hermosa beach existing conditions appendices

City of Hermosa Beach Existing Conditions Report – Technical Appendices October 2014

City of Hermosa Beach General Plan Update Existing Conditions Report | i

Table of Contents Appendix A1: Existing Market Conditions Analysis (forthcoming) Appendix A2: Vulnerability and Adaptation to Sea Level Rise Analysis Appendix B1: Natural Resource Appendix Appendix B2: Biological Resource Appendix Appendix B3: Historic Resource Appendix Appendix B4: Historic Resource Parks and Recreation Record Appendix Appendix B5: Historic Resource Windshield Survey Results Appendix B6: Archeological and Paleontological Resources Appendix B7: 2013 Hermosa Beach Housing Element

Appendix A2:

Sea Level Rise Analysis

FINAL September 2014 p.1

Vulnerability and Adaptation to Sea-Level Rise:

An Assessment for the City of Hermosa Beach

Report prepared for Raimi & Associates as part of the Existing Conditions Report developed for the General Plan Update

for the City of Hermosa Beach

September 2014

Julia A. Ekstrom, Ph.D. and

Susanne C. Moser, Ph.D.

Susanne Moser Research & Consulting Santa Cruz, CA

PHOTO: AERIAL VIEW OF THE HERMOSA BEACH COASTLINE1


Contents Part A: Vulnerability Assessment 1. Introduction: Goals, Context and Background .................................................................................... 6

1.1. Goals and Context .............................................................................................................................. 6

1.2 Background ......................................................................................................................................... 7

2. Key Concepts Use in this Report ........................................................................................................... 8

2.1 Vulnerability ....................................................................................................................................... 8

2.1.2 Exposure ........................................................................................................................................... 8

2.1.2 Sensitivity ......................................................................................................................................... 9

2.1.3 Adaptive Capacity ............................................................................................................................ 9

2.2 Adaptation and Resilience .................................................................................................................. 9

3. Flood Risk and Sea-Level Rise Projections for Hermosa Beach ...................................................... 10

3.1 Sea-Level Rise and Expected Impacts on Hermosa Beach ............................................................... 10

3.1.1 Coastal Flooding with Sea-Level Rise ....................................................................................... 11

3.1.2 Scenario Planning in the Face of Uncertainty ............................................................................ 12

3.2 Design Flood Maps with Sea-Level Rise Used in this Assessment .................................................. 14

4. Geography and History of Flooding .................................................................................................... 15

4.1 Physical Geography .......................................................................................................................... 15

4.1.1 Current Climate and Topography .............................................................................................. 15

4.1.2 Shoreline Stability and Beach Width ......................................................................................... 16

4.1.3 Past Flooding Experience ........................................................................................................... 18

4.2. Demographics and Economy ........................................................................................................... 18

4.2.1 Population .................................................................................................................................. 18

4.2.2 Economy .................................................................................................................................... 18

5. Social Vulnerability ............................................................................................................................... 19

5.2 Income and Poverty .......................................................................................................................... 21

5.3 Women as Heads of Household ........................................................................................................ 24

5.4 Age and Populations with Limited Mobility ..................................................................................... 24

5.5 Housing Type and Home Ownership ................................................................................................ 25

5.5.1 Home Ownership vs. Renting .................................................................................................... 25

5.5.2 Homelessness ............................................................................................................................. 26

5.6 The Mentally and Physically Impaired ............................................................................................. 27


5.7 Race ................................................................................................................................................... 28

5.8 Summer Daytime Visitors ................................................................................................................. 30

5.9 Summary: An Integrated View of Social Vulnerability .................................................................... 31

5.9.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 31

5.8.2 Hermosa Beach's Social Vulnerability in the Context of LA County ........................................ 31

5.9.3 Local Social Vulnerability in Hermosa Beach ........................................................................... 32

6. Critical Community Infrastructure and Services .............................................................................. 35

6.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................................... 35

6.2 Water Infrastructure: Drainage, Sewage Treatment and Supply ...................................................... 38

6.2.1 Storm Runoff and Sea-Level Rise ............................................................................................. 38

6.2.2 Storm Water Infrastructure ........................................................................................................ 39

6.2.3 Sewer System ............................................................................................................................. 39

6.2.4 Coastal Groundwater, Water Infrastructure and Saltwater Intrusion ......................................... 40

6.3 Structures and Content ...................................................................................................................... 41

6.3.1 Overview of Structures and Value at Risk ................................................................................. 41

6.3.2 Iconic Shorefront Structures at Risk .......................................................................................... 44

6.4 Roads and Emergency Response ...................................................................................................... 45

6.4.1 Streets and Emergency Routes ................................................................................................... 45

6.4.2 Fire and Police Stations .............................................................................................................. 46

6.4.3 Tsunami Inundation Zone ................................................................................................... 46

6.5 Infrastructure Vulnerabilities in Hermosa Beach: Summary ............................................................ 48

7. Synthesis ................................................................................................................................................. 48

7.1 Sea-Level Rise Projections for Hermosa Beach ............................................................................... 48

7.2 Economic and Social Vulnerability .................................................................................................. 49

7.3 Infrastructure Vulnerability ............................................................................................................... 50

7.4 Conclusions ....................................................................................................................................... 51

Part B: Coastal Adaptation Options 1. Introduction ....................................................................................................................................... 53

2. Brief Review of Hermosa Beach's Existing Local Coastal Program ............................................ 53

3. Key Vulnerabilities to be Addressed in the Local Coastal Program Update .............................. 54

3.1 Required Components in a Local Coastal Program Update ............................................................. 54

3.2 Key Identified Vulnerabilities in Key LCP Update Areas ................................................................ 56


3.2.1 Public Access ............................................................................................................................. 56

3.2.2 Recreation & Visitor-Serving Facilities ..................................................................................... 56

3.2.3 Water Quality ............................................................................................................................. 57

3.2.4 Environmentally Sensitive Habitats and Other Natural Resources ........................................... 57

3.2.5 Planning and Locating New Development and Archaeological/Cultural Resources ................ 58

3.2.6 Scenic and Visual Resources ..................................................................................................... 58

3.2.7 Coastal Hazards .......................................................................................................................... 58

3.2.8 Shoreline Erosion & Protective Devices .................................................................................... 59

3.2.9 Summary .................................................................................................................................... 60

4. Adaptation Options for Hermosa Beach ............................................................................................. 60

4.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................................... 60

4.2 Guiding Principles ............................................................................................................................. 61

4.3 Adaptation Strategies ........................................................................................................................ 62

4.3.1 Ongoing Overarching Regional Strategies ................................................................................ 62

4.3.2 Ongoing Overarching Local Strategies ...................................................................................... 64

4.3.3 Specific Improvements in Disaster Preparedness and Recovery Planning ................................ 67

4.4 Summary of Adaptation Options and Conclusion ............................................................................ 68

Appendix 1: Description of Social Vulnerability Index Constructed for Hermosa Beach ................ 73

Development of the Vulnerability Index ................................................................................................ 73

Interpreting the Vulnerability Index ....................................................................................................... 74

Acknowledgments:

The authors wish to express their thanks for the opportunity to work on this project. Thank you to all those who helped with obtaining relevant data and reports and also for review comments on an earlier draft. Any omissions, oversights or interpretations in the final report are those of the authors.


Part A: Vulnerability Assessment


1. Introduction: Goals, Context and Background 1.1. Goals and Context Flood risks from coastal storms and sea-‐level rise constitute two important threats to coastal cities in California and around the world. They can negatively affect public safety, economic activity and human well-‐being unless residents, businesses and local government take appropriate preparatory actions. With climate change, these risks can be expected to increase, requiring additional adaptive actions to prevent harm and damages to the city.

This study takes an in-‐depth look at these risks for the City of Hermosa Beach, CA. The goals of this study are threefold: (1) to provide up-‐to-‐date information about sea-‐level rise and its associated flood risks to the City of Hermosa Beach; (2) to examine where in the city and in what ways infrastructure, the built environment, business activity and city residents are vulnerable to these growing risks; and (3) to explore how the City of Hermosa Beach can address these risks through appropriate preparatory and adaptive actions through its Local Coastal Program and other mechanisms.

The City of Hermosa Beach has had a focus on green development, sustainability and climate action for several years, and has decided to update the Coastal Land Use Plan (CLUP) as part of the 2014 General Plan Update. The City is working on developing a certified Local Coastal Program (LCP) to reflect the changing risks to its coastal areas and to develop appropriate policies and actions to avoid or minimize the risk of disaster and harm to its residents, infrastructure and the local economy.

This study, conducted as part of the Existing Conditions Report that lays the foundation for the City’s General Plan Update currently underway, provides requested information so that the City can consider the risks arising from climate change and, particularly, from sea-‐level rise into its long-‐term planning and related decisions. The particular focus here is on flood risk, emergency response, public health, and development in areas that are already at risk from coastal flooding and that may additionally be at risk in the future.

At the same time that the City is updating its General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan and its LCP, the California Coastal Commission has released Draft Guidance on how to assess and how to address sea-‐level rise risks in local communities (California Coastal Commission, draft of December 2013).2 This more specific guidance follows on (and is consistent with) previous guidance from the Ocean Protection Council (2011)3 on sea-‐level rise scenarios to use in planning and development by coastal communities and state agencies. While only advisory, the City of Hermosa Beach should expect that the Coastal Commission – in the process of reviewing and approving the updated CLUP – will take a careful look at any underlying documentation as to whether or not risks and vulnerabilities have been assessed and whether or not the City is considering the best available science on sea-‐level rise, coastal hazards, and adaptation. The assessment presented here is thus in accordance with the Commission's guidance (as currently conceived, pending further updates over the next few months) and is offered in partial fulfillment of the required information for a CLUP Update. It is also consistent with common planning standards used in hazards mitigation planning. We illustrate how we have followed the guidance to the extent possible with this document.

This study was conducted between October 2013 and February 2014, providing a first-‐time assessment of sea-‐level rise vulnerability (social and infrastructure) based on existing information from secondary data sources, such as City and County planning documents, other assessments related to vulnerable segments of the city (and, in some cases, the county’s) population, newspaper articles about past floods, Census 2010 data, American Communities Survey Census 2008-‐2012 data, as well as the best available science on sea-‐level rise, coastal hazards in California, and on climate change. These data and information sources were compiled and synthesized to provide a vulnerability assessment for the City. No primary data were collected for this study due to time and budget constraints for this project. Yet, it aims to show the value of using available data that enable planners to incorporate social and infrastructure vulnerability into thinking about climate adaptation for the City. This report also points to additional information and processes that may be useful in developing future assessments that can further improve the scientific foundation for further LCP updates and ongoing coastal management decisions.


It is important to note that this report does not provide new projections of sea-‐level rise, including no new flood and coastal erosion modeling, for the region. It was outside the scope and budget for this report to conduct such new research. Instead, existing scientific projections of sea-‐level rise were applied to the City of Hermosa Beach, and the implications explored for vulnerable areas and populations in the city. The best available science and best available spatial data are described in Section 3.1 “Sea-‐level rise.”

In Part B, this study examines the existing LCP, its provisions to address coastal hazards and changing coastal conditions, and then provides a series of suggestions – based on best practices and available science about adaptation approaches to date – that can be considered in the process of updating that plan to account for the changing risks to Hermosa Beach's shorefront. An analysis is provided as to which LCP sections require attention to sea-‐level rise, and possible adaptation options are described.

Adapting to climate change is a continual process, however, and the underlying social, economic and ecological science – just like physical climate change science – is not static. Relevant science thus should be updated regularly as adaptation planning continues in the future and as additional information becomes available. Thus, any potential new policies that the City chooses to adopt should be written in ways that allow for this ongoing updating with best available science.

1.2 Background In 2008, California’s then-‐Governor Schwarzenegger signed Executive Order S-‐13-‐2008 that required the California Natural Resources Agency to coordinate the development of a statewide Climate Adaptation Strategy. Following this executive order, the state completed its first statewide adaptation strategy in December 2009,4 which is currently being updated (a draft of this update, entitled Safeguarding California: Reducing Climate Risk, An Update to the 2009 California Climate Adaptation Strategy, was released in December 2013 and will be finalized in 2014). Partially in response to the State’s first adaptation strategy,5 several regions and communities across California have initiated studies and planning processes to better understand how climate change will affect their areas and determine how to reduce and prepare for these impacts.6

Hermosa Beach, in its desire to plan ahead and ensure the city's prosperity, safety, and beauty as well as its residents' welfare while also becoming sustainable and resilient vis-‐à-‐vis climate change, is thus one of a growing number of California (and US) cities that sees these goals not as mutually exclusive, but instead as mutually supportive. As experiences like Hurricane Sandy in October 2012 illustrate vividly, and as well-‐established science documents, it pays off to prepare for disaster mitigation before extreme events strike. For every dollar spent on disaster risk reduction, four to ten dollars are saved in avoided damages.7 It is also often cheaper and more beneficial in non-‐monetary terms to work with nature than against or without her to safeguard against storm surges, floods and excessive runoff, extreme heat and water shortages.8 This vulnerability assessment for the City of Hermosa Beach thus is to support the City’s update of its General Plan in 2014 and to provide input into how to revise its LCP in ways that incorporate sea-‐level rise and related risks in line with the Coastal Commission’s guidance.

For years, the State of California has supported science that has improved our understanding of how sea-‐level rise from climate change could affect our coastlines. Increased erosion of cliffs and beaches, increased levels of flooding and storm surge, shifts in storm tracks, loss of wetlands and saltwater intrusion into coastal groundwater reservoirs are among the impacts expected as sea level continues to rise.9 The best available science on these issues is used in this report.

For example, the California Ocean Protection Council's (OPC) updated guidance from 2013 is based on the best available climate and sea-‐level rise science: it used an assessment of the state of science commissioned from the National Research Council by Governor Schwarzenegger (Executive Order S-‐13-‐08) along with his

For every dollar spent on disaster risk reduction, four to ten dollars are saved in avoided damages.


counterparts in Oregon and Washington. The report (completed in 2012) now serves as the basis for state planning efforts along the entire West Coast from the Canadian to the Mexican border.

2. Key Concepts Use in this Report 2.1 Vulnerability To be consistent with statewide adaptation efforts, in this report we employ the same basic terminology as is used in the State of California’s 2009 Climate Adaptation Strategy.10

Vulnerability – in the most general sense – describes a system’s susceptibility to harm or change. Vulnerability is the combined result of exposure, sensitivity, and adaptive or response capacity and, as such, a function of the character, magnitude, and rate of the climate change hazard to which a system is exposed, as well as of non-‐climatic (social and environmental) characteristics of the system, which determine its sensitivity and adaptive capacity. This assessment focuses primarily on social vulnerability, which points to the factors that make certain groups of people more susceptible to harm than others. Thus, we describe the social and economic characteristics of the City of Hermosa Beach that are associated with lower adaptive capacity and higher sensitivity to flood events in areas potentially exposed to flooding and inundation from sea-‐level rise.

Additionally, we discuss the vulnerability of infrastructure (incl. public facilities, public spaces, private homes and business establishments, streets, and other) that is potentially exposed to flooding with increased sea-‐level rise. We highlight challenges that Hermosa Beach and neighboring coastal areas already do – and increasingly may – endure during winter storms, the severity of which sea level is expected to exacerbate.

The three dimensions commonly used to describe and understand the vulnerability of a system are described further below as they are essential to the analysis conducted in this study.

2.1.2 Exposure First, exposure is the nature and degree to which a system experiences a stress or hazard.11 Exposure captures whether or not someone or something is at risk from a particular hazard. Examples of such hazards familiar in coastal areas include

• coastal flooding of the beach, buildings and roadways during storms, • erosion of beaches, cliffs and bluffs, and • salt water intruding into coastal groundwater aquifers.

Depending on the sensitivity (discussed below) of the exposed natural and human built environment, exposed areas may then experience certain impacts, such as

• impaired drainage backing up storm water into streets and homes, • damage to beachfront property and recreational facilities, • loss of some portion of the beach, and • in the worst case, human injuries and loss of life.

Many of the hazards that drive these impacts can be expected to be exacerbated by climate change and a rise in sea level. The levels of exposure from a stressor or hazard, however, often are not distributed evenly across a geographic space or across human populations (e.g., coastal areas will be more exposed to storms, but less to extreme heat compared to inland areas). It is also important to note that climatic hazards can be one-‐time extreme events or slower, creeping problems that are chronic in nature, which can make the occasional extreme event have more disastrous impacts. For example, a heavy rainfall event – a temporary extreme – coinciding with a lunar high tide may cause some small amount of flooding at present. It might cause even more flooding if it occurs in an El Niño winter, when sea level is already considerably elevated. However, if the same type of event sometime in the future is combined with a gradual increase of sea level, i.e., with an increase in the baseline above which the


storm occurs – it could create unprecedented flood levels and result in costly damage. Thus while gradual sea-‐level rise and associated slower changes in sediment movement may be hard to perceive, they become significant multipliers of the flood risks faced in a particular area over time.

In summary, how exposure is distributed across space and populations, and the nature of the climate perturbation, are important inputs for understanding local-‐level vulnerability. Section 3 on climate change (specifically sea-‐level rise) summarizes the best available science at present on what threats the city and county may be exposed to in the future.

2.1.2 Sensitivity The second dimension of vulnerability is sensitivity, which refers to the degree to which a person, structure or system will be impacted by a given stressor, change or hazard.12 The greater the sensitivity, the bigger the impact of a hazardous event. The effect can be direct (e.g., the damage to a single-‐story home in a low-‐lying coastal area with no flood-‐proofing) or indirect (e.g., non-‐climatic stresses – such as loss of income – may cause people to be more sensitive to additional extreme conditions from climate change than they would be in the absence of these stresses).13 Thus, the sensitivity of a system is not just the result of climate-‐related hazards, but also influenced by non-‐climatic stresses. For example, those with existing illnesses may be more sensitive than healthy adults to water-‐borne bacteria that may spread during flooding. In short, people already under significant amounts of stress for health, economic, or psychosocial reasons may be more susceptible to additional climate-‐related health stresses.

2.1.3 Adaptive Capacity The third dimension of vulnerability is adaptive capacity. This term encompasses the ability to cope with extreme events, to make adaptive changes over time, or to transform more fundamentally, including the ability to moderate potential damages (negative consequences) and to take advantage of opportunities (beneficial consequences) that may arise from climate change.14 People who have a greater adaptive capacity, even if they are at risk of experiencing a hazard and have a certain sensitivity to it, may still end up with an overall lower vulnerability than similarly exposed and sensitive populations with a more limited capacity to prepare for and recover from the hazardous event or adapt over time.

While there are a number of ways to measure and evaluate adaptive capacity (and the scientific community does not agree on just one), this concept relates to the degree to which the system can prepare for and adapt to change in order to deal with a stressors or change. Adaptive capacity can be assessed on any level of organization, from the individual to the municipal, national or international levels. In this report we focus on the individual, neighborhood, and community (i.e., municipal) levels.

The factors that tend to increase adaptive capacity include economic resources, highly functional institutions, adequate infrastructure, availability of technological options and capacities, sufficient information and high levels of education and skill among decision-‐makers and stakeholders, significant social capital among community members, and equity in the access to these resources and capacities. These definitions of exposure, sensitivity and adaptive capacity illustrate why in this report we focus extensively on the social characteristics of the city’s population and economic sectors.15

2.2 Adaptation and Resilience The term adaptation commonly refers to any adjustment in natural systems (natural reactive responses to change in an ecosystem such a grassland, forest or wetland) or in human systems (reactive and proactive, planned and ad hoc efforts in a household, a city, a business, or a nation) in response to actual or expected climatic stimuli or their effects. Goals of adaptation can vary but generally aim to minimize harm or take advantage of beneficial opportunities that may arise in the course of climate change. In this report, we refer to adaptation as including all those adjustments in planning, management and decision-‐making that a government entity, business, or private citizen might make to prepare for and deal with the impacts of climate change.

Another term frequently heard in the context of disaster preparedness and adaptation to climate change is resilience. Depending on scientific discipline and field of practice, resilience means different things to different people. In the California State Adaptation Strategy, resilience is defined as "the ability of a social or


ecological system to absorb disturbances while retaining the same basic structure and ways of functioning, the capacity for self-‐organization, and the capacity to adapt to stress and change." This definition combines two different interpretations of the term. On the one hand, resilience is sometimes understood as a characteristic of a system that allows it to function a certain way, namely to withstand and recover from extreme events and disruptions more quickly and easily. Others understand it as a desirable end state or outcome of adaptive efforts, namely that a system or community is less vulnerable than it was prior to the efforts it made to prepare for and adapt to change. Thus, in the former interpretation, a community would be called more resilient if it focused its adaptation efforts mostly on building up its adaptive capacity so that in the event of a disaster, it could recover more quickly. In the latter interpretation, a community would be called more resilient if it focused its efforts primarily on reducing its exposure or strengthened its protection and reduced other concurrent stressors (i.e., reduced its sensitivity).

Because climate conditions are not static but will continually change over time, such adaptive efforts cannot be undertaken just once but have to be monitored for continued effectiveness and augmented as needed. Thus in order to remain resilient in the face of continual change, vigilance, monitoring, learning, and periodic reviewing are required, so as to enhance or change strategies commensurate with the changing conditions. Ideally, then, adaptation efforts are focused on all three dimensions of vulnerability (exposure, sensitivity, and adaptive capacity) and are periodically reviewed and updated so as to maintain and increase a community's resilience over time.

3. Flood Risk and Sea-‐Level Rise Projections for Hermosa Beach 3.1 Sea-‐Level Rise and Expected Impacts on Hermosa Beach Sea-‐level rise – largely a result of warming ocean waters and melting ice caps – is among the most certain consequences of climate change, although considerable uncertainty remains over the exact extent of rise both globally and along different stretches of the coastline. Over the past century, sea level has risen by approximately 7 inches along the California coast, which is consistent with the observed global average.16 While an oceanographic oscillation of currents (Pacific Decadal Oscillation) in the Pacific Ocean has temporarily suppressed sea level from rising significantly along the West Coast of the United States since the 1980s, scientists currently see this phase coming to an end, and thus agree that sea-‐level rise along the U.S. West Coast will resume a pace consistent with the global average in coming decades.17 A 2012 study by the National Research Council, specifically commissioned by the states of California, Oregon, and Washington and several federal agencies to assess the state of sea-‐level rise science for the West Coast, concluded that sea level along Southern California’s coast will rise up to about 12 inches by 2030, 2 feet by 2050, and 5.5 feet by 2100.18 While there remain scientific uncertainties around these "best estimates," the biggest of which concern human choices around energy use and emissions of heat-‐trapping gases to the atmosphere as well as the behavior of the world's major ice sheets (Greenland and West Antarctica), the consensus among experts expressed in the NRC report is that the rate of sea-‐level rise over the next several decades may be as much as four to nine times larger than that observed over the 20th century.19

Along the coast of Hermosa Beach and the entire coastline of Los Angeles County, sea-‐level rise could lead to the following impacts:

• Increased erosion of beaches that are either already retreating or maintained in place by sand replenishment;

• Increased risk of bluff failures and retreat and consequent damage to the Pacific Coast Highway, other critical transportation routes along the coast, or build structures on top of bluffs;

The rate of sea-‐level rise over the next several decades may be as much as four to nine times larger than that observed over the 20th century.


• Coastal flooding with higher storm surges and flood elevations during coastal storms, potentially flooding valuable transportation, commercial, energy, wastewater, and residential infrastructure in low-‐lying areas;

• Permanent inundation of the few remaining or restored coastal wetlands, as well as beaches and other low-‐lying areas in LA county;

• Reduced capacity to absorb runoff and drain it away from inland areas as sea-‐level rise elevates the coastal groundwater levels; and

• Saltwater intrusion into coastal groundwater basins from which freshwater is drawn to serve regional (residential and commercial) water users.

Scientists estimate that by the end of the 21stcentury, the extremely high flood levels currently associated with “100-‐year” flood events (i.e. those floods that have a 1% chance of occurring in any one year) will occur on average once per year along California’s coast.20,21 A major storm in 2100 that has a 1% chance of occurring at that time, by contrast, would produce much higher flood elevations than a present-‐day 100-‐year storm, and thus reach much farther inland, a case discussed in more detail in Section 3.2 below.

3.1.1 Coastal Flooding with Sea-‐Level Rise Long-‐term sea-‐level rise raises the baseline on top of which coastal areas will experience all the short-‐term natural variability they already experience. This short-‐term variability ranges from daily tidal movement, to the monthly lunar highs and lows, to seasonal storm-‐related elevation of water levels, and interannual variability related to the El Niño Southern Oscillation or the Pacific Decadal Oscillation, which also affect sea level.

In fact, both the 2012 National Research Council report and the OPC Sea-‐Level Rise Guidance emphasize, that “most of the damage along the coast in the near term is expected to be caused by storms, in particular, the confluence of large waves, storm surges, and high astronomical tides during a strong El Niño.”22 The National Research Council report also warned that, “Large El Niño events can raise coastal sea levels by 10 to 30 cm [~4-‐12 inches] for several winter months [above average sea level].”23 Such events therefore should be considered in addition to sea-‐level rise.

For the next several decades, sea level is projected to rise by the following amounts (


Table 1):


TABLE 1. SEA-‐LEVEL RISE PROJECTIONS (BASELINE: 2000)

Time Period Projected Sea-level rise*

2000 – 2030 4 to 30 cm (0.13 to 0.98 ft)

2000 – 2050 12 to 61 cm (0.39 to 2.0 ft)

2000 – 2100 42 to 167 cm (1.38 to 5.48 ft) (or: up to ~66inches)

Source: NRC (2012)24 * Projections for all points south of Cape Mendocino.

To put these figures into perspectives: The upper end of the projected range of sea-‐level rise between 2000 and 2030 (12 inches) is nearly double the sea-‐level rise experienced in the entire 20th century (7 inches), or roughly since Hermosa Beach was incorporated as a City. Scientists expect sea-‐level rise to accelerate over time, such that sea level in the future decades will rise at even faster rates than in the very near term.

Sea-‐level rise scenarios reaching out to 2100 may appear too far in the future to be relevant to current planning. However, 85 years (to 2100) is not beyond the lifetimes of many structures in place already or built today (the Coastal Commission assumes 75-‐100 years), nor beyond the lifetime of some of Hermosa Beach's youngest residents. Moreover, and importantly, sea-‐level rise will not stop in 2100, but is expected to continue to rise. The ultimate amount of sea-‐level rise depends in large measure on the choices society makes today and in the years ahead about how much more heat-‐trapping gases are emitted into the atmosphere, how sensitively the climate will respond to these emissions, and how fast the ice will melt from the major land-‐based ice masses of the world in Greenland and Antarctica in response to the warming. 3.1.2 Scenario Planning in the Face of Uncertainty Regardless of the uncertainties described above, it is prudent to assume that sea level along the California coastline will continue to rise, rise at an accelerating rate, and continue to rise beyond this century. Regardless of the exact rate in coming decades, Hermosa Beach can no longer expect the relatively stable sea level or slow sea-‐level rise of the past.

But as Table 1 makes clear, future sea level cannot be predicted with perfect certainty. To account for the uncertainties, scientists instead give a range of projections and cannot – at this time – attach a numerical likelihood to these figures to suggest which of the projections are more or less likely to unfold. It should be noted, however, that society is currently on an emissions path that is consistent with the highest emissions scenarios underlying the projections of future warming and sea-‐level rise. In other words, global total emissions are currently putting society on the path of the hottest of possible futures and thus also on track for the fastest rising, high-‐end sea level. In fact, two independent scientific studies released in mid-‐May 2014 found that the West Antarctic Ice Sheet has been irreversibly destabilized and will add tens of feet over the next several hundred years to the global sea level, making a rise in the next 85 years toward the upper end of the projected range more likely.25

The Coastal Commission recognizes these uncertainties, and gives clear guidance on how communities should proceed: use scenario planning and adaptive management techniques.26

For general planning purposes the Coastal Commission recommends using more than one sea-‐level rise scenario. For specific projects and permit applications it recommends that communities consider at least one

In the face of uncertainty, communities should use scenario planning and adaptive management techniques.


lower and the high-‐end projection from the best available science (currently, the National Research Council report). This is also consistent with OPC Guidelines, which strongly advises that, “Future sea level will be a starting point for project design considerations. Where feasible, consideration should be given to scenarios that combine extreme oceanographic conditions on top of the highest water levels projected to result from [sea-‐level rise] over the expected life of a project.”27

One way to understand this guidance is to estimate (a) how frequently extreme sea levels will be observed in the future, and (b) for how long these extreme sea levels will last. As explained above, extreme sea levels occur when storm surge, high tides, and other conditions coincide to elevate sea level above the normal average baseline. By comparing current conditions against those during future storms when sea level is also higher, the implications become tangible: In Figure 1 below, the black line shows historically observed variations in extreme sea level at La Jolla, California (1960-‐2000) and projected forward to 2100. An "extreme" sea level, as defined here, is one so high that it is observed in only 0.01% of all cases over the historical record (what scientists call the "99.99th percentile"). The black line suggests that by 2020, the most extreme sea levels of the past will move outside the historical range. They will be regularly exceeded by even higher extremes, and by the end of this century these rare extremes are expected to be nearly 4 feet higher than at present – a flood level that would reach considerably farther inland than a 4 feet lower flood.

The second interesting information that can be gained from this graph comes from the light blue bars in Figure 1. Each vertical bar represents the number of hours per year during which the extreme sea level is experienced in that location, i.e. for how long that level is exceeded ("hours of exceedance"). The baseline (at zero) marks the historical average, and all bars above that baseline indicate a longer-‐than-‐average experience of extreme sea level. If a typical year has 365 days or 8,760 hours, and that extreme sea level is exceeded for about 2,250 hours (or more than 90 days per year) by 2100, then end-‐of-‐century La Jolla would be exposed to flood risk from this elevated sea level for practically the entire winter season.

FIGURE 1.CHANGE IN EXTREME SEA LEVEL ELEVATIONS AS SEA LEVEL RISES. THE BLACK LINE SHOWS HISTORICALLY OBSERVED VARIATIONS IN EXTREME SEA LEVEL AT LA JOLLA (1960-‐2000) AND PROJECTED FORWARD TO 2100. AN "EXTREME" SEA LEVEL IS ONE SO HIGH THAT IT IS OBSERVED IN ONLY 0.01% OF ALL CASES OVER THE HISTORICAL RECORD (THE "99.99TH PERCENTILE"). BY 2020, THE MOST EXTREME SEA LEVELS OF THE PAST WILL BE REGULARLY EXCEEDED BY EVEN HIGHER EXTREMES. THE NUMBER OF HOURS/YEAR DURING WHICH SUCH EXTREME SEA LEVELS WILL BE OBSERVED IN LA JOLLA ARE SHOWN IN LIGHT BLUE BARS. PROJECTIONS ARE BASED ON SEA LEVEL HOURLY MODEL COMPUTATIONS USING MODELED (GFDL CM2.1) SIMULATION FOR THE HISTORICAL PERIOD AND THE SRES A2 EMISSIONS SCENARIOS. PROJECTED SEA-‐LEVEL RISE IS BASED ON VERMEER AND RAHMSTORF (2009). Source: Cayan et al. 201228 Given these realities and the best available science currently available, the analysis conducted for Hermosa Beach in this study thus started out from the assumption to use the low and the high-‐end projections of sea-‐level rise, combined with the 100-‐year flood, for the following reasons:


• Cost-‐effectiveness – It is more cost-‐effective for the City to have at its finger tips the analysis ultimately needed for permit applications, rather than base its General Plan and CLUP update on one set of scenarios and requiring a different set for day-‐to-‐day management in the future.

• Prudence – If the city uses a high-‐end sea-‐level rise scenario for its general planning purposes and can illustrate that its current and future coastal management approaches will safely and adaptively address the highest risks, it uses the most prudent, reassuring and forward-‐looking approach.

• Consistency with common hazard mitigation standards – The 100-‐year flood event is the most commonly used flood hazard mitigation standard, e.g. by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and its flood maps, as well as in state hazard mitigation planning. Thus, to ensure consistency with these common standards, we used 100-‐year flooding data rather than flood maps for a smaller event. Moreover, because the Coastal Commission applies a 75-‐100 year planning horizon for siting decisions (the actual average lifetime of structures rather than merely the length of a typical mortgage), we used projections for 2100, rather than merely for the year 2050.

Available data for an analysis using these two scenarios and flooding event restricted what was feasible for the purposes of this assessment, as explained in the next section.

3.2 Design Flood Maps with Sea-‐Level Rise Used in this Assessment Data integrating the National Research Council's high-‐end scenario of 66 inches of sea-‐level rise above 2000 levels with flooding were not available at the time of this study, thus the highest available scenario was used instead. The Pacific Institute, with funding from the California Energy Commission as part of the California’s Second Climate Change Assessment (2009), used a simplified approach to modeling the 100-‐year flood on top of 55 inches of sea-‐level rise (essentially a still-‐water inundation model using the best available topographic elevation data).29 A map showing areas at risk of this flooding scenario is shown in Figure 2. It represents the best spatial information available for evaluating the extent of the 100-‐year flood risk with sea-‐level rise for the City of Hermosa Beach at this time.

As indicated above, the Coastal Commission Draft Guidance recommends the use of multiple scenarios for a vulnerability assessment. However, only the 100-‐year flood data with 55 inches of sea-‐level rise was available for Hermosa at the time of this study. The Ocean Protection Council and other entities have awarded research funds to the US Geological Survey to generate 100-‐year flood maps for the Los Angeles region (including Hermosa Beach) with several scenarios of sea-‐level rise, expected at the earliest in early 2015 (or as late as 2016). We recommend using those data when they become available and combining them with the social vulnerability analysis conducted for this study (or an updated version).

FIGURE 2. EXTENT OF THE 100-‐YEAR FLOOD IN HERMOSA BEACH AFTER 55 INCHES OF SEA-‐LEVEL RISE (RED), RESPECTIVELY, BASED ON MODELING PERFORMED BY THE PACIFIC INSTITUTE (2009). ADDITIONAL LAND WOULD BE AT RISK OF FLOODING WITH THE HIGHER SEA-‐LEVEL RISE SCENARIO (66 INCHES BY END OF THE CENTURY) RECOMMENDED BY THE NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL 2012. VIEW OF MAP IN GOOGLE EARTH FROM AERIAL VANTAGE POINT OVERLAYING THE CITY’S BUILDING FOOTPRINT (WHITE).


4. Geography and History of Flooding 4.1 Physical Geography 4.1.1 Current Climate and Topography To place future flood risk in perspective, it is important to examine Hermosa Beach's past experience with major floods, and place the flood risk in the context of the City's physical and human geography.

The City of Hermosa Beach encompasses 1.43 square miles with approximately 2 miles of coastline, located in the southern portion of Santa Monica Bay in Los Angeles County (Figure 3). The city is nestled between two other beachfront cities: Redondo Beach to the south and Manhattan Beach to the north.

FIGURE 3. GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH WITHIN LA COUNTY Source: Wikimedia Commons

One of the sunniest spots in the U.S. (325 days of sunshine on average per year), Hermosa Beach's mild air and water temperatures are key to making it one of the great beach cities of southern California, and a desirable recreational destination for people from hotter inland areas. Its average air temperature in the summer is 74°F and 55°F in winter. Average water temperatures across the seasons range from 60°F in the summer to 50°F in the winter.30 Rainfall in the Los Angeles area has historically been highly variable. Rainfall totals in the City of Hermosa Beach range widely from nearly no rainfall to more than 3 feet/year (for example, the City measured just 4.35 inches in 2001-‐2002 on one end of the spectrum, and 38.2 inches in 1883-‐1884 at the other extreme31). The region is also heavily affected by monsoons/summer tropical storms, usually in El Niño years.

The average elevation of the city is close to sea level, approximately 50 feet,32 gradually rising from sea level at the waterfront to just over 200 feet along its eastern, inland boundary33 (Figure 4). The city itself is built on a massive sand dune that hugs the coastline.34 The city’s coastline includes one pier and no breakwaters. In the 1960s an artificial reef off Hermosa Beach was built out of quarry rock, one street car, several car bodies, and cement blocks35 to support recreational fishing. A co-‐benefit of this reef, originally just meant to enhance local fishing opportunities, is its ability to reduce wave action as storm waves approach the coastline. This may help reduce coastal erosion, now and in the future, of Hermosa's famous beach.


FIGURE 4.ELEVATION MAP OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH (IN FEET ABOVE SEA LEVEL). RED ORANGE AND YELLOW COLORS INDICATE THE AREAS CLOSEST TO SEA LEVEL, INDICATING HOW THE SOUTHERN PORTION OF THE CITY HAS A GREATER AREA AT LOWER ELEVATIONS BEFORE THE LAND RISES ABOVE 30 FEET. Source: City of Hermosa Beach36 4.1.2 Shoreline Stability and Beach Width The U.S. Geological Survey has undertaken a study of shoreline stability and physical vulnerability1 to shoreline change for the entire Pacific Coast shoreline.37 As a first approximation of the risk of shoreline change, it is valuable to consider their findings. Figure 5 shows that the stretch of shoreline south of Los Angeles to the Palos Verdes Peninsula is one of very high physical vulnerability to shoreline change. This high vulnerability to shoreline change can be attributed in large part to the very soft substrate the areas has been built on (sand dunes), and the reduction of sediment influx into the Santa Monica Littoral Cell due to intense build-‐up of the region and the reduction of river discharge into the bay.38

1The authors of that study defined vulnerability differently than is commonly used here in this study. The physical vulnerability they describe is a measure of the susceptibility of the shoreline to change (erode or accrete) in response to historical sea-‐level rise and wave action. This physical vulnerability depends on shoreline geology, geomorphology, regional coastal slope, the rate of historical relative sea-‐level rise, observed shoreline erosion and accretion rates, tide range and mean wave height.


FIGURE 5: THE USGS

COASTAL

VULNERABILITY INDEX FOR THE COAST OF CALIFORNIA, WITH AN EMPHASIS ON THE HERMOSA BEACH AREA, SHOWS THAT THE SHORELINE SOUTH OF LOS ANGELES HAS A VERY HIGH VULNERABILITY OF ERODING.

Source: Map excerpt created from Thieler and Hammer-‐Klose (2000)39

However, over the last century, there has been heavy sand replenishment at neighboring beaches of Santa Monica Bay, though not directly at Hermosa Beach. The California Beach Restoration Study (2002)40 reports that Hermosa Beach gained an additional 250 feet in beach width because of the sand replenishment contributed to the shoreline in the bay between 1935 and 1990.41 It reports that the beaches of Santa Monica Bay, especially those in the central and southern areas of the bay, would not be the same wide stable beaches42i f it were not for the opportunistic43 replenishment undertaken to protect LA's Hyperion Sewage Treatment Plant.44 Moreover, King Harbor in Redondo Beach, just south of Hermosa Beach's southern boundary appears to serve as a sediment trap that prevents sand from being eroded along the shoreline and lost down Redondo Canyon (Figure 6).


FIGURE 6. AERIAL PHOTO OF HERMOSA BEACH LOOKING SOUTH AS IT RUNS INTO KING HARBOR IN REDONDO BEACH. THE HARBOR SERVES AS A SEDIMENT TRAP FOR THE SAND ALONG HERMOSA BEACH'S SHORELINE, SAFEGUARDING IT FROM BEING SEASONALLY ERODED.

Source: Image Science and Analysis Laboratory, NASA Johnson Space Center45

The OPC’s Sea-‐Level Rise Guidelines as well as the Coastal Commission's Sea-‐Level Rise Guidance advise communities to consider local shoreline dynamics in assessing their future risks. Site-‐specific information about the near-‐shore current and erosion dynamics that affect Hermosa’s sand distribution should be considered when planning for sea-‐level rise. This requires, however, a more detailed technical/engineering study of sediment supply and dynamics in order to model how sea-‐level rise could affect local erosion of beaches and coastline. Such a study was beyond the scope of this study.

To the extent future coastal erosion increases as a result of sea-‐level rise and related changes in sediment dynamics, and if future beach replenishment is not maintained, Hermosa Beach should expect a reduction of the protective beach buffer in front of the city. As a result, future flooding and storm surge could have a more destructive and farther-‐inland reaching impact than if the beach remains stable. In the absence of having such a detailed engineering study, the estimates of inland flooding under the higher sea-‐level rise scenario used here thus may not fully capture the extent of potential risks to the city.

4.1.3 Past Flooding Experience Currently, none of the city’s land is within a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) 100-‐year floodplain as currently defined46; however, City documents report frequent winter flooding, especially in El Niño years. The City's Hazard Management Plan (2005) describes Hermosa’s risk of flooding due to its physical geography as follows:

“...the towering mountains that give the LA region its spectacular views also wring a great deal of rain out of the storm clouds that pass through. Because the mountains are so steep, the rainwater moves rapidly down the slopes and across the coastal plains on its way to the ocean...higher ridges often trap eastern-‐moving winter storms. Although downtown LA averages just fifteen inches of rain a year, some mountain peaks in the San Gabriels receive more than forty inches of precipitation annually.”47

The City’s 2005 Hazard Management Plan refers to the City of Hermosa Beach as having “chronic seasonal flooding” problems due to its geography and historic climate. Though the Pier Avenue Improvement Project has addressed some flooding issues, as sea level continues to rise due to climate change, heavy rainfall cannot runoff as easily. Thus, regardless of whether the pattern of seasonal rainfall changes in the future, sea-‐level rise alone can be expected to exacerbate local flooding conditions when heavy rainfall events occur.

4.2. Demographics and Economy 4.2.1 Population In 2012 the U.S. Census reports that the City of Hermosa Beach had a total population of 19,773, which reflected a small population growth of about 1.3% (approximately 260 persons) since the last major Census year, 2010. The city’s youngest population segment (0-‐5 years) is smaller (5.1%) than the statewide average of 6.8%. Similarly, the proportion of the population that is 65 years and older is only 9%, while the statewide average is slightly higher at 11.4%.

The vast majority of the population is white (86.8%) – considerably higher than the statewide average of 57.6%. Based on the 2010 U.S. Census only 8.4% of the population is Hispanic or Latino (compared to 37.6% statewide), and 5.7% is Asian. Less than 1.5% of the city’s population is African American, American Indian, Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander.48

4.2.2 Economy As a beachfront bedroom community, the resident population of Hermosa Beach of just under 20,000 is quite small. Property tax is the City’s largest single source of revenue with the median home price just over $1


million in fiscal year 2010-‐11.49 Accommodation and food service sales also make a significant contribution to the City’s economy with a reported $100,593,000 in annual sales in 2007 (the most recent available Census report).50

Most residents are employed outside of the city, commuting on average approximately 30 minutes to reach work. Only 5.7% of residents actually work in Hermosa, while 94.3% commute to other places, many to LA.51 In 2012, the Southern California Council of Government reported there were 6,800 jobs in Hermosa in 2012, 778 of which (or 11.4%) were in the retail sector. Leisure jobs made up 27.5% of the jobs in Hermosa, with an average annual income of only $24,000, which is considerably lower than the average per capita income of Hermosa’s residents ($71,215) (Figure 7). The median household income is $100,696, again, considerably higher than the state average of $61,400.52

FIGURE 7. DISTRIBUTION OF JOBS ACROSS DIFFERENT ECONOMIC SECTORS IN HERMOSA BEACH

Source: SCAG53

While the resident population is relatively small, the city attracts a high visitor population throughout the year. In December 2010, there were 94,300 visitors to the beach, multiplying about ten-‐fold in the summer (with up to 939,000 beach visitors in July 2010), with a total of more than 3.7 million visitors in the 2010-‐11 fiscal year.54 These numbers point to the crucial dependence of the city on the beach economy, and thus on the presence of the beach and the forward-‐looking management of its coastal infrastructure.

5. Social Vulnerability 5.1 Introduction

Climate change could jeopardize the safety of Hermosa Beach residents as well as the stability and strength of the city’s economy, unless adaptation measures are implemented to prevent such potential social and economic harm. This section focuses first on social vulnerability, and in particular the specific population characteristics in those portions of the city exposed to an increased coastal flood risk as sea level rises.

Approximately 1,000 residents of Hermosa Beach live within the 100 year floodplain with 55 inches of sea-‐level rise.55 We assessed the population characteristics across the whole city here for three key reasons: (1) the extent of flooding may reach further into the city with 66 inches of sea-‐level rise (upper range projected by the National Research Council, see Section 3.1.1), (2) extreme flooding at even lower levels of sea-‐level rise


can affect the functionality of key city infrastructure (e.g., road flooding, drainage backups), and (3) important commercial activity happens within the potential flood zone, potentially causing city-‐wide impacts. Assessing the social vulnerability for the entire city will also facilitate integration of this assessment with updated flooding data when they become available.

Some segments of a community's population tend to be more socially vulnerable to flooding than others. The most important factors shaping social vulnerability include:

• Income and poverty • Race • Females as head of household • Age • Housing type (percent rentals) • Physical and mental illnesses and disabilities • Transient populations

These characteristics are associated with a higher sensitivity and/or lower adaptive capacity of populations exposed to flooding and sea-‐level rise, and thus should be taken into account in emergency and disaster response/recovery planning as well as in adaptation planning (

Table 2). TABLE 2. SOCIAL VULNERABILITY FACTORS OF SIGNIFICANCE DURING AND AFTER HAZARDOUS EVENTS


Source: Dunning and Durden (2013)56

These factors – to the extent they are relevant in Hermosa Beach – are explored in the following sections.

5.2 Income and Poverty Lower income often correlates with lower access to the necessary resources to prepare for or evacuate in the case of a disaster, or to invest in actions required to adapt to climate change (e.g., moving out of a flood plain, elevating living space in one’s house above a given flood elevation, purchasing sump pumps, or acquiring insurance to better cope with floods).

Overall the city’s population is highly educated, has a relatively high income, and very low rate of poverty (3.6%, as defined by federal standards that apply nationwide). Median household income for years of 2008-‐2012 was $100,696, which falls between that in Hermosa's two coastal neighboring cities of Redondo Beach


($98,816) and Manhattan Beach ($134,445).57 As

Figure 8 shows, in general, higher income households reside in the northern coastal portion of the city, where houses directly line the Strand.


FIGURE 8. AVERAGE ANNUAL PER CAPITA INCOME (LEFT) AND PERCENT OF HOUSEHOLDS WITH AN INCOME GREATER THAN $200,000 PER YEAR (RIGHT) BY CENSUS TRACT OF HERMOSA BEACH

Source: Based on data from the ACS 2008-‐2012.58

Although residents enjoy relatively high household incomes, the cost of living in Hermosa Beach is also high compared to other areas in the Los Angeles region, California, or the nation. Many residents may struggle economically even though this is not directly apparent from the Census statistics on income. According to the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG)59, approximately 37% of homeowner households and 41% of renter households in Hermosa Beach were paying more than 30% of their income towards housing


costs (Table 3). When renters pay more than 30% of their household income to housing costs, this is referred to as an ‘overpayment’ burden. The most severe overpayment burden, where renters pay 50% or more of their gross income towards housing costs, is experienced by 1,341 households in Census Block Groups adjacent to the southern beachfront of the city (Figure 9).

Having to spend a large part of one’s monthly income on housing can limit discretionary resources for such things as flood-‐proofing, insurance, or putting some money away as emergency savings (e.g., to repair and reconstruct after a flood event). This implies that households with overpayment burdens may require special assistance to undertake individual, household level adaptations.

TABLE 3. OVERPAYMENT BURDEN BY TYPE OF HOUSING TENURE

Source: Hermosa Beach Housing Element Technical Report 201360

FIGURE 9. PROPORTION OF RENTER-‐OCCUPIED HOUSING UNITS IN HERMOSA BEACH, WHOSE RENT COSTS 50% OR MORE OF THEIR GROSS HOUSEHOLD INCOME (SHOWN BY BLOCK GROUP)

Source: Based on data from ACS 2008-‐2012.61


5.3 Women as Heads of Household One segment of the population, often closely aligned with the spatial distribution of low income, involves women as heads of the household. Women’s capacity to prepare for flooding, cope with, or evacuate during flooding or associated hazards during a large storm, and recover afterward is particularly impaired when they have lower earnings, are the sole providers for their household (and no spouse is present), and especially when they also have children.62 Evacuating during a flood can be especially difficult for those who have young children.

Figure 10 shows the percentage of the population in Hermosa Beach (by Census Tract) that has females as heads of household. This population is relatively low overall (compared to other areas of LA County), but is slightly higher than city average on the northern side of the city and is up to 16% in the southwest area of the city. According to the City’s Housing Element (2013), female-‐headed households “make up a significant portion of households that are below the poverty level.”63

FIGURE 10. PERCENTAGE OF THE POPULATION WITH FEMALES AS HEADS OF HOUSEHOLD

Source: Based on Census ACS 2008-‐2012.64

5.4 Age and Populations with Limited Mobility Age can play a role in coping and adaptive capacity as well, as it affects mobility and dependence on others. Infants, for example, are less able to protect themselves from or escape extreme conditions (e.g., in extreme heat or during flood events) and depend on others for special assistance in times of emergency. Similarly, the elderly are considered to be more vulnerable than younger adults in emergency situations because of possible mobility challenges or other pre-‐existing health impairments. Moreover, they may be less connected to email, social media or other typical public outreach tools that inform residents about preparing for disasters and taking emergency actions.


Because cooler summers and better air quality tend to attract older populations to coastal communities all along California’s coastline, including in the greater Los Angeles area, there are higher concentrations of older residents along the coast throughout the county. In Hermosa Beach, the highest proportion of elderly residents is in the northern part of the city and in an inland area south of Aviation Boulevard, but all along the beach front residences, the Census estimates that up to 16% of the population is 65 years and older, as shown in Figure 11).

FIGURE 11. MAP SHOWING CONCENTRATION OF PEOPLE 65 YEARS OLD AND OLDER. Source: Based on ACS 2008-‐2012 data.65

Special attention and services are needed to meet the communication and mobility needs of older residents, as well as of those with pre-‐existing health conditions (see Section 5.6 below), which may inhibit the responsiveness of these populations to emergency warnings. On the other hand, some retired community members, while still active, healthy and mobile, might have the time and interest in engaging in community affairs and thus be strong assets in community efforts to develop and decide on adaptation strategies.

5.5 Housing Type and Home Ownership 5.5.1 Home Ownership vs. Renting Housing also tends to be a factor in people’s ability to prepare, respond to, recover from flood events as well as in their ability to engage in household-‐level adaptation activities. Home ownership versus renting points to possible income differences. However, with regard to adaptive capacity, it also indicates how much control individuals have over their housing, e.g., to make structural adjustments to their home for flood protection. According to the ACS 2008-‐2012 Census, home ownership in the city is only 46%, which is lower than the 56% ownership on average statewide (and still lower than neighboring beachfront cities). Out of the 9,320 total households in the city, 54% of them are renter-‐occupied housing units,66 but homeownership can vary considerably from block group to block group (see also Figure 9 above). Interestingly, a higher percentage of housing units (about 67%) are renter-‐occupied in the Census Block Groups that are directly adjacent to the beach, whereas fewer units (41%) are rented in the eastern inland portion of the city. Along the southern


coastal portion of the city, up to 76% of homes are renter-‐occupied, which is also the area that is most prone to flooding as sea level rises (Figure 12).67

FIGURE 12. PERCENTAGE OF HOUSEHOLDS IN EACH CENSUS BLOCK GROUP THAT ARE RENTED Source: American Community Survey (2008-‐2012).68

5.5.2 Homelessness Another population that is at a major disadvantage during a disaster or other hazardous event includes those people without a permanent home. Homeless individuals living in coastal areas could be directly exposed to flood events because of living in the streets or in a parked vehicle. Very little information is usually collected to document the location and living situation of this population, making it difficult for emergency response during a disaster to find and help this population. Public education, awareness campaigns and pre-‐disaster planning often do not reach this population, and the homeless often do not have adequate means to move to alternative locations.

Per the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority’s 2011 Homeless Count Report, there are 35 unsheltered adult homeless persons in Hermosa Beach. A homeless resources website69 with one homeless youth shelter within the city70 and several nearby shelters for the homeless suggests that there is a needy population to be concerned about.

As with all special-‐needs populations, especially, when housed in group shelters, emergency planning must pay special attention to the evacuation and recovery needs should the need arise. The City’s current (2005) Hazard Mitigation Plan makes a few references to special needs populations, but only includes hazard mitigation action items in reference to earthquake preparedness – not flooding – to assist these special needs populations in an emergency. For a comprehensive approach to emergency preparedness, these populations should be included in future analysis on flooding risk and pre-‐ and post-‐disaster planning.


5.6 The Mentally and Physically Impaired Populations with physical and mental disabilities are of special concern for disaster planning and emergency response, and should also be considered in long-‐term planning. People with physical and mental illnesses can have a greater sensitivity to high levels of stress during disasters, and will require personalized attention during the crisis. Importantly, it is not necessarily the most disabled that are of greatest concern for the purposes of emergency response, as they are most likely to already receive ongoing assistance. By contrast, those among the impaired and disabled who – under normal circumstances – can handle life quite independently or with only minimal help, may require the most additional assistance when distress is high.

Permanent relocation for adaptation purposes may be equally stressful, and appropriately involving those affected in relevant decision-‐making and planning may be particularly challenging, but ethically required. Existing illnesses or disabilities may impair individuals’ mental and/or physical abilities to adequately respond during an extreme event and also make it difficult to recover. Facilities providing services for those with mental health issues and physical disabilities need to have a plan that is coordinated with the local emergency response, have pre-‐determined shelters to go to during a disaster, and ensure that emergency response is educated about the special needs of these populations (e.g., they may require more personnel and special assistance during an evacuation). It is important for emergency responders to know where these people reside, whether they live on their own or rely on a group living facility.

The City General Plan documents the portion of the city’s residents who are disabled, though it does not reveal where in the city they reside. The City’s Housing Element Technical Report (2013) documents that approximately 15% of adults aged 16-‐64 years have some type of disability that prevents them from working.71 Such limitations could inhibit or slow these individuals’ ability to get out of the flood zone in case of an emergency. Not working and thus being financially dependent or limited in means also limits those individuals ability to take pro-‐active flood preparedness or adaptive measures. Similarly, as many as 22% of adults over 65 years have physical limitations, and approximately 14% of those 65 years and older have a vision or hearing limitation that may reduce their ability to act swiftly and safely in case of a flooding emergency (Table 4).

Since location data of where disabled populations residence is not easily available, and may be privacy-‐protected, it is up to the City or organizations representing the interests of these populations to ensure that they are aware of where the disabled live, the nature of their disability, and what special needs they may have in an emergency (e.g., wheelchair accessibility). Moreover, for long-‐term adaptive planning, the City and these organizations would need to take special care in addressing the special needs of these populations.

TABLE 4. PREVALENCE OF DISABILITY BY TYPE OF DISABILITY IN CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH


Source: General Plan, Housing Element City of Hermosa Beach 2012, based on Census 2000 data.

5.7 Race Studies of public health and vulnerability to disasters repeatedly indicate that minority populations tend to have lower capacity for responding to disasters and adapting to climate change than non-‐Hispanic whites.72 This was well illustrated in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina where African Americans were less likely and able to evacuate and were then hit hardest in terms of trying to rebuild their lives in the aftermath of the disaster. In neighboring City of Los Angeles, recent failures of emergency response in San Pedro and Wilmington during the January 2010 flood also demonstrate the importance of assistance during flooding events to be designed to the particular needs of different demographic groups in the community. In 2010 many residents in the San Pedro and Wilmington communities were flooded out of their homes and needed shelter. The American Red Cross opened a shelter in a local home for the elderly, but the flood victims did not know about the shelter and those who did were not comfortable going there. Since very few came to the shelter, it was closed pre-‐maturely based on the assumption that no one needed assistance. Instead, the flood victims who were mostly of Hispanic/Latino descent, many of whom were undocumented and did not speak English, went to a local non-‐profit social services agency (the Toberman Settlement House/Neighborhood Center) that is set up to work with Spanish-‐speaking and low-‐income communities. However, this center was not prepared to accommodate flood victims. The experience shows the value – and necessity – for emergency


response planners to get to know and understand the community prior to the emergency event, in order to be better able to meet the needs of the population when a disaster arises.73 Figure 13 shows the distribution of African American, Hispanic/Latino, Asian American, and Pacific Islander/Native American segments of the population. Within Hermosa Beach, there are very high concentrations of Hispanic/Latino populations residing in two areas of the city: just east of Hermosa Ave. in the northern part of the city and just east of Armdore Ave. in the central part of the city. Asia-‐Americans are most concentrated in the southern portion of the city. Whether or not any of these populations require special attention in emergency response planning (e.g., second language assistance, educational materials in other languages than English) could not be obtained during this study, but should be carefully assessed in the City's hazard mitigation planning efforts. For example, to enable effective public participation in adaptation planning efforts the City may need to provide relevant information in other than English languages and offer linguistic assistance in public meetings.


FIGURE 13. THE GEOGRAPHY OF RACE IN HERMOSA BEACH BY PERCENTAGE OF THE TOTAL POPULATION.

Source: ACS Census 2008-‐2012.74

5.8 Summer Daytime Visitors The City’s Hazard Mitigation Plan recognizes that the visitor population, especially that in the summer, is an important segment of the population of Hermosa Beach. According to the Plan, “on a typical summer day, beach goers increase the City’s population by as many as 50,000. This influx of population from under 20,000 to 70,000 creates a particularly challenging scenario for the City’s emergency response agencies.”75

This boost in the local population is of greatest concern during the summer time and must be considered with hazards that can occur at that time (e.g., extreme heat, air pollution, and fires, as well as earthquakes and other human-‐made hazardous events, such as toxic spills, or other accidents that can occur at any time). During the winter time, when the worst flooding can be expected, the visiting population is much smaller, making the visitor boost a lesser concern in flood mitigation and emergency preparedness. It is conceivable, however, that wintertime visitor populations may grow in the future as climate warming creates conditions that encourage beach visits and vacations even during the calendar winter months. Adequate localized, and seasonally distinguished population projections that take the effects of climate warming into account are not available. Thus, this issue should be revisited periodically with counts of visitors across the seasons and time series of such data, showing potential shifts and growth in visitor numbers in hand.

An indirect impact on the number of visitors, and thus the beach economy of the City, however is important to consider. If beaches erode increasingly as a result of sea-‐level rise and related changes in sediment dynamics (and are not compensated for through beach replenishment), and beach-‐ and tourism-‐related infrastructure is damaged during winter storms and not adequately restored, summer visitor numbers may decline, as they relate to perceived beach quality and perceived public safety. Again, as there are no data available projecting visitor populations forward in time accounting for these indirect impacts of climate change, the prudent approach is to carefully track changes in seasonal visitor populations and reconsider disaster preparedness and emergency response plans as changes in visitor populations indicate a need for such an update.


5.9 Summary: An Integrated View of Social Vulnerability 5.9.1 Introduction An integrated view of vulnerability that takes all the influential factors discussed above into account is the ultimate goal of a social vulnerability analysis. In the case of Hermosa Beach, the frequently used statistical method to produce such an integrative Social Vulnerability Index (SoVI) is not appropriate, however, given the small number of Census Block Groups, and a considerable number of underlying factors that do not show much variation across the city.

Before providing such an integrated view of social vulnerability in Hermosa Beach, it is important to note that social vulnerability indices are relative measures. So, for example, if such a vulnerability analysis were conducted for Hermosa Beach and its northern and southern coastal neighbors, any differences in social vulnerability observed would be based on a comparison of factors among the three cities included in the analysis. If, on the other hand, the analysis were conducted for the entire County of Los Angeles, then the conditions across a much larger number of communities would be captured, and Hermosa Beach's social vulnerability would be assessed relative to those wider conditions.

5.8.2 Hermosa Beach's Social Vulnerability in the Context of LA County Figure 14 shows the results of just such a social vulnerability analysis. It covered the entire County of LA, and shows that the SoVI scores for the City of Hermosa Beach (here magnified) are low to very low. That particular SoVI analysis used 30 demographic variables, related to income, poverty, dependent age groups, race, language ability, education, and several others. For most of these characteristics, Hermosa Beach – compared to the LA Port area and central LA – has a comparatively high income, low poverty, low percentages of dependent age groups, low racial diversity, high English speaking abilities, and high education, all of which together contribute to the low social vulnerability score.

While it may appear at first glance that it is of limited practical concern for the specific planning purposes of the City of Hermosa Beach, what conditions prevail in communities beyond its direct influence and jurisdiction, those conditions do matter in important ways. The City should be aware of this larger context as high social vulnerability elsewhere affects locally important county affairs and locally available county services, e.g.:

• economic activity and thus the tax base • social justice and civil peace • intra-‐county population displacement and relocation • public health • availability of county-‐wide services during emergencies.

The LA countywide collaboration of jurisdictions participating in regional adaptation planning (LARC) offers an important opportunity to remain aware of these contextual hotspots of vulnerability and to jointly identify cross-‐jurisdictional opportunities to reduce social vulnerability overall.


