Loading...
PC - Item 3A - Public Hearing - Design Review 12-05, General Plan Amendment 12-02, Zone Change 12-02, Tentative Tract Map 72529, and Alley Vacation 7801-7825 Garvey Avenue, 3012 Del Mar Avenue and 3017 Brighton StreetROSEMEAD PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TO: THE HONORABLE CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE ROSEMEAD PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: PLANNING DIVISION DATE: DCEMBER 15, 2014 SUBJECT: DESIGN REVIEW 12 -05, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 12 -02, ZONE CHANGE 12 -02, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 72529, AND ALLEY VACATION 7801 -7825 GARVEY AVENUE, 3012 DEL MAR AVENUE, AND 3017 BRIGHTON STREET Summary Gerard Ngo has submitted entitlement applications requesting to develop a new residential /commercial mixed -use development. The project consists of the demolition of all existing structures to construct a five -story, mixed -use development with 15,553 square feet of retail /restaurant space on the basement/first and second floors and 60 residential units on the third through fifth floors, comprising 54,609 square feet, for a total built area of 70,162 square feet. Parking is proposed as a combination of surface and two stories of subterranean basement parking. The City is proposing to participate by vacating the existing public alley that bisects the site. Access to the proposed project will be provided via the rear of the structure with one entrance each on Del Mar Avenue and Brighton Street. The project also includes a density bonus application under Senate Bill (SB) 1818, which amended the state bonus law to allow density bonuses up to 35 %. The property is located at the northeast corner of Del Mar Avenue and Garvey Avenue in the C -3 (Medium Commercial) zone and R -2 (Light Multiple Residential) zone. This item was on the Planning Commission Agenda for June 16, 2014. However, due to extensive comments from the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) and the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works (LACDPW) during the 20 -day public review distribution period for the Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for the project, the Planning Commission continued this item to a future Planning Commission meeting. The Planning Commission staff report and meeting minutes are included in this report as Exhibits "C' and "D ". On June 4, 2014 (attached as Exhibit "E "), Caltrans submitted a comment letter to the City indicating their concerns that the 1 -10 /Del Mar Avenue freeway on -off ramps is Planning Commission Meeting December 15, 2014 Paae 2 of 48 operating at or near capaCity. Any project trips will contribute significant traffic impact to the State Facilities. For this reason, the Environmental Consultant, Phil Martin & Associates, Inc. was directed to have the traffic consultant conduct the necessary traffic counts at the 1 -10 /Del Mar Avenue freeway intersections to gather the traffic information necessary to respond to Caltrans. Traffic counts were taken at the 1 -10 /Del Mar Avenue freeway intersections the week of September 8, 2014 when the public schools were in session to gather the traffic data necessary to respond to your comment. Based on the collected traffic counts and analysis, project traffic will not impact any of the Del Mar Avenue at 1 -10 freeway on -off ramps during the AM or PM peak hours. The traffic study addendum is attached to this staff report as Exhibit "F. On June 6, 2014, staff received a comment letter from the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works indicating that storm drain BI 1109 - Monterey Park Area belonging to the Los Angeles County Flood Control District (LACFCD) and the 8 -inch sewer line that will serve the project may not have the capaCity to serve the project. For this reason, a sewer analysis study was completed and the LACDPW has reviewed and approved the study (attached as Exhibit "G). Environmental Analysis The City of Rosemead acting as a Lead Agency, has completed an Initial Study /Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration for the proposed mixed -use project pursuant to Section 15070 (b) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The Initial Study has been undertaken to determine if the proposed project may have a significant effect on the environment. The Initial Study was prepared and completed in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. On the basis of the Initial Study, the City of Rosemead has concluded that the project would have a less than significant impact on the environment if certain mitigation measures are adopted and carried out, and the City has therefore prepared a Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration (MIND). The MIND reflects the independent judgment of the City as a lead agency per CEQA Guidelines. The project site is not on a list compiled pursuant to Government Code section 65962.5. The proposed project is not considered a project of statewide, regional or area -wide significance and would not affect highways or other facilities under the jurisdiction of the State of California Department of Transportation. A Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project was distributed for a 20 -day public review and comment period from May 21, 2014 to June 9, 2014. The Mitigated Negative Declaration, along with Agency comments and a Mitigation Monitoring Program as required by CEQA guidelines, is attached to this staff report for your review. If the Commission recommends this project to the City Council for approval, the Commission must make a finding of adequacy with the environmental assessment and also recommend that the City Council to adopt the attached Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program (Exhibit "H "). Planning Commission Meeting December 15, 2014 Paqe 3 of 48 Staff Recommendation Based on the analysis and findings contained in this report, it is recommended that the Planning Commission ADOPT Resolution No. 14 -10 with findings (Exhibit "A "), which is a resolution recommending that the City Council ADOPT Ordinance 942 (attached as Exhibit "I ") approving Zone Change 12 -02 and CC Resolution 2015 -01 (attached as Exhibit "J ") approving Design Review 12 -05, General Plan Amendment 12 -02, and Tentative Tract Map 72529 and recommending adoption of the associated Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program. Desiqn Review 12 -05 Rosemead Municipal Code Section (RMC) 17.74.030(A)(1) states a precise plan of design for residential/commercial mixed -use development shall be submitted, and approved in accordance with the requirements of Section 17.72.060, with the exception that the City Council shall approve or disapprove such project upon receiving a recommendation from the Planning Commission. General Plan Amendment 12 -02 The project will change the existing Rosemead General Plan land use designations from Commercial and the residence at the northeast corner Medium Density Residential (0 -12 du /ac.) to Mixed -use: Residential /Commercial (60 du /ac; 4 stories). Zone Change 12 -02 The project will change the zoning from C -3 Medium Commercial and the single - family residence at the northeast corner of the site R -2 Light Multiple Residential to C -3 Medium Commercial and add a Residential /Commercial Mixed -Use Development Overlay (RCMUDO) and Design Overlay to allow the development of the project as proposed. Tentative Tract Map 72529 The applicant has submitted a Tentative Tract Map (TTM 72529) application for the consolidation of six (6) existing parcels into one (1) parcel. Property History and Description The subject property is located at the northeast comer of the intersection of Del Mar Avenue and Garvey Avenue. The site consists of six (6) parcels, totaling approximately 44,260 square feet. The alley to be vacated totals approximately 5,590 square feet. According to Los Angeles County records, the six (6) parcels are currently developed with five (5) commercial buildings totaling approximately 8,000 square feet, one (1) single family residence totally 1,080 square feet, and a parking lot. According to Business License records, the commercial buildings are occupied by a bar, a law office, and a used car sales dealership. Planning Commission Meeting December 15, 2014 View from Southwest Corner of Del Mar Avenue and Garvey Avenue Project Analysis Project Description The project consists of the demolition of all existing structures to construct a five -story, mixed -use development with 15,553 square feet of retail /restaurant space on the basementtfirst and second floors and 60 residential units on the third through fifth floors, comprising 54,609 square feet, for a total built area of 70,162 square feet. Of the 60 units, the project proposes 12 low- income rental units. An outdoor seating area is proposed in the central area of the ground level on the north side of the building. New landscaping will be provided within the building setbacks around the perimeter of the site and throughout the outdoor seating area. The project is requesting two concessions to allow the development as proposed. Due to the slope of the property, a concession is requested to allow a building height of 60 feet at Brighton Street, exceeding the allowable building height of 55 feet. A second concession is requested to allow the north side of the building to extend into a 20 degree angle that extends onto the site from the north property line because the project abuts existing residences north of the site. Parking is proposed as a combination of surface and two stories of subterranean basement parking. The project will incorporate an existing alley that extends east -west through the middle of the site from Brighton Street on the east to Del Mar Avenue on the west. Access to the proposed project will be provided via the rear of the structure with one entrance each on Del Mar Avenue and Brighton Street. The project also includes a Planning Commission Meeting December 15, 2014 Paqe 5 of 48 density bonus application under Senate Bill (SB) 1818, which amended the state bonus law to allow density bonuses up to 35% Site & Surrounding Land Uses The project site is designated in the General Plan as Commercial and Medium Density Residential (0 -12 du /ac) and on the Zoning Map it is designated C -3 (Medium Commercial) and R -2 (Light Multiple Residential) zones. The site is surrounded by the following land uses: North General Plan — Commemial and Medium Density Residential Zoning — C -3 (Medium Commercial) and R -2 (Light Multiple Residential) Land Use — Residential South General Plan - Commercial Zoning - G3 (Medium Commercial) Land Use - Commercial East General Plan - Commercial Zoning - C -3 (Medium Commercial) and R -2 (Light Multiple Residential) Land Use - Commercial and Residential West General Plan - Commercial Zoning - C -3 (Medium Commercial) Land Use - Commercial Development Standards The developer has incorporated the Residential /Commercial Mixed -Use Development Overlay Zone standards for the proposed mixed -use project (Zoning Code prior to November, 2013). The Residential /Commercial Mixed -Use Development Overlay Zone allows the Planning Commission and the City Council to grant approval of a well - designed development project that combine residential with nonresidential uses. Development Required Proposed W- Feature Plan Lot Size 30,000 s.f. 49,850 sf. Floor Area Ratio 2.0:1(maxallowed) 1.41:1 (FAR) 12' -0 with T -0° wide sidewalk (clear zone) and 5' -0° 12 -0' with T -0° wide sidewalk Public Sidewalk wide parkway (amenity zone) (dear zone) and 5' -0" wide arkwa amen" zone rom Setback Zero (0) feet Zero (0) feet erior Lot Line r May be zero (0) but shall be a minimum of ten (10) feet No interior lot line Setback if more than zero (0). Planning Commission Meeting December 15, 2014 Page 6 of 48 Side Street Del Mar Avenue: Zero (0) feet Setback None Bri hton Street: Zero 0 feet Rear Abutting Residential Setback Del Mar Avenue: Four - stories and fifty (50) feet Height Four (4) stories with a maximum height of fifty -five (55) feet Brighton Street: Five - stories and sixty (60) feet *Requesfing conce ssion The second floor and above shall be stepped back from Requesting concession to Variable Height the rear property line as follows: establishing a height at encroach into variable height six (6) feet above finished grade of the adjacent residential property line, a 20-degree requirement Two (2) parking spaces per dwelling plus one (1) guest 82 parking spaces Parking parking space per two (2) dwelling units (Residential) Total Required: 150 parking spaces 'Density bonus allows deviation of required guest parking s aces Retail: One (1) parking space per two hundred fifty Parking (250) square feet of floor space Retail: 4,7801250 = 19 (Commercial) Restaurant: One (1) parking space per one hundred Restaurant: 10,7731100 = 108 (100) square feet of floor space Total Provided: 129 parking spaces Total Required: 127 parking spaces Bicycle Parking Ten (10) percent ( %) of required off -street parking. 21 bicycle parking spaces 211 =21 bicycle parking spaces Open Space Common Open Space: 150 s.f. /dwelling unit (9,000 s.f.) Common Open Space: 9,510 s.f. Private Open Spam: 60 s.f /dwellin unit (3,600 s.f. Private Open Spam: 5,915 s.f. Building 77.8% Residential and commercial/ Residential 75% Residential and 25 % Commercial 22.2% Commercial Ratio `Requesting concession Proposed Floor Plans Commercial — The floor plans submitted with this application show a 3,262 square foot restaurant and an 821 square foot leasing office on the basement (B -1) level. The first floor contains three (3) retail units totaling 3,959 square feet and four (4) restaurant units totaling 7,511 square feet on the first floor. The project is designed with sufficient on -site parking to accommodate the commercial users. Residential — A total of 60 apartment units are proposed within this development. All units will be located on the third through fifth floors of the building. The unit floor plans submitted show a variety of unit types, from one - bedroom units to two- bedroom units, ranging in size from 826 square feet to 1,130 square feet of living area. Each unit contains a living room, dining room, kitchen, bedroom(s), bathroom(s), closet, storage, washer and dryer, and private open space. Planning Commission Meeting December 15, 2014 Paoe 7 of 48 Proposed Landscaping and Fencing: A conceptual landscape plan has been attached as Exhibit "B". New landscaping is proposed throughout the site. Landscaping is shown in the form of perimeter planting areas and landscaped islands within the surface parking lot areas. Additionally, the central courtyard provides added landscaping in the form of raised planter beds, water feature, and shade trees. The Applicant will be required to submit a detailed landscape and irrigation plan to the Planning Division for review and approval prior to issuance of any Building Permits. The Applicant is proposing to construct new decorative perimeter block walls along the north property line. Parking and Circulation Access to the site would be provided from two (2) driveways along Del Mar Avenue and Brighton Street. The Applicant is proposing surface and two levels of subterranean basement parking. A total of two hundred eleven (211) parking spaces would be provided, which includes one hundred twenty -nine (129) spaces for commercial parking and eighty -two (82) spaces for residential parking. Through the application of the density bonus law under Senate Bill (SB) 1818, the applicant is entitled to a reduction in parking. The maximum standards for residential parking are: • One (1) onsite parking space for up to one (1) bedroom. • Two (2) onsite parking spaces for up to three (3) bedrooms. • No requirement for guest parking. In addition, the proposed project would also include twenty -one (21) bicycle parking spaces. Traffic A traffic report was prepared by VA Consulting Inc. dated January 2014, to determine the potential traffic impacts of the project (attached in Appendices of Exhibit "H "). The traffic report studied 7 area intersections. The following intersections are included in the traffic study area: • Del Mar Avenue and Hellman Avenue (signalized) • Del Mar Avenue and Emerson Place (signalized) • Del Mar Avenue and Garvey Avenue (signalized) • Garvey Avenue and Jackson Avenue (signalized) • Del Mar Avenue and Highcliff Street (signalized) • Garvey Avenue and Brighton Street (2 -way stop control) • Garvey Avenue and Kelburn Avenue (signalized) Based on the traffic study, the proposed development will not create any significant environmental effects upon the traffic and circulation systems. The study findings and recommendations are as follows: Planning Commission Meeting December 15, 2014 Page 8 ol'48 Study Area Circulation Impacts The existing (2013) study area intersections are operating at Level of Service D or better based on existing peak hour intersection volumes. Several intersections are operating at LOS A or B during peak hours. Study area roadways are operating below capaCity based on weekday 24 -hour roadway volumes. For Existing 2013 with Project, Baseline 2015 (no project), and Baseline 2015 with Project conditions the study area intersections will continue to operate at Level of Service D or better with several maintaining LOS A and B in peak hours. No circulation system mitigation measures are required for implementation of the Garvey Del Mar Plaza Project. This analysis also concludes that no project access locations satisfy warrants for signalization. These findings were based on a worst -case analysis for Project trip generation. However, an area of potential concern is the proximity of the Del Mar Avenue project access to the intersection at Garvey Avenue. The existing southbound left -turn pocket storage length at the intersection is 200 feet and existing left -turn queuing may exceed this length during pm peak hour conditions. Under future project traffic conditions, left - turn volumes are anticipated to increase and the existing southbound left -turn pocket storage length may be exceed during both the am and pm peak hours. Although the project left -tum volumes at this access are forecast to be low, 10 vehicles in and 13 vehicles out during the pm (highest) peak hour, it is recommended that the impact of left- turning vehicles be monitored at this location, with restrictions imposed, if necessary. On -site Circulation There are no concerns regarding on -site circulation associated with the proposed project. The project access driveways and roadways are appropriately sized and configured for the project volumes and will be designed in accordance with applicable agency standards. Sight- distance requirements at project access driveways and intersections will be provided per agency standards. Site parking supply has been provided to meet or exceed City code. Because of height restrictions, the proximity to residences, and potential on -site circulation impacts, the project owner has identified the following measures to address commercial deliveries to the site. 1. All delivery vehicles (no trucks) entering and exiting the site from Brighton Street shall have a maximum height of 8'6 ". Delivery vehicles (no trucks) entering the site from Del Mar Avenue shall have a maximum height of 10'. All delivery vehicles (no trucks) entering the site from Del Mar Avenue shall be restricted to the first level — no internal access to level B -1. All delivery vehicles (no trucks) that are 8'6" or less can access the site from either Del Mar Avenue or Brighton Avenue and access internally both the first level and B -1. 2. There shall be no delivery vehicle (no trucks) deliveries between the hours of 10:00 P.M. to 9:00 a.m. Planning commission Meeting December 15, 2014 Page 9 of 48 3. All delivery vehicles (no trucks) shall park in the designated loading areas located within the commercial parking areas. Traffic Signal Warrants In this study, no unsignalized study area intersections or access driveways satisfy peak hour traffic signal warrants for any scenario. The Brighton Street and Garvey Avenue intersection will remain a two -way stop. The Project will create a new driveway access on Del Mar Avenue which should be one -way stop controlled on the driveway approach. Proposed Architecture: The Applicant has worked with the Planning Division in designing an aesthetically interesting project that meets the City's design goals for the MUDO -D overlay. The architectural style is modern, characterized by multi -story street - facing facades, tall, narrow and arched windows with painted foam - stucco trims, and predominately flat roofs with parapets at the rooflines. The front fagade has been designed to create visual interest at the street level. The main entrance of the building is highlighted through the use of a distinct corner element at the southwest and southeast corners of the building. In addition, various elements have been added to provide architectural interest to the design, such as the water features and potted plants along the front elevation, the use of contrasting exterior finishes and stone veneer at the base of the building. The subtle details of common open spaces and pedestrian - scaled architectural elements echo the modern design aspect for this mixed -use development. Lighting New exterior lighting is proposed for the property. New wall mounted fixtures will be placed along the front, side, and rear of the building. New light standards will be installed in the parking lot area. All new lighting will be fully shielded and directed downwards to mitigate glare on adjacent properties. The Mitigated Negative Declaration includes a lighting mitigation measure, which states: Prior to the issuance of a building permit the project applicant shall submit a lighting plan for approval by the Planning Division that incorporates any of the following light reducing measures as applicable: • Improved physical barriers such as increased wall height. • Relocate and /or change the height and /or orientation of proposed lighting fixtures. • Select lighting fixtures with more - precise optical control and /or different lighting distribution. • Add external shielding and /or internal reflectors to fixtures. • Select lower- output lamp/lamp technologies • A combination of the above. Planning Commission Meeting December 15, 2014 Paae 10 of 48 Alley Vacation In conjunction with the approval of this project, the applicant is requesting the City to vacate the alley between the four parcels fronting Garvey Avenue and the two parcels to the north, as illustrated below. This request would allow the applicant to incorporate the alley into this mixed -use development. The City Engineer has agreed to this request since it is not necessary for the City to retain the alley. Municipal Code Requirements Section 17.72.030 of the Rosemead Municipal Code (RMC) states that design review procedures shall be followed for all improvements requiring a building permit or visible changes in form, texture, color, exterior fagade, or landscaping. Section 17.72.050 provides the criteria by which the Planning Commission may approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove a design review application: A. The plans indicate proper consideration for the relationship between the proposed building and site developments that exist or have been approved for the general neighborhood; The proposed development is located within an established commercial district of the City. The Applicant has provided a design of high aesthetic quality, which in Staffs determination will improve the aesthetics of one of the City's prominent intersections and the project site's relationship to the commercial district. The proposed project is consistent with the Goal 3, Policy 3.1 of the Land Use Element of the City's General Plan in that the goal and policy call for encouraging mixed -use development as a means of upgrading established uses and developing vacant parcels along arterials to provide new commercial, residential, Planning Commission Meeting December 15, 2014 and employment opportunities. In addition, Goal 3, Policy 3.5 of the Land Use Element of the City's General Plan calls for promoting lively and attractive ground -floor retail uses that will create public revenues needed to provide for City services and the City's tax base. B. The plan for the proposed building and site development indicates the manner in which the proposed development and surrounding properties are protected against noise, vibrations, and other factors which may have an adverse effect on the environment, and the manner of screening mechanical equipment, trash, storage and loading areas; To ensure that the surrounding properties are protected against noise, vibrations, and other factors, the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) specifically addresses noise and lighting mitigation measures. All new lighting will be fully shielded and directed downwards to mitigate glare on adjacent properties. Conditions of approval have been incorporated to eliminate adverse effects on the environment as a result of the proposed project. This development will not generate any permanent impacts to noise levels for the surrounding area. All construction work will be required to comply with the timeframe, and decibel levels indicated in the City's Noise Ordinance. Conditions of approval will specifically address factors such as noise, construction hours, screening of mechanical equipment, landscaping, lighting, and the overall maintenance of the property. C. The proposed building or site development is not, in its exterior design and appearance, so at variance with the appearance of other existing building or site developments in the neighborhood as to cause the nature of the local environment to materially depreciate in appearance and value; The proposed project will improve the aesthetics of the prominent comer by establishing a mixed -use development of high architectural quality. The improvements to the site, in terms of new construction, landscape, and hardscape will provide a marked improvement over the existing appearance of the intersection of Garvey Avenue and Del Mar Avenue. D. The proposed building or structure is in harmony with the proposed developments on land in the general area, especially in those instances where buildings are within or adjacent to land shown on the General Plan as being part of the Civic Center or in public or educational use, or are within or immediately adjacent to land included within any precise plan which indicates building shape, size, or style; The property is not part of the Civic Center Plan, precise plan or land reserved for public or educational use, so there is no special need to create harmony with the general area. Notwithstanding this, the approved design will create a Planning Commission Meeting December 15, 2014 Page 12 of 48 development that is an aesthetic upgrade over the surrounding area and that has the potential to enhance land values in the general area. This is due to the proposed new building facade with higher quality materials, a design that blends better with the area, and greatly improved landscaping and parking lot area. E. The proposed development is in conformity with the standards of this code and other applicable ordinances in so far as the location and appearance of the buildings and structures are involved; and The proposed development meets all of the minimum code requirements for the C -3 MUDO -D (Medium Commercial with a Mixed -Use and Design Overlay) zone and all applicable referenced code sections of the Rosemead Municipal Code, as modified by the request for concessions under SB 1818. F. The site plan and the design of the buildings, parking areas, signs, landscaping, luminaries, and other site features indicates that proper consideration has been given to both the functional aspects of the site development, such as automobile and pedestrian circulation, and the visual effect of the development from the view of public streets. The Applicant has worked with the Planning Division in designing an aesthetically high - quality project. The front facade has been designed to create visual interest at the street level. The main entrance of the building is highlighted through the use of a distinct corner element at the southwest and southeast corners of the building. In addition, various elements have been added to provide architectural interest to the design, such as the water features and potted plants along the front elevation, the use of contrasting exterior finishes and stone veneer at the base of the building. The subtle details of common open spaces and pedestrian - scaled architectural elements echo the modern design aspect for this mixed -use development. Section 17.116 of the Rosemead Municipal Code sets forth the procedures and requirements for zone changes and amendments. A zone change may be permitted whenever the public necessity, convenience, general welfare or good zoning practice justifies such action. Pursuant to California Government Code Section 65860 (a), a zone change must be found consistent with the City's General Plan. A. Land Use: The General Plan Land Use Designation of the subject site is currently Commercial and Medium Density Residential. However, with implementation of the zone change, the site would change to a Mixed -Use: High Density Residential /Commercial Land Use Designation with a maximum density of 60 dwelling units per acre and maximum floor -area ratio of 2.0:1. The project site area consists of 1.14 acres. With a total of 60 residential dwelling units and 1.61 acres of total floor area, the project is consist with the Land Use Element of the General Plan. Planning Commission Meeting December 15, 2014 Page 13 of 48 B. Circulation: The proposed project will result in an increase in vehicle trips from the proposed residential and commercial land uses of the mixed -use project. With the incorporation of mitigation measures, this increase will not result in significant environmental impacts upon the Level of Service of surrounding street intersections and project entry driveways, and will not adversely affect surrounding properties. The proposed project will provide adequate off - street parking, including two levels of subterranean parking and one level of surface parking, to serve the parking needs of future residents and patrons and minimize traffic- related impacts upon the neighborhood. C. Housing: The proposed project is consistent with the City of Rosemead Housing Element, which seeks to provide a variety of housing types for the various demographics of the community. The proposed development will provide 60 new residential dwelling units, including 12 designated low- income rental units. D. Resource Management: The proposed development is located in a developed urban area, and as such, will not result in any significant impact upon natural resources. With the incorporation of mitigation measures, such as building setback and landscaping, the proposed building will have a less than significant impact upon the aesthetics from adjoining properties. E. Noise: This development will not generate any significant permanent impacts to the noise levels of the surrounding area. The proposed project will result in additional pedestrian and vehicular traffic noises, but is not considered to be substantial. There will be a temporary increase in ambient noise levels above the existing levels due to the presence of heavy equipment and trade personnel during construction activities. All construction work will be required to comply with the defined timeframe and City's Noise Ordinance. All mechanical equipment will be designed to minimize noise impacts on adjoining properties. Public Safety: The proposed development will allow the construction of residential and commercial uses in a developed urbanized area where there are no known public safety concerns. The site is not located in a seismic safety zone, and the entire City of Rosemead is located in Flood Zone C (flood insurance is not mandatory) and is free from any flood hazard designations. The project will be designed to meet the latest Building Code and Fire Code to maximized public safety of the site. Section 16.08.130 of the Rosemead Municipal Code provides the standards for approval for a tentative map: Planning Commission Meeting December 15, 2014 Page 14 of 48 A. The proposed division will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare nor injurious to the property or improvements in the immediate vicinity. The proposed division will not have any foreseeable, materially detrimental impacts on the surrounding area. The proposed project will enhance the aesthetics of the immediate vicinity and potentially increase the property values of the neighborhood. The improvements to the landscape and hardscape of the site will enhance the overall appearance of the surrounding area. B. The proposed division will not be contrary to any official plan adopted by the City Council; or to any official policies or standards adopted by the City Planning Commission or the City Council and on file in the office of the City Clerk at or prior to the time of filing of the application hereunder. The proposed project was not a part of any official plan at the time of filing of the application. The proposed project consists of concurrent application filings for a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change, to ensure that the project is consistent with the General Plan and Zoning Plan. The proposed subdivision will be consistent with the purpose of Chapter 16.08 of the Rosemead Municipal Code, Minor Subdivisions, in that it will be in compliance with the official land use zoning plan of the City and any other applicable design standards. C. Each proposed parcel conforms in area and dimension to the provisions of zoning and subdivision requirements of the City. The proposed subdivision will conform to the zoning and subdivision requirements of the City in area and dimension. The C -3 (Medium Commercial) zone does not provide minimum or maximum standards for the lot area or dimensions. D. All streets, alleys and driveways proposed to serve the property have been dedicated or such dedication is not required for the protection of public safety, health and welfare and that such streets, alleys and driveways are of sufficient width, design and construction to preserve the public safety and to provide adequate access and circulation for vehicular and pedestrian traffic. The applicant has proposed a necessary number of driveways with sufficient dimensions to provide adequate access and circulation for vehicles and pedestrians. Additionally, the proposed project includes a dedication to enlarge the public right -of -way. E. All easements and covenants required for the approval of the tentative map or plot plan have been duly executed and recorded. Planning Commission Meeting December 15, 2014 Page 15 of 48 The proposed subdivision will not require any easements or covenants for the approval of the tentative map. STATE LAW REQUIREMENTS Authority for and Scope of General Plans Section 65300 at Seq of the Callfornia Government Code sets standards for each City to prepare, adopt, and amend a comprehensive general plan. This plan coordinates the long -term physical development goals and objectives of the City. Government Code Sections 65860, 66473.5 and 66474 require that day -to -day development decisions, such as zoning and land subdivisions should be consistent with the General Plan. The proposed amendment to the General Plan will change the land use designation of six (6) parcels from Commercial and Medium Density Residential to Mixed -use High Density Residential /Commercial (60 du /ac). The proposed change will not eliminate any active or passive recreation areas since the subject properties are private property and not open to the public. PUBLIC NOTICE PROCESS On December 4, 2014, forty (40) notices were sent to property owners within a 300 -feet radius from the subject property, in addition to notices posted in six (6) public locations, on -site, and published in the Rosemead Reader on December 4, 2014. Prepared.by„ Subm�/itte�d by: � e LilyTrinh Michelle Ramirez Associate Planner Community Development Director EXHIBITS A. Planning Commission Resolution No. 14 -09 B. She Plan/Floor Plan/Elevations C. Planning Commission Staff Report, dated June 16, 2014 D. