CALGreen Code,that would reduce emissions by increasing energy efficiency. Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-29 I B-237 Vestar Apartments ProjectChapter3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Any New Information of Substantial Importance That Was Not and Could Not Have Been Known at the Time of Certification of the GPU EIR that Rises to the Level of Requiring New Analysis or Verification? Any New or Changed Circumstances Involving New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Are Any New Mitigation Measures Required for the Project?Issues and Supporting Data Sources: Project Impact Conclusion GPU EIR Impact Conclusion 7.GEOLOGY AND SOILS Would the project: a)Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects,including the risk of loss injury,or death involving: i.Rupture of a known earthquake fault,as delineated on the most recent Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? NoNoNoNoN1Nl(IS) ii.Strong seismic ground shaking? NoNoNoNoLTSLTS(IS) iii.Seismic-relatedground failure, including liquefaction? NoNoNoNoNlNl(IS) No NoNoNoLTSLTSiv.Landslides? b)Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?NoNoNoNoLTSLTS(IS) July 2024AddendumtotheRoilingHillsEstatesGeneralPlanUpdate EIR Page 3-30 B-238 Chapter 3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Any New Information of Substantial Importance That Was Not and Could Not Have Been Known at the Time of Certification of the GPU EIR that Rises to the Level of Requiring New Analysis or Verification? Any New or Changed Circumstances Involving New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Are Any New Mitigation Measures Required for the Project? Issues and Supporting Data Sources:GPU EIR Impact Conclusion Project Impact Conclusion c)Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project,and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide? LTS LTS No No No No d)Be located on expansive soil,as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property? LTS (IS)LTS No No No No e)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? LTS (IS)LTS No No No No 0 Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?LTS-M LTS-M(GP)No No No No Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-31 B-239 Vestar Apartments ProjectChapters:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Discussion: a.i)Would the Project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects,including the risk of loss,injury,or death involving 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? As determined through the Notice of Preparation/Scoping process (i.e.,Initial Study)conducted priorto the preparation of the GPU EIR, the City is not located within a designated Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone.Therefore,any future development under the GPU would have no impact related to fault rupture.Accordingly,as with the determination in the Initial Study,no Project impacts related to rupture of a known earthquake fault would occur. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or change the no impact determination identified in the Initial Study.Likewise,there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification.The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR,and no new mitigation measures are required, a.ii)Would the Project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects,including the risk of loss,injury,or death involving strong seismic ground shaking? As determined through the Notice of Preparation/Scoping process (i.e.,Initial Study)conducted prior to the preparation of the GPU EIR, future development projects under the GPU would be constructed in accordance with the standards defined in the California Building Code (CBC)and would be subject to review by the City’s Building and Safety Department.Therefore,the Initial Study concluded that impacts related to strong seismic ground shaking would be less than significant.As the Project would also be constructed in accordance with CBC standards and City review. Project impacts related to strong seismic ground shaking would be less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the Initial Study.Likewise,there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification.The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR,and no new mitigation measures are required, a.iii)Would the Project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects,including the risk of loss,injury,or death involving seismic-related ground failure,including liquefaction? As determined through the Notice of Preparation/Scoping process (i.e..Initial Study)conducted priorto the preparation of the GPU EIR, with the exception of a very small portion of the Planning Area,the City is not located in a liquefaction hazard zone,and no land use change is anticipated for this small portion.Therefore,the Initial Study concluded the GPU would have no impact related to liquefaction. As the Project Site is not located in a liquefaction hazard zone,no Project impacts related to liquefaction would occur. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or change the no impact determination identified in the Initial Study.Likewise,there is no new information of July 2024AddendumtotheRollingHillsEstatesGeneralPlanUpdate EIR Page 3-32 B-240 Chapters:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification.The Project does not propose substantial changes that requirerevisionstotheGPUEIR,and no new mitigation measures are required, a.iv)Would the Project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects,including the risk of loss,injury,ordeathInvolvinglandslides? c)Would the Project be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable,or that would become unstable as a result of theproject,and potentially result in on-or off-site landslide? According to the GPU EIR,the City contains numerous landslide zones,particularly along Crenshaw Boulevard,along the northernboundaryofthePlanningArea,and the areas south of Palos Verdes Drive North between Crenshaw Boulevard and Silver Spur RoadasshowninFigure4.6-1 of the GPU EIR.The Commercial District is underlain by the Silver Spur Landslide Complex and is in proximitytotheCabrilloFault.As the precise location and boundaries of the Silver Spur Landslide Complex are unknown,there is potential forfuturedevelopmentswithin the Commercial District to be located on an unstable geologic unit.Furthermore,the Commercial District islocatedwithintheHazardManagementOverlayzone,which requires that ail future development within the district conduct geotechnicalevaluationandimplementationofrecommendeddesignandsafetymeasures.The GPU also contains goals and policies that requirenewconstructionandsignificantalterationstopropertieswithinpotentiallandslideareastobeevaluatedforsitestability,includingidentification of potential impacts to adjacent properties,during project design and review.As noted on page 4.6-3 of the GPU EIR,theCity's Planning and Engineering Departments are required to review future development projects in the City (Goal 2),and the followingpoliciesareidentified:discourage development adjacent to earthquake faults and other geological hazards (Policy 2.1);prohibitresidentialdevelopmentonnon-engineered fill of any kind (Policy 2.2);develop stringent site design and maintenance standards forareaswithhighfirehazardorsoilerosionpotential(Policy 2.3);regularly review the technical data on public safety and seismic safetyforuseinthedecision-making process (Policy 2.4);continue to require preliminary investigations of tract sites by State-registeredgeotechnicalengineersandcertifiedengineeringgeologists(Chapter 70 County Building Code);and ensure regular inspection ofgradingoperations(Policy 2.5).In addition,future developments would be required to comply with the grading standards establishedintheRHEMCtoreducelandslidepotentialandensuresoilstabilityandrequirementsoftheCBCandtheCity’s Building Code.TheGPUEIRconcludedthatcompliancewithallapplicableregulationsandrequirementswouldensurethattheimplementationoftheGPUwouldnotdirectly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects,including to risk of loss,injury,or death involving landslidesandwouldensurethatfuturedevelopmentundertheGPUwouldnotbelocatedon a geologic unit that is unstable,or that would becomeunstable,and potentially result in landslide.Therefore,such impacts of the GPU,including the representative projects,would be lessthansignificant. As the Project Site is located in the Commercial District and Hazard Management Overlay Zone,the Project would be required toconductasite-specific geotechnical evaluation,implement recommended design and safety measures,and conform with RHEMCgradingstandards,CBC,and the City’s Building Code.With such regulatory compliance.Project impacts related to landslides andunstablegeologicunitsorsoilwouldbelessthansignificant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposedProjectwouldoccurorworsenthe less-than-significant impacts identified in the GPU EIR.Likewise,there is no new information of major Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-33 B-241 Vestar Apartments ProjectChapter3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification.The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR,and no new mitigation measures are required, b)Would the Project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? As determined through the Notice of Preparation/Scoping process (i.e.,Initial Study)conducted prior to the preparation of the GPU EIR. future development within the Planning Area would be required to comply with existing regulations to reduce erosion potential,including SCAQMD Rule 403 and the NPDES requirements.Thus,impacts related to soil erosion or loss of topsoil were determined to be less than significant in the Initial Study.Similarly,as Project construction and activities would be required to comply with such regulatory requirements,Project impacts related to soil erosion or loss of topsoil would be less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the Initial Study.Likewise,there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification.The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR,and no new mitigation measures are required, d)Would the Project be located on expansive soil,as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994),creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property? As determined through the Notice of Preparation/Scoping process (i.e.,initial Study)conducted priorto the preparation of the GPU EIR, since there are a number of segments of riverine wetlands running through the Planning Area,expansive soils have the potential to occur within the Planning Area.However,the design of individual structures would be subject to review by the City’s Building and Safety Department,including review by the City Geologist and the City Engineer.With the required compliance with the CBC,no future development under the GPU is expected to result in significant impacts related expansive soils.Compliance with the CBC and City Building Code would ensure that impacts related to expansive soils were determined to be less than significant in the Initial Study. Similarly,as Project construction and activities would be required to comply with such regulatory requirements,Project impacts related to expansive soil would be less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the Initial Study.Likewise,there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification.The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR,and no new mitigation measures are required, e)Would the Project have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposai systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? As determined through the Notice of Preparation/Scoping process (i.e.,Initial Study)conducted prior to the preparation of the GPU EIR, future development within the Planning Area would be required to connect to the existing public sewer system with the exception of the potential development of accessory dwelling units (ADU)in single-family neighborhoods that utilize existing septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems.In such cases,property owners would be required to demonstrate that their on-site system meets the capacity requirements to adequately serve the addition of an ADU on their property.Accordingly,the GPU EIR determined that impacts July 2024AddendumtotheRoilingHillsEstatesGeneralPlanUpdateEIR Page 3-34 B-242 Chapters:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project related to Threshold (e)were determined to be less than significant.As the Project wouid be developed in an urbanized area,theproposedmulti-family residential development would connect to the existing public sewer system,and no impacts related to soilsincapableofadequatelysupportingtheuseofseptictanksoralternativewastewaterdisposalsystemswouldnot No new significant impacts and no substantial Increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposedProjectwouldoccurorworsentheiess-than-significant impacts identified in the Initial Study.Likewise,there is no new information ofsubstantialimportancerequiringnewanalysisorverification.The Project does not propose substantial changes that require majorrevisionstotheGPUEIR,and no new mitigation measures are required, f)Would the Project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? According to the GPU EIR,the Planning Area encompasses areas that may contain fossil-bearing units and are,therefore,consideredsensitiveforpaleontologicalresources.A paleontology collection records search for the locality and specimen data within the PlanningAreawasconductedbytheNaturalHistoryMuseumofLosAngelesCountyinMay2021andfoundseveralfossillocalitiesfromtheMontereyFormation(Altamira Shale and Lomita Marl)within the Planning Area.While future development within the Planning Areawouldbe focused in the Commercial District,which is primarily underlain by artificial fill,and infill locations that have been previouslygradedtoaccommodatetheexistingorpreviousstructuresanduses,there remains the possibility that fossils are present in the soil inthePlanningAreaandthatgrounddisturbancebyfuturedevelopmentundertheproposedGPUcoulddamagesuchfossils.The GPUEIRdeterminedthatfuturedevelopmentandredevelopmentprojectsmustbe considered on a project-by-project to determine whetherafullpaleontologicalassessmentisrequiredbasedonpreviousgrounddisturbanceatthedevelopmentsite,the extent of ground-disturbing activities,and depth of excavation.Ground-disturbin g activities (e.g.,excavation,grading,vegetation removal,andconstruction)associated with future development and redevelopment projects allowed under the proposed GPU,including therepresentativeprojects,would have the potential to unearth,damage,and/or destroy known or unknown paleontological resources andhavethepotentialto result in adverse impacts.Thus,the GPU EIR determined that impacts to paleontological resources or sites oruniquegeologicfeatureswouldbepotentiallysignificant.Accordingly, the GPU EIR identified mitigation measures to reduce impactsonpaleontologicalresources,in particular.Mitigation Measure MM-GEO-1 requires project-specific screening and preparation of apaleontologicalresourcesassessment,if applicable.Mitigation Measure MM-GEO-2 requires that,in the event that any prehistoricsubsurfacepaleontologicalresourcesareencounteredduringfutureconstructionorthecourseofanygrounddisturbanceactivities,allsuchactivitiesshallbehaltedimmediately,and proper notification and assessment of the find be conducted with subsequentimplementationofavoidanceorotherappropriatemeasures(e.g.,data recovery,excavation).With these mitigation measures,impactsoftheGPUrelatedtopaleontologicalresourceswouldbelessthansignificant.As shown in Figure 4.6-3 of the GPU EIR,based onCaliforniaGeologicalSurvey’s geologic mapping,the Project Site,which is located in the Commercial District,is underlain by artificialfill.However,consistent with the GPU EIR,Project impacts related to paleontological resources cannot be precluded.Accordingly,theProjectwouldrequireimplementationofMitigationMeasuresMM-GEO-1 and MM-GEO-2 to ensure impacts related to paleontologicalresourceswouldbelessthansignificant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposedProjectwouldoccurorworsentheIess-than-significant impact with mitigation identified in the GPU EIR.Likewise,there is no new occur. Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-35 I B-243 I Vestar Apartments ProjectChapter3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification.The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR,and no new mitigation measures are required. GPU EIR Mitigation Measures MM-GEO-1:To ensure identification and preservation of significant paleontological resources and avoid significant impacts to those resources,prior to the issuance of a grading approval by the City of Rolling Hills Estates Planning Commission,each project requiring such approval shall be screened to determine whether a full paleontological resources assessment is required.Screening shall consider whether the proposed grading activity will extend into known undisturbed fossil bearing strata (I.e.,those of the Monterey Formation,including Lomita Marl Member,Valmonte Diatomite Member,and Altamira Shale Member).If so,the City shall require a paleontological resources assessment be conducted by a paleontologist that meets Bureau of Land Management or Society of Vertebrate Paleontology standards (i.e.,a qualified paleontologist)prior to the issuance of a grading approval.If the paleontological resources assessment identifies the potential for destruction of significant paleontological resources,an avoidance and/or recovery plan shall be developed and implemented under the supervision of a qualified paleontologist to the satisfaction of the City of Rolling Hills Estates. IVIM-GEO-2:in the event that any prehistoric subsurface paleontological resources are encountered during future construction or the course of any ground disturbance activities,all such activities shall halt immediately,at which time the applicant shall notify the City and consult with a qualified paleontologist to assess the significance of the find.In the case of discovery of paleontological resources,the assessment shall be done in accordance with the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology standards.If any find is determined to be significant,appropriate avoidance measures recommended by the consultant and approved by the City must be followed unless avoidance is determined to be unnecessary or infeasible by the City. If avoidance is unnecessary or infeasible,other appropriate measures (e.g.,data recovery,excavation)shall be instituted. July 2024AddendumtotheRollingHillsEstatesGeneralPlanUpdate EIR Page 3-36 B-244 Chapter 3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Any New Information of Substantial Importance That Was Not and Could Not Have Been Known at the Time of Certification of the GPU EIR that Rises to the Level of Requiring New Analysis or Verification? Any New or Changed Circumstances Involving New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed In the GPU EIR? New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Are Any New Mitigation Measures Required for the Project? Issues and Supporting Data Sources;GPU EIR Impact Conclusion Project Impact Conclusion 8.GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS Would the project: a)Generate greenhouse gas emissions,either directly or indirectly,that may have a significant impact on the environment? LTS LTS No No No No b)Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? LTS LTS No No No No Discussion: The GPU EIR determined that the GPU’s Sustainability Element would reduce GHG emissions from buildout of the Planning Area bycooperatingwiththeStatetoimplementSB32,lowering the emissions caused by motor vehicles through education and outreachstrategies,promoting energy-efficient building construction and operation practices,and implementing "carbon sinks’’to help meet thecurrentgoaloftheCity’s Climate Action Plan (CAP).Accordingly, the GPU EIR concluded that the impacts from the GPU related togreenhouse gases (GHG)emissions are considered less than significant as the implementation of the GPU would result in a netreductioninthetotalannualGHGemissionsfromthePlanningAreaandanetreductionintheannualGHGemissionsonaper-service-population basis.In addition,the GPU EIR concluded that the buildout of the GPU is consistent with the 2017 Scoping Plan,the 2020-2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy of the Southern California Association of Governments (2020-2045 RTP/SCS),and the City’s CAP.Furthermore,when considering the representative projects,there are no additional or differentenvironmentalimpactsbeyondthoseresultingfromtheoverallbuildoutoftheGPU.As such,the GHG emission impacts of therepresentativeprojectswouldbelessthansignificant. Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-37 I I B-245 I Vestar Apartments ProjectChapter3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions As shown in Table AQ-1,the Project would propose a smaller development in terms of scale and intensity considering the development capacity of a medium site project as analyzed in the GPU EIR.The Project is also within the development assumption scenarios evaluated in the GPU EIR.Therefore,the Project would result in less total GHG emissions during construction as compared to a medium scale representative project analyzed in the GPU EIR,and,as such,construction impacts would be less than significant. Regarding operational impacts,the Project proposes a smaller scale development with fewer dwelling units,fewer parking spaces,and fewer daily vehicle trips than a medium scale representative project.The Project’s dwelling units and square footage proposed by the Project are within the scope of the GPU EIR’s buildout scenarios,as analyzed in the GPU EIR.As such,the Project would result in less operational GHG emissions than a medium scale representative project as analyzed in the GPU EIR.Accordingly,the Project would result in less-than-significant impacts regarding GHG emissions. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the GPU EIR.Likewise,there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification.The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR,and no new mitigation measures are required. Consistency Analysis The City has not adopted a numerical significance threshold for assessing impacts related to GHG emissions.Similarly,the SCAQMD, Office of Planning and Research (OPR),California Air Resources Board (CARB),California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA),or any other State or regional agency has not adopted a numerical significance threshold for assessing GHG emissions that is applicable to the Project.Since there is no applicable adopted or accepted numerical threshold of significance for GHG emissions, the methodology for evaluating the Project’s impacts related to GHG emissions focuses on its consistency with applicable Statewide, regional,and local GHG reduction plans and strategies.As such,a consistency analysis is provided below and describes the proposed Project’s compliance with or exceedance of performance-based standards included in the regulations outlined in the applicable portions of the 2022 Scoping Plan,2020-2045 RTP/SCS,and the City’s CAP.It should be noted that,although the GPU EIR analyzed consistency with the 2017 Scoping Plan,CARB adopted the 2022 Scoping Plan in December 2022,which lays out the sector-by-sector roadmap for California to achieve carbon neutrality by 2045 or earlier,outlining a technologically feasible,cost-effective,and equity- focused path to achieve the State’s climate target.The 2022 Scoping Plan reflects the latest Statewide target and actions,which are more advanced than the 2017 Scoping Plan.As such,if a project would be consistent with the 2022 Scoping Plan,it would also be consistent with the 2017 Scoping Plan. Consistency with the 2022 Scoping Plan The 2022 Scoping Plan identifies reduction measures necessary to achieve the goal of carbon neutrality by 2045 or earlier.Actions that reduce GHG emissions are identified for each AB 32 inventory sector.Provided in Table GHG-1 is an evaluation of applicable July 2024AddendumtotheRollingHillsEstatesGeneralPlanUpdate EIR Page 3-38 B-246 Chapters:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project reduction actions/strategies by emissions source category to determine how the proposed Project would be consistent with or exceedreductionactions/strategies outlined in the 2022 Scoping Plan. Table GHG-1 Consistency With The 2022 Scoping Plan:AB 32 Inventory Sectors Actions and Strategies Project Consistency Analysts Smart Growth /Vehicles Miles Traveled (VMT) Reduce VMT per capita to 25 percent below 2019 levels by 2030.and 30 percent below 2019 levels by 2045 Consistent The proposed Project would provide bicycle parking stalls in accordance with Title 24 standards.Furthermore,the Project site is located within a quarter mile of several bus stops (two on Norris Center Drive,four on Silver Spur Road,and two on Hawthorne Boulevard)and is served by transit operated by the PalosVerdesPeninsulaTransitAuthority(PVPTA),Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority(Metro),and Los Angeles Department of Transportation (LADOT),Additionally,the Project would improve theconnectivityaroundtheProjectSitebyaddingasidewalkalongthesouthwesternportionoftheProjectSite,as well as the addition of a pedestrian crossing at the northeastern corner of the Project Site, to connect theProjecttotheneighboringshoppingcenter.Furthermore,the Project design provides for adequate pedestrianaccesstotheexistingsidewalksprovidedalongtheProjectfrontageonNorrisCenterDrive.All these features encourage the use of alternative modes of transportation,including biking,transit,and walking,which reduceVMT.Thus,the proposed Project would be consistent with the action. New Residential and Commercial Buildings All-electric appliances beginning 2026 (residential)and 2029 (commercial), contributing to 6 million heat pumps installed Statewide by 2030 Consistent.The City has not adopted an ordinance or program that requires the use of all-electric appliancesinnewdevelopmentsorthatrequiresanall-electric development.Thus,the proposed Project is not requiredtoinstallali-electric appliances if constructed prior to 2026.However,if regulations related to all-electric development are adopted in the future prior to the issuance of the Project's building permit,the proposedProjectwouldcomplywithsuchregulations.Furthermore,the proposed Project would comply with Title 24standardstoreduce energy consumption,As such,the proposed Project would be consistent with this action. Construction Equipment Achieve 25 percent of energy demand electrified by 2030 and 75 percent electrified by 2045 Consistent.The City has not adopted an ordinance or program requiring electricity-powered construction equipment.However,if adopted prior to the issuance of the Project’s building permits,the proposed Projectwouldberequiredtocomplywithsuchregulations.As such,the proposed Project would be consistent withthisaction. Non-Combustion Methane Emissions Divert 75 percent of organic waste from landfills by 2025 Consistent.Senate Bill (SB)1383 establishes targets to achieve a 50-percent reduction in the level ofStatewideorganicwastedisposalfrom2014levelsby2020anda 75-percent reduction by 2025.The lawestablishesanadditional target that not less than 20 percent of currently disposed edible food is recovered forhumanconsumptionby 2025,The proposed Project would comply with local and regional regulations andrecycleorcompost75 percent of waste by 2025 pursuant to SB 1383.As such,the proposed Project wouldbeconsistentwiththisaction. Source:California Air Resources Board.2022 Scoping Plan,November 16.2022. Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-39 III B-247 Vestar Apartments ProjectChapter3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Consistency with the SCAG 2020-2045 RTP/SCS The most recent RTP/SCS (2024-2050 Regional Transportation Plan and Sustainable Communities Strategy [2024 RTP/SCS])was adopted by SCAG’s Regional Council in April 2024.While SCAG has adopted the 2024 RTP/SCS,GARB has yet to certify the plan or approve SCAG’s GHG emissions reduction calculations.As such,this assessment analyzes the Project’s consistency with the 2020- 2045 RTP/SCS.Table GHG-2 provides a consistency analysis of the proposed Project with the five key SCS strategies identified in the regulatory framework discussion above.As shown therein,the proposed Project would be consistent with the GHG emission reduction strategies contained in the 2020-2045 RTP/SCS. Table GHG-2 Consistency With The 2020-2045 RTP/SCS Applicable Land Use Tools Project Consistency AnalysisReductionStrategy Focus Growth Near Destinations and Mobility Options Consistent.The Project Site is located within a quarter mile of several bus stops (two on Norris Center Drive,four on Silver Spur Road,and two on Hawthorne Boulevard)and is served by transit operated by the PVPTA,Metro,and LADOT.The proposed infill development is in the Commercial District and would provide housing in proximity to jobs to improve the jobs/housing balance,while reducing commute times and distances.The proposed Project would be in an urbanized area within walking and biking distance of existing residential/commercial uses and transits.As such, the Project would support first/last-mile strategies and reduce reliance on vehicle trips to contribute to the reduction in VMT and associated GHG emissions.Furthermore,the Project design provides for adequate pedestrian access to the existing sidewalks along the Project frontage on Norris Center Drive,as well as a new pedestrian crossing on the northeastern corner of the Project site.The proposed Project would also provide bicycle parking spaces and EV charging stations in accordance with the CALGreen Code.Additionally, the Project proposes to construct a residential development to replace the existing vacant building on-site.Therefore,the proposed Project would focus on growth near destinations and mobility options.The proposed Project would be consistent with this reduction strategy. Center Focused●Emphasize land use patterns that facilitate multimodal access to work, educational and other destinations ●Focus on a regional jobs/housing balance to reduce commute times and distances and expand job opportunities near transit and along center- focused main streets ●Plan for growth near transit investments and support implementation of first/last mile strategies ●Promote the redevelopment of underperforming retail developments and other outmoded nonresidential uses ●Prioritize infill and redevelopment of underutilized land to accommodate new growth,increase amenities and connectivity in existing neighborhoods ●Encourage design and transportation options that reduce the reliance on and number of solo car trips (this could include mixed uses or locating and orienting close to existing destinations) ●Identify ways to “right size"parking requirements and promote alternative parking strategies (e.g.,shared parking or smart parking) Placemaking,Priority Growth Areas (PGA), Job Centers,High Quality Transit Areas (HQTAs), Priority Areas (TPA), Neighborhood Mobility (NMAs), Corridors,Spheres of Influence Transit Areas Livable (SOIs), Green Region,Urban Greening. July 2024AddendumtotheRollingHillsEstatesGeneralPlanUpdate EIR Page 3-40 B-248 Chapters:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Table GHG-2 (Continued) Consistency With The 2020-2045 RTP/SCS Applicable Land Use ToolsReductionStrategy Project Consistency Analysis Promote Diverse Housing Choices ●Preserve and rehabilitate affordable housing and prevent displacement ●Identify funding opportunities for new workforce and affordable housingdevelopment ♦Create incentives and reduce regulatory barriers for building context sensitive accessory dwelling units to increase housing supply ●Provide support to local jurisdictions to streamline and lessen barriers to housing development that supports reduction of greenhouse gasemissions PGA,Job Centers, HQTAs, NMA,TPAs, Livable Green Region,Urban Greening. Consistent.The Project site is currently occupied by an existing vacant building and associated parking spaces.Therefore,the proposed Project would not displace,but rather add residential uses. Of the 90 proposed residential units,60 units are allowed according to the base density for the zone with the remaining 30 units allowed with the bonus level development.Of the 60 proposed base density units.15 percent (i.e.,9 units)would be BMR units for moderate-income households.As such,the proposed Project would be consistent with this reduction strategy. Corridors, Leverage Technology Innovations ●Promote low emission technologies such as neighborhood electricvehicles,shared rides hailing,car sharing,bike sharing and scooters byprovidingsupportiveandsafeinfrastructuresuchasdedicatedlanes, charging and parking/drop-off space ●Improve access to services through technology—such as telework and telemedicine as well as other incentives such as a "mobility wallet,"an app-based system for storing transit and other multi-modal payments ●Identify ways to incorporate "micro-power grids”in communities,for example solar energy,hydrogen fuel cell power storage and power generation Support Implementation of Sustainability Policies ●Pursue funding opportunities to support local sustainable developmentimplementationprojectsthatreducegreenhousegasemissions ●Support statewide legislation that reduces barriers to new construction and that incentivizes development near transit corridors and stations ●Support local jurisdictions in the establishment of Enhanced Infrastructure Financing Districts (ElFDs),Community Revitalization and Investment Authorities (CRIAs),or other tax increment or value capture tools to finance sustainable infrastructure and development projects,including parks and open space ●Work with local jurisdictions/communities to identify opportunities and assess barriers to implement sustainability strategies ●Enhance partnerships with other planning organizations to promote resources and best practices in the SCAG region HQTA,TPAs,NMA, Livable Corridors. Consistent.The proposed Project would install EV charging stations and bicycle parking spaces in accordance with the most current and applicable Title 24 standards,including the requirements of the CALGreen Code.Therefore,the proposed Project would leverage technology innovations to promote the use of alternative modes of transportation. Therefore,the proposed Project would be consistent with this reduction strategy. Center Placemaking, Job Centers,HQTAs, TPA,NMAs,Livable Corridors, Green Region,Urban Greening. Focused PGA, Consistent.As previously discussed,the proposed Project would install EV charging stations and provide bicycle parking spaces to promote alternative modes of transportation.Further,the proposed Project would comply with the requirements of the most current and applicable Title 24 standards,including the requirements of the CALGreen Code,such as those related to the installation of high-efficiency lighting,energy- efficient landscaping.Thus,the proposed Project would be consistent with this reduction strategy. SOIs appliances.and water-efficient Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-41 B-249 Vestar Apartments ProjectChapters:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Table GHG-2 (Continued) Consistency With The 2020-2045 RTP/SCS Applicable Land Use Tools Project Consistency AnalysisReductionStrategy Promote a Green Region Consistent.The proposed Project involves a residential development on a site with an existing vacant building and would not interfere with regional wildlife connectivity or affect any agricultural land. The proposed Project would be required to comply with the most current and applicable Title 24 standards,including the requirements of the CALGreen Code.Thus,the proposed Project would support a resource-efficient development that reduces energy consumption and GHG emissions. The proposed project would be consistent with this reduction strategy. Green Region,Urban Greening,Greenbelts and Separators. ●Support development of local climate adaptation and hazard mitigation plans,as well as project implementation that improves community resiliency to climate change and natural hazards ●Support local policies for renewable energy production,reduction of urban heat islands and carbon sequestration ●Integrate local food production into the regional landscape ●Promote more resource efficient development focused on conservation, recycling and reclamation ●Preserve,enhance and restore regional wildlife connectivity ●Reduce consumption of resource areas,including agricultural land ●Identify ways to improve access to public park space Community Note: Source;Southern California Association of Governments,2020-2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy -Connect SoCal,September 3,2020. Consistency With the City’s Climate Action Plan The City’s CAP is a yaluable tool that will lower GHG emissions across yarious sections in a manner that is most feasible for the Planning Area.It identifies community-wide strategies to lower GHG emissions from a range of sources within the jurisdiction, including transportation,land use,energy generation and consumption,water,and waste.The CAP identifies key energy efficiency targets and separate associated goals,policies,and actions for community and municipal activities.Table GHG-3 discusses the proposed Project’s consistency with the applicable CAP goals in each chapter. Table GHG-3 Consistency With The Climate Action Plan Project ConsistencyChaptersand Goals Consistent.In accordance with Title 24,including the CALGreen Code, the proposed Project would provide electric charging stations and bicycle parking that would promote alternative modes of transportation.The Project would encourage ridesharing by educating the residents on the benefit of ridesharing.Furthermore,The Project is located within a quarter mile of several bus stops (two on Norris Center Drive,four on Silver Spur Road,and PVPTA,Metro,and LADOT. Land Use and Transportation (LUT) Goal LUT:A -Accelerate the market for EV vehicles. Goal LUT;B - Encourage ridesharing. Goal LUT:C - Encourage Transit usage. Goal LUT:G -Land Use Strategies. July 2024AddendumtotheRollingHillsEstatesGeneralPlanUpdateEIR Page 3-42 B-250 Chapters:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Table GHG-3 (Continued) Consistency With The Climate Action Plan Chapters and Goals Project Consistency The Project would replace the existing vacant building with a new residential development,which increases density and supports the City’slandusestrategies.As such,the proposed Project would be consistentwiththe goals in the Land Use and Transportation Chapter. Consistent.The proposed Project would be consistent with the most recent Title 24 standards,including the CALGreen Code.The proposedProjectwouldinstallhigh-efficiency lighting,energy-efficientappliances,and a water-efficiency irrigation system.As such,the proposed Project would be consistent with the goals in the EnergyEfficiencyChapter. Energy Efficiency (EE) Goal EE;B -Increase energy efficiency in new residential developments. Goal EE:E -Increase energy efficiency through water efficiency. Goal EE;F -Decrease energy demand through reducing urban heat island effect. Goal EE;G -Participate in education,outreach and planning for energy efficiency. Goal EE:J - Reduce energy consumption in the long run. Solid Waste (SW) Goal SW;A -Increase diversion and reduction of residential waste. Consistent.As mentioned above,the proposed Project would complywithlocalandregionalregulationsandrecycleorcompost75percentofwasteby2025pursuanttoSB1383.As such,the proposed ProjectwouldbeconsistentwiththegoalsintheSolidWasteChapter. Urban Greening (UG) Goal UG:A -Increase and maintain urban greening in the community, Consistent.The Project would propose the replacement of a vacant building and associated parking spaces with a residential building thatprovidesresidentialunitsandparkingspacesfornearbycommercials. The Project would include more trees than the existing conditions on site,increasing urban greening in the community.As such,the Projectwouldnotconflictwith the goals. Consistent.The proposed Project would be consistent with the most recent Title 24 standards,including the CALGreen Code,on solar energy requirements.The Project would be required to install solar panels if not meeting the exemption criteria per CALGreen Code.As such,the proposed Project would be consistent with the goal. Energy Generation and Storage (EGS) Goal EGS: A -Support energy generation and storage in the community, Sources:City of Rolling Hills Estate,Climate Action Plan,2017. Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-43 I B-251 Vestar Apartments ProjectChapter3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts As mentioned above,the proposed Project would be consistent with the applicable plans,and,as such,impacts would be less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the GPU EIR.Likewise,there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification.The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR,and no new mitigation measures are required. July 2024AddendumtotheRollingHillsEstatesGeneralPlanUpdate EIR Page 3-44 B-252 Chapter 3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Any New Information of Substantial Importance That Was Not and Could Not Have Been Known at the Time of Certification of the GPU EIR that Rises to the Level of Requiring New Analysis or Verification? Any New or Changed Circumstances Involving New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Are Any New Mitigation Measures Required for the Project? Issues and Supporting Data Sources:GPU EIR Impact Conclusion Project Impact Conclusion 9.HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Would the project: a)Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport,use, or disposal of hazardous materials? LTS (IS)LTS No No No No b)Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? LTS (IS)LTS No No No No c)Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials,substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? LTS (IS)LTS No No No No d)Be located on a site that is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and,as a result,would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? LTS (IS)LTS No No No No Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-45 I B-253 I I I Vestar Apartments ProjectChapter3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Any New Information of Substantial Importance That Was Not and Could Not Have Been Known at the Time of Certification of the GPU EIR that Rises to the Level of Requiring New Analysis or Verification? Any New or Changed Circumstances Involving New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Are Any New Mitigation Measures Required for the Project? Issues and Supporting Data Sources: GPU EIR Impact Conclusion Project Impact Conclusion e)For a project located within an airport land use plan or,where such a plan has not been adopted,within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area? NoNoNoNlNoNl(IS) f)Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? No NoNoNoLTSLTS g)Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly,to a significant risk of loss,injury or death involving wildland fires? NoNoNoLTSNoLTS July 2024AddendumtotheRollingHillsEstatesGeneralPlanUpdate EIR Page 3-46 B-254 Chapter 3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Discussion: a)Would the Project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport,use,or disposalofhazardousmaterials? b)Would the Project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset andaccidentconditionsinvolving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? As determined through the Notice of Preparation/Scoping process (i.e.,Initial Study)conducted prior to the preparation of the GPU EIR,future residential development would not result in significant impacts involving the routine transport,use, or disposal of hazardousmaterialsorwastes;future commercial development that replaces or expands existing commercial uses could require the routinetransport,use. storage,and disposal of hazardous materials,similar to existing uses.All such future development would be required tocomplywith existing regulations regarding the use of hazardous materials and wastes and would continue to be subject to oversight bytheLosAngelesCountyFireDepartment(LACoFD)and other regulatory agencies,as applicable.With regard to the potential foraccidentalreleasesofhazardoussubstances,numerous existing regulations are in place at the federal.State,and local levels to requireprecautionarymeasuresinthedesignofvehiclesthattransporthazardoussubstances:the routes they are allowed to travel;design,operations,and monitoring of facilities that use large quantities of hazardous substances;proper disposal of hazardous materials andwastes;and oversight by federal.State,and local regulatory agencies to ensure adherence to these regulations.The GPU would havenoeffecton those existing regulatory standards and would not authorize any kinds of activities that are more likely than existing activitiesintheCitytobeatriskforanaccidentalreleaseofhazardoussubstancesorwastes.Therefore,with buildout of the GPU,compliancewithexistingregulationswouldensurethatimpactsrelatedtotheaccidentalreleaseorroutinetransport,use,or disposal of hazardousmaterialswouldbelessthansignificant.The Project would include limited use of hazardous materials that are typical of residentialdevelopments:these hazardous materials generally include,but are not limited to,cleaning solvents,painting supplies,pesticides forlandscaping,and chemicals used for building maintenance,which are not considered significant hazards to the public or theenvironment.Project construction would likewise include limited hazardous substances,but use of those substances is also closelyregulatedandwouldbecontrolled.As the Project would comply with existing applicable regulations,impacts related to routine transport,use, or disposal or accidental release of hazardous materials would be less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase In the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposedProjectwouldoccurorworsentheless-than-significant impacts identified in the Initial Study.Likewise,there Is no new information ofsubstantialimportancerequiringnewanalysisorverification.The Project does not propose substantial changes that require majorrevisionstotheGPUEIR,and no new mitigation measures are required, c)Would the Project emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials,substances,or wastewithinone-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? As determined through the Notice of Preparatlon/Scoping process (i.e..Initial Study)conducted prior to the preparation of the GPU EIR,future development under the GPU would not introduce any new land use that might generate hazardous or acutely hazardous airemissions,and implementation of the GPU would not change existing protocols and procedures for proper handling of hazardous or Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-47 II]B-255 Vestar Apartments ProjectChapter3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts acutely hazardous materials,substances,or waste.Future development under the GPU would be required to comply with federal. State,and local regulations regarding transport and handling of hazardous materials.As such,the Initial Study determined that impacts related to the generation of hazardous or acutely hazardous emissions or handling of such materials within a quarter mile of an existing school would be less than significant. The Project Site is located within 0.25 mile of one school,the private Palos Verdes Montessori Academy.The Project would include limited use of hazardous materials that are typical of residential developments.As the Project would comply with existing applicable regulations related to the transport,use,and disposal of hazardous materials,impacts would be less than significant with regard to hazardous emissions or handling of hazardous materials,substances,or waste within 0.25 mile of a school. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the Initial Study.Likewise,there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification.The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR,and no new mitigation measures are required, d)Would the Project be located on a site that is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and,as a result,would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? As determined through the Notice of Preparation/Scoping process (i.e..Initial Study)conducted prior to the preparation of the GPU EIR, no sites included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to California Government Code Section 65962.5 were found active or open for investigation for the potential future development sites identified under the GPU.As identified in the Initial Study, several cases of leaking underground storage tanks were identified in the Peninsula Shopping Center/Promenade on the Peninsula areas:however,each of those cases had been remediated and closed.Furthermore,as described above, any future development under the GPU,including the Project,would be required to comply with existing regulations and applicable oversight.Therefore,Project impacts related to hazardous materials sites would be less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the Initial Study.Likewise,there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification.The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR.and no new mitigation measures are required, e)For a project located within an airport land use plan or,where such a plan has not been adopted,within two miles of a public airport or public use airport,would the Project result in a safety hazard excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area? As determined through the Notice of Preparation/Scoping process (i.e.,Initial Study)conducted prior to the preparation of the GPU EIR, the nearest public use airport to the GPU Planning Area is Zamperini Field in the City of Torrance,which is located approximately 0.5 mile to the north.However,implementation of the GPU would not result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the Planning Area.Future development under the GPU would not introduce any new uses to the Planning Area but would result in the intensification of mixed-use and residential uses in certain portions of the Planning Area that would not interfere airport July 2024AddendumtotheRollingHillsEstatesGeneralPlanUpdateEIR Page 3-48 B-256 Chapter 3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project uses.Accordingly,no impact related to airport use would occur as a result of the implementation of the proposed GPU.For the Project,the Zamperini Field is located greater than 2 miles from the Project Site.Therefore,no Project impacts related to hazards and airportuseswouldoccur. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposedProjectwouldoccurorchangetheno impact determination identified in the Initial Study.Likewise,there is no new information ofsubstantialimportancerequiringnewanalysisorverification.The Project does not propose substantial changes that require majorrevisionstotheGPUEIR,and no new mitigation measures are required, f)Would the Project impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergencyevacuationplan? As described in the Notice of Preparation/Scoping process (i.e.,Initial Study)conducted prior to the preparation of the GPU EIR,thepotentialimpactsrelatedtothisquestionwerescopedforfurtheranalysisunderthetopicof “Wildfire”in the GPU EIR.Accordingly,Section 4.22,Wildfire, of the GPU EIR addressed the topic of emergency response plans and emergency evacuation plans.As detailedtherein,and as addressed in Checklist Section 23,Wildfire, of this Addendum,because future development would be required to adheretostrictdesignstandardsregardingfireresistanceandcirculation,and because future development would be concentrated in the City'sCommercialDistrict,which has comparably less grasses and vegetation that could act as wildfire fuel than most of the Planning Area,the GPU would not result in a substantial increase in the potential for wildfires to move through developed areas of the Planning AreaandsubstantiallyimpairtheCity’s emergency response and emergency evacuation plan along the Planning Area’s street networkthroughtheMulti-Jurisdictional HMP.As such,impacts of the GPU would be less than significant. As described in the GPU EIR,the representative projects themselves would not cause any potentially significant impacts on theimplementationofanemergencyresponseplanoremergencyevacuationplan.The Project,which is consistent with the parameters ofamediumsiterepresentativeprojectoftheGPU,would be developed in compliance with code requirements related to fire access andcirculationandwouldbesubjecttoreviewbytheCityandLACoFDtodeterminespecificfirerequirements(e.g.,fire flow capacities,emergency access,fuel modification plans).In addition,the proposed development would be limited to the Project Site boundaries intheurbanizedCommercialDistrictandwouldnotencroachuponSilverSpurRoad,a City-designated evacuation route.Therefore,Project impacts related to emergency response plans or emergency evacuation plans would be less than significant No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposedProjectwouldoccurorworsentheless-than-significant impacts identified in the GPU EIR.Likewise,there is no new information ofsubstantialimportancerequiringnewanaiysisor verification.The Project does not propose substantial changes that require majorrevisionstotheGPUEIR,and no new mitigation measures are required, g)Would the Project expose people or structures,either directly or indirectly,to a significant risk of loss,injury or deathinvolvingwildlandfires? As determined through the Notice of Preparation/Scoping process (i.e..Initial Study)conducted prior to the preparation of the GPU EIR,the entirety of the GPU Planning Area is located within a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ)as mapped by the California Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-49 B-257 Vestar Apartments ProjectChapter3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Department of Forestry and Fire Protection {CAL FIRE).As described in the Initial Study, the potential impacts related to this question scoped for further analysis under the topic of “Wildfire”in the GPU EIR.Accordingly,Section 4.22,Wildfire,of the GPU EIR addressed the topic of exposure of people or structure involving wildland fires.As detailed therein,and as addressed in Checklist Section 23,Wildfire, of this Addendum,since the GPU Planning Area is located within a VHFHSZ,future residential and commercial structures would be required to comply with more stringent standards to resist ignition and slow the spread of fire.Further,any changes in the circulation around a project would be designed and constructed in accordance with LACoFD standards to ensure that future development would not impede or obstruct evacuation procedures during the event of a wildfire.In addition,any future projects developed as part of the GPU that would be located in close proximity to dense vegetation or mature stands of trees would require a Fuel Modification Plan and would require installation and irrigation of non-flammable landscaping materials,as well as use of ignition- resistant building materials and roofing,consistent with LACoFD standards.By focusing development on institutional and commercial land uses and in the Commercial District,which includes the City’s most intense land uses with subregional-serving commercial centers, office buildings,and low-rise residential buildings,the GPU EIR determined that the GPU would relieve development pressure on open space and low density areas that are characterized by steep hillsides