[ FIGURE 14. RESULTS OF THE SOCIAL VULNERABILITY INDEX (SOVI) ANALYSIS CONDUCTED FOR LOS ANGELES COUNTY, BASED ON 2000 CENSUS BLOCK GROUP LEVEL DATA.76 BECAUSE THE SOVI IS A RELATIVE INDICATOR OF SOCIAL VULNERABILITY, IN THIS ANALYSIS HERMOSA BEACH IS SHOWN TO HAVE MOSTLY LOW AND SOME MEDIUM VULNERABILITY COMPARED TO OTHER AREAS OF THE COUNTY, SUCH AS SOUTH-‐CENTRAL LA WITH, FAR GREATER SOCIAL VULNERABILITY. Source: Ekstrom and Moser (2013)77

5.9.3 Local Social Vulnerability in Hermosa Beach To produce a locally specific picture of social vulnerability (i.e., one that only takes into account the conditions within the city's jurisdiction), relevant demographic factors for that area must be integrated. Because of the small size of the city, with only 16 Census Block Groups, the range of appropriate statistical techniques to do so is limited, however. Typically, the SoVI method uses principal components analysis to cluster all the variables into groupings whose resulting scores are summed to arrive at the final SoVI score.78 Principal component analysis could not be used with such a small sample. Instead we calculated a social vulnerability score with a simpler method and narrowed and fine-‐tuned the field of potential variables to a smaller set of population characteristics for which spatial information is available and which demonstrated some variation among Census Block Groups (Figure 15).79 Census variables reflecting key issues discussed above – such as age, income/poverty, and mobility – included in the resulting social vulnerability score are:

• proportion of the very young and elderly (combined) • proportion of non-‐white population • females as heads of household • proportion of renter-‐occupied units • proportion of unoccupied housing units (vacancy) • proportion of households earning less than $75,000 • proportion of households earning more than $200,000 • median gross rent


• proportion of population employed in the service sector • proportion of population without a vehicle • proportion of renters with overpayment burden (with housing costs of 50% or more of household

income) The score does not explicitly include such issues as homelessness or disability, as data for these characteristics are either unavailable altogether or not available in a spatially referenced way. Thus, these population characteristics have to be considered independently. The resulting integrated view of social vulnerability for Hermosa Beach (Figure 15) shows that the block groups that score as "high vulnerability" are located along the beachfront of the city, extending inland into the city’s midsection. A section in the northern coastal part of the city is the least socially vulnerable, which is consistent with the demographic characteristics described earlier (Sections 5.2-‐5.7). Those block groups scoring highest (i.e. as the most vulnerable) show overall a pattern of high proportion of the population having female heads of household and earning less than $75K per year. Two of the top three block groups (based on their overall vulnerability scores) are in the flood zone with 55 inches of sea-‐level rise. The block group scoring as most vulnerable is just east of the Strand, bordered on the south by Herdono St. This score is dominated by a high proportion of female heads of household, high vacancy rate of housing units, and a relatively high proportion of households earning less than $75K. The second most vulnerable block group is inland, not exposed to the 100-‐year flood with 55 inches of sea-‐level rise. The third most vulnerable block group (located along the Strand in the southern part of the city) is dominated by income-‐related and home ownership related factors: a relatively low proportion of households earning $200K, high proportion of households earning less than $75K, and high proportion of renter-‐occupied units.80 The fourth and fifth highest-‐scoring vulnerable block groups (marked as “highly vulnerable” in pink on the map) are dominated by low income (households earning less than $75K).


FIGURE 15. SOCIAL VULNERABILITY SCORES, BASED ON A SUBSET OF POPULATION CHARACTERISTICS TYPICALLY USED IN A SOVI ANALYSIS, ARE SHOWN FOR THE 15 CENSUS BLOCK GROUPS OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH. VARIABLES INCLUDED IN THE SCORE ARE: AGE, WEALTH AND POVERTY, RACE, PERSONS PER HOUSEHOLD UNIT, EMPLOYMENT SECTOR, PERCENT OF HOUSEHOLDS WITHOUT A VEHICLE, PERCENT OF UNOCCUPIED HOUSING, PERCENT OF RENTERS, PERCENT HOUSEHOLDS OVERBURDENED WITH HOUSING COSTS, AND MEDIAN GROSS RENT Source: Based on data from the ACS 2008-‐2012.81

Overlaying the flood risk map with demographic data, we find that an estimated 1,000 residents live within the area exposed to a 100-‐year flood risk with 55 inches of sea-‐level rise. Overlaying the flood risk map with the social vulnerability map reveals an integrated picture of which socially vulnerable areas are also exposed to flooding with sea-‐level rise. Most of the most socially vulnerable areas are along the beachfront, which are also most likely to experience flooding. Overall the demographic variables explaining why these areas within the projected floodplain (west of Hermosa Ave) score as also highly socially vulnerable relate mainly to income, home and vehicle ownership, and females being heads of households.

As will be detailed more in Part B of this report, it is important to consider these underlying factors in devising targeted emergency preparedness and adaptation alternatives. While overall social vulnerability indices like produced here provide a useful overview and help focus on priority areas (i.e., the most vulnerable areas), the underlying factors provide more specific input into the types of measures that could help the specific populations. For example, low income populations (incl. households with female heads of household) may need assistance programs, whereas wealthier populations in flood-‐exposed areas may benefit more from incentive programs; property owners who rent housing units in the current and future flood zone could prevent harm to their renters through structural measures taken on their properties, so reaching them with relevant information and incentive programs may be more important than targeting just the renters.

Importantly, as the next section on infrastructure vulnerabilities will show, targeting those who have actual decision-‐making authority over certain preparedness and adaptive measures is key to ensuring that disaster preparedness and adaptation actually gets implemented. In some instances these measures require long lead times and thus should not be put off; in other instances measures can have immediate benefits, regardless of future climate change impacts. Taking those measures sooner rather than later is the key to avoiding and reducing impacts from flooding as sea-‐level rises.


FIGURE 16. 100 YEAR FLOOD RISK WITH 55 INCHES OF SEA LEVEL RISE OVERLAIN WITH THE MAP OF INTEGRATED SOCIAL VULNERABILITY FOR HERMOSA BEACH. CONSTRUCTED WITH CENSUS DATA FROM ACS 2008-‐2012 AND 100 YEAR FLOOD MAP WITH 55 INCHES OF SEA LEVEL RISE MAP FROM PACIFIC INSTITUTE (2009)

6. Critical Community Infrastructure and Services 6.1 Introduction In addition to direct exposure to coastal flooding and storm surge with accelerating sea level-‐rise, residents and employees of coastal communities may also be at risk of, and indirectly affected by, impairment of critical infrastructure and community services. If floods damage, destroy or temporarily interrupt infrastructure such as roads, water-‐ or energy-‐related installations, residents would be without these critical services. The most important types of infrastructure to consider include the following:

• evacuation and other transportation routes • ports • the Los Angeles International Airport • emergency response systems • electricity • underground utilities, including energy-‐related facilities, transmission, and transformers • communication


• water supply, drainage or sewage treatment, and • salt water barriers protecting coastal groundwater basins

Impairment of such services causes costly disruptions of local economic activity, interference with the daily life of residents, and jeopardizes their safety, health and well-‐being. It is typically the destruction and disruption of these critical services that turn flooding events into widespread disasters, sometimes with long-‐lasting consequences.

As a result of the infrastructure impairment listed above, communities can face "domino effects" of multiple failures that are difficult to predict and quantify, but are commonly experienced in case of disaster, including disrupted access to food and prescription medicines, risk of salinization of coastal groundwater (typically an irreversible loss), and interruption of personal lives and business activity due to the loss of electricity.82

Below we provide a glimpse of some of the connections between infrastructure and service functionality with particular reference to how these could exacerbate stressors to already vulnerable populations. Critical infrastructure is located within the 100-‐year flood zone (with 55 inches of sea-‐level rise), as shown in Figure 17, such as the Pier, numerous buildings, streets, parking lots etc.) Figure 18 gives a close-‐up view of one section of the city, where future flooding could cause significant disruptions unless adaptive measures are taken.


FIGURE 17. THE EXTENT OF THE 100-‐YEAR FLOOD AFTER 55 INCHES OF SEA-‐LEVEL RISE INTO THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH OVERLAIN ON AN ELEVATION MAP


FIGURE 18. OBLIQUE AERIAL VIEW OF AN AREA NEAR THE HERMOSA PIER EXPOSED TO THE 100-‐YEAR FLOOD WITH 55 INCHES OF SEA-‐LEVEL RISE. THE AREA IN RED MARKS THE AREA AT RISK OF FLOODING, BASED ON MODELED PROJECTIONS BY THE PACIFIC INSTITUTE (2009).

Below we discuss specific risks to infrastructure and services in the areas at risk from future flooding, including to the City's water-‐related infrastructure, buildings, the Pier, the Strand, city roads and emergency response facilities and systems.

6.2 Water Infrastructure: Drainage, Sewage Treatment and Supply 6.2.1 Storm Runoff and Sea-‐Level Rise As sea level rises storm water drainage will be increasingly impaired, leading to a growing risk of urban street flooding during intense rain events. Most of the land (more than 90%) is covered with impermeable surface (mostly asphalt), preventing water from filtering into the ground, and instead rushing down streets and potentially overloading the wastewater system. While the City has separate storm sewers (MS4) and sanitary sewers, the large amounts of surface runoff may flow into the sanitary sewer system. As it backs up, untreated wastewater can spill into city streets and become a major public health threat. Moreover, higher groundwater elevations due to sea-‐level rise can increase infiltration and inflow into the aging sanitary sewer system which can also contribute to sanitary sewer overflows.

The region receives the majority of its rain in heavy, short-‐duration storms. This problem is already familiar to Hermosa's residents and recognized in public emergency preparedness documents. According to the Hazard Mitigation Plan (2005), “a severe winter storm has the potential to disrupt the daily driving routine of hundreds of thousands of people. Natural hazards can disrupt automobile traffic and shut down local and regional transit systems.”83

Climate change is expected to worsen these existing problems. As the runoff from intense storms rushes toward the ocean, it is met by increasingly higher sea levels. While wind and waves are currently not estimated to increase with climate change off the California coast, storms as strong as those experienced historically with higher sea levels will cause higher storm surges.84 Thus, more coastal flooding and intense


runoff from inland areas will combine to cause more severe street flooding, scour and damage to roads, culverts, and water related infrastructure. Such damage will also reach further inland than at present because of the higher sea level.85

6.2.2 Storm Water Infrastructure The city has begun implementing retrofit and green street projects within its right of way to effectively increase the permeability of the developed areas to allow for increased infiltration and a reduction of stormwater runoff to the MS4 storm water drainage system. Among several related projects, in 2011 the city completed a major urban runoff water quality project that retrofit a 50-‐acre area within the downtown commercial district along Pier Avenue. The project allows water to filter through the sand into its coastal groundwater aquifer, rather than be lost to coastal waters.86 According to the City's Housing Element:

“In addition to best management practices (BMPs) implemented through its regional storm water discharge permit, the City also requires infiltration basins, when appropriate, with new developments. The City has adopted rules to allow and encourage pervious surfaces and also adopted Cal-‐Green building standards in 2010 exceeding state requirements by requiring increased permeability or infiltration in connection with new development. The City has installed an award-‐winning infiltration project in the downtown area, which should serve as a model for other areas.”87

This upgrade and related regulatory measures – whether or not taken with foresight vis-‐à-‐vis climate change – have the following adaptive co-‐benefits:

• reduction of surface runoff and thus of the risk of street flooding, especially in areas also experiencing flooding from storm surge; and

• counteracting saltwater intrusion as the infiltrating freshwater pushes back the saltwater plume.

To the extent the city maintains its storm water system in good repair, it helps to counteract the growing risks from high-‐intensity rainfall and runoff events made more challenging by climate change and sea-‐level rise.

6.2.3 Sewer System According to the City’s Housing Element (2013), the current sewer system already needs rehabilitation:

“… significant deficiencies in the sewer system exist and rehabilitation is necessary, and new development may require offsite improvements. In 2009 the City Council approved Sewer System Master and Management Plans identifying the cost to repair the 80-‐year-‐old system at $9 million over 10 years.”88

Several areas of the current sewer lines are at risk of being additionally stressed from future floods as sea level rises. Most of the exposed parts of the sewer system are in the southern portion of the city. These include portions along Hermosa Ave. at 21st St, from 18th St. to 14th, and from Pier Ave. south to 1st St. and along Beach Dr. at 20st St. (Figure 19).


FIGURE 19. SEWER LINES AT RISK OF FLOODING DURING A 100-‐YEAR FLOOD AFTER 55 INCHES OF SEA-‐LEVEL RISE (MAIN MAP); AND CLOSE UP OF SEWER LINES IN THE SECTION OF HERMOSA BEACH NEAR THE PIER (INSERT). SEWER LINES WHERE FLOODING IS PROJECTED AFTER 55 INCHES OF SEA-‐LEVEL RISE ARE HIGHLIGHTED IN BRIGHT RED. Source: City of Hermosa Beach (sewer line, streets, and building footprints), Pacific Institute (100-‐year flood map with sea-‐level-‐rise)

In addition, the sewer pump station at the north end of the city is also located very close to the coast and thus exposed to increased storm flooding. As the city upgrades its sewer system, it will be important to assess whether increased flood risks over the lifetime of the new sewer system might diminish its expected functionality, and thus whether it would be more prudent and more cost-‐effective to build a safety factor into the planned system upgrade, especially in the high-‐risk areas in the southern part of the city and for the sewer pump station.

6.2.4 Coastal Groundwater, Water Infrastructure and Saltwater Intrusion Groundwater aquifers and water-‐related infrastructure can be at risk of saltwater intrusion as sea level rises. Thus, another water-‐related infrastructure of concern includes the seawater barrier in the city (and outside the city) that – if compromised – could lead to practically irreversible salinization of the groundwater basins (Figure 20). No information could be found for this study about how sea-‐level rise could put the West Coast Barrier Project (or other Barrier Projects in the region) at risk. However, it is raised here as an area requiring further investigating to identify any structural vulnerabilities that a rising sea level may cause.


FIGURE 20. LOCATION OF SEAWATER BARRIERS (DASHED LINES) ALONG THE COAST NEAR HERMOSA BEACH

Source: Water Replenishment District of Southern California89

Saltwater intrusion can also affect shallow infrastructure, and due to hydraulic connectivity between sea level and shallow groundwater, an increase in sea level will likely propagate to an increase in groundwater elevation. Furthermore, one possible impacts of sea level rise and associated increase in groundwater elevation is an increase in the area of liquefaction. The extent of potentially liquefiable soils is directly dependent on groundwater elevation which, in coastal areas with sandy soils such as Hermosa Beach, is affected by sea level rise. An assessment of these vulnerabilities is included in the Climate Ready grant scope of work being conducted by Geosyntec, and thus not further discussed here.

The city does not depend directly on local groundwater resources for its current water supply.90 However, as previously discussed, the sewer system, stormwater and wastewater infrastructure could be at risk of reduced capacity due to higher coastal groundwater levels and of corrosion as salt water intrudes into the ground or washes in with the storm surge as sea level rises.91 This would reduce the functioning and longevity of the infrastructure.92

6.3 Structures and Content 6.3.1 Overview of Structures and Value at Risk When overlaying the Pacific Institute’s 100-‐year flood risk map without sea-‐level rise over the building footprint of the city, no buildings are at risk of a coastal flood under current conditions. When overlaying the projected 100-‐year flood map with 55 inches of sea-‐level rise, however, there are 202 buildings93 exposed to the flood risk (Figure 21 and Table 5). This estimate only includes currently existing buildings, and does not account for any future infill or development (which may well occur between now and 2100). Thus the estimates of structures and value at risk should be considered a low-‐end, conservative estimate of future structural exposure.

Based on the zoning map provided by the City, the affected structures include: 143 residential buildings; a church parking lot (at 1540 Hermosa Avenue); and 13 government owned buildings. From the 1400 block to 100 block of Hermosa Avenue, all of the exposed buildings are located in areas at less than 20ft of elevation above current sea level at ground level. Further onsite investigation is needed to determine whether these buildings are susceptible to flooding or if they are sufficiently prepared (e.g., buildings with lower levels


serving as parking garages or storage areas, or building constructed with foundations that can withstand saltwater).

TABLE 5. ESTIMATES OF INFRASTRUCTURE AND VALUES AT RISK TO FLOODING WITH 55 INCHES OF SEA-‐LEVEL RISE IN HERMOSA BEACH

Type of Infrastructure At risk of 100-year flood without SLR

At risk of 100-year flood with 55" of SLR

Data Source

All buildings 0 202 City shapefile overlain with Pacific Institute flood SLR risk map

Residences 0 143 Same as above

Drain pipes Unknown, if any 10 Same as above

Planned pipes Unknown, if any 5 Same as above

Sewer lines Unknown, if any 0 Same as above

Replacement value of buildings and contents (in *94 (in million of 2000 dollars)

Unknown, if any 35 HAZUS database


FIGURE 21. REPLACEMENT VALUE OF PROPERTY (ASSETS AND CONTENTS COMBINED) AT RISK FROM A 100-‐YEAR FLOOD WITH 55 INCHES OF SEA-‐LEVEL RISE (LEFT MAP: NORTHERN COAST OF HERMOSA; RIGHT MAP: SOUTHERN COAST OF HERMOSA).

Source: HAZUS database (2014).95


FIGURE 22. MAP SHOWING THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH (WITH A SAMPLE HIGHLIGHT OF THE PIER AND SURROUNDING AREA), SHOWING BUILDINGS AT RISK (BRIGHT RED) OF THE 100-‐YEAR FLOOD WITH 55 INCHES OF SEA-‐LEVEL RISE (TRANSPARENT RED). BUILDINGS NOT AT RISK ARE SHOWN IN GREY AND THE STRAND IS SHOWN IN YELLOW. Source: Based on flood modeling by the Pacific Institute (2009) and infrastructure maps from City of Hermosa Beach.96

6.3.2 Iconic Shorefront Structures at Risk According to the Hazard Mitigation Plan (2005), two important structures in the city are currently susceptible to flooding without the additional consideration of sea-‐level rise: the Pier and the marine Land Motor Home Park at 531 Pier Avenue.97 The Hermosa Beach Pier, first built in 1904, is a valued recreational and tourist attraction of the city. Owned by the city, the life guard office, a public library and public restrooms are located on the pier.

As sea level rises, the Strand – another cultural icon of Hermosa Beach – will be at risk of flooding. The Strand, built in the early 1900s, demarcates the boundary between the beach and the buildings of the city and is designed and used as a pedestrian and bicycle path along the beach. Single household residences are adjacent to the Strand in the northern portion of the city with more commercial properties located next to it in the central and southern part of the city (Figure 23).


FIGURE 23.THE STRAND IN HERMOSA BEACH WITH RESIDENCES ADJACENT TO THE BEACH. Photo: SameerKhan, Source: Wikimedia Commons (2005)98

The flood risk to all of these culturally and economically important land marks will increase as sea level rises because of direct floodwater and wave impact and the impaired city drainage (higher maximum water levels, see discussion above and Figure 22).

6.4 Roads and Emergency Response 6.4.1 Streets and Emergency Routes The ability of individuals to evacuate an at-‐risk or affected area in an emergency and that of First Responders to rapidly enter it is critically dependent on functional roads. Any lack of access to fire or police stations or impairment of the most direct transportation routes (due to flooding) increase the risk of additional injury and loss of life. Flooding – even temporarily from heavy rainfall, combined with increasing sea level and coastal storm surge – can lead to delays or lack of access to certain areas for emergency responders.

The primary major emergency routes for the City of Hermosa Beach are on the eastern side of the city (Pacific Coast Highway), as shown in Figure 24. But to exit those areas most prone to coastal and inland street flooding, emergency service vehicles, residents and visitors rely first on city streets. As Figure 2 (and Figure 18 in a close-‐up of one particular area) showed, Hermosa Avenue and many cross streets on the seaward side of Hermosa Avenue could be impassable in a major flood with 55 inches of sea-‐level rise. Drainage problems could worsen street flooding, making it difficult for first responders to enter or for residents to evacuate these flood-‐prone areas.


FIGURE 24. EMERGENCY ROUTES IN LOS ANGELES COUNTY, EXCERPT OF COASTAL AREAS Source: Los Angeles County Draft General Plan Accessed December 26, 2013.99

6.4.2 Fire and Police Stations According to the Pacific Institute’s (2009) study on infrastructure at risk to sea level rise, they found no fire or police stations in the potential flood zone with 55 inches of sea level rise.100

6.4.3 Tsunami Inundation Zone In addition to the flood risk from storms, the City has documented areas at risk of flooding from tsunamis. The occurrence, including the frequency and magnitude, of tsunamis are not directly affected by climate change. However, as sea level rises, so too will the baseline and the maximum run up of waves and surge generated by a tsunami. Figure 25 shows a map of the current tsunami inundation zone, which closely follows Hermosa Ave, again demonstrating the higher risk of the low-‐lying area that is to the west of this main artery. It also shows how the tsunami inundation zone compares to the flood zone with 55 inches of sea-‐level rise (inundation at present sea-‐level overlaps in key areas but goes even beyond the flood map with 55 inches of sea-‐level rise).

Key structures in the city already at risk of inundation during a tsunami include:

• Downtown District, 800-‐1500 Hermosa Avenue • City Lifeguard, 1201 The Strand • One Pump Station, 3500 The Strand


Even with this significant tsunami inundation risk at present sea level, a recent study by the U.S. Geological Survey101 found Hermosa Beach to be in a relatively low-‐risk situation: only a small percentage of property and overall population is located in the current tsunami inundation zone; fewer than 5% of the population in this area is under 5 years of age; but nearly 25% are 65 years or older; 40% are renter households, less than 5% are female-‐headed with children and no spouse present, about 15% of employees are located in the inundation zone; there is also only a very small number of community-‐support businesses, dependent-‐care facilities and public venues located in the tsunami inundation zone. While this may be true in a quantitative sense, the downtown area, Pier, and Strand are key magnets for the public and for visitors: they constitute the very heart of Hermosa Beach.

FIGURE 25. TSUNAMI INUNDATION ZONE IN THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH AND 100 YEAR FLOOD MAP WITH 55 INCHES OF SEA-‐LEVEL-‐RISE.

Source: City of Hermosa Beach (tsunami inundation zone and city boundary maps); Pacific Institute (sea-‐level rise flood map)


This USGS assessment also did not account for sea-‐level rise and how the tsunami inundation zone may expand over time. Such new tsunami inundation modeling was beyond the scope of this study, so it is not possible to display the modified inundation zone with a 55 inch-‐higher sea level, and to determine with any specificity what additional sites might be at risk in a future tsunami inundation zone. However, to keep disaster preparedness planning current, future tsunami mapping and planning should take sea-‐level rise into account as the potentially affected population, infrastructure and economic activity will expand significantly beyond the 100-‐year flood zone with 55 inches of sea-‐level rise.

6.5 Infrastructure Vulnerabilities in Hermosa Beach: Summary Streets, residences, the Strand and the Pier – all west of Hermosa Ave. – are the built infrastructure at greatest risk of flooding as sea level rises. Under the high-‐end sea-‐level rise scenario used here, an estimated 202 buildings, including 143 residences, are within the projected floodplain. The replacement value of this property and contents (in 2000 $) is an estimated $35 million. Several streets could flood and even five of the planned drainpipes (as noted in the City's GIS database) could be in the future flood risk area.

Without adequate incorporation of sea-‐level rise into infrastructure design, maintenance and planned upgrades over time, these structures could all be impaired in future floods. In addition, street flooding (from direct inundation and further inland from growing drainage problems) could impair emergency vehicles from accessing areas west of Hermosa Ave. in time of need. On the other hand, adequate proactive planning and adaptive management can enable the city's ability to maintain proper functioning of infrastructure, uphold first responders' response capacity in emergencies, and help the community recover more quickly after a disaster, should one occur.

The beach, arguably the city’s most important asset – a form of "natural" (or at least quasi-‐natural) infrastructure, is also at risk to erosion as sea level rises. In its current width, it provides the city not only with its most important economic asset, but also with a natural and critical first-‐order protection from storm surge. For both reasons, the maintenance of the beach will be critical to the city's preparedness for any near-‐term storm and flooding events, and for longer-‐term adaptation to climate change.

7. Synthesis The analyses conducted in this study aimed at assessing the social and infrastructure vulnerabilities that Hermosa Beach faces as a result of sea-‐level rise and associated flooding and erosion risks. These are summarized below before turning to the range of options available to adaptively manage them over time.

7.1 Sea-‐Level Rise Projections for Hermosa Beach Over the past century, sea level has risen by approximately 7 inches along the California coast, which is consistent with the observed global average. While an oceanographic oscillation of currents (Pacific Decadal Oscillation) in the Pacific Ocean has suppressed sea level from rising along the West Coast of the United States since the 1980s, scientists currently see this phase coming to an end, and expect that sea-‐level rise will resume at a pace consistent with the global average in coming years and decades. Such decadal, as well as shorter term natural variations will continue in the future, while the global baseline will increase.

Based on the best available science, the Ocean Protection Council and Coastal Commission recommend using the following sea-‐level rise projections along Southern California’s coast for the coming decades:

• 2-‐12 inches by 2030 • 5 inches -‐ 2 feet (24 inches) by 2050 • 16 inches -‐ 5.5 feet (66 inches) by 2100

To account for the uncertainty reflected in these ranges, the Coastal Commission advises communities to use scenario planning, with one of the scenarios being the high-‐end scenario (particularly needed for specific project permitting). Because the low-‐end (or an alternative mid-‐range) sea-‐level rise scenario was not available at the time of this study, only a high-‐end scenario was used here. Similarly, the 66-‐inch (high-‐end) sea-‐level rise scenario suggested for use by the Coastal Commission, combined with the 100-‐year design flood, has not yet been mapped (expected in 2015 or 2016). Thus, this study uses the best available data for a


55 inch sea-‐level rise plus 100-‐year flooding scenario to determine the extent of potential future flooding for Hermosa Beach.102

Experience and best available science shows that strong El Niños can temporarily (for several winter months) elevate regional sea level. While this is not explicitly included in the flood modeling presented here, prudent planning would add a safety buffer because this occasional extra sea-‐level rise (as much as 12 inches during some of the strongest El Niño's in recent decades) could worsen winter storms and related storm surges.103 Differently put, long before the average baseline is 55 inches higher than the current sea level, a temporary sea level of 55 inches could be reached during a strong El Niño winter, with all the attendant storm-‐, flooding-‐ and erosion problems all too familiar to Californians already.

The exposed area in Hermosa Beach from the 100-‐year flood with 55 inches of sea-‐level rise (Figure 26) extends inland from the Strand to Hermosa Avenue, particularly in central and southern portions of the city. Compared to other areas in LA County, Hermosa Beach appears to face a smaller relative risk than some other coastal communities. However, the potentially affected areas of the city are of high economic and cultural value, include substantial residential and commercial areas, and contain critical infrastructure on which city residents, the local economy and emergency responders depend.

FIGURE 26. EXTENT OF THE 100-‐YEAR FLOOD WITH 55 INCHES OF SEA-‐LEVEL RISE (RED) IN HERMOSA BEACH (BUILDING FOOTPRINTS OF CITY IS SHOWN IN WHITE). INSET SHOWS THE EXTENT OF THE SAME FLOOD FOR COASTAL AREAS OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY.

7.2 Economic and Social Vulnerability In the absence of adaptation measures implemented in a timely fashion that will help avert threats to the population as well as minimize damage to residences and important infrastructure, climate change could jeopardize the stability and strength of Hermosa Beach's local economy and the welfare of its residents. The city and its beach economy and culture attract a large visitor population throughout the year, particularly in the summer. Retail businesses, employment and associated services depend on this regular flow of visitors, which could be diminished if adequate measures to adapt to sea-‐level rise are not taken.


The greatest resource in this regard is the beach, along with the Pier, the Strand and the related business activity and supporting infrastructure. While a quantitative economic impact assessment on the city was beyond the scope of this study, the discussion of potential impacts of sea-‐level rise, namely beach erosion and flooding, makes clear that this essential resource and related iconic infrastructure are at risk. The city’s economy also relies heavily on property taxes, which places a great premium on taking appropriate adaptive measures to prepare for and adjust to sea-‐level rise and growing flood risks, while maintaining the defining feature of the city: its beach.

In terms of social vulnerability of residents, some segments of the population are more vulnerable to flooding hazards than others. The most important factor in social vulnerability include income/poverty, age, race, gender (female heads of household), housing type and home ownership, pre-‐existing health conditions such as physical or mental disabilities, and the presence of homeless and transient populations. Even where the percentage of people in poverty (as defined by federal standards) is low, the amount of discretionary funding available to residents is an important factor. For example, paying a high proportion of one’s gross income for housing can limit people's ability to adequately prepare for flooding or take household-‐level adaptive measures.

Thus, it is helpful to take all of these factors into account in assessing people’s sensitivity to the hazard and in their ability to prepare for, respond to, recover from flood events and adapt to sea-‐level rise.

Together with the exposure to the flood hazard, an integrated perspective of social vulnerability emerges for Hermosa Beach. Within the projected 100-‐year flood zone with 55 inches of sea-‐level rise, several areas within city bounds emerge as areas of special concern: most of the highest socially vulnerable areas are along the beachfront, which are also in areas expected to be at greatest risk of flooding as sea level rises. Overall the demographic variables explaining why these areas within the projected floodplain (west of Hermosa Ave) score as highly vulnerable relate mainly to income, home and vehicle ownership, and females as head of households. Several special needs populations are not represented in the demographic maps of Hermosa as there are no spatially reference data for them, including the homeless, visitors and people with disabilities.

In addition to the population-‐specific characteristics that reflect social vulnerability, a well-‐prepared emergency response system, and forward looking adaptive planning can ensure that the most vulnerable are cared for during emergencies and in the course of adaptation planning. The ability to do so depends in large measure on functional infrastructure.

7.3 Infrastructure Vulnerability When overlaying the 100-‐year flood zone with 55 inches of sea-‐level rise on a map of the city (showing the current degree of build-‐up), some important infrastructure emerges as exposed to the growing flood hazard. There are presently 202 buildings exposed to the flood risk, 143 of these are residential buildings; one is a parking lot; and 13 are government owned buildings. From the 1400 block to the 100 block of Hermosa Avenue all of the exposed buildings are located below 20 feet of elevation at ground level. In addition, the Pier and much of the Strand are at risk of flooding. Based on estimates of the value of buildings and their contents, this reflects a current exposure of $35 million in economic replacement value.104 (Re)development and infill, and changes to the market value of coastal properties as flood risks increase will change this figure over time.

In addition to specific buildings, sea-‐level rise and higher storm surges will increase the risk of street flooding (and damage to city streets). While the recently upgraded stormwater drainage system is a significant help in reducing the risk of street flooding within the downtown Pier Avenue business district, it will need to be kept in good repair to provide this benefit in the future. Additional stress on the sewage system – already in need of rehabilitation – can be expected from flooding (structural impairment) and saltwater intrusion (corrosion). Rising groundwater table as a result of sea-‐level rise could also be problematic. Streets seaward of Hermosa Avenue are at risk of being impassable during a 100-‐year flood event with 55 inches of sea-‐level rise, impeding evacuation from and first responders' access to these parts of the city. Fortunately, no police or fire stations are located within the projected flood zone. The tsunami inundation zone can be expected to expand as a result of the projected sea-‐level rise (even if the occurrence of tsunamis themselves is not directly affected by climate change), but this could not be quantitatively assessed in this study.


7.4 Conclusions In summary, the following observations can be made about Hermosa Beach's vulnerability to sea-‐level rise and related flood and erosion risks:

Climate Change Impacts and Exposure to Coastal Hazards

• The 100-‐year flood zone is projected to increase 300% under a scenario of 55 inches of sea level rise (from 0.034 square miles at present to 0.1 square miles with 55 inches of sea level rise). The projected flood zone encompasses more than 200 buildings, including 143 residences, and about 1000 residents (not accounting for any future infill development or population growth).

• The 100-‐year flood zone with 55 inches of sea-‐level rise extends inland from the Strand to Hermosa Avenue, particularly in central and southern portions of the city.

• Long before the average sea level is 55 inches higher than the 2000 baseline, a smaller global average sea-‐level rise combined with a strong El Niño can result in a similarly high, if temporary, sea level situation. During such El Niño winters, coastal storms can cause significant beach erosion and flood damage.

• The amount and rate of beach loss as a result of sea-‐level rise could not be assessed in this study. However, the well-‐established scientific understanding of physical beach dynamics makes clear that the beach will not remain stable as sea level increases. Absent continued beach replenishment in the littoral cell, the shoreline can be expected to retreat at an accelerated rate as sea level rises.

Social, Economic and Infrastructure Vulnerabilities

• The greatest exposure to flood risks in the coastal, especially central and southern, areas of the city coincides with the greatest social vulnerability in Hermosa Beach. This overlap of challenges should be carefully considered in emergency response planning and in longer-‐term adaptation planning.

• The typically high social vulnerability of homeless, transient, and disabled populations could not be displayed in a spatially referenced way due to data limitations. However, they do require particular attention in emergency situations.

• Similarly, infrastructure vulnerabilities particularly with regard to the city's sewage system (already in need of rehabilitation at present), city streets, and some iconic structures and associated business activity particularly in the central and southern parts of the city coincide with the greatest exposure to flooding in a future 100-‐year flood. They require particular attention both for disaster preparedness and long-‐term adaptation planning, as they are essential to the city's economic vitality and functionality.

• To the extent business and residential areas are at risk of inundation during a future major flood and cannot easily evacuate or be reached by emergency responders, the vulnerability of residents in the affected areas increases substantially. This is the case in neighborhoods seaward of Hermosa Avenue. These areas require special attention in disaster preparedness and long-‐term adaptation planning.

• The city's greatest economic and cultural asset is its beach. As sea level rises, this asset is at risk of increased beach erosion and – eventually, permanent submergence. Without continued beach replenishment, this cornerstone of the city's economy can be expected to decline over time and diminish in its effectiveness as a storm buffer, resulting in growing exposure of residential and business establishments along the Strand and in near-‐shore areas to future flooding.

How these challenges might be addressed will be discussed in Part B.


Part B: Coastal Adaptation Options


1. Introduction As part of its General Plan Update, the City of Hermosa Beach wants to update its Coastal Land Use Plan (CLUP) and related policies, programs and procedures including a coastal zoning code to obtain a certified LCP. At the same time, the California Coastal Commission – which will review and decide over the adequacy of the LCP update – has put forward guidance on how communities should update their LCPs.105 In particular, the Coastal Commission guidance (currently only available in draft form) recommends that communities not only address the standard components of an LCP, but within them explicitly assess how climate change and sea-‐level rise will affect a number of key assets and areas of concern, including public access to the coast, recreation and visitor-‐serving facilities, water quality, environmentally sensitive areas, existing and new development, including culturally important areas, scenic and visual resources, and the risks from coastal hazards and the needs for shoreline protection. It also recommends that LCPs explicitly include policies and programs that facilitate adaptation over time to the growing risks from climate change and sea-‐level rise.

A related input into the General Plan Update will develop specific language for the CLUP update and the related LCP Implementation plan, and shepherd the LCP through the public comment and Commission's review processes. This section of our study is not to replicate that work, but to provide important input into it, based on the vulnerability assessment conducted in Part A. It reviews the existing CLUP of 1981 (as amended) and relates the findings of our vulnerability assessment to the components of the CLUP that will require updating. It also offers concrete suggestions for possible adaptation options that the City of Hermosa Beach may wish to consider in deliberating its alternatives. The work conducted here does not constitute engineering or legal advice, nor an economic assessment of the costs of alternative adaptation pathways (all of which are beyond the scope of the requested study). Instead it offers – based on the best available science and experience with adaptation planning and implementation elsewhere – a menu of adaptation options that address identified vulnerabilities. In offering these options, we take into account the guiding principles put forward by the Coastal Commission and seek to be consistent with current (and forthcoming) guidance from the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to local communities on how to prepare General Plans.

Section 2 below briefly reviews Hermosa Beach's existing Local Coastal Program, Section 3 identifies the key issue areas that need to be addressed in an LCP update and which sea-‐level rise related vulnerabilities could be identified in each. And Section 4 then offers adaptation strategies to address them all.

2. Brief Review of Hermosa Beach's Existing Coastal Land Use Plan

Hermosa Beach prepared and passed its first " Coastal Land Use Plan" in 1980-‐81 and has amended it at least four times in the intervening 33 years (in 1988, 1992, 1995 and 2004).106 The existing LCP addresses the following key issues:

• Parking needs and public access to the beach

• Housing and the preservation of mixed neighborhoods

• Coastal recreational access and the preservation of the beach

• Coastal development and design, including the preservation of scenic resources, viewsheds, and community character

• Maintenance of different types of land uses (residential, commercial, recreational, industrial, and open space)

The existing CLUP does not have separate sections explicitly addressing ecologically sensitive habitat areas, coastal hazards, or shoreline protection, although relevant sections of the Coastal Act are recognized, and the existing sections include mention of related considerations and policies. For example, the section on "Coastal


Development and Design" states among its five goals and objectives that its remaining open space should be preserved, although Appendix G recognizes that there is no native habitat left in Hermosa Beach.107

In the same section on development and design, one policy explicitly calls out that "Although the LUP proposes no additional construction of structures seaward of the mean hide tide line, the City recognizes the need to maintain consistency with provisions required for shoreline structures in other jurisdictions. " The related program element to implement this policy states that:

"Revetments, breakwaters, groins, harbor channels, seawalls, cliff retaining walls, and other such construction that alters natural shoreline processes shall be permitted when required to serve coastal-‐dependent uses or to protect existing structures or public beaches in danger of erosion, and when designed and constructed to minimize erosive impacts on adjacent unprotected property and minimize encroachment on to the beach and shall indicate all area seaward of the seawall for lateral access for the public."

The minimal treatment of issues related to coastal hazards, natural resources, and shoreline protection is not surprising, as the issues were not as pressing in the early 1980s, and climate change was not on Hermosa Beach's (or most other communities') radar then. Moreover, sand replenishment within the littoral cell in the intervening years has created and preserved a wide beach in front of the Strand (which itself serves as a minor seawall) and thus has reduced the need for – and thus any question or debate over – the type of shoreline protection of individual properties.

The growth in recreational beach use over time due to population growth and fundamental socio-‐economic changes, and the resulting concerns with maintaining beach access, traffic management, parking, and the preservation of the community character have been of bigger concern in the past. The desire to update the LCP with special emphasis on coastal adaptation, however, suggests, that the City recognizes the potential threats to its shorefront neighborhoods and key economic and cultural assets.

3. Key Vulnerabilities to be Addressed in the Local Coastal Program Update

In this section, we briefly summarize the issue areas that need to be addressed in an CLUP update and related the key vulnerabilities identified in Part A of this study to each.

3.1 Required Components in a Local Coastal Program Update The Draft Coastal Commission's guidance on LCP updates discusses 11 issue areas that should be addressed – as applicable – as local governments revise their LCPs. Error! Reference source not found.Error! Reference source not found.Table 6 lists these issue areas in brief and notes which are of particular relevance to Hermosa Beach, given existing land uses.

TABLE 6: ISSUE AREAS TO ADDRESS IN HERMOSA BEACH'S LCP UPDATE

Issue Area Comments Relevance to HB 1 Public Access Issues to address include the implementation of

the California Coastal Trail, expanding non-‐automotive transportation, preventing loss of public access, recreational beach valuation, and comprehensive beach management.

Yes

2 Recreation & Visitor-‐Serving Facilities

Issues to address include condominiums, hotels and timeshares; new overnight facilities; upgrades, and conversions; and short-‐term (or vacation) rentals

Yes

3 Water Quality The draft guidance currently does not yet discuss Yes


Issue Area Comments Relevance to HB Protection this issue area due to recent changes in water

quality requirements. Under development. 4 Environmentally

Sensitive Habitats and Other Natural Resources

Issues to address include Definitions of Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas (ESHA) and wetlands; ESHA identification, use of resources, cumulative impacts, buffers, mitigation ratios, restoration and monitoring, beach grooming, tree trimming and removal, bird-‐safe buildings, night lighting, surface noise, wind energy impacts, and climate change and sea-‐level change impacts on ESHA and biodiversity.

Yes

5 Agricultural Resources Issues to address include uses in agricultural areas, urban-‐rural limit lines and buffers, agricultural land conversion criteria, and affirmative agricultural easements.

No

6 Planning and Locating New Development and Archaeological/Cultural Resources

Issues to address include concentration of development, second units, rural land divisions and development, cultural resources consultation, and discovery and preservation of cultural resources.

Yes

7 Scenic and Visual Resources

Issues to address include protected view identification, special communities and community character, visual assessments, night lighting, telecommunications facilities, signs and billboards, and landscape screening.

Yes

8 Coastal Hazards Issues to address include definitions, land divisions (zoning), siting development to avoid hazards/setbacks, redevelopment, reconstruction and setbacks in oceanfront and blufftop areas, sea-‐level rise, tsunami hazards, fire hazards, climate adaptation, and a multi-‐hazard approach.

Yes

9 Shoreline Erosion & Protective Devices

Issues to address include maps and inventories, definitions, avoidance of future shoreline armoring, sea-‐level rise, minimizing and mitigating impacts of armoring, and monitoring and maintenance.

Yes

10 Energy and Industrial Development

Issues to address include directional oil and gas drilling, decommissioning and abandonment of facilities, onshore components of offshore energy development, power plants, desalination, aquaculture, and emerging technologies to provide renewable energy.

No

11 Timberlands Issues to address include timber harvest locations, compatible and supporting uses, and timber harvest reviews.

No

Source: California Coastal Commission (2013).108

Several of the issue areas listed have direct and obvious relevance to climate change – such as #3, #8 and #9 – vulnerable ecosystems, coastal hazards, and shoreline erosion and protection. However, as the vulnerability assessment in Part A illustrates, several other issues are affected by climate change. For example, public


access to the beach/shore may be impacted if key access roads are impacted; recreational or visitor-‐serving facilities may be impacted by erosion and flooding; cultural assets may be at risk from flooding and erosion, as may be existing and new development. Thus, in Section 3.4 we discuss climate change vulnerabilities and possible adaptation options not only in those sections where attention to them is explicitly called for, but in all sections where impacts can be expected and where adaptive actions therefore should be taken to avoid or minimize these potential impacts.

Since Hermosa Beach has no agricultural areas, timberlands, or heavy industrial activities and energy development in the immediate coastal zone, these issue areas are not further discussed here.

3.2 Key Identified Vulnerabilities in Key LCP Update Areas The discussion here occurred ahead of new surveys of beach use, visitor and traffic concerns of the city, , so is based on the assessed infrastructure and socio-‐economic vulnerabilities discussed in Part A, Sections 5.2-‐5.9 and 6.2-‐6.4.

As will become clear from the list of identified vulnerabilities in each of the key issue areas that must be addressed in an LCP update, some require specific adaptation measures, yet many others can be collectively addressed through one or more overarching measures. These measures will be discussed in Section 4.

3.2.1 Public Access Identified vulnerabilities for public access to the coast include the following:

• California Coastal Trail (which, in Hermosa Beach, is the Strand) is at risk of flooding during a 100-‐year flood with 55 inches of sea-‐level rise (note, the Strand/CCT are vulnerable to flooding much sooner, given that they are the closest built structure along the ocean).109

• Access roads. During such storm events, many public walkways and streets providing vehicular access to the beach are impassable. While temporary, such floods can cause significant damage to roadways, drainage infrastructure through flooding, wave action and scour, thus potentially leaving longer-‐lasting damage and impacts on public access to the beach.

• Parking. Hermosa Beach already has challenges with meeting the parking demand for local residents, businesses and visitors, especially during the summer months. Storms and related flooding would temporarily diminish available on-‐street residential parking spaces, and the infrastructure vulnerability assessment identified parking lots to be within the projected floodzone (again, likely to be affected long before the sea level has reached 55 inches). While visitor parking needs may be reduced during coastal winter storms – because fewer visitors are in town, and fewer would want to go to the beach – there is a possibility of greater numbers of winter visitors as a result of climate change.

3.2.2 Recreation & Visitor-‐Serving Facilities Identified vulnerabilities for recreation and visitor-‐serving facilities to the coast include the following:

• The beach. The most basic and most important risk to recreation in Hermosa is how accelerating sea-‐level rise could affect the beach itself. Increased coastal erosion, unless compensated for by continued beach replenishment, could shrink the width of the beach, thus not only diminishing the basis for Hermosa Beach's recreational economy and culture, but also the quasi-‐natural buffer that currently protects the city from severe coastal storms, thus potentially increasing the risk of more severe damage to the Strand, and public access roads and related infrastructure.

• Built structures on the beach. Any built structures on or adjacent to the beach (lifeguard stations, toilets, concession stands, playground equipment) could be impacted by coastal storms, flooding, and wave action, unless temporarily removed prior to the onset of a storm.


• Visitor accommodations. The 202 buildings in the projected floodzone for a 100-‐year flood with 55 inches of sea-‐level rise include 143 buildings identified as "residential," which may include private homes (both owned or rented) of residents, condominiums, timeshares, and vacation rentals. The area within the future floodzone, however, also includes hotels and other overnight facilities.

• Commercial-‐recreational establishments. Restaurants, bars, and other visitor-‐serving businesses are located in downtown and near the Pier, both of which are within the future floodzones.

3.2.3 Water Quality While the Commission's draft guidance does not yet provide clear directives for assessing and addressing water quality issues, our vulnerability assessment did surface potential impacts of sea-‐level rise and related flooding that should be addressed in the CLUP update. Identified vulnerabilities to water quality include the following:

• Stormwater overflows. Higher sea levels combined with high runoff from intense rainfall events can produce stormwater drainage problems, back-‐ups, and possible overflows into the streets and onto the beach.

• Corrosion. Higher sea levels intruding into coastal groundwater and raising coastal groundwater levels could lead to greater saltwater corrosion of water-‐related infrastructure (sewage and drainage pipes). This will reduce the effective lifespan of water-‐related infrastructure and would require more frequent repairs, maintenance, and replacement to avoid unwanted seepage or water infrastructure failures.

• Saltwater barrier. Regionally important is the saltwater barrier as it protects regionally important groundwater resources. Any threat to the integrity of this barrier could lead to quasi-‐irreversible contamination of valuable water supplies (Hermosa Beach itself does not draw on local groundwater but on other sources for its water supplies. Climate change impacts on those source areas will need to be considered in a more comprehensive climate change impacts assessment for the city.)

3.2.4 Environmentally Sensitive Habitats and Other Natural Resources Hermosa Beach does not have any native habitat left in shorefront areas. Thus, there are no specific Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas (ESHAs) left to protect.110 However, two "natural" (though not "native") areas exist that are vulnerable to the impacts of sea-‐level rise and related flooding and erosion:

• The beach. The beach is a heavily used "natural" resource and not home to any endangered species, but provides winter foraging habitat for the Western snowy plover, which is designated by the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service as a "threatened" species. The beach also requires ongoing maintenance (grooming, beach clean-‐up). Its current width is the result of active beach replenishment within the littoral cell (upstream, not directly along Hermosa Beach's length of shoreline); without it, the beach would be affected by significant coastal erosion, and would be considerably narrower. Sea-‐level rise and coastal storms (particularly during El Niños and/or lunar high tides) will increase the risk of coastal erosion and beach narrowing.

• Nobel Park. There is only one small park area (Nobel Park) between 14th and 15th Street along the shoreline that is in a quasi-‐natural state. It is fronted by the beach and otherwise unprotected by any hard structures. As long as the beach itself is maintained it is not at risk of being eroded away. However, it would be temporarily inundated by a severe flood. An onsite assessment of the plant species in the Park would be required to assess whether they could withstand temporary inundation and the longer-‐lasting increase in soil salinity.


3.2.5 Planning and Locating New Development and Archaeological/Cultural Resources Identified vulnerabilities to Hermosa Beach's development (new and existing) and cultural resources include the following:

• New and re-‐development. Already in the early 1980s, it was recognized that Hermosa Beach was a "basically fully-‐developed community which is going through a recycling process."111 With little room left for infill, new development is of lesser concern than re-‐development. The vulnerability assessment could not assess how many buildings or parcels within the potentially inundated floodzone may be currently or in the future considered for redevelopment. Over the remaining years and decades of the 21st century, however, redevelopment is highly likely, if for no other reason than replacement or upgrading of old building stock for newer structures and accommodating population growth and expected growth in visitors. Moreover, if floods occur and if they cause severe structural damage to existing buildings (particularly non-‐floodproof structures), rebuilding of damaged/destroyed structures can also be expected within the projected floodzone. This redevelopment may increase density and intensity of urban land use, and if the new/renewed buildings accommodate a larger population, then the population at risk of future flooding also increases.

• Cultural resources. There are some historic or potentially historic buildings at risk. This assessment identified the Pier and the Strand as the key historical/cultural resources of Hermosa Beach. Both are the immediate shorefront and thus most at risk from coastal storms, flooding, wave action and erosion, even long before sea level has risen 55 inches above current levels. (A separate assessment will identify other archeological, historical or Native American cultural resources.)

3.2.6 Scenic and Visual Resources Identified vulnerabilities to the city's scenic and visual resources include the following:

• The beach. The beach – backed by the wide expanse of the Pacific Ocean – is the city's most important scenic resource. Existing policies on building height restrictions, signage, local natural elevations (dunes) from which observers can enjoy views to the beach and ocean, and beach-‐perpendicular roads and walkways leading to the beach and ocean help to maximize viewing opportunities. Climate change and sea-‐level rise are not expected to affect the viewing opportunities, but can be expected to affect the beach width through increased coastal erosion (unless beach replenishment is sustained into the indefinite future). Without such replenishment, the beach would be affected by significant coastal erosion, and would be considerably narrower. Sea-‐level rise and coastal storms (particularly during El Niños and/or lunar high tides) will increase the risk of coastal erosion and beach narrowing.

3.2.7 Coastal Hazards Coastal hazards have been the central focus of the assessment conducted for this report. In summary, key coastal hazards include the following:

• Sea-‐level rise. Sea level has already risen on average 7 inches along the California coast of the 20th century. Over the course of the 21st century, it is expected to rise four to nine times as fast as last century. While uncertainties about the exact rate of rise persist, this assessment has followed Coastal Commission guidance and used the best available science to assess potential impacts of accelerating sea-‐level rise, combined with extreme flood events (such as the flood that has a 1% chance of occurring in any given year, the 100-‐year flood). While the 2012 NRC report recommends a 66 inch scenario, data that combine that scenario with flooding are not available at this time (expected in 2015 or 2016). Thus, the 2009 Pacific Institute 55 inch sea-‐level rise scenario combined with the 100-‐year flood event was used as the high-‐end scenario.112 A lower sea-‐level rise scenario with the 100-‐year flood has not been modeled. Thus only the high-‐end scenario is used here. Qualifications to


account for El Niño and the possibility of yet higher sea levels in the future are made on a qualitative basis.

• Increased risk of flooding. Currently, Hermosa Beach does have no area in an officially designated 100-‐year or 500-‐year flood (as mapped by FEMA or USGS), However, the City's hazard Mitigation Plan of 2005 recognizes that winter-‐time flooding is a chronic problem. For this assessment, the 100-‐year floodzone with 55 inches of sea-‐level rise was mapped and exposed infrastructure and populations identified.

• Increased risk of coastal erosion. The coastline of Hermosa Beach is considered highly vulnerable to shoreline change by the USGS, but over many decades, it has remained relatively stable, largely thanks to beach replenishment upstream of Hermosa Beach, and a "sediment trap" at Redondo Beach, which prevents or slows sediment from disappearing off into Redondo Canyon. The beach is considerably wider than it would be without this beach replenishment. In the future, rising sea level will increase beach erosion, though local shoreline retreat rates could not be ascertained as part of this assessment.

• Expansion of the tsunami run-‐up/inundation zone. Hermosa Beach has mapped its tsunami wave run-‐up/inundation zone, and USGS has assessed all structures and populations at risk in that zone.113 These existing assessments and maps do not consider the potential future expansion of this zone due to sea-‐level rise. While such modeling and new mapping was beyond the scope of this study, the 100-‐year flood zone with 55 inches of sea-‐level rise was found to overlap in many areas with the map of the tsunami inundation zone at current sea level. If 55 inches of sea-‐level rise were added, the tsunami zone would expand considerably.

• Saltwater intrusion. Sea-‐level rise will push saltwater further into existing coastal freshwater aquifer lenses and may increase the corrosive effects on existing saltwater intrusion barriers. This problem for the saltwater barriers could not be further assessed in this assessment. However, corrosive effects on existing water-‐related sewage and drainage infrastructure can be expected to reduce the expected lifetime of this infrastructure.

3.2.8 Shoreline Erosion & Protective Devices As mentioned above, shoreline erosion has been identified as a growing threat resulting from accelerating sea-‐level rise. Potential impacts of shoreline erosion include:

• Narrowing of the beach as the basis for the recreational economy and culture of Hermosa Beach, unless continually maintained by beach replenishment upstream in the littoral cell.

• Loss of the quasi-‐natural buffer against coastal storms, wave action, and flooding, resulting in greater scour and impact on shoreline property and built structures (residential, recreational and commercial). Given the currently human-‐made wide beach, the question of additional shoreline protection has not been a priority issue in Hermosa Beach. However, virtually the entire shoreline is fronted by the Strand – the bike-‐ and walkway that marks the hardened boundary between the beach and residential/commercial development of the city proper. The Strand serves effectively as a low seawall along the full length of the city, set back from the shoreline and fronted by the beach. If beach erosion were to continue unabated as a result of accelerated sea-‐level rise, it would eventually lead to a situation where the water's edge would be at the base of the Strand seawall. Missing the beach buffer, the waves – particularly storm waves – would eventually undercut the seawall and damage the Strand.114

If beach loss were to continue unabated, the demand for hard shoreline protection (i.e., armoring) could grow in Hermosa Beach. The impacts of more shoreline armoring have not been specifically modeled for this assessment, but the Coastal Commission summarizes the known science on impacts of hardening as follows:


• Direct loss of sandy and rocky intertidal areas that often have been found to be a critical component of the marine ecosystem;

• Interruption of natural shoreline processes, that may contribute to erosion of the shoreline in many areas;

• Impedance of public access to and along the coastline as a result of the structure’s physical occupation of the beach; and

• Degradation of scenic and visual resources."115

3.2.9 Summary The implications of climate change-‐driven sea-‐level rise could be significant for Hermosa Beach and manifest in every component that needs to be addressed in an LCP update. The three overarching challenges the city faces are:

(1) coastal erosion, which threatens the basis of Hermosa's natural beauty and scenic value, its economic and cultural basis, and its no.1 storm buffer;

(2) coastal flooding, which threatens fully developed and densely populated areas currently used for commercial, recreational and residential purposes; and

(3) elevated coastal groundwater table and saltwater intrusion, which – through its corrosive effect -‐ threatens primarily shallow and water-‐related infrastructure and the foundations of buildings.

These threats are not independent, but interrelated: erosion increases temporarily during storm events which can also bring flooding, and both flooding and erosion and scour can put additional strain on shoreline infrastructure; and as erosion diminishes the beach buffer, waves and coastal flood waters can reach further inland, causing greater damage there. It is important to reiterate that the dynamic, interactive effect of erosion/shoreline retreat and flooding was not captured in the Pacific Institute model of the future floodzone with 55 inches of sea-‐level rise. Research currently underway by the USGS is addressing this gap, reinforcing that those data should be used in future risk mapping by the City.

If the city addresses these interrelated issues systemically and through a combination of near-‐, mid-‐, and long-‐term strategies, monitors and reviews the changing risks and the effectiveness of responses periodically, and adjusts these strategies as needed (i.e., adaptively, as the Coastal Commission recommends), it can devise solutions to each of the issue areas that need to be addressed in the LCP.

While global sea-‐level rise may be perceived as proceeding gradually and slowly to the human eye116, its more destructive effects become particularly visible during extreme events such as coastal storms. Almost imperceptibly, gradual sea-‐level rise raises the "on-‐ramp" for storms such that even relatively minor storm events in the future can have devastating impacts. A comprehensive adaptation strategy thus needs to include both mid-‐ and long-‐term response options for the challenges that will become problematic over the long-‐term (but which may require longer lead times to realize), and additional attention in ongoing emergency planning to address the more near-‐term challenges (which may yield benefits long before sea level has risen by 55 inches). Both long-‐term adaptive strategies and enhancements of emergency planning are thus discussed below.

4. Adaptation Options for Hermosa Beach 4.1 Introduction Communities in California and across the nation have chosen different pathways to develop climate change adaptation plans.117 Some have developed self-‐standing climate action plans (including greenhouse gas


mitigation and, more recently, adaptation strategies), others have chosen to integrate their climate-‐related activities into existing governance mechanisms, such as general plans, hazard mitigation and emergency preparedness plans, long-‐term development and capital investment plans, infrastructure development and maintenance plans, annual work plans, or – as the case may be – Local Coastal Programs.

Hermosa Beach has chosen this latter approach for coastal adaptation, without precluding the future possibility of developing a more comprehensive strategy for other climate change threats (including additional public health, safety, infrastructure, environmental and water supply issues than are assessed in the more narrowly focused Part A of this study).

Section 4.2 below lays out the guiding principles suggested by the Coastal Commission and the Governor's Office for Policy and Research, and in Section 4.3 we turn to the specific adaptation options aimed to address the vulnerabilities identified in each of the LCP areas of concern.

4.2 Guiding Principles The Coastal Commission's (draft) guidance on updating LCPs is fundamentally guided by the principles and goals first expressed and codified by law in the California Coastal Act of 1974. Thus, protection of public access to the coast for all, preservation of the natural and cultural resources that make the California coast unique, avoidance or minimizing coastal hazards, fostering thriving coastal communities, and ensuring public safety are overriding principles.

With specific reference to climate change, sea-‐level rise and related coastal challenges, the Commission's guidance spells out several more specific principles that we will adhere to in Section 3.4:

• To minimize the risk of urban sprawl (and related increase in vehicle miles travelled and transportation-‐related greenhouse gas emissions), preference should be given to infill development.118

• Scenic resources (incl. beaches) should be protected as much as possible.119

• In the case of new development, (1) risks to life and property in areas of high geologic, flood, and fire hazard shall be minimized, and (2) stability and structural integrity must be assured, so that it neither creates nor contributes significantly to erosion, geologic instability, or destruction of the site or surrounding area or in any way requires the construction of protective devices in the future. Preference should be given to responses to coastal hazards that minimize negative impacts on coastal resources.120 The Commission suggests this be achieved through mechanisms such as the following:

o avoid locating new development in hazardous areas, wherever feasible;

o require assurance of safety and stability for the life of a development (generally 75-‐100 years);

o if a hazard cannot be avoided entirely, maximize avoidance through safer design of new development such as elevation above the base flood elevation;

o development that is so hazardous that it constitutes a significant risk to the public should not be allowed;

• LCP Updates should be used as opportunities to comprehensively address the development and protection of coastal lands, waters and resources; 121

• Armoring should be minimized and shoreline areas and sand supplies should be protected and restored, taking into account projected sea-‐level rise;122


• Where shoreline protection is needed and allowed, the adverse impacts of allowed protection should be minimized, and alternative forms of shoreline protection that do not involve armoring should be facilitated; 123

In addition to the guidance from the Coastal Commission, the 2013 State of California Hazard Mitigation Plan notes the following:

Climate change has also been recognized by the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) as a factor to be considered in preparation of local general plans. OPR is in the process of updating the 2003 General Plan Guidelines, which provide guidance to cities and counties in the preparation of their local general plans. The next update will reflect legislative requirements enacted since 2003 and provide new guidance on addressing climate change, adaptation, and related issues. The current General Plan Guidelines require a safety element as one of seven mandatory elements in the general plan. The primary aim of the safety element is to reduce the potential risk of death, injuries, property damage, and economic and social dislocation resulting from fires, floods, earthquakes, landslides, and other hazards. Local agencies are encouraged by California law to adopt Local Hazard Mitigation Plans (LHMPs) as part of their general plan safety elements. The LHMP must be consistent with the goals and objectives of both the local general plan and the [State Hazard Mitigation Plan]. As such, the general plan and LHMP provide a local vehicle for implementation of the SHMP, including provisions dealing with climate change. (CalOES, 2013, Sect. 4, p.100, emphasis added)124

While it is impossible to foresee the climate change adaptation-‐related specifics in the forthcoming OPR guidance for preparing General Plan Updates, being consistent – in fundamental philosophy – with the existing guidance is imperative. Thus a further guiding principle or goal considered here is "to reduce the potential risk of death, injuries, property damage, and economic and social dislocation resulting from fires, floods, earthquakes, landslides, and other hazards." The fact that Hermosa Beach already considers climate change in its General Plan Update can be considered a helpful step in meeting future OPR guidance.

4.3 Adaptation Strategies 4.3.1 Ongoing Overarching Regional Strategies Several overarching strategies can help Hermosa Beach leverage its own resources and capacities and ensure that its own efforts are effectively linked and integrated with those of neighboring cities facing similar challenges.

Strategy 1: Continue Participating in the Regional Partnership in Climate Change Assessment and Adaptation Planning

Substrategy 1.1 Participate in LARC. Having recognized the importance of climate change and the limited effectiveness of any one city (no matter its size) trying to meet the challenges of climate change alone, City staff of Hermosa Beach already participate in ongoing regional assessment and planning efforts. For example, the City of Los Angeles, working with the LA Regional Collaborative for Climate Action and Sustainability (LARC)125 and the University of Southern California's Sea Grant Program, conducted an in-‐depth vulnerability assessment to support the development of its adaptation strategies. Over the next few years this effort will expand to include the entire the Los Angeles region. Hermosa has the opportunity to take advantage of this collaborative by participating actively in all stages of the process. Early partnering in the regional process will help Hermosa ensure that its local plans are consistent with the regional goals and that its own local needs are met through the combined efforts, resources and regional strategies that will be developed. Key benefits involve leverage in attracting funding for research (such as the updated sea-‐level rise and flooding data) and – in the future – funding for the implementation of adaptation strategies, as well as for monitoring of key indicators (such as sea-‐level rise, advance of the saltwater frontier, changing beach width etc.). Through the LARC, Hermosa Beach will also be able to benefit from the experience of other regional adaptation planning collaboratives (e.g., in San Diego, the San Francisco Bay) that have formed across California.