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes, dated June 16, 2014 E. Caltmns Response Letter, dated June 4, 2014 F. Traffic Impact Analysis Addendum (on CD) G. Sewer Analysis Study (on CD) H. Mitigated Negative Declaration/Mitigation Monitoring Program I. Draft City Council ordinance 942 with Attachment 'A' (Conditions of Approval) J. Draft City Council Resolution No. 2015 -01 with Attachment 'A' (Conditions of Approval) K. Letter of Request for Density Bonus L. Assessors Parcel Map (5287- 039 -001, 002, 003, 004, 005, 011) Planning Commission Meeting December 15, 2014 Page 16 of 48 EXHIBIT "A" PC RESOLUTION 14 -10 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA APPROVING DESIGN REVIEW 12 -05, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 12 -02, ZONE CHANGE 12 -02, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 72529, AND ALLEY VACATION FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW RESIDENTIAL /COMMERCIAL MIXED -USE DEVELOPMENT COMPRISED OF 15,553 SQUARE FEET OF RETAIL/RESTAURANT SPACE AND SIXTY (60) RESIDENTIAL UNITS FOR A TOTAL BUILT AREA OF 70,162 SQUARE FEET. THE SUBJECT SITE IS LOCATED AT 7801 -7825 GARVEY AVENUE, 3012 DEL MAR AVENUE, AND 3017 BRIGHTON STREET IN THE C -3 (MEDIUM COMMERCIAL) AND R -2 (LIGHT MULTIPLE RESIDENTIAL) ZONE (APN's: 5287- 039 -001, 002, 003, 004, 005, 011). WHEREAS, on December 19, 2012, Gerard Ngo submitted entitlement applications for the construction of a new residential /commercial mixed -use development comprised of 15,553 square feet of retail /restaurant space and 60 residential units for a total built area of 70,162 square feet. The project is located at 7801 -7825 Garvey Avenue, 3012 Del Mar Avenue, and 3017 Brighton Street; and WHEREAS, the applicant has requested development incentives, pursuant to Section 65915 of the California Government Code, for reduced parking in order to set aside twenty (20) percent of the proposed residential apartments to persons or households of low- income as defined in Section 50093 of the Health and Safety Code; and, WHEREAS, Section 65358 of the California Government Code allows the City Council, as the legislative body, to amend all or part of the City's adopted General Plan when it is deemed in the public interest; and, WHEREAS, Section 17.72.020 & 17.72.050 of the Rosemead Municipal Code (RMC) provides the purpose and criteria for a design review; and WHEREAS, Sections 65800 & 65900 of the California Government Code and Section 17.72.050 of the Rosemead Municipal Code authorize the Planning Commission to approve, conditionally approve, or disapprove design review applications; and WHEREAS, Sections 66473.5 and 66474 of the California Government Code (Map Act) and 16.08.130 of the Rosemead Municipal Code specify the criteria by which a subdivision map may be granted; and Planning Commission Maetlng December 15, 2014 Page 17 of 48 WHEREAS, Sections 66451 et seq. of the California Government Code (Map Act) and Section 16.08.130 of the Rosemead Municipal Code authorize the Planning Commission to approve, conditionally approve, or deny tentative subdivision maps; and WHEREAS, Section 65300 at seq. of the California Government Code sets standards for each City to prepare, adopt, and amend a comprehensive general plan. This plan coordinates the long -term physical development goals and objectives of the City. Government Code Sections 65860, 66473.5 and 66474 require that day -to -day development decisions, such as zoning and land subdivisions should be consistent with the General Plan. WHEREAS, on May 19, 2014, an Initial Environmental Study for the proposed Design Review 12 -05, General Plan Amendment 12 -02, and Tentative Tract Map 72529 was completed finding that the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment and a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared, in accordance with the guidelines of the California Environmental Quality Act, and local environmental guidelines; and WHEREAS, on December 15, 2014, the Planning Commission recommended approval Design Review 12 -05, General Plan Amendment 12 -02, and Tentative Tract Map 72529 to the City Council; and WHEREAS, on December 4, 2014, forty (40) notices were sent to property owners within a 300 -foot radius from the subject property, in addition to notices posted in six (6) public locations, onsite, and published in the Rosemead Reader, specifying the availability of the application, plus the date, time, and location of the public hearing for Design Review 12 -05, General Plan Amendment 12 -02, Zone Change 12 -02, and Tentative Tract Map 72529, pursuant to California Government Code Section 65091(a)(3); and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Rosemead as follows: SECTION 1. The Planning Commission hereby makes a finding of adequacy with the Mitigated Negative Declaration and HEREBY RECOMMENDS that the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration as the environmental clearance for Design Review 12 -05, General Plan Amendment 12 -02, and Tentative Tract Map 72529. SECTION 2. The Planning Commission HEREBY FINDS AND DETERMINES that facts do exist to justify approving Design Review 12 -05 in accordance with Section 17.72.030 at seq., of the Rosemead Municipal Code as follows: A. The plans indicate proper consideration for the relationship between the proposed building and site developments that exist or have been approved for the Planning Commission Meeting December 15, 2014 Page 18 of 48 general neighborhood; FINDING: The proposed development is located within an established commercial district of the City. The Applicant has provided a design of high aesthetic quality, which in Staffs determination will improve the aesthetics of one of the City's prominent intersections and the project site's relationship to the commercial district. The proposed project is consistent with the Goal 3, Policy 3.1 of the Land Use Element of the City's General Plan in that the goal and policy call for encouraging mixed -use development as a means of upgrading established uses and developing vacant parcels along arterials to provide new commercial, residential, and employment opportunities. In addition, Goal 3, Policy 3.5 of the Land Use Element of the City's General Plan calls for promoting lively and attractive ground -floor retail uses that will create public revenues needed to provide for City services and the City's tax base. B. The plan for the proposed building and site development indicates the manner in which the proposed development and surrounding properties are protected against noise, vibrations, and other factors which may have an adverse effect on the environment, and the manner of screening mechanical equipment, trash, storage and loading areas; FINDING: To ensure that the surrounding properties are protected against noise, vibrations, and other factors, the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) specifically addresses noise and lighting mitigation measures. All new lighting will be fully shielded and directed downwards to mitigate glare on adjacent properties. Conditions of approval have been incorporated to eliminate adverse effects on the environment as a result of the proposed project. This development will not generate any permanent impacts to noise levels for the surrounding area. All construction work will be required to comply with the timeframe, and decibel levels indicated in the City's Noise Ordinance. Conditions of approval will specifically address factors such as noise, construction hours, screening of mechanical equipment, landscaping, lighting, and the overall maintenance of the property. C. The proposed building or site development is not, in its exterior design and appearance, so at variance with the appearance of other existing building or site developments in the neighborhood as to cause the nature of the local environment to materially depreciate in appearance and value; FINDING: The proposed project will improve the aesthetics of the prominent corner by establishing a mixed -use development of high architectural quality. The improvements to the site, in terms of new construction, landscape, and hardscape will provide a marked improvement over the existing appearance of the intersection of Garvey Avenue and Del Mar Avenue. D. The proposed building or structure is in harmony with the proposed developments on land in the general area, especially in those instances where buildings Planning commission Meeting December 15, 2014 Paae 19 of 48 are within or adjacent to land shown on the General Plan as being part of the Civic Center or in public or educational use, or are within or immediately adjacent to land included within any precise plan which indicates building shape, size, or style; FINDING: The property is not part of the Civic Center Plan, precise plan or land reserved for public or educational use, so there is no special need to create harmony with the general area. Notwithstanding this, the approved design will create a development that is an aesthetic upgrade over the surrounding area and that has the potential to enhance land values in the general area. This is due to the proposed new building facade with higher quality materials, a design that blends better with the area, and greatly improved landscaping and parking lot area. E. The proposed development is in conformity with the standards of this code and other applicable ordinances in so far as the location and appearance of the buildings and structures are involved; and FINDING: The proposed development meets all of the minimum code requirements for the C -3 MUDO -D (Medium Commercial with a Mixed -Use and Design Overlay) zone and all applicable referenced code sections of the Rosemead Municipal Code, as modified by the request for concessions under SB 1818. F. The site plan and the design of the buildings, parking areas, signs, landscaping, luminaries, and other site features indicates that proper consideration has been given to both the functional aspects of the site development, such as automobile and pedestrian circulation, and the visual effect of the development from the view of public streets. FINDING: The Applicant has worked with the Planning Division in designing an aesthetically high - quality project. The front facade has been designed to create visual interest at the street level. The main entrance of the building is highlighted through the use of a distinct corner element at the southwest and southeast comers of the building. In addition, various elements have been added to provide architectural interest to the design, such as the water features and potted plants along the front elevation, the use of contrasting exterior finishes and stone veneer at the base of the building. The subtle details of common open spaces and pedestrian - scaled architectural elements echo the modern design aspect for this mixed -use development. SECTION 3. General Plan Consistency with State Law Determination. The Planning Commission finds that the Rosemead General Plan Amendment as proposed is consistent with the requirements of State law governing general plans. A. Land Use: The General Plan Land Use Designation of the subject site is currently Commercial and Medium Density Residential. However, with implementation of the zone change, the site would change to a Mixed -Use: High Density Residential /Commercial Land Use Designation with a maximum density of 60 dwelling Planning commission Meeting December 15, 2014 Page 20 of 48 units per acre and maximum floor -area ratio of 2.0:1. The project site area consists of 1.14 acres. With a total of 60 residential dwelling units and 1.61 acres of total floor area, the project is consist with the Land Use Element of the General Plan. B. Circulation: The proposed project will result in an increase in vehicle trips from the proposed residential and commercial land uses of the mixed -use project. With the incorporation of mitigation measures, this increase will not result in significant environmental impacts upon the Level of Service of surrounding street intersections and project entry driveways, and will not adversely affect surrounding properties. The proposed project will provide adequate off - street parking, including two levels of subterranean parking and one level of surface parking, to serve the parking needs of future residents and patrons and minimize traffic- related impacts upon the neighborhood. C. Housing: The proposed project is consistent with the City of Rosemead Housing Element, which seeks to provide a variety of housing types for the various demographics of the community. The proposed development will provide 60 new residential dwelling units, including 12 designated low- income rental units. D. Resource Management: The proposed development is located in a developed urban area, and as such, will not result in any significant impact upon natural resources. With the incorporation of mitigation measures, such as building setback and landscaping, the proposed building will have a less than significant impact upon the aesthetics from adjoining properties. E. Noise: This development will not generate any significant permanent impacts to the noise levels of the surrounding area. The proposed project will result in additional pedestrian and vehicular traffic noises, but is not considered to be substantial. There will be a temporary increase in ambient noise levels above the existing levels due to the presence of heavy equipment and trade personnel during construction activities. All construction work will be required to comply with the defined timeframe and City's Noise Ordinance. All mechanical equipment will be designed to minimize noise impacts on adjoining properties. F. Public Safety: The proposed development will allow the construction of residential and commercial uses in a developed urbanized area where there are no known public safety concerns. The site is not located in a seismic safety zone, and the entire City of Rosemead is located in Flood Zone C (flood insurance is not mandatory) and is free from any flood hazard designations. The project will be designed to meet the latest Building Code and Fire Code to maximized public safety of the site. Section 4. The Planning Commission HEREBY FINDS AND DETERMINES that facts do exist to justify approving Tentative Tract Map 72529; according to the criteria of Planning Commission Meeting December 15, 2014 Page 21 of 48 Section 16.08.130 of the Rosemead Municipal Code as follows: A. The proposed division will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare nor injurious to the property or improvements in the immediate vicinity. FINDING: The proposed division will not have any foreseeable, materially detrimental impacts on the surrounding area. The proposed project will enhance the aesthetics of the immediate vicinity and potentially increase the property values of the neighborhood. The improvements to the landscape and hardscape of the site will enhance the overall appearance of the surrounding area. B. The proposed division will not be contrary to any official plan adopted by the City Council; or to any official policies or standards adopted by the City Planning Commission or the City Council and on file in the office of the City Clerk at or prior to the time of filing of the application hereunder. FINDING: The proposed project was not a part of any official plan at the time of filing of the application. The proposed project consisted of concurrent application filings for a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change, to ensure that the project is consist with the General Plan and Zoning Plan. The proposed subdivision will be consistent with the purpose of Chapter 16.08 of the Rosemead Municipal Code, Minor Subdivisions, in that it will be in compliance with the official land use zoning plan of the City and any other applicable design standards. C. Each proposed parcel conforms in area and dimension to the provisions of zoning and subdivision requirements of the City. FINDING: The proposed subdivision will conform to all applicable zoning and subdivision requirements of the City in area and dimension. The C -3 (Medium Commercial) zone development standards do not provide minimum or maximum standards for lot area or dimensions. The RCMUDO (Residential /Commercial Mixed - Use Development Overlay) zone development standards require a minimum of thirty thousand (30,000) square feet of lot area, with no lot dimension requirement. Accordingly, the proposed project site consists of 49,850 square feet. D. All streets, alleys and driveways proposed to serve the property have been dedicated or such dedication is not required for the protection of public safety, health and welfare and that such streets, alleys and driveways are of sufficient width, design and construction to preserve the public safety and to provide adequate access and circulation for vehicular and pedestrian traffic. FINDING: The applicant has proposed driveways with sufficient dimensions to provide adequate access and circulation for vehicles and pedestrians. Access to the parking areas of the site will be provided on Del Mar Avenue and Brighton Street, splitting the vehicular traffic associated with the proposed project. Additionally, the Planning Commission Meeting December 15, 2014 Page 22 of 48 proposed project includes a dedication to enlarge the public right -of -way. The alley to the north of the site, between Del Mar Avenue and Brighton Street, will be vacated. E. All easements and covenants required for the approval of the tentative map or plot plan have been duly executed and recorded. FINDING: The proposed subdivision will not require any easements or covenants for the approval of the tentative map. The site will have direct access from the public right -of -way. SECTION 5. The Planning Commission HEREBY RECOMMENDS CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL of Design Review 12 -05, General Plan Amendment 12 -02, Zone Change 12 -02, and Tentative Tract Map 72529 for the construction of a new residential /commercial mixed -use development totaling 70,162 square feet, subject to the Conditions of Approval attached hereto. SECTION 6. This resolution is the result of an action taken by the Planning Commission on December 15, 2014, by the following vote: YES: NO: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: SECTION 6. The Secretary shall certify to the adoption of this resolution and shall transmit copies of same to the Applicant and the Rosemead City Clerk. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 15" day of December, 2014. Eng, Chair Planning Commission Meeting December 15, 2014 Page 23 of 48 CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that the foregoing is a true copy of a resolution adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rosemead at its regular meeting, held on the 19th day of May by the following vote: YES: NO: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Michelle Ramirez, Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM: Gregory M. Murphy, Planning Commission Attorney Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP Mwffng 2014 ATTACHMENT "A" (PC Resolution 14 -10, Ordinance 942 and CC Resolution 2015 -01) Design Review 12 -05, General Plan Amendment 12 -02, Zone Change 12 -02, and Tentative Tract Map 72529 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL January 13, 2015 1. Design Review 12 -05, General Plan Amendment 12 -02, Zone Change 12 -02, and Tentative Tract Map 72529 are approved for the construction of a new residential /commercial mixed -use development totaling 70,162 square feet, in accordance with the plans marked Exhibit "C', dated December 4, 2014. Any revisions to the approved plans must be resubmitted for the review and approval of the Planning Division. 2. Approval of Design Review 12 -05, General Plan Amendment 12 -02, Zone Change 12 -02, and Tentative Tract Map 72529 shall not take effect for any purpose until the Applicant has filed with the City of Rosemead a notarized affidavit stating that he /she is aware of and accepts all of the conditions of approval as set forth in the letter of approval and this list of conditions, within ten (10) days from the City Council approval date. 3. The onsite public hearing notice posting shall be removed by the end of the 10- day appeal period of Design Review 12 -05, General Plan Amendment 12 -02, Zone Change 12 -02, and Tentative Tract Map 72529. 4. Design Review 12 -05, General Plan Amendment 12 -02, Zone Change 12 -02, and Tentative Tract Map 72529 is approved for a period of one (1) year. The Applicant shall commence the proposed use or request an extension within 30- calendar days prior to expiration. The one (1) year initial approval period shall be effective from the City Council approval date. For the purpose of this petition, project commencement shall be defined as beginning the permitting process with the Planning and Building Divisions, so long as the project is not abandoned. If Design Review 12 -05, General Plan Amendment 12 -02, Zone Change 12 -02, and Tentative Tract Map 72529 have been unused, abandoned, or discontinued for a period of one (1) year it shall become null and void. 5. The City Council hereby authorizes the Planning Division to make and /or approve minor modifications. 6. The following conditions must be complied with to the satisfaction of the Planning Division prior to final approval of the associated plans, building permits, occupancy permits, or any other appropriate request. Planning Commission Meeting December 15, 2014 Page 25 of 48 Design Review 12 -05, General Plan Amendment 12 -02, Zone Change 12 -02, and Tentative Tract Map 72529 are granted or approved with the City and its Planning Commission and City Council retaining and reserving the right and jurisdiction to review and to modify the permit, including the modification of existing or imposition of new conditions of approval based on changed circumstances. Changed circumstances include, but are not limited to, the modification of the use, a change in scope, emphasis, size, or nature of the use, or the expansion, alteration, reconfiguration, or change of use. This reservation of right to review is in addition to, and not in lieu of, the right of the City, its Planning Commission, and City Council to review and revoke or modify any permit granted or approved under the Rosemead Municipal Code for any violations of the conditions imposed on Design Review 12 -05, General Plan Amendment 12 -02, Zone Change 12 -02, and Tentative Tract Map 72529. 8. The Applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Rosemead or its agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Rosemead or its agents, officers, or employees to attack, set side, void, or annul, an approval of the Planning Commission and /or City Council concerning the project, which action is brought within the time period provided by law. 9. The Applicant shall comply with all Federal, State, and local laws relative to the approved use including the requirements of the Planning, Building, Fire, Sheriff and Health Departments. 10. Building permits will not be issued in connection with any project until such time as all plan check fees, and all other applicable fees, are paid in full. 11. Occupancy will not be granted until all improvements required by this approval have been completed, inspected, and approved by the appropriate department(s), including but not limited to all improvements required to file a final tract map and the filing and recordation of that final map. 12. The numbers of the address signs shall be at least 6" tall with a minimum character width of 3/4 ", contrasting in color and easily visible at driver's level from the street. Materials, colors, location, and size of such address numbers shall be approved by the Planning Division, prior to installation. 13. All requirements of the Planning Division, Building Division, and Public Works Department shall be complied with prior to the final approval of the proposed construction. 14. The hours of construction shall be limited from 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Monday to Saturday. No construction shall take place on Sundays or on any federal holidays without prior approval by the City. Planning Commission Meeting December 15, 2014 Page 26 of 48 15. The Planning, Building, and Public Works staff shall have access to the subject property at any time during construction to monitor progress. 16. The site shall be maintained in a graffiti -free state. Any new graffiti shall be removed within twenty -four (24) hours. A 24 -hour, Graffiti Hotline can be called at (626) 569 -2345 for assistance. 17. The site shall be maintained in a clean, weed, and litter free state in accordance with the Rosemead Municipal Code. All trash containers shall be stored in the appropriate trash enclosure at all times. All trash, rubbish, and garbage receptacles shall be regularly cleaned, inspected, and maintained in a clean, safe, and sanitary condition. 18. A detailed elevation drawing shall be submitted to the Planning Division for review and approval all trash enclosures prior to submittal of construction drawings. All trash enclosures shall be of an integral part of the building design, and incorporate complementary colors and materials. All trash enclosures shall have a solid roof cover and doors shall be opaque, self- closing and self - latching. 19. All off - street parking shall comply with the relevant section of the Rosemead Municipal Code applicable as of the date these Conditions of Approval are adopted. The parking area, including loading and handicapped spaces, shall be paved and re- painted periodically to City standards to the satisfaction of the Planning Division. In accordance with the currently applicable section of the Rosemead Municipal Code, all designated parking stalls shall be double striped. Such striping shall be maintained in a clear, visible, and orderly manner. 20. The Applicant shall keep the electrical and mechanical equipment and /or emergency exits free of any debris, storage, furniture, etc., and maintain a minimum clearance of five (5) feet. 21. All roof top appurtenances and equipment shall adequately be screened from view to the satisfaction of the Planning Division. There shall be no mechanical equipment located on the sides of the building. Such equipment shall not exceed the height of the parapet wall. All ground level mechanical /utility equipment (including meters, back flow preservation devices, fire valves, A/C condensers, furnaces, utility cabinets and other equipment) shall be located away from public view or adequately screened by landscaping or screening walls so as not to be seen from the public right of way or other public space within the development. The Planning Division shall approve said screening prior to installation. 22. Prior to issuance of grading permits, the developer /Applicant shall comply with the City's storm water ordinance and storm water mitigation plan requirements with respect to the proposed project. 