and canyons and would reduce overall wildfire risk by concentrating future development in areas that are not characterized by mature dense tree stands,or native or non-native vegetation that could fuel spread of a wildfire.As such,buildout of the GPU within already developed areas would not result in an increase in the construction of combustible structures and improvements in areas immediately surrounded by dense,flammable vegetation.The GPU would not result in a substantial increase in the potential for wildfires to move through developed areas of the Planning Area. The proposed Project would develop a low-rise residential structure located in the Commercial District,which has comparably less grasses and vegetation that could act as wildfire fuel than most of the Planning Area.Development of the Project would also be limited to the Project Site itself.As with other future development projects under the GPU,the proposed Project would be required to comply with more stringent standards to resist ignition and slow the spread of fire per LACoFD standards,and no building permit would be issued by the City until construction plans have been reviewed and determined to be in full compliance with all applicable standards for development in a VHFHSZ.Therefore, consistent with the less-than-significant impacts identified in the GPU EIR,the proposed Project would not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan, and impacts would be less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the GPU EIR.Likewise,there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification.The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR,and no new mitigation measures are required. were July 2024AddendumtotheRollingHillsEstatesGeneralPlanUpdate EIR Page 3-50 B-258 Chapters:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Any New Information of Substantial Importance That Was Not and Could Not Have Been Known at the Time of Certification of the GPU EIR that Rises to the Level of Requiring New Analysis or Verification? Any New or Changed Circumstances Involving New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Are Any New Mitigation Measures Required for the Project? Issues and Supporting Data Sources:GPU EIR Impact Conclusion Project Impact Conclusion 10.HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Would the project: a)Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality? LTS (IS)LTS No No No No b)Substantially decrease groundwatersupplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin? LTS (IS)LTS No No No No c)Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area,including through the alteration of the course of stream or river,in a manner,which would; i)Result in substantial erosion or siltation on-or off-site?LTS (IS)LTS No No No No ii)Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on-or off-site? LTS (IS)LTS No No No No Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-51 I B-259 I Vestar Apartments ProjectChapter3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Any New Information of Substantial Importance That Was Not and Could Not Have Been Known at the Time of Certification of the GPU EIR that Rises to the Level of Requiring New Analysis or Verification? Any New or Changed Circumstances Involving New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Are Any New Mitigation Measures Required for the Project?Issues and Supporting Data Sources: Project Impact Conclusion GPU EIR Impact Conclusion iii)Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? NoNoNoNoLTSLTS(IS) NoNoNoNoNlNl(IS)iv)Impede or redirect flood flows? d)In flood hazard,tsunami,or seiche zones,risk release of pollutants due to project inundation? NoNoNoNoNlNl(IS) e)Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan? NoNoNoNoLTSLTS(IS) Discussion: a)Would the Project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality? As determined through the Notice of Preparation/Scoping process (i.e.,Initial Study)conducted prior to the preparation of the GPU EIR, future development projects under the GPU,specifically on sites that are one acre or larger,would be subject to the requirements of the NPDES Construction General Permit and the RHEMC.Both the RHEMC and the NPDES Construction General Permit require application of erosion and sedimentation control best management practices (BMPs)during construction for proper water quality management.Any development project under one acre would be required to implement construction BMPs to minimize erosion and July 2024AddendumtotheRollingHillsEstatesGeneralPlanUpdate EIR Page 3-52 B-260 Chapter 3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project the discharge of pollutants off-site.Erosion control BMPs are designed to prevent erosion,whereas sediment controls are designed totrapsedimentonceithasbeenmobilized.Each development project would be required to prepare a Wet Weather Erosion ControlPlan,which will identify BMPs,and be designed to prevent erosion and construction pollutants from entering the City’s storm drain andreceivingwaters.By requiring implementation of a Wet Weather Erosion Control Plan and BMPs during construction activities,the Cityensuresthattheseactivitieswouldnotviolatestandardsordegradewaterquality.As part of its normal project approval and constructionoversightactivities,the City monitors compliance with these requirements.Furthermore,all construction projects with disturbed 'of one acre or greater would be required to prepare a stormwater pollution prevention plans (SWPPP).During operation of such projectsduringbuildoutoftheGPU,stormwater pollution controls would also be required and provided in plans to the City.With the requiredcompliancewiththeNPDESConstructionGeneralPermitandtheRHEMC,future development projects under the GPU would result inless-than-significant impacts related to a violation of water quality standards or waste discharge requirements and substantialdegradationofsurfacewaterorgroundwaterquality.As the Project would result in disturbance of greater than one acre,the ProjectwouldcomplywiththerequirementsoftheNPDESConstructionGeneralPermitandtheRHEMC.Accordingly,because the ProjectwouldberequiredtoimplementBMPstocontrolrunoffconsistentwithapplicableregulations,as discussed in the GPU EIR,the Projectwouldalsoresultinless-than-significant impacts related to a violation of water quality standards or waste discharge requirements orsubstantialdegradationofsurfacewaterorgroundwaterquality. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposedProjectwouldoccurorworsenthe less-than-significant impacts identified in the Initial Study.Likewise,there is no new information ofsubstantialimportancerequiringnewanalysisorverification.The Project does not propose substantial changes that require majorrevisionstotheGPUEIR,and no new mitigation measures are required, b)Would the Project substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge suchthattheprojectmayimpedesustainablegroundwatermanagementofthebasin? As determined through the Notice of Preparation/Scoping process (i.e.,Initial Study)conducted prior to the preparation of the GPU EIR,since the Planning Area is primarily developed with impervious surfaces,the potential for groundwater recharge through percolation ofstormwaterorlandscapingwateriscurrentlylow.Future development under the GPU would not directly use any groundwater to servefutureusesandisnotexpectedto result in a substantial depletion of groundwater resources.Moreover,the Planning Area does notsourcedomesticwaterfromgroundwaterwells.Accordingly,as determined in the Initial Study,implementation of the GPU,includingdevelopmentoftheProject,would not substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge,and impactswouldbelessthansignificant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposedProjectwouldoccurorworsentheless-than-significant impacts identified in the Initial Study.Likewise,there is no new information ofsubstantialImportancerequiringnewanalysisorverification.The Project does not propose substantial changes that require majorrevisionstotheGPUEIR,and no new mitigation measures are required. areas Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates Genera!Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-53 B-261 Vestar Apartments ProjectChapter3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts c.i)Would the Project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area,including through the alteration of the course of stream or river,in a manner,which would result in substantia!erosion or siltatlon on- or off-site? c.ii)Would the Project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area,including through the alteration of the course of stream or river,in a manner,which would result in substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on-or off-site? c.iii)Would the Project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area,including through the alteration of the course of stream or river,in a manner,which would 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? As determined through the Notice of Preparation/Scoping process (i.e.,Initial Study)conducted prior to the preparation of the GPU EIR, construction of any future development project under the GPU may involve removal of existing structures and associated hardscape, as well as the disturbance and removal of soil.These activities have the potential to temporarily alter existing drainage patterns on construction sites and immediately surrounding areas by exposing underlying soils,modifying flow direction,and making the construction site temporarily more permeable.However,any future development project,particularly those to be developed on sites that are one acre or larger,including the proposed Project,would be subject to the requirements of the NPDES Construction General Permit,Los Angeles County Municipal Permit,and the RHEMC.In accordance with the requirements of these permits,development projects,including the proposed Project,would implement a SWPPP that specifies BMPs and erosion control measures to be used during construction to manage runoff flows and ensure that stormwater or construction watering runoff does not impact off-site drainage facilities or receiving waters.Therefore,through compliance with all NPDES Construction General Permit requirements,as well as compliance with applicable City grading permit regulations,construction activities associated with future development projects under the GPU,including the proposed Project,would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the construction site or area in a manner that would result in substantial erosion or siltation on-or off-site,flooding on-or off-site,or exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff,and impacts would be less than significant. While there may be an increase in imperviousness of a development site,this increase would not substantially increase the amount of runoff from the site.Flows would be accommodated by the existing stormwater treatment and conveyance system,in addition, implementation of Low Impact Development (LID)BMPs required by the Los Angeles County Municipal Permit would target the pollutants that could potentially be carried in stormwater runoff.Therefore,with the incorporation of LID BMPs,construction and operation of any future development project under the GPU,including the proposed Project,would not cause flooding,create runoff volumes that would exceed the capacity of existing infrastructure,or result in substantial additional sources of polluted runoff,and impacts would be less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the Initial Study.Likewise,there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification.The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR,and no new mitigation measures are required. July 2024AddendumtotheRollingHillsEstatesGeneralPlanUpdate EIR Page 3-54 B-262 Chapter 3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project c.iii)Would the Project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area,including through the alteration ofthecourseofstreamorriver,in a manner,which would impede or redirect flood flows? As determined through the Notice of Preparation/Scoping process (i.e.,Initial Study)conducted prior to the preparation of the GPU EIR,implementation of any future development project under the GPU,including the proposed Project,would not result in the placement ofuseswithina100-year or 500-year flood zone to impede or redirect flood flows.Therefore,any future development project the GPU,including the proposed Project,would not result in impacts related to flood flows. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposedProjectwouldoccurorchangetheno impact determination in the Initial Study.Likewise,there is no new information of substantialimportancerequiringnewanalysisor verification.The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to theGPUEIR,and no new mitigation measures are required, d)In flood hazard,tsunami,or seiche zones,would the Project risk release of pollutants due to project inundation? As determined through the Notice of Preparation/Scoping process (i.e.,Initial Study)conducted prior to the preparation of the GPU EIR,the Planning Area is not within a flood hazard,tsunami,or seiche zone and,as such,would not risk release of pollutants due toinundationofanyfuturedevelopmentsite.Therefore,any future development project under the GPU,including the proposed Project,would not result in impacts related to the release of pollutants due to inundation. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposedProjectwouldoccurorchangetheno impact determination in the Initial Study.Likewise,there is no new information of substantialimportancerequiringnewanalysisor verification.The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to theGPUEIR,and no new mitigation measures are required, e)Would the Project conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwatermanagementplan? As determined through the Notice of Preparation/Scoping process (i.e.,Initial Study)conducted prior to the preparation of the GPU EIR,the storm drain system that serves the Planning Area would continue to drain into Machado Lake,Santa Monica Bay,and the LosAngelesHarbor,which are identified as impaired water bodies.Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL)water quality standards have beenadoptedforthese water bodies for trash,bacteria,nitrogen,and phosphorous.As described in the GPU EIR,the County of Los AngelesandtheLosAngelesCountyFloodControlDistrict,as well as the cities of Rolling Hills Estates,Palos Verdes Estates,and RanchoPalosVerdes,collaborated on the development of an Enhanced Watershed Management Program (EWMP)to address the water qualityprioritiesforthePalosVerdesPeninsulawatersheds.The EWMP for the Palos Verdes Peninsula,which was approved by the LosAngelesRegionalWaterQualityControlBoardin2016andmodifiedin2019,continues to provide water quality goals and action itemstoachievethewastedischargestandardsandrequirementsformunicipalstormwatersystems. Both construction and operation activities associated with future development projects under the GPU could generate additional waterpollutantsthatcouldadverselyaffectstormwaterqualityandthewaterqualityindownstreamMachadoLake.Construction-r elated Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-55 1 1 B-263 Vestar Apartments ProjectChapters:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts activities can release sediments from exposed soils into local storm drains.In addition,construction waste materials,such as chemicals, liquid products,and petroleum products,may make their way into local storm drains.However,future development projects would be subject to the requirements of the NPDES Permit,the Los Angeles County Municipal Permit,and the RHEMC.Pursuant to these requirements,best management practices (BMPs)would be instituted to effectively offset these potential sources of water pollution.As such,implementation of any future development project under the GPU would not introduce new pollutants or an increase in pollutants that would conflict or obstruct the EWMP or any water quality control plans for the Palos Verdes Peninsula Watershed.In addition,as discussed above,implementation of the GPU would not substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge;as such,implementation of any future development project under the GPU would not introduce new pollutants or an increase in pollutants that would conflict or obstruct a sustainable groundwater management plan.Impacts of the GPU would be less than significant. As previously described, while there may be an increase in imperviousness of a development site,this increase would not substantially increase the amount of runoff from the site.Flows would be accommodated by the existing stormwater treatment and conveyance system,and the Project would implement BMPs to target pollutants that could potentially be carried in stormwater runoff.Therefore, with the incorporation of LID BMPs,the proposed Project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan,and impacts would be less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the Initial Study.Likewise,there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification.The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR,and no new mitigation measures are required. July 2024AddendumtotheRollingHillsEstatesGeneralPlanUpdate EIR Page 3-56 B-264 Vestar Apartments ProjectChapter3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Any New Information of Substantial Importance That Was Not and Could Not Have Been Known at the Time of Certification of the GPU EIR that Rises to the Level of Requiring New Analysis or Verification? Any New or Changed Circumstances Involving New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Are Any New Mitigation Measures Required for the Project? Issues and Supporting Data Sources: Project Impact Conclusion GPU EIR Impact Conclusion 11.LAND USE AND PLANNING Would the project; a)Physically divide an established community?NoNoNoNlNoNl(IS) b)Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan,policy,or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? No NoNoLTSNoLTS Discussion: a)Would the Project physically divide an established community? As determined through the Notice of Preparation/Scoping process (i.e.,Initial Study)conducted prior to the preparation of the GPU EIR, land use changes proposed within the specific plan areas are intended to tie into the existing uses and surrounding neighborhoods.As such,it was concluded that the GPU would not physically divide an existing community,and no impact would occur.Similarly,as the Project would replace a vacant building and surface parking with a residential development,the Project would not physically divide an existing community,and no impact would occur. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or change the no impact determination in the Initial Study.Likewise,there is no new information of substantial July 2024AddendumtotheRollingHillsEstatesGeneralPlanUpdateEIR Page 3-57 I I I B-265 I Vestar Apartments ProjectChapter3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts importance requiring new analysis or verification.The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR,and no new mitigation measures are required, b)Would the Project cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan,policy,or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? The GPU EIR analyzed the GPU’s consistency with relevant regional transportation goals contained in the SCAG 2016-2040 RTP/SCS and 2020-2045 RTP/SCS and concluded that the GPU would support further implementation of the RTP/SCS goals,such as maximizing mobility and accessibility for all people,protecting the environment and health of residents by encouraging active transportation,and encouraging diverse housing types in areas supported by multiple transportation options.In addition,the EIR concluded that with adoption of the GPU,the GPU’s amendments to the Zoning Ordinance,including a new Mixed-Use Overlay covering the Commercial District for Commercial General-Designated land and increased density opportunities,would have less-than-significan t impacts related to consistency with land use plans,policies,and regulations.Furthermore,since the GPU ElR’s representative projects are a subset of buildout of the GPU and the total buildout of the GPU was determined to not conflict with SCAG's RTP/SCS goals and policies,as well as applicable provisions of the City's Zoning Code,future development activity,such as the representative projects,would not result in significant impacts related to consistency with land use plans.Compliance with all applicable regulations and requirements would ensure that land use impacts of representative projects related to consistency with applicable plans,policies,and regulations would be less than significant.The proposed Project would be consistent with the new CGMU zoning and bonus level development opportunities for the Project Site in providing affordable housing,shared parking,and improved pedestrian connectivity,which are considered community benefits according to the City.Therefore,consistent with the GPU EIR,Project impacts related to consistency with land use plans and policies would be less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the GPU EIR.Likewise,there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification.The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR,and no new mitigation measures are required. July 2024AddendumtotheRollingHillsEstatesGeneralPlanUpdate EIR Page 3-58 B-266 Chapter 3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Any New Information of Substantial Importance That Was Not and Could Not Have Been Known at the Time of Certification of the GPU EIR that Rises to the Level of Requiring New Analysis or Verification? Any New or Changed Circumstances Involving New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Are Any New Mitigation Measures Required for the Project ? Issues and Supporting Data Sources: GPU EIR Impact Conclusion Project Impact Conclusion 12.MINERAL RESOURCES Would the project: a)Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? Nl (IS)NI No No No No b)Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan,specific plan or other land use plan? Nl (IS)Nl No No No No Discussion: As determined through the Notice of Preparation/Scoping process (i.e.,Initial Study)conducted prior to the preparation of the GPU EIR, there are no mineral resource extraction or processing operations in the Planning Area.While a portion of the Planning Area is designated as Mineral Resource Zone 2,this area is no longer used for mineral extraction and has been repurposed for commercial recreation and residential uses.According to the Initial Study,it is considered extremely unlikely that there might be a future proposal to remove existing land uses in order to establish an operation to extract mineral resources.Therefore,the Initial Study determined that the GPU would not adversely affect the availability of a known mineral resource or a locally important mineral resource recovery site,and no impacts would occur. The proposed Project would be developed within the City’s Commercial District on a site currently occupied by a vacant one-story building and associated parking.Accordingly, as with the determination in the Initial Study,the proposed Project would not adversely affect the Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-59 B-267 I I Vestar Apartments ProjectChapters:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts availability of a known mineral resource or a locally important mineral resource recovery site.Therefore,no impacts related to mineral resources would occur. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or change the no impact determinations identified in the Initial Study.Likewise,there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification.The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR,and no new mitigation measures are required. July 2024AddendumtotheRollingHillsEstatesGeneralPlanUpdate EIR Page 3-60 B-268 Vestar Apartments ProjectChapters:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Any New Information of Substantial Importance That Was Not and Could Not Have Been Known at the Time of Certification of the GPU EIR that Rises to the Level of Requiring New Analysis or Verification? Any New or Changed Circumstances Involving New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Are Any New Mitigation Measures Required for the Project? Issues and Supporting Data Sources; Project Impact Conclusion GPU EIR Impact Conclusion 13.NOISE Would the project result in: a)Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? LTS No No No NoLTS b)Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? No NoLTS-M LTS No No c)For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or,where such a plan has not been adopted,within 2 miles of a public or public use airport,would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? No NoNl(IS)Nl No No July 2024AddendumtotheRollingHillsEstatesGeneralPlanUpdateEIR Page 3-61 III B-269 Vestar Apartments ProjectChapter3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Discussion: a)Would the Project result in generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance,or applicable standards of other agencies? The GPU EIR analyzed impacts to noise from construction and operation of buildout of the GPU,including traffic noise, stationary noise, residential/commercial uses,parking,mechanical equipment,and landscape maintenance.The GPU EIR determined that development projects would be subject to environmental review,and specific construction noise attenuation techniques would be utilized to reduce noise generation during construction and ensure compliance with noise standards set forth in RHEMC Sections 8.32.050, 8.32.060, 8.32.070 or 8.32.085.Compliance with permitted construction hours per RHEMC Section 8.32.210 would reduce short-term construction noise impacts to less-than-significant levels.Analysis in the GPU EIR also demonstrated that when compared to existing conditions,future noise levels of the GPU’s low range and high range buildout scenarios would not increase by 3 dBA or more,and the Project is within the traffic generation and buildout assumptions of the GPU EIR;as such,long-term mobile traffic noise impacts resulting from the GPU were determined to be less than significant. To assess noise from residential uses,the GPU EIR included an analysis of two representative projects,the small site project and medium site project,which include multi-family residential uses in either mixed-use buildings or apartment/multi-family buildings.Noise sources from such multi-family residential uses could include mechanical equipment,woodworking,car repair,home repair,as well as noise from any outdoor activity areas (e.g.,community/associati on pools,children’s play areas,rooftop decks,etc.).The potential noise impacts from such outdoor activity areas would be dependent on various factors,including the type,scale,and intensity of use of such facilities,the orientation of project in relation to the activity area,the proximity of sensitive receptors,and the background ambient noise level.The GPU EIR stated that without specific development information,quantification of potential noise levels cannot be conducted without undue speculation.However,as with all residential uses,future projects,such as the representative projects,would be required to comply with RHEMC Section 8.32.090,which prohibits any source of sound at any location exceeding the City’s exterior and interior noise standards when measured on property line.As concluded in the GPU EIR,the required compliance with the RHEMC would ensure that potential noise impacts from the representative projects would be less than significant. As previously described,the Project is considered a medium site project with multi-family residential uses.The Project would generate noise typical of such multi-family developments,including noise associated with outdoor spaces (such as the pool deck on Level 3), parking,mechanical equipment,and landscape maintenance,and would be required to comply with RHEMC noise standards.However, pursuant to Assembly Bill 1307,which was passed in September 2023,and as included in PRC Section 21085,the effects of noise generated by project occupants and their guests on human beings is not a significant effect on the environment for residential projects. Therefore,for CEQA purposes,the Project’s noise impacts during operation would be less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the GPU EIR.Likewise,there is no new information of July 2024AddendumtotheRollingHillsEstatesGeneralPlanUpdate EIR Page 3-62 B-270 Vestar Apartments ProjectChapter3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification.The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR,and no new mitigation measures are required, b)Would the Project result in generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? According to the GPU EIR,ground-borne vibration generated during construction activities would primarily impact existing sensitive uses that are located adjacent to or within the immediate vicinity of specific projects.Land uses considered sensitive by the State of California include residences,schools,playgrounds,hospitals,rest homes,rehabilitation centers,long-term care,and mental care facilities.As determined in the GPU EIR,vibration levels could reach up to 87 vibration decibels (VdB)for typical construction activities (and up to 104 VdB if pile driving activities were to occur)at sensitive uses located within 25 feet of construction.Sensitive uses that are located at or within 25 feet of potential project construction sites may experience vibration levels during construction activities that exceed the vibration impact threshold of 80 VdB for human annoyance established by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA). Accordingly,the GPU EIR identified mitigation measures to reduce vibration impacts related to human annoyance.In particular, Mitigation Measure MM-NOl-1 requires that a project-specific vibration impact analysis be conducted should certain construction activities take place within 25 feet of an occupied sensitive use.In addition.Mitigation Measure MM-NOI-2 would prohibit pile driving within 50 feet of historic structures and instead utilize alternative installation methods;require a preconstruction survey of all designated historic buildings within 50 feet of proposed construction activities:and require vibration monitoring prior to and during pile driving operations occurring within 100 feet of historic structures.Therefore,implementation of Mitigation Measures MM-NOI-1 and MM-NOI- 2 would reduce short-term vibration impacts of the GPU to a less-than-significant level. As there are no sensitive uses within 25 feet of the Project Site,the Project would not result in the exceedance of the vibration impact threshold for human annoyance,and thus.Mitigation Measure MM-NOI-1 would not apply to the Project.Mitigation Measure MM-NOI- 2 would require that a preconstruction survey of all eligible for listing or listed historic buildings under the National Register of Historic Places,California Register of Historic Resources,and/or local historic database(s)within 50 feet of proposed construction activities be conducted.If applicable,specific pile driving installations and vibration monitoring and limits in accordance with the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans)Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual would be required.There are no buildings within 50 feet of the proposed construction activities that are older than 45 years,and thus,MM-NOI-2 would not apply to the Project. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impact with mitigation identified in the GPU EIR.Likewise,there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification.The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR,and no new mitigation measures are required, c)For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or,where such a plan has not been adopted,within 2 miles of a public or public use airport,would the Project expose people residing or working in the Project area to excessive noise levels? As previously described,the nearest public use airport to the GPU Planning Area is Zamperini Field in the City of Torrance,which is located approximately 0.5 mile to the north.However,as determined through the Notice of Preparation/Scoping process (i.e..Initial July 2024AddendumtotheRollingHillsEstatesGeneralPlanUpdate EIR Page 3-63 I B-271 I Vestar Apartments ProjectChapter3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Study)conducted prior to the preparation of the GPU EIR,implementation of the GPU would not result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the Planning Area.Implementation of the GPU would not cause any noise-related impacts from aircraft operating to or from Zamperini Field.Therefore,as determined in the Initial Study,the GPU would not expose people to excessive airport related noise and would have no associated impacts.For the Project,the Zamperini Field is located greater than 2 miles from the Project Site.Accordingly,no Project impacts related to noise and airport uses would occur. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or change the no impact determination identified in the Initial Study.Likewise,there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification.The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR,and no new mitigation measures are required. July 2024AddendumtotheRollingHillsEstatesGeneralPlanUpdate EIR Page 3-64 B-272 Chapter 3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Any New Information of Substantial Importance That Was Not and Could Not Have Been Known at the Time of Certification of the GPU EIR that Rises to the Level of Requiring New Analysis or Verification? Any New or Changed Circumstances Involving New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New Significant impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Are Any New Mitigation Measures Required for the Project? Issues and Supporting Data Sources: GPU EIR Impact Conclusion Project Impact Conclusion 14.POPULATION AND HOUSING Would the project: a)Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example,by proposing new homes and businesses)or indirectly (for example,through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? LTS LTS No No No No b)Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? LTS Nl No No No No Discussion: a)Would the Project induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area,either directly (for example,by proposing new homes and businesses)or indirectly (for example,through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? According to the GPU EIR,although buildout of the GPU would accommodate greater population and housing than SCAG’s forecast for the City,it was not considered substantial unplanned population growth.The GPU would provide the capacity and flexibility to accommodate anticipated growth,and the City is required to accommodate its share of SCAG’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA)allocation.To that end,the GPU included a Commercial District Mixed-Use Overlay to allow future housing development on parcels zoned Commercial General at an increased density from the existing Overlay,which ensures the City’s ability to accommodate Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-65 II B-273 Vestar Apartments ProjectChapter3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts its RHNA allocation.The GPU EIR determined that population impacts of the GPU would be less than significant.Since the representative projects are a subset of buildout of the GPU,new development generated by the representative projects has already been accounted for in the estimated population,housing,and employment changes in the Planning Area from buildout of the GPU.As the Project would be consistent with a medium site representative project.Project impacts would similarly be less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the GPU EIR.Likewise,there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification.The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR,and no new mitigation measures are required, b)Would the Project displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing,necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? According to the GPU EIR,any displacement of existing people or housing that could occur during buildout of the GPU could be replaced on land within the Planning Area that would allow for residential uses under the GPU land use designations.To that end, both the low range and high range buildout scenarios for the GPU anticipated an increase in housing in the Planning Area.Therefore, the GPU EIR determined that impacts related to the displacement of substantial numbers of existing people or housing such that the construction of replacement housing would be necessary elsewhere would be less than significant.For the Project,as demolition of the vacant,non-residential building on-site would not result in the displacement of residents or housing.Project impacts related to displacement would not occur. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or change the no impact determination identified in the GPU EIR.Likewise,there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification.The project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GP EIR,and no new mitigation measures are required. July 2024AddendumtotheRollingHillsEstatesGeneralPlanUpdate EIR Page 3-66 B-274 Chapter 3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Any New Information of Substantial Importance That Was Not and Could Not Have Been Known at the Time of Certification of the GPU EIR that Rises to the Level of Requiring New Analysis or Verification? Any New or Changed Circumstances Involving New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Are Any New Mitigation Measures Required for the Project? Issues and Supporting Data Sources: GPU EIR Impact Conclusion Project Impact Conclusion 15.PUBLIC SERVICES Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmentalfacilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities,the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts,in order to maintain acceptable service ratios,response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: a) Fire protection?LTS LTS No No No No b)Police Protection?LTS LTS No No No No c)Schools?LTS LTS No No No No d)Other public facilities?LTS LTS No No No No Discussion: a)Would the Project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities (i.e.,fire protection facilities),need for new or physically altered governmental facilities,the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts,in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for fire protection services? The GPU Planning Area is served by LACoFD.According to the GPU EIR,implementation of the GPU would result in additional demand on existing fire and emergency medical services {i.e.,additional staffing,equipment,expanded/new facilities)as future development projects are implemented and population increases.However,future development is assumed to occur over several years through 2040;as such,any increase in demand for fire protection services would occur gradually as additional development and associated population growth is added to the Planning Area.LACoFD would continue to monitor resources to ensure that adequate facilities and staffing are available.In addition,any future development under the GPU would be required to comply with the provisions of the California Fire and Building Codes,California Health and Safety Code,RHEMC,and applicable national standards related to Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-67 B-275 I Chapters:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project fire protection and prevention,as well as all applicable fire code requirements for construction,access,water mains,fire flows,and hydrants.Individual project development plans would be reviewed by the City and LACoFD to determine specific fire requirements (e.g.,fire flow capacities,emergency access,fuel modification plans)applicable to the specific development and to ensure compliance with these requirements.The GPU EIR concluded that buildout of the GPU,including the representative projects,would result in less- than-significant impacts related to fire protection and emergency medical services. The Project would be served by LACoFD Fire Station 106,which is located at 27413 Indian Peak Road,approximately 450 feet southwest of the Project Site.The Project’s residential development,which falls in the category of the medium site project,would be designed and constructed in accordance with fire protection and safety requirements and would undergo review by the City and LACoFD to ensure compliance with specific fire requirements (e.g.,fire flow capacities,emergency access,fuel modification plans). The Project is within the buildout assumed by the GPU EIR and analyzed to conclude no significant fire service impacts would result. The Project would pay applicable development impact fees that would contribute to providing needed fire services in the City,as the City builds out consistent with the GPU.As with the determination in the GPU EIR,Project impacts related to fire protection and emergency medical services would be less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the GPU EIR.Likewise,there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification.The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR,and no new mitigation measures are required, b)Would the Project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities (i.e.,police protection facilities),need for new or physically altered governmental facilities,the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts,in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for police protection services? The GPU Planning Area is served by the Los Angeles County Sheriffs Department (LASD). According to the GPU EIR,implementation of the GPU would result in additional demand on existing police protection and law enforcement services provided by LASD as future development projects are implemented and population increases.However,as described above,future development is assumed to occur over multiple years through 2040.As such,any increase in demand for police protection and law enforcement services would occur gradually as additional development and associated population growth is added to the Planning Area.LASD would continue to monitor resources to ensure that adequate facilities and staffing are available.In addition,any future development under the GPU would be required to comply with the provisions of the RHEMC related to public safety.Individual project development plans would be reviewed by the City and LASD to determine specific design requirements related to emergency access,lighting,and public safety that are applicable to the specific development and to ensure compliance with these requirements.The GPU EIR concluded that buildout of the GPU,including the representative projects,would result in less-than-significant impacts related to police protection and law enforcement services. The Project’s residential development,which falls in the category of the medium site project,would be constructed with safety and security design measures and would undergo review by the City and LASD to ensure compliance with specific requirements.The Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-68 B-276 Vestar Apartments ProjectChapter3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts proposed Project is within the buildout assumed by the GPU EIR and analyzed to conclude no significant police services impacts would result.The Project would pay applicable development impact fees that would contribute to providing needed police services in the City,as the City builds out consistent with the GPU.As with the determination in the GPU EIR,Project impacts related to police protection services would be less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the GPU EIR.Likewise,there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification.The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR,and no new mitigation measures are required, c)Would the Project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities (i.e.,school facilities),need for new or physically altered governmental facilities,the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts,in order to maintain acceptable service ratios or other performance objectives for schools? The GPU Planning Area is served by the Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified School District (PVPUSD).As described in the GPU EIR, buildout of the GPU could result in the development of additional residential uses,comprising of multifamily dwelling units and ADUs, that would range from 878 units to 2,158 units over existing conditions in the Planning Area.Such development would increase the student population in the PVPUSD.However,future development under the GPU is anticipated to occur gradually through 2040 and would be largely based on market demand.Thus,any increase in demand for school services would occur gradually as additional development occurs in the Planning Area.Regardless,the GPU EIR demonstrated that the estimated increase in students within the PVPUSD,when compared to student enrollment in the three school years prior to the COVID-19 pandemic remain less than the historical maximum enrollment experienced by the PVPUSD in the last two decades.Furthermore,pursuant to SB 50,payment of fees to the PVPUSD is considered full mitigation for project impacts,including impacts related to the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities,need for new or physically altered governmental facilities,the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts,in order to maintain acceptable service ratios,or other performance objectives for school facilities.Therefore, the GPU EIR determined that buildout of the GPU would result in a less-than-significant impact on school services and facilities. While the proposed 90 residential units would be anticipated to generate a corresponding student population,the Project,as with other developments under the GPU.would be required to pay the statutory fees to allow the PVPUSD to adequately serve its student population and ensure that potential impacts to PVPUSD would remain less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the GPU EIR.Likewise,there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification.The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR,and no new mitigation measures are required, d)Would the Project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities (i.e.,other public facilities,such as libraries),need for new or physically altered governmental July 2024AddendumtotheRollingHillsEstatesGeneralPlanUpdate EIR Page 3-69 B-277 I Vestar Apartments ProjectChapter3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts facilities,the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts,in order to maintain acceptable service ratios or other performance objectives for libraries? The GPU Planning Area is served by the Palos Verdes Library District (PVLD), which provides library services to all four cities on the Palos Verdes Peninsula,including the City of Rolling Hills Estates,as well as a small portion of unincorporated area in Los Angeles County.The PVLD is primarily funded through property taxes,with supplemental revenue in the form of gifts and grants.In the GPU Planning Area,the Peninsula Center Library is the main library at 701 Silver Spur Road and was expanded in 1995.As previously described,future development is assumed to occur over approximately two decades through 2040,and any increase in demand for library facilities would occur gradually as additional development and associated population growth is added to the Planning Area. Furthermore,the PVLD would continue to be funded by proportional increases in property tax,charges for library services,and other funding sources,such as those provided by the Peninsula Friends of the Library,to offset impacts of new development on PVLD services in the Planning Area.As determined in the GPU EIR,new residential units developed under the buildout of the GPU are expected to be equipped to receive individual internet service to provide more accessible information and research capabilities and the PVLD’s online services.Therefore,buildout of the GPU,including the representative projects,would not be anticipated to result in substantial increase in demand that would necessitate new or physically altered library facilities,the construction of which would cause significant environmental impacts. The Project’s residential development,which falls in the category of the medium site project,would not result in substantial increase in demand for library facilities.As such,Project impacts on library facilities would be less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the GPU EIR.Likewise,there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification.The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GP EIR,and no new mitigation measures are required. July 2024AddendumtotheRollingHillsEstatesGeneralPlanUpdateEIR Page 3-70 B-278 Chapters:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Any New Information of Substantial Importance That Was Not and Could Not Have Been Known at the Time of Certification of the GPU EIR that Rises to the Level of Requiring New Analysis or Verification? Any New or Changed Circumstances Involving New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Are Any New Mitigation Measures Required for the Project? GPU EIR Impact Conclusion Issues and Supporting Data Sources: Project Impact Conclusion 16.PARKS AND RECREATION Would the project: a)Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities,or need for new or physically altered governmental facilities,the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts in order to maintain acceptable service ratios,response times or other performance objectives for parks? LTS LTS No No No No b)Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational efcilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? LTS LTS No No No No c)Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? LTS LTS No No No No Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-71 I B-279 Vestar Apartments ProjectChapter3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Discussion: a)Would the Project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities,or need for new or physically altered governmental facilities,the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts in order to maintain acceptable service ratios,response times or other performance objectives for parks? b)Would the Project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? The GPU Planning Area includes City-owned parks and open space,trails,recreational facilities,Los Angeles County-owned parks and open spaces. Residents of the Planning Area also have the opportunity to visit private properties not managed by the City,including the Rolling Hills Country Club,the South Coast Botanic Garden (in the City’s Sphere of Influence [SOI]),and parks in the SOI.Public parks and facilities are funded by a combination of the City’s general fund,special funds,and private foundations and grants.As described in the GPU EIR,in 2020,the City had a ratio of approximately 6.6 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents,which exceeded the City’s requirement of 5 acres of park and recreational facilities per 1,000 residents as established in RHEMC Chapter 16.08.In addition,when compared to cities throughout Los Angeles County as a whole.Rolling Hills Estates provides approximately twice as much parkland per resident.Under the high-range scenario,the GPU would not meet the City’s target of 5 acres per 1,000 residents to be unmet;however,the City would still provide more parkland per resident when compared to other cities throughout Los Angeles County.Furthermore,the future development is anticipated to occur gradually through 2040,during which developers of future development projects under the GPU would be required to pay park fees or dedicate land in accordance with RHEMC requirements. Payment of fees would partially offset the deterioration of existing parks and recreation facilities by allocating these fees to the development of new or rehabilitation of existing neighborhood or community park or recreational facilities.The GPU also promotes the provision of community open space,such as plaza spaces and enhanced sidewalk space,by offering density bonuses for projects with substantial community benefit.The GPU EIR concluded that continued cooperation and coordination between the City and developers of future development projects under the GPU would ensure adequate provision and/or maintenance of parks and recreational facilities throughout the Planning Area and would result in a less-than-significant impact to parks and recreational facilities. The Project is consistent with the development assumptions and population projections of the GPU EIR,which analyzed potential impacts resulting from such increases.Also,the Project proposes 1,175 square feet of open space on Level 1,and each residential unit would include a 60-square-foot private deck.On Level 3,the Project would provide 11,225 square feet of outdoor open space with a pool,lounge seating,dining areas,fireplaces/firepits,barbeques,and an outdoor kitchen,as well as 3,500 square feet of indoor recreational amenities.In addition,as required, the Project would pay the mandatory park fees or provide land dedication to allow the City to adequately provide and/or maintain its parks and recreational facilities to serve its residents;as such,impacts of the proposed Project on parks and recreational facilities would be considered less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the GPU EIR.Likewise,there is no new information of July 2024AddendumtotheRollingHillsEstatesGeneralPlanUpdate EIR Page 3-72 B-280 Chapter 3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification.The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR,and no new mitigation measures are required, c)Would the Project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities,which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? According to the GPU EIR,the GPU would allow for and encourage development of community open spaces as part of future development projects,such as plazas and community gathering spaces,which would further contribute to the City’s existing recreational amenities and open space.For example,the scale of community open spaces and recreational amenities to be included in the representative projects and other projects developed under the GPU is expected to be commensurate with the scale of the development project and the size of the site.The potential physical effects of such facilities would be a subset of the impacts of the overall buildout of the GPU,and there would be no additional,different,or more intense environmental impacts beyond those described in the GPU EIR resulting from the overall buildout of the GPU.Therefore,the GPU EIR determined that,while the GPU would allow for and encourage development of community open spaces and recreational amenities as part of future development projects,such as the representative projects,adoption and implementation of the GPU would not result in adverse physical effects on the environment not otherwise evaluated in the GPU EIR and concluded that impacts related to parks and recreational facilities would be less than significant. As previousiy described,the Project would include private and public on-site open space and recreational amenities for its residents, and,as discussed throughout this addendum,potential physical effects of the Project,including impacts from construction (e.g.,noise generation,air pollutant emissions,vegetation removal,ground disturbance,etc.)and impacts from operation (e.g.,noise from outdoor activity and human congregation,light and glare from illumination,demand for public services,etc.),have been determined to be less than significant.Therefore,overall Project impacts related to parks and recreation would be less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the iess-than-significant impacts identified in the GPU EIR.Likewise,there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification.The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GP EIR,and no new mitigation measures are required. Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-73 I B-281 Vestar Apartments ProjectChapter3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Any New Information of Substantial Importance That Was Not and Could Not Have Been Known at the Time of Certification of the GPU EIR that Rises to the Level of Requiring New Analysis or Verification? Any New or Changed Circumstances Involving New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Are Any New Mitigation Measures Required for the Project? Issues and Supporting Data Sources: Project Impact Conclusion GPU EIR Impact Conclusion 17.TRANSPORTATION Would the project: a)Conflict with a program,plan, ordinance,or policy addressing the circulation system,including transit,roadways,bicycle,and pedestrian facilities? No NoNoNoLTSLTS b)Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3,subdivision (b)? No NoNoNoSUsu c)Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g.,sharp curves or dangerous intersections)or incompatible uses (e.g.,farm equipment)? NoNoNoLTSNoLTS d)Result in inadequate emergency access?No NoNoNoLTSLTS July 2024AddendumtotheRollingHillsEstatesGeneralPlanUpdateEIR Page 3-74 B-282 Chapters:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Discussion: a)Would the Project conflict with a program,plan,ordinance,or policy addressing the circulation system,including transit, roadways,bicycle,and pedestrian facilities? As discussed in the GPU EIR,the GPU involved updates to the City's seven General Plan Elements,including three that are related to transportation,namely the Mobility Element (formerly Transportation Element),Land Use Element,and Open Space and Recreation Element,as well as the addition of an eighth element (Sustainability Element).The purpose of the Mobility Element is to provide a safe,multimodal,efficient transportation system that meets the current and future needs of the Planning Area.Planning Area residents have a diversity of mobility needs and a desire to be able to move through the Planning Area safely and efficiently,regardless of mode choice.The goals and policies introduced in the Mobility Element are aimed at providing safe,viable alternatives to the automobile when traveling throughout the Planning area,while continuing to provide efficient automobile circulation and recognizing the distinct, rural feel of the Planning Area.The Commercial District,in particular,generally supports multimodal transportation options and would be consistent with policies,plans,and programs that support alternative transportation,as identified in the Mobility Element.The GPU is intended to minimize impacts to the public right-of-way and enhance the user experience by integrating multimodal transportation options,including on-site pedestrian infrastructure and trails connecting to the Commercial District.In addition,the GPU would encourage pedestrian and bicyclist activity because it concentrates the development near public transit and activity centers,which can be accessed by walking,biking,or using public transit.The GPU would also encourage pedestrian activity by designing locations and open space to comply with City standards to provide adequate sight distance and pedestrian movement controls to ensure pedestrian safety.The GPU would not preclude City action to fulfill or implement future projects associated with these networks but,instead, would contribute to overall waikability through enhancements to the Planning Area streetscape.Furthermore,as detailed in Section 4.8,Land Use and Planning,of the GPU EIR,the GPU would support further implementation of regional transportation goals,policies, and actions in the 2016-2040 RTP/SCS and 2020-2045 RTP/SCS.Accordingly,future development projects implemented under the GPU would not conflict with a program,plan,ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system,including transit,roadway,bicycle, and pedestrian facilities,and, as such,impacts would be less than significant. The Project would be located within 0.25 mile of several bus stops (two on Norris Center Drive,four on Silver Spur Road,and two on Hawthorne Boulevard)and is served by transit operated by the PVPTA,Metro,and LADOT.Additionally,the Project would improve the connectivity around the Project Site by adding a sidewalk along the southwestern portion of the Project Site,as well as the addition of a pedestrian crossing at the northeastern corner of the Project Site,to connect the Project to the neighboring shopping center. Furthermore,the Project design provides for adequate pedestrian access to the existing sidewalks along the Project frontage on Norris Center Drive.The Project would comply with City requirements to protect pedestrian safety and circulation,and its features would encourage alternative modes of transportation including biking,transit,and walking,which reduce VMT.Therefore,as with the determination in the GPU EIR,Project impacts related to conflict with plans would be less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significantimpacts identified in the GPU EIR.Likewise,there is no new information of Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-75 B-283 I Vestar Apartments ProjectChapters:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification.The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR,and no new mitigation measures are required, b)Would the Project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3,subdivision (b)? The GPU EIR utilized vehicle miles traveled {VMT)as the metric to analyze the potential transportation impacts of the GPU buildout. The analysis demonstrated that the GPU’s low-range and high-range buildout scenarios would not meet the City’s significance threshold for the residential VMT per capita metric,and the low-range buildout scenario would not meet the City’s significance threshold forthe work VMT per employee metric.As such,the GPU was determined to be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b), and impacts to VMT were determined to be significant.When considering the representative projects,there are no additional or different environmental impacts beyond those resulting from the overall GPU buildout.As a subset of buildout of the GPU,the representative projects themselves would also be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b) given (1)the City’s overall development pattern,(2)the likelihood for personal automobile use to remain the dominant mode of transportation choice in the City through 2040; and (3)that the City is geographically isolated from most major employment centers in the Los Angeles Area,with transit and Transportation Demand Management (TDM)options to get to places of employment being limited and often very time-intensive.The GPU included mitigation measures to reduce VMT,including Mitigation Measure MM-TRAN-1,which requires improvements to pedestrian network,construction or improvements to bike facilities,or expansion of bike networks;Mitigation Measure MM-TRAN-2, which requires expansion of car share programs,provision of ridesharing program, implementation of commute trip reduction programs);and Mitigation Measure MM-TRAN-3,which requires City coordination with neighboring cities and Metro to seek additional transit opportunities and resources in the Planning Area and on the Palos Verdes Peninsula.According to the GPU EIR,the combination of the strategies identified in Mitigation Measure MM-TRAN-1 would yield approximately a 1-to 2-percent VMT reduction for the buildout scenarios.The GPU El R concluded that even with consideration of all viable TDM strategies,the GPU would still result in a significant and unavoidable VMT impact.In addition,as discussed in the GPU EIR,since the representative projects are a subset of buildout of the GPU,and the total buildout of the GPU has been determined to result in a significant impact related to residential VMT,the representative projects themselves would be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b).Therefore,impacts of the representative projects related to VMT would also be considered significant. As previously described,the GPU EIR identifies the Project Site as an Opportunity Site in the Land Use and Housing Elements of the GPU.The Project proposes 90 apartments on a two-acre site and would be consistent with the GPU EIR’s medium site representative project (i.e.,a 60-to 125-unit multi-family residential development on an approximately two-to three-acre site).As noted above,the GPU EIR concluded that buildout of the City consistent with the GPU would result in significant and unavoidable VMT impacts.That impact determination extended to the representative projects because, as noted in the GPU EIR,the representative projects are “a subset of buildout of the proposed GPU and the total buildout of the GPU has been determined to result in significant impact[s]related to residential VMT....” The Project proposes residential development in an area well-served by local retail and public transportation,which facilitates VMT reductions.However,the Project would add residential population to the City commensurate with the planned buildout of the GPU. Because the GPU would result in a significant and unavoidable residential VMT impact,the proposed Project is assumed to result in a similar impact.Therefore,in order to reduce VMT impacts,the GPU EIR’s Mitigation Measure MM-TRAN-1,below,would apply to July 2024AddendumtotheRollingHillsEstatesGeneralPlanUpdate EIR Page 3-76 B-284 Chapters:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project the Project.As the TDM measures included in Mitigation Measure MM-TRAN-2 are primarily targeted at reducing the work VMT per employee metric,such mitigation would not apply to the Project’s residential uses.In addition,Mitigation Measure MM-TRAN-3 would not apply to the Project as it is a City-scale and regional-based measure.As with the determination in the GPU EIR,even with implementation of GPU EIR’s Mitigation Measure MM-TRAN-1,Project impacts related to VMT would be significant and unavoidable. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposedProjectwouldoccurorworsenthesignificantandunavoidableimpactsidentifiedintheGPUEIR.Likewise,there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification.The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR,and no new mitigation measures are required. GPU EIR Mitigation Measure MM-TRAN-1:The City shall work with future developers of multi-family housing,commercial projects,and mixed-use projects to ensure they provide the following as TDM measures for mitigating VMT: ●Provision of Pedestrian Network Improvements:Create a connected pedestrian network within the development and connect to nearby destinations. ●Construction or Improvements to Bike Facility or Expand Bikeway Network:Enhance bicycle network Citywide (or at similar scale),such that a building entrance or bicycle parking is within 200 yards walking or bicycling distance from a bicycle network that connects to at least one of the following:at least 10 diverse uses;a school or employment center,if the project total floor area is 50 percent or more residential:or a bus rapid transit stop,light or heavy rail station,commuter rail station, or ferry terminal, c)Would the Project substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g.,sharp curves or dangerous Intersections)or incompatible uses (e.g.,farm equipment)? d)Would the Project result in inadequate emergency access? As described in the GPU EIR,the City is largely built-out with limited vacant parcels,and implementation of the GPU would introduce land use intensification in certain portions of the Planning Area,primarily in the Commercial District.By focusing development in under utilized areas of the Commercial District,the GPU relieves pressure to develop in open space and lower density areas to avoid changing the semi-rural and suburban character of well-establish ed neighborhoods in the Planning Area or create incompatible uses. In addition,any future development that is consistent with the allowable land uses in the Commercial District would be consistent with the surrounding development and,given engineering design standards,would not create a geometric design feature or inadequate emergency access that would increase hazards in the Planning Area.Accordingly,implementation of the GPU would not result in increased hazards due to a geometric design feature or incompatible uses or inadequate emergency access. The Project would be located in the Commercial District and would construct a use that is compatible with allowed development.The Project would comply with the City’s engineering design standards for driveway and sidewalk widths, turning radii,and sight distance for pedestrians and vehicles to ensure the safety of pedestrians and users of the right-of-way and provide adequate emergency access. Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-77 I 1 B-285 Vestar Apartments ProjectChapter3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Therefore,Project impacts related to increased hazards due to a geometric design feature or incompatible uses or emergency access would be less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant Impacts identified in the GPU EIR.Likewise,there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification.The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR,and no new mitigation measures are required. July 2024AddendumtotheRollingHillsEstatesGeneralPlanUpdate EIR Page 3-78 B-286 Chapter 3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Any New Information of Substantial Importance That Was Not and Could Not Have Been Known at the Time of Certification of the GPU EIR that Rises to the Level of Requiring New Analysis or Verification? Any New or Changed Circumstances Involving New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Are Any New Mitigation Measures Required for the Project? Issues and Supporting Data Sources: GPU EIR Impact Conclusion Project Impact Conclusion 18.TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource,defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074 as either a site,feature,place,cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape,sacred place or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe,and that is: a)Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources,or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code Section 5020.1{k)? SU su No No No No b)A resource determined by the lead agency,in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c)of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1?In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c)of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1,the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe. SU SU No No No No Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-79 B-287 I Vestar Apartments ProjectChapter3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Discussion: As detailed in the GPU EIR,no known tribal cultural resources that are listed in or eligible for listing in the California Register or a local register of historical resources are present within the Planning Area.No tribal cultural resources that could be impacted by the GPU have been identified by the City through the SB 18 or AB 52 process with traditionally geographically affiliated California Native American tribes,or other cultural resources identification efforts.Nonetheless,because various prehistoric archaeological sites have been identified in the Planning Area,the Planning Area is considered potentially sensitive for tribal cultural resources.Accordingly, future development and redevelopment projects must be analyzed on a project-specific basis for conformance with the GPU and other local.State,and federal requirements,as ground-disturbing activities (e.g.,excavation,grading,vegetation removal,and construction) associated with future development and redevelopment projects would have the potential to unearth,damage,and/or destroy known or unknown tribal cultural resources and have the potential to result in adverse impacts.Therefore,impacts of the GPU to tribal cultural resources were determined to potentially be significant,and future projects under the GPU would be subject to Mitigation Measures MM-CUL-4 through MM-CUL-7,which are also included under the archaeological resources discussion in Checklist Section 5,Cultural Resources,above. In particular,Mitigation Measure MM-CUL-4 requires that a site-specific project environmental review and archaeological resources assessment be conducted before ground disturbing and demolition activities are permitted to occur.Mitigation Measure MM-CUL-5 requires additional investigation if the archaeological resources assessment identifies potentially significant archaeological resources, and impacts cannot be avoided.Mitigation Measure MM-CUL-6 requires a qualified archaeologist to monitor all ground-disturb ing construction and preconstruction activities in areas with previously undisturbed soil if the archaeological resources assessment does not identify archaeological resources but finds the area to be highly sensitive for archaeological resources.Mitigation Measure MM- CUL-7 requires an archaeologist,who meets the Secretary’s Standards,to be retained on call if an archaeological resources assessment does not identify potentially significant archaeological resources but the site has moderate sensitivity for archaeological resources. The GPU EIR concluded that,while mitigation and compliance with the applicable GPU’s policies,provisions of the RHEMC,and State and federal regulations would reduce tribal cultural resources impacts,the potential loss of tribal cultural resources may not be adequately mitigated through data recovery and collection methods,as the value of a tribal cultural resource lies in cultural values and religious beliefs of associated tribes.Since significant impacts to tribal cultural resources from future projects developed under the GPU cannot be precluded,impacts were determined to be considered significant and unavoidable. As the proposed Project’s construction activities would include grading and demolition,pursuant to Mitigation Measure MM-CUL-4, the Project would be required to undergo screening to determine whether an archaeological resources assessment is required.With implementation of this measure and subsequent mitigation provided in the GPU EIR,as applicable,Project-specific impacts related to archaeological resources would be reduced to the maximum extent feasible.However,as with the determination in the GPU EIR,since significant impacts to tribal cultural resources during construction cannot be precluded.Project impacts would be considered significant and unavoidable. July 2024AddendumtotheRoilingHillsEstatesGeneralPlanUpdate EIR Page 3-80 B-288 Vestar Apartments ProjectChapter3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed project would occur or worsen the significant and unavoidable impacts identified in the GPU EIR.Likewise,there is no new information of substantia!importance requiring new analysis or verification.The project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR,and no new mitigation measures are required. GPU EIR Mitigation Measures Please refer to Mitigation Measures MM-CUL-4 through MM-CUL-7 identified in Checklist Section 5,Cultural Resources,above. July 2024AddendumtotheRollingHillsEstatesGeneralPlanUpdate EIR Page 3-81 I B-289 Vestar Apartments ProjectChapter3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Any New Information of Substantial Importance That Was Not and Could Not Have Been Known at the Time of Certification of the GPU EIR that Rises to the Level of Requiring New Analysis or Verification? Any New or Changed Circumstances Involving New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Are Any New Mitigation Measures Required for the Project? Issues and Supporting Data Sources: Project Impact Conclusion GPU EIR Impact Conclusion 19.UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS—WATER SUPPLY Would the project; a)Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water facilities,the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? No NoNoNoLTSLTS b)Have in sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal,dry,and multiple dry years? No NoNoNoLTSLTS Discussion: a)Would the Project require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water facilities,the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? According to the GPU EIR,water service is provided to the Planning Area by the California Water Service (Cal Water)and Cal Water’s Palos Verdes District.Cal Water purchases imported water for the Palos Verdes District from the West Basin Municipal Water District (WBMWD),which is a member Metropolitan Water District.As discussed in the GPU EIR,the majority of development associated with buildout of the GPU would involve intensification of land uses within the Commercial District,which is an urbanized area that is served by existing water infrastructure.As such,future development within the Commercial District would connect to existing Cal Water infrastructure and would not involve extension of water service to currently unserved areas.Furthermore.Cal Water regularly maintains July 2024AddendumtotheRollingHillsEstatesGeneralPlanUpdate EIR Page 3-82 B-290 Chapter 3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project and upgrades water infrastructure on the Palos Verdes Peninsula,as needed,such as replacing aging water mains and hydrants,as well as service connections.Therefore,given (1)that development associated with buildout of the GPU would occur incrementally through 2040 and would be concentrated in previously developed areas already served by water infrastructure,(2)that Cal Water regularly maintains and upgrades water infrastructure as part of their normal operations,and (3)the relatively small increase in total water demand associated with buildout of the GPU,the GPU would not require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water facilities,an impacts would be less than significant. The Project would comply with a City condition of approval to provide a modeled analysis of the existing water system in the area to determine domestic needs and fire flow needs of the Project.As the Project is located within the urbanized Commercial District,the proposed residential development would connect to the existing water infrastructure and would be required to pay connection charges to Cal Water,as appropriate.Nonetheless,the Project may be required by Cal Water and LACoFD to provide upgrades to the water infrastructure to meet the Project’s domestic and fire flow demands based on the required water system analysis.Accordingly,Project impacts related to water facilities would be less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the GPU EIR.Likewise,there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification.The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR,and no new mitigation measures are required b)Would there be insufficient water supplies available to serve the Project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal,dry,and multiple dry years? As previously described,implementation of the GPU would introduce land use intensification in certain portions of the Planning Area, primarily in the Commercial District,where the most intense land uses and most dense development currently occur in the City.The GPU assumes that some of these commercial uses would be replaced by new multi-family/mixed-use residential development that would result in a net change in water demand in the Planning Area.As detailed in the GPU EIR,the recycling of commercial properties into mixed-use and residential development would result in a net increase in water demand in the Planning Area.Meanwhile,irrigation water demand associated with buildout of the GPU would be similar,if not less than existing conditions.In addition,it is likely that future water demand of residential land uses within the Planning Area would naturally decrease over time through home renovations, installation of water efficient appliances and fixtures by homeowners,and adherence to updated water efficiency measures.As analyzed in the GPU EIR,the GPU’s water demand,which conservatively does not account for water conservation and efficiency requirements,would represent only a small percentage of the total projected water demand for the Cal Water Palos Verdes District in 2040 (0.6 percent for the low range development scenario and 1.9 percent for the high range development scenario).Therefore,given the relatively small percentage of water demand associated with buildout of the GPU,which would occur gradually through 2040,and given the UWMP’s determination that water purchased by the Palos Verdes District will be sufficient to serve all water demand within the District through 2045 under all hydrologic conditions,there would be sufficient water supplies available to serve development associated with buildout of the GPU during normal,single dry,and multiple dry years.Further,the 2020 UWMP prepared by the WBMWD states that water supplies would be sufficient to meet projected demand under three hydrologic or rainfall conditions:an average (or normal)year,a single-dry year,and multiple-dry years.Therefore,the GPU concluded that impacts related to water supply Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-83 I B-291 Vestar Apartments ProjectChapter3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts as a result of the GPU buildout would be less than significant.Since the representative projects are a subset of buildout of the GPU, water demand associated with the representative projects has already been accounted for in the estimated water demand increase in the Planning Area from buildout of the GPU. As the proposed Project is within the assumed total buildout of the GPU,which has been determined to result in a less-than-significant impact on water supplies,the proposed Project would not cause any potentially significant impacts on water supplies.Accordingly,as the Project is consistent with the parameters of a medium site representative project of the GPU,Project impacts related to water supplies would also be less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the GPU EIR.Likewise,there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification.The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR,and no new mitigation measures are required. July 2024AddendumtotheRollingHillsEstatesGeneralPlanUpdate EIR Page 3-84 B-292 Chapter 3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Any New Information of Substantial Importance That Was Not and Could Not Have Been Known at the Time of Certification of the GPU EIR that Rises to the Level of Requiring New Analysis or Verification? Any New or Changed Circumstances Involving New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Are Any New Mitigation Measures Required for the Project? Issues and Supporting Data Sources: GPU EIR Impact Conclusion Project Impact Conclusion 20.UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS—WASTEWATER Would the project: a)Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded wastewater treatment facilities,the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? LTS LTS No No No No b)Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it does not have adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments? LTS LTS No No No No Discussion: The Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts (LACSD)owns,operates,and maintains the large trunk sewers that form the backbone of the regional wastewater conveyance system.Local collector and/or lateral sewer lines are the responsibility of the jurisdiction in which they are located.The Planning Area is located within the jurisdictional boundaries of LACSD’s South Bay Cities Sanitation District and District No.5.Wastewater generated by existing uses in the GPU Planning Area is then treated at the Joint Water Pollution Control Plant (JWPCP)located in the City of Carson.As discussed in the GPU EIR,the majority of development associated with buildout of the GPU would involve intensification of land uses within the Commercial District,where the most intense land uses and Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-85 1 I B-293 Vestar Apartments ProjectChapters:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts most dense development currently occur in the City,with subregional-serving commercial centers and existing structures,and where the larger sewer lines (i.e.,15-inch lines)are located to accommodate the land use intensification.The GPU assumes that some of these commercial uses would be replaced by new multi-family/mixe d-use residential development that would result in a net change in wastewater generation in the Planning Area.As detailed in the GPU EIR,under the low range scenario and high range scenario, wastewater generation within the Planning Area would increase by approximately 99,789 gallons per day and 312,735 gallons per day,respectively.However,future development under the GPU is anticipated to occur gradually through 2040 and would be largely based on market demand.Thus,any increase in wastewater generation would occur gradually as additional development occurs in the Planning Area.Furthermore,the analysis of the GPU showed that the increases would only represent a small percentage of the JWPCP’s remaining capacity:0.07 percent for the low range scenario and 0.21 percent for the high range scenario.In addition, developers of future development projects under the GPU would be required to pay sewer construction permit fees and connection charges.Such fees support,in part,the capacity determination and facilities.Accordingly,buildout of the GPU would not result in a determination by the City,the LACSD,or the JWPCP that there would be inadequate capacity to serve the projected wastewater treatment demands or require the construction of new or expanded wastewater treatment facilities,the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects. Since the representative projects are a subset of buildout of the GPU,wastewater generation associated with the representative projects has already been accounted for in the estimated increase in the Planning Area from buildout of the GPU.As the proposed Project is consistent with the assumed total buildout of the GPU,which has been determined to result in a less-than-significant impact on wastewater facilities,the proposed Project would not cause any potentially significant impacts on wastewater facilities.Accordingly, as the Project is consistent with the parameters of a medium site representative project of the GPU and would pay the required connection fees.Project impacts related to wastewater facilities would also be less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the GPU EIR.Likewise,there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification.The Project does not propose substantiai changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR,and no new mitigation measures are required. July 2024AddendumtotheRollingHillsEstatesGeneralPlanUpdate EIR Page 3-86 B-294 Chapter 3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Any New Information of Substantial Importance That Was Not and Could Not Have Been Known at the Time of Certification of the GPU EIR that Rises to the Level of Requiring New Analysis or Verification? Any New or Changed Circumstances Involving New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Are Any New Mitigation Measures Required for the Project? Issues and Supporting Data Sources: GPU EIR Impact Conclusion Project Impact Conclusion 21.UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS—SOLID WASTE Would the project; a)Generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards,or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure,or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals? LTS LTS No No No No b)Comply with federal,state,and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste? LTS LTS No No No No Discussion: a)Would the Project generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards,or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure,or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals? The projected net growth in the Planning Area would generate an annual total of 403.14 tons per year under the low range scenario or 8,419 tons per year under the high range scenario over existing conditions.The majority of the City’s solid waste was delivered by Waste Management (WM),the City's exclusive waste hauler,to El Sobrante in Riverside County.The El Sobrante Landfill has an estimated remaining capacity of approximately 142 million tons as of December 2019.Conservatively assuming that the maximum amount of solid waste that could be generated by the implementation of the GPU under the high range scenario would be taken to the El Sobrante Landfill,the total amount of 8,419 tons per year would represent less than 0.006 percent of its remaining capacity.In addition,it is likely that WM would distribute the City’s solid waste to other landfills listed on Table 4.20-1 in Section 4.20,Utilities and Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-87 I I B-295 I Chapter 3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Service Systems—Solid Waste,of the GPU EIR.These landfills,including El Sobrante Landfill,have a total remaining capacity of approximately 697 million tons,which would be more than sufficient to accommodate the City’s additional 8,419 tons per year. Furthermore,future development under the GPU is anticipated to occur gradually through 2040 and would be largely based on market demand.Thus,any increase in solid waste generation would occur gradually as additional development occurs in the Planning Area. The City also continues to comply with waste diversion and requirements pursuant to State laws regulating solid waste management, reduction,recycling,and reuse,including AB 341,AB 939,AB 1826,AB 1327,and SB 1374,as described in the GPU EIR.In addition, the RHEMC includes requirements related to recyclables and organic waste disposal,as well as solid waste containers and the use and placement of containers.Therefore,buildout of the GPU would not generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards,or in excess of the capacity of the landfills serving the City,or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals.As such, impacts of the GPU related to solid waste would be less than significant. Since the representative projects are a subset of buildout of the GPU,solid waste generation associated with the representative projects has already been accounted for in the estimated Increase in the Planning Area from buildout of the GPU.As the total buildout of the GPU has been determined to result in a less-than-signific ant impact on solid waste,the representative projects themselves would not cause any potentially significant impacts on solid waste.Accordingly,as the Project is consistent with the parameters of a medium site representative project of the GPU and would comply with waste and recycling requirements.Project impacts related to solid waste would also be less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the GPU EIR.Likewise,there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification.The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR,and no new mitigation measures are required, b)Would the Project comply with federal,state,and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste? As discussed in the GPU EIR,the City’s future per capital disposal rate is expected to be in compliance with the 50-percent diversion requirement mandated by AB 939.In addition,future development proposed under the GPU would be required to comply with the RHEh/lC,including Sections 8.20.260,Section 8.20.70,Section 8.24,and Chapter 15.04.Compliance with RHEMC would ensure that implementation of the GPU complies with AB 341,AB 939,AB 1826,AB 1327,and CALGreen Code.Furthermore,the GPU contains goals and policies that address solid waste management and diversion to ensure that State and local solid waste reduction goals are met.Therefore,the GPU would comply with federal,State,local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste.As such,impacts of the GPU would be less than significant.Since the representative projects are a subset of buildout of the GPU and the total buildout of the GPU has been determined to result in a less-than-significant impact related to compliance with solid waste management and reduction regulations,the representative projects would also result in a less-than-significant impact. Accordingly,as the Project is consistent with the parameters of a medium site representative project of the GPU and would comply with waste and recycling requirements.Project impacts related to compliance with solid waste management and reduction regulations would also be less than significant. Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-88 B-296 Chapters:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the GPU EIR.Likewise,there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification.The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR,and no new mitigation measures are required. Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-89 I 1 I B-297 I Chapter 3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Any New Information of Substantial Importance That Was Not and Could Not Have Been Known at the Time of Certification of the GPU EIR that Rises to the Level of Requiring New Analysis or Verification? Any New or Changed Circumstances Involving New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Are Any New Mitigation Measures Required for the Project? Issues and Supporting Data Sources: GPU EIR Impact Conclusion Project Impact Conclusion 22.UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS—ENERGY AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS INFRASTRUCTURE Would the project: a)Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded electrical power, natural gas,or telecommunications facilities,the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? LTS No NoLTSNoNo Discussion: As previously described,implementation of the GPU would introduce land use intensification in certain portions of the Planning Area, primarily in the Commercial District,where the most intense land uses and most dense development currently occur in the City,with subregional-serving commercial centers.The GPU assumes that some of these commercial uses would be replaced by new multifamily/mixed-use residential development that would result in a net increase in electricity and natural gas consumption (detailed in Section 4.5,Energy,of the GPU EIR)and use of telecommunications facilities in the Planning Area.However,future development under the GPU is anticipated to occur gradually through 2040 and would be largely based on market demand.Thus,any net increase in electricity and natural gas consumption and use of telecommunications facilities (provided by Cox Communications ,AT&T and DIRECTV,Frontier,Viasat,HughesNet,Spectrum,and several cellular towers managed by private telecommunications service providers)in the Planning Area would occur gradually as additional development occurs in the Planning Area.Both Southern California Edison (SCE)and Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas)regularly maintain and upgrade their transmission lines and equipment to ensure that electricity and natural gas pipeline connections withstand natural hazards,such as seismic events and wildfires.As discussed above,SCE is already implementing capital improvements,including public safety upgrades and circuit Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-90 B-298 Chapter 3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project reliability upgrades,to adequately serve its existing and future customers.Any work that may affect services to the existing electricity, natural gas,and telecommunication lines would be coordinated with service providers and the City,as applicable.Future development projects under the GPU would be expected to incorporate energy conservation features and comply with applicable regulations, including the CALGreen Code and State energy standards under Title 24.Therefore,buildout of the GPU would not be anticipated to require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded electrical power,natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects.As such,the GPU’s impact on electrical power, natural gas,or telecommunications infrastructure would be less than significant. Since the representative projects are a subset of buildout of the GPU and the total buildout of the GPU has been determined to result in a less-than-significant impact related to electrical power,natural gas,or telecommunications infrastructure,the representative projects themselves would also result in a less-than-significant impact.Accordingly,as the Project is consistent with the parameters of a medium site representative project of the GPU,Project impacts related to electrical power,natural gas,or telecommunications infrastructure would also be less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the GPU EIR.Likewise,there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification.The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR,and no new mitigation measures are required. Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-91 II B-299 I Vestar Apartments ProjectChapter3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Any New Information of Substantial Importance That Was Not and Could Not Have Been Known at the Time of Certification of the GPU EIR that Rises to the Level of Requiring New Analysis or Verification? Any New or Changed Circumstances Involving New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed In the GPU EIR? Are Any New Mitigation Measures Required for the Project? Issues and Supporting Data Sources: Project Impact Conclusion GPU EIR Impact Conclusion 23.WILDFIRE If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones,would the project: a)Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? No NoLTSLTSNoNo b)Due to slope,prevailing winds, and other factors,exacerbate wildfire risks,and thereby expose project occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of wildfire? c)Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks,emergency water sources,power lines or other utilities)that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment? No NoLTSLTSNoNo LTS No No No NoLTS July 2024AddendumtotheRollingHillsEstatesGeneralPlanUpdateEIR Page 3-92 B-300 Chapter 3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Any New Information of Substantial Importance That Was Not and Could Not Have Been Known at the Time of Certification of the GPU EIR that Rises to the Level of Requiring New Analysis or Verification? Any New or Changed Circumstances involving New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Any New Significant Impacts or Substantially More Severe Impacts than those analyzed in the GPU EIR? Are Any New Mitigation Measures Required for the Project? Issues and Supporting Data Sources: GPU EIR Impact Conclusion Project Impact Conclusion d)Expose people or structures to significant risks,including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides,as a result of runoff,post-fire slope instability,or drainage changes? LTS LTS No No No No Discussion: a)if iocated in or near state responsibiiity areas or lands ciassified as very high fire hazard severity zones,would the Project substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? According to the GPU EIR,the entirety of the GPU Planning Area is located within a VHFHSZ as mapped by CAL FIRE.The Multi- Jurisdiction Hazard Mitigation Plan (HMP)for the Cities of Rolling Hills Estates and Rancho Palos Verdes, as approved by the Federal Emergency Management Agency,includes a series of mitigation actions related to wildfire that address the HMP’s goals of protecting life and property,enhancing public awareness,preserve natural systems,encourage partnerships and implementation,and strengthen emergency services.Additionally,the HMP identifies the County-designated evacuation routes within the Planning Area,which include Hawthorne Boulevard and Crenshaw Boulevard,as well as City-designated evacuation routes,which include Highridge Road,Silver Spur Road, Palos Verdes Drive North,and Palos Verdes Drive East. The majority of sites envisioned for potential intensification through buildout of the GPU are located on underutilized parcels that are characterized by suburban development.By focusing development on institutional and commercial land uses and in the Commercial District,the GPU would relieve development pressure on open space and low density areas that are characterized by steep hillsides and canyons.This would reduce overall wildfire risk by concentrating future development in areas that are not characterized by mature dense tree stands,or native or non-native vegetation that could fuel spread of a wildfire.Further,the GPU would not result in land use Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-93 I B-301 I I I Vestar Apartments ProjectChapter3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts changes that would convert open space to other development uses.As such,buildout of the GPU within already developed areas would not result in an increase in the construction of combustible structures and improvements in areas immediately surrounded by dense,flammable vegetation.However,as the Planning Area is located within a VHFHSZ,future residential and commercial structures would be required to comply with more stringent standards to resist ignition and slow the spread of fire.Further,any changes in the circulation around a project would be designed and constructed in accordance with LACoFD standards to ensure that future development would not impede or obstruct evacuation procedures during the event of a wildfire.In addition,any future projects developed as part of the GPU that would be located in close proximity to dense vegetation or mature stands of trees would require a Fuel Modification Plan and would require installation and irrigation of non-flammable landscaping materials,as well as use of ignition- resistant building materials and roofing,consistent with LACoFD standards. Future development is assumed to occur over multiple years through 2040;as such,any impacts associated with an increase in population and,thus,an increase in the number of residents in a given area using evacuation routes during a wildfire emergency, would occur gradually.In addition,any future development under the GPU would be required to comply with the provisions of the California Fire and Building Codes for fire access and circulation.As discussed above in the Checklist Section 15,Public Services, discussion regarding fire protection,individual project development plans would be reviewed by the City and LACoFD to determine specific fire requirements (e.g.,fire flow capacities,emergency access,fuel modification plans)applicable to the specific developmentandtoensurecompliancewiththeserequirements.Further,in the event of a future wildfire event that requires evacuation,emergency responders would assess local conditions in an ongoing manner and identify locations and severity of threats to people,homes, businesses. Therefore,because future development would be required to adhere to strict design standards regarding fire resistance and circulation, and because future development would be concentrated in the City’s Commercial District,which has comparably less grasses and vegetation that could act as wildfire fuel than most of the Planning Area,the GPU would not result in a substantial increase in the potential for wildfires to move through developed areas of the Planning Area and substantially impair the City’s emergency responseandemergencyevacuationplanalongthePlanningArea’s street network through the Multi-Jurisdictional HMP.As such.Impacts of the GPU would be less than significant. As described in the GPU EIR,the representative projects themselves would not cause any potentially significant impacts on the implementation of an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan.The Project,which is consistent with the parameters of a medium site representative project of the GPU,would be developed in compliance with code requirements related to fire access and circulation and would be subject to review by the City and LACoFD to determine specific fire requirements (e.g.,fire flow capacities, emergency access,fuel modification plans).In addition,the proposed development would be limited to the Project Site boundaries intheurbanizedCommercialDistrictandwouldnotencroachuponSilverSpurRoad,a City-designated evacuation route.Therefore Project impacts related to emergency response plans or emergency evacuation plans would be less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-siqnificant impacts identified in the GPU EIR.Likewise,there is no new information of July 2024AddendumtotheRollingHillsEstatesGeneralPlanUpdateEIR Page 3-94 B-302 Chapter 3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification.The Project does not propose substantial changes that require majorrevisionstotheGPUEIR,and no new mitigation measures are required, b)If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones,would the Project,due to slope,prevailing winds,and other factors,exacerbate wildfire risks,and thereby expose project occupants to,pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of wildfire? As described above,the entirety of the GPU Planning Area is located within a VHFHSZ,The majority of sites envisioned for potentialintensificationthroughbuildoutoftheGPUarelocatedonunderutilizedparcelsthatarecharacterizedbysuburbandevelopment,thus,reducing overall wildfire risk by concentrating future development in areas that are not characterized by mature,dense tree stands,ornativeornon-native vegetation that could fuel spread of a wildfire.If future development were to occur near areas that are characterizedbydensetreecanopiesandvegetationthatcouldprovidefuel for a wildfire,such development would be required to adhere to thedesignstandardsidentifiedaboveforconstructionwithinaVHFHSZregardingtrafficcirculationandtheuseofflammablematerialsandlandscaping,as regulated by the City and the LACoFD.Such requirements would limit wildfire risks and,therefore,reduce the riskofexposingPlanningAreainhabitantstopollutantsreleasedbywildfires.Additionally,as future development would consist primarilyofcommercialandresidentialdevelopment,future development is not expected to store,use,or dispose of significant quantities ofhazardousmaterials.While a future commercial development could include development of a gas station,which would handle andstoreautomotivefuels,such uses would be required to adhere to federal,State,and local regulations for the safe storage and handlingofsuchmaterials,which would be adequate to ensure that wildfire impacts would be less than significant.For other retail commercial,office,or residential uses anticipated through buildout of the GPU,there would be no significant sources of hazardous materials thatcouldaddtothefuelloadandpotentialpollutantburdenintheeventofanon-site fire.Therefore,buildout of the GPU would notsubstantiallyexacerbatewildfirerisks,and impacts would be less than significant. The Project is consistent with the parameters of a medium site representative project of the GPU,and the proposed residentialwouldnotrequiresignificantsourcesofhazardousmaterialsthatcouldexacerbateanon-site fire.The proposed Project is also locatedinadeveloped,commercial area of the City,not in an area with abundant trees/foliage.The developed nature of the area limits wildfirepotential,and the proposed Project would not introduce construction that would exacerbate wildfire risk.Therefore,Project impactsrelatedtowildfirerisksandpollutantsexposurewouldalsobelessthansignificant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposedProjectwouldoccurorworsentheless-than-significant impacts identified in the GPU EIR.Likewise,there is no new information ofsubstantialimportancerequiringnewanalysis or verification.The Project does not propose substantial changes that require majorrevisionstotheGPUEIR,and no new mitigation measures are required, c)If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones,would the Projectrequiretheinstallationormaintenanceofassociatedinfrastructure(such as roads,fuel breaks,emergency water sources,power lines or other utilities)that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to theenvironment? uses Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-95 B-303 Vestar Apartments ProjectChapter3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts As described above,the entirety of the GPU Planning Area is located within a VHFHSZ.However,the majority of sites envisioned for potential intensification through buildout of the GPU are located on properties are characterized by existing suburban development and predominantly include impervious surfaces and managed landscaping areas with minimal areas of native and non-native grasses. These areas are also characterized by existing roadways and utilities infrastructure (including pressurized water systems).Future development would connect to existing electricity sources and utility lines for water and sewer service. Further,these utilities are predominantly located underground,further reducing the risk of wildfire.Other individual projects that would be constructed near open space or canyon areas would need to comply with fuel modification requirements,such as including vegetation removal and irrigation management.No building permits would be issued by the City until construction plans have been reviewed and determined to be in full compliance with all applicable standards for development in a VHFHSZ (e.g.,sprinkler systems, water flow pressures for fire hydrants,adequate internal circulation,and emergency site access).Therefore,buildout of the GPU would not exacerbate fire risks or result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment related to the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure,and impacts would be less than significant. As described in the GPU EIR,the representative projects themselves would not require the installation or maintenance of infrastructure that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment.The Project,which is consistent with the parameters of a medium site representative project of the GPU,would be located in an urbanized area comprising primarily impervious surfaces and managed landscaping.The Project would construct a multi-family development that would connect to existing utilities and would not require the installation or maintenance of infrastructure such as roads,fuel breaks,emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities.Therefore,Project impacts related to infrastructure and wildfire risks would be less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposed Project would occur or worsen the less-than-significant impacts identified in the GPU EIR.Likewise,there is no new information of substantial importance requiring new analysis or verification.The Project does not propose substantial changes that require major revisions to the GPU EIR,and no new mitigation measures are required, d)If located in or near state responsibility areas or iands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones,wouid the Project expose people