Substrategy 1.2 Update Scientific Basis for Coastal Adaptation Planning. As repeatedly indicated throughout this report, there are efforts underway at present to improve on the sea-‐level rise and flooding scenarios, using the National Research Council scenarios and more dynamic modeling to project the future floodzone. In the absence of better information, this assessment replied on older available information. The new projections will become available over the course of this General Plan Update or shortly thereafter. The City should use that forthcoming information to follow Coastal Commission guidance to use "the best available science." In the future, new scientific insights will improve on this basis, and the City should remain vigilant as to when state-‐level guidance in this regard changes. In a continually changing environment, as we now live in, this periodic updating of the scientific basis is prudent practice.

Strategy 2: Pursue a Regional Approach to Sediment Management and Adaptive Shoreline Protection

Substrategy 2.1. Participate in Regional Sediment Management Planning. This regional coordination and participation is particularly important when it comes to sediment management. Historically, Hermosa Beach has benefited from beach replenishment upstream in the littoral cell which created a far wider beach than would otherwise naturally exist, and which counteracted beach erosion, thus creating an effective storm buffer and, of course, the city's economic and cultural basis. Active participation in regional sediment management will allow Hermosa Beach to voice its needs, allow for coordination with its coastal neighbors, and help identify creative financial mechanisms to maintain the city's most fundamental and important "resource."

Substrategy 2.2. Develop a Long-‐term Adaptive Shoreline Management Policy. In light of the overriding importance of the beach for Hermosa, and the Coastal Commission's strong encouragement to avoid shoreline armoring, beach replenishment is the most promising option for adaptation to sea-‐level rise in the near-‐ to mid-‐term.126 It would maintain the wide beach, which is a sought-‐after recreational destination, and thus continue to serve the important economic function it has served historically; it would also continue to serve as an effective storm buffer and thus protect the Strand and inland areas from the brunt of storm impacts. If the City (together with regional, state and federal partners) maintains and elevates the beach in place, this could also considerably lessen the risk of coastal flooding and thus the risk of infrastructure damage (note, however, that the risk from intense runoff and flooding from inland areas would not be reduced this way).

As sea-‐level rises significantly higher, beach nourishment would need to be conducted more frequently, and may involve larger sediment volumes to elevate the beach to keep up with the higher baseline. Eventually this may also require an elevation of the Strand to maintain the sightline to the beach and ocean, and any related adjustments to drainage and storm runoff infrastructure to ensure that low-‐lying storm drain outfalls continue to be able to perform their functions. Clearly, the prospect of this level of beach replenishment and related structural changes is expensive, though a comprehensive cost assessment was beyond this study.

Alternative responses include the "no beach replenishment" option, resulting in the gradual narrowing and eventual loss of the beach to erosion and permanent inundation of the beach area, followed by structural damage to the Strand and shoreline residential and commercial development. This option would likely result in calls for shoreline armoring from local residents and businesses through larger seawalls or revetments (on option not favored by the Commission). A second fundamentally different alternative is the "managed retreat" alternative whereby neither beach replenishment nor hard shoreline protection are employed, and instead, flood and erosion-‐threatened structures would be relocated when that threat become immanent in years hence, either before they are damaged or by simply not rebuilding them after they are damaged. The shoreline would be allowed to progress landward over time and natural shoreline processes would not be artificially altered. Given the soft substrate on which Hermosa Beach is built, this would maintain a natural shoreline with a natural beach, albeit one that slowly moves inland.

Substrategy 2.3 Conduct a Cost-‐Effectiveness Assessment of Shoreline Adaptation Alternatives. A full economic assessment of these adaptation alternatives would help determine (a) how long the beach replenishment option is fiscally feasible and cost-‐effective for the city, taking into account the costs of beach replenishment,


the growing beach sand volumes over time, and the cost of related infrastructure adjustments, as well as the fiscal benefits of the beach as an economic asset and as a storm buffer; (b) how soon the need for shoreline hardening might arise, what damages and losses may be incurred both from periodic storm/flooding damage and from the permanent loss of the beach; and (c) what the loss and damages may be over time from the loss and removal of shorefront property, the change in the property tax base, the cost of relocation of buildings, and the benefits of a natural, albeit landward-‐moving shoreline and beach.

None of these options will be cost-‐neutral or low-‐cost; rather, they all may incur significant and growing costs over time, in monetary terms, in socio-‐cultural terms (e.g., the public's loss of the culturally significant beach) and in political terms (e.g., difficult trade-‐offs, unpopular options for some, but greater benefits for others). Assessing these costs, however, should not be put off. It is uncertain, given fiscal constraints at all levels of government and growing challenges from climate change everywhere, to what extent current cost-‐share ratios among local, state, and federal partners for shoreline protection will be retained in the future. Thus, some choices may need to be made sooner rather than later. A robust cost-‐effectiveness assessment should make assumptions about cost-‐share ratios explicit, and explore alternative ratios (e.g., no federal or state assistance or greater-‐than-‐present state and federal assistance)

Substrategy 2.4. Develop Creative Local and Regional Financing Mechanisms for the Preferred Shoreline Adaptation Strategy. Through continued regional engagement in sediment management planning, the City cannot only harmonize its preferred shoreline management approach with that of neighboring jurisdictions, but also work with regional partners on creative ways to jointly fund the preferred adaptation shoreline strategy.

4.3.2 Ongoing Overarching Local Strategies In addition to coordinating with regional adaptation efforts, there are many things that Hermosa beach can do locally. These are listed here.

Strategy 3: Educate the Public about Flooding Risks and Promote Household Disaster Preparedness

Substrategy 3.1. Develop Flood Risk Educational Materials and Distribute them Widely and Repeatedly. With the 100-‐year flood zone projected to increase 300% under the 55-‐inch sea-‐level rise scenario, areas previously not affected by flooding will become flood prone. Neither residents nor visitors, homeowners, renters, developers or insurers may currently be aware of these growing risks. Structural development may have occurred without flood proofing considerations, as neither building codes nor insurance may have required such enhancements. Older building stock in particular may not be able to withstand the onslaught of moving water, leaving particularly ground floors of buildings vulnerable to flood damage. A first overarching strategy to overcome these shortcomings is to begin educating the public about these risks. Infrequent and passive web-‐based communication is generally considered inadequate. Best practices in how to communicate flood risks and inspire household-‐level disaster preparedness are available from FEMA and from NOAA's Coastal Services Center.

Substrategy 3.2. Survey Household-‐level Preparedness and Develop Programs to Fill Disaster Preparedness Gaps. To identify specific ways in which various actors in the city may not be adequately prepared for flood risks, and thus to be able to tailor risk communication effectively, the City should consider conducting a survey to better understand the population's level of risk awareness and disaster preparedness. Such a survey should be able to distinguish different groups within the population such as homeowners, renters, schools, businesses, and different populations identified as particularly socially vulnerable (see Part A). Tailored community-‐based, social marketing approaches to increase disaster preparedness will help reduce the social vulnerability of different segments of the population.


Substrategy 3.3. Require Flood Risk Disclosure and Active Acknowledgment of Flood Risk in Property Purchases/Turn-‐overs. Risk disclosure at appropriate times in real estate transactions are critically important to raise awareness of current and future flood risks, particularly in combination with City policies that establish flood-‐cognizant building codes (see Strategy 6) for new/re-‐development. It is generally recognized that risk disclosure at the point of the final sales agreement is too late, given the time and money invested already in acquiring or redeveloping a property. Thus, risk disclosure should be required early in the process. Risk disclosure in real estate transactions is particularly important as a component of general awareness raising efforts because buildings have expected lifetimes of 75-‐100 years (far longer than the average duration of a mortgage (30 years). Over this time span, flood risks will be significantly higher in Hermosa Beach.

Strategy 4: Educate the Public about Climate Change Risks and Adaptation Alternatives

Substrategy 4.1. Communicate climate change risks and what the City is doing to address them. Research on effective climate change communication shows that merely communicating the science of climate change is inadequate and often counter-‐productive to improving public understanding of the challenges ahead.127 A sense of powerlessness and overwhelm can prevent meaningful engagement of the public with the topic. The politicization of the topic has also served as a turn-‐off for many. A comprehensive, scientifically informed approach to climate risk communication should affirm what is well established knowledge through extensive scientific research (including what remains uncertain), why climate change matters locally, and what different actors (from the individual to the City, to the State of California, to the US and the global community of nations) are doing and can do to help address the challenges. This involves both fundamental responses to climate change: mitigation/emissions reductions and adaptation/preparedness. The City is in a good position in that it is taking the science seriously, and is taking steps in both areas, and as such affirms the scientific consensus and helps people feel cared for. From this basis, the City can ask its residents and visitors to take part in addressing climate change within their spheres of influence.

Substrategy 4.2. Provide frequent updates to the population to keep climate change messaging fresh, and to signal the importance of the issue. In a communication environment in which everyone is overwhelmed with information, it is important to "keep climate change on the radar screen" through relatively frequent, short, and interesting communication. Social media can be very helpful in this matter, however, climate change communication is not sufficiently served through one-‐way communication (see Strategy 5).

Strategy 5: Meaningfully Engage the Public in Adaptation Planning

Individuals have strong emotional responses to climate change once they accept its reality, and need face-‐to-‐face dialogue to fully grasp the issue, grapple with its urgency and scope, and to support each other in taking meaningful action. Meaningful engagement thus must make space for such direct communication and dialogue. Individuals also need to see how their actions meaningfully contribute to what others within the community and beyond are doing to address climate change, both at its root causes and in its effects. The City can help community members track those action and see the ways they reinforce and support each other in community meetings. As the social vulnerability assessment illustrated, there are numerous questions about particularly vulnerable populations that statistical analysis and publicly available data cannot answer. Experience elsewhere illustrated how the lived experience of community members could significantly help in filling these data gaps and in identifying practicable adaptation options.128 In this way, the interested public becomes part of the solution.

Strategy 6: Update Development and Redevelopment Policies

Substrategy 6.1 Update Definitions. To the extent the City does not already define the economic lifespan of structural development, it should do so in accordance with the Coastal Commission's recommendation: the economic lifespan of a development should be defined to be at least 75 or 100 years unless otherwise specified and restricted for specific development proposals), and redevelopment, reconstruction or remodel.


Substrategy 6.2. Update Elevation Requirements of Infill and Redevelopment. According to the California Coastal Act, new development (and re-‐development) should be directed to reduce risks to life and property and avoid substantial changes to natural landforms. Coastal Act section 30253 provides, in part, that new development shall do all of the following:

(a) Minimize risks to life and property in areas of high geologic, flood, and fire hazard.

(b) Assure stability and structural integrity, and neither create nor contribute significantly to erosion, geologic instability, or destruction of the site or surrounding area or in any way require the construction of protective devices that would substantially alter natural landforms along bluffs and cliffs.

While new development is of limited concern in Hermosa Beach given its high degree of development already, redevelopment of existing lots in the course of normal replacement cycles or – if future floods or other hazardous events (such as fire, earthquakes or tsunamis) damage or destroy houses – rebuilding of such damaged structures is an important consideration for the City.

In order to adhere to Coastal Commission guidance and fulfill the Coastal Act requirement, infill or rebuilding and redevelopment within the projected 100-‐year flood zone with 55-‐inches of sea-‐level rise (or future updated sea-‐level rise projections) should be elevated above the expected base flood elevation expected with such a 100-‐year flood. The City should define thresholds as to when the new redevelopment/remodel policy applies.

Substrategy 6.3. Update Building Height Restrictions to Account for Elevation Requirements on New/Redevelopment Above Base Flood Level. A policy as suggested in Substrategy 6.1 to elevate new structures above the base flood elevation will impact the City's height restrictions on buildings and they need to be adjusted accordingly. Important considerations here relate to maintenance of the community character and protection of important viewsheds.

Substrategy 6.4. Update Parking Requirements Associated with Infill and Redevelopment. If structures to be built in the future are required to be above base flood elevation, an opportunity may arise (welcome in a city with limited parking space at present) whereby the parking needs associated with any new building may be met onsite, i.e. below the first livable floor. This would require an adjustment in parking related policies.

Strategy 7. Reduce Flood Vulnerability of Existing Structures

Substrategy 7.1. Issue Guidance to Homeowners and Renters on How They Can Protect Floodprone Ground Floor Installations. Where possible, homeowners and renters may be able to elevate appliances, heating and cooling equipment, and other valuable items to a higher floor. Informational and practical assistance should be provided to the population in floodprone areas, and – given turnover in building occupancy – such educational and practical assistance should be offered on a regular basis (e.g., once a year).

Substrategy 7.2. Floodproof Public Buildings. Both to serve as a model to the community and to ensure that key public buildings remain functional in flooding events, survey how public buildings are currently not flood proof, and remedy any identified weaknesses. Prioritize buildings closest to the coast and those affected in non-‐coastal wintertime flooding, and over time extend inland toward other buildings in the projected floodzone.

Substrategy 7.3. Develop Incentive Programs for Businesses to Floodproof their Establishments. Given the importance of functional businesses during and after disaster events, i.e. the ability of a community to recover quickly, the business sector requires special attention. Incentives to floodproof businesses can include informational and practical assistance, low-‐interest loans, and other means.

Strategy 8. Reduce Flood Vulnerability of Existing Infrastructure


Substrategy 8.1. Continue Stormwater Runoff Improvements. The city already has taken proactive steps to manage its runoff, which have the co-‐benefit of also supporting adaptation to climate change. Particularly, its urban runoff project with support from the U.S. EPA and funds from the American Recovery Act help filter stormwater runoff through a system built along the Strand.129 Given the rising challenges with absorbing and diverting stormwater runoff as the sea level rises, these efforts should be continued, and the system should be kept in good repair over time to minimize potential problems with street flooding and drainage backups during storm events.130

Substrategy 8.2. Increase Surface Infiltration Throughout the City. Hermosa Beach can experience intense rainfall events, which already regularly cause major street and basement flooding problems and backups of drainage with vegetation debris. At present, the City's surface is substantially covered by impermeable surfaces. To reduce this problem and thus help reduce the pressure on the stormwater runoff system during (coastal) storm events, a policy requiring the creation of permeable surfaces wherever possible could help reverse this trend. It should apply to all new/redevelopment and to any landscape repairs and alterations (e.g., repair and replacement of concrete walkways, private parking spaces, street resurfacing and parking lot repavement).

Substrategy 8.3 Integrate Sea-‐Level Rise into the Repair and Replacement of Aging Infrastructure. The corrosive effect of saltwater from surface coastal flooding, from below-‐surface saltwater intrusion, as well as the scouring effect of moving flood waters can place additional strain on water-‐ and transportation-‐related infrastructure. The City is already considering rehabilitating its sewers and drainage infrastructure, and should take sea-‐level rise into account at this time as necessary (i.e. in all areas that may be affected by flood waters over the expected lifetime of the newly placed infrastructure), and in the future when infrastructure is repaired or replaced under significantly higher sea level conditions.

Strategy 9: Consider Synergies and Trade-‐offs Between Climate Mitigation and Adaptation Policies, and between Climate and Non-‐Climate Policies.

Substrategy 9.1. Require City Staff to Routinely Assess Implications of Local Government Action for Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Climate Change Risks. To integrate climate change thinking into the day-‐to-‐day business of local government, establishing an overarching administrative policy that all applicable decisions have to consider the implications for climate change is a critical first step. "Applicable decisions" are those that pertain (1) to ongoing resource and energy consumption (i.e. direct or indirect greenhouse gas decisions) by all City government employees, (2) to long-‐term investments that commit the City and/or its residents to fossil-‐fuel based energy consumption, and (3) to any other decisions with long-‐term implications (i.e., the impacts of the decision will be felt for 20 or more years), e.g., building and infrastructure, (re)zoning, and major capital investment decisions.

Substrategy 9.2. Minimize Future Carbon Burden and Future Vulnerability to Climate Change Impacts Whenever Possible. Once the implications for greenhouse gas emissions and for the vulnerability to emerging and future climate change risks are assessed, City staff should develop option alternatives for those "applicable decisions" that minimize the carbon burden on the planet and that reduce or minimize vulnerability to these climate change risks. Many opportunities exist where options to minimize greenhouse gas emissions simultaneously maintain maximum flexibility to prepare for and adapt to climate change risks in the future.131 For example, according to the South Bay Cities Plug-‐In Electric Vehicle Deployment Plan, the region plans to build publicly accessible plug-‐in stations throughout the region.132 If Hermosa Beach participates in this effort and installs any additional charging stations within city bounds, potential sites should take precaution to avoid flooding risks or be built in a flood-‐proof manner.

4.3.3 Specific Improvements in Disaster Preparedness and Recovery Planning The suggested policies and changes here are consistent with guidance and recommendations from the California Coastal Commission and those contained within the 2013 State Hazard Mitigation Plan. Specific additional guidance and practical advice can be obtained from the Office of Emergency Planning.133


Strategy 10. Update Tsunami Emergency Response Planning

Substrategy 10.1. Require Future Tsunami Inundation Mapping to Include the Best Available Science on Sea-‐Level Rise. As this assessment revealed, Hermosa Beach's current tsunami wave run-‐up/inundation map is almost identical to the 100-‐year floodzone with 55 inches of sea-‐level rise. This is helpful in so far as tsunami emergency planning may serve as a template or guidance for coastal flood emergency planning (similar except for the extremely short lead time in a tsunami). However, the current tsunami map and thus emergency planning does not take into account the possibility of higher future sea levels. This should be remedied in the next round of tsunami mapping and periodically thereafter to stay current. In addition, the greater risk of liquefaction should be assessed as sea level rises and groundwater elevations increase.

Substrategy 10.2. Ensure that Tsunami Emergency Response Considers Social Vulnerability Before, During and After the Event. As the social vulnerability assessment conducted in this study revealed different segments of the population have different needs before, during and after an emergency event. These considerations should inform tsunami emergency planning as much as all disaster preparedness.

Strategy 11. Improve Emergency Response Planning

Legal requirements for land use planning related to flood risk reduction have changed in recent years. Additional informational and practical assistance is available from the Department of Water Resources Planning134 and from the Office of Emergency Planning.135 The following recommendations do not replace that guidance and should be viewed as additional and complementary strategies.

Substrategy 11.1 Review and Improve Evacuation, Emergency Response and Recovery Plans by Considering Identified Vulnerabilities. The Social and infrastructure vulnerability assessment conducted here should motivate a review of the existing evacuation, emergency, and recovery plans, particularly for the entire area west of Hermosa Avenue. Where gaps are identified, these plans should be updated. In particular recovery plans are important opportunities to proactively build in adaptive measures that help reduce the community's vulnerability to future events.

Substrategy 11.2. Assess the Costs and Benefits of Joining the National Flood Insurance Program. The City currently does not participate in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). This limits its access to certain federal hazard mitigation funds, which could help implement some of the strategies listed here, and which limits the opportunity for private homeowners and business owners to obtain affordable flood insurance that would help them cope in the case of a flooding disaster.136

While flood insurance rates are increasing, lack of property owners' self-‐insurance places a great financial burden on the entire community, state and nation when catastrophe strikes. As flood risks increase Hermosa Beach may consider participating in the program to buffer against the worst-‐case scenario. Moreover, participating in the NFIP's Community Rating System (CRS), whereby communities take community-‐wide flood protection measures and thereby bring down the insurance premiums for everyone, is an attractive option, especially in combination with the range of strategies listed here (especially, Strategies 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10, all of which would gain Hermosa Beach premium-‐lowering bonus points in the CRS). The benefits of participating in the NFIP are further discussed in the State's Hazard Mitigation Plan.137

4.4 Summary of Adaptation Options and Conclusion Many of the adaptation and disaster preparedness strategies listed here cut across any single area of concern that needs to be addressed in an LCP Update. Others are specifically geared toward just one. Which of the strategies proposed here addresses each of the vulnerabilities identified in Part A of this study (and summarized by LCP issue area in Section 3 of Part B) is summarized in Table 7 below. This overview suggests that the City has a considerable range of choices to reduce its vulnerabilities.


The strategies, however, should not be considered merely a menu from which to pick and chose at random. While all adhere to the Coastal Commission's guidance and principles, some overarching strategies seem indispensible in that they serve to address many key vulnerabilities at once, and others address key issues through specific actions. Not implementing them would leave key vulnerabilities unattended.

Given that Hermosa Beach is already built out, key policies are not about protecting natural areas or restricting shorefront development. Instead, of foremost importance is the maintenance of the beach which is the economic and cultural center of the city and the most important storm and coastal flood buffer the City has. In addition, dealing with growing flood risks and saltwater intrusion will further stave off far more profound (transformative) adaptation in future decades. In short, Hermosa Beach can implement many measures that will allow it to adapt in place while continuing to enjoy the many benefits of being an oceanfront community.


TABLE 7: SUMMARY OF COASTAL ADAPTATION STRATEGIES FOR HERMOSA BEACH

Relevant LCP Areas of Concern

For Hermosa Beach

Public Access

Recreation

Facilities

Water Quality

ESHA & Nat.

Res.

New/Redevel

opment

Scenic &

Visual Res.

Coastal

Hazards

Erosion &

Protection

Adaptive Strategies Addressing LCP Areas of Concern 1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9

Ongoing Overarching Regional

Strategies

Strategy 1: Continue Participating in the Regional Partnership in Climate Change Assessment and Adaptation Planning Strategy 1.1 Participate in LARC. Strategy 1.2 Update Scientific Basis for Coastal Adaptation Planning.

X X

Strategy 2: Pursue a Regional Approach to Sediment Management and Adaptive Shoreline Protection Substrategy 2.1. Participate in Regional Sediment Management Planning. Substrategy 2.2. Develop a Long-‐term Adaptive Shoreline Management Policy. Substrategy 2.3 Conduct a Cost-‐Effectiveness Assessment of Shoreline Adaptation Alternatives. Substrategy 2.4. Develop Creative Local and Regional Financing Mechanisms for the Preferred Shoreline Adaptation Strategy.

X X X X

X X X X

X X X X

X X X X

X X X X

Ongoing Overarching Local Strategies

Strategy 3: Educate the Public about Flooding Risks and Promote Household Disaster Preparedness Substrategy 3.1. Develop Flood Risk Educational Materials and Distribute them Widely and Repeatedly Substrategy 3.2. Survey Household-‐level Preparedness and Develop Programs to Fill Disaster Preparedness Gaps Substrategy 3.3. Require Flood Risk Disclosure and Active Acknowledgment of Flood Risk in Property Purchases/Turn-‐overs

X

X X X

Strategy 4: Educate the Public about Climate Change Risks and Adaptation Alternatives Strategy 4.1. Communicate climate change risks and what the City is doing to address them. Strategy 4.2. Provide frequent updates to the population to keep climate change messaging fresh, and to signal the importance of the issue.

X X

Strategy 5: Meaningfully Engage the Public in Adaptation Planning X Strategy 6: Update Development and Redevelopment Policies Substrategy 6.1 Update Definitions.

X

X



For Hermosa Beach

Public Access

Recreation

Facilities

Water Quality

ESHA & Nat.

Res.

New/Redevel

opment

Scenic &

Visual Res.

Coastal

Hazards

Erosion &

Protection

Adaptive Strategies Addressing LCP Areas of Concern 1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 Substrategy 6.2. Update Elevation Requirements of Infill and Redevelopment. Substrategy 6.3. Update Building Height Restrictions to Account for Elevation Requirements on New/Redevelopment Above Base Flood Level. Substrategy 6.4. Update Parking Requirements Associated with Infill and Redevelopment.

X

X X X

X

X X X

Strategy 7: Reduce Flood Vulnerability of Existing Structures Substrategy 7.1. Issue Guidance to Homeowners and Renters on How They Can Protect Floodprone Ground Floor Installations. Substrategy 7.2. Floodproof Public Buildings. Substrategy 7.3. Develop Incentive Programs for Businesses to Floodproof their Establishments.

X X X

Strategy 8: Reduce Flood Vulnerability of Existing Infrastructure Substrategy 8.1. Continue Stormwater Runoff Improvements. Substrategy 8.2. Increase Surface infiltration Throughout the City. Substrategy 8.3 Integrate Sea-‐Level Rise into the Repair and Replacement of Aging Infrastructure.

X X X

X X X

Strategy 9: Consider Synergies and Trade-‐offs Between Climate Mitigation and Adaptation Policies, and between Climate and Non-‐Climate Policies. Substrategy 9.1. Require City Staff to Routinely Assess Implications of Local Government Action for Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Climate Change Risks. Substrategy 9.2. Minimize Future Carbon Burden and Future Vulnerability to Climate Change Impacts Whenever Possible.

X X

X

Specific

Improvem

ents

in Disaster

Preparedness

and Recovery

Planning

Strategy 10: Update Tsunami Emergency Response Planning Substrategy 10.1. Require Future Tsunami Inundation Mapping to Include the Best Available Science on Sea-‐Level Rise. Substrategy 10.2. Ensure that Tsunami Emergency Response Considers Social Vulnerability Before, During and After the Event.

X X

Strategy 11. Improve Emergency Response Planning



For Hermosa Beach

Public Access

Recreation

Facilities

Water Quality

ESHA & Nat.

Res.

New/Redevel

opment

Scenic &

Visual Res.

Coastal

Hazards

Erosion &

Protection

Adaptive Strategies Addressing LCP Areas of Concern 1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 Strategy 11.1 Review and Improve Evacuation, Emergency Response and Recovery Plans by Considering Identified Vulnerabilities. Strategy 11.2. Assess the Costs and Benefits of Joining the National Flood Insurance Program.

X X


Appendix 1: Description of Social Vulnerability Index Constructed for Hermosa Beach Development of the Vulnerability Index A set of 11 variables was used to calculate an integrated social vulnerable index for Hermosa Beach’s risk of flooding. The variables were chosen primarily based on the Cutter et al. 2003 Social Vulnerability Index commonly used. However, because Hermosa Beach is a smaller area than this general index is calculated for, the method needed to be revised slightly. Therefore, we decided that integrating the indicators using principle components analysis was not appropriate due to the small sample size (16 block groups). Instead we summed the standardized values of the individual indicators. We chose the indicators from the Cutter et al. SoVI that displayed variation among block groups in Hermosa Beach, omitting those that showed very little or no variation across block groups. This omission was done only to reduce unnecessary “noise” in the analysis, therefore, it is important to note that the omission of indicators does not mean the variables are not important to understanding social vulnerability. It only means that they would not affect the quantitative differentiation between block groups. The ultimate goal of the index is to find where variation exists. Variables used to construct the index, with sources, are listed in Table 8.


TABLE 8: VARIABLES USED IN THE SOCIAL VULNERABILITY INDEX, TAILORED TO HERMOSA BEACH

Indicator Metric used Source (US Census table) Database and year Processing

Race % non-‐white population SE:T13. Race ACS 2008-‐2012

All metrics standardized (z-‐scores), then summed, then mapped by standard deviation to create vulnerability index score

Age-‐dependent population

% population <5 yrs and 65 and older

SE:T7A. Age -‐ Cumulative (Less)

ACS 2008-‐2012

Female as head of household

% female head of family households

SE:T17. Households By Household Type

ACS 2008-‐2012

Population (this is subtracted from vulnerability scoring)

% of households that earn >$200K

SE:T56. Household Income (In 2012 Inflation Adjusted Dollars)

ACS 2008-‐2012

Population living at poverty level

% population that earn less than 75K (2013 definition for 300% of federal poverty level for hh of four people)

SE:T56A. Household Income (In 2012 Inflation Adjusted Dollars) -‐ Cumulative (Less)

ACS 2008-‐2012

Renter occupied housing units % renter occupied units SE:T94. Tenure ACS 2008-‐

2012

Vacant housing % unoccupied housing units ACS 2008-‐

2012 Burden of overpayment of housing costs for renters

SE:T103. Gross Rent As A Percentage Of Household Income In 2012

ACS 2008-‐2012

Price of rental unit Gross median rent SE:T104. Median Gross Rent ACS 2008-‐2012

Overpayment burden of housing costs for home owners with mortgage

SE:T110. Selected Monthly Owner Costs As A Percentage Of Household Income In 2012 For Housing units with a mortgage

ACS 2008-‐2012

No access to vehicle

% of population that do not own a vehicle

ACS12_5yr:B25044. Tenure By Vehicles Available

ACS 2008-‐2012

Interpreting the Vulnerability Index Figure 27 displays the breakdown of how each Census Block Group scored overall (black dot) and individually across all variables. Patterns for those block groups scoring highest (meaning the most vulnerable) show a pattern of high proportion of the population as females as heads of family household and high proportion of households earning less than $75K per year. The block group scoring as most vulnerable is just east of the Strand, bordered on the south by Herdono St. This score is dominated by a high proportion of females as head of family households, high vacancy of housing units. The second highest block group is inland, not exposed to flooding according to the 100 year flood map with 55 inches of sea-‐level rise. The third highest block group (located along the Strand in the southern part of the city) was dominated by income related and other factors: relatively low proportion of households earning $200K, high proportion of households earning >$75K, and high renter-‐occupied units.


Figure 27: Bar Graph Showing Values of z-scores (standardized values) of each indicator used in the Social Vulnerability Index for Hermosa Beach. Sum of z-scores is indicated with a black dot (and line connecting between Census Block Groups)

City of Hermosa Beach Existing Conditions Report Sea-‐Level Rise Vulnerability Assessment |78

Endnotes and References 1 Photo by Dave Proffer (2010). Available from: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Land_Shark_over_Hermosa_Beach%3F_(4361868358).jpg.

2 California Coastal Commission (2013). California Coastal Commission Draft Sea-‐Level Rise Policy Guidance. Public Review Draft of October 14, 2013. San Francisco, CA; Coastal Commission. Available at: http://www.coastal.ca.gov/climate/slr/guidance/CCC_Draft_SLR_Guidance_PR_10142013.pdf. 3 California Ocean Protection Council (2011). Resolution of the California Ocean Protection Council on Sea-‐Level Rise. Available at: http://www.opc.ca.gov/2011/04/resolution-‐of-‐the-‐california-‐ocean-‐protection-‐council-‐on-‐sea-‐level-‐rise/. The most recent Update to the Guidance Document can be accessed here: http://www.opc.ca.gov/2013/04/update-‐to-‐the-‐sea-‐level-‐rise-‐guidance-‐document/ 4 California Natural Resources Agency (2009). 2009 California Climate Adaptation Strategy. Sacramento, California. Available at: http://www.energy.ca.gov/2009publications/CNRA-‐1000-‐2009-‐027/CNRA-‐1000-‐2009-‐027-‐F.PDF. 5 According to the survey results of what motivates coastal managers and other professionals in California to begin adaptation to climate change, as reported in: Finzi Hart, J. A., P. M. Grifman, S. C. Moser, A. Abeles, M. R. Myers, S. C. Schlosser, J. A. Ekstrom. (2012). Rising to the Challenge: Results of the 2011 Coastal California Adaptation Needs Assessment. USCSG-‐TR-‐01-‐2012. Available at: http://www.usc.edu/org/seagrant/research/climateadaptsurvey/SurveyReport_FINAL_OnlinePDF.pdf. 6 For example, Messner, S. Miranda, K. Green, C. Phillips, J. Dudley, D. Cayan, and E. Young (2008). Climate Change Related Impacts in the San Diego Region by 2050. A Summary Prepared for the 2008 Climate Change Impacts Assessment, Second Biennial Science Report to the California Climate Action Team. Available at: http://www.escholarship.org/uc/item/870746sr#page-‐2. 7 Multihazard Mitigation Council (2005). Natural hazard mitigation saves: An independent study to assess the future savings from mitigation activities. Volume 2 -‐ Study Documentation, National Institute of Building Sciences, Washington, D.C. Available at: http://www.nibs.org/resource/resmgr/MMC/hms_vol2_ch1-‐7.pdf?hhSearchTerms=Natural+and+hazard+and+mitigation. 8 Foster, J., A. Lowe and S. Winkelman (2011). The Value of Green Infrastructure for Urban Climate Adaptation. Center for Clean Air Policy, Washington, DC. 9 For a comprehensive compilation of relevant research supported by the State of California on different climate change aspects, see the California Climate Change portal at: http://www.climatechange.ca.gov/.

A discussion of sea-‐level rise impacts on coastal areas is also included in the 2013 State Hazard Mitigation Plan, which explicitly acknowledges how various climate-‐related hazards are becoming more widespread and/or challenging due to climate change. See: Governor's Office of Emergency Services (CalOES, 2013). 2013 State of California Multi-‐Hazard Mitigation Plan. Mather, CA, Section 6.4.3, pp. 318-‐325. 10 The California Natural Resources Agency in coordination with other state agencies is revising and updating the 2009 strategy document. The draft of this updated strategy, Safeguarding California, was released in late 2013, and is open for public comment until February 28, 2014. Available at: http://resources.ca.gov/climate_adaptation/docs/Safeguarding_California_Public_Draft_Dec-‐10.pdf.

Note these definitions are also largely consistent with definitions used in the 2013 State Hazard Mitigation Plan. See: Governor's Office of Emergency Services (CalOES, 2013). 2013 State of California Multi-‐Hazard Mitigation Plan. Mather, CA, Section 4, pp. 93-‐97). 11 Romero Lankao, P. and J. L. Tribbia (2009). Assessing patterns of vulnerability, adaptive capacity and resilience across urban centers. Paper presented at the Fifth Urban Research Symposium 2009: p. 4.


12 Romero Lankao, P. and J. L. Tribbia (2009). Assessing patterns of vulnerability, adaptive capacity and resilience across urban centers. Paper presented at the Fifth Urban Research Symposium 2009: p. 4. 13 California Natural Resources Agency (2009). 2009 California Climate Adaptation Strategy. Sacramento, California. Available at: http://www.energy.ca.gov/2009publications/CNRA-‐1000-‐2009-‐027/CNRA-‐1000-‐2009-‐027-‐F.PDF; Appendix. 14 This definition is consistent with the California Ocean Protection Council’s Sea-‐level Rise Guidance document: “Adaptive capacity is the ability of a system to respond to climate change, to moderate potential damages, to take advantage of opportunities, and to cope with the consequences.” See: Ocean Protection Council (2013). Updated California SLR Guidance. Available at: http://www.opc.ca.gov/webmaster/ftp/pdf/docs/2013_SLR_Guidance_Update_FINAL1.pdf, p. 4. 15 Kasperson, J.X., R.E. Kasperson, and B.L. Turner II. (2009). Vulnerability of coupled human-‐ecological systems to global environmental change. In: Human Footprints on the Global Environment: Threats to Sustainability, eds. E.A. Rosa, A. Diekmann, T. Dietz, and C.C Jaeger, 231-‐294, Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. 16 National Research Council (2012). Sea-‐Level Rise for the Coasts of California, Oregon, and Washington: Past, Present, and Future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. Available at: http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=13389&page=103 17 Bromirski, P. D., A. J. Miller, R. E. Flick, and G. Auad (2011). Dynamical suppression of sea level rise along the Pacific coast of North America: Indications of imminent acceleration. Journal of Geophysical Research 116: C07005, 12 pp. 18 National Research Council (2012). Sea-‐Level Rise for the Coasts of California, Oregon, and Washington: Past, Present, and Future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. Available at: http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=13389&page=103 19 National Research Council (2012). Sea-‐Level Rise for the Coasts of California, Oregon, and Washington: Past, Present, and Future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. Available at: http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=13389&page=103 20 Bromirski, P. D., D. R. Cayan, N. Graham, M. Tyree, and R. E. Flick (2012). Coastal Flooding-‐Potential Projections: 2000–2100. California Energy Commission. Publication number: CEC-‐500-‐2012-‐011. 21 This also means that a storm such as the January 2010 storm which significantly affected areas across LA County (only a “10-‐year” storm at present, i.e. a storm with an annual probability of occurring of 10%) can be expected to occur at least annually well before the end of the century, and probably much sooner and far more frequently. 22 Ocean Protection Council (2013). ‘Update to the Sea-‐Level Rise Guidance Document’ (webpage). Accessed December 2013. Available at: http://www.opc.ca.gov/2013/04/update-‐to-‐the-‐sea-‐level-‐rise-‐guidance-‐document/ 23 National Research Council (2012). Sea-‐Level Rise for the Coasts of California, Oregon, and Washington: Past, Present, and Future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. Available at: http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=13389&page=103. 24 The California Ocean Protection Council’s Sea Level Rise Guidance advises that, “It is important to note that the NRC [National Research Council] report is based on numerical climate models developed for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Fourth Assessment Report which do not account for rapid changes in the behavior of ice sheets and glaciers and thus likely underestimate sea-‐level rise (the new suite of climate models for the Fifth Assessment Report was not available when the NRC report was developed). The committee used the model results from the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report, together with a forward extrapolation of land ice that attempts to capture an ice dynamics component.” (See: Ocean Protection Council. 2013. Updated California SLR Guidance. Available at: http://www.opc.ca.gov/webmaster/ftp/pdf/docs/2013_SLR_Guidance_Update_FINAL1.pdf, p.3; emphasis added).


25 Joughin, I., B.E. Smith and B. Medley (2014). Marine Ice Sheet Collapse Potentially Under Way for the Thwaites Glacier Basin, West Antarctica. Science 344 (6185): 735-‐738;DOI: 10.1126/science.1249055.

Rignot, E., J. Mouginot, M. Morlighem, H. Seroussi and B. Scheuchl (2014). Widespread, rapid grounding line retreat of Pine 1 Island, Thwaites, Smith and Kohler glaciers, West 2 Antarctica from 1992 to 2011. Geophysical Research Letters 2014GL060140; DOI: 10.1002/2014GL060140.

26 California Coastal Commission (2013). California Coastal Commission Draft Sea-‐Level Rise Policy Guidance. Public Review Draft of October 14, 2013. San Francisco, CA; Coastal Commission. Available at: http://www.coastal.ca.gov/climate/slr/guidance/CCC_Draft_SLR_Guidance_PR_10142013.pdf, pp.5, 23.

27 Ocean Protection Council (2013). Updated California SLR Guidance. Available at: http://www.opc.ca.gov/webmaster/ftp/pdf/docs/2013_SLR_Guidance_Update_FINAL1.pdf, p.5. 28 Cayan, D., M. Tyree, D. Pierce, T. Das (2012). Climate Change and Sea Level Rise Scenarios for California Vulnerability and Adaptation Assessment. Scripps Institution of Oceanography, prepared for the California Energy Commission. Publication number: CEC-‐500-‐2012-‐008. 29 More detail on the methodology is available from: Heberger, Matthew, Heather Cooley, Pablo Herrera, Peter H. Gleick, and Eli Moore (2009). The Impacts of Sea-‐Level Rise on the California Coast. California Energy Commission’s Public Interest Energy Research (PIER) Program Research Report, CEC-‐500-‐2009-‐024-‐F. http://dev.cakex.org/sites/default/files/CA%20Sea%20Level%20Rise%20Report.pdf

30 Climatic information based on nearby Los Angeles averages. See: Weatherbase: Historical Weather for Los Angeles, California, United States of America. Available at: http://www.weatherbase.com/weather/weather.php3?s=159227&refer=.

31 City of Hermosa Beach, Hazard Mitigation Plan 2005, p.148. 32 Neighborhood Link.‘90254 Zip Code Profile’ (webpage). Access December 2013. Available at: http://www.neighborhoodlink.com/zip/90254 33 City of Hermosa Beach elevation map, provided as a shapefile to Ekstrom from Sonali Tambe, GIS Analyst, City of Hermosa Beach, on 12/27/2013. 34 Morino, D. (2011). Hermosa Beach Storm Water System Receives EPA Award. Daily Breeze, March 21, 2011. Accessed December 23, 2013 at: http://www.dailybreeze.com/general-‐news/20110321/hermosa-‐beach-‐storm-‐water-‐system-‐receives-‐epa-‐award. 35 Turner, C.H., Ebert, E.E., and Given, R.R. (1969). Man-‐made reef ecology. Fish Bulletin 146.State of California, Department of Fish and Game. Available at: http://content.cdlib.org/view?docId=kt2x0n9933&brand=calisphere&doc.view=entire_text.

36 GIS shapefiles from City of Hermosa Beach supplied by Sonali Tambe, GIS Analyst, City of Hermosa Beach 37 Thieler, E.R. and E.S. Hammar-‐Klose (2000). National Assessment of Coastal Vulnerability to Sea-‐Level Rise: Preliminary Results for the U.S. Pacific Coast. USGS, Woods Hole, MA. Available at: http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2000/of00-‐178/index.html. 38 Sherman, D. and B. Pipkin (2005). The coast of southern California: Santa Monica to Dana Point. In: Griggs, G., K. Patsch and L. Savoy (eds.), Living with the Changing California Coast. University of California Press: Berkeley, LA, pp. 427-‐473. 39 Thieler, E.R. and E.S. Hammar-‐Klose (2000). National Assessment of Coastal Vulnerability to Sea-‐Level Rise: Preliminary Results for the U.S. Pacific Coast. USGS, Woods Hole, MA. Available at: http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2000/of00-‐178/index.html.


40 Unnamed author (2002). Chapter 6: Effectiveness Beach Nourishment, in California Beach Restoration Study. Available at: http://www.dbw.ca.gov/PDF/Reports/BeachReport/Ch6_Effectiveness.pdf 41 California Beach Restoration Study (2002).Table 6.3. It draws on Leidersdorf et al. (1994). “Human Intervention with the Beaches of Santa Monica Bay, California” Shore & Beach, 62(3): 29-‐38. 42 See also Flick, R.E. (1993). The Myth and Reality of Southern California Beaches. Paper based on a presentation given at the California Shore and Beach Preservation Association Annual Meeting, Session on Special Coastal Issues, 17 November 1992, p.9. Accessed 12/30/13 at: http://cmbc.ucsd.edu/content/1/docs/Flick_3.pdf. 43 Opportunistic replenishment is typically defined as follows: “Opportunistic beach nourishment projects are those that are undertaken when beach-‐quality sand becomes available from projects unrelated to beach nourishment. To date, the primary sources of this ‘sand of opportunity’ in California have been harbor construction and maintenance dredging. Opportunistic nourishment is driven by economics, in that it often proves more cost effective to place the excavated material on nearby beaches than to dispose of it inland or offshore.” (California Beach Restoration Study (2002), Chapter 6, p.6-‐2, available at: http://www.dbw.ca.gov/PDF/Reports/BeachReport/Ch6_Effectiveness.pdf. 44 This relative stability of the area south of Manhattan Beach is also described in Sherman, D. and B. Pipkin (2005). The coast of southern California: Santa Monica to Dana Point. In: Griggs, G., K. Patsch and L. Savoy (eds.), Living with the Changing California Coast. University of California Press: Berkeley, LA, see, especially, the discussion on pp. 433-‐447 and the map on p. 437. 45 Photo from: http://geology.campus.ad.csulb.edu/people/bperry/AerialPhotosSoCal/CoastalCities.htm, Photo #25 Southern California. Original source: Image Science and Analysis Laboratory, NASA Johnson Space Center. 46 City of Hermosa Beach.(2005). Hazard Mitigation Plan: p.151. 47 City of Hermosa Beach. (2005) Hazard Mitigation Plan: p. 151. 48 U.S. Census Bureau: State and County QuickFacts. Data derived from Population Estimates, American Community Survey, Census of Population and Housing, County Business Patterns, Economic Census, Survey of Business Owners, Building Permits, Census of Governments. Accessed 1/1/14, online: http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/06/0633364.html 49 City of Hermosa Beach (website).Accessed January 3, 2014. Available at: http://www.hermosabch.org/index.aspx?page=5 50 U.S. Census (2007).QuickFacts: City of Hermosa Beach. Available at: http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/06/0633364.html.

Annual sales are defined here as: “Sales includes payments from customers for services rendered, from the use of facilities and from merchandise sold.” (See: http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/meta/long_AFN120207.htm) 51 Southern California Council of Governments (SCAG) (2013). Profile of the City of Hermosa Beach. (May 2013), Section VI. Employment. 52 Southern California Council of Governments (SCAG) (2013). Profile of the City of Hermosa Beach. (May 2013), chart on p.30. 53 Southern California Council of Governments (SCAG) (2013). Profile of the City of Hermosa Beach.(May 2013), p.29.Available at: http://www.scag.ca.gov/Documents/HermosaBeach.pdf.

Above SCAG report contains figure with sources noted as California Employment Development Department 2007, InfoGroup, and SCAG. 54According to the Los Angeles County Fire Department, Lifeguard Division. Available at: http://www.hermosabch.org/index.aspx?page=5.


55 The estimate of residents to flooding with sea-‐level rise is based on a proportional calculation (i.e. percentage) of residents per flooded block group after 55 inches of sea-‐level rise. This assumes equal population density throughout the block groups (the most robust assumption absent any other indication that population is not distributed evenly). The ACS 2008-‐2012 data were used for population data and the Pacific Institute’s 100-‐year floodplain with 55 inches of sea-‐level rise was used for the spatial extent of projected flooding. 56 Dunning, C.M. and Durden, S. (2013). Social Vulnerability Analysis: A Comparison of Tools. Institute for Water Resources White Paper. US Army Corps of Engineers (February 2013). Available at: http://www.iwr.usace.army.mil/Portals/70/docs/iwrreports/Social_Vulnerability_Analysis_Tools.pdf. 57 Census Bureau (2012). American Community Survey 2008-‐2012, released January 2014 at http://www.census.gov/acs/www/data_documentation/summary_file/ 58 Census Bureau (2012). American Community Survey 2008-‐2012, released January 2014 at http://www.census.gov/acs/www/data_documentation/summary_file/. 59 City of Hermosa Beach (2013). Housing Element Technical Report (September 10, 2013), p.I-‐8. Available online: http://www.hermosabch.org/modules/showdocument.aspx?documentid=1305 60 City of Hermosa Beach (2013). Housing Element Technical Report (September 10, 2013), p.I-‐8. Available online: http://www.hermosabch.org/modules/showdocument.aspx?documentid=1305. 61 Census Bureau (2012). American Community Survey 2008-‐2012, released January 2014 at http://www.census.gov/acs/www/data_documentation/summary_file/. 62 Curtis, A., J.W. Mills, M. Leitner (2007). Katrina and Vulnerability: The Geography of Stress. Journal of Health Care for the Poor and Underserved 18: 315-‐300. Available at: http://cretscmhd.psych.ucla.edu/nola/Volunteer/EmpiricalStudies/Katrina%20and%20vulnerability%20-‐%20the%20geography%20of%20stress.pdf.

Morrow, B.H. (1999). Identifying and mapping community vulnerability. Disasters 23(1):1–18. 63 Housing Element City of Hermosa Beach (2012), available at: http://www.hermosabch.org/modules/showdocument.aspx?documentid=757, p.II-‐18. 64 Census Bureau (2012). American Community Survey 2008-‐2012, released January 2014 at http://www.census.gov/acs/www/data_documentation/summary_file/. 65 Census Bureau (2012). American Community Survey 2008-‐2012, released January 2014 at http://www.census.gov/acs/www/data_documentation/summary_file/ 66 Census Bureau (2012). Selected Housing Characteristics (more information) 2008-‐2012 American Community Survey 5-‐Year Estimates, available at: http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?src=bkmk. 67 Census Bureau.(2012). American Community Survey 2008-‐2012, released January 2014 at http://www.census.gov/acs/www/data_documentation/summary_file/ 68 Census Bureau.(2012). American Community Survey 2008-‐2012, released January 2014 at http://www.census.gov/acs/www/data_documentation/summary_file/ 69 See: http://www.homelessshelterdirectory.org/cgi-‐bin/id/city.cgi?city=HermosaBeach&state=CA. 70 Fortunately, the Runaway Youth Homeless Shelter is located about 5 blocks east of Hermosa Avenue and thus not directly in the 100-‐year floodplain after 55 inches of sea-‐level rise. See map at: http://www.homelessshelterdirectory.org/cgi-‐bin/id/shelter.cgi?shelter=11232. 71 Housing Element City of Hermosa Beach (2012), available at: http://www.hermosabch.org/modules/showdocument.aspx?documentid=757, p.II-‐15.


72 Thomallla, F., T. Downing, E. Spanger-‐Siegried et al. (2006). Reducing hazard vulnerability: towards a common approach between disaster risk reduction and climate adaptation. Disasters 30(1):39-‐48. Available online with subscription at: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-‐9523.2006.00305.x/abstract

Perry , R.W. and A.H. Mushkatel (2008). Minority Citizens in Disasters. University of Georgia Press: Athens, Georgia. 73 Ekstrom, J., and S. Moser. (2013). Sea-‐level rise impacts and flooding risks in the context of social vulnerability: an assessment for the City of Los Angeles. Prepared for the Mayor’s Office, City of Los Angeles. 74 Census Bureau (2012). American Community Survey 2008-‐2012, released January 2014 at http://www.census.gov/acs/www/data_documentation/summary_file/ 75 City of Hermosa Beach (2005). Hazard Mitigation Plan, p.118. 76 Note that the boundaries of Census-‐designated block groups have changed since the year 2000, so this map’s block groups different from those shown in the maps constructed with ACS 2008-‐2012 data. 77 Ekstrom, J. and S. Moser (2013). Sea-‐level rise impacts and flooding risks in the context of social vulnerability: an assessment for the City of Los Angeles. Prepared for the Mayor’s Office, City of Los Angeles.

Social Vulnerability Index (SoVI) data were downloaded from the NOAA Coastal Services website, accessed 1/4/2014 (available at: http://www.csc.noaa.gov/digitalcoast/dataregistry/#/sovi). SoVI results for Los Angeles County were filtered out of the statewide dataset and drawn for the county. Thus, standard deviations were calculated and mapped (marked by different colors) based on the data for the County only. 78 See webra.cas.sc.edu/hvri/docs/SoVIRecipe.pdf for more information on method for conducting the SoVI analysis. 79 Those variables included in the SoVI method that did not display variation among Census Block Groups of Hermosa Beach were omitted from the analysis. Differently put, those characteristics are homogenous across the city and thus do not reveal any differences in social vulnerability. To combine the variables, we summed the standardized scores to generate a single ‘vulnerability’ score for each Census Block Group. See Appendix 1 for further discussion. 80 For description of how this was calculated and the sources of the data, see Appendix 1. 81 Census Bureau (2012). American Community Survey 2008-‐2012, released January 2014 at http://www.census.gov/acs/www/data_documentation/summary_file/ 82 According to the Los Angeles Times, January 18, 2010, downed power lines from heavy downpours caused 44,000 Southern California Edison customers to lose power. Available at: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2010/01/rains-‐worsen-‐this-‐afternoon-‐prompting-‐flooding-‐fears-‐power-‐outages-‐traffic-‐troubles.html 83 City of Hermosa Beach, Hazard Mitigation Plan 2005, p.148. 84 Bromirski, P. D., D. R. Cayan, N. Graham, M. Tyree, and R. E. Flick (2012). Coastal Flooding-‐Potential Projections: 2000–2100. California Energy Commission. Publication number: CEC-‐500-‐2012-‐011. 85 Jha, Abhas K., Robin Bloch and Jessica Lamond (2012). Cities and Flooding: A Guide to Integrated Flood Risk Management for the 21st Century and A Summary for Policy Makers, Washington, DC: The World Bank.

CH2M HILL, Inc. (2009). Confronting Climate Change: An Early Analysis of Water and Wastewater Adaptation Costs. A report prepared for the National Association of Clean Water Agencies and the Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies, Washington, DC. 86 Funds granted by the Clean Water Act State Revolving Fund Program. For more information about the grant program and the Hermosa Beach Strand Infiltration Trench see: http://www.epa.gov/region9/water/lid/ and http://hermosabeach.patch.com/groups/politics-‐and-‐elections/p/city-‐installs-‐new-‐filtration-‐system. 87 City of Hermosa Beach, Housing Element (2013), p.68.


88 City of Hermosa Beach, Housing Element (2013), p.68. 89 Water Replenishment District of Southern California (WRD) (2007). Battling seawater intrusion in the Central & West Coast Basins.WRD Technical Bulletin, Vol. 13. Available at: http://www.wrd.org/engineering/seawater-‐intrusion-‐los-‐angeles.php, accessed 1/1/2014. 90 According to Edwards and Evans (2002): “This problem is significant because much of the water used by the nearly 10 million residents of Los Angeles County comes from ground-‐water sources. Although not all coastal aquifers in the region are at risk, the existing resources are vital and must be protected to maintain adequate supplies of potable water.” (See: Edwards, B. D., and K. R. Evans. 2002. Saltwater Intrusion in Los Angeles Area Coastal Aquifers – the Marine Connection. U.S. Geological Survey Fact Sheet 030-‐02. Available at: http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2002/fs030-‐02/. Accessed 6/10/2012. 91 Most of the city’s freshwater supply comes from the San Joaquin River Delta and the snowmelt from the Sierra Nevada (see: http://hermosabeach.patch.com/groups/editors-‐picks/p/study-‐climate-‐change-‐to-‐affect-‐water). Both of these sources of water will become less reliable with other climate change impacts to California (temperature change and changes in precipitation).

For information about source of water to Los Angeles region, see: Water Education Forum. ‘Where does my water come from?’ (webpage). Available at: http://www.water-‐ed.org/watersources/community.asp?rid=9&cid=562.

For information about the projected reduction in snowpack, see: Moser, S., Franco, G. Pittiglio, S. Chou, W. and Cayan, D. (2009). The Future Is Now: An Update on Climate Change Science Impacts and Response Options for California. California Energy Commission, PIER Energy-‐Related Environmental Research Program. CEC-‐500-‐2008-‐071. Available at: http://www.energy.ca.gov/2008publications/CEC-‐500-‐2008-‐077/CEC-‐500-‐2008-‐077.PDF 92 For more information about groundwater intrusion of saltwater, refer to the California State Resources Control Board, available at::http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/gama/docs/coc_salinity.pdf. 93 Based on the “November 2013 Zoning shapefile” map provided by the City of Hermosa Beach, November 2013, to Raimi and Associates for the purposes of work related to the General Plan Update. 94 The estimate cost of replacing property was calculated here based on the sum of building structural values and the building contents values, as estimated by the HAZUS database. See below for methodology used for calculating this from the HAZUS database. 95 FEMA (2014). HAZUS Database and Software. Downloaded data on 1/2/2014 by Juliano Calil; processing and analysis by J. Ekstrom for Hermosa Beach Census Block Groups. Available at: http://www.fema.gov/hazus

The HAZUS database and software was developed by FEMA to estimate potential losses from hazards. “Hazus is a nationally applicable standardized methodology that contains models for estimating potential losses from earthquakes, floods, and hurricanes. Hazus uses Geographic Information Systems (GIS) technology to estimate physical, economic, and social impacts of disasters” (http://www.fema.gov/hazus).

The map in Figure 21 were constructed using the sum of building structural values and the building contents values, as estimated by the HAZUS database. Building Structural Exposure Values were extracted from HAZUS out-‐of-‐the-‐box data, which are stored in the table ‘hzExposureOccupT’ from the geodatabase ‘bndrygbs.mdb’.

Metadata: “This data set provides the building valuation for each HAZUS specific occupancy classifications developed from the 2000 U.S. Census and Dun& Bradstreet. All data was developed at the census block level (for the United States in the fifty states, the District of Columbia, and the territories), and then aggregated at census tract level. ABSG developed this data set from the 2000 version of TIGER/Line files and first quarter of 2002 data from D&B. This dataset was developed by applying RS Means replacement values for typical building floor areas and construction for each specific occupancy.”


Building Contents Exposure Values were extracted from HAZUS out-‐of-‐the-‐box data, which are stored in the table ‘hzExposureContentOccupT” from the geodatabase ‘bndrygbs.mdb’.

Metadata: “This data set provides the content valuation for each HAZUS specific occupancy classifications. All data was developed at the census block level (for the United States in the fifty states, the District of Columbia, and the territories), and then aggregated at census tract level. ABSG developed this data set from the 2000 version of TIGER/Line files and first quarter of 2002 data from D&B. The dataset was generated through the application of proportions of contents to building value over the total building value for each specific occupancy.” 96 Pacific Institute (2009). GIS data downloads from: http://www.pacinst.org/reports/sea_level_rise/data/, downloaded October 2013.

97 City of Hermosa Beach, Hazard Mitigation Plan (2005), Table 4-‐3, p.125. 98 Photo in public domain. Source: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Hermosa_Beach.jpg. 99 Map from the L.A. County DRAFT General Plan (accessed 2012). Available at: http://planning.lacounty.gov/assets/upl/project/gp_2035_2012-‐FIG_9-‐7_la_co_disaster_routes.pdf 100 Herberger, M. Cooley, H., Herrera, P., Gleick, P. and E. Moore (2009). The Impacts of Sea-‐Level Rise on the California Coast. A Report Prepared for the California Climate Change Center. CEC-‐500-‐2009-‐024-‐F. Available at: http://dev.cakex.org/sites/default/files/CA%20Sea%20Level%20Rise%20Report.pdf 101 Wood, N., Ratliff, J., and Peters, J. (2013). Community exposure to tsunami hazards in California: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2012–5222, 49 p. (Available at http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2012/5222/.) 102 The flood modeling was conducted by the Pacific Institute with funding from the California Energy Commission, as part of the California’s Second Climate Change Assessment (2009). See: http://www.climatechange.ca.gov/. 103 Caldwell, M.C., Griggs, G. Ewing, L. Moser, S. C. et al. (2012). Coastal Areas and Resources, in: Assessment of Climate Change in the Southwest United States: a Technical Report Prepared for the U.S. National Climate Assessment. A report by the Southwest Climate Alliance [G. Garfin, A. Jardine, R. Merideth, M. Black, and J. Overpeck (eds.)], pp.168-‐196. Tucson, AZ: Southwest Climate Alliance. 104 FEMA (2014). HAZUS Database and Software. Downloaded data on 1/2/2014 by Juliano Calil; processed by J. Ekstrom for Hermosa Beach Census Block Groups. Available at: http://www.fema.gov/hazus. 105California Coastal Commission (2013).California Coastal Commission Draft Sea-‐Level Rise Policy Guidance. Public Review Draft of October 14, 2013. San Francisco, CA; Coastal Commission. Available at: http://www.coastal.ca.gov/climate/slr/guidance/CCC_Draft_SLR_Guidance_PR_10142013.pdf, pp.5, 23. 106 City of Hermosa Beach (1981, as amended). Local Coastal Plan (including related Appendices). Available at: http://www.hermosabch.org/index.aspx?page=501. 107 City of Hermosa Beach (1981, as amended). Local Coastal Plan, Appendix G, p. G-‐10. Available at: http://www.hermosabch.org/index.aspx?page=501. 108 California Coastal Commission (2013). Local Coastal Program (LCP) Update Guide, Part I: Updating LCP Land Use Plan (LUP) Policies. Available at: http://www.coastal.ca.gov/climate/SLRguidance.html. 109 See the description of the California Coastal Trail, Section 12 at: http://www.californiacoastaltrail.info/hikers/hikers_main.php?DisplayAction=DisplaySection&CountyId=18&SectionId=61. 110 Section 30107.5 of the California Coastal Act defines environmentally sensitive area as follows:

"Environmentally sensitive area" means any area in which plant or animal life or their habitats are either rare or especially valuable because of their special nature or role in an ecosystem and which could be easily disturbed or degraded by human activities and developments.


111 City of Hermosa Beach (1981, as amended). Local Coastal Plan, Appendix G, p. G-‐11. Available at: http://www.hermosabch.org/index.aspx?page=501. 112 Heberger, Matthew, Heather Cooley, Pablo Herrera, Peter H. Gleick, and Eli Moore (2009). The Impacts of Sea-‐Level Rise on the California Coast. California Energy Commission’s Public Interest Energy Research (PIER) Program Research Report, CEC-‐500-‐2009-‐024-‐F. http://dev.cakex.org/sites/default/files/CA%20Sea%20Level%20Rise%20Report.pdf 113 Wood, N., Ratliff, J., and Peters, J. (2013). Community exposure to tsunami hazards in California: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2012–5222, 49 p. (Available at http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2012/5222/.) 114 This statement is based entirely on a general scientific understanding of the physical dynamics of progressive shoreline retreat of soft substrate coasts in the face of a rising sea. A technical engineering study would be required to assess how fast the shoreline in front of Hermosa Beach could retreat from its current position under different sea-‐level rise scenarios without further sediment additions. Such an analysis was beyond the scope of this assessment. 115 California Coastal Commission (2013), Local Coastal Program (LCP) Update Guide, Part I: Updating LCP Land Use Plan (LUP) Policies. Section 9, p.1. Available at: http://www.coastal.ca.gov/climate/SLRguidance.html. 116 This does not consider the short-‐term changes due to tidal, seasonal and interannual variability which raise and lower the sea level more rapidly but only temporarily. 117 Bierbaum, R., J. B. Smith, A. Lee, M. Blair, L. Carter, F. S. C. III, P. Fleming, S. Ruffo, M. Stults, S. McNeeley, E. Wasley & L. Verduzco (2012). A comprehensive review of climate adaptation in the United States: More than before, but less than needed. Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Change, 18, 361-‐406.