23. Prior to issuance of building permits, Deed Restrictions or an Affordable Housing Planning Commission Meeting December 15, 2114 Page 27 of 48 Agreement in a form approved by the City Attorney must be recorded against the twelve (12) affordable condominium units that meet all of the requirements for affordability for low- income families and meet all other criteria outlined in Government Code Section 65915. In addition, in an effort to respond to the needs of City residents before nonresidents and to provide affordable housing, the Applicant shall give existing qualified City of Rosemead residents priority in obtaining an affordable unit. 24. All open areas not covered by concrete, asphalt, or structures shall be landscaped and maintained on a regular basis. Maintenance procedures of such landscaped and common areas shall be specifically indicted in the CC &R's prior to issuance of any building permit. 25. Prior to the issuance of any sign permit, the Applicant shall submit a Master Sign Program to the Planning Division for review and approval. The sign program shall address sign materials, colors, height, width and location. It shall also address the use of temporary signage such as banners as well as appropriate window signage. 26. A final landscape and irrigation plan shall be submitted to the Planning Division for review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. The new planting materials shall include a combination of colorful and drought tolerant trees, large potted plants, shrubs, and low growing flowers. The landscape and irrigation plan shall include a sprinkler system with automatic timers and moisture sensors. 27. Violations of the conditions of approval may result in citation and /or initiation of revocation proceedings. Mitigation Measure Conditions Aesthetics 28. The City Council authorizes the applicant to work with the Planning Division on the public art plan, prior to the issuance of a building permit. Planning Commission Meeting December 15, 2014 Page 28 of 48 29. Prior to the issuance of a building permit the project applicant shall submit a lighting plan for approval by the Planning Division that incorporates any of the following light reducing measures as applicable: Improved physical barriers such as increased wall height Relocate and /or change the height and /or orientation of proposed lighting fixtures. Select lighting fixtures with more - precise optical control and /or different lighting distribution. Add external shielding and /or internal reflectors to fixtures. Select lower- output lamp /lamp technologies. A combination of the above. Air Qualilv 30. During construction, the contractor shall apply water three times daily, or non- toxic soil stabilizers according to manufacturers' specifications, to all unpaved parking or staging areas, unpaved road surfaces, and active construction areas. Geology and Soils 31. As recommended in the geotechnical engineering investigation prepared for the project and approved by the City Engineer, the project shall be designed for a peak acceleration value of 0.798. Hazards and Hazardous Materials 32. Prior to the issuance of a demolition permit for any structure, the project developer shall provide a building survey to determine if asbestos or lead paint are present. The asbestos and lead paint survey shall be conducted by a Cal - OSHA Certified Asbestos consultant in accordance with sampling criteria of the Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act (AHERA). If lead paint and /or asbestos containing materials are found, all lead containing paint and /or asbestos shall be removed and disposed by a licensed and certified lead paint and /or asbestos removal contractor, as applicable in accordance with local, state, and federal regulations prior to the start of activities that would disturb any ACM containing materials or lead paint. Hydrology and Water Quality 33. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project developer shall submit a Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plan (SUSWMP) to the City for approval. All applicable erosion control measures including Best Management Practices (BMP's), to reduce erosion and minimize water quality impacts during grading Planning Commission Meeting December 15, 2014 Page 29 of 48 and construction shall be installed and maintained during construction to control water quality impacts. 34. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the first residential unit or leasing the first retail space, the project developer shall install a surface storm water collection system to collect and treat the first % of an inch of surface water runoff from the site as approved by the City Engineer. 35. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the first residential unit or leasing the first retail space, the project developer shall install two underground water storage tanks totaling 3,500 gallons and a dry well system to capture on- site surface water flows. If the dry well fills up during a storm a sump pump located adjacent to the dry well will pump any overflow from the dry well into Brighton Street. 36. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the first residential unit or leasing the first retail space, the project developer shall install a catch basin with a filter to filter the storm water prior to its discharge into the underground storage tanks. Noise 37. Project related operational hours for the following activities are recommended to be restricted as follows: There shall be no delivery vehicle (no trucks) deliveries between the hours of 10:00 p.m. to 9:00 a.m. Refuse collection vehicles shall restrict activity to between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. Loading of boxes, crates and building materials is restricted to the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. adjacent to a residential property line. Construction activities are restricted by the City of Rosemead Noise Ordinance. While construction noise is not expected to exceed 85 dB at the nearest sensitive use (residences north of the site), construction noise can be minimized with the implementation of the following conditions: • All motorized construction equipment shall be equipped with property operating and maintained mufflers. • Equipment and materials shall be staged in areas that will create the greatest distance between construction - related noise sources and the noise - sensitive receptors nearest the project site during all project construction. • Haul truck and other construction - related trucks traveling to and from the project site shall be restricted to the same hours specified for the operation of construction equipment. Planning Commission Maabng December 15, 2014 Paae 30 of 48 • To the extent feasible, construction haul routes shall not pass directly by sensitive land uses or residential dwellings. 38. An acoustical study shall be submitted to the City prior to the issuance of a building permit to show that all balconies facing Garvey Avenue and Del Mar Avenue have a transparent glass or plastic shield to create outdoor space that achieves the 65 dB CNEL or less. Public Services 39. Pdor to the issuance of a building permit, the project developer shall pay any required student impact fee to the Garvey Unified School District. 40. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the project developer shall pay any required park fee to the City of Rosemead. Transportation/Traffic 41. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the first residential unit or leasing the first retail space, the project developer shall install a new bus stop and shelter on Garvey Avenue at a location determined by the City and 21 bicycle stalls, with 10 bicycle stalls on the first subterranean level (B -1) and 11 bicycle stalls on the lower parking level (B -2). 42. Within six months after 75% of the retail /commercial space is occupied, the project developer shall provide weekday PM peak hour left turn traffic volumes on Del Mar Avenue to the City's Traffic Consultant to confirm that project left -tums do not cause congestion with the existing southbound left -turns at Garvey Avenue. If determined by the City's Traffic Consultant that project left -tums onto Del Mar Avenue during the PM peak hour cause congestion, left -tums at the Del Mar Avenue driveway shall be restricted. 43. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the project developer shall design the two project driveways in compliance with City driveway standards for site access. 44. All delivery vehicles (no trucks) entering and exiting the site from Brighton Street shall have a maximum height of 8'6 ". Delivery vehicles (no trucks) entering the site from Del Mar Avenue shall have a maximum height of 10'. All delivery vehicles (no trucks) entering the site from Del Mar Avenue shall be restricted to the first level — no internal access to level B -1. All delivery vehicles (no trucks) that are 8'6" or less can access the site from either Del Mar Avenue or Brighton Avenue and access internally both the first level and level B -1. 45. All delivery vehicles (no trucks) shall park in the designated Loading areas located within the commercial parking areas. Planning Commission Maetlng December 15, 2014 Page 31 of 48 Utilities and Service Systems 46. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the first residential unit or leasing the first retail space, the project developer shall install all State mandated low -flow water fixtures. Engineering Conditions of Approval GENERAL 47. Details shown on the tentative map are not necessarily approved. Any details which are inconsistent with requirements of ordinances, general conditions of approval, or City Engineer's policies must be specifically approved in the final map or improvement plan approvals. 48. A final tract map prepared by, or under the direction of a Registered Civil Engineer authorized to practice land surveying, or a Licensed Land Surveyor, must be processed through the City Engineer's office prior to being filed with the County Recorder. 49. Initiate process of Public Right -of -Way Vacation for the Alley northerly of Garvey Avenue between Del Mar Avenue and Brighton Avenue pursuant Municipal Code, California Streets and Highways Code and California Subdivision Map Act. This is not guarantee approval. 50. A preliminary subdivision guarantee is required showing all fee interest holders and encumbrances. An updated title report shall be provided before the final parcel map is released for filing with the County Recorder. 51. The final tract map shall be based on a field survey, and monuments shall be set to permanently mark parcel map boundaries, street center lines and lot boundaries to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The basis of bearing used for the field survey required for the final map shall include two survey well monuments found or set. The City Engineer may waive this requirement upon petition should this be impractical. Well monuments shall be set in accordance with standard plan No. S08 -001, if required. 52. Final tract map shall be filed with the County Recorder and one (1) Mylar copy of filed map shall be submitted to the City Engineer's office. Prior to the release of the final map by the City, a refundable deposit in the amount of $1,000 shall be submitted by the developer to the City, which will be refunded upon receipt of the Mylar copy of the filed map. 53. Comply with all requirements of the Subdivision Map Act. 54. Approval for filling of this land division is contingent upon approval of plans and specifications mentioned below. If the improvements are not installed prior to Planning Commission MeeOng December 15, 2014 Page 32 of 48 the filing of this division, the developer must submit an Undertaking Agreement and a Faithful Performance and Labor and Materials Bond in the amount estimated by the City Engineer guaranteeing the installation of the improvements. 55. The City reserves the right to impose any new plan check and /or permit fees approved by City Council subsequent to tentative approval of this map. 56. Prior to performing any grading, obtain a permit from the Engineering Division. Submit grading and drainage plans pre the City's grading guidelines and the latest edition of the Los Angeles County Building Code. The plans shall be stamped and signed by a California State Registered Civil Engineer. 57. Prior to the recordation of the final map, grading and drainage plans must be approved to provide for contributory drainage from adjoining properties as approved by the City Engineer, including dedication of the necessary easements. 58. A grading and drainage plan must provide for each lot having an independent drainage system to the public street, to a public drainage facility, or by means of an approved drainage easement. 59. Historical or existing storm water flow from adjacent lots must be received and directed by gravity to the public street, to a public drainage facility, or an approved drainage easement. 60. Prepare and submit hydrology and hydraulic calculations for sizing of all proposed drainage devices. The analysis shall also determine if changes in the post development versus pre development conditions have occurred. The analysis shall be stamped by a California State Registered Civil Engineer and prepared per the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works Hydrology Method. 61. All grading projects require an Erosion Control Plan as part of the grading plans. Grading permit will not be issued until and Erosion Control Plan is approved by the Engineering Department. 62. The project is greater than one acre; therefore, a Storm Water Pollution Plan is required. A Notice of Intent (NO[) shall be filed with the State Water Resources Control Board. When submitting the SWPPP for the City's review, please include the NOI and the Waste Discharger Identification (WDID) number. 63. Adjust, relocate, and /or eliminate lot lines, lots, streets, easements or other physical improvements to comply with ordinances, policies, and standards in effect at the date the City determined the application to be completed all to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department. Planning Commission Meeting December 15, 2014 Page 33 of 48 64. Show clearly all existing lot lines and proposed lot line on the plans. 65. Provide a complete boundary and topographic survey. 66. Show any easement on the plans if applicable. ROAD 67. New drive approaches shall be constructed at least 3' from any aboveground obstructions in the public right -of -way to the top of "x" or the obstruction shall be relocated. New drive approaches shall be limited to the frontage of the parcel. The drive approach is intended to serve, and is designed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 68. All work proposed within the public right -of -way shall require permits from the Public Works Department. 69. Remove and replace existing curb and gutter from northerly property line along Brighton Street to northerly property line along Del Mar Avenue. 70. Remove and replace sidewalk from northerly property line along Brighton Street to northerly property line along Del Mar Avenue. 71. Remove and construct driveway approaches as indicated on the plans. 72. Construct five feet parkway. Install parkway trees as indicated on the plans. All street trees shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the City Urban Forester. Street trees shall be planted in a manner that provides a minimum clearance of eight (8) feet from any existing or proposed sewer laterals to be used to serve the project. The size of the trees shall be minimum 48 inches box. 73. Traffic Signal Modification at the intersection of Garvey Avenue and Del Mar Avenue as indicated by traffic impact analysis and Public Works Department. 74. Show dimensions of existing and proposed right -of -way along Brighton Avenue, Del Mar Avenue and Garvey Avenue. 75. A $2,000.00 fee will be required per each storm drain adjacent to the property per retrofit pursuant Los Angeles River Trash TMDL requirements. SEWER 76. Approval of this land division is contingent upon providing a separate house sewer lateral to serve each lot of the land division. Planning Commission Meeting December 15, 2014 Paqe 34 of 48 77. Prepare and submit a sewer calculations analysis for sizing of proposed laterals including capacity conditions of existing sewer trunk line. The analysis shall be stamped by a California State Registered Civil Engineer and prepared per the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works Guidelines. 78. If the new sewer flow alters the capacity conditions of the existing sewer main along Garvey Avenue, a sewer main improvement will be required. 79. All existing laterals to be abandoned shall be capped at the public right of way to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the Building Official of the City of Rosemead. Utilities 80. All power, telephone and cable television shall be underground. 81. Any utilities that are in conflict with the development shall be relocated at the developer's expense. 82. Provide a street lighting plan. Water 83. Prior to the filing of the final map, there shall also be filed with the City Engineer, a statement from the water purveyor indicating compliance with the Fire Chiefs fire flow requirements. 84. Water hydrant, water meter box and utilities box shall be located 8 feet away from parkway trees and 3 feet away from driveway approach. Planning Commission Meefing December 15, 2014 Paae 35 of 48 EXHIBIT "I" ORDINANCE NO. 942 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA APPROVING ZONE CHANGE 12 -02 CHANGING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF SIX PARCELS FROM C -3 (MEDIUM COMMERCIAL) AND THE SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENCE AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE SITE R -2 (LIGHT MULTIPLE RESIDENTIAL) TO C -3 MUDO -D (MEDIUM COMMERCIAL WITH A RESDIENTIALICOMMERCIAL MIXED -USE DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY AND DESIGN OVERLAY). THE SUBJECT SITE IS LOCATED AT 7801- 7825 GARVEY AVENUE, 3012 DEL MAR AVENUE, AND 3017 BRIGHTON STREET (APN's: 5287- 039 -001, 002, 003, 004, 005, 011). WHEREAS, the City of Rosemead has an adopted Zoning Ordinance and associated maps, including speck development standards to control development; and WHEREAS, approval of Zone Change 12 -02 will change the zoning of six (6) parcels from C -3 Medium Commercial and the single - family residence at the northeast corner of the site R -2 Light Multiple Residential to C -3 Medium Commercial and add a Residential /Commercial Mixed -Use Development Overlay (RCMUDO) and Design Overlay; and WHEREAS, State Planning and Zoning Law, Title 17, and Chapter 17.116 of the Rosemead Municipal Code authorizes and sets standards for approval of Zone Change applications and governs development of private properties; and WHEREAS, Section 17.116.010 of the City of Rosemead Municipal Code authorizes the City Council to approve zone change applications whenever the public necessity, convenience, general welfare or good zoning practices justify such action; and WHEREAS, City of Rosemead policy encourages consistency of its Zoning Code with the General Plan and promotes separation of conflicting land uses through good planning practices; and WHEREAS, on December 15, 2014, the City of Rosemead Planning Commission considered Zone Change 12 -02 and recommended approval to the City Council after the Commission made findings that the proposed application will not have a significant impact on the environment; and WHEREAS, on December 15, 2014, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to receive testimony, and after hearing all testimonies from the public, the Planning Commission Meeting December 15, 2014 Paqe 36 of 46 Commission recommended approval to the City Council of Zone Change 12 -02; and WHEREAS, on December 15, 2014, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution 14 -10, thereby recommending approval to the City Council of Zone Change 12 -01; and WHEREAS, on December 4, 2014, forty (40) notices were sent to property owners within a 300 -feet radius from the subject property, in addition to notices posted in six (6) public locations, on -site, and published in the Rosemead Reader, specifying the availability of the application, plus the date, time and location of the public hearing pursuant to California Government Code Section 65091(a)(3); and WHEREAS, on January 13, 2015, the City Council held a public hearing to receive public testimony relative to Zone Change 12 -02; and WHEREAS, the City Council has sufficiently considered all testimony presented to them and hereby make the following determination: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED, by the City Council of the City of Rosemead as follows: SECTION 1. The City Council hereby makes a finding of adequacy with the Mitigated Negative Declaration and HEREBY ADOPTS the Mitigated Negative Declaration, as the environmental clearance for Zone Change 12 -02. SECTION 2. The City Council HEREBY FINDS AND DETERMINES that Zone Change 12 -02 is consistent with the Rosemead General Plan as follows: A. Land Use: The General Plan Land Use Designation of the subject site is currently Commercial and Medium Density Residential. However, with implementation of the zone change, the site would change to a Mixed -Use: High Density Residential /Commercial Land Use Designation with a maximum density of 60 dwelling units per acre and maximum floor -area ratio of 2.0:1. The project site area consists of 1.14 acres. With a total of 60 residential dwelling units and 1.61 acres of total floor area, the project is consist with the Land Use Element of the General Plan. B. Circulation: The proposed project will result in an increase in vehicle trips from the proposed residential and commercial land uses of the mixed -use project. With the incorporation of mitigation measures, this increase will not result in significant environmental impacts upon the Level of Service of surrounding street intersections and project entry driveways, and will not adversely affect surrounding properties. The proposed project will provide adequate off - street parking, including two levels of subterranean parking and one level of surface parking, to serve the parking needs of future residents and patrons and minimize traffic- related impacts upon the neighborhood. Planning Commission Maeling December 15, 2014 Page 37 of 48 C. Housing: The proposed project is consistent with the City of Rosemead Housing Element, which seeks to provide a variety of housing types for the various demographics of the community. The proposed development will provide 60 new residential dwelling units, including 12 designated low- income rental units. D. Resource Management: The proposed development is located in a developed urban area, and as such, will not result in any significant impact upon natural resources. With the incorporation of mitigation measures, such as building setback and landscaping, the proposed building will have a less than significant impact upon the aesthetics from adjoining properties. E. Noise: This development will not generate any significant permanent impacts to the noise levels of the surrounding area. The proposed project will result in additional pedestrian and vehicular traffic noises, but is not considered to be substantial. There will be a temporary increase in ambient noise levels above the existing levels due to the presence of heavy equipment and trade personnel during construction activities. All construction work will be required to comply with the defined timeframe and City's Noise Ordinance. All mechanical equipment will be designed to minimize noise impacts on adjoining properties. F. Public Safety: The proposed development will allow the construction of residential and commercial uses in a developed urbanized area where there are no known public safety concerns. The site is not located in a seismic safety zone, and the entire City of Rosemead is located in Flood Zone C (flood insurance is not mandatory) and is free from any flood hazard designations. The project will be designed to meet the latest Building Code and Fire Code to maximized public safety of the site. SECTION 3. The City Council hereby AMENDS the City's Zoning Map to change the zoning of six (6) parcels from C -3 Medium Commercial and the single -family residence at the northeast comer of the site R -2 Light Multiple Residential to C -3 Medium Commercial and add a Residential /Commercial Mixed -Use Development Overlay (RCMUDO) and Design Overlay. SECTION 4. The Zoning Map as a part of Title 17 of the Rosemead Municipal Code is HEREBY AMENDED to read as read as incorporated by this reference as Exhibit A: SECTION 5. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or word of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council of the City of Rosemead HEREBY DECLARES that it would have passed and adopted Ordinance No. 942 and each and all provisions thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more of said provisions may be declared to be invalid. Planning Commission Meeting December 15, 2014 Page 38 of 48 SECTION 6. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage of this Ordinance. PASSED AND APPROVED, this 13t^ day of January, 2015. William Alarcon, Mayor City of Rosemead, California ATTEST: Gloria Molleda, City Clerk City of Rosemead, California APPROVED AS TO FORM: Rachel Richman, City Attorney Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP Planning Commission Meeting December 15, 2014 Pace 39 of 48 EXHIBIT "J" RESOLUTION 2015 -01 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA APPROVING DESIGN REVIEW 12 -05, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 12 -02, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 72529, AND ALLEY VACATION FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW RESIDENTIALICOMMERCIAL MIXED -USE DEVELOPMENT COMPRISED OF 15,553 SQUARE FEET OF RETAILIRESTAURANT SPACE AND SIXTY (60) RESIDENTIAL UNITS FOR A TOTAL BUILT AREA OF 70,162 SQUARE FEET. THE SUBJECT SITE IS LOCATED AT 7801 -7825 GARVEY AVENUE, 3012 DEL MAR AVENUE, AND 3017 BRIGHTON STREET IN THE C -3 ZONE (MEDIUM COMMERCIAL) s 002, 00(L 04T005, 011). MULTIPLE RESIDENTIAL) WHEREAS, on December 19, 2012, Gerard Ngo submitted entitlement applications for the construction of a new residential /commercial mixed -use development comprised of 15,553 square feet of retail /restaurant space and 60 residential units for a total built area of 70,162 square feet. The project is located at 7801 -7825 Garvey Avenue, 3012 Del Mar Avenue, and 3017 Brighton Street; and WHEREAS, the applicant has requested development incentives, pursuant to Section 65915 of the California Government Code, for reduced parking in order to set aside twenty (20) percent of the proposed residential apartments to persons or households of low- income as defined in Section 50093 of the Health and Safety Code; and, WHEREAS, Section 65358 of the California Government Code allows the City Council, as the legislative body, to amend all or part of the City's adopted General Plan when it is deemed in the public interest; and, WHEREAS, Section 17.72.020 & 17.72.050 of the Rosemead Municipal Code (RMC) provides the purpose and criteria for a design review; and WHEREAS, Sections 65800 & 65900 of the California Government Code and Section 17.72.050 of the Rosemead Municipal Code authorize the Planning Commission to approve, conditionally approve, or disapprove design review applications; and WHEREAS, Sections 66473.5 and 66474 of the California Government Code (Map Act) and 16.08.130 of the Rosemead Municipal Code specify the criteria by which a subdivision map may be granted; and Planning Commission Meeting December 15, 2014 Page 40 of 48 WHEREAS, Sections 66451 et seq. of the California Government Code (Map Act) and Section 16.08.130 of the Rosemead Municipal Code authorize the Planning Commission to approve, conditionally approve or deny tentative subdivision maps; and WHEREAS, Section 65300 et seq. of the California Government Code sets standards for each City to prepare, adopt, and amend a comprehensive general plan. This plan coordinates the long -term physical development goals and objectives of the City. Government Code Sections 65860, 66473.5 and 66474 require that day -to -day development decisions, such as zoning and land subdivisions should be consistent with the General Plan. WHEREAS, on December 15, 2014, the Planning Commission considered the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program that was prepared for the proposed project, along with agency comments and public testimony. The Planning Commission concurred with the findings of the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the proposed mixed -use development, finding that no potentially significant environmental impacts could occur with the proposed development; and, WHEREAS, on December 15, 2014, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed and advertised public hearing to receive oral and written testimony relative to various entitlement requests for the proposed mixed -use project; and, WHEREAS, on December 15, 2014, the Planning Commission of the City of Rosemead, recommended that the City Council consider a Mitigated Negative Declaration as the environmental clearance for Design Review 12 -05, General Plan Amendment 12 -02, and Tentative Tract Map 72529; and WHEREAS, on January 13, 2015, the City Council fully studied the proposed Design Review 12 -05, General Plan Amendment 12 -02, and Tentative Tract Map 72529, Mitigated Negative Declaration, environmental findings, and considered all public comments; and WHEREAS, City Council, having final approval authority over this project, has reviewed and considered all comments received during the public review period prior to the approval of this project. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD HEREBY FINDS, DECLARES, AND RECOMMENDS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The CITY COUNCIL HEREBY FINDS AND DETERMINES that facts do exist to justify approving Design Review 12 -05 in accordance with Section 17.72.030 at seq., of the Rosemead Municipal Code as follows: A. The plans indicate proper consideration for the relationship between the proposed building and site developments that exist or have been approved for the Planning Commission Meeting December 15, 2014 Paae 41 of 48 general neighborhood; FINDING: The proposed development is located within an established commercial district of the City. The Applicant has provided a design of high aesthetic quality, which in Staffs determination will improve the aesthetics of one of the City's prominent intersections and the project site's relationship to the commercial district. The proposed project is consistent with the Goal 3, Policy 3.1 of the Land Use Element of the City's General Plan in that the goal and policy call for encouraging mixed -use development as a means of upgrading established uses and developing vacant parcels along arterials to provide new commercial, residential, and employment opportunities. In addition, Goal 3, Policy 3.5 of the Land Use Element of the City's General Plan calls for promoting lively and attractive ground -floor retail uses that will create public revenues needed to provide for City services and the City's tax base. B. The plan for the proposed building and site development indicates the manner in which the proposed development and surrounding properties are protected against noise, vibrations, and other factors which may have an adverse effect on the environment, and the manner of screening mechanical equipment, trash, storage and loading areas; FINDING: To ensure that the surrounding properties are protected against noise, vibrations, and other factors, the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) specifically addresses noise and lighting mitigation measures. All new lighting will be fully shielded and directed downwards to mitigate glare on adjacent properties. Conditions of approval have been incorporated to eliminate adverse effects on the environment as a result of the proposed project. This development will not generate any permanent impacts to noise levels for the surrounding area. All construction work will be required to comply with the timeframe, and decibel levels indicated in the City's Noise Ordinance. Conditions of approval will specifically address factors such as noise, construction hours, screening of mechanical equipment, landscaping, lighting, and the overall maintenance of the property. C. The proposed building or site development is not, in its exterior design and appearance, so at variance with the appearance of other existing building or site developments in the neighborhood as to cause the nature of the local environment to materially depreciate in appearance and value; FINDING: The proposed project will improve the aesthetics of the prominent corner by establishing a mixed -use development of high architectural quality. The improvements to the site, in terms of new construction, landscape, and hardscape will provide a marked improvement over the existing appearance of the intersection of Garvey Avenue and Del Mar Avenue. D. The proposed building or structure is in harmony with the proposed developments on land in the general area, especially in those instances where buildings Planning Commission Meeting December 15, 2014 Page 42 of 48 are within or adjacent to land shown on the General Plan as being part of the Civic Center or in public or educational use, or are within or immediately adjacent to land included within any precise plan which indicates building shape, size, or style; FINDING: The property is not part of the Civic Center Plan, precise plan, or land reserved for public or educational use, so there is no special need to create harmony with the general area. Notwithstanding this, the approved design will create a development that is an aesthetic upgrade over the surrounding area and that has the potential to enhance land values in the general area. This is due to the proposed new building facade with higher quality materials, a design that blends better with the area, and greatly improved landscaping and parking lot area. E. The proposed development is in conformity with the standards of this code and other applicable ordinances in so far as the location and appearance of the buildings and structures are involved; and FINDING: The proposed development meets all of the minimum code requirements for the C -3 MUDO -D (Medium Commercial with a Mixed -Use and Design Overlay) zone and all applicable referenced code sections of the Rosemead Municipal Code, as modified by the request for concessions under SIB 1818. F. The site plan and the design of the buildings, parking areas, signs, landscaping, luminaries, and other site features indicates that proper consideration has been given to both the functional aspects of the site development, such as automobile and pedestrian circulation, and the visual effect of the development from the view of public streets. FINDING: The Applicant has worked with the Planning Division in designing an aesthetically high - quality project. The front facade has been designed to create visual interest at the street level. The main entrance of the building is highlighted through the use of a distinct corner element at the southwest and southeast corners of the building. In addition, various elements have been added to provide architectural interest to the design, such as the water features and potted plants along the front elevation, the use of contrasting exterior finishes and stone veneer at the base of the building. The subtle details of common open spaces and pedestrian - scaled architectural elements echo the modern design aspect for this mixed -use development. Section 2. General Plan Consistency with State Law Determination. The City Council finds that the Rosemead General Plan Amendment as proposed is consistent with the requirements of State law governing general plans. A. Land Use: The General Plan Land Use Designation of the subject site is currently Commercial and Medium Density Residential. However, with implementation of the zone change, which proposes a Mixed -Use: High Density Residential/Commercial Land Use Designation with a maximum density of 60 dwelling units per acre and Planning Commission Meeting December 15, 2014 Page 43 of 48 maximum floor -area ratio of 2.0:1. The project site area consists of 1.14 acres. With a total of 60 residential dwelling units and 1.61 acres of total floor area, the project is consist with the Land Use Element of the General Plan. B. Circulation: The proposed project will result in an increase in vehicle trips from the proposed residential and commercial land uses of the mixed -use project. With the incorporation of mitigation measures, this increase will not result in significant environmental impacts upon the Level of Service of surrounding street intersections and project entry driveways, and will not adversely affect surrounding properties. The proposed project will provide adequate off- street parking, including two levels of subterranean parking and one level of surface parking, to serve the parking needs of future residents and patrons and minimize traffic- related impacts upon the neighborhood. C. Housing: The proposed project is consistent with the City of Rosemead Housing Element, which seeks to provide a variety of housing types for the various demographics of the community. The proposed development will provide 60 new residential dwelling units, including 12 designated low- income rental units. D. Resource Management: The proposed development is located in a developed urban area, and as such, will not result in any significant impact upon natural resources. With the incorporation of mitigation measures, such as building setback and landscaping, the proposed building will have a less than significant impact upon the aesthetics from adjoining properties. E. Noise: This development will not generate any significant permanent impacts to the noise levels of the surrounding area. The proposed project will result in additional pedestrian and vehicular traffic noises, but is not considered to be substantial. There will be a temporary increase in ambient noise levels above the existing levels due to the presence of heavy equipment and trade personnel during construction activities. All construction work will be required to comply with the defined timeframe and City's Noise Ordinance. All mechanical equipment will be designed to minimize noise impacts on adjoining properties. F. Public Safety: The proposed development will allow the construction of residential and commercial uses in a developed urbanized area where there are no known public safety concerns. The site is not located in a seismic safety zone, and the entire City of Rosemead is located in Flood Zone C (flood insurance is not mandatory) and is free from any flood hazard designations. The project will be designed to meet the latest Building Code and Fire Code to maximized public safety of the site. Section 3. The CITY COUNCIL HEREBY FINDS AND DETERMINES that facts do exist to justify approving Tentative Tract Map 72529; according to the criteria of Section 16.08.130 of the Rosemead Municipal Code as follows: Planning Commission Meeting December 15, 2014 Paae 44 of 48 A. The proposed division will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare nor injurious to the property or improvements in the immediate vicinity. FINDING: The proposed division will not have any foreseeable, materially detrimental impacts on the surrounding area. The proposed project will enhance the aesthetics of the immediate vicinity and potentially increase the property values of the neighborhood. The improvements to the landscape and hardscape of the site will enhance the overall appearance of the surrounding area. B. The proposed division will not be contrary to any official plan adopted by the City Council; or to any official policies or standards adopted by the City Planning Commission or the City Council and on file in the office of the City Clerk at or prior to the time of filing of the application hereunder. FINDING: The proposed project was not a part of any official plan at the time of filing of the application. The proposed project consisted of concurrent application filings for a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change, to ensure that the project is consist with the General Plan and Zoning Plan. The proposed subdivision will be consistent with the purpose of Chapter 16.08 of the Rosemead Municipal Code, Minor Subdivisions, in that it will be in compliance with the official land use zoning plan of the City and any other applicable design standards. C. Each proposed parcel conforms in area and dimension to the provisions of zoning and subdivision requirements of the City. FINDING: The proposed subdivision will conform to all applicable zoning and subdivision requirements of the City in area and dimension. The C -3 (Medium Commercial) zone development standards do not provide minimum or maximum standards for lot area or dimensions. The RCMUDO (Residential /Commercial Mixed - Use Development Overlay) zone development standards require a minimum of thirty thousand (30,000) square feet of lot area, with no lot dimension requirement. Accordingly, the proposed project site consists of 49,850 square feet. D. All streets, alleys and driveways proposed to serve the property have been dedicated or such dedication is not required for the protection of public safety, health and welfare and that such streets, alleys and driveways are of sufficient width, design and construction to preserve the public safety and to provide adequate access and circulation for vehicular and pedestrian traffic. FINDING: The applicant has proposed driveways with sufficient dimensions to provide adequate access and circulation for vehicles and pedestrians. Access to the parking areas of the site will be provided on Del Mar Avenue and Brighton Street, splitting the vehicular traffic associated with the proposed project. Additionally, the proposed project includes a dedication to enlarge the public right -of -way. The alley to the north of the site, between Del Mar Avenue and Brighton Street, will be vacated. Planning Commission Mmfing December 15, 2014 Page 45 of 48 E. All easements and covenants required for the approval of the tentative map or plot plan have been duly executed and recorded. FINDING: The proposed subdivision will not require any easements or covenants for the approval of the tentative map. The site will have direct access from the public right -of -way. Section 4. The Mayor shall sign this resolution and the City Clerk shall attest to the adoption thereof. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 13th day of January, 2015. William Alarcon, Mayor City of Rosemead, California ATTEST: Gloria Molleda, City Clerk City of Rosemead, California APPROVED AS TO FORM: Rachel Richman, City Attorney Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP Planning Commission Meeting December 15, 2014 Paue 46 of 48 EXHIBIT "K" SIMON LEE & ASSOCIATES I ,WAR C H I T E C T S website: www.nlarch.com November 7, 2013 HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCILS CITY OF ROSEMEAD 140 W. VALLEY 81-M. SUITE 2 t 5 SAN CAMEL, CA 91776 TEL: 16261 571.8000 FAX: 162 61 5 7 1 -8 0 0 5 e -mail; sla®slarch.cem clo Michelle G. Ramirez Community Development Dhxctor Tel: (626) 569 -2158 Email: tmamirez@cityofrosemead.org Re: "NEW GARVEY DEL MAR PLAZA" — A Commercial & Residential Mixed -Use Project Location: 7801 Garvey Ave. Rosemead, CA 91770 Per California State Law (SB 1818 - 2008), a Density Bonus for mixed -use projects may be achieved by providing a percentage ofaffordable housing units within the residential portion of the project. A density bonus of 35% increase and no more than two incentives or concessions may be granted for a project that includes at least 20% for persons and families of low - income in a residential development. Mr. Gerard Yang, property owner of `New Garvey Del Mar Plaza" is proposing 20% low- income housing for 35% density bonus to qualify for a total of 60 -unit residential apartments with two allowable concessions. Per your review and approval, the following two (2) concessions are proposed: 1. Building Height & Story. Per RMC Section 17.74.050(C)(3)(c), High Density Commercial/Residential mixed -use building (forty (40) to sixty (60) dulac, four (4) stories) shall have u maximum height of fifty -five (55) fret. Project proposed: Building measured from Del Mar Ave. is 50'47 4 -Story, but building measured firm Brighton St. is 60' -0 "/ 5 -Story due to the existing elevation change on Garvey Ave 10'-0" drop from Del Mar Ave to Brighton St. Planning Commission Meeting December 15, 2014 Pace 47 of 48 Variable Height: Per RMC Section 17.74.050(C)(1)(f), All residemial/commucial mixed -use developments shall have a variable height limitation when abutting R -1 and R -2 zones. The second floor and above shall be stepped back from the rear property line as follows: establishing a height at six (6) feet above finished grade of the adjacent residential property line with a 20 -degree incline plane projected to establish the height limitation of the residential/commercial mixed -use development. The proposed section B -B on sheet A -4.1 shows the north residential units and central garden is encroaching into the 20- degree incline plane even though the main building is 50' -0" away from the rear property line. Also, Parking Requirements: Per RMC Chapter 17.74, two parking spaces shall be provided for every dwelling unit and one guest space shall be provided for each two units in a multiph >family dwelling project. Per the State Density Bonus program SB 1818 (Government Code Section 65915), we are allowed to reduce parking for the entire project base on the new residential parking standards detailed as follows: Zero to one bedroom unit — one onsite parking space Two to three bedrooms unit — two onsite parking space Four to more bedrooms unit — two and a -half parking spaces These numbers are inclusive of guest parking and handicapped parking for the residential portion ofthe project. Sincerely, Simon Lee, AIA Simon Lee & Associates, Architects For Mr. Gerard Yang/ Owner Hawaii Properties 120 E. Valley Blvd., San Gabriel, CA 91776 Planning Commission Meefing December 15, 2014 Page 48 of 48 EXHIBIT "L" 5287 vu r - so• .fq'xt BRICHTON A ST. „ 1993 a.P )CN ilY f:9YL6.2 N.2X $i2t63dDJ xu� p® n ®s�� IY O n u 3 I O O OOO9 � 35 O < 19 18 IT 16 8 tl } SUBJECT i soi31 SITE LOT 89 � 3 n ppq ® !I p Ia+. 4 yiI14 ' i 8 I Is Id u rs I1 to � � II i 11 yl d DEL MAR i AVE. TRACT NO. 7223 _ I M.B. 85-38 LANDS OF THE SAN GABRIEL coot 3B1 _ IMPROVEMENT COMPANY — M.R.54-71 -72 iR IIIN. WMC Y[ IW -M S M E ROSEMEAD PLANNING COMMISSION p n� STAFF REPORT TO: THE HONORABLE CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE ROSEMEAD PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: PLANNING DIVISION DATE: JUNE 16, 2014 SUBJECT: DESIGN REVIEW 12 -05, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 12 -02, ZONE CHANGE 12 -02, AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 72347 7801 -7825 GARVEY AVENUE Summary Gerard Ngo has submitted entitlement applications requesting to develop a new residential /commercial mixed use development. The project consists of the demolition of all existing structures to construct a five- story, mixed use development with 15,553 square feet of retail /restaurant space on the basemenUfirst and second floors and 60 residential units on the third through fifth floors, comprising 54,609 square feet, for a total built area of 70,162 square feet. Parking is proposed as a combination of surface and two stories of subterranean basement parking. The City is proposing to participate by vacating the existing public alley that bisects the site. Access to the proposed project will be provided via the rear of the structure with one entrance each on Del Mar Avenue and Brighton Street. The project also includes a density bonus application under Senate Bill (SB) 1818, which amended the state bonus law to allow density bonuses up to 35 %. The property is located at the northeast corner of Del Mar Avenue and Garvey Avenue in the C -3 (Medium Commercial) zone. A Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for the project was distributed for a 20 -day public review and comment period from May 21, 2014 to June 9, 2014. During the review period, staff received comments from several agencies. Due to the extent of the comments received from the California Department of Transportation ( Caltrans) and the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works (LACDPW), it is requested that this item is continued to a future Planning Commission date. Staff Recommendation The Planning Commission continue this public hearing item to a date uncertain. The continuance will allow the Planning Division, Applicant, and Environmental Consultant to work with Caltrans and tACDPW to ensure that all reviewing agencies deem the MND acceptable. EXHIBIT "C" Pinning Can lasion Meeting June 16, 2014 Pogo 2 of 2 Prepared b Submitted by: 44L � Lily Trinh Michelle Ramirez Associate Planner Community Development Director Minutes of the PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING June 16, 2014 The regular meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 7:00 P.M. by Chair Herrera in the Council Chambers, 8838 E. Valley Boulevard. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - Commissioner Tang INVOCATION - Commissioner Dinh ROLL CALL - Commissioners Dinh, Lopez, Tarp, Vioe -Chair Eng, and Chair Herrera ROLL CALL OF OFFICERS PRESENT — Community Development Director Ramirez and Commission Secretary Lockwood. 1. EXPLANATION OF HEARING PROCEDURES AND APPEAL RIGHTS Community Development Director Ramirez presented the procedure and appeal rights of the meeting. 2. PUBLIC COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE None 3, PUBLIC HEARINGS A. DESIGN REVIEW 12 -05, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 12 -02, ZONE CHANGE 12 -02, AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 72347,7801-7825 GARVEY AVENUE - Gerard Ngo has submitted entitlement applications requesting to develop a new resident allcommercial mixed use development The project consists of the demolition of all existing structures to construct a five -story, mixed use development with 15,553 square feet of retai0restaurant space on the basemerdyfirst and second floors and 60 residential units on the third through fi th floors, comprising 54,609 square feet, for a total built area of 70,162 square feet. Parking is proposed as a combination of surface and two stories of subterranean basement parking. The City is proposing to participate by vacating the existing public alley that bisects the site. Access to the proposed project will be provided via the rear of the structure with one entrance each on Del Mar Avenue and Brighton Street. The project also Includes a density bonus application under Senate Bill (SB) 1616, which amended the state bonus law to allow density bonuses up to 35 %. The property is located at the northeast corner of Del Mar Avenue and Garvey Avenue in the C -3 (Medium Commercial) zone. A Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MIND) for the project was distributed for a 20 -day public review and comment period from May 21, 2014 to June 9, 2014. During the review period, staff received comments from several agencies. Due to the extent of the comments received from the California Department of Transportation ( Caltrans) and the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works (LACDPW), it Is requested that this hem is continued to a future Planning Commission date. STAFF RECOMMENDATION - The Planning Commission continue this public hearing item to a date uncertain. The continuance will allow the Planning Division, Applicant, and Environmental Consultant to work with Caltrans and LACDPW to ensure that all reviewing agencies deem the MIND acceptable. Community Development Director Ramirez presented the staff report. EXHIBIT "D" Chair Herrera asked the Planning Commission If them were any questions or comments for staff Commissioner Tang referred to the Garvey Avenue corridor and the subcommittee that has been formed. He asked if Mere is speck vision of what they would like the Garvey Avenue corridor to look like, other than what's been tasked with the subcommittee. Community Development Director Ramirez replied no and explained that is the idea of the Garvey Avenue Specific Plan Subcommittee. Commissioner Tang referred to the interest of mixed -use developments and asked ff there are ways that the City or staff can attract quality developments that doesn't really overdevelop. Community Development Director Ramirez replied yes and explained that will also be discussed in the specific plan. Vice -Chair Eng asked if this property is within the specific plan project area. Community Development Director Ramirez replied yes. Vice -Chair Eng asked A there is a mason why this item was scheduled for a Public Hearing and brought to the Planning Commission before comments were received from revrewing agencies. Community Development Director Ramirez explained due to timing A just happened to overlap this way. She added it has happened in the past and noted that the two reviewing agencies did not submit comments until the very last day. Commissioner Dinh asked I specific questions in regards to the project can be asked. Community Development Director Ramirez stated questions may be asked and informed Me Planning Commission Mat she may not be able to reply. She stated since this item is being continued to a date uncertain, she currently does not have information available. She added that due to the two reviewing agencies and their comments, Mere may be changes to the project, and her comments may be incorrect Commissioner Dinh asked what the exact square footage of the land that will be developed. Community Development Director Ramirez replied she does not have that information. Commissioner Dinh referred to the approved mixed -use pmject on Mission Boulevard and asked how this project will compare to that one or will be on a larger scale. Community Development Director Ramirez replied it will be more intense. Commissioner Lopez asked what are the two (2) reviewing agencies questioning. Community Development Director Ramirez replied that Los Angeles County had questions regarding the sewer capacity and Cal -Trans had questions regarding traffic. Commissioner Lopez asked if the recommendation for this project is to continue this item to a date uncertain and clarified that this item will return to the Planning Commission to be heard with clearer details. Community Development Director Ramirez replied that the recommendation is for this item to come back at a date uncertain and staff ill re-notice this item. Chair Herrera opened the Public Hearing and asked Brian Lewin to the podium. Resident Brian Lewin stated he is on mailing list for most notices that the City provides and expressed concern that he had not received a notice or heard anything about this hem. He requested that the next time this item is noticed and future notices, especially regarding N9tgated Negative Declarations, be sent to him. He also requested that they be part of the Public Announcements especially t there is an opportunity to comment on them. He referred to the density bonus in the staff report and asked what specifically is the applicant receiving in temps to their selected density bonus. Community Development Director Ramirez stated she is noting all of Brian Lewins questionslcomments and if Chair Herrera would like her to respond after all his questions have been made, she will respond at that time Resident Brian Lewin expressed concern with density bonuses and unnecessary giveaways such as parking, if parking Is what is being given, especially when the City will possibly be granting a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change. He expressed the City has leverage and does not have to allow giveaways. He expressed concern with the size of the residences with sixty (60) residential units on 54,609 square feet Community Development Director Ramirez stated since staff is not prepared to present the staff report this evening, this infomhation is not available. She added the information that is included in the staff report, such as how large the site is and the number of residential units could change due to any mitigation measures outlined in the MNgated Negative Declaration. Resident Gerardo Hijar stated his family owns two (2) properties located at 3031 and 3035 Brighton Avenue. He requested that Public Hearing Notices be written in different languages and sent out with more notice. He expressed that everyone that received this notice had difficulty reading it, understanding it, and did not know they would have an opportunity to speak this evening. Chair Herrera asked resident Gerardo Hijar if he received a notice. Resident Gerardo Hijar replied yes, but he had only received one. He stated h was addressed to the property owner, but they own two properties on Brighton Avenue. He added he has been a resident for a number of years and recommended that a follow up letter be sent and better communication. Chair henera asked staff if the distance is a 300 ft. radius for Public Hearing Notices to be sent out Community Development Director Ramirez replied yes. Resident Gerardo Hijar stated there 6 a gentleman in the audience that did not receive a notice. Community Development Director Ramirez requested the gentleman leave his name and address so she may contact him. She stated she will confirm with staff and check that the address is within the 300 ft, radius and if a notice was mailed. Resident Gerardo Hijar stated there is a gentleman present that speaks Mandarin and asked 'd there is anyone that may translate for him. Vice -Chair Eng stated she speaks Mandarin and offered to translate. She asked the gentleman to state his name and address. Resident Jackson Tsai of 3030 N. Brighton Street stated he did not receive a Public Hearing Notice, V ce -Chair Eng asked staff if the Public Hearing Notices are mailed to property owners only and not the tenants. She also asked if the informaton is obtained from the current County Assessors records. Community Development Director Ramirez replied yes. Vice -Chair Eng asked the resident if the address of 3030 Brighton Street is zoned as R -2 and has two properties on one (1) lot. Response was from the audience and not audible. Resident Made Isabel Suarez of 3041 Brighton Street stated in Spanish that she received the Public Hearing Notice but it was in English only, so she did not understand it (she speaks Spanish only). Community Development Director Ramirez stated she did not speak Spanish. Audience member offered to translate, and translated that the residents name is Made Isabel Suarez and her address is 3041 Brighton Street She added that the resident dirt receive the Public Hearing Notice but it was in English only so she did not understand it Commissioner Lopez asked if the Public Hearing Notice is only sent in English. Community Development Director Ramirez replied yes. Chair Herrera recommended that if a Public Hearing Notice is sent to a resident and they do not understand it they may contact City staff, or come to City Hall to have someone assist them. Audience member translated Chair Hemeras recommendation to Maria Isabel Suarez. Chair Hemere explained that a decision will not be made on this Rem this evening and will be re- scheduled for a date uncertain. She recommended that when this item is re- noticed and sent out for anyone who doesn't understand the notice to call or come by City Hall and have staff explain or translate R. Maria Isabel Suarez thanked Chair Herrera. Chair Herrera asked if there is anyone else wishing to speak in favor or against this item. None Chair Herrera dosed the Public Hearing. Commissioner Tang requested that before this item is closed and a motion is made, an explanation be given to the public on what R means to "Continue'this item to a date uncertain. Chair Herrera explained that due to comments from CalVans, LACDPW, and the recommendation from staff, the Planning Commission will be voting to'Contill this item to a date uncertain. Community Development Director Ramirez explained that a decision will not be made on the project this evening. She informed the public that the item will be re -noticed and all property owners within a 300 ft. radius will be notified of the new date forthis item to be heard by the Planning Commission. She staled a date will not be set at this lime. Vice -Chair Eng thanked the public for attending the Planning Commission meeting and encouraged them to keep an eye out for the Public Notice that will be sent out in the future. Chair Herrera asked dre Planning Commission if there were any fuller comments or questions. None Chair Herrera asked for a motion. Commissioner Lopez made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Dinh, to continue this public hearing item to a date uncertain. The continuance will allow the Planning Division, Applicant, and Environmental Consultant to work with Coltrane and LACDPW to ensure that all reviewing agencies deem the MND acceptable. Vote resulted in: Yes: Dinh, Eng, Herrera, Lopez, Tang No: None Abstain: None Absent: None 4. CONSENTCALENDAR None 5, MATTERS FROM STAFF Community Development Director Ramirez announced the date, time, and location of the City of Rosemead Fourth of July ParederCelebradon. She reminded the Planning Commission that they have been asked to participate in the parade and opening ceremonies. She requested that the Planning Commissioners RSVP to Sandy Bari in the Parks & Recreation Department to receive further instruction and information. Chair Herrera announced the date of the Chamber of Commerce Installation Dinner. Community Development Director Ramirez informed the Planning Commission they am to RSVP to Linda Young In Administration in regards to this function. 