or structures to significant risks,inciuding downsiope or downstream flooding or landsiides,as a result of runoff,post-fire slope instability,or drainage changes? As described above,the entirety of the GPU Planning Area is located within a VHFHSZ.As discussed in the GPU EIR and above in Checklist Section 7,Geology and Soils,the Planning Area contains numerous landslide zones,particularly along Crenshaw Boulevard, along the northern boundary of the Planning Area,and the areas south of Palos Verdes Drive North between Crenshaw Boulevard and Silver Spur Road.The Commercial District is underlain by the Silver Spur Landslide Complex and is in proximity to the Cabrillo Fault.The precise location and boundaries of the Silver Spur Landslide Complex is unknown;however,there is potential for future developments within the Commercial District to be located on an unstable geologic unit.In addition,infill developments within the Planning Area that result from buildout of the GPU could also be located on steep slopes.These potential landslide areas are included within the Hazard Management Overlay zone,and any future development within this overlay zone would require geotechnical evaluation and implementation of recommended design and safety measures.As such,the GPU also included goals and policies that require new construction and significant alterations to properties within potential landslide areas to be evaluated for site stability. July 2024AddendumtotheRollingHillsEstatesGeneralPlanUpdateEIR Page 3-96 B-304 Chapter 3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project including identification of potential impacts to adjacent properties,during project design and review.In addition,future developmentswouldberequiredtocomplywiththegradingstandardsestablishedintheRHEMCtoreducelandslidepotentialandensuresoilstabilityandrequirementsoftheCBCandtheCity’s Building Code. The majority of future development associated with buildout of the GPU would be located within the Commercial District,which hascomparablylessgrassesandvegetationthatcouldactaswildfire fuel than most of the Planning Area.In the event that futuredevelopmentweretooccurincloseproximitytoslopedareascharacterizedbyflammablevegetation,such development would berequiredtoadheretostrictdesignguidelines,such as fuel modification activities required by LACoFD,which would remove some oftheflammablevegetationincloseproximityto a proposed combustible structure and replace it with irrigated and/or fire-resistantvegetation.In addition,as determined through the Notice of Preparation/Scoping process (i.e.,Initial Study)and as discussed inChecklistSection10,Hydrology and Water Quality,through compliance with all NPDES Construction General Permit requirements,as well as compliance with applicable City grading permit regulations,construction activities associated with future developmentprojectsundertheGPU,including the proposed Project,would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the constructionsiteorareaInamannerthatwouldresultinsubstantialerosionorsiltationon-or off-site,flooding on-or off-site.The GPU EIRconcludedthatbuildoutoftheGPUwouldnotexposepeopleor structures to significant risks associated with post-fire slope instabilityordrainagechanges,and impacts would be less than significant. As the Project Site is located in the Commercial District and Hazard Overlay Zone,the Project would be required to conduct a site-specific geotechnical evaluation,implement recommended design and safety measures,and conform with RHEMC grading standards,CBC,and the City’s Building Code to reduce Project impacts related to landslides.In addition,as discussed in Checklist Section 1o'Hydrology and Water Quality, with adherence to NPDES Construction General Permit requirements and LID BMPs the Project wouldnotsubstantiallyaltertheexistingdrainagepatterninamannerthatwouldresultinsubstantialerosion,siltation,or flooding.Therefore,the Project would not expose people or structures to significant risks associated with post-fire slope instability or drainage changes!and impacts would be less than significant. No new significant impacts and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts associated with the proposedProjectwouldoccurorworsentheless-than-significant impacts identified in the GPU EIR.Likewise,there is no new information ofsubstantialimportancerequiringnewanalysisorverification.The Project does not propose substantial changes that require majorrevisionstotheGPUEIR,and no new mitigation measures are required. Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-97 B-305 I I Vestar Apartments ProjectChapter3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts This page intentionally left blank. July 2024AddendumtotheRollingHillsEstatesGeneralPlanUpdate EIR Page 3-98 B-306 Chapter 3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project Environmental Determination Based upon the evidence in light of the whole record documented in the attached environmental checklist explanation,cited incorporations and attachments,the City finds that the Project: □Has previously been analyzed as part of an earlier CEQA document (which either mitigated the project or adopted impacts pursuant to findings)adopted/certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines.The proposed project is a component of the whole action analyzed in the previously adopted/certified CEQA document. Has previously been analyzed as part of an earlier CEQA document (which either mitigated the project or adopted impacts pursuant to findings)adopted/certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines.Changes and additions to the earlier CEQA document are needed to make the previous documentation adequate to cover the project which are documented in this Addendum (CEQA Guidelines §15164).However,none of the conditions described in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 that would require the preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred. □Has previously been analyzed as part of an earlier CEQA document (which either mitigated the project or adopted impacts pursuant to findings)adopted/certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines.However,there is important new information and/or substantial changes have occurred requiring the preparation of an additional CEQA document (Negative Declaration or EIR)pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 through 15163. Prepared By Date Reviewed By Date Printed Name Printed Name Addendum approved on: Approval attested to by: Signature Date Printed Name Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 3-99 B-307 Chapter 3:Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Vestar Apartments Project This page intentionally left blank. July 2024AddendumtotheRollingHillsEstatesGeneralPlanUpdateEIR Page 3-100 B-308 Chapter 4:Mitigation Measures Vestar Apartments Project CHAPTER 4: MITIGATION MEASURES A listing of applicable mitigation measures from the General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report is presented below.The mitigation measures listed are the same as the measures in the Final EIR and would be applicable to the proposed Project.No new mitigation measures are required as a result of implementing the proposed Project.The City,as the CEQA lead agency,is responsible for monitoring the implementation of the adopted mitigation measures. Air Quality MM-AQ-1:Prior to issuance of any grading permit,the City’s Community DevelopmentDepartmentshallconfirmthatthegradingplans,building plans,and specifications require that ozone precursor emissions from construction equipment vehicles shall be controlled by maintaining equipment engines in good condition and in propertunepermanufacturer’s specifications.The equipment maintenance records and equipment design specifications data sheets shall be submitted to the City andverifiedbytheCity’s Community Development Department,and shall be kept onsitebytheprojectcontractor during construction activities. Biological Resources MM-BIO-2:If future development projects that involve vegetation removal,and are not otherwise categorically exempt from CEQA or subject to the emergency project statutory exemption from CEQA,are unable to avoid construction activities within nesting bird season (January 1st through July 31st for raptors and February 1stthroughAugust31stforother avian species),a qualified biologist shall conduct a pre-construction nesting bird survey for avian species to determine the presence/absence,location,and status of any active nests on or adjacent to theareaproposeddevelopmentarea.The survey shall be conducted for active nests, eggs,and young of any bird species protected by the state or federal EndangeredSpeciesActs,Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA),and/or the California Fish and Game Code (CFGC)Sections 3503,3503.5,or 3511,within 200 feet of the disturbance zone for songbirds,or within 500 feet of the disturbance zone for raptors and special-status bird species.To avoid the destruction of active nests and to protect the reproductive success of birds protected by the MBTA and theCFGC,a nesting bird survey should be conducted no more than three (3)daysprior to the commencement of project construction if construction occurs between January 1st and August 31st.In the event that active nests are discovered,a suitable buffer (distance to be determined by the biologist)shall be established around such active nests,and no construction activities within the buffer will be allowed,until the biologist has determined that the nest(s)is no longer active (i.e.,the nestlings have fledged and are no longer dependent on the nest). Cultural Resources MM-CUL-4:To ensure identification and preservation of archaeological resources and avoidsignificantimpactstothoseresources,prior to grading approval by the Rolling HillsEstatesPlanningCommission,each project requiring such approval shall bescreenedtodeterminewhetheranArchaeologicalResourcesAssessmentreportisrequired.Screening shall consider the type of project and whether grounddisturbancewilloccurinnativesoils(i.e.,previously undisturbed soils).If so,prior Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 4-1 B-309 Chapter 4:Mitigation Measures Vestar Apartments Project to grading approval by the Rolling Hills Estates Planning Commission,the City shall require an Archaeological Resources Assessment be conducted under the supervision of an archaeologist that meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards. Archaeological Resources Assessments shall include a California Historical Resources Information System records search at the South Central Coastal Information Center and a Sacred Lands File search through the Native American Heritage Commission.The records searches will determine if the proposed development area has been previously surveyed for archaeological resources, identify and characterize the results of previous cultural resource surveys,and disclose any cultural resources that have been recorded and/or evaluated.If unpaved surfaces are present within the development area,and the entire development area has not been previously surveyed within the past 10 years,a Phase I pedestrian survey shall be undertaken in proposed development areas to locate any surface cultural materials that may be present. If the Archaeological Resources Assessment identifies potentially significant archaeological resources and impacts cannot be avoided,a Phase II Testing and Evaluation investigation shall be performed by an archaeologist who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards to determine significance prior to any ground- disturbing activities.If resources are determined significant or unique through Phase II testing and site avoidance is not possible,appropriate site-specific mitigation measures shall be undertaken.These may include a Phase 111 data recovery program implemented by a qualified archaeologist and performed in accordance with the California Office of Historic Preservation’s “Archaeological Resource Management Reports (ARMR):Recommended Contents and Format” (1990)and “Guidelines for Archaeological Research Designs”(1991). IVIM-CUL-5: If the Archaeological Resources Assessment did not identify archaeological resources but found the area to be highly sensitive for archaeological resources, a qualified archaeologist shall monitor all ground-disturbing construction and preconstruction activities in areas with previously undisturbed soil.The archaeologist shall inform ail construction personnel prior to construction activities of the proper procedures in the event of an archaeological discovery.The training shall be held in conjunction with the project’s initial on-site safety meeting and shall explain the importance and legal basis for the protection of significant archaeological resources.In the event that archaeological resources (artifacts or features)are exposed during ground-disturbing activities,construction activities in the immediate vicinity of the discovery shall be halted while the resources are evaluated for significance by an archaeologist who meets the Secretary’s Standards,and tribal consultation shall be conducted in the case of a tribal If the discovery proves to be significant,the long-term disposition of any MM-CUL-6: resource, collected materials shall be determined in consultation with the affiliated tribe(s), where relevant;this could include curation with a recognized scientific or educational repository,transfer to the tribe,or respectful reinternment in an area designated by the tribe. If an Archaeological Resources Assessment does not identify potentially significant archaeological resources but the site has moderate sensitivity for archaeological resources,an archaeologist who meets the Secretary’s Standards shall be retained on call.The archaeologist shall inform all construction personnel prior to construction activities about the proper procedures in the event of an MM-CUL-7: July 2024AddendumtotheRollingHillsEstatesGeneralPlanUpdate EIR Page 4-2 B-310 Chapter 4:Mitigation Measures Vestar Apartments Project archaeological discovery.The preconstruction training shall be held in conjunctionwithafuturedevelopmentproject’s initial on-site safety meeting and shall explain the importance and legal basis for the protection of significant archaeological resources.In the event that archaeological resources (artifacts or features)are exposed during ground-disturbing activities,construction activities in the immediate vicinity of the discovery shall be halted while the on-call archaeologistiscontacted.The resource shall be evaluated for significance and tribal consultation shall be conducted,in the case of a tribal resource.If the discoveryprovestobesignificant,the long-term disposition of any collected materials should be determined in consultation with the affiliated tribe(s),where relevant. Geology and Soils MM-GEO-1:To ensure identification and preservation of significant paleontological resources and avoid significant impacts to those resources,prior to the issuance of a gradingapprovalbytheCityofRollingHillsEstatesPlanningCommission,each projectrequiringsuchapprovalshallbescreenedtodeterminewhetherafull paleontological resources assessment is required.Screening shall considerwhethertheproposedgradingactivitywillextendintoknownundisturbedfossil bearing strata (i.e.,those of the Monterey Formation,including Lomita MarlMember,Valmonte Diatomite Member,and Altamira Shale Member).If so,the CityshallrequireapaleontologicalresourcesassessmentbeconductedbyapaleontologistthatmeetsBureauofLandManagementorSocietyofVertebratePaleontologystandards(i.e.,a qualified paleontologist)prior to the issuance of agradingapproval.If the paleontological resources assessment identifies the potential for destruction of significant paleontological resources,an avoidance and/or recovery plan shall be developed and implemented under the supervisionofaqualifiedpaleontologisttothesatisfactionoftheCityofRollingHillsEstates. In the event that any prehistoric subsurface paleontologicalencounteredduringfutureconstructionorthecourseofanyground disturbanceactivities,ail such activities shall halt immediately,at which time the applicant shallnotifytheCityandconsultwithaqualifiedpaleontologisttoassessthesignificanceofthefind.In the case of discovery of paleontological resources,the assessment shall be done in accordance with the Society of Vertebrate Paleontologystandards.If any find is determined to be significant,appropriate avoidance measures recommended by the consultant and approved by the City must befollowedunlessavoidanceisdeterminedtobeunnecessaryorinfeasiblebytheCity.If avoidance is unnecessary or infeasible,other appropriate measures (e.g.,data recovery,excavation)shall be instituted. MM-GEO-2:resources are Transportation MIVl-TRAN-1:The City shall work with future developers of multi-family housing,projects,and mixed-use projects to ensure they provide the following as TDMmeasuresformitigatingVMT; ●Provision of Pedestrian Network Improvements;Create a connected pedestrian network within the development and connect to nearbydestinations. ●Construction or Improvements to Bike Facility or Expand Bikeway Network:Enhance bicycle network Citywide (or at similar scale),such that a building commercial Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 4-3 B-311 Chapter 4:Mitigation Measures Vestar Apartments Project entrance or bicycle parking is within 200 yards walking or bicycling distance from a bicycle network that connects to at least one of the following;at least 10 diverse uses;a school or employment center,if the project total floor area is 50 percent or more residential:or a bus rapid transit stop,light or heavy rail station,commuter rail station, or ferry terminal. July 2024AddendumtotheRollingHillsEstatesGeneralPlanUpdate EIR Page 4-4 B-312 Chapter 5:List of Preparers Vestar Apartments Project CHAPTERS: LIST OF PREPARERS LEAD AGENCY City of Rolling Hills Estates Community Development Department 4045 Palos Verdes Drive North Rolling Hills Estates,CA 90274 Jeannie Naughton,Community Development Director Whitney Berry,Senior Planner PREPARED BY Michael Baker International 3760 Kilroy Airport Way,Suite 270 Long Beach,California 90806 John Bellas -Principal-in-Charge/Project Advisor Madonna Marcelo -Project Director,Principal Environmental Planner Frankie Tong -Project Manager,Senior Environmental Planner Eddie Torres -Technical Manager,Air Quality &Noise Zhe Chen -Technical Specialist II,Air Quality & Noise Tina Yuan -Environmental Associate,Air Quality &NoiseWinnieWoo-EnvironmentalAssociate Addendum to the Rolling Hills Estates General Plan Update EIR July 2024 Page 5-1 B-313 Chapter 5:List of Preparers Vestar Apartments Project This page intentionally left blank. July 2024AddendumtotheRollingHillsEstatesGeneralPlanUpdate EIR Page 5-2 B-314 I I RESIDENCES AT PENINSULA CENTER ROLLING HILLS ESTATES,CA i ●if B-315 RESIDENCES AT PENINSULA CENTER ROLLING HILLS ESTATES.CA AOOHSS:27570 NORRIS CENTEA DRIVE R0LUNC>llLLS ESATES,CA 90274 ZONING:COMWEflCIAL CfNERAl (C C) OVERLAY:COMMtfiCIAt.DISTRICT MJXtO USE ICOMU) LOT SIZE:87,1 39 SF (2.000 AC) DENSITY AUOWED BASE 30OUMC IS OD/AC («50%) 4S OU/AC DESStTV BONUS TOTAL DENSITY PKOROSEO 45 OU/AC (90 UNITS) BUILDING KCICMTALIOWCD: PERCOMU DENSITY BONUS 4 STORIES lol SlOHYl TOTAL S STORIES BUILDING HEIGHT PROPOSED;S STORIES I&8 FT) LOT COVERAGE ALLOWED:35%<30.498 SF) (NOTE:INCREASED AREA COVERAGE RATIO ALLOWED ABOVE 35%PER I 7.30.090 (OftO 744) LOT COVERAGE PROPOSED:67%(58.600 SF) SETBACKS: STREET (PER COMU)OTO S rT(flECOMM[NOfD) SIDE/REAR PROPOSED UPf'EK FlOOH $r TRACKS 10 FT (FOR ALLOWABLE OPENINGS) 4 STORIES PROPOSED ALONG NORRIS CENTER DRIVE OPEN SPACE REQUIRED:27.00(1 sr OOO Sf/UMII DU) fTO BE PROVIDEO AS PRIVATE DECKS ANO/OR OUTDOOR COKWQN AREAS) OPEN SPACE PROPOSED:3,400 SF (60 SF UCCK/UNI7 dPOOOU) U 75 SF (GROUND FLOOR LEASING PLAZA) II.22S SF (POOL DECK) I?,B0D SF TOTAL (REQUESTCO CONCESSlON/INCENnvu SUMMARY OF PROVIDED COMMUKITY AMENITIES ANO/OR BENEFITS FOR BONUS LEVEL DEVELOPMENT: II Pdrkl/ig ●Sh;ired Pubk/Prtvite pjtklri;vli SSmllf Z)ConnecTivUv ●Adding jld«w4lk dicng p(ivai«rojdMVdy 3)ATfordibifny ●Adding katirtg t«i^olrement <ii S irnm reserved for Modefale*if’come hmiseholds (he ground floor conned Peninsula Ccnier to (he neighboring Promenade mall. SUMMARY WAIVERS TO DEVELOPMENT 5TAN0AR0S: 1) *1 STORY 2)LOT COVERAGE INCREASE 3)OPEN SPACE REDUCTION PROGRAM PARKING RATIO AVC.NET AREA TOTAL Nn* AREA CITY PARKING |CITY PARKING RATIO* UHETTYPE PROGRAM PROGRAM PARKING REQ. NO.OF UNin MIX ISF)REQ. Al 1BD/1BA 57 63%77S 44,175 T/UNIf S7 B)2BO/2BA 33 37%1,133 37,4SS 2/JNIT C6 GUEST I PLH iUNilS I 30 90 81.630ZTOTAL100%1,70/UNIT IS3(4S DU/AC)907 CITY PARKING F?AT10S PROVIDED FOR REFERENCE ONLY.SEE BONUS LEVEL RATIOS (ORDINANCE 744 .17.76.0501 FOR ASSOCIATED REQUIREMENTSa PARKING PROVIOEP:I 1.7Z/USIT 1 ISS PROCRAM LOCATION PROCRAM NET AREA (SF) LOBBYAEASINC LT 3.600 NAAMtUlTYL33,500 TOTAL 7,100 PROGRAM OISPLACED PARKING FlEa LOCATION PROCRAM NET AREA (SF) tXISTlNCRCTAIL LI NA [TOTAL PARKING PROVIdToT Z40 ROLLING HILLS ESTATES,CAMVERESIDENCESATPENINSULACENTERPROJECTDATA I CEN-01ecOjiCTSUUKA I6IH,B-316 B-317 B-318 B-319 1/ / /IrIFI\lil 1 lt:D'I\F!T H I jB.uIel o;c yji.'Uiu PW5 ^m2"V" / L Ji F;M r>a'.tm°o-o^>rLlil :)(m <_<●?;■S’^S>rrtt‘ EJ I // / ■»H'-3^■Jt2 itrjOIsgLi_r ●a:OlO*1’ / XJ.!|BD r // // // ///■/ /////k / ,/ / /\/ //\( % /%(\ \v\,v~ &\ \ \\ \ I '^r)\>51-I\>X Ci\ ( %^ \.V/ \ \ \ ■ ■>-■r-^-.\i I o 7 -CF^V'^I \ \'sr- \ \ \ \ \ \ \ N ROLLING HILLS ESTATES,CAMVECt10'20’ SCAIE:r = 20'-0"<FULL SIZE:22'X 34") 40'80'RESIDENCES AT PENINSULA CENTERLEVEL4PLAN II I A1-4PftO)CCTNUMUA 2O2M0i24 APR L ^024B-320 B-321 -A. t- 1/i I r I I I Iie-iv ] ^ ^ ^ ^ S &£ ^ ^9^^<f *4 S7-r 56.10*Sff.tcr W.iO*Sff.lff'/ / / / / /9% 9 9 /C«9 /9 9 /9 9 *-# / t / /‘TOOn^JQ CLAV THE / /% / t s \ \ \ % \ \ \ \ I \ \ \ \ I t \ I ROLLING HILLS ESTATES,CAMVEO'10'20'40’80' RESIDENCES AT PENINSULA CENTERROOFPLANSCALE:r-20’-0‘(FULL SIZE:22'X 34") ((I Al-9mo;ecTMUMKR 202 m 02^4 AHM6TH2024B-322 B-323 B-324 B-325 B-326 I I UPPER FLOOR SETBACK ALONG >LORRIS CENTER DRIVE MOST HIGHEST POINT OF TTPlCAL CABLE OF PITCHED ROOFHEIGHTAPPURTENANCE: STAIR AND/OR ELEVATOR OVERRUN EXISTING COMMERCIAL tlOBO- r1027 z lOOS'TO 1018' ->}r UNITSUNITSUNITS bUNITSUNITSUNITSUNITSb V-v*.-bUNITSAMENITY bAMENITYDECKUNITSUNITSb b RESIDENTIAL GARAGE b b( COMMERCIAL GARAGE RESIDENTIAL GARAGElosr -I -9«2I- ROLLINC HILLS ESTATES,CAf 80'AO'MVE O'10'20'RESIDENCES AT PENINSULA CENTERBUILDINGSECTIONSCALE:Af Indicaied (FULL SIZE:22' X 34‘) A3-1 I6IH.)W4NUySCThUWKAB-327 ROLLING HILLS ESTATES,CAMVERESIDENCESATPENINSULACENTEREXTERIORARCHITECTURE 1 (I A4-2 A*K liTH 2024B-328 B-329 B-330 B-331 B-332 B-333 B-334 B-335 B-336 B-337 B-338 MAY 202iB-339 B-340 II[pi.IPLESLANDSCAPEDESI,LY PANT PALETTEPRELIMINARYPANTPALETTE CONCEPTUAL PLANS DEMONSTRATE THAT THIS DEVELOPMENT SATISFIES FOLLOWING GUIDELINES 1 PROVIDES VISUAL SCREENING.PRIVACY.AND NATURAL SURVEILLANCE.WHERE NKOED 2.DEFINES PEDESTRIAN PATHWAYS AND OPEN SPACE AREAS WITH LANDSCAPE MATERIALS WHERE APPROPRIATE 3 PROVIDES FOCAL POINTS WITHIN A DEVELOPMENT, SUCH AS SPECIMEN TREES.HEDCES, FLOWERING PLANTS,AND PEDESTRIAN AMENITIES 4 USES A COMBINATION OF PLANTS FOR YEAR-LONG COLOR AND INTEREST 5 USE UNDSCAPE TREATMENTS TO ENHANCE THE SCREENING OF OUTDOOR STORAGE AND MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT AREAS.AND ENHANCE GRADED AREAS SUCH AS EARTH ffiRMS SHRUBS -GROUND LEVEL AND PODIUM -3'o.c.spacingTREES-GROUND LEVEL AND PODIUM -30.C.spacing ICONT IWUCOLSICOMMONICOMMONNA^ICONT IWUCOLS BOTANICAL NAMEBOTANICALNAME LARGE SHRUBSMULTI-TRUNK TREES LOWDRHUROMANZANITA5GALARCTOSTAPHUOSWN2ANITADR HURDMODERATEMARINASTRAWBERRYTREE36'BOXARBUTUSX'MARINA' VERY LOW1SGALFLANNELBUSHFREMOKTOOENORONXXEH TAYLORLOWTHQFINIESSPALOVERDE3TBOXCERCIOlUMXDESERTMUSEUM IS*BOX LOWFRUITLESSSWANHILLOLIVEOLEA EUROPAEA SWAN HILL'TM MEDIUM SHRUBS IRRIGATION CONCEPT STATEMENTCOASTLIVEOAXMULTI-TRUML «'60X LOWOUERCJSAGPIFaiA SGAL LOWCALIFORNIALILACCEANOTHUSSP IRRIGATION ZONES IRRIGATION HYDRO-ZONES SHALL HAVE PLANTS GROUPED wj|h SIMIUR WATERING REQUIREMENTS DEPTH OF IRRIGATION UNES ALLON-GRAOE LATERAL LINES SLALL BE BURIED TO A DEPTH OF W MIN ALL ON-GRADE MAINLINES SHALL BE BURlEOTO A DEPTH OF 24'MIN. BACKFLOW PREVENTER BACKFLOW PREVENTER SHALL BE A REDUCED PRESSURE PRINCIPLE BACKFLOW PREVENTER (FEBCO 825Y OR EQUAL)TYPE AS APPROVED BY WATER PURVEYOR atvj SCREENED vtift LANDSCAPING from PUBLIC VIEW. IRRIGATION EMITTERS ALL SHRUB AREAS SHALL BE IRRIGATED USING DRIP TYPE IRRIGATION SYSTEM AU TREES SHALL BE IFtRIGATCO USING BUBBLER AHDfOR ORIP IRRIGATION SYSTEM.AU GROINDCOVER AREAS SHALL BE IRRIGATED USING DRIP IRRIGATION SYSTEM IRRIGATION CONTROLLER CONTROLLER SHALL BE AUTOMATIC WITH MULTIPLE PROGRAMMING CAPABILflY CONTROLLER TO BE REPROGRAMMED SEASONAaY TO MINIMIZE RUNOFF AND OVER WATERING -SMART CONTROLLER WEATHER TRACKING DEVICES SHALL BE ITIU20T0 CONTROL IRRIGATION CYCLES ACCORDING TO SPECIFIC IRRIGATION REQUIREMENTS CLASS OF IRRIGATION PIPE ALL MAINLINE SHALL BE CLASS 315 PVC ALL LATERAL UNE SHALL BE OASS200PVC EVERGREEN TREES LOW5 CALGROVILLEAGREVILIEAX'PEACHES ANDCREAM 16GAL LOWPOM POM LEUCADENOfiONLEUCAOENDRONEHSCOLWIPOMPOMMARINASTRAWBERRYTREEMDDERATE35-BOXARBUTUSX'MARINA GIANT ORANGE NODDING PINCUSHIOK 15 GAL LOWLEUCOSPERMUMCORDIFOIIUMFLAX€GIANT MODERATESGALKAROPIITOSPORUMPITTOSPORUUCRASSIFOLIUM'NAHA'FLAXLEAF PAPERBARK 36-BOX LOWMELALEUCALINARIIFaiA 5GA1 VERY LOWTUSCANBLUERCSEMARYR05MAHWU5OFFICtNALISTUSCANBLUENEWZEALANDCHRISTMASTREE36-BOX MODERATEfuETROSIDEROSEXCELSA LOWSGALCOASTROSEMARYWESTRINGIAFRUTCOSAMODERATE36-BOXAFGHANPINEPINUSELDARICA MODERATEBRISBANEBOX24-BOXTRISTANIACONFERTA SMALL SHRUBS AND GROUNOCOVERS DECIDUOUS TREES MODERATE1GALCARPCTBLK3LEAJUGAREPTANS SGAL MODERATEMYERSASPARAGUSASPARAGUSOENSIFLORUSMVERSFORESTPANSYRKieuO24-BOX MODERATECHKISCANADENSISFORESTPANSYTM IGAl LOWSMOOTHBLUEASTERASTERLAEVIS36-BOX MODERATELONDONPLANETREEPLATANUSXACERIFOLIA IGAL LOWSEASIDEDAISYEfiCERONGLAUCUSWAYNERCOERCX ACCENTSA/ERTICAL SGAL LOWDOUGLASIRISIRISDOUOASIANA IGAL LOW THE IRRIGATION DESIGN SHALL COMPLY <n«i THE CRITERIA of CITY-S WATER CONSERVATION POUCIES ma REOUIREliENTS INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO BEARD TONGUEPENSTEMONHETEROPHVLLUSMARGABITABOPALOETREE24-BOX LOWALOEBAJNSII ACOERATESGALGOLFBALLTAWHIWHIPinoSPORUMTENUFOLIUM GOLF BALL24-BOX LOWDRAGONTREEDRACAENADRACO SGAL VERY LOWROSEMARYROSMARINUSOFFICINALISPfiOSTRATUS'24-BOX MODERATEJAPANESEBLUEBERRYTREEELAEOCARPUSDECIPIENSTM A.PWNT MATERIALS SHALL B£SELECTED FOR ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND DROUGHT TOLERANCS, ADAPTABILITY AND REIATICWSHIP TO ROLLING HILL'S ESTATES E ENVIRONMENT,COLOR,FORM amf PATTERN ABILITY TO PROVIDE SHADE,SOIL RETENTION,FIRE RESISTIVENSS,ETC.THE OVERALL LANDSCAPE PUN SHALL BE INTEGRATED WITH ALL ELEMENTS OF THE PROJECT.SUCH AS BUILDINGS, PARKING LOTS AND STREETS,TO ACHCVE DESIRABLE MICRO-CLIMATE ANO MINIMIZE ENERGY DEMAND AND WATER USE. a WHERE SHRUBS OR LOW-LEVEL VEGETATION ARE USED.VEGETATIVE MATTER AT MATURITY SHALL COVER AT LEAST 75»OF ACTUAL PUHTEO«?£A C.IRRIGATION SYSTEMS SHALL BE IN ACCORDWfCE WITH THE CITY WATER EFFCENT LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS ANO THE ARBORICULTURALSTANOAROS ANOSPECIFICATIOHSON RLE IN THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS SGAL LOWSAGESALVLAXfiRSBEARD24-BOX LOWSARATOGAHYBROLAURELLAURUSXSARATOGA LOWSGALGERMANDERTEUCRIUMCHAMAEORYS MCOERATEIGALZEPHYRIILYZEPHYRANTHESCANDIDAPRELIMINARYPLANTPALETTE NOTES: ACCENT/COLOR SHRUBS THE OaiECnVE OF THE OVERALL LANDSCAPING CONCEPT ISTO PROVIDE A DISTINCTVISUALIMPRESSIONAND COMMUNITY IDENTITY.SOFTEN THE URBAN EXPERIENCE. PROVIDE THE HIGHEST LEVEL OF AESTHETIC STANDARDS COMPLIMENTED BY THE QUALITY OF THE BUILDING MATERIALS THAT WILL ASSURE AN ATTRACTIVE ENVIRONMENT ENHANCNG THE QUALITY OF LIFE AMONG ITS RESIDENTS ANO VISTTORS. I.LOWMMTSAUCERAEONKJMSGALAEONIUMXMINTSAUCER' SGAL LOWFOXTAILAGAVEAGAVEATTENUATA LOWSGALFANALOEALOEPLICATIIS LOWSGALALOEALOEXSPMOSISSIMA THE LANDSCAPE IRRIGATION CONCEPT FOR THE SITE WILL BE DESIGNED TO PROVIDE THE MOST EFFICIENT AND CONSERVING MEANS TO DISTRIBUTE IRRIGATION WATER AND PROVIDE THE PROPERTY MANAGER WITH THE LATEST TECHNOLOGY FOR WATER CONSERVATION. 