Moser, S. C. & A. Abeles (2012). Public Engagement and Communication on Adaptation: A Brief Analysis of Adaptation Plans. White Paper prepared for ecoAmerica, 38 pp. Santa Cruz, CA: Susanne Moser Research & Consulting. 118 California Coastal Commission (2013), Local Coastal Program (LCP) Update Guide, Part I: Updating LCP Land Use Plan (LUP) Policies. Section 6, pp. 3-‐4. Available at: http://www.coastal.ca.gov/climate/SLRguidance.html. 119 California Coastal Commission (2013), Local Coastal Program (LCP) Update Guide, Part I: Updating LCP Land Use Plan (LUP) Policies. Section 7, p. 1. Available at: http://www.coastal.ca.gov/climate/SLRguidance.html. 120 California Coastal Commission (2013), Local Coastal Program (LCP) Update Guide, Part I: Updating LCP Land Use Plan (LUP) Policies. Section 8, p. 1. Available at: http://www.coastal.ca.gov/climate/SLRguidance.html. 121 California Coastal Commission (2013), Local Coastal Program (LCP) Update Guide, Part I: Updating LCP Land Use Plan (LUP) Policies. Section 9, p.1. Available at: http://www.coastal.ca.gov/climate/SLRguidance.html. 122 California Coastal Commission (2013), Local Coastal Program (LCP) Update Guide, Part I: Updating LCP Land Use Plan (LUP) Policies. Section 9, p.1. Available at: http://www.coastal.ca.gov/climate/SLRguidance.html. 123 California Coastal Commission (2013), Local Coastal Program (LCP) Update Guide, Part I: Updating LCP Land Use Plan (LUP) Policies. Section 9, pp.1-‐2. Available at: http://www.coastal.ca.gov/climate/SLRguidance.html. 124 Governor's Office of Emergency Services (CalOES, 2013). 2013 State of California Multi-‐Hazard Mitigation Plan. Mather, CA. Available at: http://hazardmitigation.calema.ca.gov/plan/state_multi-‐hazard_mitigation_plan_shmp. 125 For further information, see: http://www.laregionalcollaborative.com/. 126 Finzi Hart, J., Grifman, P. Moser, S., Abeles, A., Myers, M., Schlosser, S. and Ekstrom, J. (2012). Rising to the Challenge: Results of the 2011 Coastal California Adaptation Needs Assessment. USCSG-‐TR-‐01-‐2012. Available at: http://www.usc.edu/org/seagrant/research/climateadaptsurvey/SurveyReport_FINAL_OnlinePDF.pdf 127 Most of the publications (and other related ones) listed here are available at www.susannemoser.com:


Moser, Susanne C. (2014). Communicating climate change adaptation: The art and science of public engagement when climate change comes home. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews–Climate Change,

Moser, S. C. (2013). Navigating the political and emotional terrain of adaptation: Community engagement when climate change comes home. In Successful Adaptation to Climate Change: linking Science and Policy in a Rapidly Changing World, eds. S. C. Moser & M. T. Boykoff, 289-‐305. London: Routledge.

Moser, S. C. (2012). Climate Change in Paradise: Engaging the Community in Successfully Preparing for Monterey’s Future. Highlights from Focus Groups Held in April and June 2012. Monterey, CA: Stanford, Center for Ocean Solutions.

Moser, S. C. & L. Dilling. (2011). Communicating Climate Change: Closing the Science-‐Action Gap. In Oxford Handbook of Climate Change and Society, eds. R. Norgaard, D. Schlosberg & J. Dryzek. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Wolf, J. & S. C. Moser (2011) Individual understandings, perceptions, and engagement with climate change: insights from in-‐depth studies across the world. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 2, 547-‐569.

Moser, S. C. & L. Dilling. (2007). Creating a Climate for Change: Communicating Climate Change and Facilitating Social Change. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Moser, S. C. & L. Dilling (2004) Making climate hot: Communicating the urgency and challenge of global climate change. Environment, 46, 32-‐46. 128 See the experience with just such an engagement process described in: Moser, S. C. & J. A. Ekstrom (2011). Taking ownership of climate change: Participatory adaptation planning in two local case studies from California. Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, 1, 63-‐74. 129 HermosaBeachPatch (2010). City Installs New Filtration System. Available at: http://hermosabeach.patch.com/groups/politics-‐and-‐elections/p/city-‐installs-‐new-‐filtration-‐system, accessed 12/27/13. 130 See Climate Ready Scope of Work to evaluate long-‐term feasibility of such systems in consideration of increased sea level elevation. 131 Liverman, Diana and Susanne C. Moser (Convening Lead Authors) et al. (2012). Climate choices for the Southwest, in: Assessment of Climate Change in the Southwest United States: a Technical Report Prepared for the U.S. National Climate Assessment. A report by the Southwest Climate Alliance [Gregg Garfin, Angela Jardine, Robert Merideth, Mary Black, and Jonathan Overpeck (eds.)], pp.405-‐435. Tucson, AZ: Southwest Climate Alliance. 132 Southern California Council of Governments (SCAG) (2013). South Bay Cities Plug-‐In Electric Vehicle Deployment Plan. Available at: http://innovation.luskin.ucla.edu/sites/default/files/South%20Bay%20Plan.pdf 133 Governor's Office of Emergency Services (CalOES, 2013). 2013 State of California Multi-‐Hazard Mitigation Plan. Mather, CA. Available at: http://hazardmitigation.calema.ca.gov/plan/state_multi-‐hazard_mitigation_plan_shmp. 134 Implementing California Flood Legislation into Local Land Use Planning: A Handbook for Local Communities Available at: www.water.ca.gov/LocalFloodRiskPlanning/ 135 Governor's Office of Emergency Services (CalOES, 2013). 2013 State of California Multi-‐Hazard Mitigation Plan. Mather, CA. Available at: http://hazardmitigation.calema.ca.gov/plan/state_multi-‐hazard_mitigation_plan_shmp.

The Multi-‐Hazard Mitigation Plan also offers a long list of adaptation planning resources for use by local communities. This list can be found on pp. 102-‐105 of the plan. 136 Open-‐market flood insurance is almost impossible to obtain and is far more expensive than policies from the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) even though that program is currently in the process of being reformed to better reflect the growing flood expenditures incurred across the nation.


137 Governor's Office of Emergency Services (CalOES, 2013). 2013 State of California Multi-‐Hazard Mitigation Plan. Mather, CA, SECTION 5.3 -‐ pp. 220-‐222. Available at: http://hazardmitigation.calema.ca.gov/plan/state_multi-‐hazard_mitigation_plan_shmp.

Appendix B1:

Natural Resources

Hermosa BeachCNDDB Results 02/26/14

1‐MileOccurrence Count Scientific Name Common Name Federal Listing State Listing Rare Plant Rank

1 Aphanisma blitoides aphanisma None None 1B.21 Atriplex pacifica south coast saltscale None None 1B.21 Atriplex parishii Parish's brittlescale None None 1B.11 Brennania belkini Belkin's dune tabanid fly None None1 Cicindela senilis frosti senile tiger beetle None None1 Dithyrea maritima beach spectaclepod None Threatened 1B.1

2Glaucopsyche lygdamus palosverdesensis Palos Verdes blue butterfly Endangered None

1 Navarretia prostrata prostrate vernal pool navarretia None None 1B.1

1 Perognathus longimembris pacificus Pacific pocket mouse Endangered None1 Phacelia stellaris Brand's star phacelia None None 1B.11 Phrynosoma blainvillii coast horned lizard None None

1Rhaphiomidas terminatus terminatus El Segundo flower‐loving fly None None


1 Agelaius tricolor tricolored blackbird None None3 Aphanisma blitoides aphanisma None None 1B.21 Astragalus tener var. titi coastal dunes milk‐vetch Endangered Endangered 1B.11 Atriplex pacifica south coast saltscale None None 1B.21 Atriplex parishii Parish's brittlescale None None 1B.13 Brennania belkini Belkin's dune tabanid fly None None1 Carolella busckana Busck's gallmoth None None

2 Centromadia parryi ssp. australis southern tarplant None None 1B.1


1Chaenactis glabriuscula var. orcuttiana Orcutt's pincushion None None 1B.1

1 Charadrius alexandrinus nivosus western snowy plover Threatened None3 Cicindela hirticollis gravida sandy beach tiger beetle None None1 Cicindela senilis frosti senile tiger beetle None None1 Coelus globosus globose dune beetle None None3 Danaus plexippus monarch butterfly None None2 Dithyrea maritima beach spectaclepod None Threatened 1B.11 Eucosma hennei Henne's eucosman moth None None1 Eumops perotis californicus western mastiff bat None None4 Euphilotes battoides allyni El Segundo blue butterfly Endangered None


1 Lasthenia glabrata ssp. coulteri Coulter's goldfields None None 1B.1

1 Laterallus jamaicensis coturniculus California black rail None Threatened


1 Onychobaris langei Lange's El Segundo Dune weevil None None1 Orcuttia californica California Orcutt grass Endangered Endangered 1B.1

2 Perognathus longimembris pacificus Pacific pocket mouse Endangered None2 Phacelia stellaris Brand's star phacelia None None 1B.11 Phrynosoma blainvillii coast horned lizard None None1 Polioptila californica californica coastal California gnatcatcher Threatened None


1 Southern Coastal Bluff Scrub Southern Coastal Bluff Scrub None None1 Southern Dune Scrub Southern Dune Scrub None None


1 Trigonoscuta dorothea dorothea Dorothy's El Segundo Dune weevil None None


2 Agelaius tricolor tricolored blackbird None None1 Anniella pulchra pulchra silvery legless lizard None None1 Antrozous pallidus pallid bat None None7 Aphanisma blitoides aphanisma None None 1B.21 Arenaria paludicola marsh sandwort Endangered Endangered 1B.11 Astragalus brauntonii Braunton's milk‐vetch Endangered None 1B.1

1Astragalus pycnostachyus var. lanosissimus Ventura Marsh milk‐vetch Endangered Endangered 1B.1

2 Astragalus tener var. titi coastal dunes milk‐vetch Endangered Endangered 1B.12 Athene cunicularia burrowing owl None None2 Atriplex pacifica south coast saltscale None None 1B.22 Atriplex parishii Parish's brittlescale None None 1B.1

2 Atriplex serenana var. davidsonii Davidson's saltscale None None 1B.24 Brennania belkini Belkin's dune tabanid fly None None1 Buteo swainsoni Swainson's hawk None Threatened

1 Calystegia sepium ssp. binghamiae Santa Barbara morning‐glory None None 1B.11 Carolella busckana Busck's gallmoth None None

10 Centromadia parryi ssp. australis southern tarplant None None 1B.1

2Chaenactis glabriuscula var. orcuttiana Orcutt's pincushion None None 1B.1

2 Charadrius alexandrinus nivosus western snowy plover Threatened None1 Chenopodium littoreum coastal goosefoot None None 1B.2


2Chloropyron maritimum ssp. maritimum salt marsh bird's‐beak Endangered Endangered 1B.2

1 Chorizanthe parryi var. fernandina San Fernando Valley spineflower Candidate Endangered 1B.11 Cicindela gabbii western tidal‐flat tiger beetle None None5 Cicindela hirticollis gravida sandy beach tiger beetle None None

1 Cicindela latesignata latesignata western beach tiger beetle None None1 Cicindela senilis frosti senile tiger beetle None None3 Coelus globosus globose dune beetle None None2 Crossosoma californicum Catalina crossosoma None None 1B.27 Danaus plexippus monarch butterfly None None4 Dithyrea maritima beach spectaclepod None Threatened 1B.12 Dudleya virens ssp. insularis island green dudleya None None 1B.2

2 Empidonax traillii extimus southwestern willow flycatcher Endangered Endangered1 Emys marmorata western pond turtle None None1 Eucosma hennei Henne's eucosman moth None None4 Eumops perotis californicus western mastiff bat None None4 Euphilotes battoides allyni El Segundo blue butterfly Endangered None


1 Helianthus nuttallii ssp. parishii Los Angeles sunflower None None 1A1 Lasiurus cinereus hoary bat None None8 Lasthenia glabrata ssp. coulteri Coulter's goldfields None None 1B.1

1 Laterallus jamaicensis coturniculus California black rail None Threatened

1 Lycium brevipes var. hassei Santa Catalina Island desert‐thorn None None 1B.13 Microtus californicus stephensi south coast marsh vole None None1 Nama stenocarpum mud nama None None 2B.21 Nasturtium gambelii Gambel's water cress Endangered Threatened 1B.1


1 Navarretia fossalis spreading navarretia Threatened None 1B.1


1 Nemacaulis denudata var. denudata coast woolly‐heads None None 1B.21 Neotoma lepida intermedia San Diego desert woodrat None None2 Nyctinomops femorosaccus pocketed free‐tailed bat None None

1 Onychobaris langei Lange's El Segundo Dune weevil None None1 Orcuttia californica California Orcutt grass Endangered Endangered 1B.1

1 Panoquina errans wandering (=saltmarsh) skipper None None

2 Passerculus sandwichensis beldingi Belding's savannah sparrow None Endangered

1 Pelecanus occidentalis californicus California brown pelican Delisted Delisted2 Pentachaeta lyonii Lyon's pentachaeta Endangered Endangered 1B.1

3 Perognathus longimembris pacificus Pacific pocket mouse Endangered None3 Phacelia stellaris Brand's star phacelia None None 1B.13 Phrynosoma blainvillii coast horned lizard None None9 Polioptila californica californica coastal California gnatcatcher Threatened None1 Potentilla multijuga Ballona cinquefoil None None 1A


1 Riparia riparia bank swallow None Threatened1 Sidalcea neomexicana Salt Spring checkerbloom None None 2B.21 Siphateles bicolor mohavensis Mohave tui chub Endangered Endangered

1 Sorex ornatus salicornicussouthern California saltmarsh shrew None None

1 Southern Coastal Bluff Scrub Southern Coastal Bluff Scrub None None1 Southern Coastal Salt Marsh Southern Coastal Salt Marsh None None


1 Southern Dune Scrub Southern Dune Scrub None None4 Sternula antillarum browni California least tern Endangered Endangered1 Suaeda esteroa estuary seablite None None 1B.22 Symphyotrichum defoliatum San Bernardino aster None None 1B.21 Taxidea taxus American badger None None1 Thamnophis hammondii two‐striped garter snake None None

2 Trigonoscuta dorothea dorothea Dorothy's El Segundo Dune weevil None None

3 Tryonia imitatormimic tryonia (=California brackishwater snail) None None

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Natural Resources of Concern

02/26/2014 Information, Planning, and Conservation System (IPAC) Page 1 of 6

Version 1.4

This resource list is to be used for planning purposes only — it is not an official species list.

Endangered Species Act species list information for your project is available online and listed below for the following FWS Field Offices:

Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office2177 SALK AVENUE - SUITE 250CARLSBAD, CA 92008(760) 431-9440http://www.fws.gov/carlsbad/

Ventura Fish and Wildlife Office2493 PORTOLA ROAD, SUITE BVENTURA, CA 93003(805) 644-1766

Project Name:Hermosa Beach

http://www.fws.gov/carlsbad/




Version 1.4

Project Location Map:

Project Counties:Los Angeles, CA

Geographic coordinates (Open Geospatial Consortium Well-Known Text, NAD83):MULTIPOLYGON (((-118.3996841 33.85175, -118.403628 33.8601678, -118.4095503 33.8764167, -118.4048297 33.8774856, -118.404319 33.8771293, -118.4029457 33.8776958, -118.4029457 33.8772718, -118.4018299 33.877197, -118.3960835 33.8770545, -118.3959977 33.8742718, -118.3954827 33.8728465, -118.391277 33.8728465, -118.3855263 33.8636566, -118.3845822 33.8561016, -118.3904187 33.8541735, -118.3996841 33.85175)))

Project Type:Guidance




Version 1.4

Endangered Species Act Species List (USFWS Endangered Species Program).There are a total of 14 threatened, endangered, or candidate species on your species list. Species on this list should be considered in an effects analysis for your project and could include species that exist in another geographic area. For example, certain fishes may appear on the species list because a project could cause downstream effects on the species. Critical habitats listed under the Has Critical Habitat column may or may not lie within your project area. See the Critical habitats within your project area section below for critical habitat that lies within your project area. Please contact the designated FWS office if you have questions.

Species that should be considered in an effects analysis for your project:

Amphibians Status Has Critical Habitat Contact

California red-legged frog (Rana draytonii)

Population: Entire

Threatened species info Final designated critical habitat Ventura Fish And Wildlife Office

Birds

California Least tern (Sterna antillarum browni)

Endangered species info Carlsbad Fish And Wildlife Office

Coastal California gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica)

Population: Entire

Threatened species info Proposed critical habitat (map unavailable)Final designated critical habitat

Carlsbad Fish And Wildlife Office

Least Bell's vireo (Vireo bellii pusillus) Population: Entire

Endangered species info Final designated critical habitat Ventura Fish And Wildlife Office

Light-Footed Clapper rail (Rallus longirostris levipes)

Population: U.S.A. only


http://www.fws.gov/endangered/

http://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=D02D

http://criticalHabitat.fws.gov/crithab/flex/crithabMapper.jsp?entityId=205&polySourceId=1062&minX=-123.72091058&minY=34.168495380000024&maxX=-118.48320269999999&maxY=39.75028746000001

http://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=B03X

http://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=B08X


http://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=B067


http://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=B04B




Version 1.4

Southwestern Willow flycatcher (Empidonax traillii extimus)

Population: Entire

Endangered species info Final designated critical habitat Ventura Fish And Wildlife Office

western snowy plover (Charadrius nivosus ssp. nivosus)

Population: Pacific coastal pop.

Threatened species info Final designated critical habitat Carlsbad Fish And Wildlife Office

Crustaceans

Riverside fairy shrimp (Streptocephalus woottoni)

Population: Entire

Endangered species info Final designated critical habitat Ventura Fish And Wildlife Office,Carlsbad Fish And Wildlife Office

Vernal Pool fairy shrimp (Branchinecta lynchi)

Population: Entire

Threatened species info Final designated critical habitat Ventura Fish And Wildlife Office

Flowering Plants

California Orcutt grass (Orcuttia californica)

Endangered species info Ventura Fish And Wildlife Office

Spreading navarretia (Navarretia fossalis) Threatened species info Final designated critical habitatProposed critical habitat (map unavailable)

Ventura Fish And Wildlife Office

Insects

http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/wizard/speciesInformation!showSpeciesInformation.action?spcode=B094


http://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=B07C


http://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=K03F


http://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=K03G


http://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=Q1ZO

http://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=Q2E7





Version 1.4

El Segundo Blue butterfly (Euphilotes battoides allyni)

Population: Entire


Palos Verdes Blue butterfly (Glaucopsyche lygdamus palosverdesensis)

Population: Entire

Endangered species info Final designated critical habitat Carlsbad Fish And Wildlife Office

Mammals

Pacific Pocket mouse (Perognathus longimembris pacificus)

Population: Entire


Critical habitats within your project area: (View all critical habitats within your project area on one map)

The following critical habitats lie fully or partially within your project area.

Birds Critical Habitat Type

western snowy plover (Charadrius nivosus ssp. nivosus) Population: Pacific coastal pop.

Final designated critical habitat

FWS National Wildlife Refuges (USFWS National Wildlife Refuges Program).

There are no refuges found within the vicinity of your project.

FWS Migratory Birds (USFWS Migratory Bird Program).

Most species of birds, including eagles and other raptors, are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 U.S.C. 703). Bald eagles and golden eagles receive additional protection under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 668). The Service's Birds of Conservation Concern (2008) report identifies species, subspecies, and populations of all migratory nongame birds that, without additional conservation actions, are likely to become listed under the Endangered Species Act as amended (16 U.S.C 1531 et seq.).

http://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=I00C

http://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=I01B


http://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=A0BY

http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/wizard/pdf/trustResourceListAsPdf!prepareAsPdf.action


http://refuges.fws.gov

http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/

http://www.fws.gov/midwest/eagle/protect/laws.html

http://library.fws.gov/Bird_Publications/BCC2008.pdf




Version 1.4

Migratory bird information is not available for your project location.

NWI Wetlands (USFWS National Wetlands Inventory).

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is the principal Federal agency that provides information on the extent and status of wetlands in the U.S., via the National Wetlands Inventory Program (NWI). In addition to impacts to wetlands within your immediate project area, wetlands outside of your project area may need to be considered in any evaluation of project impacts, due to the hydrologic nature of wetlands (for example, project activities may affect local hydrology within, and outside of, your immediate project area). It may be helpful to refer to the USFWS National Wetland Inventory website. The designated FWS office can also assist you. Impacts to wetlands and other aquatic habitats from your project may be subject to regulation under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, or other State/Federal Statutes. Project Proponents should discuss the relationship of these requirements to their project with the Regulatory Program of the appropriate U.S. Army Corps of Engineers District.

The following wetlands intersect your project area:

Wetland Types NWI Classification Code Approximate Acres

Estuarine and Marine Wetland M2USN 63.181752

Freshwater Pond PUBKr 0.142902

Freshwater Pond PUBKr 0.462184

Estuarine and Marine Deepwater M1UBL 2220425.184731

Estuarine and Marine Wetland M2USP 268.395299

http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/

http://www.usace.army.mil/Missions/CivilWorks/RegulatoryProgramandPermits.aspx

http://137.227.242.85/Data/interpreters/wetlands.aspx?CodeURL=M2USN

http://137.227.242.85/Data/interpreters/wetlands.aspx?CodeURL=PUBKr

http://137.227.242.85/Data/interpreters/wetlands.aspx?CodeURL=PUBKr

http://137.227.242.85/Data/interpreters/wetlands.aspx?CodeURL=M1UBL

http://137.227.242.85/Data/interpreters/wetlands.aspx?CodeURL=M2USP

Venice and Redondo Beach QuadsCNPS Results 02/26/2014

Scientific Name Common Name CESA FESAElevation High (meters)

Elevation Low (meters)

Abronia maritima red sand‐verbena None None 100 0Aphanisma blitoides aphanisma None None 305 1Astragalus pycnostachyus var. lanosissimus Ventura marsh milk‐vetch CE FE 35 1Atriplex pacifica South Coast saltscale None None 140 0Atriplex parishii Parish's brittlescale None None 1900 25Calochortus catalinae Catalina mariposa lily None None 700 15Camissoniopsis lewisii Lewis' evening‐primrose None None 300 0Centromadia parryi ssp. australis southern tarplant None None 480 0Chaenactis glabriuscula var. orcuttiana Orcutt's pincushion None None 100 0Chenopodium littoreum coastal goosefoot None None 30 10Chorizanthe parryi var. fernandina San Fernando Valley spineflower CE FC 1220 150Cistanthe maritima seaside cistanthe None None 300 5Convolvulus simulans small‐flowered morning‐glory None None 700 30Deinandra paniculata paniculate tarplant None None 940 25Dichondra occidentalis western dichondra None None 500 50Dithyrea maritima beach spectaclepod CT None 50 3Dudleya multicaulis many‐stemmed dudleya None None 790 15Dudleya virens ssp. insularis island green dudleya None None 300 5Erysimum insulare island wallflower None None 300 0Erysimum suffrutescens suffrutescent wallflower None None 150 0Juncus acutus ssp. leopoldii southwestern spiny rush None None 900 3Lasthenia glabrata ssp. coulteri Coulter's goldfields None None 1220 1Leptosyne maritima sea dahlia None None 150 5Navarretia prostrata prostrate vernal pool navarretia None None 1210 15Phacelia hubbyi Hubby's phacelia None None 1000 0Phacelia ramosissima var. austrolitoralis south coast branching phacelia None None 300 5Phacelia stellaris Brand's star phacelia None FC 400 1Potentilla multijuga Ballona cinquefoil None None 2 0Suaeda esteroa estuary seablite None None 5 0Suaeda taxifolia woolly seablite None None 50 0

Appendix B2:

Biological Resources

TABLE1.RESULTSOFDATABASESEARCHESFORSPECIAL‐STATUSPLANTSPECIESWITHINTHEVICINITYOFTHEPLANNINGAREA

Species Status

USFWS/CDFW/CNPS

HabitatandBloomingTime PotentialforOccurrence

aphanisma

Aphanismablitoides

‐/‐/1B.2 Sandysoilsincoastalbluffscrub,coastaldunes,andcoastalscrub.Elev:3‐1,000ft.(1‐

305m.)Blooms:March‐June

Notexpectedtooccur:Nosuitablehabitatispresentwithintheplanningarea.Sandycoastlineis

unvegetatedandroutinelydisturbed.

VenturaMarshmilk‐vetch

Astragaluspycnostachyusvar.

lanosissimus

FE/SE/1B.1 Coastaldunes,coastalscrub,andtheedgesofcoastsaltorbrackishmarshesandswamps.Elev:3‐115ft.(1‐35m.)Blooms:June‐Oct.



alkalimilk‐vetch

Astragalustenervar.tener

‐/‐/1B.2 Alkalinesoils.Playas,valleyand foothillgrassland(adobeclay),andvernalpools.

Elev:3‐197ft.(1‐60m.)Blooms:March‐June

Notexpectedtooccur:Nosuitablehabitatispresentwithintheplanningarea.

SouthCoastsaltscale

Atriplexpacifica

‐/‐/1B.2 Playas,coastalbluffscrub,coastaldunes,andcoastalscrub.Elev:0‐459ft.(0‐140m.)

Blooms:March‐Oct.



Parish’sbrittlescale

Atriplexparishii

‐/‐/1B.1 Alkalinesoilsinplayas,vernalpoolsandchenopodscrub.Elev:82‐6,233ft.(25‐1900

m.)Blooms:June‐Oct.


southerntarplant

Centromadiaparryissp.australis

‐/‐/1B.1 Vernallymesicvalleyandfoothillgrassland,vernalpools,andthemarginsofmarshesandswamps.Elev:0‐1,575ft.(0‐480m.)Blooms:

May‐Nov.


Orcutt’spincushion ‐/‐/1B.1 Sandycoastalbluffscrubandcoastaldunes. Notexpectedtooccur:Nosuitablehabitatispresent

Species Status

USFWS/CDFW/CNPS


Chaenactisglabriusculavar.

orcuttiana

Elev:0‐328ft.(0‐100m.)Blooms:Jan.‐Aug. withintheplanningarea.Sandycoastlineisunvegetatedandroutinelydisturbed.

coastalgoosefoot

Chenopodiumlittoreum

‐/‐/1B.2 Coastaldunes.Elev:33‐98ft.(10‐30m.)Blooms:April‐Aug.



SanFernandoValleyspineflower

Chorizantheparryivar.fernandina

FC/SE/1B.1 Sandycoastalscrub,andvalleyandfoothillgrassland.Elev:492‐4,003ft.(150‐1,220m.)

Blooms:April‐July



beachspectaclepod

Dithyreamaritima

‐/ST/1B.1 Coastaldunesandsandycoastalscrub.Elev:10‐164ft.(3‐50m.)Blooms:March‐May



many‐stemmeddudleya

Dudleyamulticaulis

‐/‐/1B.2 Oftenonclaysoilinchaparral,coastalscrub,andvalleyandfoothillgrassland.Elev:49‐2,592ft.(15‐790m.)Blooms:April‐July


islandgreendudleya

Dudleyavirensssp.insularis

‐/‐/1B.2 Rockysubstratesincoastalbluffscrubandcoastalscrub.Elev:16‐984ft.(5‐300m.)

Blooms:April‐June


islandwallflower

Erysimuminsulare

‐/‐/1B.3 Coastalbluffscrubandcoastaldunes.Elev:0‐984ft.(0‐300m.)Blooms:March‐July



Coulter’syellow ‐/‐/1B.1 Coastalsaltmarshesandswamps,playasandvernalpools.Elev:3‐4,003ft.(1‐1,220m.)

Notexpectedtooccur:Nosuitablehabitatispresent

Species Status

USFWS/CDFW/CNPS


goldfields

Lastheniaglabratassp.coulteri

Blooms:Feb.‐June withintheplanningarea.

seadahlia

Leptosynemaritima

‐/‐/2B.2 Coastalbluffscrubandcoastaldunes.Elev:16‐492ft.(5‐150m.)Blooms:March‐May



spreadingnavarettia

Navarretiafossalis

FT/‐/1B.1 Assortedshallowfreshwatermarshesandswamps,andchenopodscrub,playasand

vernalpools.Elev:98‐2,149ft.(30‐655m.)Blooms:April‐June


prostratevernalpoolnavarettia

Navarretiaprostrata

‐/‐/1B.1 Mesicareasincoastalscrub,meadowsandseeps,vernalpools,andalkalinevalleyandfoothillgrasslands.Elev:49‐3,970ft.(15‐

1,210m.)Blooms:April‐July


CaliforniaOrcuttgrass

Orcuttiacalifornica

FE/SE/1B.1 Vernalpools.Elev:49‐2,165ft.(15‐660m.)Blooms:April‐Aug.


Brand’sstarphacelia

Phaceliastellaris

FC/‐/1B.1 Coastaldunesandcoastalscrub.Elev:3‐1,312ft.(1‐400m.)Blooms:March‐June



Ballonacinquefoil

Potentillamultijuga

‐/‐/1A Brackishmeadowsandseeps.Elev:0‐6ft.(0‐2m.)Blooms:June‐Aug.


estuaryseablight

Suaedaesteroa

‐/‐/1B.2 Coastalsaltmarshesandswamps.Elev:0‐16ft.(0‐5m.)Blooms:May‐Jan.


Species Status

USFWS/CDFW/CNPS


KEY

Federal&StateStatus CNPSRarePlantRank

(FE)FederalEndangered RarenessRanks

(FT)FederalThreatened (1A)PresumedExtinctinCalifornia

(FC)FederalCandidate (1B)Rare,Threatened,orEndangeredinCaliforniaorelsewhere

(SE)StateEndangered (2)Rare,Threatened,orEndangered,butmorecommonelsewhere

(ST)StateThreatened ThreatRanks

(SSC)StateSpeciesofSpecialConcern (0.1) SeriouslythreatenedinCalifornia

(0.2) FairlythreatenedinCalifornia

(0.3) NotverythreatenedinCalifornia

Sources: CDFW 2014, CNPS 2014, USFWS 2014

REFERENCES

CDFW (California Department of Fish and Wildlife). 2014. California Natural Diversity Database – February 4, 2014 update. CDFW Biogeographic Data Branch; Sacramento, CA.

CNPS (California Native Plant Society). 2014. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants (online edition, v8-01a). California Native Plant Society. Sacramento, CA.

USFWS (US Fish and Wildlife Service). 2014.. Information, Planning, and Conservation System (IPaC). USFWS. February 2014.

TABLE2.RESULTSOFDATABASESEARCHESFORSPECIAL‐STATUSWILDLIFESPECIESWITHINTHEVICINITYOFTHEPLANNINGAREA

Species Status

USFWS/CDFW

Habitat PotentialforOccurrence

Invertebrates

vernalpoolfairyshrimp

Branchinectalynchi

FT/‐ Foundonlyinvernalpoolsandvernalpool‐likehabitats(USFWS2005).

Notexpectedtooccur:Novernalpool habitatispresentwithintheplanningarea.

SanDiegofairyshrimp

Branchinectasandiegonensis

FE/‐ Small,shallowvernalpools.Occasionallyoccurinditchesandroadrutswithsuitableconditions.Haveneverbeenfoundin

permanentwaterbodies(USFWS1998a).

Notexpectedtooccur:Novernalpool habitatispresentwithintheplanningarea.

ElSegundobluebutterfly

Euphilotesbattoideaallyni

FE/‐ KnownonlyfromtheElSegundosanddunes.Dependentonfoodplant,coastbuckwheat(Eriogonumparvifolium)(USFWS1998b).

Notexpectedtooccur:Nosuitablehabitatispresentwithintheplanningarea.Planningareaisoutside

speciesrange.

Palos Verdes blue

butterfly

Glaucopsyche lygdamus

palosverdesensis

FE/‐ Requireoneoftwolarvalhostplants:coastlocoweed(Astragalustrichopoduslonchus)ordeerweed(Acmisponglaber).Foundincoastal

sagescrubhabitat(USFWS2014c).

Notexpectedtooccur:Nosuitablehabitatispresentwithintheplanningarea.Coastalsagescrubhabitathas

beenextirpatedfromtheplanningarea.

Amphibians

Californiared‐leggedfrog

Ranadraytonii

FT/SSC Ponds/streamsinhumidforests,woodlands,grasslands,coastalscrub,andstreamsideswithplantcoverinlowlandsorfoothills.Breeding

habitat=permanentorephemeralwatersources;lakes,ponds,reservoirs,slowstreams,marshes,bogs,andswamps.Ephemeralwetlandhabitatsrequireanimalburrowsorothermoist

Notexpectedtooccur:Nosuitable aquaticbreedinghabitatispresentwithintheplanningarea.

Species Status

USFWS/CDFW


refugesforestivationwhenthewetlandsaredry.Fromsealevelto5,000ft.(1,525m.)(Nafis

2014).

Reptiles

coasthornedlizard

Phrynosomablainvillii

‐/SSC Occurinvalley‐foothillhardwood,coniferandriparianhabitats,aswellasinpine‐cypress,

juniperandannualgrasslandhabitats.Rangeupto4,000ft(1,219m)intheSierraNevadafoothills,andupto6,000ft(1,800minthemountainsofsouthernCalifornia(CDFW

2014b).

Notexpectedtooccur:Nosuitable habitatispresentwithintheplanningarea.

Birds

tricoloredblackbird

Agelaiustricolor

‐/SSC Dominantnestsubstratespeciesincludescattails,bulrushes,Himalayaberry,agriculturalsilage.Densevegetationispreferredbutheavilylodgedcattailsnotburnedinrecentyearsmay

precludesettlement.Needaccesstoopenwater.Stripsofemergentvegetationalongcanalsareavoidedasnestsitesunlesstheyareabout10

ormoremeterswidebutinsomeponds,especiallywhereassociatedwithHimalayan

blackberriesanddeepwater,settlementmaybeinnarrowerfetchesofcattails.Ifsitesarehardforanobservertoreach,thesiteitisrelatively

suitable(Hamilton2004).

Notexpectedtooccur:Nowetland habitatispresentwithintheplanningarea.

westernsnowyplover

Charadriusnivosusssp.nivosus

FT/SSC Barrentosparselyvegetatedsandbeaches,drysaltflatsinlagoons,dredgespoilsdepositedonbeachordunehabitat,leveesandflatsatsalt‐

evaporationponds,riverbars,alongalkalineorsalinelakes,reservoirs,andponds(Cornell

Knowntooccur. OccupieddesignatedcriticalhabitatsubunitonHermosaStateBeach.Beachiswinteringhabitat.Nonestingbirdshavebeenrecordedsince

1949(USFWS2007).

Species Status

USFWS/CDFW


2014).

southwesternwillowflycatcher

Empidonaxtrailliiextimus

FE/SE Denseriparianforestandscrubhabitatsassociatedwithrivers,swamps,wetlands,lakes

andreservoirs(USFWS2002).


Californiablackrail

Laterallusjamaicensiscoturniculus

‐/ST Yearlongresidentofsaline,brackish,andfreshemergentwetlands.Occursmostcommonlyin

tidalemergentwetlandsdominatedbypickleweedorinbrackishmarshessupporting

bulrushes,cattailsandsaltgrass(CDFW2014b).

Notexpectedtooccur:Nowetland habitatispresentwithintheplanningarea.

coastalCaliforniagnatcatcher

Polioptilacalifornicacalifornica

FT/SSC Scrub‐dominatedplantcommunities,stronglyassociatedwithcoastalscrub,sagescrub,and

coastalsucculentscrubcommunities.DistributionrangesfromsouthernVenturaCountydownthroughLosAngeles,Orange,Riverside,SanBernardinoandSanDiego

counties(USFWS2010).

Notexpectedtooccur:Nosuitablehabitatispresentwithintheplanningarea.Coastalsagescrubhabitathas

beenextirpatedfromtheplanningarea.

light‐footedclapperrail

Ralluslongirostrislevipes

FE/SE Coastalsaltmarshes,lagoons,andtheirmaritimeenvirons.Requireshallowwaterand

mudflatsforforaging,withadjacenthighervegetationforcoverduringhightide(USFWS

2009).


Californialeasttern

Sternulaantillarumbrowni

FE/SE Nestandroostincoloniesonopenbeaches,foragenearshoreoceanwatersandinshallow

estuariesandlagoons(USFWS2006).

Mayoccur.Suitablenestinghabitatpresentonthebeach;however,nohistoricalrecordsofnestinginthe

planningarea.NearestbreedingcoloniesareatthePortofLosAngelesandVeniceBeach(USFWS2006).

Mayforageinoffshorewaters.

leastBell’svireo FE/SE Obligateriparianbreeder.Cottonwoodwillow, Notexpectedtooccur:Noriparian habitatispresent

Species Status

USFWS/CDFW


Vireobelliipusillus oakwoodlands,andmulefatscrubalongwatercourses(Kus2002).

withintheplanningarea.

Mammals

westernmastiffbat

Eumopsperotiscalifornicus

‐/SSC Open,semi‐aridtoaridhabitats,includingconiferanddeciduouswoodlands,coastalscrub,

annualandperennialgrasslands,palmoases,chaparral,anddesertscrub.Roostsincrevicesonverticalclifffaces,highbuildings,trees,and

tunnels(CDFW2014b).

Notexpectedtooccur:Nosuitable habitatispresentwithintheplanningarea.

Pacificpocketmouse

Perognathuslongimembrispacificus

FE/SSC Foundpredominantlyonsandysubstratesincoastalsagescrub,coastalstrand,coastaldune,andriveralluvium,onmarineterraceswithin

2.5milesoftheocean(USFWS1998c).

Notexpectedtooccur: Nosuitablehabitatispresentwithintheplanningarea.Norecordsofthisspeciesin

LosAngelesCountysince1938.ClosestknownpopulationisatDanaPointinOrangeCounty(USFWS

1998c).

Key to State & Federal Status

(FE) Federal Endangered

(FT) Federal Threaten

(FC) Federal Candidate

(SE) State Endangered

(ST) State Threatened

(SSC) State Candidate

Sources: CDFW 2014a, USFWS 2014a

REFERENCES CDFW (California Department of Fish and Wildlife). 2014a. California Natural Diversity Database – February 4, 2014

update. CDFW Biogeographic Data Branch; Sacramento, CA.

———. 2014b. California Wildlife Habitat Relationships System Life History Accounts and Range Maps (online edition). CDFW Biogeographic Data Branch; Sacramento, CA. http://www.dfg.ca.gov/biogeodata/cwhr/cawildlife.aspx

Cornell Lab of Ornithology. 2014.All About Birds. http://www.allaboutbirds.org/Page.aspx?pid=1189

Hamilton, W. J. 2004. “Tricolored Blackbird (Agelaius tricolor).” The Riparian Bird Conservation Plan: A strategy for reversing the decline of riparian-associated birds in California. California Partners in Flight.

Kus, B. 2002. “Least Bell's Vireo (Vireo bellii pusillus).” The Riparian Bird Conservation Plan: a strategy for reversing the decline of riparian-associated birds in California. California Partners in Flight.

Nafis, Gary. 2014. California Herps: A Guide to Reptiles and Amphibians of California. Accessed February 26, 2014. http://www.californiaherps.com/

USFWS (US Fish and Wildlife Service). 1998a. Vernal Pools of Southern California Recovery Plan. USFWS; Portland, OR.

———. 1998b. Recovery Plan for the El Segundo Blue Butterfly. USFWS; Portland, OR.

———. 1998c. Recovery Plan for the Pacific Pocket Mouse. USFWS; Portland, OR.

———. 2002. Final Recovery Plan Southwestern Willow Flycatcher (Empinodax traillii extimus). USFWS; Albuquerque, NM.

———. 2005. Recovery Plan for Vernal Pool Ecosystems of California and Southern Oregon. USFWS; Portland, OR.

———. 2006. California Least Tern 5-Year Review. USFWS; Carlsbad, CA.

———. 2007. Recovery Plan for the Pacific Coast Population of the Western Snowy Plover (Charadrius alexandrius nivosus). USFWS; Sacramento, CA.

———. 2009. Light-footed Clapper Rail (Ralluss longirostris levipes) 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation. USFWS; Carlsbad, CA.

———. 2010. Coastal California Gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica) 5-year Review: Summary and Evaluation. USFWS; Carlsbad, CA.

———. 2012. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Revised Designation of Critical Habitat for the Pacific Coast Population of the Western Snowy Plover. Final rule. Federal Register 77(118): 36728 – 36869.

———. 2014a. Information, Planning, and Conservation System (IPaC). USFWS. Accessed February 2014..

———. 2014b. Critical Habitat Portal. USFWS. Accessed February 2014..

———. 2014c. 5-Year Review for Palos Verdes Blue Butterfly. USFWS; Carlsbad, CA.

Appendix B3:

Historic Resources

California Historical Resource Status Codes

1 Properties listed in the National Register (NR) or the California Register (CR) 1D Contributor to a district or multiple resource property listed in NR by the Keeper. Listed in the CR. 1S Individual property listed in NR by the Keeper. Listed in the CR. 1CD Listed in the CR as a contributor to a district or multiple resource property by the SHRC 1CS Listed in the CR as individual property by the SHRC. 1CL Automatically listed in the California Register – Includes State Historical Landmarks 770 and above and Points of Historical

Interest nominated after December 1997 and recommended for listing by the SHRC. 2 Properties determined eligible for listing in the National Register (NR) or the California Register (CR) 2B Determined eligible for NR as an individual property and as a contributor to an eligible district in a federal regulatory process.

Listed in the CR. 2D Contributor to a district determined eligible for NR by the Keeper. Listed in the CR. 2D2 Contributor to a district determined eligible for NR by consensus through Section 106 process. Listed in the CR. 2D3 Contributor to a district determined eligible for NR by Part I Tax Certification. Listed in the CR. 2D4 Contributor to a district determined eligible for NR pursuant to Section 106 without review by SHPO. Listed in the CR. 2S Individual property determined eligible for NR by the Keeper. Listed in the CR. 2S2 Individual property determined eligible for NR by a consensus through Section 106 process. Listed in the CR. 2S3 Individual property determined eligible for NR by Part I Tax Certification. Listed in the CR. 2S4 Individual property determined eligible for NR pursuant to Section 106 without review by SHPO. Listed in the CR. 2CB Determined eligible for CR as an individual property and as a contributor to an eligible district by the SHRC. 2CD Contributor to a district determined eligible for listing in the CR by the SHRC. 2CS Individual property determined eligible for listing in the CR by the SHRC. 3 Appears eligible for National Register (NR) or California Register (CR) through Survey Evaluation 3B Appears eligible for NR both individually and as a contributor to a NR eligible district through survey evaluation. 3D Appears eligible for NR as a contributor to a NR eligible district through survey evaluation. 3S Appears eligible for NR as an individual property through survey evaluation. 3CB Appears eligible for CR both individually and as a contributor to a CR eligible district through a survey evaluation. 3CD Appears eligible for CR as a contributor to a CR eligible district through a survey evaluation. 3CS Appears eligible for CR as an individual property through survey evaluation. 4 Appears eligible for National Register (NR) or California Register (CR) through other evaluation 4CM Master List - State Owned Properties – PRC §5024. 5 Properties Recognized as Historically Significant by Local Government 5D1 Contributor to a district that is listed or designated locally. 5D2 Contributor to a district that is eligible for local listing or designation. 5D3 Appears to be a contributor to a district that appears eligible for local listing or designation through survey evaluation. 5S1 Individual property that is listed or designated locally. 5S2 Individual property that is eligible for local listing or designation. 5S3 Appears to be individually eligible for local listing or designation through survey evaluation. 5B Locally significant both individually (listed, eligible, or appears eligible) and as a contributor to a district that is locally listed,

designated, determined eligible or appears eligible through survey evaluation. 6 Not Eligible for Listing or Designation as specified 6C Determined ineligible for or removed from California Register by SHRC. 6J Landmarks or Points of Interest found ineligible for designation by SHRC. 6L Determined ineligible for local listing or designation through local government review process; may warrant special consideration

in local planning. 6T Determined ineligible for NR through Part I Tax Certification process. 6U Determined ineligible for NR pursuant to Section 106 without review by SHPO. 6W Removed from NR by the Keeper. 6X Determined ineligible for the NR by SHRC or Keeper. 6Y Determined ineligible for NR by consensus through Section 106 process – Not evaluated for CR or Local Listing. 6Z Found ineligible for NR, CR or Local designation through survey evaluation. 7 Not Evaluated for National Register (NR) or California Register (CR) or Needs Revaluation 7J Received by OHP for evaluation or action but not yet evaluated. 7K Resubmitted to OHP for action but not reevaluated. 7L State Historical Landmarks 1-769 and Points of Historical Interest designated prior to January 1998 – Needs to be reevaluated

using current standards. 7M Submitted to OHP but not evaluated - referred to NPS. 7N Needs to be reevaluated (Formerly NR Status Code 4) 7N1 Needs to be reevaluated (Formerly NR SC4) – may become eligible for NR w/restoration or when meets other specific conditions. 7R Identified in Reconnaissance Level Survey: Not evaluated.

12/8/2003 7W Submitted to OHP for action – withdrawn.

HISTORICAL RESOURCES IN HERMOSA BEACH The City's historic resources preservation program established in 1998 encourages property owners of historically significant structures or sites to voluntarily apply for local landmark status. A number of financial Incentives are available to the owners of landmark properties. For more information about the program please contact Planning Staff at the Hermosa Beach Community Development Department at (310) 318-0242.

HERMOSA BEACH’S HISTORIC RESOURCES Protecting the integrity of historic resources in Hermosa Beach is one way that Hermosa Beach can distinguish itself from ‘everywhere USA.’ As of June 2009, three buildings have been designated for protection under the City’s Historic Resources Preservation Ordinance. � The ‘Bijou Theater’ at 1229-1235 Hermosa Avenue is a local and state designated landmark. � The Bank of America Building at 90 Pier Avenue and Hermosa Hotel at 20-26

Pier Avenue are designated as potential landmarks that warrant further study by Section

17.53.040(B) of the Historic Preservation ordinance (per Planning Commission

Resolution No. 98-65). � The Community Center was designated a locally significant landmark for the purposes of a

grant application (City Council Resolution 02-6216). A Certificate of Appropriateness granted by the City Council is required prior to alteration of the exterior or interior of a designated landmark or potential landmark on a list of historic resources established by City Council being considered for landmark status. The City’s General Plan Land Use Element (Historic Preservation) designates 28 resources as potentially significant including those listed above, although several have been demolished and others have been significantly altered: Historic Resources Map As time marches on, more resources become potential candidates by virtue of their age and community significance. However, without specific identification, designation and protection, the community cannot be assured that these resources will remain intact.

HISTORIC RESOURCES PRESERVATION ORDINANCE The City’s Historic Resources Preservation Ordinance in Municipal Code Chapter 17.53 is intended to identify and ensure the long-term protection and use of historic resources, such as buildings and structures, sites and places within the City that reflect special elements of the City's architectural, artistic, cultural, historical, political, and social heritage. Historic Landmark Eligibility: To be considered as a historic landmark, a historic resource must be at least 50 years old. However, a historic resource at least 30 years old may be eligible if the City Council determines it is exceptional or is threatened by demolition, removal, relocation, or inappropriate alteration. The resource must also meet one or more of the following criteria:

� exemplify or reflect special elements of the City's cultural, social, economic,

political, aesthetic, engineering, or architectural history � are identified with persons or events significant in local, state, or national history � embody distinctive characteristics of a style, type, period, or method of construction, or is

a valuable example of the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship � represent notable work of a builder, designer, or architect � has a unique location or singular physical characteristic representing an established and

familiar visual feature or landmark of a neighborhood, community, or the City. Designating and Protecting a Site or Building as a Historic Landmark: The property owner may apply for local historic landmark status. Other interested persons or the City itself may also pursue designation. Property owners or interested persons should review the information in the Historic Resources Preservation Ordinance before contacting Planning staff at the Community Development Department at (310)318-0242. Under the City’s ordinance, property owners have a duty to maintain landmark resources in good repair. Landmark properties cannot be altered or removed without being granted a ‘Certificate of Appropriateness’ by the City Council. Property maintenance and some minor modifications are allowed without going through this process; property owners or managers should confirm with Community Development staff whether proposed work may proceed without a ‘Certificate of Appropriateness’. The ordinance also provides procedures for removing the landmark designation.

INCENTIVES Protection of historic resources preserves our cultural past and maintains Hermosa’s identity. Some communities have ‘marketed’ these resources as an important part of their economic development programs. Property owners can be proud of their contribution and also obtain financial incentives. However, historic designation also imposes responsibilities to maintain the building as detailed in the City’s ordinance. Historical Building Code: Repairs, alterations, restorations, or changes in use of historic landmarks may conform to the California Historical Building Code as an alternative to building standards adopted by the City. Mills Act Program: The Mills Act is a state tax incentive law that allows cities to enter into contracts with the owners of historic structures. This contract provides a method of reducing property taxes by 50 percent or more in exchange for the continued preservation of the property. To qualify for the Mills Act, a building must first be designated as a local landmark or be a contributing structure within a designated local historic district approved by the City Council. The Mills Act enables the City Council to enter into 10-year contracts with owners of historic properties. The owners agree to maintain and, if necessary, rehabilitate their historic structure. The property may be owner occupied or income property. The contract automatically renews itself annually so that the term of the contract is always 10 years unless the property owner or City files a ‘notice of nonrenewal’ electing not to renew, for

any reason. Nonrenewal terminates the contract at the end of the current 10-year term. The owner may also petition the City to initiate an ‘immediate cancellation.’ If the City approves immediate nonrenewal, a penalty equal to 12.5 percent is imposed. The City may also cancel the contract, but only in the case of breach of the contract conditions. Participation in the Mills Act Program is administered by the City. Information about this state law, including tax abatement issues, is available at the State Office of Historic Preservation – click on Incentives. Other incentives: Information on other federal and state incentives is available at the State Office of Historic Preservation – click on Incentives.

HOW CAN I HELP TO PROTECT HERMOSA BEACH’S RESOURCES? Owners of potential historic resources and other interested persons or groups may contact the Community Development Department at (310) 318-0242 for more information. The criteria are for listing are:

� exemplify or reflect special elements of the City's cultural, social, economic, political, aesthetic, engineering, or architectural history

� are identified with persons or events significant in local, state, or national history � embody distinctive characteristics of a style, type, period, or method of construction, or is

a valuable example of the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship � represent notable work of a builder, designer, or architect � has a unique location or singular physical characteristic representing an established and

familiar visual feature or landmark of a neighborhood, community, or the City. � is at least 50 years old, or at least 30 years old if determined by the City Council to be

exceptional or threatened by demolition, removal, relocation, or inappropriate alteration.

HERMOSA BEACH HISTORICAL SOCIETY The Hermosa Beach Historical Society http://www.hermosabeachhistoricalsociety.org/ exists for the purpose of preserving and chronicling the history of Hermosa Beach. Established in 1987, its offices and the museum are located in the Hermosa Beach Community Center, 710 Pier Avenue (310) 318-9421.

LINKS � City of Hermosa Beach, Historic Resources Preservation Ordinance: Municipal Code Chapter 17.53 http://www.hermosabch.org/index.aspx?page=462 � Hermosa Beach Historical Society: http://www.hermosabeachhistoricalsociety.org/ � State Office of Historic Preservation: http://ohp.parks.ca.gov/ 8/21/2011

GTE Building

Clark Stadium Building

Community Center(Pier Ave School)

Del Mar Apartments

William W. Matthews House

Charlie Chaplin House

Sea Sprite Motel

Berth Hotel Grannis Hotel and Apartments

Matteson Home

The Lighthouse

Bank of America Building(National Bank of Hermosa Beach)

Insomniac Coffee House

Bijou Theatre(The Metropolitan)

Hermosa Hotel

Neutra Apartments

House

Pueblo Apartments Matteson Home

William Jennings Bryan Home

Sarah A. Beane House

McComb House

Sprague House

Ozzie and Harriet Nelson Home

Mrs. Gooch's BuildingHermosa Tabernacle Church

Pitcher House

Valle

y Dr

Manhattan Ave

Ardmore Ave

Prospect Ave

Monterey Blvd

Pacific Coast Hwy

8th St

Hermosa Ave

2nd St

Gould Ave

Longfellow Ave

Artesia Blvd

1st St

27th St

2nd St

®

Potential Locally Significant Historic ResourcePotential State Historic LandmarkState historic Landmark

City of Hermosa Beach

Historic Resources

Source: Hermosa Beach General PlanAs of February 2009

Appendix B4:

Parks and Recreation Record

Primary #State of California – The Resources AgencyDEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI #

Trinomial

NRHP Status Code 5S3Other Listings

Review Code __________ Date _______________Reviewer ____________________________

PRIMARY RECORD

c. Address: City Hermosa Beach Zip 90254

a. County Los Angeles

P1. Other Identifier: Hermosa Valley Greenbelt

Not for Publication Unrestricted

b. USGS 7.5' Quad Date T R 1/4 of 1/4 of Sec B.M.

Zone mE/ mN

Runs parallel between S. Ardmore Avenue and S. Valley Drive.

Parcel No.

P3b. Resource Attributes: HP31. Urban open space

Building Structure Object Site District Element of District Other (Isolates, etc.)

Prehistoric Historic Both

PCR Services

201 Santa Monica Blvd, Ste 500

Santa Monica, CA 90401

P9. Date Recorded: 2/24/2014

Windshield Reconnaissance

Hermosa Beach General Plan Update, 2014

NONELocation MapSketch Map

Continuation SheetBuilding, Structure, and Object RecordArchaeological Record

District RecordLinear Feature RecordMilling Station Record

Rock Art RecordArtifact RecordPhotograph Record

P2. Location:

and (P2b and P2c or P2d. Attach a Location Map as necessary.)

Attachments:

Other: (List)

P4. Resources Present:

P11. Report Citation: (Cite survey report and other sources, or enter "none.")

d. UTM: (Give more than one for large and/or linear resources)

P5b Description of Photo:

P6. Date Constructed/Age and Sources:

e. Other Locational Data (e.g. Parcel #, directions to resource, elevation, etc., as appropriate)

(Assigned by recorder)

P10. Survey Type: (Describe)

P8. Recorded by:

(Name, affiliation, and address)

P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;

(Describe resources and its major elements. Include design, materials, condition, alterations, size, and boundaries)

(List attributes and codes)

(View, date, accession #)

;

View South, 2013

P3 Description:

The Hermosa Valley Greenbelt is a 3.7 mile linear trail that runs parallel between S. Ardmore Avenue and S. Valley Drive. It was once part of the Santa Fe Railroad easement. The Santa Fe Railroad connected Hermosa Beach to east Los Angeles and Redondo Beach. There was once a railroad depot constructed at Ardmore and Pier Avenue that was torn down during the 1960s when the Santa Fe Depot stopped using the Hermosa Beach to Renondo Beach railline. During the 1980s, there was a successful movement to preseve the open land as a greenbelt for the recreational use of the community and is now part of the Federal Rails to Trails network.

Page of Resource Name or #:

DPR 523B (1/95) PCR Services Corporation


Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD



P1. Other Identifier: 31st St Walk-Street Bet Manhattan and Morningside



Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No.

P3b. Resource Attributes: HP29. Landscape architecture



PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

View West, 2013

P3 Description:

The walk-street on 31st Street between Manhattan Avenue and Morningside Drive in the Shakespeare Tract has integrity and is a representative example of the early development of Hermosa Beach.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD



P1. Other Identifier: The Vetter Windmill



Zone mE/ mN

Northeast intersection of Aviation and Pacific Coast Highway

Parcel No. 4186-003-900

P3b. Resource Attributes: HP39. Other


Prehistoric Historic BothEarly 1900s

PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

View East, 2013

P3 Description:

The Vetter Windmill represents the early twentieth century development of Hermosa Beach when the City was in the early stages of development. Originally the windmill was located at Ardmore and Avenue and Sixteenth Street, where it was erected by Herman Vawter to provide water for his flower and vegetable gardens. The windmill has been relocated to Greenwood Park at the northeast intersection of Aviation and Pacific Coast Highway.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD


a. County

P1. Other Identifier: Sand Hill Parkette



Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No.




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

View West, 2013

P3 Description:

The Sand Hill Parkette located at Circle Drive and Long Walk is an example of a small park integrated into the early First Addition of Hermosa Beach residential tract and is potentially eligible as a historic landscape.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD

c. Address: 28 10th Ct City Hermosa Beach Zip 90254


P1. Other Identifier:



Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4187-003-023

P3b. Resource Attributes: HP 2. Single family property


Prehistoric Historic Both1923/1937 (LA Assessor)

PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

View North, 2013

P3 Description:

This one-story wood-frame single-family residence maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Beach Cottage style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD

c. Address: 39 10th St City Hermosa Beach Zip 90254





Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4187-004-020



Prehistoric Historic Both1921

PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4187-004-022




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

View North, 2013

P3 Description:

This one-story single-family residence sheathed in stucco maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Spanish Colonial Revival style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4187-007-001

P3b. Resource Attributes: HP 3. Multiple family property



PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

View South, 2013

P3 Description:

This two-story multi-family property maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Mid-Century Modern style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4186-004-017




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

View South, 2013

P3 Description:

This two story stucco duplex maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Spanish Colonial Revival style.




Trinomial

NRHP Status Code 5D3Other Listings


PRIMARY RECORD

c. Address: 10th Street City Hermosa Beach Zip 90254


P1. Other Identifier: Bungalow Grouping: 50-70 10th Street



Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. See below



Prehistoric Historic Both1914-1930

PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

View South, 2013

P3 Description:

Grouping of five beach bungalows (50, 54, 58, 64, 70 10th Street) potentially eligible as distinctive examples of one-story beach bungalows in Hermosa Beach with good integrity.

50 10th Street (APN 4187-003-013) constructed in 1922.54 10th Street (APN 4187-003-031) constructed in 1930.58 10th Street (APN 4187-003-016) constructed in 1920.

64 10th Street (APN 4187-003-017) constructed in 1914.70 10th Street (APN 4187-003-019) constructed in 1925.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4185-011-036




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

View South, 2013

P3 Description:

This one-story stucco single-family residence maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Spanish Colonial Revival style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4183-003-009



Prehistoric Historic Both1911 (LA Assessor)

PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

View South, 2013

P3 Description:

This two story wood-frame single-family residence maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Beach Cottage style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4183-003-010



Prehistoric Historic Both1910/1915 (LA Assesor)

PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

View South, PCR 2013

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4183-004-018



Prehistoric Historic Both1921/1927 (LA Assesor)

PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

View North, 2013

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4185-008-008




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

North, 12/11/13

P3 Description:

This two-story wood-frame single-family residence maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Beach Cottage style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4185-008-013



Prehistoric Historic Both1922 (LA Assesor)

PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

North, 12/11/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4185-011-011




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

South, 12/11/13

P3 Description:

This one-story wood-frame single-family residence maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Beach Cottage style with Colonial Revival architectural elements.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4185-017-004




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

South, 12/12/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4183-006-022




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

North, 12/12/13

P3 Description:

This two-story wood-frame single-family residence maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Craftsman style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4183-006-023




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

North, 12/12/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD



P1. Other Identifier: 16th Street Walk-Street bet Hermosa and The Strand



Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No.




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

View West, 2013

P3 Description:

The walk-street on 16th Street between Hermosa Avenue and The Strand in the Hermosa Beach Tract has integrity and is a representative example of the early development of Hermosa Beach.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4183-006-029




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

South, 12/12/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4183-007-029




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

North, 12/12/13

P3 Description:

This one-story bungalow court sheathed in stucco maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Spanish Colonial Revival style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4183-006-012




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

South, 12/12/13

P3 Description:

This one-story wood-frame single-family residence maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the hipped-roof Beach Cottage style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4183-006-015




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

South, 12/12/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4185-023-010




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

North, 12/11/13

P3 Description:

This one-story wood-frame single-family residence maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Ranch style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No.




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

View West, 2013

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4183-007-024




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

North, 12/12/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4183-007-027




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

South, 12/12/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4183-007-013




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

South, 12/12/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No.




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

View West, 2013

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4183-009-011




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

South, 12/09/13

P3 Description:

This one-story multi-family residential property maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Spanish Mission style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4183-016-033




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

South East, 12/10/13

P3 Description:

This two-story multi-family residential property maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Spanish Colonial Revival style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4184-012-002




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

South, 12/09/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4184-012-001




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

South, 12/09/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No.




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

P3 Description:

The walkstreet on 19th Street between Hermosa Avenue and The Strand in the Hermosa Beach Tract has integrity and is a representative example of the early development of Hermosa Beach.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD

c. Address: 126 1st Ct City Hermosa Beach Zip 90254





Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4188-014-074




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

South, 12/12/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD

c. Address: 625 1st Pl City Hermosa Beach Zip 90254





Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4188-022-032




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

North, 12/11/13

P3 Description:

This two-story wood-frame residence maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Beach Cottage style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4182-006-024




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

South, 12/12/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4183-024-015




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

North, 12/10/13

P3 Description:

This one-story wood-frame single-family residence maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Minimal Tradtional style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4183-024-014




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

North, 12/12/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No.




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

View West, 2013

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD

c. Address: 21st Street City Hermosa Beach Zip 90254


P1. Other Identifier: 21st Street Walk-Street bet Hermosa and The Strand



Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No.




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

View West, 2013

P3 Description:

The walk-street on 21st Street between Hermosa Avenue and The Strand in the Hermosa Beach Tract has integrity and is a representative example of the early development of Hermosa Beach.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4182-014-036



Prehistoric Historic Both1912/1930

PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

East, 12/09/13

P3 Description:

This two-story wood-frame single-family residence maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Arts and Crafts style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD



P1. Other Identifier: North School



Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4182-028-900

P3b. Resource Attributes: HP15. Educational building


Prehistoric Historic BothUnknown

PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

North, 12/09/13

P3 Description:

This one-story school maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the WPA Moderne Style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4182-028-008




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

North, 12/09/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4181-025-016




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

North, 12/09/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4181-024-022




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

North, 12/09/13

P3 Description:

This one-story wood-frame single-family residence maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Spanish Colonial Revival style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4181-023-015




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

North, 12/09/13

P3 Description:

This two-story multi-family residential property maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Mid-Century Modern style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4181-023-029




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

North, 12/09/13

P3 Description:

This one-story single-family residence maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Spanish Colonial Revival style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4181-024-039




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;


P3 Description:

This two-story wood-frame single-family residence maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Colonial style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4181-022-004




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

North, 12/09/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4181-023-007




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

South, 12/09/13

P3 Description:

This one-story wood-frame single-family residence maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Mid-Century Modern style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4181-028-009




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

north, 12/09/13

P3 Description:

This two-story single-family residence maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Spanish Mission style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4181-022-007




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

South, 12/09/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4181-022-013




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

South, 12/09/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4181-022-017




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

South, 12/09/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4181-022-021




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

South, 12/09/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4181-021-039




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

North, 12/09/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD

c. Address: 705 2nd St City Hermosa Beach Zip 90254





Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4188-028-050




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

North, 12/11/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4188-022-021




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

South, 12/11/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4188-028-051




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

North, 12/11/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4186-026-014




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

North, 12/11/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4186-027-031




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

South, 12/11/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial

NRHP Status Code 5D3Other Listings


PRIMARY RECORD

c. Address: 2nd Street City Hermosa Beach Zip 90254


P1. Other Identifier: Bungalow Grouping: 1101 - 1041 2nd Street



Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. See below




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

View North, 2013

P3 Description:

Grouping of six beach bungalows (1101, 1103, 1025, 1031, 1037, 1041) potentially eligible as distinctive examples of one-story beach bungalows in Hermosa Beach with good integrity.