6. MATTERS FROM THE CHAIR &COMMISSIONERS Chair Herrera stated she has received complaints in regards to Tour Buses parking, loading, and unloading on Delta Avenue and Valley Boulevard. Community Development Director Ramirez announced that the City Council just passed a new ordinance that will not akw any type of tour or casino buses to park, load and unload passengers on City shoals and right -a -ways except for emergencies. She stated this will go into effect on July 10, 2014 and that they must have written permission from the property owner and a City business license to park in a private parking lot. She stated they ate subject to a oration of 5500.00 for the first offense, and $1,000 for subsequent violations of the Ordinance. Commissioner Dinh asked if the private bus operators are being notified of this new Ordinance Community Development Director Ramirez replied yes. 7. ADJOURNMENT The next regular Planning Commission meeting v Meeting adjourned at 7:28 P.m. Di ct ATTEST: Rachel Lockwood Commission Secretary ROWN nm :mar DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT 7, TRANSPORTATION PLANNING J IGRICEQA BRANCH 100 MAIN STREET, MS 016 LOS ANGELES, CA 90012-3606 Flex yourymverl PHONE: (213)897.9140 ee energy 8e� +/� FAX: (213) 897 -1337 June 4, 2014 Ms. Lily Trmh Associate Planner Planning Division City of Rosemead P.O. Box 399 Rosemead, CA 91770 IGR/CEQA No. 140538AL -MND Case no.: GPA 12 -02, ZC 12 -02 TIM 72529 and DR 12 -05 Vic. LA -10 / PM 25.327 Dear Ms. Trinh Thank you for including the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) in the environmental review process for the above refcrenced project. The proposed project involves a development with 60 multi- family residential units, 10,773 square feet of restaurant, use, and 4,780 square feet of retail use. According to the Traffic Impact Analysis prepared in January 2014, on Table 4, the project will generate 1,973 daily vehicle trips with 152 and 161 vehicle trips during AM and PM peak hours. Unfortunely, the report does not provide cumulative traffic analysis that includes a mixed use project located at 8479 Garvey Avenue and other projects in the attachment. The total cumulative traffic volume is about 7203 daily vehicle trips, 345/644 AM/PM Peak hours (referenced from TTM72347 and Design Review 13 -02). Many of those trips will utilize I -10 and its on/off ramps. In addition, the traffic report does not provide off -ramps analysis as such Caltrans always has safety concerns when the additional trips are going cause congestion on the off - ramps. We request the City to�provide a queuing analysis on the ofi ramps utilizing the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 85 percentile queuing methodology with the actual signal timing at the ramps' termini to determine the impact and if there is a need for ramp improvements. Currently, I -10 in the project vicinity is operating at or near capacity. Any project trips will contribute significant traffic impact to the State facilities. The proposed project may contribute cumulative significant traffic impacts to the State facilities in the future when the existing Level of Service exceeds operating capacity. The cumulative significant traffic impact may be unavoidable if no traffic mitigation is proposed. Decision makers should be aware of this cumulative traffic impact issue and be prepared to mitigate cumulative project impact in the future. We recommend the City work with Caltrans and neighboring cities and establish a mechanism to address cumulative transportation impacts from the cumulative projects. •'CaUmmi px mo6,ll�ya Cart mo- EXHIBIT "E„ Ms. Lily Trinh June 4, 2014 Page 2 of 3 Stoan water runoff is a sensitive issue for Los Angeles and Ventum counties. Please be mindful that projects should be designed to discharge clean runoff water. Transportation of heavy construction equipment and/or materials, which requires the use of oversized - transport vehicles on State highways, will require a transportation permit from Caltmns. It is recommended that large size track trips be limited to off-peak commute periods. To follow up with the phone conversation between yourself, and Mr. Alan Lin of my staff on June 4, 2014, we would like to formally invite the lead agency, City of Rosemead to discuss sub - regional traffic impacts, and traffic mitigation alternatives which may include fair share contributions towards planned or future freeway improvements within the City limits. Please contact this office at your earliest convenience to schedule a meeting in the near future. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Alan Lin the project coordinator at (213) 897 -8391 and refer to IGR/CEQA No. 140538AL. Sincerely, DNrNNA WAT SONr�i- �'7zS,1(r'i`r- IGR/CEQA Branch Chief cc: Scott Morgan, State Clearinghouse "CWI.p'im l.o -o Illy— Call(wnW" Ms. Lily Trinh June 4, 2014 Page 3 of 3 Attachment Cumulative Project and Trips Trip Generation of Included Area Projects N • ProleekLx�tl98 _ _ WeQii . lend Use mtenail7 umt mg Taut - AM Ptak TOW In out PM Pk To In Wr 7419.7459 CCrvq Arinue R «am«d Sh Cenur 18x00 "f 4d 769 17 11 / 67 33 35 Su mma*m 101100 3,061 103 63 39 204 145 139 SaE h 4A9d 119 74 43 331 111 114 O801.181SC'en•97A".b R«em«d pinSGnr« 1 4.780 W 704 5 3 2 Is 9 9 HlNu mover Rcaunm 10.773 hf IJ70 116 M 52 106 64 42 AS, 60 du 399 31 6 N 37 24 13 Svb - 1,913 in 73 19 "141 96 63 3 8408fanpAmue Rosemead ShappNBCenw 11500 1 SO 491 II 7 4 43 20 12 I du 3% 23 5 19 1 29 1 19 10 Su6anenh. M7 35 12 23 11 39 32 4 8841 Cove,Armue R «4mead 5 pin3Canex 5311 W 121 5 3 2 1 20 1 9 10 Jak. I 5.111 I W 59 a / 1 8 1 I Su86e1O8 188 "a 10 2 :xU II IS NET TOTA2 92 In 130 :"ill^r 3U no Scum rte iq Gueram 9A Edw Related project also include a mixed use project located at 8479 Garvey Avenue. (referenced firm on and Design Review 13 -02). The total cumulative traffic volume is about 7203 daily vehicle trips, 345/644 AM/PM Peak hours "Ca/ham improres mobility unosr Call rniO" W ex"SuLi1Nc VA CONSULTING, INC. Engineem- Plane- Sumeyom 46 Discovery, Suite 250 Irvine, CA 92618 Tel 949474-1400 Fax 948-281 -8482 v vaconsJlii im.mm GARVEY DEL MAR PLAZA TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS ADDENDUM FOR I-10/DEL MAR AVENUE INTERCHANGE ROSEMEAD,CA OCTOBER 2014 Prepared for: Phil Martin & Associates 3002 Dow Avenue, Suite 122 Tustin, CA 92780 Prepared By: Keith R. Rutherfurd, TE /A� VA Consulting, Inc. Garvey Del Mar Plaza )N October 2014 Traft Impact Analysis Addendum I- 10/Det Mar Avenue Interchange consuLrmc Rosemead, California The purpose of this addendum is to identify potential traffic impacts to the Del Mar Avenue /1 -10 interchange associated with the proposed Garvey Del Mar Plaza mixed -use development project. This addendum has been prepared in response to Caltrans review of the original Project traffic study "Garvey Del Mar Plaza Traffic Impact Analysis," January 14, 2014, prepared by VA Consulting, Inc. The original study did not include a specific analysis of the interchange intersections and this addendum has been prepared in response to Caltrans review. The location of the proposed Garvey Del Mar Plaza Project and proximity to the Del Mar Avenue /1 -10 interchange is shown on Figure 1. Figure 1 also shows the study area intersections and number of through lanes and intersection controls within the interchange area. The project site is approximately 1.14 acres located at the northeast corner of Del Mar Avenue and Garvey Avenue in the City of Rosemead. The project site has formerly been developed simultaneously with a law office, bar and grille restaurant, auto sales, and a single - family detached housing unit. For the purpose of this analysis the existing site has been considered vacant with no trip reduction applied to Project traffic forecasts to account for demolition of the existing site uses. The Project would develop the property with 60 multi - family residential units, 10,773 square feet of restaurant use, and 4,780 square feet of retail use. The project is to be completed in 2015 as a single phase with the following trip generation and distribution as identif ied in the previous project traffic impact analysis. Table 1 - Garvey Del Mar Plaza Project Trip Generation Project ADT AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Total In Out Total Out Out Garvey Del Mar Plaza 1,973 152 73 79 161 1 97 64 Table 2 — Garvey Del Mar Plaza Project Trip Distribution Origin /Destination 1 -10 1 -10 Del Mar Ave Del Mar Ave Garvey Ave Gary ey Ave Total To/from East West North South East West Garvey Del Mar 200% 20% 15% 15% 15% 15% 100% Plaza Project %:V .1115703WE %T.chexe .WEPp1- Telnc S.M.. a1201s1C.nrzne AddeM —mw R.dx kk� :2E} §6§/ - �\(§ § 2§| ! §! m § §! \ §4w22� d! } _,_. \ - G \ § / 1 / _, w s , © � I ® -- ' | w ] � \ - �`_ ©� � r ! � ƒ-- , r kk� :2E} §6§/ - �\(§ § 2§| ! §! m § §! \ §4w22� d! } _,_. \ - G \ § / 1 / _, w s , © � I ® -- ' | w ] � \ `T VA Consulting, Inc. V� October 2014 [ONBVLTING Garvey Del Mar Plaza Traffic Impact Analysis Addendum 1- 1011391 Mar Avenue Interchange Rosemead,, California In addition to traffic generated by the proposed Garvey Del Mar Plaza Project, this analysis has considered the potential of three additional development projects located within the City of Rosemead to impact the Del Mar Avenue /1 -10 interchange. These projects are shown on Figure 2 and are as follows: 1. 7419 Garvey Avenue (Garvey Market Plaza Project); 2. 8408 Garvey Avenue (Garvey Garden Plaza Project); and 3. 8841 Garvey Avenue (Garvey 168 Plaza Project). Figure 2 shows that each of these projects has a more direct route to the 1 -10 Freeway via separate interchanges and therefore, these projects are not expected to add traffic volumes to the Del Mar Avenue /1 -10 interchange. The traffic studies to be prepared for each of these projects will include an analysis of potential 1 -10 interchange impacts based on the interchange(s) anticipated to be utilized by each project. Project traffic volumes within the interchange area are shown on Figures 3A and 3B for am and pm peak hours, respectively. WMe 11157_030N ,,UechD —R ftW001.T fc 6WtlVRe W 01 211141Ca1,an A6]eMUn`AeGal Wa a x WW 3AV atlni N O LL d SOH -< Z W `a O i p a 31V WdD 1nN VM Q O < O W J W 31V V1130 N } Q � J Ml9 131N9tl0 Ntl5 N d H Q Q F- N C< O O 0 � } 3W NtlnB13N 0 W $ Ttf O } U O g c)� m >LL cc < ¢ 15 NON10188 C Cc MY M 130 m 3NV NDSADVP N m �j g O oc`i a � U w zz � as 7 �f 3Atl M3N N oz � �" � o m =OW � a N z LOFTUS DR a 0 m U 9 W SAXON AVE + N / E SAXON AVE mo � N z 0 x 10 m w ARTSON ST a COLUMBIA ST Q _rn w 0 N Z O \9 CJ \j } m I roo -N- HELLM AN AVE " vaePARm BY-. GARVEY DEL MAR PLAZA TRAFFIC MPACT STUDY FIGURE 3A PROJECT WEEOAY AM PEAK HOUR W; j� VA�Conspul�ingg'Ina.q „E` °: 926 a °'T s° ROSEMEAD, CA TURNING MOVEMENT VOLUMES 0 = LOFTUS OR w r 12 1 < � 1 � E SAXON AVE /SAXI, �m z 0 x 10 it m ARTSON ST > COLUMBIA ST a J � N1 W 1 � N Z 12 1 m HELLMAN AVE rMPARM en GARVEY DEL MAR PLAZA TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY FIGURE 3B PROJECT WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR VA Consulting, Inc. RI NNY CA 92618w ""'° ROSEMEAD, CA TURNING MOVEMENT VOLUMES V VA ConsuRing, Inc. Garvey Del Mar Plaza October 2014 Traffic Impact Analysis Addendum 1- 10/Del Mar Avenue Interchange coaeor.Twc Rosemead, California EXISTING AND BASELINE 2015 INTERCHANGE STUDY AREA CONDITIONS Figures 4A and 4B show existing (September 2014) weekday am and pm peak hour intersection and ramp turning movement volumes within the project study area, respectively. Traffic data was collected for this study in September 2014 while local schools were in session by National Data Collection and Surveying Services (NDS) and is included in the appendix. To provide a detailed analysis of existing peak hour and Baseline 2015 year traffic operation within the study area and to provide a baseline for existing and year 2015 level of service, the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) Operations Method for signalized and unsignalized intersections was used to determine Level of service (LOS) for the study area intersections, per Cakrans guidelines. The results of HCM analysis are shown on Table 3. Table 3 shows that all of the existing ramp intersections within the Del Mar Avenue /1 -10 interchange are currently operating at a desirable LOS. All intersections are operating at LOS B during existing weekday am and pm peak hours except during the WB off -ramp intersection is operating at LOS A. Per Caltrans traffic impact analysis preparation guidelines, for a project that contributes between 50 and 100 peak hour trips to a Caltrans facility, the threshold to warrant preparation of a full traffic analysis is an existing facility experiencing noticeable delay and approaching unstable flow with LOS C or D. The existing operating conditions at this interchange are above this threshold. Table 3 also shows the LOS for Baseline 2015 (no project) conditions. For Baseline 2015 conditions (2% growth over existing volumes) the LOS is the same as existing conditions and all intersections are anticipated to operate at desirable LOS B or better during weekday am and pm peak hours. Baseline 2015 volumes are shown on Figures 5A and 5B for am and pm peak hours, respectively. XW "1115] OoO U,Wecho Wie ftWEM -Trel! StudylR W 01_2014`. am n. hldendumwepon_tea.do S3Wf1l0A 1N3W3AOW ONNuni V3 'aV3VM0a B19M VD 3NVd1 ^W 0Sz Ai05 ARAN' S10 96 11f10H )lV3d WV AVGN33M DNIlSLX3 Aanis IOVdVi 0WAVlll •aai Say[MOZ) VA V4 32 noizi VzV'ld avw l30 k3AHV9 'A9 MWa d 'K OZ 'll d3031d3S 'AVOS?JfIHl NO SON AB NDVi S1N000 :io2 s 3AV NVWl13H N loa 0 y 7.L1 (/ 0 m V(nl mm m D 1S V18W(1100 D G IS NOSAV m 0L Z ti [O� J 1 1 3AV NOXVS 3 L 0l I� SSl 3AV NOXVS M LZI� m 6Ll m b0 SR1jOl 0 m rl rn� N z LOFTUS DR > a �74 w W SAXON AVE X96 s FE n a 174 m 60� �, �' 1 E SAXON AVE z 0 io m ARTSON ST > Q COLUMBIA ST a �N J W Nt0 NOS � z o 2011 m HELLMAN AVE SOURCE: COUNTS TAKEN BY NOS ON THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 11, 2014. PREPARED By' GARVEY DEL MAR PLAZA FIGURE 4B VA Consulting, Inc. TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY EXISTING WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR a ome ai a. iNNe, Ca ascie' ROSEMEAD, CA TURNING MOVEMENT VOLUMES nj€ �c C7 @ 2 otp yN v �a T � C — �. a O W U_ is J' RI Z 6 FQ- y E A > 3 J a� �Fs o'Y a. a ;o -ms Wa. °x n a a° ii �F ny 6• 9 V8� iO SyJ 6i e'I �m8 Oy di o 6y B m r, a g Q 8 8 - m i E m 2 E O �j 00 N z LOFTUS DR a 0 183 130 X260 0 W SAXON AVE ° a 14� f N 101 NJ 1 E SAXON AVE Tmo f N z 0 i x m 10 m ARTSON ST COLUMBIA ST J �O W M OJ 0 z O 205 HELLMAN AVE OM m M N- PREPARED Br. GARVEY DEL MAR PLAZA TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY BASELINE FIGURE 5A 2015 WEEKDAY AM PEAK VA Consulting, Inc. e DISCC E zso °0RY1 °" o`" Y Ws BANE, CA 92618 ROSEMEAD, CA HOUR TURNING MOVEMENT VOLUMES O r� F N JNI �I+ Z / I LOFTUS DR W SLAVE 279 0 x r [ 304 < 1 ,I E SAXON AVE MO c� H m Z O H i 2 O m m 10 ARTSON ST > COLUMBIA ST a M M m W Q J� 259 <205 Z O m HELLMAN AVE N RRE er. GARVEY DEL MAR PLAZA FIGURE 5B VA Consulting, Inc. TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY BASELINE 2015 WEEKDAY PM PEAK 4 c �RNNEsc<°A grs 8 zso ROSEMEAD, CA HOUR TURNING MOVEMENT VOLUMES VA Consulting, Inc. October 2014 consuUnec Garrey Del Mar Plaza Traffic Impact Analysis Addendum 140/Del Mar Avenue Interchange Rosemead, California FUTURE WITH PROJECT INTERCHANGE STUDY AREA CONDITIONS Existing (2014) with Project Traffic Volumes Existing 2014 and project only traffic volumes have been combined to produce forecasts of existing traffic conditions with Project implementation. Figures 6A and 6B show Existing 2014 with Project traffic volumes for am and pm peak hours, respectively. Baseline 2015 with Project Traffic Volumes Baseline 2015 and project only traffic volumes have been combined to produce forecasts of future traffic conditions with Project implementation. Figures 7A and 7B show Baseline 2015 with Project traffic volumes for am and pm peak hours, respectively. Table 3 in the previous section above shows the results of HCM analysis for Existing with Project peak hour traffic conditions. Table 3 shows that all study area interchange intersections are expected to have no change in LOS as the result of project generated traffic. All intersections are expected to continue to operate at LOS B or better with 2014 with Project traffic volumes and existing intersection /roadway improvements. Table 3 also shows the results of Baseline 2015 with Project peak hour HCM analysis. Table 3 shows that there is no change in forecast LOS for 2015 with Project conditions with the exception of the EB off -ramp at Del Mar Avenue (SB) where the weekday pm peak hour LOS is forecast to be reduced from LOS B to C. However, the resulting LOS C will be at the low range of vehicle delay associated with LOS C and a favorable and desirable LOS is still indicated. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS The existing Del Mar Avenue /1 -10 interchange intersections are operating at a desirable LOS B or better during existing weekday am and pm peak hour conditions. The Garvey Del Mar Plaza Project is expected to add 60 or less trips to the Del Mar Avenue /1 -10 interchange during weekday am and pm peak hours. This interchange is also not anticipated to provide access to the 1 -10 Freeway for other identified development projects in vicinity of the Project. The interchange intersections will continue to operate at a high level of service with the addition of Garvey Del Mar Plaza Project peak hour volumes. Only one intersection, the stop - controlled EB xwe UIW wag W\Tmhm�ew fto Ego+ Taffic d Vewed_a± 014%Ca ,*add. uMwSpo teadm V VA Consulting, Inc. October 2014 cONBVLTLYC Garvey Del Mar Plaza TmItiic Impact Analysis Addendum 1- IO/Del Mar Avenue Interchange Rosemead, California off -ramp at Del Mar Avenue (SB) is forecast to have a change in LOS to LOS C during the pm peak hour for 2015 with Project conditions. This LOS C falls within the low end of the range of vehicle delay associated with LOS C and is considered a desirable LOS and no project mitigations are considered necessary. %:1�grc 1157 W T-*Ta50owW ftW0`01 -Tmfic SMlyW W 01_2010 \CaN ns PGdeMumY we teAtl m �o � JI —127 N 1 / E SAXON AVE A?AVE �m �o F N Z O 1- O m 10 m ARTSON ST :7COLUMBIAT a a mug J w �o rim C' J � 172 N o z,0 m HELLMAN AVE rnn PB mm BY: GARVEY DEL MAR PLAZA FIGURE 6A VA Consulting, Inc. TRAFFIC MPACT STUDY EXISTING PLUS PROJECT WEEKDAY AM PEAK w A NE` °.;,be" ROSEMEAD, CA TURNING MOVEMENT VOLUMES m LOFTUS DR o 274 0 X310 W SAXON AVE a 174 60� E SAXON AVE 1 � mt° � z 0 H x c7 10 m ARTSON ST COLUMBIA ST COW J W CNm NOS C) J 254 N z O \ CD 2,31 1 � r' m 0� N- HELLMAN AVE amr,wm BY. GARVEY DEL MAR PLAZA FIGURE 66 VA Consulting, Inc. TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY EXISTING PLUS PROJECT WEEKDAY PM PEAK NC28 M 2s° NE AA 9961 ROSEMEAD, CA TURNING MOVEMENT VOLUMES O O F N /00 z / I LOFTUS DR 00 163 A269 W SAXON AVE °o a m 14 10 N I,I N E SAXON AVE 1 gN H N Z O t- 2 K 10 m LLJ ARTSON ST COLUMBIA ST <N JM] 1W 1 I 175 � z O 214 m HELLMAN AVE Sn PRMMM BY: GARVEY DEL MAR PLAZA FIGURE 7A j� VA Consulting, Inc. ,Inc. TRAFFlC IMPACT STUDV BASELINE 2015 WITH PROJECT WEEImAY AM PEAK �mswcovon s ui`lti a sw� RME, CA M10 ROSEMEAD, CA HOUR TURNING MOVEMENT VOLUMES N z / 1 LOFTUS OR x a E SAXON AVE AAVE6 0 x �o m w ARTSON ST COLUMBIA ST � ro J W 259 N Z 2177) m ,/111Au 1 1 -I HELLMAN AVE NN PRPr BY. GARVEY DEL MAR PLAZA FIGURE 7B VA Consulting, Inc. TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY BASELIE 2015 WITH PROJECT WEEKDAY PM PEAK W, CA 2618 ROSEMEAD, CA HOUR TURNING MOVEMENT VOLUMES APPENDIX A Existing Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movements Counts ITM Peak Hour Summary P,.E M: NDS NxNonal ozla a survrymg swim. Del Mar Ave and 1.10 WB Ramps, Rosemead Peak Hour Summary W., W11=14 1 1 e AM = F71 851 Pg . 1L55Z i DA, 1M Y i 1 AM 3065 1006] 0 F 10<L IAM 151 PM Liry Roenre60 1 LA- Q f NooN 0 0 0 0 NOON AM P' . k N wu A pM 306 t0Q/9 0 15A N 3k HO11I NOON 0 PM PeakHOUr SOOPM 140 WB Ram PS AM NOON AM L NOON PM J90 F F� 10]9 0 0 In «-0001 1 1g Oo to J sag ,n =.° r zss ne 1 A =° =° Oo 0 00 0 Inn + AM NOON PM Total Ins & Outs Am NOON AM PM V 1 1 e AM = F71 851 199 M OONO 0 0 F'—] NOON pM 0 I 151 PM 1 LA- 199 ❑0 15] AM NOON PM Total Volume Per Leg OeR: wnrzofa aY mU., ITM Peak Hour Summary wP,."ed tw: N1 7 x.mn.imesw'ke' 1— Del Mar Ave and 1- 10 WB Ramos Rosemead <I - 000 SINOONEo Eo Fo AM N°°N PM F-1 F I ,°° a 1000 Total Ins & Outs A. NOON AM NOON PM ME 41 0 0 D AM �0 PM 4 M 1 °.NM P�gxiF 1655]61% czr No ad AM WAM- AM NWN PM la L00 0 ,., 4- 001 r =101 b❑ AM NOON PM Total Volume Per Leg s AM = wN F F° F° P�gxiF 1655]61% czr No ad AM WAM- AM NWN PM la L00 0 ,., 4- 001 r =101 b❑ AM NOON PM Total Volume Per Leg ITM Peak Hour Summary wPrtW�E W: xam:M1 at. r, m:.e3NNM sMwm Del Mar Ave and I -10 EB Ramos . Rosemead Wb: V11M14 I 1 e 902 =p 02fi 03fi AM pOX� Fol PmRGR 1L152AMW pey INUMH Fol ro AM 1 3 ° F F 1-A. CM'. RuerteM 6 A E O N� NOON AN PNkXm: 730AM NOON Pesk Mu: pN 230 962 El 10n5I0 PMPeskXw $ pm 610 Ea Ramps LJ AM 1 N PM AM NOON PM la - F] xze 112 E�i ° �J w,v smmse:wM� 4rE:l E ° y 1 zw =0 -*❑ ❑ ❑ ea AM M N + PN AM NWN PM Total Ins & Outs A. 1. V I 1 e 902 =p 02fi 03fi AM pOX� Fol = =NOO N F-1-1',—] Fol F7--1 D Total Volume Per Leg APPENDIX B Level of Service Computation Reports EXISTING (2014) AM /PM PEAK HOUR AM Peak Thu Oct 2, 2014 12:06:00 Scenario Report Scenario: AM Peak Command: AM Peak Volume: Default Volume Geometry: Default Geometry Impact Fee: Default Impact Fee Trip Generation: Default Trip Generation Trip Distribution: Default Trip Distribution Paths: Default Path Routes: Default Route Configuration: AM Peak Page 1 -1 Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to VA CONSULTING, IRVINE AM Peak Thu Oct 2, 2014 12:06:00 Impact Analysis Report Level Of Service Intersection Base Del/ V/ LOS Veh C 4 1 A 9.5 0.619 4 2 B 13.7 0.295 4 3 B 12.8 0.304 Page 2 -1 Future Change Del/ V/ in LOS Veh C A 9.5 0.619 + 0.000 D/V B 13.7 0.295 + 0.000 D/V B 12.8 0.304 + 0.000 D/V Tra£fiz 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to VA CONSULTING, IRVINE AM Peak Thu Oct 2, 2014 12:06:00 Page 3 -1 Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations Method (Base Volume Alternative) Intersection tl Cycle (sec): 60 Critical Vol. /Cap.(X): 0.619 Loss Time (sec): 4 Average Delay (sec /veh): 9.5 Optimal Cycle: 27 Level Of Service: A Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L- T - R L- T - R L- T- R L- T- R ------------ I --------------- II--_------------ II --------------- II ---------- - - - - - I Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y +R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lanes: 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 ------------ I --------------- II--------------- II--------------- II ---------- - - - - - I Volume Module: Base Vol: 98 851 199 0 1062 265 14 0 10 255 127 179 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 98 851 199 0 1062 265 14 0 10 255 127 179 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.DO 1.OD 1.00 PST Adj: 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.85 0.85 0.85 PER Volume: 122 1058 248 0 1139 284 26 0 18 3DO 149 211 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 122 1058 248 0 1139 284 26 0 18 300 149 211 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.DO 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 122 1058 248 0 1139 284 26 0 18 300 149 211 ------------ --------------- II--------------- II--------------- II---------- - - - -- I Saturation Flow Module: Sat /Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.18 0.92 0.92 1.00 0.95 0.85 0.60 1.00 0.85 0.77 1.00 0.85 Lanes: 1.00 1.62 0.38 0.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 344 2844 665 0 3610 1615 1146 0 1615 1461 1900 1615 ------------ I --------------- II--------------- II--------------- II---------- - - - -- I Capacity Analysis Module: Vol /Sat: 0.35 0.37 0.37 0.00 0.32 0.18 0.02 O.DO 0.01 0.21 0.08 0.13 Crit Moves: .... * * ** Green /Cycle: 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.60 0.60 0.33 0.00 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 Volume /Cap: 0.59 0.62 0.62 0.00 0.52 0.29 0.07 0.00 0.03 0.62 0.24 D.39 Uniform Del: 7.4 7.6 7.6 0.0 7.0 5.8 13.7 0.0 13.5 16.9 14.5 15.4 IncremntDel: 4.4 0.6 0.6 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 2.4 0.2 0.5 InitQueuDel: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Delay /Veh: 11.8 8.2 8.2 0.0 7.2 6.0 13.8 0.0 13.6 19.3 14.7 15.9 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.DO 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Del /Veh: 11.8 8.2 8.2 0.0 7.2 6.0 13.8 0.0 13.6 19.3 14.7 15.9 LOS by Move: B A A A A A B A B B B B HCM2kAvgQ: 3 9 9 0 7 3 0 0 0 6 2 3 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ x++ a«+++ a++««++++ a«+ + +« +a « «x +«xxxaaxxx+a«xxxx «xa +a« Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to VA CONSULTING, IRVINE AM Peak Thu Oct 2, 2014 12:06:00 Page 4 -1 Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Base Volume Alternative) +«+ a+«+++++++++ x+ a« xxx+ awwxaawa axa a+aaaaa ++ + + + + + + + « + ++ + + + ++ « « + «x +xaa +xaaa a + + + +aa Intersection Y2 Average Delay (sec /veh): 2.1 Worst Case Level Of Service: B[ 13.71 Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L- T- R L- T- R L- T - R L- T- R ------------ --------------- II--------------- II-------------- -II - -' i Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 ------------ --------------- II--------------- II--------------- II--------------- I Volume Module: Base Vol: 0 976 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 172 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 0 976 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 172 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PER Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.OD 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PER Vol. : 0 976 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 172 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVOlume: 0 976 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 172 ------------ I --------------- II -_------------- II--------------- II---- ------ - - - - - I Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 6.2 FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 3.3 ------------ I --------------- II--------------- II--------------- II---------- - - - - - I Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 488 Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 584 Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 584 Volume /Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.29 ------------ I ---------------II---------------II---------------II---- Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 1.2 Control Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 13.7 LOS by Move: * * * * * * + * + a B Movement: IT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - AT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd Con Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * * * + * * * x * * * + ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx 13.7 ApproachLOS: ` * * B Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. axxxawxxxx +axx ++ +aaa + + + + ++++ +««x + +« xxxx+ axxaaaa+ as +aa «+ + + « « « «ax«xxxaaax ++ + + + + + ++ Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to VA CONSULTING, IRVINE AM Peak Thu Oct 2, 2019 12:06:00 Page 5 -1 Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Base Volume Alternative) +++++++++ + + + + + + + ++ + + +++ + +a+ax+xx «xxxxxx+ xzxxx++ xzxxx + + + + + + + + + + +++ + ++ + + +++x++ ++ ++ Intersection $3 aaxwax++ x++++++++++++++++ xaa++ xtar+ xxxaxxxxaax++ xxa « ++ + + + + + + + + ++++ +++ ++ +++ +a+ + ++ Average Delay (sec /veh): 2.6 Worst Case Level Of Service: B[ 12.81 + + + + + + + + + + + + + + ++ ++ + + +++« ++x«« xxx « «x +xxxx+xxxx+x+ xxxx ++ + + + + + + + + ++ ++ +++ ++ +++ ++++x+ Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L- T- R L- T - R L- T- R L- T- R --- -- - - - - - -- --------------- II --------- - - - - -- --------------'II Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 ------ - - ---- --------------- II --------------- II--------------- II --------------- Volume Module: Base Vol: 0 0 0 0 786 0 0 0 201 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 0 0 0 0 7B6 0 0 0 201 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 0 0 0 0 786 0 0 0 201 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 0 0 0 0 786 0 0 0 201 0 0 0 ---- '_------ I ----------- - ---II -------------- II--------------- II---------- - - - - - I Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxz xxxxx xxxx 6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Follo.UpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx ------------ I --------------- II--------------- II --------------- II --------------- I Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 393 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 660 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 660 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Volume /Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.30 xxxx xxxx xxxx ------------ I --------------- II--------------- II --------------- II ---------- - - - - - I Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 1.3 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Control Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xzxxx xxxx 12.8 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: * * * ' ' ' ' ' B Movement: IT - LTR - AT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - AT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xzxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx x Shared LOS: ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx 12.8 xxxxxx ApproachLOS: * * B Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. ++++++++++++++++++ aaaxxaa« wwa++ ww++++++++++++++++ + + + + + + + +++ + +++ + + + ++ ++ + + ++ + + ++ ++ Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to VA CONSULTING, IRVINE PM Peak Thu Oct 2, 2014 12:09:04 Scenario Report Scenario: PM Peak Command: PM Peak Volume: Default Volume Geometry: Default Geometry Impact Fee: Default Impact Fee Trip Generation: Default Trip Generation Trip Distribution: Default Trip Distribution Paths: Default Path Routes: Default Route Configuration: PM Peak Page 1 -1 Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to VA CONSULTING, IRVINE PM Peak Thu Oct 2, 2019 12:09:09 Page 2 -1 Impact Analysis Report Level Of Service Intersection Base Future Change Del/ V/ Del/ V/ in LOS Veh C LOS Veh C Y 1 B 11.6 0.602 B 11.6 0.602 + 0.000 D/V Y 2 B 13.9 0.387 B 13.9 0.387 + 0.000 D/V M 3 B 19.2 0.391 B 19.2 0.391 + 0.000 D/V Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to VA CONSULTING, IRVINE PM Peak Thu Oct 2, 2014 12:09:04 Page 3 -1 Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations Method (Base Volume Alternative) ++++++++++ aa++++++««++x««++ xx««++ x« x+ xxaax+ aaa+++ + + ++ + + ++ ++ + + + + + + + + + ++ + + + + +x + «xx Intersection M1 +++++++++++++++++++««++ xx««+ xxa«++++ xxx+ a+++ xaa++ + + ++ + + + + + + + +++ + + + + + + + + +x + + + + + ++ Cycle (sec): 60 Critical Val. /Cap.(X): 0.602 Loss Time (sec): 4 Average Delay (sec /veh): 11.6 Optimal Cycle: OPTIMIZED Level Of Service: B Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L- T - R L- T- R L- T- R L- T- R ------------ I --------------- II--------------- II --------------- II --------------- I Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 YiR: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lanes: 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 ------------ I Volume Module Base Vol: Growth Adj: Initial Bse User Adj: PHF Adj: PHF Volume: Reduct Vol: Reduced Vol PCE Adj: MLR Adj: FinalVolume 7 1.00 7 1.00 0.95 7 0 7 1.00 1.00 7 885 1.00 885 1.00 0.95 928 0 928 1.00 1.00 928 Saturation Flow Module: Sat /Lane: 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.15 0.93 Lanes: 1.00 1.70 Final Sat.: 293 2996 I - --- Capacity Analysis Vol /Sat: 0.03 Crit Moves: 174 Green /Cycle: 0.52 Volume /Cap: D.05 Uniform Del: 7.1 IncremntDel: 0.1 InitQueUDel: 0.0 Delay Adj: 1.00 Delay /Veh: 7.2 User DelAdj: 1.00 Adj Del /Veh: 7.2 LOS by Move: A HCM2kAvgQ: 0 1.00 1.00 1.00 157 1.00 157 1.00 0.95 165 0 165 1.00 1.00 165 ---------------11""""---------------- 0 1079 26 174 0 60 298 7 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0 1079 26 174 0 60 298 7 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.82 0.82 0 1129 27 223 0 77 364 9 0 0 0 0 D 0 0 0 0 1129 27 223 0 77 364 9 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0 1129 27 223 0 77 364 9 1900 1900 1900 1900 0.93 1.00 0.95 0.85 0.30 0.00 2.00 1.00 531 0 3610 1615 ---- 11 --------------- 11 Module; 0.31 0.31 0.52 0.60 10.0 0.5 0.0 1.00 10.6 1.00 10.6 B 8 0.52 0.60 10.0 0.5 0.0 1.00 10.6 1. DO 10.6 B 8 0.00 0.31 0.02 0.00 0.52 0.52 0.00 0.60 0.03 0.0 10.1 7.1 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.0 10.6 7.1 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.0 10.6 7.1 A B A D 8 0 x + ++« + + +aa + + +++ 274 1. DO 274 1.00 0.82 335 0 335 1.00 1.00 335 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 0.76 1.00 0.85 0.77 1.00 0.85 1.00 0.00 1.OD 1.00 1.00 1.00 1446 0 1615 1461 1900 1615 ----- -------- II ---------- - - - - - I 0.15 0.00 0.41 0.00 0.37 0.00 12.2 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.00 0.00 12.6 0.0 1.00 1.OD 12.6 0.0 B A 3 0 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. 