2.GRASSES WATER CONSERVATION PRINCIPLES IGAL MODERATEBERKELEYSEDGECAREXDIVULSA PURPOSE:TO PROVIDE THE PROPERTY MANAGEMENT STAFF A MECHANICAL DEVICE TO DISTRIBUTE WATER ANOENSURE PLANT SURVIVAL IN THE MOST EFFICIENT MANNER ANO WITHIN A TIME FRAME THAT l£AST INTERFERES WITH THE ACTIVITIES OF THE RESIDENTS nONCFPT THE SYSTEM WILL UTILIZE DRIP aid BUBBLER IRRIGATION COMPATIBLE WITH THE AREA BEING WATERED AND INFILTRATION RATES OF THE SOIL THE SYSTEM WIU BE CONTROLLED BY A ■WEATHER TRAK-a SMART CONTROLLER VALVES PROGRAMACO FROM AUTOMATIC CONTRaLERS WILL MAXIMIZE EFFICIENT WATER APPLICATION LOWIGALBLUEFESCUEFESTUCAGLAUCA LOW5GALMATRUSHLOMAHORALONG!FOLIATHEFOLLOWINGPLANTMATERIALASSELECTEDISCOMPLIANTWITHCITYOFRCH.LING HILL'S ESTATES GREEN INITIATIVES OR CAL GREEN EQUIVALENT INCLUDING CONSIDERATION FOR WATER CONSERVATION AND NON-INVASIVE SPEQES. 3.MCOERATESGALPINKMUHLY GRASSMUHLENBPIGIACAPIILARIS MODERATESGALRYEPUFFSPENNISETM4SPATHIOUTUM MODERATEIGALAUIUKWMOORGRASSSESLERIAAUTUMNALIS LOWIGALBLUEEYEDCRASSSISYRINCHIUMBELLUM TO AVOID WATER RUNOFF,THE CONTROLS WILL BE OVERSEEN BY A FLOW MONITOR THAT WILL DETECT ANY BROKEN BUBBLER HEADS or DRIP TUBING TO STOP THAT STATION'S OPERA'DON, ADVANCING TO THE NEXT WORKABLE STATION IN THE EVENTOF PRESSURE SUPPLY LINE BREAKAGE. IT Wia COMPLETELY STOP THE OPERATION OF THE SYSTEM ALL MATERIAL WILL BE NONf ERROUS. WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE BRASS PIPING INTO AND OUT OF THE BACKFLOW UNITS ALL WORK WILL BE IN THE BEST ACCEPTABLE MANNER IN ACCORDANCE WITH APPLICABLE COOES ANO STANDARDS PREVAIUNG IN THE INDUSTRY. VINES/CLIMBING SHRUBS EXISTING TREE NOTE:VERY LOWSGALPIPESTEMCLEMATISCLEMATISLASIANTHA LOWSGALWESTERNWHITECLEMATISNOEXISTINGTREE TO REMAIN ON-SITE DUE TO PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION.CLEMATIS LIGUSTICIFOLIA MODERATESGALCLEMATISCLEMATISMACROPETALA LCWSGALHONEYSUCKLELONICERAHISPIDUUmiTXKErriciciiiuwmcamwdiuuheei PteUr«nC4 6v«pMr9fi$pirU)OA 16 GAL MODERATEENGLISHROSEROSADAVIDAUSTINCLAIREAUSTINrorMAWAots SCREENING OF UTILITY EQUIPMENT:MOKRATE1SGALCECILEBRUNNERaiUBlNGROSEROSAXCECAEBRUNNER MODERAIEISGALCHINESEWISTERIAWISTERIASINENSIS ALL ABOVE-GROUND UTILITY EQUIPMENT WILL BE SCREENED FROM PIBUC VIEWWITH A MINIMUM3' WIDE PLANTING AREA PROPOSEDSCREEN SHRUB WILL BE ISGALLON SIZE SPACED TOSCREEN75% OF UTtUTY AT THE TIME OF PLANTING.K031 JOT*HfHROZC**C1 WEGNOUNO 09 GENERAL PLANTING NOTES:OS!130HTDROZQNS2SfWCPCM030(TP COURT Timo mUlAW SHRUeS AT 24*HCH INSIDE OF STREET ANO DRIVEWAY UNE OF SIGHT08?oso WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE ORDINANCE (WELO)NOTEHioaojOfTT CgXJPTYAflp >rAOC 09J I seeou SECURITY PLANTING MATERIALS WILL BE UTILIZED ALONG WALL AND PROPERTY LINES AND UNDER VULNERABLE WINDOWS ANO BALCONIES 2. LANDSCAPE PLANS WILL ADHERE TO THE OTYS WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE ORDINANCE ROOT BARRIERS ARE REQUIREDFOR ALLTREESWITHIN ?OF ANY HARDSCAPE SURFACE PUNT MATURITY -SHRUBS WILL REACH MATURITY IN 3 YEAR /TREES WILL REACH MATURITY IN 5 YEARS LINE-OF-SIGHT NOTE:3 SHRUBS TO K MAINTAINED AT MAXIMUM 24’HIGH WITHIN LINE OF SIGHT AT STREET INTERSECTIONS4 R31 ROLLING HILLS ESTATES,CA PLANT PALETTE AND NOTES RESIDENCES AT PENINSULA CENTERLANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE L5lon^2D23B-341 oDtygjTMwwoTE fT|FSOTtCT H FIACS f»l ■SHOW EMSmC BUUW MU«HC SLABS,f»7l<«k UTUTtS F®LOCAL SIAIt A»0 ftOLBAL fitOUFEUBIIS |T| SLBOVt EaSHW PCC 0*9 [T|KBcnc cosnNC mecs RDAO^C D3SIWG LKH7 P9SIMC RnANNC (AIL nrtlO\f EXISTING OCCWAGtE LANOSCAPHG (OCXS 0 mio«DBsmo AC/AB pawac 0 BDAOVt EXISTWO lAMTSCAPlNC 0 RQACnt oosTw:eno scouiK 0 ROAOTt COSrwG 9W ut! s O' to 0 o u4 ,?l7 ot u_ 2li o DEMOUnON GENERAL NQTESt ALL COHIRACTORS A»«0 SUSCOMTRACTOdS PttfOftUM;MRK SHOWN ON ORBELAItD70 THES£PLANS SHALL CONOtACT THOR OPERATIONS SO THAT ALLEUPL0TEE5AREPROVIDEDA SAFE PLACE TO WORK AHO THE PUBUC ISPROTECTED.THCT UUST OBEY THE OCCUPATIONAL SAfETT AHO HEALTHRECULATIOHSOP THE U.S.DfPARTUENT Of LABOR ANO CAUfORABA STATE INDUSTRIAL REIATIOHS 'CONSTRUCTION AHO SAfETT CBOEBS'AHO KEEP THEENGINEERHARULESS FROM AKT PROBLEMS. 2 THE COtfTRACrOR FURTHER AGREES THAT HE SHALL ASSLME SOLERESPONSIBILnVFOR JOB SITE COHCHTIOHS DURJHO THE COURSE OfCONSTRUCTIONOFTHISPROJECTINCLUDING THE SAFETY OF ALL PERSONS AHOPROPERTY,THS COHOmON SHAU APPLY CONTINUOUSLY AHO NOT BE UUITED TONORMALWORKWCHOURSAHOTHAT THE CONTRACTOR SHAU OEFENO.WCUNirFAHOHOLDTHEOWNERAHOTHEENCINEEBHARULESS FROM AHY AHO ALLLIABILITYREAL OR ALLEGED IN CONNECTION WITH THE PERFORUAHCE OF WORKONimsPROJECTEXCEPTINGFORLMBIUTYARISINGFROMTHENEGUGCNCEOF THE OWNER OR EHCmEER. 3.THE EXISTENCE AHO LOCATION OF AHY UNDEROROUNO PIPES ORSTRUCTURESSHOWNON THESE PLANS ARE OBTAJNEO BY A SEARCH OFAVAILABLEBATA.10 THE BEST OF OUR KNOWLEDGE THERE ABE NO EXISTINGUTEITIESEXCEPTASSHOWNONnCSEPLANS. THE CONTRACTOR IS REOLITOl TOTAKE PRECAUTlONAflY MEASURES TO PROIECT THE UTILITIES SHOWN AHO AMYOTHERLHESORSTRUCTURESNOTSHOWNON THESE PLANS. A.THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR flOTABUNC AU OEMOLIDON ANOENCROACHUENTPERMITSASSOCIATEDWITHTHEWORKON THESE PLANS. i.WORK ON PUBUC UIUTIES IS TO BE DONE WIIH THE APPROVAL ON TICGOVERNINGLITIUIYCOMPANYAHOINCOICORMANCEWITHTHATUTIUTYCOMPAMT-SSTAHDAROSAHOREQUIREMENTS.CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR CONTACTINGANOCOORDIKATINCWITHTHEGOVERNINGAGENCYFORAPPROVALPRIOR TO THESTART Of DCMOOnON..v iha S.COMTRACIOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PRtPAHINO,PROCESSING FOR APPROVALWITH THE CriY OF ROILPIO ESTATES ANO IMPLEMENDNC TO THESATISFACTION Of THE ClIY OF ROLIANG ESTATES PUBUC WORKS DCPARTMEHT ANYNECESSARYTEAWN3RANYTRAfFlCOR PEDESTRIAN CONTROL PLANS ANO MEASURESOURINOWORKANOPERMANENTOEVtCES/MEASURES WHEN THE DEMOLITION ISCOMPLETE T.THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR REPAIRKC DAMAGE TO ANYIMPROVEMENTSDAALAGEODURINGWORKTHATWEREHOTNOTEOTOBEREMCVEOINTHE DEMOLITION PLANS.AU REPAIRS ARE TO BE TO THESADSfACIWHor THE COVERNPAC AGENCY OF THE dJPROVEUENT,OR C PBIVAIETO THE SATTSFACDON OF THE PROPERTY OWNER.THE CONTTUCTOR SRESPONSIBLEFORCOOfiOINAnONWITH THE OWEHMINO AGENCY AND AKtFEES/nNES FOR THE DAMAGE AND FOR PERFORUIHC AND INSPECDNO THEREPAIRS, a.THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PR0V1DWC A OUAUnED SWPPPPRACTIIIONCB.TEMPORAJTY EROSIONS CONTROL MEASURES DURING DCUOLjnONAHOPERMANENTEROSICWCONTROLMEASURESAFTEROEMOUTIONWCOMPUAHCEWITHTHESWPPPREPORT. STATE STORMWATER OENERAL PERMIT AHO TO THESATISFACTION OF THE CRY PUBUC WORKS INSPECTOR. ».AU ajUMNO REMOVALS SMALL BE M CONFORMANCE WITH OTY.COLPITY.STATE.AND FEDERAL CIROEUNES AHO REOOKEMENIS.THE CONIRACTOB SHAUPRCMDeTHEAGENCIESWITH AHY REQUIRED REPORTS AND PERUBS FOR THESUILDINGDEMOlinON. 10.THIS DEMOUTIOH PLAN DOES MOT WCIUOE REMOVALS WIIHW THE PUBUCR/W. 1. 0 0 S 6 Ul iQC>1lUoc4ao UJ tcco(/>5lijliJh-<z 34<UJ H3Oa>tf>iQ.UJ(O i<A 9CCOUlAQCCL2£O HZQC t<3^U>Z Ocj3 5(/)U)UJUlh-O OJ CC>a 1 i i*I i3Jt MvCUruM 5ATt:4/l»/702i o*t»n>ORA'M;US/D»AWC fKL >fKXEcr NO.:iJ mt SHCtT NUMBER 1CRAPHtC$CAt£:1 WO - 30 FI I I I or (alters IUM.AO m^9wn B-342 J A N U A R Y 3 , 2 0 2 5 In the News DAILY BREEZE: Los Angeles, Lomita to take ownership of San Pedro Ballfields SHARE Los Angeles and Lomita will take ownership of some baseball fields from the U.S. Navy’s Defense Support Point in San Pedro, officials announced Tuesday, Dec. 31. Rep. Nanette Barragán, D-Los Angeles, said she secured language in the National Defense Authorization Act to help transfer the federal land, which would happen a er negotiations between the Navy and the cities are complete. President Joe Biden signed the bill into law last week, the congresswoman said. Four years ago, the Secretary of Defense issued a memo stating that the Department of Defense would no longer support nonprofits that use and maintain the sites, according to Barragán’s office. As a result, the Defense Department was planning to dramatically increase fees for using the ballfields, at 2981 N. Gaffey St. and 3181 N. Gaffey St., in San Pedro, and at 26800 S. Western Ave., in Lomita. Related: San Pedro, Lomita youth sports fields get new lease on life The San Pedro Girls So ball Association, the San Pedro Athletic Complex and the Lomita Little League — which had used and maintained the fields for nearly 50 years — would have been priced out from using the fields, Barragán said. “Baseball is America’s pastime,” Barragán said in a statement, “and our communities in the Los Angeles Harbor Area have long relied on these fields to provide access to youth athletic programs and other outdoor recreation activities. “I’m so proud to have secured this language in this year’s NDAA to begin the transfer of the ballfields to our communities,” she added, “providing our kids with access for years to come.” The language gave the Secretary of the Navy the authority to transfer the San Pedro ballfields to the cities of Los Angeles and Lomita, but requires a “mutually satisfactory Español About Contact Issues Media Services & Resources Privacy - Terms C-1 agreement” between the parties, according to Barragán’s office. The congresswoman previously led efforts on an interim agreement that allowed community organizations to access the fields. Earlier this year, Barragán and Rep. Ted Lieu, D-Torrance, introduced similar legislation to protect community access to the fields. They sent a letter in September 2021 to U.S. Navy Secretary Carlos del Toro that helped prevent a dramatic fee increase, they said. “I’m pleased that with this bill becoming law, our communities will continue to have access to these vital recreational spaces,” Lieu said in a statement. “By allowing Los Angeles and Lomita to gain permanent ownership of the San Pedro ballfield, we are ensuring accessibility for future generations. No family should have to pay sky-high fees for their children to enjoy sports and play ball.” Stay up-to-date on District 44's latest news, updates and more! Sign Up Washington D.C. Office 2312 Rayburn House Office Building Washington, DC 20515 Phone: (202) 225 8220 Long Beach Office 4201 Long Beach Blvd, Suite 422 Long Beach, CA 90807 Phone: (310) 831 1799 South Gate City Hall Office 8650 California Ave South Gate, CA 90280 Phone: (310) 831 1799 Carson City Hall Office 701 E. Carson St Carson, CA 90745 Phone: (310) 831 1799 San Pedro Office (Coming Soon!) 638 S. Beacon St San Pedro, CA 90731 Phone: (310) 831 1799 C-2 Home <https://epa.gov/> / News Releases <https://epa.gov/newsreleases/search> EPA Announces Reconsideration of the Risk Management Plan to Boost Safety, Competitiveness of American Businesses March 12, 2025 Contact Information EPA Press O ice (press@epa.gov) WASHINGTON – U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Lee Zeldin announced the agency is reconsidering the 2024 Risk Management Plan (RMP) rule. This rule has raised significant concerns relating to national security and the value of the prescriptive requirements within the rule. As a result, the 2024 RMP rule makes America’s oil and natural gas refineries and chemical facilities less safe and less competitive. “The Biden EPA’s costly Risk Management Plan rule ignored recommendations from national security experts on how their rule makes chemical and other sensitive facilities in America more vulnerable to attack,” said EPA Administrator Zeldin. Accident prevention was and continues to be a priority for EPA in the Trump Administration. In 2019, the agency implemented rules that promoted coordination between chemical facilities and emergency responders, cut red tape and regulatory burdens, and addressed security risks associated with prior amendments to the rule. Biden’s costly rules negated this progress. EPA is committed to delivering common sense policy decisions that safeguard human health and the environment and bolster economic growth. This was announced in conjunction with a number of historic actions <https://epa.gov/newsreleases/epa-launches-biggest- deregulatory-action-us-history> to advance President Trump’s Day One executive orders and Power the Great American Comeback. Combined, these announcements represent the greatest and most consequential day of deregulation in the history of the United States. While accomplishing EPA’s core mission of protecting the environment, the agency is committed to fulfilling President Trump’s promise to unleash American energy, lower costs for Americans, revitalize the American auto industry, restore the rule of law, and give power back to states to make their own decisions. Last updated on March 12, 2025 D-1 M A R C H 1 , 2 0 2 4 Energy & Commerce Environmental justice and energy Press Releases EPA Strengthens Safeguards on Chemical Facilities to Include Requirements Urged by Rep. Barragán SHARE FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE 1 March 2024 Contact: Kevin McGuire, 202 538 2386 (mobile) Kevin.McGuire@mail.house.gov WASHINGTON, D.C.– Today, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced new safeguards and rules to improve the safety of nearly 12,000 chemical plants operating under the Risk Management Program (RMP). EPA included a number of new amendments to its final rule to improve protections for workers, first responders, and communities living near the facilities that were requested in a letter led Representative Barragán and Senator Cory Booker last year. “Communities of color and low-income communities disproportionately live in worst-case-scenario areas for a chemical disaster, including those surrounding oil refineries and liquified petroleum gas facilities. EPA’s final Safer Communities by Chemical Accident Prevention Rule is a significant step forward for the safety of these frontline communities, like Carson and Wilmington, to ensure chemical facilities adopt safer technologies and processes, improve their resilience to climate change, and are more accountable to the public. I will continue to work to reduce the number of dangerous, polluting facilities located in environmental justice communities, and strengthen safety and pollution standards for chemical facilities in our backyard.” EPA’s amendments to its original rule, many of which were requested by Congresswoman Barragán and Senator Booker, include: Requiring analysis of safer technologies and alternatives, and in some cases, implementation of reliable safeguard measures for certain facilities in industry sectors with high accident rates. Advancing employee participation, training, and opportunities for employee decision-making in facility accident prevention. Español About Contact Issues Media Services & Resources Privacy - Terms E-1 Requiring third-party compliance audits and root cause analysis incident investigation for facilities that have had a prior accident. Enhancing facility planning and preparedness efforts to strengthen emergency response by ensuring chemical release information is timely shared with local responders and a community notification system is in place to warn the community of any impending release. Emphasizing the requirement for regulated facilities to evaluate risks of natural hazards and climate change, including any associated loss of power. Increased transparency by providing access to RMP facility information for communities nearby. ### Congressmember Nanette Barragán represents California’s 44 District. She sits on the House Energy and Commerce Committee and works on environmental justice and healthcare issues. She is also Chair of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus (CHC). Stay up-to-date on District 44's latest news, updates and more! Sign Up Washington D.C. Office 2312 Rayburn House Office Building Washington, DC 20515 Phone: (202) 225 8220 Long Beach Office 4201 Long Beach Blvd, Suite 422 Long Beach, CA 90807 Phone: (310) 831 1799 South Gate City Hall Office 8650 California Ave South Gate, CA 90280 Phone: (310) 831 1799 Carson City Hall Office 701 E. Carson St Carson, CA 90745 Phone: (310) 831 1799 San Pedro Office (Coming Soon!) 638 S. Beacon St San Pedro, CA 90731 Phone: (310) 831 1799 th E-2 January 10, 2025 Via Email ceqacomments@portla.org Lisa Wunder Acting Director of Environmental Management Los Angeles Harbor Department 425 South Palos Verdes Street San Pedro, CA 90731 SUBJECT: Comments on the Draft Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) for the West Harbor Modification Project Dear Ms. Wunder, The City of Rancho Palos Verdes has reviewed the Draft SEIR for the West Harbor Modification Project and offers the following comments for your consideration. We appreciate the extension of the public review and comment period until after the holiday season. Rancho Palos Verdes is a semi-rural, residential community, with a significant senior population and households with pets, especially dogs. Since plans for the 6,200-seat amphitheater were announced, residents of the Eastview neighborhood, which borders San Pedro, have shared repeated concerns with the City about potential noise impacts from performances and fireworks displays at this proposed venue. In comments on the Notice of Preparation for the SEIR, t he City stated its expectation that the SEIR include a detailed noise analysis, prepared by a sound engineer, using measurable testing of noise impacts under various atmospheric conditions from the amplified sound system, fireworks displays, and crowds, including the diameter that these impacts would be experienced. While favorable and unfavorable atmospheric conditions were studied, the noise-sensitive locations in the Draft SEIR were limited to the immediate surrounding area. The radius should be expanded to adequately assess noise impacts on the Palos Verdes Peninsula community, including Rancho Palos Verdes, and provide specific data that establishes the decibel levels expected to be experienced. We support the creation of a noise complaint hotline and/or website for the amphitheater, penalties for noise violations, and requirements for a noise monitoring station and sound- monitoring data reports. However, more information is needed on how these mitigation F-1 Los Angeles Harbor Department January 10, 2025 Page 2 measures will be enforced. This includes the specific provisions and enforcement mechanisms included in contracts, permits, or other agreements with amphitheater users. We remain concerned about the long-term significant and unavoidable noise impacts generated not only by the amphitheater, but by the proposed 25 offshore fireworks displays per year. These fireworks and explosives trigger flashbacks in veterans with post-traumatic stress disorder, cause pets to run away from home in terror, and cause anxiety, especially in seniors. Fireworks displays should be kept at a minimum for not only these reasons, but also because of the resulting air and water pollution in a region already heavily impacted by the twin ports. We therefore support the mitigation measure to replace firework displays with lighted drone displays to the extent possible. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Draft SEIR, and we hope the final analysis will thoroughly address our concerns. Sincerely, Ara Mihranian City Manager cc: Tim McOsker, L.A. City Councilmember, 15th District Rancho Palos Verdes City Council Catherine Jun, Deputy City Manager F-2 SAN PEDRO West Harbor adds to partnership Developers says investment boost will speed up waterfront project’s progress BY DONNA LITTLEJOHN DLITTLEJOHN@SCNG.COM Developers of West Harbor, San Pedro’s long-awaited waterfront development, announced another addition this week to the partnership they said will move the 42-acre attraction forward more quickly. Carrix, one of the world’s largest independent marine and intermodal terminal operators, has formed a partnership with San Pedro developer Jerico Development and acquired a “signi cant equity position” in the waterfront development currently under construction, West Harbor developers announced on Wednesday. Carrix is the parent company of SSA Marine, operating multiple terminals in the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach. “They decided to make investment in the San Pedro community because they liked what we were doing,” said Eric Johnson, senior project executive for West Harbor. No dollar amount was provided for the latest boost, but in February, the development announced a new round of re nancing, called a recapitalization, that would provide $61.5 million for West Harbor, the $500 million project that’s replacing the former, 1960s-era Ports O’ Call Village. The new development stretches about a mile along the port’s Main Channel, from just south of the Los Angeles Maritime Museum near Sixth Street and Harbor Boulevard. A promenade provides pedestrian space right up against the water’s edge. Carrix is a leading operator of container, conventional cargo and cruise terminals across the Americas and Vietnam. Speci cs of how the latest addition will be applied have yet to be hammered out, Johnson said, but “another seasoned invested partner provides the ability to accelerate” the efforts that currently aim to have soft openings by the end of 2025 and a grand opening in the rst or second quarter of 2026. The development is 80% leased. “This will accelerate most everything we do,” Johnson said, “and will allow us to do things bigger and better on the water side.” His brother, Alan Johnson of Jerico Development, said the latest investment allows them to “keep things going.” While tenant spaces are being readied for occupancy, the process has taken longer than many had hoped. Rendering of proposed 175-foot Ferris wheel and amusement area at West Harbor waterfront development is shown. Rendering Courtesy Port of Los Angeles G-1 And one early signed tenant, Bark Social, an East Coast-based membership off-leash dog park, abruptly went out of business in November. West Harbor is talking to other similar tenants to replace them but remain committed to making West Harbor “family and dog friendly” either way. Including the rst satellite location of Hollywood’s Yamashiro, tenants include the rst California location for the experiential art gallery Hopscotch; and new locations for Mike Hess Brewing, Poppy + Rose, King and Queen Cantina, and Mario’s Neighborhood Butcher Shop and Delicatessen. Besides Harbor Breeze Cruises, the Los Angeles Maritime Institute, with its historic tall ships, will be regular tenants. Guest docks are included in the build-out, where private vessels can tie up and come ashore for visits. The San Pedro Fish Market has signed a 49-year lease to be a major part of the new development mix. The family-owned San Pedro business is already operating from a temporary spot on the location. A new building is being constructed to house the popular gathering spot, formerly part of Ports O’ Call, that has long brought visitors from miles around to experience a part of the port and shing town’s deep roots. An amusement area near the restaurant will include a carousel and a Ferris wheel — up to 175 feet tall — that will provide views of the port’s main channel, and the World War II Battleship USS Iowa. A pickleball space will round out some of the outdoor areas in the more northern section of West Harbor. The second building, now framed, should be nished in August, and the Fish Market’s permanent space could be ready as early as late 2026. If an amphitheater gets the nal go-ahead — among concerns being addressed are parking, traf c, noise and plans for reworks — work on that element will begin as soon as possible, Eric Johnson said. Nederlander Concerts will be a partner in the 6,200-seat outdoor venue. West Harbor, located along the main channel of the port, is designed to offer a mix of restaurants, retail and entertainment, including a mile-long promenade, the outdoor waterfront amphitheater, waterside recreational attractions, and commercial vessel docks and piers. “We see this as a pivotal development for San Pedro and the region,” Stefano Borzone, president of Carrix’s cruise division, said in a written comment provided in a release by the developers. “It aligns with our approach to long-term, community- focused investment and re ects our belief in the potential of the LA Waterfront.” West Harbor welcomes the partnership, the developers said. “Carrix’s capital investment strengthens our ability to deliver and enhance the quality of West Harbor’s built environment and guest experience — anchored by a unique, authentic, and fun collection of attractions,” Eric Johnson said, “helping to ensure the long-term success of West Harbor as a community-centered waterfront.” Jerico will retain a controlling interest in the project, ensuring continuity of the West Harbor vision and maintaining its deep commitment to the local community throughout the completion and operation of the project. G-2 CITY COUNCIL POLICY NUMBER: 34 DATE ADOPTED: 09/04/01 SUBJECT: Border Issues POLICY: It shall be the policy of the City Council that at least once a month, the City Council agenda shall contain an item to discuss “Border Issues” that have the potential to adversely impact residents of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes. “Border Issues” consist of individual projects that are likely to have direct adverse impacts on City residents on their own, as well as projects that, together with other projects, could create cumulative impacts to City residents. The procedure for addressing such issues shall be as follows, which is summarized in the attached flow chart: 1)When City Staff receives notices or other information regarding proposed projects that are located outside of the City’s borders but with the potential to impact City residents, City Staff shall report such information to the City Council as part of the Council’s monthly “Border Issues” agenda item. Such proposed projects shall include, but not be limited to, proposed land use development projects, events, or special uses in the neighboring cities and communities of Rolling Hills, Rolling Hills Estates, Palos Verdes Estates, San Pedro, Lomita and unincorporated LA County. 2)The Staff Report to the City Council on any such “Border Issue” proposed project shall include a description of the proposed project and the current status of the proposed project. 3)A copy of the Staff Report on such proposed projects shall be mailed to the Council of Homeowners Associations and any Homeowners Associations on file with the City that are located in the proximity of the proposed project. 4)Upon receipt of the Staff Report, the City Council shall consider any public testimony and take one of the following actions: A)Determine that no potential adverse impacts would result to City residents and direct that no further action be taken on the item; B)Determine that potential adverse impacts may result to City residents and direct the Border Issues sub-committee to monitor the proposed project and make a recommendation to the City Council as to what, if any, position the City should take on the project. H-1 City Council Policy No. 34 Border Issues Page 2 C)Determine that adverse impacts will result to City residents and establish a City position on the proposed project and give specific direction to the sub-committee and/or Staff. 5)Unless otherwise directed by the City Council, when a project is referred to the sub-committee for monitoring, the sub-committee will have the ability to take one or more of the following actions: A)Direct Staff to respond to any CEQA notices: B)Direct Staff to draft a letter to the lead agency stating the City’s position on the project; C)Attend or direct Staff to attend any public hearings, workshops or any other informational meetings on the proposed project; D)Meet with representatives of the lead agency proposing the project. 6)The sub-committee shall monitor projects, when directed to do so by the City Council, until the City Council deems otherwise. Unless otherwise directed by the City Council, monitoring reports shall be submitted to the City Council as part of the monthly “Border Issues” agenda item and may be accompanied by oral reports from the sub-committee members. 7)Projects shall remain on the monthly status report to the City Council until the City Council removes the item or deems the item closed. H-2