1101 2nd Street (APN 4186-024-020) constructed in 1924.1103 2nd Street (APN 4186-024-019) constructed in 1923.1025 2nd Street (APN 4186-024-024) constructed in 1928.1031 2nd Street (APN 4186-024-025) constructed in 1925.1037 2nd Street (APN 4186-024-026) constructed in 1930.1041 2nd Street (APN 4186-024-021) constructed in 1923.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD

c. Address: 2nd Street City Hermosa Beach Zip 90254


P1. Other Identifier: Moondust Parkette



Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4186-027-900




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

View North, 2013

P3 Description:

The Moondust Parkette located on 2nd Street is an example of a small park integrated into a residential tract and is potentially eligible as a historic landscape.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4181-029-007




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

North, 12/ 09/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4181-029-009




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

North, 12/09/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4181-029-012




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

North, 12/09/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4181-021-016




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

South, 12/09/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4181-021-020




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

South, 12/09/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4181-020-027




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

north, 12/09/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4181-009-001




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

North, 12/09/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4181-008-012




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

South, 12/09/13

P3 Description:

This two-story single-family residence maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Tudor Revival style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD

c. Address: 124 31st St City Hermosa Beach Zip 90254





Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4181-029-008




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

South, 12/09/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4181-019-007




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

North, 12/09/13

P3 Description:

This one-story wood-frame property maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Craftsman style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4181-020-017




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

South, 12/09/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4181-020-024




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

South, 12/09/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4181-020-038




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

South, 12/09/13

P3 Description:

This two-story wood-frame single-family residence maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Spanish Colonial Revival style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4181-010-003




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

North, 12/09/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD

c. Address: 235 33rd St City Hermosa Beach Zip 90254





Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4181-016-011




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

North, 12/09/13

P3 Description:

This one-story wood-shingle single-family residence maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Beach Cottage style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4181-018-019




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;


P3 Description:

This two-story single-family residence maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Tudor Revival style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4181-018-031




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;


P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4181-033-021




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

South, 12/09/13

P3 Description:

This two-story wood-frame multi-family residential property maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Mediterranean style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4186-019-013




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

North, 12/11/12

P3 Description:

This one-story single-family residence maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Beach Cottage style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4186-024-033




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

South, 12/11/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4188-006-012




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;


P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4188-005-020




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

North West, 12/12/13

P3 Description:

This two-story apartment building maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Mission style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4188-031-014




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

North, 12/11/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4186-018-009




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

North, 12/10/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4186-017-004




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

South, 12/10/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4186-021-002




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

South, 12/10/13

P3 Description:

This one-story property maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Beach Cottage style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No.




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

View East, 2013

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4186-017-011




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

South, 12/10/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4186-015-004




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

North, 12/10/13

P3 Description:

This one-story wood-frame single-family residence maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Craftsman style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No.




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

View East, 2013

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4188-004-013




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;


P3 Description:

This one-story wood-frame singel-family residence maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the hipped-roof Beach Cottage style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4188-030-009




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

South, 12/10/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No.




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

View East, 2013

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4187-016-021




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

South, 12/12/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4186-013-004




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

South, 12/10/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4186-013-005




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

South, 12/10/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4186-013-008




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

South, 12/10/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4186-012-008




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

North, 12/10/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No.




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

View West, 2013

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4187-015-042




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

South, 12/12/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD

c. Address: 739 8th Pl City Hermosa Beach Zip 90254





Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4187-028-015




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

North, 12/11/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4187-028-014




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

North, 12/11/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4186-008-005




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4187-015-035




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

South, 12/12/13

P3 Description:

This one-story single-family residence maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Minimal Traditional style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4187-002-020




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

North, 12/12/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4187-022-016




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

South, 12/10/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4187-029-019




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

North, 12/11/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No.




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

View West, 2013

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4187-003-022




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD



P1. Other Identifier: William W. Mathews House



Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4187-003-024




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4187-002-010




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

P3 Description:

This two-story multi-family residence sheathed in stucco maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Mediterranean style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No.




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

View West, 2013

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD

c. Address: 2900 Amby Pl City Hermosa Beach Zip 90254





Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4169-032-033




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

West, 12/10/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD

c. Address: 1075 Aviation Blvd City Hermosa Beach Zip 90254





Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4185-016-019

P3b. Resource Attributes: HP 6. 1-3 story commercial building



PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

East, 12/11/13

P3 Description:

This one-story commercial property maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Mid-Century Modern style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD

c. Address: 1403 Bayview Dr City Hermosa Beach Zip 90254





Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4183-013-006




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

West, 12/10/13

P3 Description:

This two-story wood-shingle single-family residence maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Beach Cottage style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4182-018-006




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

East, 12/10/13

P3 Description:

This two story wood-frame single-family residence maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Colonial style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4182-018-007




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

East, 12/10/13

P3 Description:

This two story wood-frame single-family residence maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Craftsman style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4182-018-008




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

East, 12/10/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD

c. Address: 1251 Bonnie Brae St City Hermosa Beach Zip 90254





Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4185-014-041




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

West, 12/11/13

P3 Description:

This two story wood-frame single-family residence maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Craftsman style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD

c. Address: 646 Braeholm Pl City Hermosa Beach Zip 90254





Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4169-032-031




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

South West, 12/10/13

P3 Description:

This one-story brick single-family residence maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Ranch style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD

c. Address: 2020 Circle Dr City Hermosa Beach Zip 90254





Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4182-018-026




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

East, 12/10/13

P3 Description:

This two-story wood-frame single-family residence maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Mediterranean style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD

c. Address: 2055 Circle Dr City Hermosa Beach Zip 90254





Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4182-017-016




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

West, 12/10/13

P3 Description:

This two-story single-family residence maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Art Deco style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD

c. Address: 1401 Corona St City Hermosa Beach Zip 90254





Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4185-010-015




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

North, 12/11/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD

c. Address: 716 Cypress Ave City Hermosa Beach Zip 90254





Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4187-031-011

P3b. Resource Attributes: HP 8. Industrial building



PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;


P3 Description:

This one-story industrial building maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of vernacular modern industrial building.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD

c. Address: 1529 Golden St City Hermosa Beach Zip 90254





Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4185-019-021




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

West, 12/11/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD

c. Address: 350 Hermosa Ave City Hermosa Beach Zip 90254





Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4188-008-034




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

East, 12/12/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4188-011-005




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

East, 12/12/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4188-011-012




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

East, 12/12/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4187-002-021




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;


P3 Description:

This one-story multi-family residential bungalow court maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Spanish Colonial Revival style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4187-007-019




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

East, 12/12/13

P3 Description:

This one-story brick commercial building maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of a Early 20th Century Utilitarian Brick Commercial Building.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4187-003-028




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;


P3 Description:

This one-story commercial building maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Art Deco/Moderne style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4183-005-033




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

North, 12/12/13

P3 Description:

This one-story commercial building maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Mid-Century Modern style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4183-010-003




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

East, 12/12/13

P3 Description:

This two-story single-family residential property maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Mediterranean style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD



P1. Other Identifier: Pueblo Apartments



Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4182-007-003




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

East, 12/10/13

P3 Description:

This one-story wood-frame multi-family residence maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Pueblo Revival style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4182-007-010




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

East, 12/12/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4182-010-012




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

East, 12/10/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4182-012-008




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

East, 12/12/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4182-012-009




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

East, 12/12/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4181-037-001




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

North, 12/09/13

P3 Description:

This three story wood-frame single-family residence maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Shingle style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD



P1. Other Identifier: The Carousel



Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4181-025-013




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

North East, 12/09/13

P3 Description:

This one-story property maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of commercial Mid-Century Modern architecture Roadside Vernacular architecture.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4181-034-002




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

South, 12/09/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD

c. Address: Hermosa Avenue City Hermosa Beach Zip 90254


P1. Other Identifier: Lamp Posts



Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No.




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

View North, 2013

P3 Description:

Three lamp posts on the east side of Hermosa Avenue between Pier Avenue and 10th Street.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD

c. Address: Hermosa Avenue City Hermosa Beach Zip 90254


P1. Other Identifier: Lamp Posts



Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No.




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

2013

P3 Description:

Eight lamp posts on the west and east sides of Hermosa Avenue between 14th and 18th Streets.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD

c. Address: 650 Loma Dr City Hermosa Beach Zip 90254





Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4187-030-014




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

East, 12/10/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4187-013-008




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

West, 12/10/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4187-019-015




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;


P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD

c. Address: 115 Longfellow Ave City Hermosa Beach Zip 90254





Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4181-031-005




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

North, 12/09/13

P3 Description:

This two story wood-shingle single-family residence maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Beach Cottage style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4181-031-012




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

North, 12/09/13

P3 Description:

This two story wood-frame single-family residence maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Mediterranean style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4181-019-010




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

South, 12/09/13

P3 Description:

This two story single-family residence maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Mediterranean style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4181-019-012




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

South, 12/09/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4181-019-018




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

South, 12/09/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4181-019-023




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;


P3 Description:

This one-story wood-frame single-family residence maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Mid-Century style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4181-018-032




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

North, 12/10/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4169-028-019




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;


P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD

c. Address: 429 Manhattan Ave City Hermosa Beach Zip 90254





Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4188-011-024




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

West, 12/10/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4188-011-020




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

West, 12/10/13

P3 Description:

This two-story multi-family residence maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Spanish Colonial Revival style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4187-022-011




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

East, 12/10/13

P3 Description:

This one-story wood-frame multi-family bungalow court maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Beach Cottage style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4187-008-036




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

East, 12/10/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD



P1. Other Identifier: 124-138 Pier



Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4187-006-011




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

South, 12/12/13

P3 Description:

This one-story commercial building maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of a Early 20th Century Utilitarian Commercial Building.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4183-013-026




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

East, 12/10/13

P3 Description:

This three-story wood-frame property maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Arts and Crafts style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4183-013-059

P3b. Resource Attributes: HP16. Religious building



PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

West, 12/10/13

P3 Description:

This multi-story brick church maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Neoclassical style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4183-010-018




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

West, 12/10/13

P3 Description:

This one-story bungalow court maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Spanish Colonial Revival style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4183-009-018




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

West, 12/10/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4183-009-015




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

West, 12/10/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4182-010-020




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;


P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4182-016-009




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;


P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4182-010-019




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

West, 12/09/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4182-010-014




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

West, 12/09/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4182-010-013




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

West, 12/09/13

P3 Description:

This two-story wood-shingle property maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Shingle style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4182-013-007




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

East, 12/09/13

P3 Description:

This two-story wood-frame property maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Italianate style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4182-013-003




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

East, 12/09/13

P3 Description:

This two-story wood-frame single-family residence maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Craftsman style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4182-012-001




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;


P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4181-025-015




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

West, 12/09/13

P3 Description:

This two story stucco single-family residence maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Spanish Colonial Revival style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4181-028-015




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;


P3 Description:

This two-story stucco single-family residence maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Mediterranean style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4181-031-014




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

West, 12/09/13

P3 Description:

This one-story stucco commercial property maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Mediterranean style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD

c. Address: 635 Monterey Blvd City Hermosa Beach Zip 90254





Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4187-022-022




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

West, 12/12/13

P3 Description:

This one-story stucco commercial property maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Spanish Colonial Revival style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4187-013-016




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

East, 12/09/13

P3 Description:

This one-story wood-frame duplex maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Beach Cottage style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4187-009-044




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

West, 12/09/13

P3 Description:

This one-story wood-frame multi-family property maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Beach Cottage style with Craftsman elements.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4183-016-034




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

East, 12/10/13

P3 Description:

This two-story stucco multi-family residential property maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Mediterranean Style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4183-016-040

P3b. Resource Attributes: HP16. Religious building



PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;


P3 Description:

This multi-story chruch maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Spanish Colonial Revival style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4182-019-007




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

East, 12/10/13

P3 Description:

This one-story wood-frame bungalow court maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Spanish Mission style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4182-019-016




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

East, 12/09/13

P3 Description:

This one-story wood-frame property maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Beach Cottage style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4182-020-008




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

East, 12/09/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4182-016-001




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

North, 12/09/13

P3 Description:

This one-story wood-frame single-family residence maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Beach Cottage style with Craftsman elements.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD

c. Address: 2426 Myrtle Ave City Hermosa Beach Zip 90254





Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4182-014-019




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

East, 12/09/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD

c. Address: 1212 Ocean Dr City Hermosa Beach Zip 90254





Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4185-014-033




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

East, 12/10/13

P3 Description:

This two story wood-frame single-family residence maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Beach Cottage style with Victorian elements.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD

c. Address: 429 Ocean View Ave City Hermosa Beach Zip 90254





Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4186-017-006




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

West, 12/10/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD

c. Address: 1214 Owosso Ave City Hermosa Beach Zip 90254





Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4185-015-021




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

East, 12/10/13

P3 Description:

This one-story stucco duplex maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Spanish Colonial Revival style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4185-014-004




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

West, 12/10/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4185-015-020




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

East, 12/10/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4185-014-009




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

West, 12/10/13

P3 Description:

This two-story wood-frame single-family residence maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Beach Cottage style with Craftsman elements.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4185-015-014




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

East, 12/10/13

P3 Description:

This one-story stucco bungalow court maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Spanish Colonial Revival style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD

c. Address: 102 Pacific Coast Highway City Hermosa Beach Zip 90254





Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4186-026-806

P3b. Resource Attributes: HP 9. Public utility building



PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

View East, 2013

P3 Description:

The reinforced concrete utility building maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the WPA Moderne style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD

c. Address: 142 Pacific Coast Hwy City Hermosa Beach Zip 90254


P1. Other Identifier: Pitcher House



Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4186-026-018



Prehistoric Historic Both1922, 1938/1966 (LA Assessor)

PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

South, 12/11/13

P3 Description:

This one-story brick commercial property maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Reinaissance Revival style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD

c. Address: 1600 Pacific Coast Hwy City Hermosa Beach Zip 90254





Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4185-005-017




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

North, 12/10/13

P3 Description:

This one-story commercial property maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Mid-Century Modern style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD

c. Address: 1130 Palm Avenue City Hermosa Beach Zip 90254


P1. Other Identifier: Grouping of Three Bungalows: 1131-1141 Manhattan



Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4187-006-012




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

View West, 2013

P3 Description:

Grouping of three Craftsman style bungalows with the addresses of 1131, 1135, and 1141 Manhattan Avenue constructed in 1915 potentially eligible as distinctive examples of one-story Craftsman style bungalows in Hermosa Beach with good integrity.

It appears 1131 and 1135 Manhattan Avenue are located on APN 4187-006-012 and identified with the address of 1130 Palm Avenue. 1141 Manhattan Avenue is located on the adjacent parcel at APN 4187-006-011 and idenitified with the address of 140 Pier Avenue.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD

c. Address: 1717 Palm Dr City Hermosa Beach Zip 90254





Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4183-010-013




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

East, 12/12/13

P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD

c. Address: 22 Pier Ave City Hermosa Beach Zip 90254


P1. Other Identifier: Hermosa Beach Hotel, 26 Pier Ave



Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4187-005-005

P3b. Resource Attributes: HP 5. Hotel/motel



PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

South, 12/12/13

P3 Description:

This three-story commercial buillding (a former hotel) maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Art Deco style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4183-002-015




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;


P3 Description:

This bank building maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the New Formalist style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4187-009-039




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;


P3 Description:

This two story wood-frame former single-family residence converted into a retail store and restaurant maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Beach Cottage style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4183-017-025




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;


P3 Description:

This two-story commercial property maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Mid-Century Modern style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD



P1. Other Identifier: Mrs. Gooch's Building (Hermosa Tabernacle Church)



Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4187-020-017




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;


P3 Description:

This multi-story commercial property maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Roadside Vernacular Style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD

c. Address: 117 Prospect Ave City Hermosa Beach Zip 90254





Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4186-027-037




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

West, 12/11/13

P3 Description:

This one-story stucco property maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Spanish Colonial Revival style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD

c. Address: 30 The Strand City Hermosa Beach Zip 90254





Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4188-002-031




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;


P3 Description:

This multi-story stucco property maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Art Deco style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD



P1. Other Identifier: Sea Sprite Hotel



Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4187-004-026

P3b. Resource Attributes: HP 5. Hotel/motel



PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;


P3 Description:

Thistwo-story motel maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Mid-Century Modern style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4182-005-022




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;


P3 Description:

This two-story stucco single-family residence maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Mediterranean style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4182-005-006




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

East, 12/12/13

P3 Description:

This two story wood-frame single-family residence maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Shingle style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4182-003-001




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;


P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4182-003-032




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;


P3 Description:





Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4182-002-006




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;


P3 Description:

This two-story single-family residence maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Spanish Colonial Revival style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4181-036-005




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;


P3 Description:

This multi-story wood-frame property maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Craftsmen style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD






Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4181-035-020




PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;


P3 Description:

This three story wood-frame property maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the Colonial style.




Trinomial



PRIMARY RECORD

c. Address: 1315 Valley Drive City Hermosa Beach Zip 90254


P1. Other Identifier: Civic Center Complex



Zone mE/ mN

Parcel No. 4187-020-904

P3b. Resource Attributes: HP14. Government building



PCR Services










P2. Location:


Attachments:

Other: (List)









P8. Recorded by:


P7. Owner Address:

; ;

;




;

View South, 2013

P3 Description:

The New Formalist style Civic Center complex was designed by Savo Stoshitch between 1961 and 1965. The Civic Center complex includes buildings for the city hall, public library, police station and fire station buildings. The ground was broken for the library, facing Pier Avenue, on November 17, 1961 and dedicated on August 10, 1962. The city hall was dedicated on January 24, 1965 and the construction cost was approximately $328, 390.

The Civic Center maintains its integrity and is potentially eligible as a good example of the New Formalist style.



Appendix B5:

Windshield Survey Results

Hermosa Beach Windshield Survey Results

Address Number Street NRHP Status Code Parcel No Date Constructed Style Property Type22 Pier Ave 5S3 4187‐005‐005 1924/1940 Art Deco style HP 5. Hotel/motel1940 Bayview Dr 5S3 4182‐018‐006 1921/1942 (LA Assessor) Colonial style HP 2. Single family property1954 Bayview Dr 5S3 4182‐018‐007 1917/1920 (LA Assessor) Craftsman style HP 2. Single family property913 5th St 5S3 4186‐015‐004 1920 Craftsman style HP 2. Single family property2020 Circle Dr 5S3 4182‐018‐026 1927/1935 (LA Assessor) Mediterranean style HP 2. Single family property222 Longfellow Ave 5S3 4181‐019‐010 1934/1935 (LA Assessor) Mediterranean style HP 2. Single family property1547 Manhattan Ave 5S3 4183‐013‐059 1926/1930 (LA Assessor) Neoclassical style HP16. Religious building125 26th St 5S3 4181‐025‐016 1954 Ranch style HP 2. Single family property801 Hermosa Ave 5S3 4187‐002‐021 1921/1923 (LA Assessor) Spanish Colonial Revival style HP 3. Multiple family property254 29th St 5S3 4181‐022‐017 1927 Spanish Colonial Revival style HP 2. Single family property2444 The Strand 5S3 4182‐002‐006 1928 Spanish Colonial Revival style HP 2. Single family property260 30th St 5S3 4181‐021‐020 1930 Spanish Colonial Revival style HP 2. Single family property127 29th St 5S3 4181‐028‐009 1931 (LA Assessor) Spanish Mission style HP 2. Single family property30 The Strand 5S3 4188‐002‐031 1932 Art Deco style HP 2. Single family property2055 Circle Dr 5S3 4182‐017‐016 1936 (LA Assessor) Art Deco style HP 2. Single family property901 Hermosa Ave 5S3 4187‐003‐028 1928 Art Deco/Moderne style HP 6. 1‐3 story commercial building303 24th St 5S3 4182‐014‐036 1912/1930 Arts and Crafts style HP 2. Single family property1412 Manhattan Ave 5S3 4183‐013‐026 1913/1930 (LA Assessor) Arts and Crafts style HP 2. Single family property833 14th St 5S3 4185‐008‐008 1906/1925 (LA Assessor) Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property34 17th St 5S3 4183‐006‐029 1907 Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property68 17th St 5S3 4183‐006‐012 1907/1920 (LA Assessor) Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property25 9th St 5S3 4187‐003‐022 1910 Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property934 Manhattan Ave 5S3 4187‐008‐036 1910 Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property65 14th Ct 5S3 4183‐003‐010 1910/1915 (LA Assesor) Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property84 17th St 5S3 4183‐006‐015 1911 Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property57 14th Ct 5S3 4183‐003‐009 1911 (LA Assessor) Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property2010 Hermosa Ave 5S3 4182‐007‐010 1911/1915 (LA Assessor) Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property37 9th St 5S3 4187‐003‐024 1912 Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property2324 Hermosa Ave 5S3 4182‐010‐012 1912 Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property124 31st St 5S3 4181‐029‐008 1912 (LA Assessor) Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property650 Loma Dr 5S3 4187‐030‐014 1912/1920 (LA Assessor) Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property71 16th St 5S3 4183‐006‐023 1912/1928 (LA Assessor) Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property44 20th St 5S3 4182‐006‐024 1912/1930 (LA Assessor) Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property220 29th St 5S3 4181‐022‐007 1913 Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property1010 4th St 5S3 4186‐021‐002 1913 Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property625 1st Pl 5S3 4188‐022‐032 1915 Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property1403 Bayview Dr 5S3 4183‐013‐006 1916 Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property429 Ocean View Ave 5S3 4186‐017‐006 1916 Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property745 8th Pl 5S3 4187‐028‐014 1917 Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property38 8th Ct 5S3 4187‐015‐042 1919 Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property119 30th St 5S3 4181‐029‐007 1920 Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property906 7th St 5S3 4186‐013‐008 1920 Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property1958 Bayview Dr 5S3 4182‐018‐008 1920 Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property2552 Manhattan Ave 5S3 4182‐012‐001 1920 Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property2122 Monterey Blvd 5S3 4182‐020‐008 1920 Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property


Address Number Street NRHP Status Code Parcel No Date Constructed Style Property Type1717 Palm Dr 5S3 4183‐010‐013 1920 Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property88 18th St 5S3 4183‐007‐013 1920/1929 (LA Assessor) Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property1092 Loma Dr 5S3 4187‐019‐015 1920/1931 (LA Assessor) Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property39 10th St 5S3 4187‐004‐020 1921 Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property838 2nd St 5S3 4186‐026‐014 1921 Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property246 30th St 5S3 4181‐021‐016 1921 Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property1825 Manhattan Ave 5S3 4183‐009‐018 1921 Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property830 Monterey Blvd 5S3 4187‐013‐016 1921 Beach Cottage style HP 3. Multiple family property2202 The Strand 5S3 4182‐003‐001 1921 Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property80 18th Ct 5S3 4183‐007‐024 1921/1925 (LA Assessor) Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property45 14th St 5S3 4183‐004‐018 1921/1927 (LA Assesor) Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property701 Longfellow Ave 5S3 4169‐028‐019 1921/1928 (LA Assessor) Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property832 7th St 5S3 4186‐013‐005 1921/1930 (LA Assessor) Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property2309 Manhattan Ave 5S3 4182‐010‐014 1922 Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property318 31st St 5S3 4181‐020‐024 1923 Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property845 4th St 5S3 4186‐017‐004 1923 Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property826 5th St 5S3 4186‐017‐011 1923 Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property3417 Hermosa Ave 5S3 4181‐034‐002 1923/1933 (LA Assessor) Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property230 Longfellow Ave 5S3 4181‐019‐012 1923/1934 (LA Assessor) Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property28 10th Ct 5S3 4187‐003‐023 1923/1937 (LA Assessor) Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property235 33rd St 5S3 4181‐016‐011 1924 Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property909 3rd St 5S3 4186‐019‐013 1924 Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property615 4th St 5S3 4188‐031‐014 1924 Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property739 8th Pl 5S3 4187‐028‐015 1924 Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property842 19th St 5S3 4184‐012‐002 1924 (LA Assessor) Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property848 19th St 5S3 4184‐012‐001 1924/1925 (LA Assessor) Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property651 8th St 5S3 4187‐029‐019 1924/1930 (LA Assessor) Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property208 8th St 5S3 4187‐022‐016 1925 Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property1835 Manhattan Ave 5S3 4183‐009‐015 1925 Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property238 Pier Ave 5S3 4187‐009‐039 1925 Beach Cottage style HP 6. 1‐3 story commercial building133 30th St 5S3 4181‐029‐012 1926 Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property832 4th St 5S3 4186‐018‐009 1926 Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property708 2nd St 5S3 4188‐022‐021 1927 Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property1062 3rd St 5S3 4186‐024‐033 1927 Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property115 Longfellow Ave 5S3 4181‐031‐005 1927/1928 (LA Assessor) Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property348 33rd St 5S3 4181‐018‐031 1928 Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property1529 Golden St 5S3 4185‐019‐021 1930 Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property2032 Monterey Blvd 5S3 4182‐019‐016 1930 Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property2426 Myrtle Ave 5S3 4182‐014‐019 1930 Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property40 4th St 5S3 4188‐006‐012 1931 Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property63 8th St 5S3 4187‐002‐020 1932 Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property712 Manhattan Ave 5S3 4187‐022‐011 1936/1940 (LA Assessor) Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property327 30th St 5S3 4181‐020‐027 1937 (LA Assessor) Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property1219 Owosso Ave 5S3 4185‐014‐004 1938 Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property705 2nd St 5S3 4188‐028‐050 1939 Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property


Address Number Street NRHP Status Code Parcel No Date Constructed Style Property Type1401 Corona St 5S3 4185‐010‐015 1939 (LA Assessor) Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property2201 Manhattan Ave 5S3 4182‐010‐020 1940 Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property715 2nd St 5S3 4188‐028‐051 1950 Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property571 20th St 5S3 4183‐024‐014 1953 (LA Assessor) Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property824 7th St 5S3 4186‐013‐004 1958/1974 (LA Assessor) Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property126 1st Ct 5S3 4188‐014‐074 1998 Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property930 14th St 5S3 4185‐011‐011 1923/1935 (LA Assessor) Beach Cottage style with Colonial Revival HP 2. Single family property1263 Owosso Ave 5S3 4185‐014‐009 1918 Beach Cottage style with Craftsman elements HP 2. Single family property2204 Monterey Blvd 5S3 4182‐016‐001 1921 Beach Cottage style with Craftsman elements HP 2. Single family property1137 Monterey Blvd 5S3 4187‐009‐044 1961 Beach Cottage style with Craftsman elements HP 3. Multiple family property1212 Ocean Dr 5S3 4185‐014‐033 1920 Beach Cottage style with Victorian elements HP 2. Single family property35 17th St 5S3 4183‐007‐029 1922 Bungalow court Spanish Colonial Revival style HP 3. Multiple family property1322 Owosso Ave 5S3 4185‐015‐014 1924 bungalow court Spanish Colonial Revival style HP 3. Multiple family property356 27th St 5S3 4181‐024‐039 1937 (LA Assessor) Colonial style HP 2. Single family property3033 The Strand 5S3 4181‐035‐020 1938 Colonial style HP 2. Single family property1130 Palm Ave 5S3 4187‐006‐012 1915 Craftsman style HP 2. Single family property209 31st St 5S3 4181‐019‐007 1912/1956 (LA Assessor) Craftsman style HP 2. Single family property63 16th St 5S3 4183‐006‐022 1914 (LA Assessor) Craftsman style HP 2. Single family property811 Loma Dr 5S3 4187‐013‐008 1920/1925 (LA Assessor) Craftsman style HP 2. Single family property1230 Owosso Ave 5S3 4185‐015‐020 1921 Craftsman style HP 2. Single family property1251 Bonnie Brae St 5S3 4185‐014‐041 1929 Craftsman style HP 2. Single family property2464 Manhattan Ave 5S3 4182‐013‐003 1933 Craftsman style HP 2. Single family property2838 The Strand 5S3 4181‐036‐005 1922 Craftsmen style HP 2. Single family property832 Hermosa Ave 5S3 4187‐007‐019 1913/1938 Early 20th Century Utilitarian Brick Commercial HP 6. 1‐3 story commercial building1131 Manhattan Ave 5S3 4187‐006‐011 1915 Early 20th Century Utilitarian Commercial Building. HP 6. 1‐3 story commercial building

Hermosa Avenue 5S3Eight lamp posts on the west and east sides of Hermosa Avenue between 14th and 18th Streets. HP39. Other

10th Street 5D3 See below 1914‐1930

Grouping of five beach bungalows (50, 54, 58, 64, 70 10th Street) potentially eligible as distinctive examples of one‐story beach bungalows in Hermosa Beach with good integrity. HP 2. Single family property

2nd Street 5D3 See below 1923‐1930Grouping of six beach bungalows (1101, 1103, 1025, 1031, 1037, 1041 2nd Street) HP 2. Single family property

650 6th St 5S3 4188‐030‐009 1920 hipped‐roof Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property44 6th St 5S3 4188‐004‐013 1935 hipped‐roof Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property56 7th St 5S3 4187‐016‐021 1938 hipped‐roof Beach Cottage style HP 2. Single family property2418 Manhattan Ave 5S3 4182‐013‐007 1924/1957 (LA Assessor) Italianate style HP 2. Single family property118 35th St 5S3 4181‐033‐021 1922 (LA Assessor) Mediterranean style HP 2. Single family property1602 Hermosa Ave 5S3 4183‐010‐003 1922 (LA Assessor) Mediterranean style HP 2. Single family property139 Longfellow Ave 5S3 4181‐031‐012 1926 Mediterranean style HP 2. Single family property48 9th St 5S3 4187‐002‐010 1928/1936 (LA Assessor) Mediterranean style HP 3. Multiple family property1644 Monterey Blvd 5S3 4183‐016‐034 1934 Mediterranean Style HP 3. Multiple family property


Address Number Street NRHP Status Code Parcel No Date Constructed Style Property Type2901 Manhattan Ave 5S3 4181‐028‐015 1937 Mediterranean style HP 3. Multiple family property2000 The Strand 5S3 4182‐005‐022 1943 Mediterranean style HP 2. Single family property3201 Manhattan Ave 5S3 4181‐031‐014 1946 Mediterranean style HP 6. 1‐3 story commercial building405 31st St 5S3 4181‐010‐003 1947 Mid‐Century Modern style HP 2. Single family property321 Pier Ave 5S3 4183‐017‐025 1948 Mid‐Century Modern style HP 6. 1‐3 story commercial building1501 Hermosa Ave 5S3 4183‐005‐033 1948/1959 (LA Assessor) Mid‐Century Modern style HP 6. 1‐3 story commercial building243 27th St 5S3 4181‐023‐015 1951 Mid‐Century Modern style HP 3. Multiple family property256 Longfellow Ave 5S3 4181‐019‐023 1951 Mid‐Century Modern style HP 2. Single family property244 Longfellow Ave 5S3 4181‐019‐018 1953 Mid‐Century Modern style HP 2. Single family property220 28th St 5S3 4181‐023‐007 1954 Mid‐Century Modern style HP 2. Single family property355 29th St 5S3 4181‐021‐039 1957 Mid‐Century Modern style HP 2. Single family property350 Hermosa Ave 5S3 4188‐008‐034 1957 Mid‐Century Modern style HP 3. Multiple family property238 29th St 5S3 4181‐022‐013 1958 Mid‐Century Modern style HP 2. Single family property1016 The Strand 5S3 4187‐004‐026 1958 Mid‐Century Modern style HP 5. Hotel/motel150 10th St 5S3 4187‐007‐001 1961/1965 (LA Assessor) Mid‐Century Modern style HP 3. Multiple family property1600 Pacific Coast Hwy 5S3 4185‐005‐017 1962 Mid‐Century Modern style HP 6. 1‐3 story commercial building1075 Aviation Blvd 5S3 4185‐016‐019 1963 Mid‐Century Modern style HP 6. 1‐3 story commercial building52 8th St 5S3 4187‐015‐035 1949 Minimal Traditional style HP 2. Single family property565 20th St 5S3 4183‐024‐015 1957 (LA Assessor) Minimal Traditional style HP 2. Single family property47 4th St 5S3 4188‐005‐020 1925 Mission style HP 3. Multiple family property1315 Valley Drive 5S3 4187‐020‐904 1961‐1965 New Formalist Style HP14. Government building81 Pier Ave 5S3 4183‐002‐015 1971 New Formalist style HP 6. 1‐3 story commercial building

2nd Street 5S3 4186‐027‐900 Parkette HP29. Landscape architecture3rd Street 5S3 4186‐018‐900 Parkette HP29. Landscape architecture

1912 Hermosa Ave 5S3 4182‐007‐003 1924 Pueblo Revival style HP 3. Multiple family property646 Braeholm Pl 5S3 4169‐032‐031 1938 Ranch style HP 2. Single family property2202 Manhattan Ave 5S3 4182‐016‐009 1951 Ranch style HP 2. Single family property1139 17th St 5S3 4185‐023‐010 1953 Ranch style HP 2. Single family property2900 Amby Pl 5S3 4169‐032‐033 1957 Ranch style HP 2. Single family property142 Pacific Coast Hwy 5S3 4186‐026‐018 1922, 1938/1966 (LA Assessor) Reinaissance Revival style HP 6. 1‐3 story commercial building526 Pier Ave 5S3 4187‐020‐017 1945 Roadside Vernacular Style HP 6. 1‐3 story commercial building2626 Hermosa Ave 5S3 4181‐025‐013 1950 Roadside Vernacular Style HP 6. 1‐3 story commercial building2601 Hermosa Ave 5S3 4181‐037‐001 1912 Shingle style HP 2. Single family property2317 Manhattan Ave 5S3 4182‐010‐013 1935 Shingle style HP 2. Single family property2028 The Strand 5S3 4182‐005‐006 1940 Shingle style HP 2. Single family property36 18th St 5S3 4183‐007‐027 1911 (LA Assessor) Spanish Colonial Revival style HP 2. Single family property435 Manhattan Ave 5S3 4188‐011‐020 1912/1930 (LA Assessor) Spanish Colonial Revival style HP 3. Multiple family property925 14th St 5S3 4185‐008‐013 1922 (LA Assesor) Spanish Colonial Revival style HP 2. Single family property421 25th St 5S3 4182‐028‐008 1923 Spanish Colonial Revival style HP 3. Multiple family property1214 Owosso Ave 5S3 4185‐015‐021 1923 Spanish Colonial Revival style HP 3. Multiple family property960 13th St 5S3 4185‐011‐036 1923/1926 (LA Assessor) Spanish Colonial Revival style HP 2. Single family property217 28th St 5S3 4181‐022‐004 1924 Spanish Colonial Revival style HP 2. Single family property635 Monterey Blvd 5S3 4187‐022‐022 1924 Spanish Colonial Revival style HP 6. 1‐3 story commercial building1234 14th St 5S3 4185‐017‐004 1924/1925 (LA Assessor) Spanish Colonial Revival style HP 2. Single family property302 19th St 5S3 4183‐016‐033 1924/1930 (LA Assessor) Spanish Colonial Revival style HP 3. Multiple family property


Address Number Street NRHP Status Code Parcel No Date Constructed Style Property Type911 7th St 5S3 4186‐012‐008 1925 Spanish Colonial Revival style HP 2. Single family property2215 Manhattan Ave 5S3 4182‐010‐019 1925 Spanish Colonial Revival style HP 3. Multiple family property1703 Manhattan Ave 5S3 4183‐010‐018 1925/1929 (LA Assessor) Spanish Colonial Revival style HP 3. Multiple family property403 30th St 5S3 4181‐009‐001 1926 Spanish Colonial Revival style HP 2. Single family property942 10th St 5S3 4186‐004‐017 1927 Spanish Colonial Revival style HP 3. Multiple family property321 26th St 5S3 4181‐024‐022 1927 Spanish Colonial Revival style HP 2. Single family property306 29th St 5S3 4181‐022‐021 1927 Spanish Colonial Revival style HP 2. Single family property843 8th Pl 5S3 4186‐008‐005 1927 Spanish Colonial Revival style HP 2. Single family property353 Longfellow Ave 5S3 4181‐018‐032 1927/1931 (LA Assessor) Spanish Colonial Revival style HP 2. Single family property438 Hermosa Ave 5S3 4188‐011‐005 1928 Spanish Colonial Revival style HP 2. Single family property1244 2nd St 5S3 4186‐027‐031 1929 Spanish Colonial Revival style HP 2. Single family property117 Prospect Ave 5S3 4186‐027‐037 1929 Spanish Colonial Revival style HP 2. Single family property254 31st St 5S3 4181‐020‐017 1930 Spanish Colonial Revival style HP 2. Single family property429 Manhattan Ave 5S3 4188‐011‐024 1930 Spanish Colonial Revival style HP 2. Single family property329 27th St 5S3 4181‐023‐029 1931 Spanish Colonial Revival style HP 2. Single family property125 30th St 5S3 4181‐029‐009 1932 Spanish Colonial Revival style HP 2. Single family property358 31st St 5S3 4181‐020‐038 1934 Spanish Colonial Revival style HP 2. Single family property2615 Manhattan Ave 5S3 4181‐025‐015 1935 Spanish Colonial Revival style HP 2. Single family property47 10th St 5S3 4187‐004‐022 1938/1945 (LA Assessor) Spanish Colonial Revival style HP 2. Single family property2302 The Strand 5S3 4182‐003‐032 1940 Spanish Colonial Revival style HP 2. Single family property1818 Monterey Blvd 5S3 4183‐016‐040 1952 Spanish Colonial Revival style HP16. Religious building1936 Monterey Blvd 5S3 4182‐019‐007 1924 Spanish Mission style HP 3. Multiple family property100 19th St 5S3 4183‐009‐011 1933 (LA Assessor) Spanish Mission style HP 2. Single family property

5S3 N/A Hermosa Valley Greenbelt HP31. Urban open space

Hermosa Avenue 5S3 N/AThree lamp posts on the east side of Hermosa Avenue between Pier Avenue and 10th Street. HP39. Other

310 33rd St 5S3 4181‐018‐019 1929 Tudor Revival style HP 2. Single family property426 30th St 5S3 4181‐008‐012 1948/1960 Tudor Revival style HP 2. Single family property716 Cypress Ave 5S3 4187‐031‐011 1968 vernacular modern industrial building HP 8. Industrial building

5S3 4186‐003‐900 Early 1900s Vetter Windmill HP39. Other16th Street 5S3 N/A Walk‐Street HP29. Landscape architecture17th Street 5S3 N/A Walk‐Street HP29. Landscape architecture18th Street 5S3 N/A Walk‐Street HP29. Landscape architecture19th Street 5S3 N/A Walk‐Street HP29. Landscape architecture20th Street 5S3 N/A Walk‐Street HP29. Landscape architecture21st Street 5S3 N/A Walk‐Street HP29. Landscape architecture30th St 5S3 N/A Walk‐Street HP29. Landscape architecture31st St 5S3 N/A Walk‐Street HP29. Landscape architecture4th Street 5S3 N/A Walk‐Street HP29. Landscape architecture5th Street 5S3 N/A Walk‐Street HP29. Landscape architecture6th Street 5S3 N/A Walk‐Street HP29. Landscape architecture7th Street 5S3 N/A Walk‐Street HP29. Landscape architecture8th Street 5S3 N/A Walk‐Street HP29. Landscape architecture9th Street 5S3 N/A Walk‐Street HP29. Landscape architecture


Address Number Street NRHP Status Code Parcel No Date Constructed Style Property Type861 Valley Drive 5S3, 2S2 4187‐017‐900 1935 WPA Moderne style HP39. Other710 Pier Avenue 5S3, 2S2 4187‐024‐902 1939 WPA Moderne style HP14. Government building417 25th St 5S3 4182‐028‐900 Unknown WPA Moderne style HP15. Educational building102 Pacific Coast Hwy 5S3 4186‐026‐806 WPA Moderne style HP 9. Public utility building

Appendix B6:

Archaeological and Paleontological Resources

ARCHAEOLOGICALANDPALEONTOLOGICALRESOURCESASSESSMENT

TOSUPPORTTHEGENERALPLANUPDATEFORTHECITYOFHERMOSABEACH,

LOSANGELESCOUNTY,CALIFORNIA

PreparedFor:

RAIMI&ASSOCIATES2000HearstAvenue,Suite306

Berkeley,CA95670

PMC2729ProspectParkDrive,Suite220

RanchoCordova,CA95670

PreparedBy:

PCRSERVICESCORPORATION1Venture,Suite150

Irvine,California92618Phone:(949)753‐7001

Authors:

FatimaClark,ArchaeologistGavinArcher,MA,RPA,DirectorofArchaeology&Paleontology

VeniceandRedondoBeach,CAUnitedStatesGeologicalSurvey7.5'Quadrangle,unsectionedareas

March2014

i

Table of Contents

Page

EXECUTIVESUMMARY.....................................................................................................................................................ES‐1

1.0 INTRODUCTION.........................................................................................................................................................1 1.1 ProposedProject...................................................................................................................................................................1

2.0 DEFINITIONS...............................................................................................................................................................3 2.1 DefinitionofanArchaeologicalResource...................................................................................................................3 2.2 DefinitionofaTraditionalCulturalResource/Property......................................................................................3 2.3 DefinitionofaPaleontologicalResource....................................................................................................................3

3.0 REGULATORYSETTING...........................................................................................................................................5 3.1 FederalLevel...........................................................................................................................................................................5

3.1.1Section106oftheNationalHistoricPreservationActof1966(Section106)......................................5 3.2 StateLevel................................................................................................................................................................................7

3.2.1CaliforniaRegisterofHistoricalResources..........................................................................................................7 3.2.2CaliforniaEnvironmentalQualityAct.....................................................................................................................8

4.0 CULTURALSETTING..............................................................................................................................................11 4.1 Prehistoriccontext............................................................................................................................................................11

4.1.1Prehistory,EarlyHolocenetoA.D.1542............................................................................................................12 4.1.2Protohistory,A.D.1542‐1769.................................................................................................................................13 4.1.3IntraregionalVariation..............................................................................................................................................13 4.1.4EarlyHistory,A.D.1769‐1822................................................................................................................................14

4.2 MajorSitesandExcavations..........................................................................................................................................14 4.3 GeologicalandPaleontologicalSetting.....................................................................................................................15

5.0 METHODS..................................................................................................................................................................17 5.1 CulturalResourcesRecordsSearch............................................................................................................................17 5.2 SacredLandsFileSearch................................................................................................................................................17 5.3 PaleontologicalResourcesrecordsSearch..............................................................................................................17

6.0 RESULTS....................................................................................................................................................................19 6.1 ArchaeologicalResources...............................................................................................................................................19 6.2 SacredlandsfileSearch...................................................................................................................................................20 6.3 Paleontologicalresourcesrecordssearch...............................................................................................................20

7.0 PROBABILITYOFBURIEDARCHAEOLOGICALRESOURCES....................................................................21 7.1 PROBABILITYOFBURIEDPALEONTOLOGICALDEPOSITS............................................................................21

8.0 CONCLUSION............................................................................................................................................................23 8.1 ArchaeologicalResources...............................................................................................................................................23 8.2 SacredLandsFileSearch................................................................................................................................................23 8.3 PaleontologicalResources.............................................................................................................................................24

9.0 REFERENCESCITED...............................................................................................................................................25

Table of Contents (Continued)

Page

Raimi&Associates,PMC CityofHermosaBeachGeneralPlanUpdatePCRServicesCorporation ii

APPENDICES

APPENDIXA–PERSONNELQUALIFICATIONS

APPENDIXB–NATIVEAMERICANCONSULTATIONDOCUMENTATION

APPENDIXC–PALEONTOLOGICALRESOURCESRECORDSSEARCHRESULTS

List of Tables

PageTable1 CulturalChronologyoftheSouthernCaliforniaCoastfromtheEarlyHolocenethroughthe

SpanishPeriod...................................................................................................................................................................11

Raimi&Associates,PMC CityofHermosaBeachGeneralPlanUpdatePCRServicesCorporation ES‐1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

TheCity (City) ofHermosaBeachproposes toupdate itsGeneralPlan. This report describes the currentarchaeologicalandpaleontologicalconditionsintheCityinsupportoftheGeneralPlanupdate.

PCRServicesCorporation(PCR)conductedanarchaeologicalandpaleontologicalresourcesassessmentoftheCitytoprovideoverviewinformationforthepurposeofupdatingtheCity’sGeneralPlan.Thescopeofwork for this assessment included an archaeological resources records search through the CaliforniaHistoricalResourcesInformationSystem,SouthCentralCoastalInformationCenter(CHRIS‐SCCIC),aSacredLands File (SLF) search through the California Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), and apaleontological resources records search through the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County(NHMLAC),andconclusionsontheprobabilitiesforburiedandthereforepreviouslyunidentifiedresources.

Raimi&Associates,PMC CityofHermosaBeachGeneralPlanUpdatePCRServicesCorporation 1

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 PROPOSED PROJECT

TheCityisproposingtoupdateitsGeneralPlan.AnupdatetotheGeneralPlanwillprovidetheopportunityfor residents, stakeholders and government officials to come together to re‐evaluate Hermosa Beach’sarchaeology and paleontology priorities and goals, and to establish the course for the future ofarchaeologicalandpaleontological resourceswithin theCity. This isanopportunity toexamine theCity’svisionforarchaeologyandpaleontology.Anoverallvisionwillprovideaframeworkforpoliciesrelatingtoarchaeological and paleontological resources and a clear path for their implementation. This reportdescribesthecurrentarchaeologicalandpaleontologicalconditionsoftheCity.

1.2 SCOPE OF STUDY AND PERSONNEL

PCRconductedanarchaeologicalandpaleontologicalresourcesassessmenttooverviewinformationforthepurpose of updating the City’s General Plan. The scope of work for this assessment included anarchaeological and paleontological resources records search through the California Historical ResourcesInformation System, South Central Coastal Information Center (CHRIS‐SCCIC), a Sacred Lands File (SLF)search through the California Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), and a paleontologicalresources records search through the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County (NHMLAC), andconclusions on the probabilities for buried and therefore previously unidentified resources. The recordssearcheswere completedwith the assistance of CHRIS‐SCCIC,NAHC, andNHMLAC staff. The reportwascompiledbyMrs.FatimaClarkandMr.Archer.ManagementofthisassessmentwasoverseenbyMr.Archer.QualificationsofkeypersonnelareprovidedinAppendixA.


2.0 DEFINITIONS

2.1 DEFINITION OF AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCE

According to Section 3 of the Archaeological Resources ProtectionAct (ARPA) of 1979, an archaeologicalresourceisdefinedasanymaterialremainsofpasthumanlifeoractivities.Materialremainscouldinclude,butarenotlimitedtoprojectilepoints,pottery,basketry,bottles,tools,structuresorportionsofstructures,rock carvings, rock paintings, pit houses, intaglios, human skeletal materials, graves, etc. Based on theProtection of Archaeological Resources, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Title 43, Part 7, Section 7.3,materialremainscanprovideevidenceofhumanoccupation,useandactivity.Typesofmaterialremainscaninclude, shelters, surface or subsurface structures, features (such as domestic, storage, cooking andceremonial structures; artificialmounds, canals, reservoirs, bedrockmortars, cairns, cooking pits, borrowpits,refusepits,hearths,kilns,walltrenches,tonameafew.Othermaterialremainswhichcouldrepresentanarchaeologicalfeaturecancompriseoforganicwaste,burials,cremationsandhumanremainsconsistingofbone,teethandmummifiedflesh.

2.2 DEFINITION OF A TRADITIONAL CULTURAL RESOURCE/PROPERTY

Atraditionalculturalresourceoratraditionalculturalpropertyhasbeendefinedasaproperty,orplace,thatiseligibleforinclusionontheNationalRegisterofHistoricPlaces. Atraditionalculturalpropertycouldbeeligible due to its connection with cultural practices and beliefs that are embedded in the history of acommunity,andthatareimportanttopreservingthecontinuityofthatcommunity’straditionalbeliefsandpractices.Protectingpropertiesinordertomaintaincommunitytraditionsisnotnew.Asamatteroffact,apurpose of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 is to “preserve the historical and culturalfoundations of the Nation as living parts of community life.” The National Register includes: districts,buildings, sites, structures, and objects which could be significant to American history, archaeology,engineering, architecture, and culture. As printed on the National Register Bulletin 38, the word“Traditional”hasalsobeenusedtorefertopractices,beliefsandcustomsofacommunitywhicharepasseddown fromgeneration togeneration,either throughoral literature,oralhistoryor through thepracticeoftraditionalskills.Theword“Culture”intheBulletinalsoisusedtotalkaboutthepractices,lifeways,beliefs,andthesocialinstitutionsofanycommunity,andnotjustofNativeAmericancommunities(Parker1993).

2.3 DEFINITION OF A PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCE

Paleontology is defined as a multidisciplinary science which combines geology, biology, chemistry, andphysics in order to understand earth’s life history. Paleontological resources are the remains, traces orimprintsoforganismsthathavebeenpreservedinrocksandsediments. Thesecouldincludemineralized,partiallymineralized or unmineralized bones, teeth, shells, soft tissues, wood, leaf impressions, burrows,footprints, and microscopic remains. Associated rocks or organic matter and the fossils’ associatedsedimentarymatrixarealsoconsideredpaleontologicalresources(MurpheyandDaitch2007).


3.0 REGULATORY SETTING

Numerouslawsandregulationsrequirefederal,state,andlocalagenciestoconsidertheeffectsofaproposedproject on cultural resources. These laws and regulations establish a process for compliance, define theresponsibilities of the various agencies proposing the action, and prescribe the relationship among otherinvolvedagencies(e.g.,StateHistoricPreservationOfficeandtheAdvisoryCouncilonHistoricPreservation).The National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966, as amended; CEQA; the California Register ofHistoricalResources(CaliforniaRegister);andCaliforniaPublicResourcesCode(PRC)5024,aretheprimaryfederalandstatelawsgoverningandaffectingpreservationofhistoricresourcesofnational,state,regional,and local significance. Other relevant regulations at the local level include the County’s General Plan. Adescriptionoftheapplicablelawsandregulationsisprovidedinthefollowingparagraphs.

3.1 FEDERAL LEVEL

3.1.1 Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (Section 106)

TheregulationsimplementingSection106oftheNationalHistoricPreservationActof1966(Section106),asamended,requiresthatthe lead federalagencywith jurisdictionovera federalundertakingmustconsideradverseeffectstohistoricpropertiesbeforethatundertakingoccurs.CompliancewithSection106requiresasequenceofsteps,oftenreferredtoasthe“Section106process.”Thestepsinclude(1)identificationoftheareathatwillbeaffectedbytheproposedundertaking(“areaofpotentialeffect”[APE]);(2)identificationofhistoric or archaeological resources; (3) evaluation of the eligibility of the resources for listing on theNationalRegister ofHistoricPlaces; (4)determinationof the level of effect of theundertakingon eligibleproperties; and (5) consultation with concerned parties and agreement in the form of a Memoranda ofAgreement(MOA)onavoidance,minimization,ormitigationofadverseeffectsoneligibleproperties.Thesestepsaredescribedinmoredetailbelow.

As defined in the NHPA (36 CFR 800.16(d)), an APE “is the geographic area or areas within which anundertakingmaydirectlyor indirectlycausechanges in thecharacteroruseofhistoricproperties, ifsuchpropertiesexist. Theareaofpotentialeffect is influencedby thescaleandnatureof theundertakingandmay be different for different kinds of effects caused by the undertaking.” Federal agencies define theculturalresourcesAPEinconsultationwiththeStateSHPO.TheAPEmayormaynotmatchthefootprintoftheStudyArea.

Identificationofhistoricorarchaeologicalpropertiesisdonebymeansofpedestriansurveyandresearchinappropriatehistoricalandarchaeologicalarchives.TheSecretaryoftheInteriorhassetforthguidelinesforqualifications for archaeologists and historians responsible for identifying, evaluating, recording, andprovidingtreatmentforhistoricalandarchaeologicalresources(36CFR61).TheseguidelinesareupdatedandpublishedbytheNationalParkService(NPS1983).

Evaluation of archaeological and historical property significance follows the significance criteria of theNationalRegisterofHistoricPlaces(NationalRegister).TheNationalRegisterwasestablishedbytheNHPAin 1966 to serve as “an authoritative guide to be used by Federal, State, and local governments, privategroups and citizens to identify the Nation’s cultural resources and to indicatewhat properties should beconsidered for protection from destruction or impairment.” (36 CFR § 60.2). The National Registerrecognizespropertiesthataresignificantatthenational,state,andlocal levels. Guidelinesfornomination

3.0 Regulatory Setting March 2014


require that significant resources exhibit aspects of important themes in American history, architecture,archaeology, engineering, and culture and possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials,workmanship,feeling,andassociationandthat:

a. Areassociatedwithevents thathavemadeasignificantcontributionto thebroadpatternsofourhistory;or

b. Areassociatedwiththelivesofpersonssignificantinourpast;or

c. Embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or thatpossess high artistic values, or that represent a significant distinguishable entity whosecomponentsmaylackindividualdistinction;or

d. Haveyielded,ormaybelikelytoyield,informationimportanttohistoryorprehistory.

If compliancewithSection106 is triggered, the criteria for eligibility to theNationalRegisterprovide thebasisforevaluationandsubsequentmanagementofculturalresourcesintheStudyArea.

InadditiontomeetingtheCriteriaforEvaluation,apropertymusthaveintegrity.“Integrityistheabilityofapropertytoconveyitssignificance.”1AccordingtoNationalRegisterBulletin15(NRB),theNationalRegisterrecognizessevenaspectsorqualitiesthat,invariouscombinations,defineintegrity:location,design,setting,materials,workmanship, feeling,andassociation. Inassessingaproperty's integrity, theNationalRegistercriteriarecognizethatpropertieschangeovertime,therefore,itisnotnecessaryforapropertytoretainallitshistoricphysical featuresor characteristics. Thepropertymust retain,however, theessentialphysicalfeaturesthatenableittoconveyitshistoricidentity.2

ForpropertiesthatareconsideredsignificantunderNationalRegisterCriteriaAandB,theNationalRegisterBulletin,HowtoApplytheNationalRegisterCriteriaforEvaluationstatesthatapropertythatissignificantforits historic association is eligible if it retains the essential physical features thatmadeup its character orappearanceduringtheperiodofitsassociationwiththeimportantevent,historicalpattern,orperson(s).3

Inassessing the integrityofproperties thatareconsideredsignificantunderNationalRegisterCriterionC,theNational Register Bulletin,How to Apply theNational Register Criteria for Evaluation provides that aproperty important for illustrating a particular architectural style or construction techniquemust retainmostofthephysicalfeaturesthatconstitutethatstyleortechnique.4

1 NationalRegisterBulletin15,p.44.2 “A property retains association if it is the placewhere the event or activity occurred and is sufficiently intact to convey that

relationship toanobserver. Like feeling,association requires thepresenceofphysical features that conveyaproperty’shistoriccharacter. Because feelingandassociationdependon individualperceptions, their retentionalone isnever sufficient to supporteligibilityofapropertyfortheNationalRegister.”Ibid,15,p.46.

3 Ibid.4 “Apropertythathaslostsomehistoricmaterialsordetailscanbeeligibleifitretainsthemajorityofthefeaturesthatillustrateits

style in terms of the massing, spatial relationships, proportion, pattern of windows and doors, texture of materials, andornamentation.Thepropertyisnoteligible,however,ifitretainssomebasicfeaturesconveyingmassingbuthaslostthemajorityofthefeaturesthatoncecharacterizeditsstyle.”Ibid.

March 2014 3.0 Regulatory Setting


Archaeological resources, in contrast to historical resources, aremost often eligible underCriterionD fortheir“informationpotential.”ForpropertieseligibleunderCriterionD,lessattentionisgiventotheiroverallcondition,thaniftheywerebeingconsideredunderCriteriaA,B,orC.Archeologicalsites,inparticular,donotexisttodayexactlyastheywereformedastherearealwaysculturalandnaturalprocessesthatalterthedepositedmaterials and their spatial relationships. For properties eligible under CriterionD, integrity isbasedupontheproperty'spotentialtoyieldspecificdatathataddressesimportantresearchquestions.5

Effects of the proposed undertaking on eligible properties are determined by analysis and agreementbetweenfederalagencies, theStateHistoricPreservationOffice(SHPO),andotherconcernedparties. TheCaliforniaSHPO, theOfficeofHistoricPreservation (OHP),establishedby theNHPA to implementhistoricpreservationmanagementatthestatelevel,ismandatedtoreviewNationalRegisternominations,maintaindata on historic properties that have been identified but not yet nominated, and consult with federalagenciesduringSection106review.ConcurrenceoftheOHPonsiteevaluationsandrecommendationswithrespecttoNationalRegistereligibilityandprojecteffectswillberequired.

MOAs on avoidance, minimization, or mitigation of adverse effects on eligible properties are developedthrough the course of the project by federal agencies, SHPO, and other parties concerned with thepreservationanddispositionofculturalresources,includingNativeAmericangroupswithaffiliationtotheStudyArea.

3.2 STATE LEVEL

3.2.1 California Register of Historical Resources

TheCaliforniaOfficeofHistoricPreservation(OHP),asanofficeoftheCaliforniaDepartmentofParksandRecreation,implementsthepoliciesoftheNHPAonastatewidelevel.TheOHPalsomaintainstheCaliforniaHistoricResources Inventory. TheStateHistoricPreservationOfficer (SHPO) isanappointedofficialwhoimplementshistoricpreservationprogramswithintheState’sjurisdictions.

CreatedbyAssemblyBill2881,whichwassignedintolawonSeptember27,1992,theCaliforniaRegisteris“an authoritative listing and guide to be used by state and local agencies, private groups, and citizens inidentifying the existing historical resources of the state and to indicate which resources deserve to beprotected,totheextentprudentandfeasible,fromsubstantialadversechange.”6 ThecriteriaforeligibilityfortheCaliforniaRegisterarebaseduponNationalRegistercriteria.7 Certainresourcesaredeterminedbythestatute tobeautomatically included in theCaliforniaRegister, includingCaliforniaproperties formallydeterminedeligiblefor,orlistedin,theNationalRegisterofHistoricPlaces.8

Tobeeligible fortheCaliforniaRegister,aprehistoricorhistoricpropertymustbesignificantat the local,state,and/orfederallevelunderoneormoreofthefollowingcriteria:

5 NationalRegisterBulletin15,p.46.6 CaliforniaPublicResourcesCode§5024.1(a).7 CaliforniaPublicResourcesCode§5024.1(b).8 CaliforniaPublicResourcesCode§5024.1(d).

3.0 Regulatory Setting March 2014


a. Is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns ofCalifornia’shistoryandculturalheritage;

b. Isassociatedwiththelivesofpersonsimportantinourpast;

c. Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, orrepresentstheworkofanimportantcreativeindividual,orpossesseshighartisticvalues;or

d. Hasyielded,ormaybelikelytoyield,informationimportantinprehistoryorhistory.

AresourceeligiblefortheCaliforniaRegistermustmeetoneofthecriteriaofsignificancedescribedaboveand retain enough of its historic character or appearance (integrity) to be recognizable as a historicalresourceandtoconveythereasonforitssignificance.ItispossiblethatahistoricresourcemaynotretainsufficientintegritytomeetthecriteriaforlistingintheNationalRegister,butitmaystillbeeligibleforlistingintheCaliforniaRegister.

Additionally,theCaliforniaRegisterconsistsofresourcesthatarelistedautomaticallyandthosethatmustbenominated through an application and public hearing process. The California Register automaticallyincludesthefollowing:

Californiaproperties listedontheNationalRegisterandthoseformallyDeterminedEligiblefortheNationalRegister.

CaliforniaRegisteredHistoricalLandmarksfromNo.770onward.

ThoseCalifornia Points ofHistorical Interest that have been evaluatedby theOHP andhavebeenrecommendedtotheStateHistoricalCommissionforinclusionontheCaliforniaRegister.

OtherresourcesthatmaybenominatedtotheCaliforniaRegisterinclude:

HistoricalresourceswithasignificanceratingofCategory3through5.9

Individualhistoricalresources.

Historicalresourcescontributingtohistoricdistricts.

Historicalresourcesdesignatedorlistedaslocallandmarks,ordesignatedunderanylocalordinance,suchasanhistoricpreservationoverlayzone.

3.2.2 California Environmental Quality Act

CEQA is the principal statute governing environmental review of projects occurring in the State. CEQArequires leadagenciestodetermineifaproposedprojectwouldhaveasignificanteffectonarchaeologicalresources(PRCSections21000etseq.).AsdefinedinSection21083.2ofthePRCa“unique”archaeologicalresourceisanarchaeologicalartifact,object,orsite,aboutwhichitcanbeclearlydemonstratedthatwithoutmerelyaddingtothecurrentbodyofknowledge,thereisahighprobabilitythatitmeetsanyofthefollowingcriteria:

9 ThosepropertiesidentifiedaseligibleforlistingintheNationalRegister,theCaliforniaRegister,and/oralocaljurisdictionregister.

March 2014 3.0 Regulatory Setting


Contains information needed to answer important scientific research questions and there is ademonstrablepublicinterestinthatinformation.

Hasaspecialandparticularqualitysuchasbeingtheoldestofitstypeorthebestavailableexampleofitstype.