0.05 0.41 0.12 10.8 0.1 0.0 1.00 10.9 1.00 10.9 B 1 0.25 0.00 0.21 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.60 0.01 0.50 13.7 10.3 13.0 1.7 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.00 1.00 1.00 15.4 10.4 13.6 1.00 1.00 1.00 15.4 10.4 13.6 B B B 6 0 5 Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to VA CONSULTING, IRVINE PM Peak Thu Oct 2, 2014 12:09:04 Page 4 -1 Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Base Volume Alternative) ++++ axax++++++«+« x+++ + « « + +«« « + + +««« + +« ««« +xxxxxxaa+x +aaa +xaaa + +xaa + +xaa + + + + + + + ++ Intersection A2 +++++++++++++++++++++++ « + + ++««« ++«« « «+ + « « +x +axxxaaax +x aaa + +aaa++a aa++aaa+a ++++ ++ Average Delay (sec /veh): 3.4 Worst Case Level Of Service: B[ 13.9] axx+ xax++ xxa+++++++++++++++++« « «++««« ++ « «« +++xx +xxxa++aaa+++x saa+x aa+++aax + + + + ++ Approach: North Bound Movement: L - T - R _ --------------- Control: Uncontrolled Rights: Include Lanes: 0 0 2 0 0 ------------ --------------- Volume Module: Base Vol: 0 796 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bee: 0 796 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 0 796 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 0 796 0 ------------ I --------------- South Bound East Bound West Bound L- T- R L- T- R L- T- R ---------------II---------------II--------------- Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Include Include Include 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 --------------- --------------- ll--------------- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 254 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 254 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 254 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 254 --------------- II-------- ---- - - -11 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 6.2 FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxzxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 3.3 ------------ I --------------- II --------------- II--------------- II--------------- 1 Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 398 Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 656 Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 656 Volume /Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.39 ------------ I --------------- II --------------- II----- ---------- il---------- - - - - - I Level Of Service Module; 2Way95thQ: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 1.8 Control Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 13.9 LOS by Move: * * * * * * * + * * * B Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT IT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx x xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx zxx x xxx xxxx xxxxx x zxx xxxx Shared LOS: * * * * * + + * * ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx * 13.9 ApproachLOS: x x + B Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. + + + « + ++ + «« « ++ xxx+ xxxxaxxxxaxxaaaa+ +aaaa++aaa +++xx + + + + +xxxxxxaa+aa +xxx + + ++ +xxx +++ Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to VA CONSULTING, IRVINE PM Peak Thu Oct 2, 2014 12:09:04 Page 5 -1 Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalixed Method (Base Volume Alternative) * * + ++ + + + + ++ «+ xxx+++ x++++ • + + + + ++• + + + +x ++ + +• * * * * + + * *x + ««x +++xxx++++ + + + ++ + + + ++ + + * ** Intersection 83 Average Delay (sec /veh): 2.5 Worst Case Level Of Service: B[ 14.21 Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L- T- R L- T- R L- T- R L- T- R ------------ --------------- II--------------- 11 --------------- ll Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 D 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 ------------ --------------- II--------------- II--------------- II--------------- 1 Volume Module: Base Vol: 0 0 0 0 962 0 0 0 201 D 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 0 0 0 0 962 0 0 0 201 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 0 0 0 0 962 0 0 0 201 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVOlume: 0 0 0 0 962 D 0 0 201 0 0 0 ------------ I --------------- II --------------- 11 --------------- II --------------- I Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 6.2 xxzxx xxxz xxxxx FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx ------------ I --------------- II----------- - - - -II --- 11 - - -- 1 Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 481 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 589 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 589 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Volume /Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.34 xxxx xxxx xxxx ------------ I --------------- II--------------- II--------------- II--------------- 1 Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 1.5 xxxx xxxx xxzxx Control Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 14.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: * * * • * * • * B • * « Movement: LT - LTR - RT IT - ITS - RT IT - LTR - RT IT - ITS - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx x xxx xxxxx xxxxx x xxx xxxxx x x xxx x xxx xxzxx xx xxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * * • * * + • x x ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx + 14.2 xxxxxx ApproachLOS: * * H Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. + + ++ + + + * + *x * *+ +xxx xxx++ xx+++++ x+++ x++****+****«++ +++x + + ++x ++++*+ + + * * ++ «x +xx+++++ Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to VA CONSULTING, IRVINE EXISTING (2014) WITH PROJECT AM /PM PEAK HOUR AM Peak Thu Oct 2, 2014 12:10:43 Scenario Report Scenario: AM Peak Command: AM Peak Volume: Default Volume Geometry: Default Geometry Impact Fee: Default Impact Fee Trip Generation: Default Trip Generation Trip Distribution: Default Trip Distribution Paths: Default Path Routes: Default Route Configuration: AM Peak Page 1 -1 Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to VA CONSULTING, IRVINE AM Peak Thu Oct 2, 2014 12:10:43 Page 2 -1 Intersection # 1 $ 2 k 3 Impact Analysis Report Level Of Service Base Del/ V/ LOS Veh C A 9.8 0.634 A 13.9 0.298 D 13.1 0.322 l ture Change Del/ V/ in LOS Veh C A 9.8 0.634 + 0.000 D/V B 13.9 0.298 + 0.000 D/V D 13.1 0.322 + 0.000 D/V Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to VA CONSULTING, IRVINE AM Peak Thu Oct 2, 2014 12:10:43 Page 3 -1 Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 ROM Operations Method (Base Volume Alternative) Volume Module Base Vol: 98 859 209 0 1069 265 14 0 10 264 127 179 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 98 859 209 0 1069 265 14 0 10 264 127 179 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.65 0.85 0.85 PHF Volume: 122 1068 260 0 1147 284 26 0 18 311 149 211 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 D 0 0 Reduced Vol: 122 1068 260 0 1147 284 26 D 18 311 149 211 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVOlume: 122 1068 260 0 1147 284 26 0 18 311 149 211 ------------ --------------- II--------------- II--------------- I --------------- Saturation Flow Module: Sat /Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.18 0.92 0.92 1.00 0.95 0.85 0.60 1.00 0.85 0.77 1.00 0.85 Lanes: 1.00 1.61 0.39 0.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 336 2819 606 0 3610 1615 1148 0 1615 1461 1900 1615 ------------ I --------------- II--------------- II--------------- II--------------- I Capacity Analysis Module: Vol /Sat: 0.36 0.38 0.38 0.00 0.32 0.18 0.02 0.00 0.01 0.21 0.08 0.13 Crit Moves: ** Green /Cycle: 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.60 0.60 0.34 O.OD 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 Volume /Cap: 0.61 0.63 0.63 0.00 0.53 0.29 0.07 0.00 0.03 0.63 0.23 0.39 Uniform Del: 7.6 7.8 7.8 0.0 7.1 5.9 13.6 0.0 13.4 16.8 14.4 15.2 IncremntDel: 5.2 0.6 0.6 0.0 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 2.7 0.2 0.5 InitQueuDel: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Delay /Veh: 12.8 8.5 B.5 0.0 7.4 6.1 13.6 0.0 13.4 19.5 14.6 15.7 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Del /Veh: 12.8 8.5 8.5 0.0 7.4 6.1 13.6 0.0 13.4 19.5 14.6 15.7 LOB by Move: B A A A A A B A B B B B HCM2kAVgQ: 3 9 9 0 7 3 0 0 0 6 2 3 ++++ x+ aaaa«« xax++«««+++« x+++«++«++ a+++++ r++++++++ a + + ++aaa +xaaa « + +a ++ + + + + +« + ++ + ++ Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to VA CONSULTING, IRVINE Intersection S1 +++ rrr++++ r+«++ r++ r++ r+ r++ rr++++ rrr+ rrr++ r+++«+ rrr + +x + + + ++r +r + + + +rr+ + +rr +rr + ++ +r Cycle (sec): 60 Critical Vol. /Cap.(X): 0.634 Loss Time (sec): 4 Average Delay (sec /veh): 9.8 Optimal Cycle: 28 Level Of Service: A Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L- T- R L- T - R L- T - R L - T- R ------------ I --------------- Control: II--------------- Permitted II --------------- II ---------- Permitted Permitted - - - - - � Permitted Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y +R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lanes: 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 Volume Module Base Vol: 98 859 209 0 1069 265 14 0 10 264 127 179 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 98 859 209 0 1069 265 14 0 10 264 127 179 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.65 0.85 0.85 PHF Volume: 122 1068 260 0 1147 284 26 0 18 311 149 211 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 D 0 0 Reduced Vol: 122 1068 260 0 1147 284 26 D 18 311 149 211 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVOlume: 122 1068 260 0 1147 284 26 0 18 311 149 211 ------------ --------------- II--------------- II--------------- I --------------- Saturation Flow Module: Sat /Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.18 0.92 0.92 1.00 0.95 0.85 0.60 1.00 0.85 0.77 1.00 0.85 Lanes: 1.00 1.61 0.39 0.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 336 2819 606 0 3610 1615 1148 0 1615 1461 1900 1615 ------------ I --------------- II--------------- II--------------- II--------------- I Capacity Analysis Module: Vol /Sat: 0.36 0.38 0.38 0.00 0.32 0.18 0.02 0.00 0.01 0.21 0.08 0.13 Crit Moves: ** Green /Cycle: 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.60 0.60 0.34 O.OD 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 Volume /Cap: 0.61 0.63 0.63 0.00 0.53 0.29 0.07 0.00 0.03 0.63 0.23 0.39 Uniform Del: 7.6 7.8 7.8 0.0 7.1 5.9 13.6 0.0 13.4 16.8 14.4 15.2 IncremntDel: 5.2 0.6 0.6 0.0 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 2.7 0.2 0.5 InitQueuDel: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Delay /Veh: 12.8 8.5 B.5 0.0 7.4 6.1 13.6 0.0 13.4 19.5 14.6 15.7 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Del /Veh: 12.8 8.5 8.5 0.0 7.4 6.1 13.6 0.0 13.4 19.5 14.6 15.7 LOB by Move: B A A A A A B A B B B B HCM2kAVgQ: 3 9 9 0 7 3 0 0 0 6 2 3 ++++ x+ aaaa«« xax++«««+++« x+++«++«++ a+++++ r++++++++ a + + ++aaa +xaaa « + +a ++ + + + + +« + ++ + ++ Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to VA CONSULTING, IRVINE AM Peak Thu Oct 2, 2014 12:10:43 Page 4 -1 Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalixed Method (Base Volume Alternative) Intersection %2 Average Delay (sec /veh): 2.0 Worst Case Level Of Service: B[ 13.9] Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L- T- R L- T- R L- T - R L - T- R ------------ --------------- II--------------- II--------------- II---------- - - - - - I Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 ------------ --------------- II--------------- II--------------- II---------- - - - - - I Volume Module: Base Vol: 0 994 0 0 0 0 0 0 D 0 0 172 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bee: 0 994 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 172 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 0 994 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 172 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 0 994 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 172 ------------ I --------------- II --------------- II--------------- II ---------- - - - - - I Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 6.2 FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 3.3 ------------ I--------------- II--------------- II--------------- II---------- - - - - -1 Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 497 Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 577 Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 577 Volume /Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.30 ------------ I --------------- II--------------- II--------------- II---------- - - - - - I Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx zxxx 1.2 Control Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 13.9 LOS by Move: * ' * * ' ' ' * ' * * B Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT IT - LTR - AT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxaxx x x x x x x x x xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx 13.9 ApproachLOS: ` B Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. +xxaa «xxa« xxx++++ a++ xa+«++ a« x+ xa« x« x++++«++++«+++ + +a «xx +aa +x+aa «x+aa + +xaaa ++aaa+ Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to VA CONSULTING, IRVINE AM Peak Thu Oct 2, 2014 12:10:43 Page 5 -1 Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Base Volume Alternative) Intersection 83 Average Delay (sec /veh): 2.7 Worst Case Level Of Service: B[ 13.1] +++ + « +++ «x «+ +x « + + + + ++ + + + + + + + ++ xxx+ xxx++ xx«+++ x«+ x + +«« «+ +« « « ++ + ++ « « + + + + + + + ++ + + + ++ Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L- T - R L- T - R L- T - R L- T- R ------------ --- - - - - -- ----- II--------------- II--------------- II---------- - - - - -I Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 ------------ --------------- II--------------- II--------------- II---------- - - - - - I Volume Module: Base Vol: 0 0 0 0 805 0 0 0 210 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 0 0 0 0 805 0 0 0 210 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 0 0 0 0 805 0 0 0 210 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 0 0 0 0 805 0 0 0 210 0 0 0 ------------ I --------------- II_-------------- II--------------- II---------- - - - - - I Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxx xx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 3.3 xxxx. xxxx xxxxx ------------ I --------------- ll --------------- II --------------- II ---------- - - - - - � Capacity Module Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 403 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 652 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 652 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Volume /Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.32 xxxx xxxx xxxx ------------ I --------------- II --------------- II --------------- II ---------- - - - - - I Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 1.4 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Control Del:zxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 13.1 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: * ' ' ' ' « + B + + + Movement: IT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT IT - LTR - RT IT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd Conpel:xxzxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx x xxxxx Shared LOS: ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx k 13.1 xxxxxx ApproachLOS: * * B ' Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. + + + +x ++ + + + ++ xxx + + +x+ +xxxx +xx «xxxx+ xxxx++++ x++++++ +xx +x +x + +x +x + + +x + + « + + + + + + + + + + +x Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to VA CONSULTING, IRVINE PM Peak Thu Oct 2, 2014 12:12:08 Scenario Report Scenario: PM Peak Command: PM Peak Volume: Default Volume Geometry: Default Geometry Impact Fee: Default Impact Fee Trip Generation: Default Trip Generation Trip Distribution: Default Trip Distribution Paths: Default Path Routes: Default Route Configuration: PM Peak Page 1 -1 Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to VA CONSULTING, IRVINE PM Peak Thu Oct 21 2014 12:12:08 Page 2 -1 Impact Analysis Report Level Of Service Intersection Base Future Change Del/ V/ Del/ V/ in LOS Veh C LOS Veh C i 1 B 11.8 0.616 B 11.8 0.616 + 0.000 D/V 2 B 14.0 0.391 B 14.D 0.391 + 0.000 D/V 3 B 14.8 0.368 B 14.8 0.368 + 0.000 D/V Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2009 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to VA CONSULTINGr IRVINE PM Peak Thu Oct 2, 2014 12:12:08 Page 3 -1 Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations Method (Base Volume Alternative) Intersection Y1 + x++++++ xxx+ aa++«++ a«++++++++++ x++++++++++++ x+ a+« xx++a««++ + +« ++ + + + + + + ++ + + +++x+ ++ Cycle (sec): 60 Critical Vol. /Cap.(X): 0.616 Loss Time (sec): 4 Average Delay (sec /veh): 11.8 Optimal Cycle: 27 Level Of Service: B Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L- T- R L- T- R L- T- R L- T- R ------------ I --------------- Control: II--------------- Permitted II --------------- Permitted II Permitted ---------- - - - - - I Permitted Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y +R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lanes: 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 -I Volume Module Base Vol: 7 891 165 0 1089 26 174 0 60 310 7 274 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 7 891 165 0 1089 26 174 0 60 310 7 274 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.82 0.82 0.82 PHF Volume: 7 934 173 0 1139 27 223 0 77 379 9 335 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 7 934 173 0 1139 27 223 0 77 379 9 335 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 7 934 173 0 1139 27 223 0 77 379 9 335 ------------ --------------- II--------------- II--------------- II---------- - - - - - I Saturation Flow Module: Sat /Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.15 0.93 0.93 1.00 0.95 0.85 0.76 1.00 0.85 0.77 1.00 0.85 Lanes: 1.00 1.69 0.31 0.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 281 2976 551 0 3610 1615 1446 0 1615 1461 1900 1615 ------------I---------------II---------------II---------------II- Capacity Analysis Module: Vol /Sat: 0.03 0.31 0.31 0.00 0.32 0.02 0.15 0.00 0.05 0.26 0.00 0.21 Crit Moves: "" ' Green /Cycle: 0.51 0.51 0.51 0.00 0.51 0.51 0.42 0.00 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 Volume /Cap: 0.05 0.61 0.61 0.00 0.62 0.03 0.37 0.00 0.11 0.62 0.01 0.49 Uniform Del: 7.3 10.4 10.4 0.0 10.4 7.3 11.9 0.0 10.6 13.6 10.1 12.7 IncremntCel: 0.1 0.6 0.6 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.1 1.9 0.0 0.6 InitQueuDel: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Delay /Veh: 7.5 11.0 11.0 0.0 11.1 7.3 12.3 0.0 10.6 15.5 10.1 13.2 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Del /Veh: 7.5 11.0 11.0 0.0 11.1 7.3 12.3 0.0 10.6 15.5 10.1 13.2 LOS by Move: A B B A B A B A B B B B HCM2kAVgQ: 0 8 8 0 9 0 3 0 1 6 0 5 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to VA CONSULTING, IRVINE PM Peak Thu Oct 2, 2014 12:12:08 Page 4 -1 Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Base Volume Alternative) Intersection M2 Average Delay (sec /veh): 3.4 Worst Case Level Of Service: B[ 14.0) Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound west Bound Movement: L- T- R L- T - R L- T - R L- T- R ------------ I --------------- II--------------- II --------------- 11 --------------- I Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 ____________I Volume Module Base Vol: 0 810 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 0 810 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PRE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 0 810 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 FinalVOlume: 0 810 0 0 ____________ I --------------- I Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx ____________ I______________ _11____ Capacity Module: Cn£lict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx ---------- II--------------- II--------------- I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 254 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 254 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 254 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 254 ---------- II--------------- II--------------- I xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 6.2 xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 3.3 __________11_______________ II _______________I xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 405 xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 650 Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 650 Volume /Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.39 ------------ I --------------- II --------------- IIXX---- - - - - -- %X11 --------------- I Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 1.9 Control Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 14.0 LOS by Move: * ' ' * ' * * * B Movement: IT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT IT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx x z x xxxx xxxxx xxxxx z x x z xxxx xxxxx xxxxx x xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: Approach Del: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx 14.0 ApproachLOS: ' * * B Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to VA CONSULTING, IRVINE PM Peak Thu Oct 2, 2014 12:12:08 Page 5 -1 Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Base Volume Alternative) a a«+a aa+ aaa++ a+ aaxx + + + « + +x + ««« «a +aa « + +aa++aaa«x+ xxzxx + + +a «« « « «aa « + +aa+ + +aa ++a +x+ Intersection S3 a++++ x++ aa+ x+ x+ a«« x«««++++a a«++ aaaa++ aa+++++««+++ x « + «« + +« «««aa+a + ++aa + +aa« + +x + ++ Average Delay (sec /veh): 2.6 Worst Case Level Of Service: B[ 14.81 Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L- T- R L- T- R L- T- R L- T- R ----- - - - - - -- --------------- II--------------- 11--------------- II---- ------ - - - - -I Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 ------ - - - - -- --------------- II--------------- 11 --------------- II--------------- I Volume Module: Base Vol: 0 0 0 0 988 0 0 0 213 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bee: 0 0 0 0 988 0 0 0 213 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 0 0 0 0 988 0 0 0 213 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 0 0 0 0 988 0 0 0 213 0 0 0 ------------ I --------------- II--------------- II ---------- _---- II---------- - - - - - I Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx ------------ I --------------- II--------------- II------------ - -II Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 494 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 579 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 579 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Volume /Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.37 xxxx xxxx xxxx ------------ I --------------- II----------__--- II---------- --- -- II---------- - - - - - I Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: xxxx xxxx xxzxx xxxx xxxx xxzxx xxxx xxxx 1.7 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Control Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxzxx xxxxx xxxx 14.8 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: ' * ' • • * * • B ' • ' Movement: IT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT IT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx x x x x xxxx xxxxx xxz x xzx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * * " • " * " * " ' ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx 14.8 xxxxxx ApproachLOS: " * B + aa++ xx+ a++++« a+«+«««++++ a« x+ aaax+++++ a++ x+««++«« + + + + «« « « ««« + «+ +«aa+ ««aa+xa+x++a Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to VA CONSULTING, IRVINE BASELINE 2015 AM /PM PEAK HOUR AM Peak Thu Oct 2, 2014 12:22:28 Scenario Report Scenario: AM Peak Command: AM Peak Volume: Default Volume Geometry: Default Geometry Impact Fee: Default Impact Fee Trip Generation: Default Trip Generation Trip Distribution: Default Trip Distribution Paths: Default Path Routes: Default Route Configuration: AM Peak Page 1 -1 Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to VA CONSULTING, IRVINE AM Peak Thu Oct 2, 2014 12:22:26 Page 2 -1 Intersection # 1 # 2 # 3 Impact Analysis Report Level Of Service Base Del/ V/ LOS Veh C A 9.7 0.631 B 13.9 0.304 B 13.0 0.314 Future Change Del/ V/ in LOS Veh C A 9.7 0.631 + 0.000 D/V B 13.9 0.304 + 0.000 D/V B 13.0 0.314 + 0.000 D/V Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to VA CONSULTING, IRVINE AM Peak Thu Oct 2, 2014 12:22:28 Page 3 -1 Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HUM Operations Method (Base Volume Alternative) Intersection #1 + + + +++ aaa +x+ + + «aa+x + + +xxxaa+ +aaa ++ +aaa + +aa + ++ aaaa +xaaa «xx+« « + +++ « « + + + ««+ + + + + + + ++ Cycle (sec): 60 Critical Vol. /Cap.(x): 0.631 Loss Time (sec): 4 Average Delay (sec /veh): 9.7 Optimal Cycle: 28 Level Of Service: A Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L- T- R L - T- R L - T- R L- T- R ------------ I --------------- II--------------- II --------------- II--------- - - - - -- I Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y +R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lanes: 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 ------------ I --------------- II--------------- II--------------- II---------- - - - - - I Volume Module: Base Vol: 100 868 203 0 1083 270 14 0 10 260 130 183 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial ese: 100 868 203 0 1083 270 14 0 10 260 130 183 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.85 0.85 0.85 PHF volume: 124 1080 252 0 1162 290 26 0 18 306 153 215 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 124 1080 252 0 1162 290 26 0 18 306 153 215 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ML£ Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 124 1080 252 0 1162 290 26 0 18 306 153 215 ------------ --------------- II-------_------- II--------------- II---------- - - - - - I Saturation Flow Module: Sat /Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.17 0.92 0.92 1.00 0.95 0.85 0.60 1.00 0.85 0.77 1.00 0.85 Lanes: 1.00 1.62 0.38 0.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 O.OD 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 331 2844 665 0 3610 1615 1134 0 1615 1461 1900 1615 ------------ I --------------- II--------------- II--------------- II---------- - - - - - I Capacity Analysis Module: Vo1/Sat: 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.00 0.32 0.18 0.02 0.00 0.01 0.21 0.08 0.13 Crit Moves: Green /Cycle: 0.60 D.60 0.60 0.00 0.60 0.60 0.33 0.00 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 Volume /Cap: 0.63 0.63 0.63 0.00 0.54 0.30 0.07 0.00 0.03 0.63 0.24 0.40 Uniform Del: 7.6 7.7 7.7 0.0 7.0 5.8 13.7 0.0 13.6 16.9 14.6 15.5 Incremnt Del: 6.1 0.6 0.6 0.0 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 2.7 0.2 0.5 InitQueuDel: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 O.DO 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Delay /Veh: 13.8 8.3 8.3 0.0 7.3 6.0 13.8 0.0 13.6 19.6 14.8 16.0 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.DO 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Del /Veh: 13.8 8.3 8.3 0.0 7.3 6.0 13.8 0.0 13.6 19.6 14.8 16.0 LOS by Move: B A A A A A B A B B B B HCM2kAvgQ: 3 9 9 0 7 3 0 0 0 6 2 3 a«axxx.aaxx +aa +x ++ + + + ++x +a +aaaa+ + ++ aaa+ aaaa +xx aaxa ++aaa«a +aaaaxaaax ++aaa + +a +aaaa Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. ax «x++ + + « « ++ + + « + ++ + + + + ++ aaa +xaaa+ xaaaa« xxa« x+ xx «axa «xxxa«xxa : ««xa : « «xxaaxxxxxx as Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to VA CONSULTING, IRVINE AM Peak Thu Oct 2, 2019 12:22:28 Page 9 -1 Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Base Volume Alternative) Intersection S2 Average Delay (sec /veh): 2.1 Worst Case Level Of Service: B[ 13.9] Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L- T- R L- T- R L- T- R L- T- R ------------ --------------- --------------- --------------- 11 --------------- Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 D 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 ------------ --------------- II--------------- II--------------- II------ ---- - - - -- I Volume Module: Base Vol: 0 996 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 175 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 0 996 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 175 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 0 996 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 175 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 0 996 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 D 175 ------------ I --------------- II__------------- II--------------- II---------- - - - -- I Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 6.2 FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 3.3 ------------ I ----------__-- II--------------- II--------------- II---------- - - - -- I Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 998 Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 576 Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 576 Volume /Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.3D ------------ I --------------- II--------------- II_------ -------- II---------- - - - - - I Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 1.3 Control Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 13.9 LOS by Move: * ' * * « + + + + + + B Movement: IT - LTR - RT IT - LTR - RT IT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - AT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx x x x x x xxx z xxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx x xxx Shared LOS: Approach Del: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx 13.9 ApproachLOS: * ' * B Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. x+++++++ x ++ + +++ ++ + ++ + + ++++ ++ ++ + + + + ++xx++ xxx++ xx+ x ++ + + + +x « +x +x « + + + + +x + + + + + + + + + + ++ Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to VA CONSULTING, IRVINE AM Peak Thu Oct 2, 2014 12:22:28 Page 5 -1 Level Of Service Computation Report 200D RCM Unsignalixed Method (Base Volume Alternative) + + + +aa++ + +a aaa+aa +aaa+ aaa+ xaa ax+ x+ aaxx+«++++««+++ + « « + + +««x ++ « « « + ++«w + + + + +w + +wa ++ Intersection i3 +++++ aa+ a++ aaa+ a++ as + +aaa+x+aaxa +aaa+xaaaxx+xxxxxa .axx +a «xxxaaaxx+a +axxa +«a +axxx Average Delay (sec /veh): 2.6 Worst Case Level Of Service: B[ 13.0] axxx + + + +www + + +w +w+ + + ++ + + +aa «aaa++ aaa + ++ aaa «as++ +aaa + + «aa aaaaa+ + «aa + + «+ +aa ++ Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L- T- R L- T - R L- T - R L- T- R ------------ --------------- II--------------- II--------------- II---------- - - - -- I Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 ------------ --------------- II--------------- II--------------- II---------- - - - - - I Volume Module: Base Vol: 0 0 0 0 802 0 0 0 205 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 0 0 0 0 802 0 0 0 205 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PUP Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PUP Volume: 0 0 0 0 802 0 0 0 205 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FSnalVolume: 0 0 0 0 802 0 0 0 205 0 0 0 ------------ I --------------- II --------------- II--------------- II---------- - - - - - I Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx zxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx ------------ I --------------- II --------------- II --------------- II ---------- - - - - - I Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx. xxxx xxxx 401 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 653 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 653 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Volume /Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.31 xxxx xxxx xxxx Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx zxxxx xxxx xxxx 1.3 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Control Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 13.0 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: ' * * * ' * ' ' B Movement: LT - LTR - AT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:zxxxx z x x x x x x x xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx 13.D xxxxxx ApproachLOS: * ` B ' Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. +.axxxax«xxaxx ax xaaxxaaxxxxaxxxx :x« xxxx xxxx: a« xxa +++ +xaax + +xaaax ++a. + + +a +«+ + +a ++ Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to VA CONSULTING, IRVINE PM Peak Thu Oct 2, 2014 12:23:43 Scenario Report Scenario: PM Peak Command: PM Peak Volume: Default Volume Geometry: Default Geometry Impact Fee: Default Impact Fee Trip Generation: Default Trip Generation Trip Distribution: Default Trip Distribution Paths: Default Path Routes: Default Route Configuration: PM Peak Page 1 -1 Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to VA CONSULTING, IRVINE PM Peak Thu Oct 2, 2014 12:23:43 Page 2 -1 Intersection 8 1 B 2 8 3 Impact Analysis Report Level Of Service Base Del/ V/ LOS Veh C B 11.7 0.614 B 14.2 0.399 B 14.5 0.352 Future Change Del/ V/ in LOS Veh C B 11.7 0.614 + 0.000 D/V B 14.2 0.399 + 0.000 D/V B 14.5 0.352 + 0.000 D/V Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to VA CONSULTING, IRVINE PM Peak Thu Oct 2, 2014 12:23:43 Page 3 -1 Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations Method (Base Volume Alternative) Intersection kl Cycle (sec): 60 Critical Vol. /Cap.(X): 0.614 Loss Time (sec): 4 Average Delay (sec /veh): 11.7 Optimal Cycle: 27 Level Of Service: B Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L- T- R L- T- R L- T- R L- T- R --------------------------- II--------------- II--------------- II---------- - - - --1 Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y +R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lanes: 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 ------------ --------------- II--------------- II--------------- II---------- - - - - - I Volume Module: Base Vol: 7 903 160 0 1101 27 177 0 61 304 7 279 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bee: 7 903 160 0 1101 27 177 0 61 304 7 279 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.82 0.82 0.82 PHF Volume: 7 947 168 0 1152 28 227 0 78 372 9 341 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 7 947 168 0 1152 28 227 0 78 372 9 341 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 7 947 168 0 1152 28 227 0 78 372 9 341 --------------------------- II--------------- II--------------- II---------- - - - --1 Saturation Flow Module: Sat /Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.15 0.93 0.93 1.00 0.95 0.85 0.76 1.00 0.85 0.77 1.OD 0.85 Lanes: 1.00 1.70 0.30 0.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 277 2996 531 0 3610 1615 1446 0 1615 1461 1900 1615 ------------ I ---------------II---------------II---------------II- Capacity Analysis Nodule: Vol /Sat: 0.03 0.32 0.32 0.00 0.32 0.02 0.16 0.00 0.05 0.25 0.00 D.21 Crit Moves: Green /Cycle: 0.52 0.52 0.52 0.00 0.52 0.52 0.41 0.00 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41 Volume /Cap: 0.05 0.61 0.61 0.00 0.61 0.03 0.38 0.00 0.12 0.61 0.01 0.51 Uniform Del: 7.1 10.1 10.1 0.0 10.2 7.1 12.2 0.0 10.8 13.8 10.3 13.1 Incremnt Del: 0.1 0.6 D.6 0.0 D.6 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.1 1.9 0.0 0.7 InitQueuDel: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.OD 1.00 Delay /Veh: 7.3 10.7 10.7 0.0 10.8 7.1 12.6 0.0 10.9 15.7 10.4 13.7 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.OD 1.00 Adj Del /Veh: 7.3 10.7 1D.7 0.0 10.8 7.1 12.6 0.0 10.9 15.7 10.4 13.7 LOS by Move: A B B A B A B A B B B B HCM2kAvgQ: 0 8 8 0 9 0 3 0 1 6 0 5 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to VA CONSULTING, IRVINE PM Peak Thu Oct 2, 2019 12:23:93 Page 9 -1 Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 NCM Unsignalized Method (Base Volume Alternative) + +ar ++ +aaa +xaaa+ax + + + + + + + + + + +wr +raw aaaa +aaa+x aaa« «xxaaxx + + +wwxrr ++aaaar + +aaaa« ++ Intersection ;2 ++++ ra rraa+++aa sa r++ aa«++ aa+ xx+++ r+r++++++++ wraa aw +aaa+x +aa««xxx +aw + + +w + + + + +rrww Average Delay (sec /veh): 3.9 Worst Case Level Of Service: B[ 19.2] Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L- T- R L- T- R L- T - R L- T- R ------------ --------------- II--------------- II--------------- II--------------- 1 Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 ------------ --------------- II--------------- II-------- --- --"II Volume Module: Base Vol: 0 812 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 259 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bar: 0 812 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 259 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 0 812 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 259 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 0 812 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 259 ------------ I --------------- II-----------_--- II--------------- II---------- - - - - - I Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 6.2 FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 3.3 ------------ I --------------- II--------------- II--------------- II--------------- 1 Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 906 Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 699 Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 699 Volume /Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.90 ------------ I --------------- II--------------- II--------------- II--------------- 1 Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 1.9 Control Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 19.2 LOS by Move: * ' ' ' * * * ' ' ' ' B Movement: IT - LTR - AT LT - LTR - RT IT - LTR - AT IT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd Connel:xxxxx x x x x x x x x xxxx xxxxx xxxxx x : := xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx 19.2 ApproachLOS: * * ' B r +r + +a + + +wr aaa+ + +x aaa« xxx« xx+++++++++ a +r + + + + + + + + +rw+rrawwrar++++aaa+x aa+x++x +x as Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to VA CONSULTING, IRVINE PM Peak Thu Oct 2, 2014 12:23:43 Page 5 -1 Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Base Volume Alternative) +++++ a+++ a++++ a+« aaxx«+++++++++++++++++++ aa+++++ a « + +xaaax + + ««+ + + + +++ + + + +++ + + + +aa Intersection Y3 Average Delay (sec /veh): 2.5 Worst Case Level Of Service: B[ 14.5] Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L- T- R L- T- R L- T- R L- T- R ------------ --------------- II--------------- II--------------- II---------- - - - - - I Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 ------------ --------------- II------_-------- II--------------- II---------- - - - -- I Volume Module: Base Vol: 0 0 0 0 981 0 0 0 205 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 0 0 0 0 981 0 0 0 205 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PUP Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 0 0 0 0 981 0 0 0 205 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 0 0 0 0 981 0 0 0 205 0 0 0 ------------ I --------------- II--------------- II--------------- II---------- - - - - - I Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim:xxxxx xzxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx ------------ I --------------- II --------------- II--------------- II--------------- I Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 491 xxxx xzxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: xxxx xzxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 582 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 582 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Volume /Cap: xxxx xxxx xzxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.35 xxxx xxxx xxxx ------------ I --------------- II --------------- II--------------- II---------- - - - - - I Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: xxxx xzxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 1.6 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Control Del:xxxxx xxzx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 14.5 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: * * * ' ' ' * B Movement: LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - AT LT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xzxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx x xxx x x xxx x x xxx xxxx xxxxx xx xxx xxxx x x xxx x x xxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: Approach Del: xxxxxx xxxxxx 14.5 xxxxxx ApproachLOS: * * B ' Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to VA CONSULTING, IRVINE BASELINE 2015 WITH PROJECT AM /PM PEAK HOUR AM Peak Thu Oct 2, 2014 12:29:36 Scenario Report Scenario: AM Peak Command: AM Peak Volume: Default Volume Geometry: Default Geometry Impact Fee: Default Impact Fee Trip Generation: Default Trip Generation Trip Distribution: Default Trip Distribution Paths: Default Path Routes: Default Route Configuration: AM Peak Page 1 -1 Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to VA CONSULTING, IRVINE AM Peak Thu Oct 2, 2014 12:29:36 Impact Analysis Report Level Of Service Intersection Base Del/ V/ LOS Veh C # 1 A 10.0 0.646 # 2 B 14.1 0.307 # 3 B 13.3 0.332 Page 2 -1 Future Change Del/ V/ in LOS Veh C A 10.0 0.646 + 0.000 ON B 14.1 0.307 + 0.000 D/V B 13.3 0.332 + 0.000 D/V Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to VA CONSULTING, IRVINE AM Peak Thu Oct 2, 2014 12:29:36 Page 3 -1 Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations Method (Base volume Alternative) Intersection 81 + +x+a +«xx +a + «++ + + +«+ aaa +++ aaa ++ aaa +aaaxxxa w++ x++ w + + + ++ + + ++ +«+ + + « +++ + ++++ +++ + ++++ Cycle (sec): 60 Critical Vol. /Cap.(X): 0.646 Loss Time (sec): 4 Average Delay (sec /Veh): 10.0 Optimal Cycle: 29 Level Of Service: A + + +++ +xxxxww +x « + + + +++ + +a ++ aaa++ aaa++ aaaa+ a+ a++ aa+ « «x + + + «x+ «« + ++ + + + + + + + + + + +++++++ Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L- T - R L- T- R L- T- R L- T- R Control: Rights: Min. Green: Y +R: Lanes: Volume Mod. Base Vol: Growth Adj: Initial Bse User Adj: PHF Adj: PHF Volume: Reduct Vol: Reduced Vol PCE Adj: MLF Adj: FinalVolume --------------- Permitted Include 0 0 0 4.0 4.0 4.0 1 0 1 1 0 --------------- Le: 100 876 213 1.00 1.00 1.00 100 876 213 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.80 0.80 O.BO 124 1090 265 0 0 0 124 1090 265 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 124 1090 265 Saturation Flow Module --------------- II--------------- 11 --------------- I Permitted Permitted Permitted Inclutle Include Include 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 0 0 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 --------------- II--------------- II--------------- I 0 1090 270 14 0 10 269 130 183 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0 1090 270 14 0 10 269 130 1B3 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.85 0.85 0.85 0 1170 290 26 0 18 316 153 215 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1170 290 26 0 18 316 153 215 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0 1170 290 26 0 18 316 153 215 --------------- II--------------- II--------------- I Sat /Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.17 0.92 0.92 1.00 0.95 0.85 0.60 1.00 0.85 0.77 1.00 0.85 Lanes: 1.00 1.61 0.39 0.00 2.00 1.00 1.00.0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 325 2820 686 0 3610 1615 1136 0 1615 1461 1900 1615 ------------ I --------------- II--------------- II--------------- II--------------- I Capacity Analysis Module: Vol /Sat: 0.38 0.39 0.39 0.00 0.32 0.18 0.02 0.00 0.01 0.22 0.08 0.13 Crit Moves: Green /Cycle: 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.60 0.60 0.34 0.00 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 Volume /Cap: 0.64 0.65 0.65 0.00 0.54 0.30 0.07 0.00 0.03 0.65 0.24 0.40 Uniform Del: 7.9 7.9 7.9 0.0 7.2 5.9 13.6 0.0 13.4 16.9 14.4 15.3 Incremnt Del: 7.0 0.7 0.7 0.0 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.2 D.5 InitQueuDel: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 D.0 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Delay /Veh: 14.9 8.6 8.6 0.0 7.5 6.1 13.6 0.0 13.4 19.9 14.6 15.8 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.OD 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Del /Veh: 14.9 8.6 8.6 0.0 7.5 6.1 13.6 0.0 13.4 19.9 14.6 15.8 LOS by Move: B A A A A A B A B B B B HCM2kAvgQ: 3 10 10 0 7 3 0 0 0 6 2 3 +++ a++++ a+++ a++ a++ aaaa« xa+« xx++«+++++«++ aa+ +aa+aa + +a+ ++ + +a + + «+a + + +a + ++ +« +a aaa + ++ Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. Traf£iz 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to VA CONSULTING, IRVINE AM Peak Thu Oct 2, 2014 12:29:36 Page 4 -1 Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Base Volume Alternative) Intersection f2 Average Delay (sec /veh): 2.1 Worst Case Level Of Service: B[ 14.1] Approach: North Hound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L- T- R L- T- R L- T- R L- T- R ------------ I --------------- II--------------- II --------------- II --------------- I Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Inclutle Inclutle Lanes: 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Volume Module Base Vol: 0 1014 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 175 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bee: 0 1014 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 175 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 0 1014 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 175 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVOlume: 0 1014 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 175 Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 6.2 FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 3.3 ------------ I --------------- II --------------- II --------------- II ---------- - - - - - I Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 507 Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 570 Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 570 Volume /Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.31 ------------ I --------------- II --------------- II --------------- II ---------- - - - - - I Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 1.3 Control Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 14.1 LOS by Move: * * ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' B Movement: IT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - AT LT - LTR - AT LT - LTR - AT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LAS: * * * * * * + + + + + + Approach Del: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx 14.1 ApproachLOS: ' * B Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to VA CONSULTING, IRVINE AM Peak Thu Oct 2, 2014 12:29:36 Page 5 -1 Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Base Volume Alternative) Intersection f3 Average Delay (sec /veh): 2.8 Worst Case Level Of Service: B[ 13.3] Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L- T- R L - T - R L- T - R L- T- R ------------ Control: I --------------- II Uncontrolled --------------- 11 Uncontrolled --------------- 11 Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 Volume Module: Base Vol: 0 0 0 0 821 0 0 0 214 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bee: 0 0 0 0 821 0 0 0 214 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 0 0 0 0 821 0 0 0 214 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 0 0 0 0 821 0 0 0 214 0 0 0 ------------ I --------------- II--------------- 11--------------- --------------- Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xzxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xzxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxzx ---------- - - I --------------- 11 --------------- H --------------- 11 --------------- I Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 411 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxzxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 646 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxzx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 646 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Volume /Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.33 xxxx xxxx xxxx ------------ I --------------- II --------------- II --------------- II --------------- I Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 1.4 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Control Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxzxx xxxxx xxxx 13.3 xxzxx xxxx xxzxx LOS by Move: * * * * « * * * B Movement: LT - LTR - AT IT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT IT - LTR - AT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx x x x x z x x x xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: + * * * * + + + + + + + ApproachDel: xxxxxx xxxxxx 13.3 xxxxxx ApproachLOS: * B Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. + ++ ++ + ++ +++ + +++x++«+ +«x++xx++ xxx++« x+++++++++++++ ++ + +« + + + + + + ++++ ++ + +« +++ + + + + + + ++ Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to VA CONSULTING, IRVINE PM Peak Thu Oct 2, 2019 12:32:59 Scenario Report Scenario: PM Peak Command: PM Peak Volume: Default Volume Geometry: Default Geometry Impact Fee: Default Impact Fee Trip Generation: Default Trip Generation Trip Distribution: Default Trip Distribution Paths: Default Path Routes: Default Route Configuration: PM Peak Page 1 -1 Traffiz 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to VA CONSULTING, IRVINE PM Peak Intersection # 1 # 2 # 3 Thu Oct 2, 2014 12:32:59 Impact Analysis Report Level Of Service Base Del/ V/ LOS Veh C B 12.0 0.628 B 14.3 0.403 C 15.1 0.379 Page 2 -1 Future Change Del/ V/ in LOS Veh C B 12.0 0.628 + D.000 D/V B 14.3 0.403 + 0.000 D/V C 15.1 0.379 + 0.000 D/V Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to VA CONSULTING, IRVINE PM Peak Thu Oct 2, 2014 12:32:59 Page 3 -1 Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Operations Method (Base Volume Alternative) Intersection 81 Cycle (sec(: 60 Critical Vol. /Cap.(%): 0.628 Loss Time (sec): 4 Average Delay (sec /veh): 12.0 Optimal Cycle: 28 Level Of Service: B Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound Nest Bound Movement: L- T - R L- T- R L- T- R L- T- R ------------ --------------- II--------------- II--------------- II---------- - - - - - I Control: Permitted Permitted Permitted Permitted Rights: Include Include Include Include Min. Green: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y +R: 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lanes: 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 ------------ --------------- II--------------- II--------------- II--------------- I Volume Module: Base Vol: 7 909 168 0 1111 27 177 0 61 316 7 279 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Be.: 7 909 168 0 1111 27 177 0 61 316 7 279 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.82 0.82 0.82 PHF Volume: 7 953 176 0 1162 28 227 0 78 386 9 341 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced Vol: 7 953 176 0 1162 28 227 0 78 386 9 341 PCE Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MLF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 FinalVolume: 7 953 176 0 1162 28 227 0 78 386 9 341 Saturation Flow Module: Sat /Lane: 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Adjustment: 0.14 0.93 0.93 1.00 0.95 0.85 0.76 1.00 0.85 0.77 1.00 0.85 Lanes: 1.00 1.69 0.31 0.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Final Sat.: 266 2977 550 0 3610 1615 1446 0 1615 1461 1900 1615 ------------ I --------------- --------------- --------------- --------------- Capacity Analysis Module: Vol /Sat: 0.03 0.32 0.32 0.00 0.32 0.02 0.16 0.00 0.05 0.26 0.00 0.21 Crit Moves: +•x + + ++ Green /Cycle: 0.51 0.51 0.51 0.00 0.51 0.51 0.42 0.00 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 Volume /Cap: 0.05 0.62 0.62 0.00 0.63 0.03 0.37 0.00 0.12 0.63 0.01 0.50 Uniform Del: 7.3 10.5 10.5 0.0 10.5 7.3 11.9 0.0 10.6 13.7 10.1 12.8 Incremnt Del: 0.2 0.7 0.7 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.1 2.1 0.0 0.6 InitQueuDel: 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Delay Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Delay /Veh: 7.5 11.2 11.2 0.0 11.2 7.3 12.3 0.0 10.6 15.8 10.1 13.3 User DelAdj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Adj Del /Veh: 7.5 11.2 11.2 0.0 11.2 7.3 12.3 0.0 10.6 15.8 10.1 13.3 LOS by Move: A B B A B A B A B B B B HCM2kAvgQ: 0 9 9 0 9 0 3 0 1 7 0 5 Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to VA CONSULTING, IRVINE PM Peak Thu Oct 2, 2014 12:32:59 Page 4 -1 Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalixed Method (Base Volume Alternative) Intersection 12 Average Delay (sec /veh): 3.4 Worst Case Level Of Service: B[ 14.3] Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L- T - R L- T- R L- T - R L- T- R ----------------- ----- - - - - -I I--------------- II --------------- II---------- - - - -_ Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 ------ - - - - -- --------------- II--------------- II----- ----------II---------- - - - - - I Volume Module: Base Vol: 0 826 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 259 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bse: 0 826 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 259 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 0 626 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 259 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVOlume: 0 826 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 259 ------------ I --------------- II--------------- II--------------- II ---------- - - - - - I Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 6.2 FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 3.3 ------------ I ------ -- - - -- - II--------------- II--------------- II---------- - - - - -I Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx x xxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 413 Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 643 Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 643 Volume /Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.40 ------------ I--------------- II--------------- II--------------- 11-- `------ - - - - -I Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 1.9 Control Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 14.3 LOS by Move: ' ' ' ' ' * * * ' ' ' B Movement: LT - LTR - RT IT - LTA - RT IT - LTA - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx x x xxx xxxx x x xxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: Approach Del: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx 14.3 ApproachLOS: * ' + H Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to VA CONSULTING, IRVINE PM Peak Thu Oct 2, 2014 12:32:59 Page 5 -1 Level Of Service Computation Report 2000 HCM Unsignalized Method (Base Volume Alternative) Intersection $3 Average Delay (sec /veh): 2.7 Worst Case Level Of Service: C[ 15.1] +++++++++++++«««« x++«+++ a«++«« x+ a+ a+ aaaa+ a+ a+++++ ++ + + +« ++ + + + +++ + + + ++ + « « ++ + + + + «xx Approach: North Bound South Bound East Bound West Bound Movement: L- T- R L- T- R L- T- R L- T- R ------------ --------------- II--------------- II-- _------------ II---------- - - - - - I Control: Uncontrolled Uncontrolled Stop Sign Stop Sign Rights: Include Include Include Include Lanes: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 ------------ --------------- II--------------- II-------------- _II---------- - - - -- I Volume Module: Base Vol: 0 0 0 0 1007 0 0 0 217 0 0 0 Growth Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Initial Bee: 0 0 0 0 1007 0 0 0 217 0 0 0 User Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Adj: 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 PHF Volume: 0 0 0 0 1007 0 0 0 217 0 0 0 Reduct Vol: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FinalVolume: 0 0 0 0 1007 0 0 0 217 0 0 0 ------------ I --------------- II--------------- II--------------- II ---- ------ - - - -- I Critical Gap Module: Critical Gp:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 6.2 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx FollowUpTim:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 3.3 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx ------------ I --------------- II--------------- II--------------- II--------------- I Capacity Module: Cnflict Vol: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 504 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Potent Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 572 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Move Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 572 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Volume /Cap: xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 0.38 xxxx xxxx xxxx ------------ I --------------- II--------------- 11--------------- II--------------- I Level Of Service Module: 2Way95thQ: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx 1.8 xxxx xxxx xxxxx Control Del:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx 15.1 xxxxx xxxx xxxxx LOS by Move: * * * * * * * * C Movement: IT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - AT IT - LTR - RT LT - LTR - RT Shared Cap.: xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxx xxxxx SharedQueue:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shrd ConDel:xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxx x xxxxx xxxxx xxxx xxxxx Shared LOS: * * * + + + + a + + + Approach Del: xxxxxx xxxxxx 15.1 xxxxxx ApproachLOS: * * C Note: Queue reported is the number of cars per lane. Traffix 8.0.0715 (c) 2008 Dowling Assoc. Licensed to VA CONSULTING, IRVINE SEWER AREA STUDY APPROVED APPROVED BY: J40�'— ME NO,5A 2 DATE 11/12/2014 CHECKED BY: /v DATE 11/12/2074 COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS LAND DEVELOPMENT DIVISION THIS APPROVAL EXPIRES TWO YEARS FROM THE DATE OF APPROVAL SEWER AREA STUDY Garvey Del Mar Plaza Consulting Engineers OWNER: HAWAII PROPERTIES/ Mr. Gerard Yang 120 E. Valley Blvd. San Gabriel, CA 91776 (626) 307 -0062 7801 GARVEY AVENUE ROSEMEAD, CA 91770 KPFF Job # 114197 PC 12221AS October 22, 2014 QyFpFESS,01 ' TOE yy GAO EIP. 3!3'x4 u.a J CIVIL aP OF LAUiJF PREPARED BY: KPFF Consulting Engineers 6080 Center Drive, Suite 700 Los Angeles, CA 90045 (310) 665 -2800 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No. 1. INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................... ............................... 