Is directly associated with a scientifically recognized important prehistoric or historic event orperson.

Inaddition,CEQAGuidelinessection15064.5broadenstheapproachtoCEQAbyusingtheterm“historicalresource”insteadof“uniquearchaeologicalresource.”TheCEQAGuidelinesrecognizethatcertainhistoricalresourcesmayalsohavesignificance.TheCEQAGuidelinesrecognizethatahistoricalresourceincludes:(1)a resource in theCaliforniaRegister ofHistoricalResources; (2) a resource included in a local registerofhistoricalresources,asdefinedinPRCsection5020.1(k)oridentifiedassignificantinahistoricalresourcesurveymeetingtherequirementsofPRCsection5024.1(g);and(3)anyobject,building,structure,site,area,place,record,ormanuscriptwhichaleadagencydeterminestobehistoricallysignificantorsignificantinthearchitectural,engineering,scientific,economic,agricultural,educational,social,political,military,orculturalannalsofCaliforniabytheleadagency,providedtheleadagency’sdeterminationissupportedbysubstantialevidenceinlightofthewholerecord.

If a lead agency determines that an archaeological site is a historical resource, the provisions of section21084.1of thePRCand section15064.5of theCEQAGuidelines apply. If an archaeological site doesnotmeetthecriteriaforahistoricalresourcecontainedintheCEQAGuidelines,thenthesiteistobetreatedinaccordancewiththeprovisionsofPRCsection21083,whichisauniquearchaeologicalresource.TheCEQAGuidelinesnotethatifanarchaeologicalresourceisneitherauniquearchaeologicalnorahistoricalresource,theeffectsoftheprojectonthoseresourcesshallnotbeconsideredasignificanteffectontheenvironment.(CEQAGuidelines§15064.5(c)(4)).

3.2.3 Paleontological Resources

Paleontological resources are also affordedprotectionby environmental legislation set forthunderCEQA.Appendix G (part V) of the CEQA Guidelines provides guidance relative to significant impacts onpaleontological resources, stating that “a project will normally result in a significant impact on theenvironment if it will …disrupt or adversely affect a paleontological resource or site or unique geologicfeature.”TheGuidelinesdonotdefine“directlyorindirectlydestroy,”butitcanbereasonablyinterpretedasthe physical damage, alteration, disturbance, or destruction of a paleontological resource. TheGuidelinesalsodonotdefinethecriteriaorprocesstodeterminewhetherapaleontologicalresource issignificantor“unique.”


4.0 CULTURAL SETTING

ThefollowingisareviewoftheculturalchronologyoftheHermosaBeachareafromthebeginningofhumanoccupation of the region through prehistory, protohistory, and early history. It integrates currentarchaeological, ethnographic, and historical knowledge. Although no known scholarly archaeologicalexcavationshavebeenconductedwithinthecitylimits,importantexcavationsconductedwithintheareaaredescribed.

4.1 PREHISTORIC CONTEXT

ArchaeologistsgenerallydividethehumanhistoryofthesouthernCaliforniacoastregionintothreemajortimeintervals:Prehistoric,Protohistoric,andHistoricasshownbelowinTable1,CulturalChronologyoftheSouthernCaliforniaCoastfromtheEarlyHolocenethroughtheSpanishPeriod. Althoughsomescholarsnowprefer the use of arbitrary Early, Middle and Late Holocene periods (Altschul and Grenda 2002), theprehistory of the region is traditionally subdivided into the Paleocoastal,Milling Stone, Intermediate, andLatePrehistoricperiods (Elsasser1978;Schuyler1978). History is subdivided into theSpanish,Mexican,andAmericanperiods.AlthougharchaeologicalsitesmayalsobeoftheMexicanandAmericanperiods,thisdiscussionfocusesonprehistory,protohistory,andtheSpanishperiod.ForinformationontheMexicanandAmerican periods, the reader is referred to the historic resources context prepared for the General Planupdate.

Table 1

Cultural Chronology of the Southern California Coast from the Early Holocene through the Spanish Period

Date Range Period

A.D.1769–1822 SpanishA.D.1542–1769 Protohistoric

1,500YearsBeforePresent(YBP)10toA.D.1542 LatePrehistoric4,000–1,500YBP Intermediate7,000–4,000YBP MillingStone

Morethan7,000YBP Paleocoastal

Source: Adapted from Elsasser (1978) and Schuyler (1978), and modified.

The cultural chronologyof the region is a subjectof ongoing investigation. Thedatingof cultural changecontinues to undergo refinement using the results of new excavations and analyses, as does ourunderstandingof theprocessesof cultural change. Theneed for further research accounts for theuse ofsome broad date ranges and the presentation of some key but untested hypothesis within the followingdiscussion.10 Byconvention,“present”issetatA.D.1950.

4.0 Cultural Setting March 2014


4.1.1 Prehistory, Early Holocene to A.D. 1542

HermosaBeach is located in thenorthernmostPeninsularRangesportionof thesouthernCaliforniaCoastprehistoriccultureareawhichencompassestheTransverseRanges,thenorthernPeninsularRanges,andthecoastal zone and near‐shore islands from Point Conception in the north to San Diego Bay in the south(Elsasser1978).Thesubsistenceofprehistorichunter‐gatherersinthecoastalzoneandnear‐shoreislandsdepended on marine shellfish, fish, and mammals supplemented with terrestrial game and a variety ofterrestrialplants.Furtherinland,subsistenceopportunitieswerelimitedtoterrestrialplantsandanimals.

AlthoughPaleocoastal sites are rare, some conclusive evidence of Paleocoastal occupationduring the latePleistoceneandearliestHoloceneisemerging.11SomeoftheoldesthumanskeletonsfoundintheAmericas,those collected from theHaverty Site,were discovered only 10miles north‐northwest ofHermosa Beach(Brooksetal.1990). AstheHavertyskeletonswerecollected in1924,directandabsolutedateswerenotavailable until they were made possible by late twentieth century technological developments. A morerecentstudyconcludesthatatleastsomeoftheskeletonsmaybeof“terminalPleistoceneage”(Brooksetal.1990:80). Humanbone collected fromArlington Springson SantaRosa Island in1959has recentlybeendatedto10,000‐11,500YBP(Johnsonetal.2002)andiscontemporaneouswithpygmymammothbonealsofoundonthe island(Agenbroadetal.2005). TheearliestarchaeologicalremainsatDaisyCavehavebeendatedto10,500YBP(Erlandsonetal.1996). Theyincludetheearliestmarineshellmidden,basketry,andcordage inNorthAmerica. LocatedonSanMiguel Island, thesite implies theuseofboatsbytheterminalPleistocene.12

TheMillingStoneperiod(Wallace1955)13marksashiftfromasubsistencestrategywhichemphasizedbiggamehunting(ofwhichlarge,flutedspearpoints,andthebonesofbutcheredlargemammalsarehallmarks)to onewhich, for inland populations, emphasized plant seeds (as represented by themanos andmetatesused tomill them, and carbonized seeds). Thispresumably adaptive changeoccurredperhaps as early as7,000YBPandnolaterthanabout4,000or3,000YBP(Elsasser1978).

MoreelaboratematerialculturerepresentsthesubsequentIntermediateperiod,about4,000or3,000YBPtoabout1,500YBP(Elsasser1978;Wallace1955):baskethoppermortars,bowlmortars,pestles,broadleaf‐shapedblades,heavyside‐notchedandleaf‐shapedspearpoints,stemmedatlatldartpoints,implementsandornamentsofbone,horn,shell,asphalt,andsteatite,andinhumationswithredocherandstonecairns.Thiselaborationofmaterial culturemay reflectburgeoningandaggregatingpopulations, and intensified socialandpoliticalinteraction.

The Late Prehistoric period, circa 1,500YBP (Elsasser 1978),marks the advent of the bow and arrow asevidenced by finely chipped, stemless, concave‐ and convex‐based arrow points, and steatite arrowstraighteners.Alsoaddedtothematerialcultureweresteatitecontainersand,infargreaterabundancethanpreviously,shell,bone,andstonebodyornaments.Inhumationsincludedabundantanddiversegravegoods.Thebowandarrowmayhavebeenadoptedordevelopedprimarilyasaweaponratherthanasahunting

11 Humananddomesticdogbone,collectedfromLaBreaTarPitsabout13milesnorth‐northeastofHermosaBeach,hasbeendatedto

thebeginningoftheHolocene,butradiocarbondatingcomplicationsmakethedateuncertain(Erlandson1994).12 UnlikeSantaRosaIsland,SanMiguelIslandwasnotconnectedtothemainlandbyalandbridgeduringtheterminalPleistocene.13 Wallace(1955)usestheterm“MillingStoneHorizon.”

March 2014 4.0 Cultural Setting


tool,suggestingthefullrealizationofpopulationpressureandterritoriality.Laboriouslymanufacturedandvisuallyattractivecontainersandornaments,andmortuarycustomsrequiringthesacrificeofconsiderablyvaluable material possessions, suggest a fully developed concept of wealth. Warfare, territoriality andwealthallpointtoincipienttribalism.

4.1.2 Protohistory, A.D. 1542‐1769

TheProtohistoricperiodisthetimebetweeninitialcontactandsubsequent,tenuousandperipheralcontactwitha literateculture,tothefullestablishmentofa local literateculture. IntheSouthernCaliforniaCoastculturearea,theadventofprotohistoryismarkedbythemaritimeEuropeanexplorationsofCabrilloinA.D.1542. Duringthefollowing227years,directcontactbetweenlocal indigenouspeopleandEuropeanswaslimitedtooccasionalEuropeanvisitsbysea.SpanishexplorationandtheestablishmentofSpanishcoloniesinMexico, includingalongtheBajaCaliforniaPeninsula,affordedopportunities forbriefepisodesofdirectcontact and for peripheral contact such as “down‐the‐line” or “neighbor‐to‐neighbor” exchange ofinformationandgoods(LightfootandSimmons1998).

European artifacts, although rare, are found in protohistoric archaeological deposits (King 1978). Glasstradebeadsarethemostcommon.Oneexample,albeitfromfarthernorthalongtheCaliforniacoast,isthatofChinaceramicfragmentsfromanA.D.1595SpanishshipwreckwhichwerecollectedandreworkedbytheCoastMiwokforgenerations(Starr2005). Europeandiseases likelytookatollon indigenouspopulationsduring protohistory (Erlandson and Bartoy 1995). Historical documentation of local people and eventsbeganwiththeoverlandPortoláexpeditionin1769andtheestablishmentofSpanishmissionsinthe1770s.

In1542,whenCabrillo,leaderofthefirstEuropeanexplorationoftheCaliforniacoast,sailedhisshipsintotheSanPedroandSantaMonicabays,a“greatnumberofIndianvillages”wereobserved(Walker1951:11):

Villageswere situated all along the Pacific shorewherever freshwaterwas available fromflowing springs or cañon streams. In this semi‐arid land established villages were almostinevitablewherevertherewasastretchof level landalongthebanksoftheLosAngelesRiverandthe fewotherstreamswithinthecountyarea. Inthemountains,thecañonsusuallyweretoonarrow toafford sites forvillages;but settlement sitesare tobe foundwhere the cañonsopenoutandthelandlevelsoff…

ItisnotablethatthecoursesoftheriversoftheLosAngelesBasin,priortomodern,artificialchannelization,fluctuatedhorizontallyassedimentsbuiltup,orweretransportedandshiftedduetostormwatersand,attheirestuaries, tidalandwave forces. Prehistoricvillagesite locations,hence,maycorrelatewith former,pluvialriverchannelsratherthanwithcurrentchannels.Priortofloodsin1824‐1825,forexample,theLosAngelesRiveremptiedintoSantaMonicaBay,notSanPedroBay(Johnston1962:77).

4.1.3 Intraregional Variation

Local peoples, dubbed Gabrielino14 by the Spanish when they colonized the southern California coast,occupiedtheSouthernChannel Islands,coastaland inlandLosAngelesBasin,andadjacentportionsof the14 TheGabrielino(alternativelyspelledGabrieleno)aresocalledfortheiraggregationattheMissionSanGabrielArcángelduringthe

earlySpanishPeriod.Currently,manyGabrielinospreferthetermGabrielino‐TongvaorsimplyTongva.

4.0 Cultural Setting March 2014


SanGabrielMountains inprehistoryandprotohistory.Theyreliedongatheredwildplantsandtrappedorhuntedanimals for food. Plantsalsoprovidedbuildingmaterialandrawmaterial forcraftmanufacturingsuch as basket making. Animal bone, skin, fur, and feathers were used as raw material for craftmanufacturing. Certain types of stonewere quarried and asphaltumwas gathered for tool and containermanufacturing.

Onthe islandsandalongthecoast,marineresources,especiallyshellfish,greatlysupplementedterrestrialresources. Fish and seamammalswere also important foods, andwhale boneswere sometimes used inbuildingwindbreaksandhouses(Sallsetal.1993). Theseaalsoyieldedasphaltumwhichwassupremelyusefulforwater‐proofingboatsandbaskets,haftingarrowheads,andawidevarietyofothermanufacturing.The island provided abundant steatitewhich is relatively rare on themainland andwas valued as a rawmaterial forbowlsandanarrayofother items,notablybodyornaments.The islandersandcoastalpeoplemusthavebeenchallengedbythenotoriouslydangerouschannelcrossing,buttheydevelopedsuitableboatsand it does not appear that island‐mainland interaction was diminished by this natural barrier.EthnographicdatasuggestclosesocialtiesbetweenSanClementeandSantaCatalinaislands,andbetweentheislandsandtheadjacentmainland(Johnson1988).

Although steep terrain presumably hampered foot travel and offered fewer locales suitable for sedentaryhabitation, the mountains were not a hinterland. Mountain occupation sites included bothhunting/gathering camps and villages. Acorns and piñon nuts were food staples found only in themountains/foothills environment, and small game was plentiful (Bean and Smith 1978). According toAltschulandGrenda(2002),theGabrielinomainlandersalsotypicallychosetheirprimarysettlementsnearthe interfaces of several environmental zones in order to acquire access to a greater diversity of foodresources.Onceinawhile,smallgroupswouldseparatetodistantcampstocollectseasonalplantsorfoods.It is also known that the Gabrielino living in the California Bight received the bulk of their calories fromvegetalresources(AltschulandGrenda2002).

4.1.4 Early History, A.D. 1769‐1822

ThehistoryofthesouthernCaliforniacoastalregioniscommonlydividedintotheSpanishPeriod,A.D.1769‐1822,theMexicanPeriod,A.D.1822‐1847,andtheAmericanPeriod,A.D.1847‐1960.FortheGabrielinoandotherNativeAmericans,Euro‐Americanexplorationandsettlement,andtheSpanishmissionsystem,meantdisease,strife,capture,displacementandpopulationdeclinefromfirstcontactuntilthe20thcentury(Castillo1978;CostoandCosto1987;McCawley1996).

During the Spanish period, from the time of the overland Portolá expedition until the culmination of theMexican War of Independence, the Hermosa Beach area was a portion of Rancho San Pedro, but likelyexperiencedlittleSpanishpresenceotherthanpossiblycattlegrazing. Itwasaconsiderabledistancefromthecentersofpopulationandcommerce. ThePueblode losAngeleswas15miles to thenorth‐northeast,MissionSanGabrielwasabout22milestothenortheast,MissionSanFernandowasabout28milestothenorth,andMissionSanJuanCapistranowasabout48milestothesoutheast(BeckandHaase1974).

4.2 MAJOR SITES AND EXCAVATIONS

TheMalagaCovesite,locatedonthenorthernshorelineofthePalosVerdesPeninsulaaboutthreeandahalfmilessouthofHermosaBeach,wasexcavatedbyWalker(1951) in1936. Walker(1951:27) identifiesthe

March 2014 4.0 Cultural Setting


MalagaCovesiteastheremainsofChowgna,avillagewhichwasinhabitedatthetimeofCabrillo’svisittotheareain1542.Thesite,asandduneonthehighestbluffinthearea,includesarchaeologicaldepositsfromadepthofeightfeettoadepthof33feetinfourstrata.Thedeepestandoldeststratumwascharacterizedby“microliths– tinychippedstone implements…andworkedshells”, anda lackofburials (Walker (1951:38‐39). The stratumabovewasdistinguishedby “manosandmetates…,mostly in cairns”and reburials.Thethirdstratumwasnotablefor“largestonemortarsandpestles,andshellfishhooks”andcremations.“Stonearrowpoints,basket‐hoppermortars,andpaintedgamingstones”,andflexedburialswerethehallmarksofthetopstratum.Glasstradebeads(indicativeoftheProtohistoricalperiod)werepresentintheuppermostdepositsofthetopstratum.

4.3 GEOLOGICAL AND PALEONTOLOGICAL SETTING

ThemunicipalboundaryofHermosaBeach is locatedwithin theLosAngelesBasin,which isanalluviatedlowland,sometimesreferredtoasthecoastalplain.Thebasinisunderlainbyastructuraldepressionthatisimportant for its structural relief and complexity in relation to its small size and for its abundant oilproduction.Thepresent‐dayLosAngelesBasinislocatedatthenorthendofthePeninsularRangesprovinceand is bounded on the east and southeast by the Santa AnaMountains and the San JoaquinHills, on thenorthwestbytheSantaMonicaMountains,andtheprovinceboundaryissituatedonaneast‐trendingzoneoffaults.Thebasinwasformedabout15millionyearsagoduringtheNeogene,whenthelandwasunderwaterandduringacrustaldisruptioncausedbyaclockwiseshiftinthesurroundingmountains. Thisweakeningledtotheformationofalargebowlofthebasinandsedimentfromtheseaandriversaccumulatedinthicklayers in the undersea bowl. Then, about fivemillion years ago, the crustal stretching collapsed and thebasinwasforcedtothesurface.TheLosAngelesBasinismadeupoffourlargesubdivisionsofcontrastingrocksandeachsubdivisionisconsideredastructuralblock,whosecontactwithadjacentblocksaremajorzones of faulting or flexure. These blocks have been informally designated as the southwestern,northwestern,central,andnortheasternblocks.ThesouthwesternblockcoversthemunicipalboundaryofHermosaBeachandmostofitisalowplainthatextendsfromSantaMonicaatthenorthwesttoLongBeachat the southeast. The Palos VerdesHills are themost outstanding topographic feature of the block. TherocksofLosAngelesbasinaredividedintotwolargegroupsbyadistinctunconformityofmidCretaceousage.Belowtheunconformity,basementrocks,metamorphicandigneouscrystallinerocksofPrecambriantoearlyLateCretaceousagecanbefound.Abovetheunconformity,athicksequenceofmarineandnonmarinesedimentaryandvolcanicrocksofLateCretaceoustoRecentagecanbefound(Yerkesetal.1965).

Geologicmapsindicatethatthemunicipalboundaryisunderlainbyancientandrecentlyactiveeolian(sanddune)deposits.Thesedepositsareknownasparalicsediments,alsoconsistingoftidalmarshdepositsandalluvium and range in age from firm Pleistocene to loose Holocene deposits. From the bottom of theseparalic deposits to a depth of about 500 feet below sea level is the Pleistocene San Pedro Formation,consistingofmassiveandpoorlyconsolidatedmarinesanddeposits.BeneaththeSanPedroFormationtoadepth of several thousand feet below ground surface are marine sedimentary units extending from thePliocenetotheMioceneandincludingnumerousoil‐bearingstrata(VerhoffandSpauldingn.d).


5.0 METHODS

ThestudyareawastheCityandaonehalfmilezonearoundtheoutsideofthemunicipalboundary.

5.1 CULTURAL RESOURCES RECORDS SEARCH

OnOctober15,2013,Mr.ArchercommissionedarecordssearchforthestudyareaattheCHRIS‐SCCIC.Therecords search included a reviewof all recorded archaeological andhistorical resourceswithin the studyarea. In addition CHRIS‐SCCIC records, the California Points of Historical Interest (CPHI), the CaliforniaHistoricalLandmarks(CHL),theCaliforniaRegister,theNationalRegister,andtheCaliforniaStateHistoricResources Inventory (HRI) listings were consulted. The purpose of the record searchwas to determinewhetherornot therearepreviouslyrecordedarchaeologicalorhistoricalresourceswithin thestudyarea.The results also provide a basis for assessing the sensitivity of the study area for additional, buried andthereforeundiscoveredarchaeologicalresources.

5.2 SACRED LANDS FILE SEARCH

OnOctober15,2013,Mr.ArchercommissionedaSLFrecordssearchof thestudyareathroughtheNAHC.The purpose of the search was to obtain information as to the nature and location of additional NativeAmericanresourcesforwhichrecordsmaynotbeavailableattheCHRIS‐SCCIC.

5.3 PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES RECORDS SEARCH

OnNovember21,2013,Mr.Archer commissionedapaleontological resources records search through theNHMLAC.Thisinstitutionmaintainsfilesofregionalpaleontologicalsiterecordsaswellassupportingmapsand documents. This record search entailed an examination of current geologic maps and known fossillocalitiesinsideandwithinthegeneralvicinityofthestudyarea.Theobjectiveoftherecordsearchwastodeterminethegeologicalformationsunderlyingthestudyarea,whetheranypaleontologicallocalitieshavepreviouslybeenidentifiedwithintheStudyAreaor inthesameorsimilarformationsnearthestudyarea,andthepotentialforexcavationsassociatedwiththestudyareatoencounterpaleontologicalresources.Theresults also provide a basis for assessing the sensitivity of the study area for additional and buriedpaleontologicalresources.


6.0 RESULTS

6.1 ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES

TheresultsoftherecordssearchindicatedthatnoarchaeologicalsitesorisolateshavebeenrecordedwithintheCity. However,onearchaeological site,CA‐LAN‐1872, is locatedwithinonehalfmileof themunicipalboundary. Morespecifically,CA‐LAN‐1872 is located immediatelyadjacent to thesouthernportionof themunicipalboundaryandwithinanarrowpieceoflandbetweenHerondoStreetonthenorthandBerylStreetonthesouth.CA‐LAN‐1872isaprehistoricandhistoricsite,originallyrecordedin1990.Thesiteconsistedof three different loci (A, B, and C). The historic portion of the site was described as three commercialbuildings fromthe1880sandnarrowgaugetrackswhichrun intotwobuildings. In1990,aPhaseIITestExcavation consisting of a total of 37 shovel test pits (STPs) and one 1x3 meter (m) excavation wasconductedwithinthethreeloci.PhaseIITestExcavationsareconductedforhistoricorprehistoricsitesinordertomakearecommendationregardingtheireligibilityforinclusionontheNationalRegisterofHistoricPlaces (NRHP). Creosoted wood was found in one STP, so a 1x1 m unit was excavated and it yielded awoodenstructurewithwirenails. Thisstructurewasdeterminedtobehistoric;however,itsfunctionwasnotclear. STPsandaugerexcavationthroughouttheentiresiterevealedtheexistenceofshellandlimitedartifactstoadepthof120centimeters(cm)belowsurface.Themajorityoftheshoveltestpitsdemonstratedverydisturbeddeposits.However,oneareaclosetothethreehistoricstructures,LocusBwasexcavatedasitseemedtobelessdisturbed.Shelldepositswereidentifiedat100cmbelowsurface,whileintrusivedebriswasfoundat60cmbelowsurface,andasaresultmonitoringwasrecommended.In1996,supplementaryexcavations were conducted in the surrounding area of Locus B. The excavations revealed that theprehistoric items recoveredwere intermixedwith historic andmodern trash. Interviewswith the localsindicated that the property in which the site was located had been previously used for soil storage andthereforenofurtherworkwasrecommendedatthesite.Thereportforthetestingindicatedthatthesiteiscurrently being occupied by a mini storage facility and that the site has been destroyed (Verhoff andSpauldingn.d;Foster1990).

It isbelievedthattheprehistoricportionofCA‐LAN‐1872representstheremainsofthehistoriceraoftheGabrielino village, Engva. The historic and prehistoric components of the site have been recommendedeligiblefortheNRHP.ThevillageofEngva,isbelievedtohavebeenlocatedalongtheedgesoftheOldSaltLake(alsoonceknownasLakeSalinas)atRedondoBeach.TheRedondo1896historicmapdepictstheOldSaltLakeaslocatedwithinverycloseproximitytothesouthernportionofthemunicipalboundary.TheOldSaltLakehasbeendesignatedasaStateHistoricLandmark(SHL)No.373andit is listed intheCaliforniaRegisterforHistoricalResources.J.Arbucklerecordedthesitein1980andonMarch27,1955amarkerwaserected by the Tierra Del Rey Parlor #300 Native Daughters of the Golden West and mentions the saltharvestingofNativeAmerican, earlyEuropean andMexican settlers. TheOld Salt Lakewasdescribed aslocatedapproximately300yardsfromtheocean,wherethefourtanksassociatedwiththeRedondoSteamPlantarenowinplace.TheOldSaltLakewasaboutahalfmilelongandaboutfourtosixfeetdeep.Thesaltlakewas fed fromasalt spring,andnot fromthePacificOcean. Archaeologicalexcavationsareknown tohavebeenconductedatthevillageofEngvain1960.AnunknownnumberofmiddenswithlittledepthwerereportedtohavebeenfoundwithintheSouthernCaliforniaEdisonPlant.Amiddenisadepositwhichcancontainshell,animalbone,andotherrefuseandindicateshumanactivity.

The excavations revealed that the area was utilized by salt harvesting and that temporary camps wereoccupiedthroughoutdifferentlocationsatthedunes. Wallace(2008)mentionedthataportionofthissite

6.0 Results March 2014


had been destroyed by the construction of an apartment complex, expansion of the Redondo BeachGeneratingStation,androadexpansion.Eventually,sometimeintheearly1900s,theOldSaltLakewasfilledinwithconcentratedchloridebrine(OldSaltLake1890,1958,1984;VerhoffandSpauldingn.d).

Forinformationonhistoricresources,pleaserefertotheHistoricResourcesreport.


TheSLFsearchdidnotyieldinformationaboutNativeAmericantraditionalculturalplacesinthestudyarea.However,theNAHCstatesthattheabsenceofrecordsintheSLFdoesnotprecludetheexistenceofculturalresources (Singleton 2013). Places of traditional cultural importance may be indentified through futureconsultationswith appropriate, knowledgeableNativeAmerican informants. TheNAHCprovided contactinformationforinformantsaffiliatedwithninetotalrepresentativesfromtheGabrielino‐TongvaTribesandtheLACity/CountyNativeAmericanIndianCommission.

6.3 PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES RECORDS SEARCH

ThepaleontologicalrecordsdidnotincluderecordsofvertebratefossillocalitieswithintheCity.TheCityislocatedwithinsurfacedepositsofactivebeachsands,youngerQuaternarydunesandsandolderQuaternarydunesands.Thesedepositsarenotknownforcontainingvertebratefossilsintheuppermostlayersandnovertebratefossillocalitiesexistnearby.However,olderQuaternaryterracedeposits(marineandterrestrial)mayunderliethesurficialmaterial inthestudyarea. TheseolderQuaternarydepositsareknowntohaveyielded vertebrate fossils at shallow depth. The closest locality (LACM 4444), located approximately 2.5mileseastof themunicipalboundaryproducedspecimensofa terrestrialhorseandmarinewhale (Equusand Cetacea) at 15 feet below the surface. South of this locality and near the intersection of CrenshawBoulevardand236thStreet,LACM1839producedafossilspecimenofahorse(Equus)at35feetbelowthesurface. Another location of importance, LACM 2035 (near the intersection of Praire Avenue and 139thStreet)produceda fossil specimenofamammoth (Mammuthus)atanunknowndepth. TheNHMLAChasindicatedthatexcavationsextendingdownintoolderQuaternarydepositsmayencountersignificant fossilspecimens. Therefore, any substantial excavations within the Project site should bemonitored (McLeod2013).

Inaddition, records fromtheUCMPand thePaleoBiologyDatabase indicate that theSanPedroFormationwhichunderliestheCityhasproducednumerousfossilsofdiversevertebratefaunawithintheLosAngelesBasin.Thesefindshaveincludedproboscidean,equid,wolf,sloth,bison,andfishfossils.Moreimportantly,immediately adjacent to the municipal boundary and at the Redondo Beach Generating Station, aRancholabrian‐age toothof anextinct llamawas foundat adepthof approximately30 feetbelowgroundsurface.AfossilhorsetoothwasalsofoundneartheRedondoBeachGeneratingStationatadepthofabout35feetbelowsurface(VerhoffandSpauldingn.d).


7.0 PROBABILITY OF BURIED ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES

AlthoughCA‐LAN‐1872andtheOldSaltLakeassociatedwiththevillageofEngvaareknowntohaveexistedimmediatelyadjacenttothesouthernportionofthemunicipalboundaryandapproximately300yardsfromtheocean,thesehavebeendestroyedbymoderndevelopmentorcoveredwithfilledinthepast.Inaddition,theprobabilityforencounteringburiedarchaeologicalresourcesalonglowlyingareasnearthebeachislowdue to shifting beach sands and sand dunes which are too dynamic to preserve prehistoric sites.Furthermore,evidencesuggeststhattheGabrielinoonthemainlandchosetheirsettlementsneartheborderofseveralenvironmentalzonesinordertoacquireagreaterdiversityoffoodresources(AltschulandGrenda2002). Prehistoric people also chose their habitation sites near fresh water sources, especially at theconfluencesofrivers.ThebodyoffreshwaterclosesttothemunicipalboundaryistheDominguezSlough,located approximately five miles east. Sloughs are known for providing a great variety of wildlife, fish,shellfish, furbearing animals, andwaterfowl. A great varietyofplants andanimals, suchas frogs, snakes,beavers, muskrats, and minks could also be found in sloughs. The next closest bodies of water to themunicipal boundary are in theBallonaWetlands located approximately ninemiles north, theWilmingtonLagoonlocatedapproximately9.25milessoutheast,andtheLosAngelesRiverlocatedabout11mileseastofHermosaBeach. Based on all of this information, it ismore likely that if buried archaeological resourcesexistwithinthemunicipalboundarythatthesearelocatedawayfromlowlyingareasnearthebeach,andathigherelevationswheretherewouldhavebeenaccesstoagreatvarietyoffoodandfreshwaterresources.

7.1 PROBABILITY OF BURIED PALEONTOLOGICAL DEPOSITS

Themunicipalboundaryislocatedwithinsurfacedepositsofactivebeachsands,youngerQuaternarydunesands and older Quaternary dune sands. According to the NHMLAC, These deposits are not known forcontaining vertebrate fossils in the uppermost layers and no vertebrate fossil localities exist nearby(McLeoad2013). Asaresult,theprobabilityofencounteringburiedpaleontologicaldepositswithinactivebeachsands,youngerQuaternarydunesandsandolderQuaternarydunesandsinthemunicipalboundaryisconsideredlow.

Three fossil localities of the same sedimentary deposits (older Quaternary terrace deposits)which occurwithin the municipal boundary have been found nearby and these have yielded fossils of two horses, amarinewhale,andamammothatdepthsbetween15to35feetbelowsurface(McLeod2013).Inaddition,theSanPedroFormationwhichunderliesthemunicipalboundaryhasproducednumerousfossilsofdiverseinvertebratefaunawithinthegeneralvicinityofLosAngelesBasin.Thesefindshaveincludedproboscidean,equid, wolf, sloth, and bison, and fish fossils. More importantly, immediately adjacent to the municipalboundaryandattheRedondoBeachGeneratingStation,aRancholabrian‐agetoothofanextinctllamawasfound at a depth of approximately 30 feet belowground surface. A horse toothwas also foundnear theRedondoBeachGeneratingStationat adepthof about35 feetbelowsurface (Verhoff andSpauldingn.d).Based on all these findings, the potential to encounter buried paleontological resources within olderQuaternarydepositsinthemunicipalboundaryisconsideredatleastmoderate.TheNHMLACrecommendsmonitoringofanydeepsubstantialexcavationsofolderQuaternarydeposits.


8.0 CONCLUSION

8.1 ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES

Although no resources have been recorded within the City, CA‐LAN‐1872 was recorded as locatedimmediately adjacent to the southern municipal boundary, along Herondo Street. CA‐LAN‐1872 is aprehistoricandhistoricsite,originallyrecordedin1990.Thesiteconsistedofthreedifferentloci(A,B,andC). ArchaeologicalexcavationswereconductedatCA‐LAN‐1872in1990and1996. The1990excavationswereconductedwithinthethreelocianditresultedintherecommendationforarchaeologicalmonitoringatLocusB.LocusBwaslessdisturbedthantheotherlociandshelldepositswereidentifiedat100cmbelowsurface.The1996excavationswerefocusedonLocusBanditrevealedthattheprehistoricitemsrecoveredwereintermixedwithhistoricandmoderntrash. Interviewswiththelocals indicatedthatthepropertyinwhich the sitewas located had been previously used for soil storage and therefore no furtherworkwasrecommendedatthesite.ThearchaeologicaltestingreportalsoindicatedthatthesitehadbeendestroyedandthattheareawhereCA‐LAN‐1872oncestoodiscurrentlybeingoccupiedbyaministoragefacility.

CA‐LAN‐1872isbelievedtorepresentaportionoftheGabrielinovillageofEngva,whichwaslocatedalongtheedgesoftheOldSaltLake.TheOldSaltLakewaslocatedapproximately300yardsfromtheoceanandwithinverycloseproximitytothesouthernportionofthemunicipalboundary.TheOldSaltLakehasbeendesignatedasaStateHistoricLandmark(SHL)No.373anditislistedintheCaliforniaRegisterforHistoricalResources. ArchaeologicalexcavationsareknowntohavebeenconductedatthevillageofEngva in1960.Anunknownnumberofmiddenswith littledepthwere reported tohavebeen foundwithin theSouthernCalifornia Edison Plant. The excavations revealed that the area was utilized by salt harvesting and thattemporary campswere occupied throughout different locations at the dunes. Wallace (2008)mentionedthataportionofthissitehadbeendestroyedbytheconstructionofanapartmentcomplex,expansionoftheRedondoBeachGeneratingStation,androadexpansion.Sometimeintheearly1900s,theOldSaltLakewasfilledinwithconcentratedchloridebrine(OldSaltLake1890,1958,1984;VerhoffandSpauldingn.d).

AlthoughCA‐LAN‐1872andtheOldSaltLakeassociatedwiththevillageofEngvaareknowntohaveexistedimmediately adjacent to the southern portion of the municipal boundary and close to the ocean, theseresources are also known to have been destroyed by modern development or filled in the past. Theprobabilityforencounteringburiedarchaeologicalresourcesalonglowlyingareasnearthebeachislowduetoshiftingbeachsandsandsandduneswhicharetoodynamictopreserveprehistoricsites.Thereisamuchhigherprobabilitythatifburiedarchaeologicalresourcesexistwithinthemunicipalboundarythattheyarelocatedatmuchhigheraltitudesinareaswheretherewouldhavebeenaccesstoagreatvarietyoffoodandfreshwaterresourcesinthepast.


The SLF search through theNAHC failed to indicate the existence ofNative American traditional culturalplacesintheProjectsite.However,theNAHChasstatedthat“theabsenceofarchaeologicalrecordeditemsdoesnotprecludetheirexistence”(Singleton2013).Inaddition,theresultsofthearchaeologicalresourcesrecords search also did not reveal the presence of traditional cultural properties within the municipalboundary.Nevertheless,theabsenceoftraditionalculturalplaceswillneedtobeconfirmedbyconducting

8.0 Conclusion March 2014


Native American consultation when the Draft General Plan Update is ready for public review and whenNativeAmericanrepresentativescanprovidetheircomments.

8.3 PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES

Thepaleontologicalrecordssearchrevealedthatthemunicipalboundaryislocatedwithinsurfacedepositsofactivebeachsands,youngerQuaternarydunesandsandolderQuaternarydunesands.AccordingtotheNHMLAC,Thesedeposits are not known for containing vertebrate fossils in the uppermost layers andnovertebrate fossil localitiesexistnearby (McLeod2013). Therefore, theprobabilityof encounteringburiedpaleontologicaldepositswithinactivebeachsands, youngerQuaternarydunesandsandolderQuaternarydunesandsinthemunicipalboundaryisconsideredlow.

The paleontological records search also indicated that three fossil localities have been found in similarsedimentary deposits as those which occur within the municipal boundary (older Quaternary terracedeposits). Theselocalitiesarelocatednearbyandhaveproducedfossilspecimensoftwohorses,amarinewhaleandamammoth(McLeod2013).Inaddition,recordsfromtheUCMPandthePaleoBiologyDatabaseindicate that the San Pedro Formationwhich underlies themunicipal boundary has produced numerousfossilsofdiverseinvertebratefaunawithintheLosAngelesBasin.Moreimportantly,immediatelyadjacentto themunicipalboundaryandat theRedondoBeachGeneratingStation,aRancholabrian‐age toothofanextinctllamawasfoundatadepthofapproximately30feetbelowgroundsurface. Ahorsetoothwasalsofoundnear theRedondoBeachGeneratingStationat adepthof about35 feetbelowsurface (Verhoff andSpaulding n.d). Based on all these findings, the potential to encounter buried paleontological resourceswithinolderQuaternarydepositsinthemunicipalboundaryisconsideredatleastmoderate.TheNHMLACrecommendsmonitoringofanydeepsubstantialexcavationsofolderQuaternarydeposits.


9.0 REFERENCES CITED

Agenbroad,LarryD.,JohnR.Johnson,DonMorris,andThomasW.Stafford2005 MammothsandHumansasLatePleistoceneContemporariesonSantaRosaIsland.InProceedingsof

theSixthCaliforniaIslandsSymposium,D.GarcelonandC.Schwemm,eds.,pp.3‐7.NationalParkServiceTechnicalPublicationCHIS‐05‐01,InstituteforWildlifeStudies,Arcata,California.

Altschul,JeffreyH.andDonnR.Grenda,editors2002 IslandersandMainlanders:PrehistoricContextfortheSouthernCaliforniaBight.SRIPress,Tucson,

Arizona.

ArchaeologicalResourcesProtectionAct1979 Section3,definitionofan“archaeologicalresource”,http://www.cr.nps.gov/local‐

law/FHPL_ArchRsrcsProt.pdf,accessedJanuary23,2014.

Bean,LowellJohn,andCharlesR.Smith1978 Gabrielino.In:HandbookofNorthAmericanIndians,Vol.8,California.RobertF.Heizer,ed.,pp.538‐

549.SmithsonianInstitution,Washington.

Beck,WarrenA.,andYnezD.Haase1974 HistoricalAtlasofCalifornia.UniversityofOklahomaPress,Norman.

Brooks,Sheilagh,RichardH.Brooks,G.E.Kennedy,J.Austin,JamesR.Firby,LouisA.Payen,PeterJ.Slota,Jr.,ChristineA.Prior,andR.E.Taylor1990 TheHavertyHumanSkeletons:Morphological,Depositional,andGeochronologicalCharacteristics.

JournalofCaliforniaandGreatBasinAnthropology12(1).

Castillo,EdwardD.1978 TheImpactofEuro‐AmericanExplorationandSettlement.InHandbookofNativeAmericanIndians,

Volume8:California.RobertF.Heizer,ed.,pp.99‐127.SmithsonianInstitution,Washington.

Costo,Rupert,andJeannetteHenryCosto,editors1987 TheMissionsofCalifornia:ALegacyofGenocide.IndianHistorianPress,SanFrancisco.

Elsasser,AlbertB.1978 DevelopmentofRegionalPrehistoricCultures.InHandbookofNorthAmericanIndians,Vol.8,

California.RobertF.Heizer,ed.,pp.37‐57.SmithsonianInstitution,Washington.

Erlandson,J.M.1994 EarlyHunter‐GatherersoftheCaliforniaCoast.PlenumPress,NewYork.

Erlandson,JonM.,andKevinBartoy1995 Cabrillo,theChumash,andOldWorldDiseases.JournalofCaliforniaandGreatBasinAnthropology

17(2):153‐173.

9.0 References Cited March 2014


Erlandson,J.M.,D.J.Kennett,L.Ingram,D.A.Guthrie,D.P.Morris,M.A.Tveskov,G.J.WestandP.L.Walker1996 AnArchaeologicalandPaleontologicalChronologyforDaisyCave(CA‐SMI‐261),SanMiguelIsland,

California.Radiocarbon38(2):355‐373.

Foster,JohnM.1990 SiteRecordFormforCA‐LAN‐1872.OnfileattheSouthCentralCoastalInformationCenter,

CaliforniaStateUniversityFullerton.

Johnson,JohnJ.1988 ThePeopleofQuinqukia:SanClementeIsland'sOriginalInhabitantsasDescribedinEthnohistoric

Documents.OnfileattheNaturalResourcesOffice,NavalAirStation,NorthIsland.

Johnson,JohnR.,ThomasW.Stafford,Jr.,HenryO.Ajie,andDonP.Morris2002 ArlingtonSpringsRevisited.InProceedingsoftheFifthCaliforniaIslandsSymposium.D.Brown,K.

MitchellandH.Chaney,ed.,pp.541‐545.USDIMineralsManagementServiceandTheSantaBarbaraMuseumofNaturalHistory,SantaBarbara,California.

Johnston,BerniceEastman1962 California’sGabrielinoIndians.SouthwestMuseum,LosAngeles.

King,Chester1978 ProtohistoricandHistoricArchaeology.InHandbookofNativeAmericanIndians,Volume8:

California.RobertF.Heizer,ed.,pp.58‐68.SmithsonianInstitution,Washington.

Lightfoot,KentG.,andWilliamS.Simmons1998 CulturecontactinProtohistoricCalifornia:SocialContextsofNativeandEuropeanEncounters.

JournalofCaliforniaandGreatBasinAnthropology20(2):138‐170.

McCawley,William1996 TheFirstAngelinos:TheGabrielinoIndiansofLosAngeles.MalkiMuseumPress,Banning,California.

Murphey,P.C.,andD.Daitch2007 PaleontologicalOverviewofOilShaleandTarSandsAreasinColorado,UtahandWyoming.U.S.

DepartmentofEnergy,ArgonneNationalLaboratory.ReportpreparedfortheU.S.DepartmentofInterior,BureauofLandManagement.

OldSaltLake1890 Exhibit11“CaliforniaStateMiningBureau”‐oldreportsfilteredforOldSaltLakedata."LakeSalinas,

LosAngelesCounty",byE.B.Preston,AssistantintheField,CaliforniaStateMiningBureau,ReportX,(p.281),CaliforniaGeologicalSurveyLibrary.Accessedon02/05/2014,http://www.oldsaltlake.org/exhibits/exhibit_12.html

1917 Exhibit121917,"HighSchoolGetsValuableGifts",Newspaperarticle,RedondoReflex,Feb.02,1917RedondoBeachMainPublicLibrary.Accessedon02/05/2014,http://www.oldsaltlake.org/exhibits/exhibit_12.html

March 2014 9.0 References Cited


1958 Exhibit11“CaliforniaStateMiningBureau”‐oldreportsfilteredforOldSaltLakedata."SaltInCalifornia",DivisionofMinesBulletin175.Accessedon02/05/2014,http://www.oldsaltlake.org/exhibits/exhibit_12.html

Parker,PatriciaL.1993 TraditionalCulturalProperties,WhatYouDoandHowWeThink.InCRM,Volume16,SpecialIssue.

CulturalResourceManagementInformationforParks,FederalAgencies,IndianTribes,States,LocalGovernmentsandthePrivateSector.U.S.DepartmentoftheInterior,NationalParkService,CulturalResources.http://www8.nau.edu/~hcpo‐p/Parker.pdf,websiteaccessedJanuary23,2014.

R.F.Yerkes,T.H.McCulloh,J.E.Schoellhamer,andJ.GVedder1965 GeologyoftheLosAngelesBasinCalifornia‐anIntroduction.GeologicalSurveyProfessionalPaper

420A.GeologyoftheEasternLosAngelesBasinSouthernCalifornia.UnitedStatesGovernmentPrintingOffice,Washington.ReportaccessedonFebruary11,2014,http://pubs.usgs.gov/pp/0420a/report.pdf

Salls,RoyA.,MarkRaab,andKatherineG.Bradford1993 TheSanClementeIslandPerspectiveonCoastalResidentialStructuresandtheEmergenceof

Sedentism.JournalofCaliforniaandGreatBasinAnthropology15(2):176‐194.

Schuyler,RobertL.1978 Indian‐Euro‐AmericanInteraction:ArchaeologicalEvidencefromNon‐IndianSites.InHandbookof

NorthAmericanIndians,Vol.8,California.RobertF.Heizer,ed.,pp.69‐79.SmithsonianInstitution,Washington.

Singleton,Dave2013 SacredLandsFileSearchfortheHermosaBeachGeneralPlanUpdate.ReceivedviafaxonOctober

16,2013.

Starr,Kevin2005 California:AHistory.ModernLibrary,NewYork.

Verhoff,JamesandW.GeoffreySpauldingn.d RedondoBeachEnergyProject(RBEP),PaleontologicalResources,Section5.8,AccessedFebruary8,

2014.www.energy.ca.gov/sittingcases/redondo_beach/

Walker,EdwinFrancis1951 FivePrehistoricArchaeologicalSitesinLosAngelesCounty,California.SouthwestMuseum,Los

Angeles,California.

Wallace,WilliamJ.1955 ASuggestedChronologyforSouthernCaliforniaCoastalArchaeology.SouthwesternJournalof

Anthropology11(3):214‐230.

2008 GraveGoodsvs.MiddenArtifacts:TheCaseofPalmer‐Redondo.InAvocadostoMillingstone:PapersinHonorofD.L.True,pp.203‐206.MonographsinCaliforniaandGreatBasinAnthropology,No.5.

A‐1

APPENDIX A – Personnel Qualifications

Gavin Archer, M.A., RPA, DIRECTOR OF ARCHAEOLOGY & PALEONTOLOGY

Education M.A., Anthropology (Archaeology

Thesis), University of Arizona, Tucson, 1990

B.A., Anthropology, University of Arizona, Tucson, 1987

Archaeology Field School University of Alaska, Fairbanks, 1986

Registrations/Certifications Member, Register of Professional

Archaeologists

Certified Archaeologist, County of Riverside (#155)

Professional Affiliations Archaeological Institute of America

Summary Mr. Archer has studied and practiced anthropology and archaeology in California, and several other states since 1982. His research interests include the prehistory, history and ethnography of the American West. His expertise includes all aspects of archaeological investigation, documentary research, Native American consultation, permitting, and regulatory compliance.

Mr. Archer has successfully managed diverse cultural resources consulting projects for public and private sector clients, and including a variety of resources: Native American prehistoric occupation sites, traditional cultural properties, and sacred lands, and Historic Period sites, buildings, and structures. Examples of his field experience include: a central Alaskan Paleoindian encampment, windward O’ahu Island pondfields, Archaic, Hohokam, and Trincheras villages of the Sonoran Desert, and the Tomato Springs sites of coastal southern California with hunter-gatherer occupation components dating from 7,500 years before present to Spanish contact in the late 1700s. His research has also included landfill “garbology,” Tarahumara ethnoarchæology, Great Depression homesteading, and the early 20th century remains of downtown Phoenix and Los Angeles.

Experience Complying with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) – Mr. Archer has provided NAGPRA consulting and coordination services to a local university since 2011. He prepared a NAGPRA compliance strategic plan for the university, and is coordinating consultation with multiple Native American tribes regarding the cultural affiliation of human remains in the university’s collections and repatriation requests.

Protecting a Sacred Site in Los Angeles – Mr. Archer managed archaeological monitoring for Los Angeles Unified School District during a beautification project on the historic University High School campus. The campus includes the remains of a protohistoric Indian village and natural springs considered sacred by Gabrielino Indians. The archaeological monitoring program ensured the protection of the village site and springs, and resulted in the discovery of remains of the original portico of the Administration Building which was destroyed by the Long Beach Earthquake of 1933.

Inventorying Archaeological and Paleontological Resources within the Long Beach Unified School District – Mr. Archer managed a district-wide inventory which entailed extensive documentary research. The inventory identified scientifically important vertebrate fossils and fossiliferous deposits, and numerous prehistoric and protohistoric Indian occupation sites including a village site which is considered a sacred ancestral site by Gabrielino and Juaneño Indians. The study included formulation of preservation guidelines for use during future development and redevelopment of multiple school sites.

Repairing Crude Oil Pipelines in Angeles National Forest, Los Angeles County, California – Mr. Archer conducted a monitoring program for Plains All American Pipeline. The repair work required vehicle access along the Old Ridge Route, a highway built in 1913 and listed on the National Register of Historic Places. The monitoring program ensured that the Old Ridge Route and historical sites along it were not damaged, and the repair work was completed in compliance with Angeles National Forest's conditions of project approval.

Redeveloping in Historic Downtown San Juan Capistrano, Orange County, California – Mr. Archer conducted test excavations to evaluate the significance of archaeological deposits on a site in historic downtown San Juan Capistrano. Excavations were conducted adjacent to Acjacheme, an indigenous ancestral village site, and the 18th Century Spanish Mission San Juan Capistrano. Some deposits were found to include prehistoric and protohistoric Native American artifacts, including rare early pottery fragments. Mission Period artifacts were also found. The study was completed in cooperation with the Juaneño Band of Mission Indians and is in use for the planning of mixed-use redevelopment of the site.

Recovering Human Remains on a Southern California Coastal Bluff – Mr. Archer conducted an excavation to recover human remains unearthed at a home in a neighborhood which was built, in the 1940s, on a prehistoric Native American village site. Sediments and artifacts at the site indicated a Late Prehistoric (AD 450-1500) date. The excavation was completed in cooperation with the Juaneño Band of Mission Indians. The remains were repatriated to the Juaneño for reburial and home improvement work recommenced.

Bringing Retail Opportunities to the Historic Community of Highgrove, Riverside County, California – Mr. Archer conducted the assessment for the proposal to build a much-needed shopping plaza on a long-vacant lot in the unincorporated community of Highgrove, which facilitated county permitting for the project. Highgrove has a rich agricultural heritage and the area includes historic canals, railroads, and buildings. A required a cultural resources assessment in accordance with Riverside County standards and guidelines.

Fatima Clark, ARCHAEOLOGIST/PALEONTOLOGIST

Education M.A. (ABT), Anthropology,

California State University Fullerton, 2008

B.A., Anthropology, California State University Fullerton, 2005

Continuing Education Workshop: The Art and Science of

Flintknapping, California Desert Studies Center, 2013

40-Hour HAZWOPER Training – Update, 2012

Successful CEQA, Compliance-Southern California Edison, Environmental Training, 2011

Cultural Resources Protection under CEQA and Other Legislative Mandates, UCLA Extension, 2010

Public Archaeology Course, California State University Fullerton, 2005

Professional Affiliations Society for California Archaeology

Summary Fatima Clark is an archaeologist with eight years of hands-on experience. Her field experience is complimented by the courses she has taken and participation in many archaeological excavations in California, Arizona and Peru. In addition to her archaeology background, Ms. Clark has been cross trained in Paleontology and conducted surveys, monitoring and co-authored associated reports.

Ms. Clark has gained valuable knowledge in Cultural Resource Management by conducting field surveys, conducting Phase II testing, site recordation, records searches, monitoring, and writing CEQA document sections and Phase I CEQA-level reports for a wide variety of projects including energy, water and road infrastructure projects as well as residential and mixed-use. Working closely with Southern California Edison, Ms. Clark has become seasoned in Deteriorated Pole projects, General Order 131D projects, Fiber Optic, and Capitol projects.

Experience Archaeology: Ms. Clark has been involved in a number of aspects of archaeological investigations, from Phase pedestrian surveys and construction monitoring to excavations and testing, and compliance documentation. Ms. Clark has prepared CEQA sections including the Initial Study sections for the Anaheim 3-Lot Henning Way residential Subdivision, the Burbank Reservoir No. 1 Replacement project, and the Century Woods project in Los Angeles.

She has performed pedestrian surveys and written Phase I reports for over 50 Southern California Edison (SCE) projects, as well as for the 7.5-acre proposed Highgrove library site and Badlands Landfill stockpile project for Riverside County, Cal Water Palos Verdes pipeline project, the City of San Clemente Recycled Water project, the Cascade Solar project in San Bernardino County, and the 2nd+PCH Mixed-Use project in Long Beach, pursuant to applicable State and Federal regulations (e.g., CEQA and NEPA).

Her monitoring experience includes a number of projects for the City of San Juan Capistrano, Burbank Water & Power, as well as work at the Orange County Great Park (on the former El Toro MCAS), with the city of Mission Viejo, and on Lennar Homes and John Laing Homes Housing development projects.

Ms. Clark has also participated on a Phase II site investigation for the Cascade Solar Project, located in the 29 Palms area where she excavated several Shovel Test Probes within a newly recorded archaeological site. As part of the Phase II field investigation, Ms. Clark has also conducted lab analysis of lithic materials recovered at the archaeological site. She has also written peer reviews for Archaeological Survey Reports for San Bernardino Associated Governments transportation projects, preparing Native American letters (Senate Bill 18), and performing records searches at several Southern California Information Centers.

Southern California Edison: Working for the Deteriorated Poles Program Ms. Clark has been in charge of sending work to outside consultants, updating the pole projects database, conducting field surveys, monitoring, records searches, creating maps and shape files, writing letters for poles within federal lands, finalizing archaeological/biological clearances, coordinating with individuals involved with these clearances and updating SCE’s archaeological library of reports. Ms. Clark has also performed archaeological reviews for General Order 131D projects, which are subject to the rules and regulations of the California Public Utilities Commission and therefore follows CEQA mandated requirements. Ms. Clark has been tasked with conducting records searches, field surveys, writing final clearances, assisted several Distribution Substation Planning and Grid Reliability & Maintenance meetings, Fiber Optics projects, and coordinated with SCE staff.

Among the larger projects was the Valley South Subtransmission Capitol project with three alternative routes for a total of approximately 25 miles in length) for the purpose of developing a Proponent's Environmental Assessment (PEA) for the California Public Utilities Commission’s review. Her role on the Valley South project includes records searches, creating a Scope of Work, reviewing PEA bidders’ proposals, assessing/developing study corridors, developing suitable access roads to avoid/minimize impact to archaeological sites, and project coordination.

Paleontology: Ms. Clark has performed a number of paleontological surveys and monitoring projects, and co-authored the associated reports. Projects include ithe in the Highgrove community of Riverside County; the proposed San Clemente Recycled Water Project study areas associated with the installation, transmission, distribution of pipelines, and expansion of facilities at water treatment plants; and the 2nd + PCH mixed-use project in Long Beach.

B‐1

APPENDIX B – Sacred Lands File Search Results

C‐1

APPENDIX C – Paleontological Resources Records Search Results

Vertebrate Paleontology SectionTelephone: (213) 763-3325

Fax: (213) 746-7431e-mail: [email protected]

6 December 2013

Planning Consultants ResearchOne Venture, Suite 150Irvine, CA 92618

Attn: Gavin Archer, Director of Archaeology & Paleontology

re: Paleontological Records Check for the proposed City of Hermosa Beach General Plan UpdateProject, Los Angeles County, project area

Dear Gavin:

I have conducted a thorough search of our Vertebrate Paleontology records for theproposed City of Hermosa Beach General Plan Update Project, Los Angeles County, project areaas outlined on the portions of the Venice and Redondo Beach USGS topographic quadranglemaps that you sent to me via e-mail on 21 October 2013. We do not have any vertebrate fossillocalities that lie within the proposed project site boundaries, but we do have localities nearbyfrom the same sedimentary units that may occur as subsurface deposits in the proposed projectarea.

West of Hermosa Avenue in the proposed project area the surface deposits are of activebeach sands. Eastward from there to about Ardmore Avenue in the proposed project area thesurface deposits consist of younger Quaternary dune sands. Further eastward in the proposedproject are the surface deposits consist of older Quaternary dune sands. These deposits typicallydo not contain significant vertebrate fossils, at least in the uppermost layers, and we have novertebrate fossil localities anywhere nearby from such deposits. Older Quaternary terracedeposits, both marine and terrestrial, underlie these type of surficial deposits somewhat inlandand they also probably underlie the surficial material in the proposed project area. These olderQuaternary deposits have produced vertebrate fossils, sometimes at relatively shallow depth.

Our closest vertebrate fossil locality from these older Quaternary deposits is LACM 4444,directly east of the southern portion of the proposed project area at the Mobil Oil Refineryproperty just west of Crenshaw Boulevard and just south of 190 Street, that produced fossilth

specimens of both terrestrial horse, Equus, and marine whale, Cetacea, at a depth of 15 feetbelow the surface. South of locality LACM 4444, southeast of the proposed project area near theintersection of Crenshaw Boulevard and 236 Street, our fossil vertebrate locality LACM 1839th

also produced a fossil specimen of horse, Equus, at a depth of about 35 feet below the surface. About equidistant from the proposed project area, but northeast near the intersection of PrairieAvenue and 139 Street, our locality LACM 2035 produced a fossil specimen of mammoth,th

Mammuthus, at an unrecorded depth.

Shallow excavations in the dune and beach sands in the proposed project area are unlikelyto uncover significant vertebrate fossil remains. Deeper excavations that extend down into olderQuaternary deposits, however, may well encounter significant fossil vertebrate specimens. Anysubstantial and deep excavations in the proposed project area, therefore, should be monitoredclosely to quickly and professionally recover any fossil remains discovered while not impedingdevelopment. Any fossils recovered during mitigation should be deposited in an accredited andpermanent scientific institution for the benefit of current and future generations.

This records search covers only the vertebrate paleontology records of the Natural HistoryMuseum of Los Angeles County. It is not intended to be a thorough paleontological survey ofthe proposed project area covering other institutional records, a literature survey, or any potentialon-site survey.

Sincerely,

Samuel A. McLeod, Ph.D.Vertebrate Paleontology

enclosure: invoice

Appendix B7:

2013 Hermosa Beach Housing Element

CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH

HOUSING ELEMENT POLICY PLAN

2013-2021

September 10, 2013

Hermosa Beach 2013-2021 Housing Element

Housing Policy Plan iii September 10, 2013

Contents I. Introduction ................................................................................................................................. I-1

A. Purpose of the Housing Element ............................................................................................ I-1 B. Scope and Content of the Housing Element ...................................................................... I-1 C. Public Participation ................................................................................................................... I-2 D. Consistency with Other Elements of the General Plan ...................................................... I-2

II. Housing Policy Plan ................................................................................................................... II-1 A. Goals, Objectives and Policies ...............................................................................................II-1 B. Housing Element Policies ..........................................................................................................II-1 C. Description of Housing Programs ...........................................................................................II-4 D. Housing Program Implementation Matrix .......................................................................... II-10

List of Tables Table II-1 Program Implementation Matrix ......................................................................................... II-10 Table II-2 Quantified Objectives 2013-2021 ........................................................................................ II-10


Housing Policy Plan iv September 10, 2013

This page intentionally left blank

Hermosa Beach 2013-2021 Housing Element I Introduction

Housing Policy Plan I-1 September 10, 2013

I. INTRODUCTION A. Purpose of the Housing Element The Housing Element describes the City’s needs, goals, policies, objectives, and programs regarding the preservation, improvement, and development of housing within Hermosa Beach. The Element provides an indication of community housing needs in terms of affordability, availability, adequacy, and accessibility. The Element provides a strategy to address housing needs and identifies a range of specific housing programs to meet identified needs.

The Housing Element is an official municipal response to a growing awareness of the need to provide housing for all economic segments of the community, as well as a legal requirement for all California jurisdictions. It provides Hermosa Beach with the opportunity to plan for the existing and future housing needs in the community. This Element has been prepared in compliance with the 2013-2021 planning cycle for cities within the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) region. It identifies strategies and programs that focus on: 1) providing diverse housing sites and opportunities; 2) conserving and improving the existing affordable housing stock; 3) removing govern-mental and other constraints to housing development; and 4) promoting equal housing opportunities.

B. Scope and Content of the Housing Element The California Legislature recognizes the role of local general plans and particularly the Housing Element in implementing statewide housing goals to provide decent and adequate housing for all persons. Furthermore, the Legislature stresses continuing efforts toward providing affordable housing for all income groups. The California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) also sets forth specific requirements regarding the scope and content of housing elements, including the following major components:

• An analysis of the city’s demographic and housing characteristics and trends (Technical Report, Chapter I). The key findings from this section include the city’s smaller than average typical household size, very low level of overcrowding, generally well-maintained housing stock, and high rate of small-scale redevelopment of older housing units;

• An evaluation of land, financial, and administrative resources available to address the City’s housing goals (Technical Report, Chapter II). Key findings from this section include the city’s lack of vacant land and minimal financial resources for housing assistance;

• A review of potential constraints, both governmental and non-governmental, to meeting Hermosa Beach’s housing needs (Technical Report, Chapter III). Key findings from this section include no unwarranted regulatory constraints to housing production, but very high land cost which makes affordable housing production very difficult;



• The Housing Policy Plan for addressing the City’s identified housing needs, including housing goals, policies and programs (Chapter II of this document);

• An evaluation of the appropriateness and effectiveness of previous policies and programs in achieving the City’s objectives, and the progress in implementing Housing Element programs (Technical Report, Appendix A); and

• A parcel-specific inventory of vacant and underutilized land (Technical Report, Appendix B).

• A description of the public participation process during the preparation and adoption of the Housing Element (Technical Report, Appendix C).

C. Public Participation Public participation is an important component of the planning process, and this update to the Housing Element has provided residents and other interested parties numerous opportunities to be involved in the preparation of the element. Public notices of all meetings and hearings were published in the local newspaper in advance of each meeting, as well as posted on the City’s website. The draft Housing Element was made available for review at City Hall and posted on the City’s website prior to public meetings. The document was also circulated to housing advocates and non-profit organizations representing the interests of lower-income persons and special needs groups. After receiving comments on the draft Housing Element from the State Housing and Community Development Department, a proposed final Housing Element was prepared and made available for public review prior to adoption by the City Council.

Appendix C provides a listing of opportunities for public involvement in the preparation of this Housing Element update, identification of persons and organizations that were invited to participate, and a summary of issues raised during the process.

D. Consistency with Other Elements of the General Plan The Housing Element must be consistent with other elements of the General Plan, which was last updated in 1994. The Housing Element has been prepared within the context of the other General Plan Elements and is consistent with the policies and proposals set forth therein. The Housing Element is closely related to development policies contained in the Land Use Element, which establishes the location, type, and intensity of land uses throughout the City. The Land Use Element determines the number and type of housing units that can be constructed in the various land use districts. Areas designated for commercial and industrial uses create employment opportunities, which in turn, create demand for housing. The Circulation Element establishes the location and scale of streets, highways and other transportation routes that provide access to residential neighborhoods. Because of the requirement for consistency among the various General Plan elements, any proposed amendment to one element will be evaluated against the other elements to ensure that no conflicts occur. If necessary to maintain internal consistency, amendments to other elements of the General Plan will be processed concurrently with future Housing Element amendments.



Government Code Section 65302 requires that the Land Use Element be reviewed annually for consistency with Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and state Department of Water Resources (DWR) flood hazard maps, and that amendments to the Safety and Conservation Elements that are required to address flood hazard issues be adopted upon the first amendment to the Housing Element after January 1, 2009. The City will comply with these requirements prior to or concurrent with Housing Element adoption.

SB 1087 of 2005 requires cities to provide a copy of their Housing Elements to local water and sewer providers, and also requires that these agencies provide priority hookups for developments with lower-income housing. The Housing Element will be provided to these agencies immediately upon adoption.

Hermosa Beach 2013-2021 Housing Element II Housing Policy Plan

Housing Policy Plan II-1 September 10, 2013

II. HOUSING POLICY PLAN A. Goals, Objectives and Policies The purpose of the Housing Plan is to identify those policies and programs that will enable the City to accommodate its housing objectives during the 2013-2021 planning period. This section consists of the following:

• The Introduction to the Housing Plan provides an overview of the components that comprise the Housing Plan;

• The Housing Policies outlines those policies that serve as the City’s vision relative to the conservation of existing housing and the provision of new housing;

The Housing Programs describes those programs that will be effective in the implementation of the aforementioned policies, including specific actions, objectives and implementation schedule.

B. Housing Element Policies This section establishes the City’s housing policy framework. Section 65583(c) of the California Government Code requires that actions and policies included in the housing program address five key issue areas. As a result, the policies that have been included in the City of Hermosa Beach Housing Element respond to the following issue areas:

• The manner in which the City will assist in the conservation of existing housing resources, including affordable housing;

• The City’s strategy in assisting in the development of new housing opportunities;

• How the City intends to provide adequate sites to achieve a variety and diversity of housing types;

• How the City proposes to remove governmental constraints that may impact the preservation and development of housing; and,

• How the City may help to promote equal housing opportunities.

Issue Area No. 1 - Conservation of Existing Housing

As indicated previously, the City’s proximity to the Pacific Ocean and its desirability as a place to live and vacation has contributed to the high land and housing costs relative to the surrounding region. The City, nevertheless, has been successful in maintaining its more affordable housing through the adoption of ordinances and special land use regulations. The City of Hermosa Beach remains committed to those efforts designed to preserve and maintain the existing housing resources in the City, including affordable housing.



This commitment is underscored by the policies listed below.

Policy 1.1 The City will continue to encourage the maintenance and improvement of the existing housing stock within the local neighborhoods.

Policy 1.2 The City will assist in the preservation and enhancement of the housing supply available to senior citizens.

Policy 1.3 The City will work to minimize the conversion of existing lower-cost rental housing in multiple-family developments to condominiums.

Policy 1.4 The City will promote and encourage the conservation and maintenance of the existing neighborhoods.

Policy 1.5 The City will investigate potential sources of funding and other incentives that will assist in the preservation and renovation of older housing units.

Policy 1.6 The City will continue to implement its current code enforcement procedures as a means to ensure the conservation and maintenance of existing housing resources in the City.

Issue Area No. 2 - Development of New Housing Opportunities

The City’s ability to directly fund the construction of affordable housing is constrained due to budget limitations. In addition, the construction of affordable public housing within the coastal zone would not represent an efficient expenditure of public money, given the relatively high land and development costs in the City. As a result, the City continues to be an active participant in the development of more affordable housing through the relaxation of land use controls and other incentives. The City of Hermosa Beach will continue to assist in the development of new housing for all income groups through the implementation of the policies listed below.

Policy 2.1 The City will continue to promote the development of a variety of housing types and styles to meet the existing and projected housing needs of all segments of the community.

Policy 2.2 The City will continue to encourage the development of safe, sound, and decent housing to meet the needs of varying income groups.

Policy 2.3 The City will continue to implement the land use policy contained in the City’s General Plan, which provides for a wide range of housing types at varying development intensities.

Policy 2.4 The City will continue to support and promote home ownership in the community.

Policy 2.5 The City will continue to cooperate with other government agencies, citizen groups, and the private sector, in order to assist in meeting the existing and future demand for housing.



Issue Area No. 3 - Provision of Adequate Sites for New Housing

The majority of the City underwent development during the early 1900s. More intensive development followed, and this intensification has occurred up to the present time. There are few vacant parcels of land remaining in the City, and the majority of the residential construction that has occurred involved the “recycling” of individual properties. Nevertheless, the City of Hermosa Beach will continue to explore potential sites for residential development as a means to achieve a variety and diversity of housing types.

Policy 3.1 The City will evaluate new development proposals in light of the community's environmental resources and values, the capacity of the public infrastructure to accommodate the projected demand, and the presence of environmental constraints.

Policy 3.2 The City will continue to evaluate the General Plan and zoning to ensure residential development standards are adequate to serve future development.

Policy 3.3 The City will continue to review current zoning practices for consistency with the General Plan as a way to facilitate new mixed-use development within or near the commercial districts.

Issue Area No. 4 - Removal of Governmental Constraints

In previous years, the City has been successful in the conservation of housing, especially affordable housing, through the implementation of land use ordinances and regulations. A key component of the City’s housing policy is to assist in the development of more affordable housing with the use of incentives and other measures. The City of Hermosa Beach will remain committed to the removal of governmental constraints.

Policy 4.1 The City will continue to abide by the provisions of the Permit Streamlining Act as a means to facilitate the timely review of residential development proposals.

Policy 4.2 The City will work with prospective developers and property owners to assist in their understanding of the review and development requirements applicable to residential development in the City.

Policy 4.3 The City will continue its efforts to educate the community regarding the development standards contained in the City of Hermosa Beach Zoning Ordinance.

Policy 4.4 The City will continue to evaluate its Zoning Ordinance and General Plan and remove governmental constraints related to development standards. These may include, but not be limited to, parking requirements, allowing affordable housing on commercial sites, new standards for mixed-use development, lot consolidation incentives, and senior housing requirements.



Issue Area No. 5 - Equal Housing Opportunities

Federal and State laws prohibit housing discrimination based on an individual’s race, ethnicity, or religion. Enforcement of fair-housing laws generally occurs through the courts, though persons being discriminated against often lack the resources to obtain the necessary legal protections. As a result, alternative means to obtain assistance must be made available. Towards this end, the City will continue to cooperate with other public agencies and non-profit organizations providing this assistance.

Policy 5.1 The City will continue to provide information and referral services to regional agencies that counsel people on fair housing and landlord-tenant issues.

Policy 5.2 The City will continue to cooperate with the County Housing Authority related to the provision of rental assistance to lower-income households.

Policy 5.3 The City will continue to cooperate with other cities and agencies in the area in investigating resources available to provide housing for the area's homeless population.

Policy 5.4 The City will support the expansion of shelter programs with adjacent cities and local private interests for the temporary accommodation of the homeless population.

Issue Area No. 6 – Sustainability Housing Development

The City works to promote sustainability and energy conservation in a number of ways. The framework for the revised Hermosa Beach General Plan will be an integrated blueprint for sustainability and a low carbon future. It will provide specific policy direction and a framework under which City regulations, programs, and projects work in unison to ensure land use, transportation, and other aspects City operations support sustainable development and energy conservation goals. Specifically for the residential sector of the community, the issue of energy conservation can be addressed at several levels: community-wide land use and transportation planning, building technology in both new construction and rehabilitation or remodeling of existing structures, and through lifestyle options. This is further supported by water conservation and sustainable neighborhood design.

Policy 6.1 The City will support sustainable residential development through land use planning, building technology and lifestyle options.

The housing programs that will implement these policies are described in Section II.C below.

C. Description of Housing Programs The programs included in this Housing Element focus on those incentives that will encourage the private sector to construct affordable housing in the City. As indicated in the Needs Assessment section of the Technical Report, the City’s RHNA allocation calls



for the construction of 2 new housing units during the 2014-2021 period. The City’s main challenge in accommodating new residential development is its lack of vacant land. As a result, the vast majority of new housing development must occur through the “recycling” of older housing units and redevelopment of underutilized parcels. The lack of available resources, coupled with high land and development costs, will be a constraint to the development of new affordable housing. As a result, the focus of the following programs is to identify strategies to assist the private market in the development of affordable housing. These programs include:

• A program that encourages the development of more affordable housing through the use of incentives currently required under state law;

• Continuation of support for conversion of the Marine Land Mobile Home Park to a resident-owned park and maintenance of the City's Mobile Home Park Ordinance;

• Programs that promote the implementation of those sections of the City’s Zoning Ordinance permitting high density, and thus potentially affordable residential development in the R-3, R-P and C-1 zoning districts; and

• Programs designed to promote the maintenance of the existing housing stock and the protection of existing residential neighborhoods from the intrusion of incompatible land uses.

1. Density Bonus Program Description: In 2004 the state legislature adopted SB 1818, which overhauled state density bonus law. The new law required cities to grant a density bonus of up to 35% and other incentives for qualifying affordable or senior housing developments. The City updated the Zoning Ordinance in 2013 in conformance with SB 1818 to encourage the development of affordable and senior housing. To help inform developers and contractors of this incentive program, the City will continue to provide brochures at the public counter and provide information on the City’s web site regarding the Density Bonus Program.

Timing: Continue to make information available on the density bonus program through brochures and the City website throughout the planning period.

Funding: City General Fund. No new funding source will be required.

2. Housing Sites Database Program Description: The City will ensure that adequate sites are available to accommodate its new housing need for the 2014-2021 planning period, and continue to maintain its comprehensive land use database as means to identify suitable sites for new residential development. This database provides zoning and other information for every parcel in the City, and includes information regarding underdeveloped and undeveloped parcels.



The City will make the database available to property owners, investors, and builders at the Planning Department counter.

Timing: This is an existing program to be continued.

Funding: General Fund.

3. Mobile Home Conservation This program provides for the ongoing maintenance and conservation of the Marine Land Mobile Home Park located at 531 Pier Avenue. The 60-space park provides housing for extremely-low-, very-low- and low-income households. The Hermosa Court Recreational Vehicle Park with 19 pads at 725 10th Street also provides transitional housing space for those persons or households in transition from an RV to apartment or home. The City's MHP Zoning District requires Planning Commission approval in order to add or delete spaces in the park, which helps to preserve affordability by discouraging conversion from single- to double-wide spaces. The Mobile Home Park has obtained state funding to convert to a resident owned park.

This program was implemented with City Council allocation of over $111,000 and $1,200,000 awarded under the state’s Mobilehome Park Resident Owner Program (MPROP). The Marineland Community Association, Inc., the resident association, is in escrow for purchase of the park from the current owners, with closing anticipated in July 2013.

Timing: This program is ongoing.

Funding: General Fund. No new funding source will be required.

4. Code Enforcement Program Description: Chapter 8.28 of the Municipal Code provides for the abatement of nuisance conditions relating to private property. To ensure that this goal is achieved, the Code Enforcement Program emphasizes the following:

• The City actively pursues Municipal Code violations on a complaint basis, with particular emphasis being placed on those areas clearly exposed to public view;

• All necessary steps are taken to ensure that violations are corrected in an expeditious and voluntary manner;

• Where appropriate, property owners are informed of available assistance programs for lower-income persons who may not be able to afford needed improvements or corrections; and

• The City utilizes misdemeanor criminal prosecution only when attempts to gain voluntary compliance have failed.

The Code Enforcement Program is responsible for enforcing those sections of the Municipal Code related to property maintenance, including zoning, property



maintenance, illegal units, trash container regulations, construction without permits, and sign regulations. The Code Enforcement Officer assists and makes recommendations to other City departments, such as conducting inspections of business licenses, home occupation offenses, and obstructions in public right-of-way.

Timing: This program is in place and will continue through the planning period.


5. Affordable Housing Development Outreach and Assistance Program Description: This program involves the investigation of potential funding sources and administrative support to assist private and non-profit organizations in the development and/or provision of affordable housing. The City will investigate the feasibility of expanding CDBG funding and Section 8 rental vouchers to qualifying households. The Section 8 program is one of the major sources of housing assistance for very-low- and extremely-low-income households. If the City is successful in obtaining increased CDBG funding and/or expanding Section 8 rental vouchers for residents, this information will be posted in the Community Center, on the City’s website, in handouts provided in the information kiosk in the City Hall lobby, and in the local library. Brochures will also be provided to local service clubs including the local “Meals on Wheels” program, local dial-a-ride service, the local recreation center, and emergency shelters in the area.

The City will also provide incentives such as priority processing, fee waivers and deferrals, and modified development standards to projects with low- or moderate-income units, and will assist in preparing and processing grant applications for affordable housing projects to support the development of such units. Project sponsors will be encouraged to include units for extremely-low-income households where feasible. The City in 2010 conferred with a variety of nonprofits to identify specific actions the City can take to facilitate the development of affordable housing, including to extremely-low-, very-low- and low-income households.

Timing: Contact nonprofits annually regarding residential development opportunities.

Funding: This program will be financed through the City’s General Fund and grant funds. No new funding source will be required.

6. Fair Housing

Program Description: The City provides assistance to local fair housing organizations to address complaints regarding housing discrimination within the City and to provide counseling in landlord/tenant disputes. This program includes a referral service in City Hall whereby a staff person provides materials (e.g., handouts, booklets, pamphlets) to the public. This information is also available to the public at the library and on the City’s website.

Timing: This program is ongoing and will continue through the planning period.




7. Zoning for Special Needs and Affordable Housing Program Description: The Zoning Code encourages the provision of housing for persons with special needs, including regulations and procedures related to group homes, emergency shelters, transitional/supportive housing and persons with disabilities.

Timing: Continue to monitor changes in state law regarding regulations related to persons with special needs and affordable housing.


8. Facilitate Efficient Use of Sites that Allow High-Density Residential Development

Program Description: This program will facilitate affordable housing development on sites that allow high-density residential development including reducing constraints posed by small lot sizes.

a. The City will facilitate lot consolidation by:

• Assisting affordable housing developers in identifying opportunities for lot consolidation using the City’s GIS system and property database;

• Continuing to expedite processing for lot consolidations processed concurrently with planning entitlements;

• Continuing to provide a graduated density bonus for lower-income housing on small lots consolidated into a single building site according to the following formula:

Combined Parcel Size Allowable Base Density* Less than 0.50 acre 33 units/acre 0.50 acre to 0.99 acre 34.7 units/acre (5% increase) 1.00 acre or more 36.3 units/acre (10% increase) *Excluding density bonus

• Publicizing the program on the City’s website, at the Planning counter, and by

notice to affordable housing providers.

b. The City will facilitate affordable housing development by:

• Facilitating pre-application meetings;

• Implementing incentives under the Density Bonus law;

• Reducing on-site property development standards (e.g. reduced setbacks, reduced parking standards) for developments with affordable elderly or disabled housing units for small projects below the threshold of the Density Bonus law;

• Allowing deferral or waiver of City fees necessary to make the project cost-effective;

• Facilitating permit processing so that developers can take advantage of funding opportunities;



• Expediting permit processing through concurrent review through the planning and building processes;

• Promoting programs on the City’s website and at the Planning Counter and biennially notify affordable housing developers of the City’s housing incentives.

Timing: Implementation of these incentives and procedures throughout the planning period.


Program 9 – Sustainable Housing Development

Program Description: In 2013 the City embarked on a comprehensive update to the General Plan. One of the primary themes of the new General Plan will be community sustainability. As part of the General Plan update, state-of-the-art options to improve sustainability and energy conservation will be reviewed, and those that are appropriate for Hermosa Beach will be pursued. New initiatives related to residential development will be incorporated into the Housing Element, as appropriate. Policies to be considered as part of the General Plan update include the following:

Facilitate Sustainable Housing Development

• Continue to provide incentives to encourage green building.

• Develop a green building program, including incentives, addressing expansions and upgrades to the existing residential stock.

• Encourage and facilitate renewable energy use and production at home.*

• Continue to implement solar and wind energy ordinances.

• Continue to implement CEC’s Building Energy Efficiency Standards and explore strategies to achieve greater efficiencies above existing standards.

• Encourage use of local and/or recycled building materials.

• Continue to implement water conservation and water efficient landscape ordinances.

• Continue to monitor energy and water use in the city and investigate programs to conserve these scarce natural resources.

• Amend the Municipal Code as appropriate to support improved environmental performance of existing and new residential development.

Incorporate Sustainable Design into New Development

• Achieve enhanced energy efficiency through use of passive and active solar strategies.*

• Encourage residential development near public transportation and existing infrastructure.

• Incorporate high levels of internal and external connectivity to promote a variety of travel options.



• Provide direct and safe connections for pedestrians, bicyclists and drivers from residential areas to local community destinations and neighborhood centers.

• Preserve and enhance existing tree canopy, native vegetation, and pervious surfaces.

Funding: General Fund; Sustainable Communities Grant.

Timing: The comprehensive General Plan update is expected to be completed in 2016.

D. Housing Program Implementation Matrix Table II-1 indicates the agency or department responsible for overseeing the administration and/or implementation of the aforementioned programs. The table also indicates the funding source for the program, the schedule for the program’s implementation, and finally, where appropriate, the estimated number of housing units or persons that will be assisted.

Table II-1 Program Implementation Matrix

Program Funding Source Implementation Schedule Responsible Department

1. Density Bonus Program General Fund Throughout the planning period Community Development Department

2. Housing Sites Database General Fund Throughout the planning period Community Development Department

3. Mobile Home Conservation General Fund Throughout the planning period Community Development Department

4. Code Enforcement General Fund Throughout the planning period Community Development Department

5. Affordable Housing Outreach & Assistance

General Fund Notify nonprofits of housing opportunities annually

Community Development Department

6. Fair Housing General Fund Annual assistance to fair housing organization Community Development Department

7. Zoning for Special Needs Housing and Affordable Housing

General Fund Monitor state law throughout the planning period Community Development Department

8. Efficient Site Use for High Density Development

General Fund Implementation throughout the planning period Community Development Department

9. Sustainable Housing Development

General Fund Concurrent with the General Plan update and ongoing


Table II-2 Quantified Objectives 2013-2021

Income Category Totals Ex. Low V. Low Low Mod Upper

New construction (1) 1 - 1 - - 2

Rehabilitation 10 10

Conservation (2) 60 60

1. Quantified objective for new construction is for the period 1/1/2006 - 6/30/2014 per the RHNA 2. Mobile homes

CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH

HOUSING ELEMENT TECHNICAL REPORT

2013-2021

September 10, 2013


Housing Element Technical Report i September 10, 2013

Contents I. Housing Needs Assessment ................................................................................................................... I-1

A. Population Characteristics ...................................................................................................... I-1 1. Population Growth Trends .................................................................................................... I-1 2. Age ........................................................................................................................................... I-3 3. Race and Ethnicity ................................................................................................................. I-4

B. Household Characteristics ....................................................................................................... I-5 1. Household Composition and Size ....................................................................................... I-5 2. Housing Tenure ........................................................................................................................ I-6 3. Overcrowding ......................................................................................................................... I-7 4. Household Income ................................................................................................................. I-8 5. Overpayment .......................................................................................................................... I-8

C. Employment ............................................................................................................................... I-9 1. Employment ............................................................................................................................ I-9 2. Projected Job Growth ......................................................................................................... I-10

D. Housing Stock Characteristics ............................................................................................... I-11 1. Housing Type and Growth Trends ..................................................................................... I-11 2. Housing Age and Conditions ............................................................................................. I-12 3. Vacancy ................................................................................................................................ I-13 4. Housing Cost.......................................................................................................................... I-14

E. Special Needs .......................................................................................................................... I-15 1. Persons with Disabilities ........................................................................................................ I-15 2. Elderly...................................................................................................................................... I-18 3. Large Households ................................................................................................................. I-18 4. Female-Headed Households ............................................................................................. I-19 5. Farm Workers ......................................................................................................................... I-19 6. Homeless Persons.................................................................................................................. I-19

F. Assisted Housing at Risk of Conversion ................................................................................ I-22 G. Low- and Moderate-Income Housing in the Coastal Zone ............................................ I-22 H. Future Housing Needs ............................................................................................................. I-23

1. Overview of the Regional Housing Needs Assessment ................................................. I-23 2. 2014-2021 Hermosa Beach Housing Needs ..................................................................... I-23

II. Resources and Opportunities ...............................................................................................................II-1 A. Land Resources ..........................................................................................................................II-1 B. Financial and Administrative Resources ...............................................................................II-2

1. State and Federal Resources .............................................................................................. II-2 2. Local Resources ..................................................................................................................... II-2

C. Sustainable Housing Development ........................................................................................II-2 III. Constraints ............................................................................................................................................... III-1

A. Governmental Constraints ..................................................................................................... III-1 1. Land Use Plans and Regulations......................................................................................... III-1 2. Development Processing Procedures ............................................................................ III-11 3. Development Fees and Improvement Requirements ................................................. III-12

B. Non-Governmental Constraints ........................................................................................... III-14 1. Environmental Constraints ................................................................................................ III-14 2. Infrastructure Constraints .................................................................................................. III-14 3. Land Costs ........................................................................................................................... III-15 4. Construction Costs ............................................................................................................. III-15 5. Cost and Availability of Financing .................................................................................. III-16

C. Fair Housing .............................................................................................................................. III-16


Housing Element Technical Report ii September 10, 2013

Appendix A – Evaluation of the 2008-2014 Housing Element Appendix B – Residential Land Inventory Appendix C – Public Participation Summary


Housing Element Technical Report iii September 10, 2013

List of Tables Table I-1 Population Trends, 1990-2012 – Hermosa Beach vs. Los Angeles County ...................... I-1 Table I-2 Age Distribution .......................................................................................................................... I-3 Table I-3 Race/Ethnicity ............................................................................................................................ I-4 Table I-4 Household Composition ........................................................................................................... I-5 Table I-5 Household Tenure ...................................................................................................................... I-6 Table I-6 Overcrowding ............................................................................................................................ I-7 Table I-7 Median Household Income Hermosa Beach and Los Angeles County......................... I-8 Table I-8 Overpayment by Tenure .......................................................................................................... I-8 Table I-9 Labor Force – Hermosa Beach vs. Los Angeles County .................................................... I-9 Table I-10 Employment by Occupation .................................................................................................. I-9 Table I-11 2010-2020 Industry Employment Projections – Los Angeles County .............................. I-10 Table I-12 Job Location for Hermosa Beach Residents ...................................................................... I-11 Table I-13 Housing by Type – Hermosa Beach vs. Los Angeles County .......................................... I-11 Table I-14 Age of Housing Stock by Tenure – Hermosa Beach vs. Los Angeles County .............. I-12 Table I-15 Housing Vacancy – Hermosa Beach vs. Los Angeles County ........................................ I-13 Table I-16 Income Categories and Affordable Housing Costs – Los Angeles County ................. I-14 Table I-17 Persons with Disabilities by Age – Hermosa Beach ........................................................... I-16 Table I-18 Elderly Households by Tenure – Hermosa Beach .............................................................. I-18 Table I-19 Household Size by Tenure – Hermosa Beach ..................................................................... I-18 Table I-20 Household Type by Tenure – Hermosa Beach ................................................................... I-19 Table I-21 – Regional Housing Growth Needs 2006-2014 – Hermosa Beach .................................. I-23 Table II-1 Land Inventory Summary – Hermosa Beach ........................................................................II-1 Table III-1 Residential Land Use Categories – Hermosa Beach General Plan ................................ III-1 Table III-2 Residential Development Standards by Zone .................................................................... III-2 Table III-3 Permitted Residential Development by Zone ..................................................................... III-3 Table III-4 Residential Parking Requirements ......................................................................................... III-7 Table III-5 City of Hermosa Beach Planning & Building Fees ............................................................ III-13

List of Figures Figure I-1 Population Growth 1990-2012 – Hermosa Beach vs. Los Angeles County ..................... I-2 Figure I-2 Los Angeles County Homeless Service Planning Areas ................................................... I-21


Housing Element Technical Report iv September 10, 2013


Hermosa Beach 2013-2021 Housing Element I Housing Needs Assessment

Housing Element Technical Report I-1 September 10, 2013

I. HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT This chapter examines general population and household characteristics and trends, such as age, race and ethnicity, employment, household composition and size, household income, and special needs. Characteristics of the existing housing stock (e.g., number of units and type, tenure, age and condition, costs) are also addressed. Finally, the City’s projected housing growth needs based on the 2014-2021 Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) are examined.

The Housing Needs Assessment utilizes the most recent available data from the U.S. Census, the California Department of Finance (DOF), the California Employment Development Department (EDD), the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) and other relevant sources. Supplemental data were obtained through field surveys and from the California Department of Finance.

A. Population Characteristics 1. Population Growth Trends

Located 17 miles southwest of Los Angeles at the southern end of Santa Monica Bay, the 1.3-square-mile City of Hermosa Beach was incorporated in 1907. The city grew very slowly during the 1990s, having grown less than 2% from 1990 to 2000. Most of the growth that has recently occurred has consisted of density increases on existing parcels, through demolition and replacement of existing homes. From 2000 to 2012 the city’s population increased by about 5%, which was partially attributable to an increase in average household size. This is in contrast with Los Angeles County, which grew by 7.4% between 1990 and 2000, and an additional 3.8% from 2000 to 2012 (see Table I-1 and Figure I-1). As an essentially built-out city, there continue to be few opportunities for growth, except through redevelopment/infill on existing parcels.

Table I-1 Population Trends, 1990-2012 –

Hermosa Beach vs. Los Angeles County

1990 2000 2012 Growth

1990-2000 2000-2012

Hermosa Beach 18,219 18,566 19,574 1.9% 5.4%

Los Angeles County 8,863,164 9,519,330 9,884,632 7.4% 3.8%

Source: U.S. Census, California Dept. of Finance Table E-5 (2012)



Figure I-1 Population Growth 1990-2012 – Hermosa Beach vs. Los Angeles County

1.9%

5.4%

7.4%

3.8%

0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

5%

6%

7%

8%

1990-2000 2000-2012

Hermosa Beach

Los Angeles County



2. Age Housing needs are influenced by the age characteristics of the population. Different age groups have different housing needs based on lifestyles, family types, income levels, and housing preference. Table I-2 provides a comparison of the city and county population by age group in 2010. This table shows that the age distribution of the city’s population is older than Los Angeles County as a whole, with Hermosa Beach’s population having a median age about two years older than Los Angeles County. An aging population has implications regarding the type and size of future housing needs, as well as accessibility.

Table I-2 Age Distribution

Age Group

Hermosa Beach Los Angeles County

Persons % Persons %

Under 5 years 992 5% 645,793 7%

5 to 9 years 968 5% 633,690 6%

10 to 14 years 704 4% 678,845 7%

15 to 19 years 608 3% 753,630 8%

20 to 24 years 1,063 5% 752,788 8%

25 to 29 years 2,606 13% 759,602 8%

30 to 34 years 2,091 11% 716,129 7%

35 to 39 years 1,925 10% 715,635 7%

40 to 44 years 1,894 10% 714,691 7%

45 to 49 years 1,649 8% 706,742 7%

50 to 54 years 1,199 6% 662,205 7%

55 to 59 years 1,095 6% 560,920 6%

60 to 64 years 955 5% 452,236 5%

65 to 69 years 638 3% 323,287 3%

70 to 74 years 430 2% 245,183 2%

75 to 79 years 275 1% 192,881 2%

80 to 84 years 200 1% 152,722 2%

85 years and over 214 1% 151,626 2%

Total 19,506 100% 9,818,605 100%

Median age 37.0 34.8 Source: 2010 Census, Table DP-1



3. Race and Ethnicity The racial and ethnic composition of the city differs from the county in that a lower proportion of city residents are Hispanic/Latino or other racial minorities. Approximately 81% of city residents are non-Hispanic white, contrasted with 28% for the county as a whole. The percentage of Hispanics residing in the city, at 8%, is significantly lower than that of the county with 48% Hispanic/Latino. Asians, at 6%, represent the largest non-Hispanic minority (Table I-3).

Table I-3 Race/Ethnicity

Racial/Ethnic Group

Hermosa Beach Los Angeles County

Persons % Persons %

Not Hispanic or Latino 17,874 91.6% 5,130,716 52.3%

-White 15,780 80.9% 2,728,321 27.8%

-Black or African American 216 1.1% 815,086 8.3%

-American Indian/Alaska Native 28 0.1% 18,886 0.2%

-Asian 1,097 5.6% 1,325,671 13.5%

-Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander 43 0.2% 22,464 0.2%

-Other races or 2+ races 710 3.6% 220,288 2.2%

Hispanic or Latino (any race) 1,632 8.4% 4,687,889 47.7%

Total 19,506 100% 9,818,605 100%

Source: 2010 Census, Table DP-1



B. Household Characteristics 1. Household Composition and Size

Household characteristics are important indicators of the type and size of housing needed in a city. The Census defines a “household” as all persons occupying a housing unit, which may include single persons living alone, families related through marriage or blood, or unrelated persons sharing a single unit. Persons in group quarters such as dormitories, retirement or convalescent homes, or other group living situations are included in population totals, but are not considered households.

Hermosa Beach had 9,550 households as reported in the 2010 Census. Table I-4 provides a comparison of households by type for the city and Los Angeles County as a whole. Family households in 2010 comprised approximately 42% of all households in the city, 26% less than the county. Another significant difference in household composition between the city and county is the number of single person households (38% city vs. 24%county). Due to these factors, the city’s average household size is also lower than Los Angeles County as a whole (2.04 persons per household City vs. 2.98 persons per household county). These statistics suggest that there is less need for large units in Hermosa Beach than are needed for other areas of the county.

Table I-4 Household Composition

Household Type

Hermosa Beach LA County

Households % Households %

Family households: 4,039 42% 2,194,080 68%

Husband-wife family 3,254 34% 1,480,665 46%

With own children under 18 years 1,380 14% 721,804 22%

Male householder, no wife present 325 3% 216,368 7%

With own children under 18 years 178 2% 92,161 3%

Female householder, no husband present 460 5% 497,047 15%

With own children under 18 years 238 2% 239,012 7%

Non-family households: 5,511 58% 1,047,124 32%

Householder living alone 3,644 38% 784,928 24%

Households with individuals under 18 years 1,878 20% 1,220,021 38%

Households with individuals 65 years and over 1,381 14% 790,386 24%

Total households 9,550 100% 3,241,204 100%

Average household size 2.04 2.98




2. Housing Tenure Housing tenure (owner vs. renter) is an important indicator of the housing market. Communities strive to have an adequate supply of units available both for rent and for sale in order to accommodate a range of households with varying incomes, family sizes and composition, and lifestyles. Table I-5 provides a comparison of the number of owner-occupied and renter-occupied units in the city in 2010 as compared to the county as a whole. This table reveals a higher level of renters in the city, approximately 3 percentage points higher than the county, which is common for beach communities.

Table I-5 Household Tenure

Housing Type


Units % Units %

Occupied housing units 9,550 94.0% 3,241,204 94.1%

Owner-occupied housing units 4,255 41.9% 1,544,749 44.8%

Average household size of owner-occupied units 2.37 3.16

Renter-occupied housing units 5,295 52.1% 1,696,455 49.2%

Average household size of renter-occupied units 1.78 2.81

Vacant housing units 612 6.0% 203,872 5.9%

For rent 247 2.4% 104,960 3.0%

Rented, not occupied 16 0.2% 4,994 0.1%

For sale only 45 0.4% 26,808 0.8%

Sold, not occupied 17 0.2% 6,726 0.2%

For seasonal, recreational, or occasional use 212 2.1% 19,099 0.6%

All other vacants 75 0.7% 41,285 1.2%

Homeowner vacancy rate (%) 1.0 1.7

Rental vacancy rate (%) 4.4 5.8

Total housing units 10,162 100% 3,445,076 100%




3. Overcrowding Overcrowding is often closely related to household income and the cost of housing. The U.S. Census Bureau considers a household to be overcrowded when there is more than one person per room, excluding bathrooms and kitchens, with severe overcrowding when there are more than 1.5 residents per room. Overcrowded households are usually a reflection of the lack of affordable housing (see Section D.4 starting on page I-14 below for a detailed definition of “affordable” housing). Table I-6 summarizes recent overcrowding data for the City of Hermosa Beach as reported by the Census Bureau.

Table I-6 Overcrowding

Occupants per Room


Units % Units %

Owner occupied units 4,279 100% 1,552,091 100%

1.01 to 1.50 0 -- 71,920 5%

1.51 to 2.00 0 -- 17,241 1%

2.01 or more 0 -- 4,877 0.3%

Renter occupied units 5,110 100% 1,665,798 100%

1.01 to 1.50 17 0.3% 163,166 10%

1.51 to 2.00 0 -- 86,760 5%

2.01 or more 0 -- 43,489 3%

Source: Census 2006-2010 ACS, Table B25014

Based on U.S. Census standards, Hermosa Beach residents live in relatively less crowded housing conditions than the rest of Los Angeles County. Recent Census data indicate that there were no overcrowded owner-occupied units and only 0.3% overcrowded renter-occupied units in Hermosa Beach. In the county, however, 1.4% of the owner-occupied units and about 18% of renter-occupied units are considered overcrowded.



4. Household Income Household income is a primary factor affecting housing needs in a community – the ability of residents to afford housing is directly related to household income. According to recent Census data, the median household income in Hermosa Beach was$99,976, over 80% higher than Los Angeles County.

Table I-7 Median Household Income

Hermosa Beach and Los Angeles County

Jurisdiction Median Income

% of County Median Income

Hermosa Beach $99,976 180%

Los Angeles County $55,476 100%

Source: U.S. Census, 2006-2010 ACS, Table DP-3

5. Overpayment According to state housing policy, overpaying occurs when housing costs exceed 30% of gross household income. Table I-8 displays recent Census estimates for overpayment by tenure. According to SCAG, approximately 41% of renter households and 37% of owner households were overpaying for housing.

Although homeowners enjoy interest and property tax deductions and other benefits that help to compensate for high housing costs, lower-income homeowners may need to defer maintenance or repairs due to limited funds, which can lead to deterioration. For lower-income renters, severe cost burden can require families to double up, resulting in overcrowding and related problems.

Table I-8 Overpayment by Tenure

Housing Payment Level (% of gross income)

Renters Owners

Households Percent Households Percent

Less than 30% 2,954 59% 2,648 63%

30-34% 366 7% 318 8%

35-39% 473 10% 289 7%

40-49% 410 8% 275 7%

50% or more 691 14% 650 15%

Not available 96 2% 56 1%

Totals 4,990 100% 4,236 100% Source: SCAG based on 2005-2009 ACS



C. Employment Employment is an important factor affecting housing needs within a community. The jobs available in each employment sector and the wages for these jobs affect the type and size of housing residents can afford.

1. Employment Employment and projected job growth have a significant influence on housing needs during this planning period. Table I-9 shows that the city had a workforce of 13,349 persons, or 80% of the working-age population, as reported by recent Census data. This table also shows that the city’s population has a much higher participation in the workforce than the county (80% city vs. 65% county).

Table I-9 Labor Force – Hermosa Beach vs. Los Angeles County

Labor Force Status


Persons % Persons %

Population 16 years and over 16,764 100% 7,602,252 100%

In labor force 13,349 80% 4,959,167 65%

Civilian labor force 13,328 80% 4,953,791 65%

Employed 12,667 76% 4,522,917 60%

Unemployed 661 4% 430,874 6%

Armed Forces 21 0.1% 5,376 0.1%

Not in labor force 3,415 20% 2,643,085 35%

Source: Census 2006-2010 ACS, Table DP3

According to recent Census data, approximately 61% of the city’s working residents were employed in management and professional occupations (Table I-10). A low percentage of workers (under 9%) were employed in service related occupations such as waiters, waitresses and beauticians. Blue collar occupations such as machine operators, assemblers, farming, transportation, handlers and laborers constituted approximately 6% of the workforce.

Table I-10 Employment by Occupation

Occupation

Hermosa Beach

Persons % Civilian employed population 16 years and over 12,667 100% Management, business, science, and arts occupations 7,739 61% Service occupations 1,076 9% Sales and office occupations 3,085 24% Natural resources, construction, and maintenance occupations 276 2% Production, transportation, and material moving occupations 491 4% Source: U.S. Census 2006-2010 ACS, Table DP3



2. Projected Job Growth Table I-11 shows projected employment growth by industry for Los Angeles County for the period 2010-2020. The greatest number of new jobs projected to be produced in Los Angeles County over this 10-year period are expected to be in Trade, Transportation and Utilities, Educational Services, Health Care and Social Assistance, and Professional and Business Services.

Table I-11 2010-2020 Industry Employment Projections –

Los Angeles County

NAICS Code Industry Title

Annual Average Employment Employment Change

2010 2020 Numerical Percent Total Employment 4,246,700 4,904,300 657,600 15.5 Self-Employment (A) 337,500 366,900 29,400 8.7 Unpaid Family Workers (B) 3,300 3,400 100 3.0 Private Household Workers (C) 126,600 163,300 36,700 29.0 Total Farm 6,200 5,800 -400 -6.5 Total Nonfarm 3,773,100 4,364,900 591,800 15.7

1133,21 Mining and Logging 4,100 4,500 400 9.8 23 Construction 104,500 129,600 25,100 24.0 31-33 Manufacturing 373,200 362,500 -10,700 -2.9 22,42-49 Trade, Transportation, and Utilities 739,800 887,700 147,900 20.0 51 Information 191,500 211,700 20,200 10.5 52-53 Financial Activities 209,500 231,300 21,800 10.4 54-56 Professional and Business Services 527,500 640,600 113,100 21.4 61-62 Educational Services, Health Care and Social Assistance 522,000 660,000 138,000 26.4 71-72 Leisure and Hospitality 384,800 480,000 95,200 24.7 81 Other Services (excludes 814-Private Household Workers) 136,700 150,700 14,000 10.2 Government 579,600 606,300 26,700 4.6 Federal Government (D) 51,600 43,900 -7,700 -14.9 State and Local Government 528,000 562,400 34,400 6.5 State Government 80,700 88,100 7,400 9.2 Local Government 447,300 474,300 27,000 6.0 Data sources: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics' Current Employment Statistics (CES) March 2011 benchmark and Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW) industry employment. Industry detail may not add up to totals due to independent rounding. Notes 1. Self-Employed persons work for profit or fees in their own business, profession, trade, or farm. Only the unincorporated self-employed are included in

this category. The estimated and projected employment numbers include all workers who are primarily self-employed and wage and salary workers who hold a secondary job as a self-employed worker.

2. Unpaid family workers are those persons who work without pay for 15 or more hours per week on a farm or in a business operated by a member of the household to whom they are related by birth or marriage.

3. Private household workers are employed as domestic workers whose primary activities are to maintain the household. Industry employment is based on QCEW.

4. Temporary U.S. Census workers are included in the base and projected year employment numbers.



According recent Census data, about 92% of employed Hermosa Beach residents worked in Los Angeles County, but only 17% of all workers were employed within the city limits (Table I-12).

Table I-12 Job Location for Hermosa Beach Residents Workplace Location %

Worked in state of residence 98%

Worked in county of residence 92%

Worked in place of residence 17%

Worked outside county of residence 6%

Worked outside state of residence 2% Source: Census 2006-2010 ACS, Table S0801

D. Housing Stock Characteristics This section presents an evaluation of the characteristics of the community’s housing stock and helps in identifying and prioritizing needs. The factors evaluated include the number and type of housing units, recent growth trends, age and condition, tenure, vacancy, housing costs, affordability, and assisted affordable units at-risk of loss due to conversion to market-rate. A housing unit is defined by the Census Bureau as a house, apartment, mobile home, or group of rooms, occupied as separate living quarters, or if vacant, intended for occupancy as separate living quarters.

1. Housing Type and Growth Trends As of 2012, 51% of the city’s housing stock was comprised of single family units, while multi-family units comprised 47% of the total. Mobile homes comprised the remaining 1%. Table I-13 provides a breakdown of the housing stock by type along with growth trends for the city compared to the county as a whole for the period 2000-2012.

Table I-13 Housing by Type – Hermosa Beach vs. Los Angeles County

Structure Type 2000 2012 Growth

Units % Units % Units % Hermosa Beach Single-family 5,021 51% 5,146 51% 125 39.1% Multi-family 4,737 48% 4,797 47% 60 18.8% Mobile homes 82 0.8% 217 2.1% 135 42.2%

Total units 9,840 100% 10,160 100% 320 100% Los Angeles County Single-family 1,835,024 56% 1,947,820 56% 112,796 61.6% Multi-family 1,379,277 42% 1,447,958 42% 68,681 37.5% Mobile homes 56,605 2% 58,314 2% 1,709 0.9%

Total units 3,270,906 100% 3,454,092 100% 183,186 100% Source: Cal. Dept. of Finance, Tables E-5 & E-8



Between 2000 and 2012, single-family homes represented about 39% of all units built in the city. The number of mobile homes added to the housing stock totaled 135, outpacing both the number of single family homes (125) and multi-family units (60) constructed during this period.

2. Housing Age and Conditions Housing age is often an important indicator of housing condition. Housing units built prior to 1978 before stringent limits on the amount of lead in paint were imposed may have interior or exterior building components coated with lead-based paint. Housing units built before 1970 are the most likely to need rehabilitation and to have lead-based paint in deteriorated condition. Lead-based paint becomes hazardous to children under age six and to pregnant women when it peels off walls or is pulverized by windows and doors opening and closing.

Table I-14 shows the age distribution of the housing stock in Hermosa Beach compared to Los Angeles County as a whole as reported in recent Census data.

Table I-14 Age of Housing Stock by Tenure –


Year Built


Units % Units %

Built 2005 or later 179 2% 54,241 2%

Built 2000 to 2004 437 4% 109,255 3%

Built 1990 to 1999 711 7% 208,791 6%

Built 1980 to 1989 961 9% 403,248 12%

Built 1970 to 1979 2,395 23% 496,376 14%

Built 1960 to 1969 1,486 14% 518,500 15%

Built 1950 to 1959 1778 17% 722,473 21%

Built 1940 to 1949 664 6% 396,035 12%

Built 1939 or earlier 1700 16% 516,817 15%

Total units 10,311 100% 3,425,736 100%

Source: Census 2006-2010 ACS, Table DP-4

This table shows that 53% of the housing units in Hermosa Beach were constructed prior to 1970. These findings suggest that there may be a need for maintenance and rehabilitation, including remediation of lead-based paint, for a large percentage of the city’s housing stock. However, due to the city’s relatively high household incomes, market forces would be expected to encourage more private maintenance, rehabilitation, and lead paint remediation, as compared to lower-income communities.

A 2003 citywide survey of housing conditions categorized units into the following three groups:



• Good - housing unit appears to be well-maintained;

• In Need of Minor Repair - unit exhibits need for repair, which may include repainting or other limited maintenance; or,

• Major Repair - unit is in need of major repairs, which may include, but not be limited to, foundations, roofing materials, etc.

The field survey identified a total of just six units in Category 2 and two units in Category 3. Given the relatively large number of housing units in the City, the housing stock overall was found to be very well-maintained. Based on the high property values typical in beach communities it is estimated that the number of housing units in need of repair is equal to or less than found in the previous survey.

3. Vacancy Housing vacancy rates as reported in the 2010 Census are shown in Table I-15. The table shows that vacancy rates in the city were relatively low, with a rental vacancy rate of just 2.5% and an owner vacancy rate of only 1%. The rental vacancy rate for the county as a whole was somewhat higher, at 5.8% for rental units and 1.7% for owner units. A rental vacancy rate in the 5% range is considered a healthy market condition allowing for tenant mobility.

Table I-15 Housing Vacancy –


Housing Type


Units % Units %

Occupied housing units 9,550 94.0% 3,241,204 94.1%

Owner-occupied housing units 4,255 41.9% 1,544,749 44.8%

Average household size of owner-occupied units 2.37 3.16

Renter-occupied housing units 5,295 52.1% 1,696,455 49.2%

Average household size of renter-occupied units 1.78 2.81

Vacant housing units 612 6.0% 203,872 5.9%

For rent 247 2.4% 104,960 3.0%

Rented, not occupied 16 0.2% 4,994 0.1%

For sale only 45 0.4% 26,808 0.8%

Sold, not occupied 17 0.2% 6,726 0.2%

For seasonal, recreational, or occasional use 212 2.1% 19,099 0.6%

All other vacants 75 0.7% 41,285 1.2%

Homeowner vacancy rate (%) 1.0 1.7

Rental vacancy rate (%) 4.4 5.8

Total housing units 10,162 100% 3,445,076 100%




4. Housing Cost a. Housing Affordability Criteria State law establishes five income categories for purposes of housing programs based on the area (i.e., county) median income (“AMI”):

• Extremely-Low (30% or less of AMI), • Very-Low (31-50% of AMI), • Low (51-80% of AMI), • Moderate (81-120% of AMI), and • Above Moderate (over 120% of AMI).

Housing affordability is based on the relationship between household income and housing expenses. According to HUD and the California Department of Housing and Community Development, housing is considered “affordable” if the monthly payment is no more than 30% of a household’s gross income. In some areas, these income limits may be increased to adjust for high housing costs.

Table I-16 shows 2012 affordable rent levels and estimated affordable purchase prices for housing in Los Angeles County by income category. Based on state-adopted standards, the maximum affordable monthly rent for extremely-low-income households is $633, while the maximum affordable rent for very-low-income households is $1,054. The maximum affordable rent for low-income households is $1,686, while the maximum for moderate-income households is $1,944.

Maximum purchase prices are more difficult to determine due to variations in mortgage interest rates and qualifying procedures, down payments, special tax assessments, homeowner association fees, property insurance rates, etc. With this caveat, the maximum home purchase prices by income category shown in Table I-16 have been estimated based on typical conditions.

Table I-16 Income Categories and Affordable Housing Costs –

Los Angeles County 2013 County Median Income = $64,800 Income Limits Affordable Rent Affordable Price (est.)

Extremely Low (<30%) $25,600 $640

Very Low (31-50%) $42,700 $1,068 $150,000

Low (51-80%) $68,300 $1,708 $250,000

Moderate (81-120%) $77,750 $1,944 $300,000

Above moderate (120%+) $77,750+ $1,944+ $300,000+

Assumptions: -Based on a family of 4 -30% of gross income for rent or PITI -10% down payment, 4% interest, 1.25% taxes & insurance, $200 HOA dues Source: Cal. HCD; J.H. Douglas & Associates



b. For-Sale Housing Housing sales price statistics reported by DataQuick Information Systems for the calendar year 20121 showed median sales prices of $1,060,000 for single-family homes and $758,000 for condos in Hermosa Beach. Based on the estimated affordable purchase prices shown in Table I-16, it is unlikely that any market rate homes or condos would be affordable to lower- or moderate-income residents. These data illustrate the fact that in beach communities, very large public subsidies are generally required to reduce sales prices to a level that is affordable to low- and moderate-income buyers. At a median condo price of about $750,000, there is a “gap” of $450,000 between the market price and the maximum price a moderate-income household can afford to pay for a home. For low-income households, this gap is $500,000.

c. Rental Housing Based on a recent rental survey, typical rents for 2-bedroom units in large apartment complexes range from $2,300 to $3,000 per month. As would be expected in a desirable beach community in Southern California, when market rents are compared to the amounts households can afford to pay (Table I-16, page I-14), it is clear that very-low- and extremely-low-income households have a very difficult time finding housing without overpaying. At a rent of $2,300 per month, the gap between market rent and affordable rent at the very-low-income level is at least $1,000 per month, while the gap at the extremely-low-income level is over $1,700 per month.

E. Special Needs Certain groups have greater difficulty in finding decent, affordable housing due to special circumstances. Such circumstances may be related to one’s employment and income, family characteristics, disability, or other conditions. As a result, some Hermosa Beach residents may experience a higher prevalence of overpayment, overcrowding, or other housing problems.

State Housing Element law defines “special needs” groups to include persons with disabilities, the elderly, large households, female-headed households with children, homeless people, and farm workers. This section contains a discussion of the housing needs facing each of these groups.

1. Persons with Disabilities The most recent available Census data found that approximately 1,125 people in Hermosa Beach between the 16 and 64 years of age, or 15% of the working age population, reported a work-related disability (Table I-17). Of those aged 65 and over, 959 disabilities were reported. Included within these disabilities are persons whose disability hinders their ability to go outside the home (3.3% of the working age population and 17.5% of the senior population). Housing opportunities for the handicapped can be maximized through housing assistance programs and providing universal design features

1 http://www.dqnews.com/Charts/Annual-Charts/LA-Times-Charts/ZIPLAT12.aspx



such as widened doorways, ramps, lowered countertops, single-level units and ground floor units.

Table I-17 Persons with Disabilities by Age –

Hermosa Beach Disability by Age Persons Percent

Age 5 to 15 - total persons 1,228 --

Sensory disability 0 0.0%

Physical disability 27 2.2%

Mental disability 45 3.7%

Self-care disability 27 2.2%

Age 16 to 64 - total persons 7,340 --





Go-outside-the-home disability 239 3.3%

Employment disability 1,125 15.3%

Age 65 and over* - total persons 1,248 17.0%





Go-outside-the-home disability 219 17.5% Source: 2000 Census, SF3 Tables P8 and P41 Note: Totals may exceed 100% due to multiple disabilities per person

Developmentally Disabled

As defined by federal law, “developmental disability” means a severe, chronic disability of an individual that:

• Is attributable to a mental or physical impairment or combination of mental and physical impairments;

• Is manifested before the individual attains age 22;

• Is likely to continue indefinitely;

• Results in substantial functional limitations in three or more of the following areas of major life activity: a) self-care; b) receptive and expressive language; c) learning; d) mobility; e) self-direction; f) capacity for independent living; or g) economic self-sufficiency; and

• Reflects the individual’s need for a combination and sequence of special, interdisciplinary, or generic services, individualized supports, or other forms of



assistance that are of lifelong or extended duration and are individually planned and coordinated.

The Census does not record developmental disabilities as a separate category of disability. According to the U.S. Administration on Developmental Disabilities, an accepted estimate of the percentage of the population that can be defined as developmentally disabled is 1.5 percent. Many developmentally disabled persons can live and work independently within a conventional housing environment. More severely disabled individuals require a group living environment where supervision is provided. The most severely affected individuals may require an institutional environment where medical attention and physical therapy are provided. Because developmental disabilities exist before adulthood, the first issue in supportive housing for the developmentally disabled is the transition from the person’s living situation as a child to an appropriate level of independence as an adult.

The California Department of Developmental Services (DDS) currently provides community-based services to approximately 243,000 persons with developmental disabilities and their families through a statewide system of 21 regional centers, four developmental centers, and two community-based facilities. The Westside Regional Center (WRC) located in Culver City (http://www.westsiderc.org/) provides services for people with developmental disabilities in Hermosa Beach. The WRC is a private, non-profit community agency that contracts with local businesses to offer a wide range of services to individuals with developmental disabilities and their families.

There is no charge for diagnosis and assessment for eligibility. Once eligibility is determined, most services are free regardless of age or income. There is a requirement for parents to share the cost of 24-hour out-of-home placements for children under age 18. This share depends on the parents' ability to pay. There may also be a co-payment requirement for other selected services.

Regional centers are required by law to provide services in the most cost-effective way possible. They must use all other resources, including generic resources, before using any regional center funds. A generic resource is a service provided by an agency that has a legal responsibility to provide services to the general public and receives public funds for providing those services. Some generic agencies may include the local school district, county social services department, Medi-Cal, Social Security Administration, Department of Rehabilitation and others. Other resources may include natural supports. This is help that disabled persons may get from family, friends or others at little or no cost. According to the latest WRC Performance Report2, the Center served approximately 7,100 individuals during 2010.

In addition to the services provided by the WRC, City housing programs that respond to the needs of this population include 5a (Incentives for Affordable Housing), 6a (Section 8 Rental Assistance) and 7d (Emergency Shelters and Transitional/Supportive Housing).

2 http://www.westsiderc.org/s/WRC%20Performance%20Contract%20Year%20End%20Report%20For%202010.pdf

http://www.westsiderc.org/



2. Elderly According to recent Census data, there were 1,2274 households (24% of owners but only 5% of renters) in Hermosa Beach where the householder was 65 or older (Table I-18). Many elderly persons are dependent on fixed incomes and/or have a disability. Elderly homeowners may be physically unable to maintain their homes or cope with living alone. The housing needs of this group can be addressed through smaller units, second units on lots with existing homes, shared living arrangements, congregate housing and housing assistance programs.

Table I-18 Elderly Households by Tenure –

Hermosa Beach

Householder Age

Owner Renter

Households % Households % Under 65 years 3,245 76% 4,917 96% 65 to 74 years 597 14% 82 2% 75 to 84 years 350 8% 31 1% 85 years and over 87 2% 80 2%

Total Households 4,279 100% 5,110 100% Source: U.S. Census 2006-2010 ACS, Table B25007

3. Large Households Household size is an indicator of need for large units. Large households are defined as those with five or more members. Among both owners and renters, more than 67% of all households have only one or two members. Less than 1% of renter households had five or more members, while about 3% of owners were large households (Table I-19). This distribution suggests that the need for large units with four or more bedrooms is expected to be much less than for smaller units.

Table I-19 Household Size by Tenure –

Hermosa Beach

Household Size

Owner Renter

Households % Households % 1 person 1,361 32% 2,595 51% 2 persons 1,517 35% 1,655 32% 3 persons 688 16% 621 12% 4 persons 572 13% 202 4% 5 persons 73 2% 8 0% 6 persons 50 1% 12 0% 7 persons or more 18 0% 17 0%

Total Households 4,279 100% 5,110 100% Source: U.S. Census 2006-2010 ACS, Table B25009



4. Female-Headed Households Recent Census data reported that approximately 4% of owner households and 2% of renter households in the city were headed by a female (Table I-20). A similar number of households were headed by single men. While female-headed households represent a small portion of households, they may have significant difficulties finding affordable housing, particularly in expensive coastal areas.

Table I-20 Household Type by Tenure –

Hermosa Beach

Household Type

Owner Renter

Households % Households %

Married couple family 2,270 53% 915 18%

Male householder, no wife present 175 4% 145 3%

Female householder, no husband present 187 4% 115 2%

Non-family households 1,647 38% 3,935 77%

Total Households 4,279 100% 5,110 100%

Source: U.S. Census 2006-2010 ACS, Table B11012

5. Farm Workers Farm worker households are considered as a special needs group due to their transient nature and the lower incomes typically earned by these households. Migrant workers, and their places of residence, are generally located in close proximity to agricultural areas providing employment. Although agriculture produces a total annual value of approximately $278 million per year in Los Angeles County, no major agricultural activities are found in Hermosa Beach or in the surrounding communities.3 In addition, 2006-2010 ACS data estimated 75 City residents who were employed in the agriculture, forestry, fishing, hunting and mining industries, although there is a substantial margin of error for these estimates.

6. Homeless Persons The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) defines the term “homeless” as the state of a person who lacks a fixed, regular, and adequate night-time residence, or a person who has a primary night time residency that is:

• A supervised publicly or privately operated shelter designed to provide temporary living accommodations;

• An institution that provides a temporary residence for individuals intended to be institutionalized; or

3 2005 Crop and Livestock Report, Los Angeles County Agricultural Commissioner



• A public or private place not designed for, or ordinarily used as, a regular sleeping accommodation for human beings.4

Although there are myriad causes of homelessness, among the most common are:

• Substance abuse and alcohol

• Domestic violence

• Mental illness

According to the 2011 Homeless Count Report5 by the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority (LAHSA), 51,340 homeless persons were identified at the time of the survey. Of this population, 38% were in shelter facilities and 62% were unsheltered. Hermosa Beach is located within LAHSA’s Service Planning Area (SPA) 8 – South Bay (see Figure I-2). The homeless count for SPA 8 found 5,833 single adults, 943 family members, and 12 unaccompanied youth.

LAHSA’s “Opt-In Program” provides local jurisdictions with homeless count numbers specific to their area or city allowing them to obtain local homeless count information to more effectively address local homelessness and to report progress to federal, state, and county agencies to meet funding requirements. The City of Hermosa Beach participated in the 2011 Greater Los Angeles Homeless Count, which identified 35 unsheltered adult homeless persons within the city.

Shelter and service needs of the homeless population are significantly different depending on the population subgroup. Los Angeles County’s Continuum of Care approach to homelessness is a coordinated and systematic local approach to meet the needs of homeless individuals and families within these subgroups, including:

• Chronic Homeless Persons;

• Episodic Homeless Persons; and

• Persons at Risk of Becoming Homeless

The County’s focus is to provide funding for access to mainstream resources such as income supports, health care, mental health care, substance abuse treatment programs, child care, and job training placement.6 These resources serve the existing homeless population, and also work toward the prevention of homelessness.

Contacts with the City of Hermosa Beach Police Department and the Los Angeles County Departments of Beaches indicate that transients occasionally pass through the City. When transients or homeless individuals are encountered, they are referred to the appropriate agencies for assistance.”

4 Stewart B. McKinney Act, 42 U.S.C. §11301, et seq. (1994) 5 http://www.lahsa.org/docs/2011-Homeless-Count/HC11-Detailed-Geography-Report-FINAL.PDF 6 Los Angeles County Housing and Community Development Consolidated Plan, page 5-21



Figure I-2 Los Angeles County Homeless Service Planning Areas



Senate Bill 2 of 2007 strengthened the planning requirements for emergency shelter and transitional/supportive housing. Unless existing shelter facilities are available to meet local needs, jurisdictions must designate at least one zone where new shelters may be established “by-right” (i.e., without a conditional use permit or other discretionary approval). In 2013 the City amended the Municipal Code to address these new requirements.

F. Assisted Housing at Risk of Conversion As part of the Housing Element update, state law requires jurisdictions to identify assisted units that are at risk of conversion to market rate housing during the 10-year period 2013-2023. According to the Southern California Association of Governments and the California Housing Partnership Corporation, there are no units at risk in Hermosa Beach.

G. Low- and Moderate-Income Housing in the Coastal Zone The majority of Hermosa Beach located west of Valley Drive is within the Coastal Zone. California Government Code §65590 et seq. prohibits conversion or demolition of existing residential dwelling units occupied by low- or moderate-income persons or families unless provision has been made for the replacement in the same city or county of those dwelling units with units for persons and families of low- or moderate-income (excludes structures with less than 3 units, or less than 10 units for projects with more than one structure, among other exclusions).

Section 65590(d) further requires new housing development in the coastal zone to provide housing units for persons and families of low or moderate income, or if not feasible, to provide such units at another location within the same city or county, within the coastal zone or within three miles thereof. Due to the exemptions noted above, no documented affordable units have been constructed in the Coastal Zone. A total of approximately 850 units were constructed from 1982 through 2012.

No affordable units have been demolished or converted within the Coastal Zone since 1982. The Coastal Land Use Plan (LUP) addresses three primary issue areas: access, planning for new development, and the preservation of marine-related resources. The LUP contains policies that may impede the construction of new housing development within the designated coastal zone of the City. These include policies related to the preservation of beach access, adequate parking and controlling the types and densities of residential development within the coastal zone. Coastal policies and standards controlling mass, height and bulk discourage “mansionization.” Policies do not prevent residential units above ground floor commercial as allowed in the C-1 zoning district.



H. Future Housing Needs 1. Overview of the Regional Housing Needs Assessment

The Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) is a key tool for local governments to plan for anticipated growth. The RHNA quantifies the anticipated need for housing within each jurisdiction for the period January 2014 to October 2021. Communities then determine how they will address this need through the process of updating the Housing Elements of their General Plans.

The current RHNA was adopted by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) in October 2012. The future need for housing is determined primarily by the forecasted growth in households in a community. Each new household, created by a child moving out of a parent's home, by a family moving to a community for employment, and so forth, creates the need for a housing unit. The housing need for new households is then adjusted to maintain a desirable level of vacancy to promote housing choice and mobility. An adjustment is also made to account for units expected to be lost due to demolition, natural disaster, or conversion to non-housing uses. The sum of these factors – household growth, vacancy need, and replacement need – determines the construction need for a community. Total housing need is then distributed among four income categories on the basis of the county’s income distribution, with adjustments to avoid an over-concentration of lower-income households in any community.

2. 2014-2021 Hermosa Beach Housing Needs The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) determined the RHNA housing needs for each city within the SCAG region, plus the unincorporated areas. The total housing need for the City of Hermosa Beach during the 2014-2021 planning period is two units, distributed by income category as shown in Table I-21. Pursuant to Government Code §65583(a)(1) it is assumed that the need for extremely-low-income households is half of the very-low-income need. A discussion of the city’s net remaining housing need is provided in the land inventory section of Chapter II.

Table I-21 – Regional Housing Growth Needs 2006-2014 –

Hermosa Beach Very Low Low Moderate Above Moderate Total

1* 1 - - 2

50% 50% - - 100%

Source: SCAG 2012 *This unit is allocated to the extremely-low-income category



This page intentionally left blank.

Hermosa Beach 2013-2021 Housing Element II Resources and Opportunities

Housing Element Technical Report II-1 September 10, 2013

II. RESOURCES AND OPPORTUNITIES A. Land Resources Section 65583(a)(3) of the Government Code requires Housing Elements to contain an “inventory of land suitable for residential development, including vacant sites and sites having potential for redevelopment, and an analysis of the relationship of zoning and public facilities and services to these sites.” A detailed analysis of vacant land and potential redevelopment opportunities has been prepared and is described in Appendix B. The results of this analysis are summarized in Table II-1 below. The table shows that the city’s land inventory exceeds the RHNA allocation of 2 units for this planning period.

As discussed in Appendix B, the requirement to demonstrate availability of lower-income sites is met through zoning that allows redevelopment of underutilized sites at densities greater than 20 units/acre. In 2004 state law was amended to establish 20 units/acre as the density deemed appropriate to accommodate housing for lower-income house-holds in small urban cities like Hermosa Beach [Government Code §65583.2(c)(3)(B)]. The land inventory analysis in Appendix B contains an estimate of the realistic capacity of potential sites for residential development at densities greater than 20 units/acre. The analysis notes that high land values have resulted in extensive “recycling” of small residential parcels to higher-density projects.

Table II-1 Land Inventory Summary –

Hermosa Beach

Income Category

Total Lower Mod Above

Vacant sites 8 - - 8

RHNA 2014-2021 2 - - 2

Adequate Capacity? Yes Yes Yes

Sources: Hermosa Beach Community Development Dept., 2013

A discussion of public facilities and infrastructure needed to serve future development is contained in Section III.B, Non-Governmental Constraints. There are currently no known service limitations that would preclude the level of development described in the RHNA, although developers will be required to pay fees or construct public improvements prior to or concurrent with development.



B. Financial and Administrative Resources 1. State and Federal Resources

Community Development Block Grant Program (CDBG) - Federal funding for housing programs is available from the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). During the previous planning period the City received approximately $93,000 per year, however the latest grant for FY12-13 was about $78,000 and future years are expected to be even less. In recent years the City has used CDBG funds for ADA compliance retrofits for the Community Center and Playhouse, City Hall and sidewalk handicap ramps.

The City does not currently participate in other HUD programs such as HOME, Emergency Shelter Grant (ESG) or Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA).

Section 8 Rental Assistance – The Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program (HCVP) assists very-low-income senior citizens, families and the disabled with the cost of rental housing. Generally, a tenant pays 30% of his or her adjusted income towards the rent and the Section 8 program pays the balance directly to the landlord. Unfortunately, the need for rental assistance is greater than available resources. The Los Angeles County Section 8 waiting list for assistance in 2013 consists of approximately 200,000 households.

2. Local Resources As a very small jurisdiction, Hermosa Beach has extremely limited resources for housing assistance. The only locally-generated source of housing revenue is the Condominium Conversion fund, which is an "infrastructure fee toward the physical and service structure of the community from which the development benefits" (Municipal Code Section 17.22.270).

C. Sustainable Housing Development The City of Hermosa Beach is working to be a leader in sustainability. The three elements of sustainability, environment, economy, and are related to the objectives of this housing element in several ways. Strong, sustainable communities connect housing, transportation, jobs and equity. They reduce transportation costs for families, maximize resource efficiency, improve housing affordability, save energy, and increase access to housing and employment opportunities. This nurtures healthier, more inclusive communities and housing opportunities. Hermosa Beach can use sustainable communities strategies and techniques to invest in healthy, safe and inclusive neighborhoods.

Strategies to increase sustainability are multidisciplinary and should be integrated throughout all elements of the City’s General Plan. The City is embarking on a major General Plan/Coastal land Use Plan revision focusing on sustainability and a low carbon future with an anticipated adoption date in 2016, within this Housing Element planning period. Therefore, the purpose of this discussion is to recognize this longer term planning effort while outlining early actions that can be pursued while that process is ongoing.



AB 32 and SB 375

In 2006, the Legislature passed AB 32—The Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006,—which requires the State of California to reduce “greenhouse gas” (GhG) emissions to 1990 levels no later than 2020. Passenger vehicles account for 31 percent of the state’s total emissions. In 1990 greenhouse gas emissions from automobiles and light trucks were 108 million metric tons, but by 2004 these emissions had increased to 135 million metric tons. SB 375 asserts that “Without improved land use and transportation policy, California will not be able to achieve the goals of AB 32.”

SB 375, passed in 2008, builds on the existing regional transportation planning process (which is overseen by local officials with land use responsibilities) to connect the reduction of GhG emissions from cars and light trucks to land use and transportation policy.

SB 375 has three goals: (1) to use the regional transportation planning process to help achieve AB 32 goals; (2) to use the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) streamlining as an incentive to encourage residential projects that help achieve AB 32 goals to reduce GhG emissions; and (3) to coordinate the regional housing needs allocation process with the regional transportation planning process. SB 375 requires consistency between the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) and the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA), which is accomplished through using an “integrated” growth forecast for use in both of these policy documents.

In 2012 the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) adopted both an RTP and a RHNA which allocated only two units to the City of Hermosa Beach as its ‘fair share’ of new housing development that must be accommodated during the planning period. Local governments help to implement SB 375 by adopting housing elements that facilitate new housing development in a manner consistent with the growth forecast and the RHNA. Hermosa’s RHNA of two units reflect that most of the city’s housing development will be in the form of replacement of demolished units.

As required by SB 375 the South Bay Cities Council of Governments adopted its South Bay Sustainable Strategy: An Integrated Land Use and Transportation Strategy, 2009,7 which focuses on placing housing and jobs in close proximity and accelerating use and conversion to low carbon transportation modes. Opportunities related to housing may include ensuring housing is electric vehicle ready, enhancing biking and walking and as feasible transit connections between housing and workplaces, and ensuring a range of housing choices for all stages of life, close to jobs.

The City was provided a Sustainability Plan prepared by its ad hoc Green Task Force in 2011, being a plan of local actions the City and people of Hermosa Beach can take to meet today’s needs without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs. Programs relevant to residential development and neighborhoods include increasing the feasibility of biking and walking and amending codes to support these modes, creating streetscape and environments to encourage walking, improve local transit services, personal choice and workplace programs to reduce commuter trips,

7 http://www.southbaycities.org/files/Sustainable%20South%20Bay%20Strategy.09.08.09_0.pdf



promote low emission vehicle use, encourage photovoltaics at home and businesses for electric vehicle charging, encourage and facilitate renewable energy at home, expand the use of graywater systems and increase water conservation, adopt an ordinance with incentives and facilitation for green building retrofits, and improve waste reduction and recycling at home including a zero waste goal.

The Hermosa Beach Community Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory prepared in 2010 evaluated greenhouse gas (GhG) emissions from electricity and natural gas use in homes, finding this sector comprised 24% of the community’s emissions in 2007. The transportation sector (which includes all sources) comprised 59%. Under a business as usual forecast, GhG generated by the residential sector would increase 0.3% from 2007 to 2020. The inventory is being updated so that trends and actions can be monitored. Therefore addressing energy conservation will reduce GhG emissions, increase sustainability, and reduce housing costs as well as potentially making homes more comfortable. All of the above are supported by many other initiatives the city is undertaking.

Energy Conservation Opportunities

Given that future housing growth is projected to be limited, attention should be focused on redevelopment, rehabilitation and retrofits. As residential energy costs rise, the subsequent increasing utility costs also reduce housing affordability. Although the City is fully developed, new infill development, rehabilitation and retrofits provide the City opportunities to enhance community sustainability and directly affect energy use within its jurisdiction.

State of California Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings were established in 1978 in response to a legislative mandate to reduce California's energy consumption. The standards are codified in Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations and are updated periodically to allow consideration and possible incorporation of new energy efficiency technologies and methods. California's building efficiency standards (along with those for energy efficient appliances) have saved more than $56 billion in electricity and natural gas costs since 1978. It is estimated the standards will save an additional $23 billion by 20138.

Title 24 sets forth mandatory energy standards and requires the adoption of an “energy budget” for all new residential buildings and additions to residential buildings. Separate requirements are adopted for “low-rise” residential construction (i.e., no more than 3 stories) and non-residential buildings, which includes hotels, motels, and multi-family residential buildings with four or more habitable stories. The standards specify energy saving design for lighting, walls, ceilings and floor installations, as well as heating and cooling equipment and systems, gas cooling devices, conservation standards and the use of non-depleting energy sources, such as solar energy or wind power. The home building industry must comply with these standards while localities are responsible for enforcing the energy conservation regulations through the plan check and building inspection processes.

8 California Energy Commission (http://www.energy.ca.gov/title24)

http://www.energy.ca.gov/title24



In addition to state-mandated Title 24 requirements, Hermosa Beach is participating in a coalition to collaboratively tackle the issue of energy conservation.9 The South Bay Environmental Services Center (SBESC10) is educating residents, business owners and public agencies and hosting or making available information about the energy conservation programs, retrofits and incentives available in the community and how to incorporate more energy-saving practices into everyday life. Established through funding from the California Public Utilities Commission, the SBESC includes the 15 cities that comprise the South Bay Cities Council of Governments (SBCCOG), and is associated with Southern California Edison and Southern California Gas Company. Member cities include Carson, El Segundo, Gardena, Hawthorne, Hermosa Beach, Inglewood, Lawndale, Lomita, Manhattan Beach, Palos Verdes Estates, Rancho Palos Verdes, Redondo Beach, Rolling Hills, Rolling Hills Estates, Torrance, and the Harbor City and San Pedro communities of Los Angeles.

The City of Hermosa Beach has adopted solar energy and wind energy ordinances to facilitate their use, and has reduced building permit fees for solar energy systems and waived the planning fee for wind energy systems. These waivers are reviewed annually.

The City has adopted a water conservation ordinance and a water efficient landscape ordinance that is significantly more restrictive than required by state law in that demonstration of drought-tolerant landscaping is required for all new landscaping in connection with all projects regardless of size or tenancy.

The City adopted increased energy efficiency requirements (Tier 1) as part of the 2010 CalGreen Code. The City is participating in the Los Angeles County Energy Upgrade Program so that residents and businesses can take full advantage of energy retrofit programs per AB 811. The City has instituted a fee reduction for LEED or Build-It Green certified buildings, with this incentive to be reviewed annually.

The City, in concert with the South Bay Environmental Service Center (SBESC) and others, will continue to participate and host workshops on green building; the City hosted workshops on solar energy, green building codes, adopted a provision to allow solar energy systems exceeding height limits, waives plan check fees for installation of solar systems, waives building permits for electrical upgrades to charge electric vehicles, and has adopted a form-based zoning district mandating and encouraging green building provisions. The City became a member of 'Cool Cities' and the City’s ‘Green Building Task Force' prepared a Sustainability Plan accepted by the City in 2011. The City’s new Hermosa Beach website and Green Webpage at www.hermosabch.org allow the City to provide housing information updated on a regular basis.

State policy requires all new residential buildings to be ‘net zero energy” by 2020. On May 31, 2012 the California Energy Commission (CEC) adopted new energy efficiency standards for both residential and commercial buildings. The new standards take effect on January 1, 2014.

9 http://www.imakenews.com/priorityfocus/e_article001104271.cfm?x=bcHNgMg,b7M8B89t 10 www.sbesc.com

http://www.hermosabch.org/



The CEC’s 2013 Building Energy Efficiency Standards are 25 percent more efficient than previous standards for residential construction and 30 percent better for nonresidential construction.

Some of the 2013 changes to residential standards include:

• Solar-ready roofs to allow homeowners to add solar photovoltaic panels at a future date. The City’s code already mandates this requirement as well as requiring solar readiness for solar hot water heating;

• More efficient windows to allow increased sunlight, while decreasing heat gain. The City’s Cal-Green code already requires 15% efficiency over Title 24;

• Insulated hot water pipes to save water and energy and reduce the time it takes to deliver hot water;

• Whole house fans to cool homes and attics with evening air, reducing the need for air conditioning load; and

• Air conditioner installation verification to insure efficient operation.

As part of its comprehensive General Plan update, initiated in 2013, the City will focus on new opportunities to encourage sustainable development. Strategic opportunity areas include the following:

• Land use and transportation planning: opportunities include enhanced bicycle and pedestrian modes including implementing the South Bay Bicycle Master Plan and improving walkability, improved jobs/housing balance including opportunities to foster economic innovation close to home, the potential for mixed use development in limited areas, and protection of the marine environment and the City’s coastal economy etc.

• Building technology: opportunities include incentives for higher-efficiency buildings, green roofs, smart buildings, green building programs targeting small projects and retrofits, etc.

• Lifestyle options: opportunities include improved information dissemination to the building community and residents to foster informed choices in site design, home construction and remodeling; efficient resource use; improved environmental protection (runoff controls, water conservation, measures to reduce greenhouse gases); housing options for all stages of life, etc.

Issue Area No. 6 and Program 9 in the Housing Plan describe the City’s policies and objectives for identifying these and other opportunities for more sustainable development as part of the General Plan update.

Hermosa Beach 2013-2021 Housing Element III Constraints

Housing Element Technical Report III-1 September 10, 2013

III. CONSTRAINTS A. Governmental Constraints

1. Land Use Plans and Regulations a. General Plan Each city and county in California must prepare a comprehensive, long-term General Plan to guide its future. The Land Use Element of the General Plan establishes the basic land uses and density of development within the various areas of the city. Under state law, the General Plan elements must be internally consistent and the City’s zoning must be consistent with the General Plan. Thus, the land use plan must provide suitable locations and densities to implement the policies of the Housing Element.

The Hermosa Beach General Plan Land Use Element includes four residential land use designations, as shown in Table III-1.

Table III-1 Residential Land Use Categories –

Hermosa Beach General Plan

Designation Maximum Density*

Low Density 13 DU/acre

Medium Density 25 DU/acre

High Density 33 DU/acre

Mobile Home 13 DU/acre

The City of Hermosa Beach General Plan is not considered a constraint to the goals and policies of the Housing Element as the City’s zoning is consistent with the General Plan and adequate sites with appropriate densities have been identified to accommodate the remaining RHNA allocation.

b. Zoning Designations The City regulates the type, location, density, and scale of residential development through the Municipal Code. Zoning regulations serve to implement the General Plan and are designed to protect and promote the health, safety, and general welfare of residents. The Municipal Code also helps to preserve the character and integrity of existing neighborhoods. The Municipal Code sets forth residential development standards for each zone district.



There are five residential zones in Hermosa Beach:

R-1 Single Family Residential (R-1A: Two Dwelling Units per Lot) R-2 Two-Family Residential (R-2B: Limited Multiple Family Residential) R-3 Multiple-Family Residential R-P Residential Professional MHP Mobile Home Park

In addition to these zones, residential uses are also permitted above ground floor commercial within the C-1 “Limited Business and Residential Zone” (see Table III-3). A summary of the development standards for these zones is provided in Table III-2.

Table III-2 Residential Development Standards by Zone

Development Standard R-P R-1 R-1A R-2 R-2B R-3 C-1

Minimum Lot Area (sq.ft.) per DU 1,320 4,000 3,350 1,750 1,750 1,320 1,320 Equivalent Density 33 10.9 13 24.9 24.9 33 33 Minimum Front Yard (ft.) n/a 10% of lot

depth 10% of lot

depth 10% of lot

depth 10% of lot

depth Per zoning

map 0

Minimum Side Yard (ft.) 10% of lot width

10% of lot width

10% of lot width

10% of lot width

10% of lot width

10% of lot width

5'

Minimum Rear Yard (ft.) 5 5 (3 if alley)

5 (3 if alley)

5 (3 if alley)

5 (3 if alley)

5 if alley 5'

Maximum Building Height (ft.) 30 25 25 30 30 30 30 Source: Hermosa Beach Zoning Ordinance, http://www.hermosabch.org/departments/cityclerk/code/zoning.html

Minimum lot area per unit ranges from 1,320 square feet in the R-P, R-3 and C-1 zones to 4,000 square feet in the R-1 zone. The R-P zone provides for mixed-use commercial/ residential development with varying densities depending on lot area and dimensions. Density bonuses would permit more units than allowed by the underlying zone pursuant to State law and the implementing ordinance adopted by the City in 2004. The densities

within mobile home parks are regulated by Title 25 of the California Administrative Code, subject to a use permit.

A summary of the uses permitted in the City’s residential zoning districts is provided in Table III-3. Although a range of residential densities are allowed by-right in residential zones, a discretionary precise development plan (PDP) is required when more than one unit is developed per lot to ensure site design is compatible with the Code and adjacent development. In 2013 the Zoning



Code was amended to clarify that the PDP is a site design tool, rather than providing a means of evaluating whether the type of use should be allowed on a particular site.

The City also has adopted nine specific plan areas (SPAs), in many cases to accommodate specific commercial or residential development projects. Residential use is either not allowed in these specific plan areas or the specific plan area was adopted to specifically accommodate a development project which has been constructed. SPA-7 and SPA-8 provide a significant number of parcels for commercial development fronting Pacific Coast Highway.

Table III-3 Permitted Residential Development by Zone

Housing Type Permitted R-1 R-1A R-2 R-2B R-3 MHP R-P C-1 C-3

SF Detached P P P P P P 4

Single-Family Attached P* P* P* P* P* 4

Multi-Family P* P* P* C Mobile Home P P P P P P P Second Units P3 C1 C1 C1 C1 C1 Emergency Shelters P

Transitional, Supportive, Group Housing 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6

Single-Room Occupancy P Care Facility (6 or fewer) P P P P P P Care Facility (7+) C2 C2 C2 C2 C2 Assisted Living5 Source: Hermosa Beach Zoning Ordinance P = Permitted P* = Permitted subject to approval of a precise development plan to evaluate site design (excluding development of small second unit in R-1 zone) C = Conditional Use Permit 1 Senior units only 2 Accessory to a single-family detached dwelling; for child care purpose 3 Administrative Permit subject to limitation on size 4 Residential uses are allowed above ground floor commercial uses 5 A specific plan area was created to accommodate a senior assisted living center. 6. Permitted as a residential use subject to the same standards as other residential uses of the same type in the same zone.

Zoning for Lower-Income Housing

Lower-income housing can be accommodated in all zones permitting residential use in Hermosa Beach. These may include second residential units in the R-1A and R-2B zones, multi-family apartments in the R-3 zone, and commercial/residential mixed-use developments within the C-1 and R-P Zones. Under state law, the “default density” presumed to be adequate to facilitate lower-income housing is 20 units/acre in Hermosa Beach. As noted in Table III-2 (page III-2, the R-2, R-2B, R-3, R-P and C-1 zones all permit development at greater than 20 units/acre and therefore are considered suitable for



lower-income housing under state law11. Review of development trends confirms that actual densities in these zones are typically greater than 20 units per acre.

The City of Hermosa Beach has adopted a lot merger ordinance. Chapter 16.24 of the Subdivision Ordinance requires continuous lots in the R-1 zone under the same ownership to be merged if one or both of the lots is substandard (less than 4,00 square feet) in size. The city initiated a residential lot merger program in 1986. The city adopted lot merger provisions in 1986 within the Subdivision Ordinance in response to state law, requiring substandard-size properties under common ownership to be merged. The city completed a citywide lot merger program in 1989. In 2006 the city became of aware of several parcels that were not included in the 1989 program, and conducted another citywide survey (showing 71 lots remained subject to merger—25 separate lots that could be developed, 46 remnant parcels), and conducted another lot merger program. In 2007 the merger ordinance was amended to reduce applicability to the R-1 properties to prevent splitting and separation of lots in R-1 neighborhoods, finding that merging lots in R-2 and R-3 zones has limited or no impact. Therefore, changes to the lot merger program are not necessary.

Despite significant land zoned for residential uses, Hermosa Beach is already one of the most densely developed and populated cities in Los Angeles County and is essentially built-out. While rezoning of commercial or industrial areas could be considered to provide additional housing, there are no large commercial or industrial areas that are suitable for this purpose. About 75% of the city is already residentially zoned, with about 35% of this area zoned for high-density R-2 and R-3 development. Approximately 11% of the city has commercial zoning, and

just 1% is industrially zoned. The balance of the city is zoned for open space, most of which is the beach area. The percentage of commercial and industrial zoning is well below the neighboring cities in the South Bay and the region in general. The City Council has recognized this imbalance and supports maintaining and where possible aggregating small lots in commercial areas. As a result, there are no significant non-residential parcels that can be re-zoned for high-density residential development. In addition, it is important for the City’s economic viability that existing commercial and industrial areas be preserved.

The residential land inventory reveals that the majority of potential housing sites are underused parcels with older homes. While none of these sites are on the City's inventory of potentially significant historic landmark sites (last updated in the early 1970s), there is a

11 Assembly Bill 2348 of 2004



concern that redevelopment of most of these sites would change the character of the city's neighborhoods, which are typically a mix of older, often single-story bungalow style homes, with two- or three-story high-density condo projects, as well as potentially impacting access on narrow residential streets and other infrastructure. With little room for street widening in older beach communities, it is important to note that the added traffic generation of more high-density housing could conflict with other statewide priorities such as facilitating access to the beach.

In order to encourage and facilitate the production of higher-density affordable housing, the Housing Plan includes Programs 5 and 8 that will offer assistance and incentives to developers who provide units affordable to lower-income households.

Special Needs Housing

Under state law, persons with special needs include those in residential care facilities, persons with disabilities, farm workers, persons needing emergency shelter, transitional or supportive housing, and low-cost single-room-occupancy units. The City’s regulations regarding these housing types are discussed below.

• Housing for Persons with Disabilities

State requirements. Health and Safety Code §§1267.8, 1566.3, and 1568.08 require local governments to treat licensed group homes and residential care facilities with six or fewer residents no differently than other single-family residential uses. “Six or fewer persons” does not include the operator, the operator’s family, or persons employed as staff. Local agencies must allow these licensed care facilities in any area zoned for residential use, and may not require licensed residential care facilities for six or fewer persons to obtain conditional use permits or variances that are not required of other family dwellings.

In 2013 the Municipal Code was amended to identify definitions and standards for group homes and residential care facilities in conformance with state law.

Reasonable Accommodation. The City’s Building Code requires that new residential construction comply with Title 24 accessibility standards. These standards include requirements for a minimum percentage of fully accessible units in new multi-family developments. In order to facilitate the processing of requests to reduce architectural obstacles for persons with disabilities, the City in 2011 amended the Municipal Code to allow the review of requests for reasonable accommodation pursuant to SB 520 of 2001.

Definition of “Family”. The Municipal Code defines "Family" as “two or more persons living together in a dwelling unit, sharing common cooking facilities, and possessing the character of a relatively permanent single bona fide housekeeping unit in a domestic bond of social, economic and psychological commitment to each other, as distinguished from a group occupying a boarding house, club, dormitory, fraternity, hotel, lodging house, motel,



rehabilitation center, rest home or sorority.” This definition is consistent with state law..

Maximum concentration requirements. There are no concentration or separation requirements for residential care facilities or group homes in the Zoning Code.

Site planning requirements. There are no special site planning requirements (other than parking, height, and setbacks) for residential care facilities in the Zoning Code.

Parking requirements. The Zoning Code does not specify a parking requirement for residential care facilities. The city has not been presented with requests for such facilities, therefore parking demand would be determined on a case-by-case based on comparison with uses having similar parking demand.

• Farm Worker Housing

The City’s Zoning Ordinance does not identify farm worker housing separately as a permitted use. However, as discussed in Chapter II, no agricultural activities are found within Hermosa Beach or in the surrounding communities. Therefore there is no demand for farm worker housing in Hermosa Beach.

• Emergency Shelters and Transitional/Supportive Housing

Emergency shelters are facilities that provide a safe alternative to acute homelessness either in a shelter facility, or through the use of motel vouchers. Emergency shelter is short-term, usually for 30 days or less. Recent amendments to state law (Senate Bill 2 of 2007) require that unless adequate shelter facilities are available to meet a jurisdiction’s needs, emergency shelters must be allowed by-right (i.e., without discretionary review such as a conditional use permit) in at least one zoning district, but may include specific development standards. In 2013 the Municipal Code was amended in compliance with SB 2, to allow emergency shelters by-right in the C-3, SPA 7 and SPA 8 zones. The C-3 zone encompasses approximately 28 acres while the SPA 7 and SPA-8 contain a total of approximately 22 acres. All of these districts are adjacent to Pacific Coast Highway, which provides excellent transit service.

Transitional housing is longer-term housing, typically up to two years. Transitional housing generally requires that residents participate in a structured program to work toward established goals so that they can move on to permanent housing. Residents are often provided with an array of supportive services to assist them in meeting goals. Under SB 2 transitional and supportive housing is deemed to be a residential use subject only to the same requirements and standards that apply to other residential uses of the same type in the same zone. The Zoning Code was amended in 2013 to provide definitions and regulations for transitional or supportive housing consistent with state law.



• Single Room Occupancy

Single-room-occupancy (SRO) facilities are small studio-type units that typically rent in the very-low- or extremely-low-income category. SROs are not identified by the City’s Zoning Code as permitted uses within any residential or commercial district, although such facilities may be built in multi-family zones if the applicable development standards are met. The City’s Building Code requires a 600 square-foot minimum for one-bedroom multi-family units and the Zoning Code requires a 900 square-foot minimum for condominiums.

California Health and Safety Code §17958.1 allows jurisdictions to permit efficiency units with a minimum floor area of 150 square feet and partial kitchen or bathroom facilities for occupancy by no more than two persons. In order to facilitate the development this source of affordable housing, the Zoning Code was amended in 2013 to add a definition and development standards for SROs consistent with state law.

c. Off-Street Parking Requirements The City’s parking requirements for residential zones vary by residential type and housing product (Table III-4). Two off-street parking spaces plus one guest space are required for single-family, duplex or two-family dwellings. Multiple dwellings (three or more units) are also required to have two off-street spaces, plus one guest space for each two dwelling units. Mobile homes are required to have two spaces per unit. The City adopted a reduced parking standard for Specific Plan Area No. 6 in conjunction with approval of a senior assisted living facility, and shared and reduced parking may be approved by the Planning Commission on a case-by-case basis. State density bonus law (SB 1818) prescribes reduced parking standards for affordable housing developments, and in 2013 the Code was amended to reduce parking standards for multi-family lower-income and senior restricted housing, multi-family housing restricted to disabled persons, and single-room-occupancy facilities.

Table III-4 Residential Parking Requirements

Type of Unit Minimum Parking Space Required

Single family residence 2 spaces plus 1 guest space

Mobile home park 2 spaces

Duplex or two-family dwelling 2 spaces plus 1 guest space

Multiple dwellings (3+ units) 2 spaces plus 1 guest space for each 2 dwelling units

Detached servant’s quarters or guest houses 1 space

Multi-family lower-income and senior restricted housing, multi-family housing restricted to disabled persons, and single-room-occupancy facilities

Reduced standards, refer to Hermosa Beach Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 17.44

Source: Hermosa Beach Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 17.44



d. Accessory and Second Units The Zoning Code limits guest houses and accessory living quarters to space within the main building for someone employed on the premises or temporary use by guests pursuant to a use permit.

• "Guest house" or "accessory living quarters" means living quarters within a main building for the use of persons employed on the premises, or for temporary use by guests of the occupants of the premises. Such quarters shall have no kitchen facilities and shall not be rented or otherwise used as a separate dwelling unit. Guest houses and accessory living quarters are subject to the issuance of a conditional use permit and are not allowed in accessory buildings.

Accessory units differ from second units, which may be rented subject to an age restriction. In 2013 the City amended the code to allow a maximum 640 square foot unit on an 8,000+ square foot lot in the R-1 zone subject to a ministerial approval process. Those portions of the city that are presently zoned R-2 and R-3 typically contain parcels that are too small to accommodate second units. As a result, the provisions for a second unit apply only to the R-1 single-family zone. In 1992 the City adopted Ordinance No. 92-1080 which makes all of the required findings under California Government Code §65852.2 to preclude the creation of second units in single-family and multi-family zones, and the City has determined that second units are not suitable on the residential lots in the City due to impacts on such things as traffic, density, the school system, infrastructure, sewer, loss of open space, increased impervious surfaces, and increase of solid waste generation. While the City subsequently conducted an extensive lot merger program these conditions and the reasons to preclude second units continue to exist.

e. Density Bonus Under state law (SB 1818 of 2004), cities and counties must provide a density increase up to 35% over the otherwise maximum allowable residential density under the Municipal Code and the Land Use Element of the General Plan (or bonuses of equivalent financial value) when builders agree to construct housing developments with units affordable to low- or moderate-income households. The Municipal Code was amended in 2013 to be consistent with state density bonus law.

f. Mobile Homes/Manufactured Housing There is often an economy of scale in manufacturing homes in a plant rather than on site, thereby reducing cost. State law precludes local governments from prohibiting the installation of mobile homes on permanent foundations on single-family lots. It also declares a mobile home park to be a permitted land use on any land planned and zoned for residential use, and prohibits requiring the average density in a new mobile home park to be less than that permitted by the Municipal Code.



Mobile homes are permitted in each of the residential zones, thereby facilitating the construction of this type of housing.

One mobile home park is located in Hermosa Beach (Marine Land Mobile Home Park), which is owned by a private, non-profit corpora-tion. In addition, the adjacent "State RV Park" is occupied by very-low-income households and persons in transition to permanent residency. The City committed to retaining the Marine Land Mobile Home Park by designating it within the General Plan and Zoning Code as a Mobile Home Park (MHP) Zone and in 2008 the City Council allocated over $111,000 from the Condominium Conversion Fund to assist residents with their acquisition of the Marine Land Mobile Home Park. In December 2008 the project was awarded $1,200,000 subject to conditions under the state’s Mobilehome Park Resident Owner Program (see Program 3 in Chapter V).

g. Condominium Conversions In order to reduce the impacts of condominium conversions on residents of rental housing and to maintain a supply of rental housing for low- and moderate-income persons, the City's Municipal Code provides for a tenant assistance plan that includes the following:

a. An option to first purchase units, including tenant purchase discounts. For those who choose not to purchase a unit, the subdivider must provide a method by which tenants will be assisted in finding comparable replacement rental housing within the area of the conversion, including professional relocation assistance.

b. A statement of the method by which the subdivider will comply with the requirements of Section 66427.1 of the State Subdivision Map Act. Such method must provide that no tenant shall be required to move from his or her apartment due to the proposed conversion until the expiration of the two-month period for exercise of his or her right of first refusal.

c. Reimbursement for moving costs incurred, not to exceed $500.00.

d. Extension of tenancy to complete school term, if necessary.

Because of these requirements, the potential impact of condominium conversions is not a significant constraint on the preservation of affordable rental housing. However, the reimbursement amounts for moving and for rent differentials should be reviewed to ensure costs have not outpaced reimbursements. This review is incorporated into Program 8.



h. Nonconforming Uses and Buildings The Zoning Code allows residential uses to be rebuilt in the case of destruction or damage beyond the owner's control provided the nonconformity is not increased. Nonconforming buildings may expand 100 percent in floor area (existing prior to October 26, 1989, up to 3,000 square feet per unit or 5,000 square feet of total floor area for the building site). Nonconforming portions of a building with a nonconforming residential use may be partially modified or altered to the extent necessary to comply with the Uniform Building Code. Specific rules pertaining to nonconforming parking apply. Building sites with three or more dwelling units cannot be expanded in floor area unless two parking spaces per unit plus one guest space for every two units are provided.

The Zoning Code also allows the Planning Commission to validate as legal nonconforming residential units that can be shown to have been used for residential occupancy more or less continuously since January 1, 1959 when City records and actual property use conflict. In 2013 the City evaluated whether to relax provisions governing validation of residential units that contribute to the supply of affordable rental housing when the use is demonstrated to have existed for a shorter period of time (to be

determined as part of the city's consideration) than is currently required under the code, provided the units are improved so as to not be substandard and parking adequate for the occupancy can be provided and determined to maintain the existing regulations due to density, parking and issues that would be associated with administration of such a program.

i. Building Codes State law prohibits the imposition of building standards that are not necessitated by local geographic, climatic or topographic conditions and requires that local governments making changes or modifications in building standards must report such charges to the Department of Housing and Community Development and file an expressed finding that the change is needed. The City’s Building Code incorporates the California Building Code, which includes the Uniform Building Code and Uniform Housing Code. The City’s Building Code also incorporates the California Building, Plumbing, Mechanical and Electrical Codes. These are considered the minimum necessary to protect the public's health, safety and welfare.

The City’s ordinance details the revisions and amendments to the Building Code that exceed state standards. These amendments are all relatively inexpensive, and most of the revisions are related to fire alarms, smoke detectors, sprinkler systems, and other basic safety measures. The City has adopted some local modifications to the 2010 CalGreen Codes to address drainage, increased demolition diversion, and increased energy



efficiency, among others, however these were determined to not substantially increase project costs.

j. Coastal Zone Policies in the Coastal Land Use Plan are likely to aid in the maintenance of affordable housing since they discourage “mansionization.” Since the Zoning Ordinance has not been certified by the Coastal Commission, amendments and projects affecting coastal resources must continue to be submitted to the Coastal Commission for review and approval.

2. Development Processing Procedures a. Residential Permit Processing State Requirements. State Planning and Zoning Law provides permit processing requirements for residential development. Within the framework of state requirements, the City has structured its development review process in order to minimize the time required to obtain permits while ensuring that projects receive careful review.

Developer Assistance. Hermosa Beach has prepared permit processing guidelines to assist residential builders in applying for development permits for single-family residences, multi-family, and subdivisions. The guides are comprehensive in nature, address the steps, and check points to be followed. Early consultation with City staff is encouraged to identify issues as soon as possible and reduce processing time. This consultation (at no cost to applicants) allows applicants to become acquainted with the information and fees required by each department and agency. Preliminary site and architectural plans are also reviewed for consistency with City standards. This conference allows the applicant to assess the feasibility of the project and make adjustments during the preliminary planning stages to minimize costs.

Permit Approval Procedures and Timing. Simultaneous processing of required entitlements (e.g., subdivisions and planned developments permits) is also provided as a means of expediting the review process. Most projects under the purview of the Planning Commission are approved or denied within six weeks of filing; a subsequent process requiring Planning Commission actions to be reported to the City Council and the appeal period typically consumes about 30 days. Therefore, the process is typically completed within 3 months from application filing.

• Single-Family Detached Units – Applications are reviewed by the Planning Division for zoning clearance, and subsequently by the Building Division. Processing time is typically three to four weeks.

• Condominiums – A conditional use permit, precise development permit (PDP) design review, and tentative subdivision map must be approved by the Planning Commission; this process is usually completed within three months from the date a complete application is received. Once that approval is obtained, the building permit application can be simultaneously reviewed by the planning and building divisions. The building permit process takes about three to six weeks.



• Multi-Family Projects – A precise development plan (PDP) design review is conducted by the Planning Commission. If a conditional use permit is also required by the Zoning Code, then it is reviewed by the Planning Commission concurrently. Such review is usually completed within three months from the date a complete application is received. Once approval is obtained, the building permit application can be simultaneously reviewed by the planning and building divisions. A structural plan check is performed by an outside contractor. The building permit process takes about four to six weeks.

• Mixed-Use Projects – A precise development plan (PDP) design review is conducted by the Planning Commission. If a conditional use permit is required by the Zoning Code, concurrent Planning Commission review is usually completed within three months from the date a complete application is received. The building permit process takes about three to six weeks.

• Building Plan Check - Plan check for the processing of residential building permits is generally four to six weeks, depending on the City’s workload. For discretionary permits, there is an initial internal review period of 30 days. Building codes are applied to new construction, and projects are monitored and inspected under the building permit process. Where no permits have been obtained, inspections are made in response to request and complaints.

Programs 5 and 9 in the Housing Plan include specific actions the City will take to streamline the development review process to facilitate the production of affordable housing.

b. Environmental Review Environmental review is required for all discretionary development projects under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Most projects in Hermosa Beach are either Categorically Exempt or require only an Initial Study and Negative Declaration. Developments that have the potential of creating significant impacts that cannot be mitigated require the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report. Most residential projects require a Negative Declaration and take an additional three to four weeks to complete. Categorically Exempt developments such as second residential units require a minimal amount of time. As a result, state-mandated environmental review does not pose a significant constraint to housing development.

3. Development Fees and Improvement Requirements State law limits fees charged for development permit processing to the reasonable cost of providing the service for which the fee is charged. Various fees and assessments are charged by the City and other public agencies to cover the costs of processing permit applications and providing services and facilities such as schools, parks and infrastructure. Almost all of these fees are assessed through a pro-rata share system,



based on the magnitude of the project's impact or on the extent of the benefit that will be derived.

Table III-5 shows fees associated with new development within Hermosa Beach. As can be seen from the table, Park and Recreation and Building Permit fees represent the largest development fees, although since many projects replace units, credits can be obtained. For a typical 2,000-square-foot single-family dwelling (excluding any demolition or entitlement cost), cumulative permit fees are estimated at approximately $20,000 per unit or $10,000 if the new unit replaced a 1,500-square-foot house (2013). Fees for a 2,000-square-foot condominium unit (part of a typical two-unit project) that replaced a 1,500-square-foot dwelling would be about $20,000, or $30,000 if no replacement was involved. Nearly all multi-family projects are small condominium projects which allow owners to maximize investment on small lots.

The City periodically evaluates the actual cost of processing the development permits when revising its fee schedule. The last review was 2012.

In addition to City fees, development fees levied by the school districts and special districts include the following as of April 2013:

• School Fees: $2.63 per square foot • L.A. County Sewer Connection Fee: $2,850 (single family home)

Aside from parkland fees, no other impact fees have been adopted.

Table III-5 City of Hermosa Beach Planning & Building Fees

Planning Fees/Building Fees Fee Amount Conditional Use Permit (CUP) $3,205 CUP for Condominium (cost/2 units) $5,290 CUP for Condominium (per unit over 2 units) $195 CUP/Parking Plan/PDP (amendment) $2,720 Negative Declaration/Initial Study $2,305 Extension (tentative map, final map, CUP) $1,000 Final Map $705 General Plan Amendment Map/Text $3,630/$4,570 Zone Change $3,705 Parking Plan $3,460 Precise Development Plan $3,945 Subdivision – Tentative Map $3,225 Variance $2,875 Parks and Recreation Fees (condos excluded)** $6,813/unit Parks and Recreation Fees, in lieu (condos only)** $14,096/unit

Building Permit $1,621.44 for first $100,000 plus $9.28 for each additional $1,000

Sewer Use Fee** Same as County Sewer Fee Source: City Of Hermosa Beach. 2013 *Averages for 3-bedroom, 2 bath single-family home. **Credits available if existing square footage is demolished or dwelling units are replaced. Does not include possible cost for an environmental impact report or related consultant fees.



The City requires developers to provide on-site and off-site improvements necessary to serve their projects. Such improvements may include water, sewer and other utility extensions, street construction and traffic control device installation that are reasonably related to the project. Dedication of land or in-lieu fees may also be required of a project for rights-of-way, transit facilities, recreational facilities and school sites, consistent with the Subdivision Map Act.

The City’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP) contains a schedule of public improvements, including street improvements and other public works projects, to facilitate the City’s continued development according to the City’s General Plan. The CIP helps to ensure that construction of public improvements is coordinated with private development.

Although development fees and improvement requirements increase the cost of housing, cities have little choice in establishing such requirements due to the limitations on property taxes and other revenue sources needed to fund public improvements.

B. Non-Governmental Constraints 1. Environmental Constraints

Environmental constraints include physical features such as steep slopes, fault zones, floodplains, or sensitive biological habitat. In many cases, development of these areas is constrained by state and federal laws (e.g., FEMA floodplain regulations, the Clean Water Act, Endangered Species Act, Coastal Act, State Fish and Game Code and Alquist-Priolo Act). The City’s Coastal Land Use Plan and General Plan have been designed to protect sensitive areas from development, and to protect public safety Environmentally sensitive areas are generally zoned and protected as parklands. However, a significant portion of the City is within the Coastal Zone wherein impacts to coastal resources are always of concern. In addition, portions of the city are located on moderately steep hillsides and some areas are subject to liquefaction. While policies constrain residential development to some extent, they are necessary to support other public policies.

2. Infrastructure Constraints With almost 20,000 people living within its 1.3 square miles and virtually no vacant land, the City’s growth is limited to redevelopment and replacement of existing structures. This section discusses potential infrastructure constraints on such development.

Water and Wastewater. Water and wastewater systems are generally able to serve existing demands. Most new development will continue to be replacement of existing structures, and water and sewer capacities are projected to be sufficient to accommodate this replacement during the planning period. However, significant deficiencies in the sewer system exist and rehabilitation is necessary, and new development may require offsite improvements. In 2009 the City Council approved Sewer System Master and Management Plans identifying the cost to repair the 80-year-old system at $9 million over 10 years. City staff met with Los Angeles County Department of Public Works regarding annexing the city’s facilities into the county’s Sewer



Maintenance District with favorable response. In June 2012, the City Council approved the first step, County review of City sewer videos to determine deficiencies requiring rehabilitation prior to annexation. In 2012 the City contracted for limited sewer repair and replacement. Water infrastructure is replaced and developer improvements are in accordance with the schedules and requirements of the service providers.

Streets and Parking. One of the primary infrastructure issues associated with the current level of development is the limited capacity of on-street parking. As a dense beach city inundated by tourists throughout the summer months, the city lacks adequate parking in many areas. The City addresses this constraint incrementally by ensuring that all new developments, both residential and commercial, provide adequate off-street parking so they do not need to rely on on-street parking.

Streets in Hermosa Beach are subject to high levels of traffic, which would be further impacted by new development. The great majority of the traffic, especially during the summer months, consists of through-traffic, over which the City has no control. Because of the City’s location in relation to the regional freeway system, access to the surrounding region is limited to the arterial roadways. The many thousands of visitors to the local beaches also affect parking and other services, in addition to traffic.

Drainage. Finally, urban storm water run-off is a challenging issue because the City is an ocean front community with over 90% impermeable ground surface. In addition to best management practices (BMPs) implemented through its regional storm water discharge permit, the City also requires infiltration basins, when appropriate, with new developments. The City has adopted rules to allow and encourage pervious surfaces and also adopted Cal-Green building standards in 2010 exceeding state requirements by requiring increased permeability or infiltration in connection with new development. The City has installed an award-winning infiltration project in the downtown area, which should serve as a model for other areas.

3. Land Costs Land represents one of the most significant components of the cost of new housing. Land values fluctuate with market conditions, and the downturn in the housing market following the 2008 mortgage crisis had a negative effect on property values. Real estate professionals have reported that sales and property values are now recovering, however.

Per-unit land cost is directly affected by density – higher density allows the cost to be spread across more units, reducing the total price. Most new residential development in the City consists of one to two units per lot, and recent trends indicate redevelopment projects have been maximizing density.

4. Construction Costs Residential construction costs are estimated by the Community Development Department at $200 per square foot and higher, usually due to the type of construction and amenities desired by the developer in this market. Construction cost is affected by the price of materials, labor, development standards, and general market conditions. The City has no influence over materials and labor costs, and the building codes and



development standards in Hermosa Beach are not substantially different from other cities in the South Bay area. Since most development consists of private redevelopment where impact fees and major infrastructure or offsite improvements are typically not required, it is likely that costs are lower than in many cities. The City adopted the 2010 CalGreen codes with some local modifications; however, no ‘reach’ codes were adopted and these amendments were carefully reviewed to ensure they were readily achievable and would not add substantial cost, especially given current economic conditions.

5. Cost and Availability of Financing Hermosa Beach is similar to most other communities with regard to private sector home financing programs. The recent crisis in the mortgage industry has affected the availability of real estate loans, although the long-term effects are unpredictable. For buyers with good credit histories, mortgages can be obtained at very favorable interest rates.

Under state law, it is illegal for real estate lending institutions to discriminate against entire neighborhoods in lending practices because of the physical or economic conditions in the area (“redlining”). In monitoring new construction sales, re-sales of existing homes, and permits for remodeling, it would not appear that redlining is practiced in any area of the city.

C. Fair Housing State law prohibits discrimination in the development process or in real property transactions, and it is the City’s policy to uphold the law in this regard. Fair housing issues are addressed in Hermosa Beach through coordination with fair housing organizations to process complaints regarding housing discrimination and to provide counseling in landlord/tenant disputes. Anti-discrimination resource materials (e.g., handouts, booklets, and pamphlets) are made available to the public at City Hall, the library, and on the City’s website through links to the Housing Rights Center (see Program 6 in the Housing Plan).

Hermosa Beach 2013-2021 Housing Element Appendix A – Evaluation

Housing Element Technical Report A-1 September 10, 2013

Appendix A

Evaluation of the 2008-2014 Housing Element

Section 65588(a) of the Government Code requires that jurisdictions evaluate the effectiveness of the existing Housing Element, the appropriateness of goals, objectives and policies, and the progress in implementing programs for the previous planning period. This appendix contains a review the housing goals, policies, and programs of the 2008-2014 Housing Element, and evaluates the degree to which these programs have been implemented during the previous planning period. This analysis also includes an assessment of the appropriateness of goals, objectives and policies. The findings from this evaluation have been instrumental in determining the City’s 2013-2021 Housing Implementation Program.

Table A-1 summarizes the programs contained in the previous Housing Element along with the source of funding, program objectives, accomplishments, and implications for future policies and actions.

Table A-2 evaluates the appropriateness of previous goals and policies, and identifies any changes that are called for in response to the City’s experience during the past planning period. Based on this evaluation, all of the current Goals and Policies continue to be appropriate and have been retained.

Table A-3 presents the City’s progress in meeting the quantified objectives from the previous Housing Element.



Table A-1 Housing Element Program Effectiveness Evaluation

City of Hermosa Beach 2008-2013

Program Responsible Agency Funding Source Program Objectives Accomplishments

Future Policies and Actions

1. Density Bonus Program


General Fund Code amendment in conformance within state Density Bonus law within six months of Housing Element adoption. Brochures, website and other outreach elements of this program during 2009-2010.

An updated Density Bonus ordinance was adopted in 2013 and made available on the City website.

This program has been completed.

2. Housing Sites Database Program


General Fund Continue to maintain a comprehensive land use database as means to identify suitable sites for new residential development. This database provides zoning and other information for every parcel in the City, and includes information regarding underdeveloped and undeveloped parcels. Make the database available to property owners, investors, and builders at the Planning Department counter.

The residential site inventory was made available to all interested parties on the City website.

This program should be continued.

3. Mobile Home Conservation Program


General Fund This program provides for the ongoing maintenance and conservation of the Marine Land Mobile Home Park. The 60-space park provides housing for extremely-low-, very-low- and low-income households. The Hermosa Court Recreational Vehicle Park with 19 pads at 725 10th Street also provides transitional housing space for those persons or households in transition from an RV to apartment or home. The City's MHP Zoning District requires Planning Commission approval in order to add or delete spaces in the park, which helps to preserve affordability by discouraging conversion from single- to double-wide spaces. The Mobile Home Park has obtained state funding to convert to a resident owned park. This program was implemented with City Council allocation of over $111,000 and $1,200,000 awarded under the state’s Mobilehome Park Resident Owner Program (MPROP).

The City continued to assist the park in its conversion process.

This program should be continued.





4. Code Enforcement Program


General Fund To enhance public health, safety, and welfare through the expeditious implementation of an effective code enforcement program.

The City has continued its proactive Code Enforcement program to address public health and safety concerns before they become a hazard.

This program is successful and should be continued.

5. Affordable Housing Outreach and Assistance


General Fund Investigate potential funding sources and administrative support to assist private and non-profit organizations in the development and/or provision of affordable housing. Investigate the feasibility of expanding CDBG funding and Section 8 rental vouchers to qualifying households. If the City is successful in obtaining increased CDBG funding and/or expanding Section 8 rental vouchers for residents, this information will be posted in the Community Center, on the City’s website, in handouts provided in the information kiosk in the City Hall lobby, and in the local library. Brochures will also be provided to local service clubs including the local “Meals on Wheels” program, local dial-a-ride service, the local recreation center, and emergency shelters in the area. The City will also provide incentives such as priority processing, fee waivers and deferrals, and modified development standards to projects with low- or moderate-income units, and assist in preparing and processing grant applications for affordable housing projects. Project sponsors will be encouraged to include units for extremely-low-income households where feasible.

The City in 2010 conferred with a variety of nonprofits to identify specific actions the City can take to facilitate the development of affordable housing, including to extremely-low-, very-low- and low-income households.

This program was successfully completed and should be modified to reflect previous accomplishments.

6. Fair Housing Program Community Development Department

General Fund Provide assistance to local fair housing organizations to address complaints regarding housing discrimination and to provide counseling in landlord/tenant disputes. This program includes a referral service in City Hall whereby a staff person provides materials (handouts, booklets, pamphlets, etc.) to the public. This information is also available to the public at the library and on the City’s website.

The City has not received any complaints regarding housing discrimination and continues to provide mediation services for disputes, (The City maintains a contract with a Dispute Resolution Service company) including landlord/tenant disputes and issues between parties that cannot be resolved through Municipal or Building Code provisions.

This program is successful and should be continued.





7. Zoning for Special Needs and Affordable Housing


General Fund Update the Zoning Code to remove constraints and encourage the provision of housing for persons with special needs, and create a lower-income housing overlay zone. a. Group Houses and Residential Care Facilities.

The Municipal Code was amended in 2013 to accomplish this objective.

Completed – no longer necessary.

b. Reasonable Accommodation. A Reasonable Accommodation ordinance was adopted in 2011.


c. Emergency Shelters. The Municipal Code was amended in 2013 to accomplish this objective.


d. Transitional/Supportive Housing. The Municipal Code was amended in 2013 to accomplish this objective.


e. SROs. The Municipal Code was amended in 2013 to accomplish this objective.


f. On-Site Parking. The Municipal Code was amended in 2013 to accomplish this objective.


g. Restrictions on Unrelated Persons in a Household. The Municipal Code was amended in 2013 to accomplish this objective.


h. Minimum Unit Size. The Municipal Code was reviewed in 2013 and it was determined that unit size was not an impediment to development of affordable lower income housing and the code was not amended.


i. Second Units. The Municipal Code was amended in 2013 to accomplish this objective.


j. Housing by right. The Municipal Code was amended in 2013 to accomplish this objective.






k. Affordable Housing Development Opportunity Sites. An Affordable Housing Overlay Zone was adopted in 2012 to meet the RHNA which has been now been reduced to 2 units.


8. Non-Conforming Residential Uses


General Fund Evaluate whether to relax provisions governing validation of non-conforming residential units that contribute to the supply of affordable rental housing.

The City evaluated this program and declined to amend the code.


9. Facilitate Efficient Use of Sites that Allow High Density Residential Development


General Fund a. The City will facilitate lot consolidation by: Assisting affordable housing developers in identifying opportunities for lot consolidation using the City’s GIS system and property database; Continue to expedite processing for lot consolidations processed concurrently with planning entitlements; Amend the Zoning Code to provide a graduated density bonus for lower-income housing on small lots consolidated into a single building site; Publicize the program on the City’s website, at the Planning counter, and by notice to affordable housing providers.

The Municipal Code was amended in 2013 to accomplish this objective.

This program was completed and should be revised to reflect previous accomplishments.

b. The City will facilitate affordable housing development by: Facilitating pre-application meetings; Implementing incentives under the Density Bonus law; Reducing on-site property development standards (e.g. reduced setbacks, reduced parking standards) for developments with affordable elderly or disabled housing units for small projects below the threshold of the Density Bonus law; Allowing deferral or waiver of City fees necessary to make the project cost-effective; Facilitating permit processing so that developers can take advantage of funding opportunities; Expediting permit processing through concurrent review through the planning and building processes; Promote programs on the City’s website and at the Planning Counter and biennially notify affordable housing developers of the City’s housing incentives.

The Municipal Code was amended in 2013 to modify the density bonus law and allow reduced parking. The remainder of the programs continue to be available.

Continue to implement this program (excluding those items completed).



Table A-2 Appropriateness of Previous Housing Element Policies

City of Hermosa Beach

Issue Policy Appropriateness Issue Area No. 1 - The City of Hermosa Beach will remain committed to those efforts designed to preserve and maintain the existing housing resources in the City, including affordable housing.

Policy 1.1 - The City will continue to encourage the maintenance and improvement of the existing housing stock within the local neighborhoods.

Appropriate - retain

Policy 1.2 - The City will assist in the preservation and enhancement of the housing supply available to senior citizens.


Policy 1.3 - The City will work to minimize the conversion of existing lower-cost rental housing in multiple-family developments to condominiums.


Policy 1.4 - The City will promote and encourage the conservation and maintenance of the existing neighborhoods.


Policy 1.5 - The City will investigate potential sources of funding and other incentives that will assist in the preservation and renovation of older housing units.


Policy 1.6 - The City will continue to implement its current code enforcement procedures as a means to preserve the existing housing resources in the City.


Issue Area No. 2 - The City of Hermosa Beach will continue to assist in the development of new housing for all income groups

Policy 2.1 - The City will continue to promote the development of a variety of housing types and styles to meet the existing and projected housing needs for all segments of the community.


Policy 2.2 - The City will encourage the development of safe, sound, and decent housing to meet the needs of varying income groups.


Policy 2.3 - The City will continue to implement the land use policy of the General Plan, which provides for a wide range of housing types at varying development intensities.


Policy 2.4 - The City will continue to support and promote home ownership in the community. Appropriate - retain

Policy 2.5 - The City will continue to cooperate with other government agencies, citizen groups, and the private sector in order to assist in meeting the existing and future demand for housing.




Issue Policy Appropriateness Issue Area No. 3 - The City of Hermosa Beach will continue its commitment to the identification of sites for potential residential development as a means to achieve a variety and diversity of housing types.

Policy 3.1 - The City will evaluate new development proposals in light of the community's environmental resources and values, the capacity of the public infrastructure to accommodate the projected demand, and the presence of environmental constraints.


Policy 3.2 -The City will continue to evaluate the General Plan and zoning to ensure residential development standards are adequate to serve the future development.


Policy 3.3 - The City will continue to review current zoning practices for consistency with the General Plan as a way to potentially facilitate new mixed-use development within or near the commercial districts.


Issue Area No. 4 - The City of Hermosa Beach will continue to remain committed to the removal of governmental constraints.

Policy 4.1 - The City will continue to abide by the provisions of the Permit Streamlining Act as a means to facilitate a timely review of residential development proposals.


Policy 4.2 - The City will work with prospective developers and property owners to outline the review and development requirements applicable to residential development in the City.


Policy 4.3 - The City will continue to implement its efforts to educate the community regarding the development standards contained in the City of Hermosa Beach Zoning Ordinance.


Policy 4.4 - The City will continue to evaluate its Zoning Ordinance and General Plan as a means to remove governmental constraints related to development standards. These may include, but not be limited to, parking requirements, allowing affordable housing on commercial sites, new standards for mixed-use development, lot consolidation incentives, and senior housing requirements.

Appropriate – retain

Issue Area No. 5 - The City will remain committed to promoting equal housing opportunities.

Policy 5.1 - The City will continue to provide information and referral services to regional agencies that counsel people on fair housing and landlord-tenant issues.


Policy 5.2 - The City will continue to cooperate with the County Housing Authority related to the provision of rental assistance to lower-income households.


Policy 5.3 - The City will continue to cooperate with other cities and agencies in the area in investigating resources available to provide housing for the area's homeless population.


Policy 5.4 - The City will continue to encourage and promote the expansion of shelter programs with adjacent cities and local private interests for the temporary accommodation of the homeless population.




Table A-3 Progress in Achieving Quantified Objectives

City of Hermosa Beach 2008-2013

Program Category Quantified Objective Progress New Construction1 Extremely Low 74 - Very Low 73 - Low 93 - Moderate 98 - Above Moderate 224 208

Total 562 208

Rehabilitation2 Extremely Low

10 0 Very Low Low Moderate Above Moderate -

Total 10

Conservation3 Extremely Low

62 60 Very Low Low Moderate Above Moderate - -

Total 62 60 1 Quantified objective and progress for new construction reflect units built 2006-2013, per the

previous RHNA cycle 2 Private repairs 3 Mobile Home Park and RV Park units

Hermosa Beach 2013-2021 Housing Element Appendix B – Land Inventory

Housing Element Technical Report B-1 September 10, 2013

Appendix B Residential Land Inventory

1. Methodology and Assumptions

State law requires each city to include in the Housing Element an inventory of vacant parcels having the potential for residential development, or “underutilized” parcels with potential for additional development or redevelopment. The purpose of this inventory is to evaluate whether there is sufficient capacity, based on the General Plan, zoning, development standards, and infrastructure, to accommodate the City’s fair share of regional growth needs as identified in the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA). This analysis represents an estimate of the City’s realistic development potential. Actual development will depend on the intentions of each property owner, market conditions and other factors. The detailed methodology and assumptions for the residential land inventory discussed in Chapter II are provided below.

The City has been allocated a growth need of 2 units during the 2014-2021 projection period.

For potential new units in a city’s land inventory, state law establishes affordability assumptions based on density. The “default” density for small metropolitan jurisdictions, including Hermosa Beach, is 20 units per acre12. This means that if the General Plan and zoning allow development at 20 units per acre or greater, these sites are deemed appropriate to accommodate housing for lower-income households.

In Hermosa Beach, the following residential zoning districts allow multi-family development at densities greater than 20 units/acre:

District Allowable Density R-2 24.9 units/acre R-2B 24.9 units/acre R-3 33 units/acre R-P 33 units/acre

In addition, the C-1 commercial district allows mixed-use development at a density of 33 units/acre. The allowable densities in all of these districts are significantly greater than the state default density of 20 units/acre, therefore they are considered suitable for accommodating the city’s lower-income housing need.

2. Land Inventory

Table B-1 summarizes the city’s land inventory compared to the RHNA, while potential sites for residential development are listed in Table B-2 and shown in Figure B-1. Vacant sites have the potential of 8 lower-income units, which exceeds the RHNA allocation for the planning period.

12 Assembly Bill 2348 of 2004 (Government Code §65583.2(c)(3)(B))



Table B-1 Land Inventory Summary vs. RHNA

Income Category

Total Lower Mod Above Vacant sites 8 - - 8

RHNA (2014-2021) 2 - - 2

Adequate Capacity? Yes Yes Yes Sources: Hermosa Beach Community Development Dept., 2013



Table B-2 Residential Land Inventory

Address/APN Gen Plan Zoning Lot size

(sf)

Max. Density

(units/ac)

Existing Units

Realistic Capacity Low Mod

Above Mod Current Use

60 Hermosa Ave APN 4188-014-040

NC C-1 2,396 33 0 1 1 Vacant

APN 4183-009-019 (No address)

MD R-2 3,054 24.9 0 1 1 Vacant

825 15th St APN 4185-006-018

MD R-2B 5,672 24.9 0 3 3 Vacant

APN 4187-006-015 (no address)

HD R-P 4,000 33 0 3 3 Vacant

Total 8 8



Figure B-1 Residential Land Inventory

Hermosa Beach 2013-2021 Housing Element Appendix C – Public Participation Summary

Housing Element Technical Report C-1 September 10, 2013

Appendix C Public Participation Summary

This summary of Housing Element public-participation efforts describes opportunities for public involvement along with an explanation of how public comments were incorporated into the Housing Element. In addition, prior to the adoption hearings all interested parties were given the opportunity to review the recommended revisions.

Public participation is an important component of the planning process, and this update to the Housing Element has provided residents and other interested parties, particularly representatives of lower-income and special needs persons, numerous opportunities for review and comment. Public notices of all Housing Element meetings and public hearings were published in the local newspaper in advance of each meeting, as well as posting the notices on the City’s website. The draft Housing Element was made available for review at City Hall, posted on the City’s website, as well as at the Public Library. The document was also made available to housing advocates, mobile home residents, and non-profit organizations representing the interests of lower-income persons and special needs groups. Table C-1 on the following page lists persons and organizations that were sent direct mail notice of public meetings for this Housing Element update. In addition, public hearings are televised on the local cable channel.

After receiving comments on the draft Housing Element from the State Housing and Community Development Department, a proposed final Housing Element was prepared and made available for public review prior to adoption by the City Council.

The following is a list of opportunities for public involvement in the preparation of this Housing Element update.

Planning Commission hearing May 22, 2013 City Council hearing September 10, 2013

Hermosa Beach 2013-2021 Housing Element Appendix C – Public Participation Summary

Housing Element Technical Report C-2 September 10, 2013

Table C-1 Housing Element Notification List

LA Metropolitan Transit Authority Beach Cities Transit Native American Heritage Commission Gabrieleno/Tongva Indians of CA Chumash Tribe Sec For Resources State Of California So Bay Cities COG City Of Manhattan Beach City Of Torrance City Of Redondo Beach Hermosa Beach School District Redondo Beach USD South Bay Assoc Of Realtors Hermosa Beach Chamber of Commerce South Bay Senior Services Marineland Mobilehome Park Sunrise Assisted Living South Bay Adult Center Shelter Partnership Beach Cities Health District Family Crisis Center Social Vocational Services South Bay Ind Visions L.A. County Department of Children & Family Services Wellness Community-South Hermosa Beach Bay Cities Harbor Regional Center

Westside Center for Independent Living The Arc-South Bay 1736 Family Crisis Center Emma Hoff-Regional Community Service Coord. Rebuild Together So Bay LA Kenny Nickelson Memorial Foundation For Homeless Veterans and Children Salvation Army “His House Family Services” Project Touch South Bay Center for Counseling Hermosa Beach Community Ctr. Foundation Sister Dulce Charitable Foundation Hermosa Beach Kiwanis Club Hermosa Beach Woman's Club Rotary Of Hermosa Beach Hermosa Beach Veterans Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority Hope Chapel Church Catholic Charities Church Of Christ St. Cross Episcopal Church Our Lady of Guadalupe Catholic Church Jewish Community Center Christian Science Church