1 hI. PROJECT DESCRIPTION ......................................................................... ..............................1 III. SEWER PIPE CAPACITY ANALYSI S .................................................... ..............................1 IV. EMSTING SEWER SYSTEM DESCRIPTION ....................................... ..............................2 V. PROPOSED SEWER SYSTEM DESCRIPTI ON ..................................... ..............................2 VI. FLOW MEASUREMENT REPORT ......................................................... ..............................3 VII. CONCLUSI ON ............................................................................................. ..............................3 x1A:I V3 Y 1 Exhibit 1 Proposed Garvey Del Mar Plaza Site Plan & Section Plan Exhibit 2 Sewer Area Study Map (includes Tributary Areas and Zoning) Exhibit 3 City of Rosemead Planning Division Letter Exhibit 4 Will Serve Letter APPENDICES Appendix A Table 1: Proposed Project Sewer Area Study Calculations Table 2: Sewer Area Study Calculations Table 3: Flow Measurements with Proposed Project Table 4: Sewer Area Study Calculations with Measured Flow Data Appendix B City of Rosemead — Official Zoning Map Los Angeles County Department of Public Works Zoning Coefficients Estimated Average Daily Sewage Flows For Various Occupancies Flow Diagram for the Design of Circular Sanitary Sewers County Standard S -C4 Appendix C Normal Depth Calculations 100% Flow Capacity Calculations at Half Full (FlowMaster) Flow Measurements with Proposed Project Appendix D E -2020 — Consolidated County Sewer Maintenance District (S.M.D.) Map E -2019 — Consolidated County Sewer Maintenance District (S.M.D.) Map Cl 1243 — Sanitary Sewer As- Builts CI 1257 — Sanitary Sewer As- Builts Appendix E Sewer Flow Measurement Report INTRODUCTION The following study analyzes the capacity of sanitary sewer lines from the project site to the main trunk sewer. The northern boundary of the area study begins at Garvey Avenue and continues south to Garvalia Avenue where the sewer system joins a Los Angeles County Sewer Maintenance District (LACSMD) trunk sewer line. The study includes all tributary flow in the sewer system from upstream of the proposed development to downstream of the proposed development all the way to the LACSMD trunk line. The analysis will determine the impact on the existing sewer system. II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The project site is approximately 0.77 - acres, located at 7801 Garvey Avenue and is bound by the alley north of Garvey Avenue to the north, Brighton Street to the east, Del Mar Avenue to the west and Garvey Avenue to the south. The project will involve the construction of a mixed -use retail and residential development. The new mixed -use development will consist of subterranean parking, restaurants, retail shops, 1 and 2 bedroom residential units, elevators, bathrooms and dining areas. See attached Exhibit I for proposed buildings. III. SEWER PIPE CAPACITY ANALYSIS The existing sewer pipes were analyzed using the County of Los Angeles Department of Public Works ( LADPW) Sewer Manual S -C4 chart for a maximum design capacity at half full for pipes less than 15" and at three quarters full for pipes 15" and greater. The chart is base on Kutter's Formula. The pipes were analyzed for a maximum design capacity of half full and normal depth capacities. The cumulative calculated flow for each segment was analyzed. The equation for the tributary sewer discharge is as follows: Q =ZA Where: Q = Sewer discharge (cfs) Z = Zoning coefficient (cfsiacre) A = Area (acres) Refer to Appendix A for Table 1: Project Site Sewer Area Study Calculations and Table 2: Sewer Area Study Calculations and Appendix C for 100% Flow Capacity Calculations at normal depth and half full for pipes less than 15 ". The tributary areas of the sewer study can be found in Exhibit 2. Tributary Areas and Zoning information was obtained from the City of Rosemead Planning website. The corresponding zoning coefficients were obtained from the County of Los Angeles Department of Public Works. Refer to Appendix B for the zoning map, zoning coefficients, Estimated Average Daily Sewage Flows For Various Occupancies and Flow Diagram for the Design of Circular Sanitary Sewers County Standard S-C4. Refer to Appendix D for the following LADPW maps used in the sewer pipe capacity analysis: L E-2020— Consolidated County Sewer Maintenance District (S.M.D.) Map 2. E-2019 —Consolidated County Sewer Maintenance District (S.M.D.) Map 3. CI 1243 — Sanitary Sewer As- Builts 4. CI 1257 — Sanitary Sewer As- Builts Sewer Area Study October 22, 2014 Page 1 In addition, based on feedback from the LADPW, sewer flow measurements were performed at three manholes. See Appendix E for complete sewer flow measurement report. Measurement results have been incorporated into the sewer area study. IV. EXISTING SEWER SYSTEM DESCRIPTION The upstream end of the sewer shed begins at the project site with an 8" Vitrified Clay Pipe at Brighton Street (MH# 14) and continues south to an 8" Vitrified Clay Pipe on Garvey Avenue (MH# 360). The 8" Vitrified Clay Pipe then continues east to MH# 354. From MH# 354, the pipe up- sizes to a 10" Vitrified Clay Pipe and continues east to MH# 353. The sewer system then flows south down the residential street Pine Avenue and continues to Newmark Avenue (MH# 346). A 10" Vitrified Clay Pipe then continues east along Newmark Avenue to MH# 320. From MH# 320, the pipe up -sizes to a 12" Vitrified Clay Pipe and continues south to MH# 322. The sewer system discharges into the 27" Los Angeles County trunk line at the Alhambra Wash, just east of where Garvalia Avenue meets San Gabriel Boulevard. Refer to Exhibit 2 for Sewer Area Study Map of existing sewer lines and flow directions for the study area of the proposed project site. Refer to Exhibit 3 for Tributary Area and Zoning Map. The following assumptions were made in the sewer area study: 1. The lots along Del Mar Avenue that are zoned for "Planned Development," are assumed to have a z -value of 0.015, which is the same as the neighboring commercial lots. 2. Any lots zoned for "Open Area" or "Parking" were assumed to have a z -value of 0.001, which is the same as agricultural lots. 3. Any lots zoned for "Commercial Industrial Mixed Use" were assumed to have a z -value of 0.021, which is the highest z -value and is used for manufacturing lots. 4. No as- builts were found for the segment between MH #741 to MH #346 on Pine & Newmark Ave. Since the pipes in that segment are consistently the same size and slope, we assumed the pipe size to be loin and the slope to be 0.44% in our Flowmaster calculations. V. PROPOSED SEWER SYSTEM DESCRIPTION The proposed mixed -use development will discharge into the existing 8" sewer line undemeath the alley just north of Garvey Avenue. The site will connect into this line between manhole #13 and manhole #14. The calculations in Appendix A show the peak flow site discharge to be 0.195 cfs of sewage. A majority of this discharge (about 0.135 cfs) is expected to come from the proposed restaurant(s). Sewer Area Study October 22, 2014 Page 2 VI. FLOW MEASUREMENT REPORT Based on feedback from the LADPW, sewer flow measurements were performed at three manholes. See Appendix E for complete sewer flow measurement report. A summary of the findings are listed below. Site 1: MH# 294 • During peak flow -31% of the pipe's capacity is utilized. • Average flows utilize -17% of the pipes capacity. The d/D ratio for gravity drains of 12 inches in diameter should be no greater than 0.50 for the ultimate peak flow condition. The average d/D ratio during testing was 0.24 and the maximum was 0.35. Therefore, this system still has capacity available. Site 2: ME # 347 • During peak flows -37% of the pipe's capacity is utilized. • Average flows utilize -23% of the pipe's capacity. The d/D ratio for gravity drains of 10 inches in diameter should be no greater than 0.50 for the ultimate peak flow condition. The average d/D ratio during testing was 0.29 and the maximum was 0.40. Therefore, this system still has capacity available. Site 3: ME # 348 • During peak flows-35% o the pipes capacity is utilized. • Average flows utilize-.15% of the pipe's capacity. The d/D ratio for gravity drains of 10 inches in diameter should be no greater than 0.50 for the ultimate peak flow condition. The average d/D ratio during testing was 0.23 and the maximum was 0.37. Therefore, this system still has capacity available. VII. CONCLUSION The sewer flow measurement report shown in Appendix E, reveals that the tributary area flows are significantly less than the previously calculated flows shown in Table 2 and Table 3. Flow monitoring indicates sewer levels do not exceed half -flow capacity. Table 3 incorporates the flow measurement results combined with the proposed project's peak flow discharge. Since sewer segments do not exceed 150% capacity, mitigation is not required based on LADPW design criteria. Sewer Area Study October 22, 2014 Page 3 EXHIBIT 1 Proposed Garvey Del Mar Plaza Site Plan and Section Plan R w w a r i ZU W LL f U 0 wp 0 S1O311MOLtl 1N3WdOl3A3O 3SO O3XIW OAS 8f S31tlIOOSStl 9331 NOWIS l3O A3A21tl0 R w w a r i ZU W LL f U 0 wp 0 EXHIBIT 2 Sewer Area Study Map (Includes Tributary Areas and Zoning) ���I 3 � o� a :. � � m a .' �E® ��e� � d n A � � � �� tl �. d � a � � � � d �� � ��a: � � ��° � � q w � � � �� d EXHIBIT 3 City of Rosemead Planning Division Letter June 6, 2014 Ms. Lily Trinh, Associate Planner City of Rosemead Planning Division 8838 E. Valley Boulevard P.O. Box 399 Rosemead, CA, 91770 INITIAL STUDY— MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION (IS -MND) GARVEY /DEL MAR PLAZA ASSESSOR'S MAP BOOK NO. 5287, PAGE 39, PARCEL NOS. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 11 CITY OF ROSEMEAD LOS ANGELES COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS We completed our review of the IS -MND associated with the Garvey /Del Mar Plaza which is located on six parcels at the northeast corner of the intersection of Garvey Avenue and Del Mar Avenue and west of Brighton Street in the City of Rosemead. The proposed project is a mixed use project that includes 60 residential units, including 12 low income units, 15,550 square feet of retail /restaurant use, and 211 parking spaces, in a five -story building with two levels of subterranean parking. The following are County of Los Angeles, Department of Public Works' comments for your consideration and relate to the environmental document only: Section 3.8 - Hydrology/ Water Quality: Storm drain BI 1109 - Monterey Park Area (Drawing No. 364 - 1109 -D4) belonging to the Los Angeles County Flood Control District ( LACFCD) should be identified in the environmental document along with any impacts the project may have on this infrastructure. A connection /construction permit from LACFCD prior to construction is required for any new proposed connection to these drains /facilities. A Hydrology Study and Storm Drain Improvement Plans must be submitted to the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works (LACDPW) for review and approval prior to any construction. If you have any questions regarding the Hydrology and Water Quality comment above, please contact Mr. Toan Duong of Land Development Division at (626) 458 -4921 or tduona(rDdow.lacounty.gov. For submittal requirements and permit fees associated with Ms. Lily Trinh June 6, 2014 Page 2 connections to LACFCD facilities, please contact Land Development Division, Permits Section at (626) 458 -3129. Section 3.16 — Utilities and Service Systems: 2. The Los Angeles County Department of Public Works Consolidated Sewer Maintenance District (CSMD) is responsible for the operation and maintenance of the local sewers within the City of Rosemead. The CSMD currently serves the project site via an eight -inch sewer line located in the alley that traverses the project site. (See attached SMD map 2020). The eight -inch sewer line in Garvey Avenue is located east of the project site and is downstream of the sewer line in the alley. Currently this sewer line does not directly serve the project site. The Mitigated Negative Declaration should discuss the potential impact on the available capacity in the existing local sewer lines for both peak dry and wet weather flows pursuant with the Statewide General Waste Discharge Requirement (Order No. 2006 -003). If you have any questions regarding the Utilities and Service Systems comment above, please contact Ms. Anna -Marie Gilmore of Sewer Maintenance Division at (626) 300- 3360 or agilmore(a)dow.lacountv.Dov. If you have any other questions or require additional information, please contact Matthew Dubiel of Land Development Division at (626) 458 -4921 or and ubielt7a.dpw.lacounty. goy. MD: P:VJpubMBPCHECK tan Checking Filesl oning PermitstP,oje ssubmift tl by Other AgenciesV801 -78256 wry Avenue - City of Rosemea&IS -10ND 2014-08 -06, 7801 -7825 Garvey Avenue, tACDPW Comments rbcx 1*1111118YIF1 Will Serve Letter COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY 1955 Workman Mill Road, Whinier, CA 90601 -1400 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 4998, Whitlier, CA 90607 -4998 Telephone: 15621 699 -7411, FAX: 15621699 -5422 www.lacad.org Mr. Farhan Lilani RPFF Consulting Engineers 6080 Center Drive, Suite 700 Los Angeles, CA 90045 Dear Mr. Lilani: GRACE ROBINSON HYDE Chief Engineer and General Manager October 16, 2014 Ref File No.: 3106568 Garvey Del Mar Plaza Mixed -Use ProieM RECEIVED KPFF•L.A. CC: JOB N FILE N OCT 201014 This is in response to your request for a will serve letter for the subject project, which was received by the County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County (Districts) on August 29, 2014. The proposed development is located within the jurisdictional boundaries of District No. 15. We offer the following comments regarding sewerage service: I. The wastewater flow originating from the proposed project will discharge to a local sewer line, which is not maintained by the Districts, for conveyance to the Districts' Joint Outfall Unit I Trunk Sewer, located in a private right of way on the west side of the Alhambra Wash east of the intersection of San Gabriel Boulevard and Garvalia Avenue. This 27 —inch diameter trunk sewer has a design capacity of 6.1 million gallons per day (mgd) and conveyed a peak flow of 2.5 mgd when last messured in 2012. 2. The wastewater generated by the proposed project will be treated at the Whittier Narrows Water Reclamation Plant (WRP) located near the City of South El Monte, which has a design capacity of 15 mgd and currently processes an average flow of 8.6 mgd, or at the Los Coyotes WRP located in the City of Cerritos, which has a design capacity of 37.5 mgd and currently processes an average flow of 22.1 mgd. 3. In order to estimate the volume of wastewater the project will generate, go to www.lacsd.ore, Wastewater & Sewer Systems, click on Will Serve Program, and click on the Table 1. Loadines for Each Class of Land Use link for a copy of the Districts' average wastewater generation factors. 4. The Districts are empowered by the California Health and Safety Code to charge a fee for the privilege of connecting (directly or indirectly) to the Districts' Sewerage System for increasing the strength or quantity of wastewater attributable to a particular parcel or operation already connected. This connection fee is a capital facilities fee that is imposed in an amount sufficient to construct an incremental expansion of the Sewerage System to accommodate the proposed project. Payment of a connection fee will be required before a permit to connect to the sewer is issued. For more information and a copy of the Connection Fee Information Sheet, go to www.lacsd.ore, Wastewater & Sewer Systems, click on Will Serve Program, and search for the DOC: 43106589D 15 A Recycled Paper ci Mr. Farhan Lilani -2- October 16, 2014 appropriate link. For more specific information regarding the connection fee application procedure and fees, please contact the Connection Fee Counter at extension 2727. 5. In order for the Districts to conform to the requirements of the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA), the design capacities of the Districts' wastewater treatment facilities are based on the regional growth forecast adopted by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). Specific policies included in the development of the SCAG regional growth forecast are incorporated into clean air plans, which are prepared by the South Coast and Antelope Valley Air Quality Management Districts in order to improve air quality in the South Coast and Mojave Desert Air Basins as mandated by the CCA. All expansions of Districts' facilities must be sized and service phased in a manner that will be consistent with the SCAG regional growth forecast for the counties of Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, Riverside, Venture, and Imperial. The available capacity of the Districts' treatment facilities will, therefore, be limited to levels associated with the approved growth identified by SCAG. As such, this letter does not constitute a guarantee of wastewater service, but is to advise you that the Districts intend to provide this service up to the levels that are legally permitted and to inform you of the currently existing capacity and any proposed expansion of the Districts' facilities. If you have any questions, please contact the undersigned at (562) 9084288, extension 2717 Very truly yours, A(Gymaccee"lR.�obinson Hyde , �K Adrian Raza Customer Service Specialist Facilities Planning Department AR:ar cc: M. Tremblay J. Ganz DW: N3106589DI5 APPENDIX A Table 1: Proposed Project Sewer Area Study Calculations Table 2: Sewer Area Study Calculations Table 3: Flow Measurements with Proposed Project Table 4: Sewer Area Study Calculations with Measured Flow Data Table 1: Proposed Project Sewer Area Study Calculations Estimated Average Daily Sewage Flows for Various Occupancies Occupancy Abbreviation *Average daily flow Apartment Buildings: Peak Flow (cfs) Basement Level 2 1 bedroom dwelling unit Apt 200 gal /D.U. 2bedroom dwelling unit Apt 250 gal /D.U. Automobile Parkings P 25 gal /1000 sq ft gross floor area Commercial Shops & Stores CS 100 gal /1000 sq ft gross floor area Restaurants, cafeterias, etc. R 50 gal /seat *Assuming 15 sq ft per person *Multiply the average daily flow by 2.5 to obtain the peak flow Garvey Del Mar Plaza Level Type Units Average Daily Flow (cfs) Peak Flow (cfs) Basement Level 2 Parking 43952 sq ft 0.0016482 0.0041205 Basement Level 1 Parking 35998 sqft 0.00134993 0.00337481 Restaurant 220 Estimated People 0.0165 0.04125 1st Floor Parking 26196 sq ft 0.00098235 0.00245588 Restaurant 500 Estimated People 0.0375 0.09375 Retail 3959 sq ft 0.00059385 0.00148463 2nd Floor 1 -Bed 14 Units 0.0042 0.0105 2 -Bed 6 Units 0.00225 0.005625 3rd Floor 1 -Bed 14 Units 0.01)421 0.0105 2 -Bed 6 Units 0.00225 0.005625 4th Floor 1 -Bed 14 Units 0.0042 0.0105 2 -Bed 6 Units 0.00225 0.005625 Total 0.077924331 0.19481081 F ss € x min - saxEgAgA ygE as €: xF @ €w °sES mea_F$ °"'a y'3 g Haas - 55993 °a C �i S9 O� yypp � 33 ��a$g 3 A � ®B AeBpp�A 8$xx�e BA o�a3ABaa° o3� e A � Vaasa cc = =84ass A >'eOev „aAe AAaa Ae�o AvA vaAaaaaa "aeS,° 3 S3SSS:33 S:S 9 +SS =3SY S..So 5 == � = iB8 "c3�vAAAABsxsy 8888883°8 s9e z'�a= = a'ad "a A?S�AA 3 a 383 a s A s e A i A sei 3 3 s 3 A A A A 'x xis a - a3 E 4 e € a e s xsxa a ssA c ie 'c333395 a 3$89', c8 a 3 e ` s„ g Table 3: Flow Measurements with Proposed Project 1) Flow Information is Based on U53 Flow Measurement Report, Appendix E, TAB 3: Calibration Site Sheets. 2) U53 Flow Data Has Been Converted From MGD to CFS. 3) % Full Capacities are based on Half -Full capacity. 4) Cumulative Depths were determined using Flow Master PEAK CUMULATIVE CUMULATIVE %FULL FLOWS (CFS) FLOWS (CFS) DEPTH (IN.) (CUMULATIVE FLOWS/ CAPACITY) X 100 EMPIRICAL FLOW DEPTH /(0.5X PIPE DIA.) Project Site 0.195 0.195 1.56 14.23% 39.00% MH 348 0.706 0.901 5.9 130.51% 118.00% MH 347 0.945 1.140 5.03 100.03% 100.60% MH 294 0.9111 1.1061 5.661 89.94% 94.33% 1) Flow Information is Based on U53 Flow Measurement Report, Appendix E, TAB 3: Calibration Site Sheets. 2) U53 Flow Data Has Been Converted From MGD to CFS. 3) % Full Capacities are based on Half -Full capacity. 4) Cumulative Depths were determined using Flow Master ) | ) ) | . .... , ,,! ...,,, |,$21 | |eemmmem,emm mm,mm \«m | : : : :;,,.,, :.: ,: : :. : :., : : : : : :- : : , mommmmmUmmemm :mg /mm „§S`aGZ lSelS;'!2!!e' , .., ... |l= ,,,,`...� ,•, !i� ! )_!.) ) |/ !,! � « ••� ; ;j(j))q!| } APPENDIX B City of Rosemead — Official Zoning Map Los Angeles County Department of Public Works Zoning Coefficients Estimated Average Daily Sewage Flows For Various Occupancies Flow Diagram for the Design of Circular Sanitary Sewers County Standard S -C4 \ I � I mroF _ —l� �\ � TEnnscm L: 1 I� Cm OF I sAx ansRl¢ I \b 11 �� V ' Cm OF q EL MONIE 1. I T I p a. CT OF SOUTH EL IpRTE I 00� C+ _ I � I 44 1 Cm OF ) YCMFAEYMRK / d T WHITTIEP NAq pOWS r`I /`.l• PECREATl..AL PARK NOHiEBELLO qqqq eov -e d OwIT Ca P Low WINa Petla.I. m.'FFR aCUmmn.. aCI.Mu- Canmwew HaEPEW NUM we is \ \\ o eetln w.nry . RR IMF- WITIFIR -deMnI . COO CewaIB— lrenoamn . M -1 LIpM MaM1A➢Slq . CI Kl]INMaS C.mmem.l . G Iaibmoal. P.N.e . as Olma $ww Po n.ro.a o..amm.m • p®IIw1CW¢uWy City of Rosemead ® M Official Zoning Map o Two zoos saro ..mq aoYaw - -wo MOl Ya�nlNO. me Cb MI.W mYesgeMpn.FUF W6mlwaaau.ac dwmcvm, no vv � Wwryxmubneoln maYm µn �Xmiwbi,ywewN'�pwYM. msnm wme Mdpouirenema inaryvy euenel �Wa��Wesµ.m xmx �M1 Cmwle -m IL.tl edJb OryNpaiMMnlveln Ylmvuxwxwnucnu,q nwnMawWwmnrytlnuem m.mparaislb.Aim4vbRAll. Estimated Average Daily Sewage Flows for Various Occupancies Bachelor or Single dwelling units Apt 100 gal/D.U.--;- ITo 1 bedroom dwelling un is Apt 150 gal/D.U. —y zoo 2 bedroom dwelling units Apt 200 gal/D.U. -I.2So 3 bedroom or more dwelling units Apt 250 gal /D.U. a use 30 6M P`r churches, etc. Aud 5 gal /seat 1Auditoriums, Automobile parking P 25 gal /1.000 sq ft gross floor area 13ars, cocktails lounges, etc. Bar 20 gal /seat Commercial Shops & Stores CS 100 gal /1000 sq ft gross floor area Hospitals (surgical) HS 500 gal /bed Hospitals (convalescent) HC 85 gallbed Hotels H 150 gal /room Medical Buildings MB 300 gal /1000 sq it gross floor area Motels M 150 gal /unit Wce Buildings Off 200 gal /1000 sq ft gross floor area Restaurants, cafeterias, etc. R 50 gal /seat ichools: Elementary or Jr. High S 10 gal /student iigh Schools HS 15 gal/student Iniversitles or Colleges U 20 gal /student Tolle a Dormltolies CD 85 al /student Multiply the average dally flow by 2.5 to obtain the peak flow Zone ResldemlaP: -- - R -1 ' _ 0.004 R -2 0.008 R-3 _`_ "_ 0.012 R-4 0.018' Commercial: C•1 through C+1 ----__ 0.075' Heavy Industrial: M1 throunh ••- • -• -�a� uunuing, commercial or Industrial plant capacities shall be the determining factor when they exceed the coefficients shown • Use 0.001 (cfs /unit) for condominiums only APPENDIX C Normal Depth Calculations (FlowMaster) 100% Flow Capacity Calculations at Half Full (FlowMaster) Flow Measurements with Proposed Project ,| :! !°!!!)!I!!!!! ]! /!)!!! /!! ^!!)!!!!!)!)!]!)!)!] §!!!!!§ §!!!!! $\§!!!!!!! _;;:,;.. ;.. ;....,, ;; . |# ..................... 91 § §§ § || 1 lod t)!] , !!!!!!! • EB!!!EE |<!! :B!!!!§!!§r !§lw;El;!!!! !!!!!!!!66o66 !!B666 . -.... § | | §]] | | | |) | ;!! |! ;] !!!) !! ;l ;; |!)!)4 \()! }!i \!)()§)! |�!! ; |I))!aa oo to §])r, \}!t ' § - 27 • ; = 4!r!.! , , .. , , i` °! ,`.�,!`..,A • . .,` ; ! ('l.,l,,., .,,,. . : { / \ \ ;!/l!!)!I ! i!)!!!]! /!!!]!!!!!! )( §! f \E!!!!!!!!!!!!!! §!!!!! !!!! 6dA!6 |9 |§,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ri jr /!!!!!!!! : §!! :!! § : §B §! •!!!!;!!! ;! §!!!!!!!!!!!! ...- ,��,,.,.,., ;, ;„ § |!] § §§ |) ; :)!]!|) ) !|!t|)!\|t!)! t!\ |t! /!)�t /!)!)! /!)N \t{ S9 ;E{! ! f Circular Pipe (Flow Measurements with Proposed Project.fmil) Report Discharge Label Solve For Friction Method Roughness Coefficient Al MH 398 Normal Depth Kufter Formula 0,013 MH 397 Normal Depth Kutter Formula 0.013 MH 294 Normal Depth Kutter Formula 0.013 Channel Slope Normal Depth Diameter Discharge N (in) (in) (R' /s) 0,44000 5.90 10.00 Q90 1.20000 5.03 1000 1.14 0.52000 5.65 12.00 1.11 Flow Area Wetted perimeter Hydraulic Radius Top Width AIIIIII (to) (ft) (in) (ft) ,.. 0.34 146 275 0.82 0.27 1.31 2.51 0.83 0.36 1.51 2.89 1.00 Critical Depth percent Full Critical Slope I (ft) N (ftttt) (6/s 0.42 59.0 000745 2.69 0.46 50.3 000782 4.15 044 47.2 0.00657 3.03 Velocity Head Specific Energy Fmude Number M"mum Discharge (ft) (ft) (fft) 0.11 060 0]4 1.49 0.27 0.69 1.27 2.46 Bentley System,Inc. Hoesmd McNO Bola dQ�asbr VBi(SELECTseries1) [08.11.01.03] 10/2 &201410:48:40 AM 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT OST95 USA N -203 -755 -1888 Page 1 at 2 Circular Pipe (Flow Measurements with Proposed Project.fm8) Report 2.25 0.00310 SuperCntical 0.14 0 62 0.88 2.67 Benlley Systems, Inc. Haeafe0 MMho sSol8 dd)rt Master V8i(SELECTseries 1) 108.11.01.031 ta2VW1410:48:40 AM 27SiemonsCmpany Drive SUlte200W Walert ,CTW195USA +1 -M3 -755 -1858 Page 2 of 2 1.36 0.00195 SubUticel 2.25 0.00310 SuperCntical 2.45 0.00109 SubCntiael Benlley Systems, Inc. Haeafe0 MMho sSol8 dd)rt Master V8i(SELECTseries 1) 108.11.01.031 ta2VW1410:48:40 AM 27SiemonsCmpany Drive SUlte200W Walert ,CTW195USA +1 -M3 -755 -1858 Page 2 of 2 APPENDIX E-2020 — Consolidated County Sewer Maintenance District (S.M.D.) Map E -2019 — Consolidated County Sewer Maintenance District (S.M.D.) Map Cl 1243 — Sanitary Sewer As- Builts Cl 1257 — Sanitary Sewer As- Builts m 0 ti ZIP J O � � n w iii yeC 9. i p : IN e x � § } W Rf Erg a.' x s ;' _ acaew sz�anos � up a t o i � w Q0 TST $ o 4 _ � � _— — — s �' c. �•�.mai. `s �p�q Ill � g k sRa z Ft EQ � aaaT al.id m 0 ti ZIP J O � � n w iii yeC 9. i p : IN e x � § } W Rf Erg a.' x s ;' _ acaew sz�anos � up a t o i � w Q0 TST $ o 4 _ � � _— — — s �' c. �•�.mai. `s �p�q Ill � g k sRa z Ft i m 0 Q O w � Y � a J 5 C z :E ax a3 _ ^. ^§E5 ° '§ g•.R s e a $ 3i xA31. $i U z, b. a _�4 m y �� e �e $ •ea. mmIIIypy IIIII ��mmI�II1I IIII ��VLJW= r �A 9 5s i m 0 Q O w � Y � a J 5 C z :E ax a3 _ ^. ^§E5 ° '§ g•.R s e a $ 3i xA31. $i U z, b. a _�4 m y �� e �e $ •ea. mmIIIypy IIIII ��mmI�II1I IIII ��VLJW= lv� ou / h; - �� I ^ '1 lin I N p j @yy } ¢i °f iO ? � � � ,� i I �yY� .�yF 4 / / � d , t- OZ a ` ai of v i 2 t 4e IN, I t I II I� 1 E c+xxn s s�+v III i Od9+9 � oYL +9 b 9 A yM1 $� A OS[K O jj b � ° Arlo OS9N X � iM1 099W �I OO/ +9 OOS+d 4 13 III I F I •y J. - OES+9 � I ' ' i i F•� f I V S'ydK I w P l SJO +9 k rrns -t— I 4 i � I OIH p I SX[Y I I � I ILL i I ours al9+r TI I s owns y r v� i siYH I a Od9+9 � oYL +9 b 9 A yM1 $� A OS[K O jj b s 3 i OS9N h iM1 M1 I I �I OO/ +9 OOS+d 4 13 III I F I •y J. - OES+9 � I ' ' i i F•� f I V S'ydK I w P l SJO +9 Od9+9 � oYL +9 b 9 A yM1 $� A OS[K O jj b OS9N + Moll �I OOS+d 4 13 v^JV !Y ! M1 � I I w P l SJO +9 k rrns -t— I 4 i Od9+9 � oYL +9 b 9 A yM1 $� A OS[K O jj N o-r OR I � YLOIy � I k� a ' i Z nY Mdf>JM I l it L !�. o Axprap' vnr � wsnrr/ e 'I L,S I w Ike 2 ;a L i � OL9rL FlpprZ „ k ObErE .g ozl�z o<ss:z 4 OrF +F t !# yi b!f/F e ff x E � ozo.s , , e ILI o'FZs I N g 1 � rsew k ' I"s I " "� .� ✓�X iM AM Y16 i E \ orL p 6 a /t Y l O'E6gY y ti r � 1£ . ea +si � rr I I iT .f j •I I ..gFET •� f L$ J" 0 � I I I I arru I � H _ o LI yu I bi (•. � � pry- 3' a I i� j1 i III I X } OY9 /6'/ - 5 i✓ F: A II i 3 t �, I� i - • � In. 'N 6 .I iii a l I I � � � .� I I I i 2 sri7l'E°• °� 8 I i I'I , i i I F. I i I' a l III i I jl f I �} i�l ! I • osrri _ • I Fk x • I I I I I I I I r7�� �_ � I I : f III l b Fl 9y£�,Iliill. j V l III 'I jll �I j� V3 Y milmillff OPIP's FYI v M fTH/ klli C ?ifs Y I E h x YFO �•k4" \+$ it , j� V3 Y milmillff OPIP's FYI v M ilfI i 4 i !Ii o= rcp ZR 00 4F i s "e i f �. YA'MWAV V Ka M�fvnR1Y �a,t�e311 :rai �. P �J I Y i, I.� I fYlw y � ^ rv7s I I rYSK� try' 4 4 OfNI u n Fi d i a I - it d l aww� III tl. xj I- tY� wmr a I � 3 i I Jig pC'17A79 '41d'9w Nr� »y�r w ne I aoxro t t '�{I I I II , pp N k V I v I 8 j �i sni alts II x =` i b °_ fRK I % r Hn EI 4.$ I OYNf +7 a I II O[MI �3 i °I iii alWfE. I L 01DK . 4 ry `fK.I O a 0'HN a ORK V rlr M "I y 3z$ 0 e o � v � x O)9K s ePUY tl � it II� eiaa � .1d OWx N I�\ a >K �Yw FO 6 I IIII I x assA� P Y Ll I I i. i " � i I;II 'I ! lll I I 9 N0, i F hE } �66•I N I ;\ S� L x � I h R v V � Y SAWN sr/N ti Ail acs's A 0 0 v V � Y SAWN sr/N ti Ail acs's A 0 Pnc I ora2� I � � x � ` OYls9 v \ _\ \\ I - � t® §a ,2 � |� \ } J S d h I 2 n b R 2 it � w 5 Y t Y..yh 0liN q 3 f I I I � W a ucatt�� e � � . T I axsa - I I � I I y ovlsu 1 i ul 'll+ I h I ! V ' Ijj1 it I ' 1 I II II �I Afm I � I F I 0 »N/ fw.f, wo t #s t 3 NVS F i I j 01 WI i 11 jil�'i Y IF Not— !mil ! I i II t i s CI .h Y N r I wxn> F 1 Ii M 3' 3i&7 a ' I I r �A it 14 I m � I a U� � a la x Y {g� c Y I yrA IIIi I I, Is A i I I I fo' j'OY[fl I �I m � I � a la x Y � I c Y v't A I I �I I 0� wr \\ Utility Systems Science and Software Flow Measurement Report Flow Monitoring Services For Garvey Del Mar Plaza Rosemead, CA Sept 17, 2014 through Oct 6, 2014 M!—R- I Leaders in Sewer Flow Monitoring Services 601 N. Parkcenter Dr., Suite 209 Santa Ana, CA 92705 Phone: 714 -542 -1004 Fax: 714 -542 -1332 www.uscubed.com www.sewerflow.com MH 294, MH 347 & MH 348 KPFF Consulting Engineers WASTEWATER FLOW MONITORING SERVICES Table of Contents Tab 1: Overview & Summary of Sites 1.1 Overview 1.2 Site Maps 1.3 Summary of Sites 1.4 Site Statistics Tab 2: Methods & Procedures & Equipment 2.1 Methods & Procedures 2.2 Equipment 2.3 Benefits 2.4 How it Works 2.5 Accurate Flow Measurements Tab 3: Calibration Site Sheets Tab 4: DVD with Excel Data —,, ., .,, , _ .... MH 294, MH 347 & MH 348 KPFF Consulting Engineers Tab 1: Overview & Summary of Sites 1.1 Overview The Consolidated Sewer Maintenance District of Los Angeles County (CSMD) is administered by the County of Los Angeles Department of Public Works. The Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts operate the largest engineered wastewater recycling program in the world. The CSMD system serves greater than one -half of a million parcels and a population of approximately 2.3 million people within the unincorporated areas of the County, a total of 38 cities including the City of Rosemead. The CSMD system includes over 4,600 miles of sanitary sewers, 153 pump stations, and 4 wastewater treatment/reclamation plants. The Water Reclamation Plants (WRPs) provide primary, secondary, and tertiary treatment for approximately 165 million gallons of wastewater per day. The CSMD provides assistance to Rosemead in the case of sewer accidents. The Rosemead Engineering Division is responsible for the management of the sewers including the design, operation and maintenance of sanitary sewers and the preparation of various studies relating to Public Works. The Rosemead Public Works Department is responsible for maintaining the City's public works infrastructure, which includes the sewers. They also review proposed private developments and land division maps, issue permits, and inspect all work within the public right of way. As part of the Garvey Del Mar Plaza redevelopment, the City of Rosemead required flow monitoring to be performed to access system capacitance. Therefore, Utility Systems Science & Software, Inc. (US) was contracted by KPFF to install flow monitoring equipment at three sanitary sewer manholes receiving flow from Garvey Del Mar Plaza. This system capacity assessment was developed for the current conditions to determine potential capacity limitations upon redevelopment of the Garvey Del Mar Plaza. Each wastewater collection system is different, and some of the differences that affect flow monitoring include: slope of sewer line; age, condition and material of sewer line; number and type of connections; and sewer design, specifically the proximity of baffles, drop structures, pumps, siphons, and weirs. Therefore, US3 performed initial site inspections to evaluate the sites and assess traffic control requirements. From the preliminary investigations, it was determined that the selected sites were acceptable for flow monitoring and should provide accurate representations of the flow patterns within the sewer lines. Note: If there are any baffles, drop structures, pumps, siphons, or weirs in near proximity to these manholes, they can have an impact on the hydraulics and the data. UUtility Systems Science & Software � l MH 294, MH 347 & MH 348 KPFF Consulting Engineers The first site was located in a vacant lot near 2516 N. San Gabriel Blvd (MH 294). The second site was in the road near 8120 Newmark Avenue (MH 347), and the third site was in the road near 2659 Pine Street (MH 348). The locations have been shown on the site maps in Section 1.2. Installation at the three sites occurred on 9/17/2014. The manholes were equipped with Hach Marsh - McBirney Flo -Dar® AV Sensors and Loggers. With the installation and removal of the equipment, the manholes were opened and confined space entry was limited to crossing the plane with hands and arms, but not actually entering the manholes. Even though US3 personnel did not enter the manholes during VVV installation, they were fully trained and certified i in Confined Space Entry and CPR, and in accordance with safety standards, gas readings were taken and recorded throughout the duration of the installation and removal process. Flow monitoring took place between 9/17/2014 and 10/06/2014 at all three sites. In summary, US' performed the following services as part of this project: • Sewer Monitoring • Detailed Preliminary Investigation • Assessment and implementation of traffic control requirements • Inspection and evaluation of the three sites • Installation of Marsh- McBirney Flo -Dar® AV Sensors and Loggers • Interface of Real-time Web -Based Wireless Flow Monitoring using CDMA, GPRS /GSM, VHF /UHF/Trunk radio networks (including Motorola Networks) • Validation of hydraulic suitability • Calibration of MM Meter • Record of detailed site data • Sanitary System Evaluation Services • Development of a report to discuss the existing sanitary sewer collection system, including system statistics, graphs and data. Utility systems Science & Software OrEN, MH 294, MH 347 & MH 348 KPFF Consulting Engineers 1.2 Site Maps Figure: Sewer Flow Monitoring Site 1, MH 294, near 2516 N. San Gabriel Blvd, 34.058276,- 118.089592 Utility Systems Science & Software MH 294, MH 347 & MH 348 KPFF Consulting Engineers Figure: Sewer Flow Monitoring Site 2, MH 347, near 8120 Newmark Avenue, 34.059928, - 118.091426 Utility Systems Science & Software USM. MH 294, MH 347 & MH 348 KPFF Consulting Engineers Figure: Sewer Flow Monitoring Site 3, MH 348, near 2659 Pine Street, 34.060764, - 118.092105 Utility Systems Science & Software 11S MH 294, MH 347 & MH 348 KPFF Consulting Engineers 1.3 Summary of Sites Site 1: Located within a fenced vacant lot, Site 1 (MH 294) had no traffic of any kind; therefore, no traffic control was required. Figures: Sewer Flow Monitoring Site 1, in fenced vacant lot, no pedestrian or vehicular traffic MH 294 provided access to a 12 inch vitrified clay pipe; gas levels were good. The flow at Site 1 remained consistent throughout the duration of the study (19 days). The flow began increasing around 7 am in the morning and flowed consistently until around 1 am the next morning, which is representative of a commercial area with businesses with a minimum of a first and second shift. The residential flow pattern was blended with the commercial flow pattern, which masked some of its characteristic morning and evening peaks. The scatter plot depicted the relationship between the level and the velocity in the pipe as almost ideal, showing no signs of processed flow or dumping, only the blended flow at the peaks. Site 2: Located on a residential street, Site 2 (MH 347) was near a neighborhood post office; therefore, traffic control consisted of using cones, signs, and a flagger. Figures: Sewer Flow Monitoring Site 2 (MH 347), mid -road location with moderate traffic flow during installations and removals JJ Utility Systems Science & Software �ISN. MH 294, MH 347 & MH 348 KPFF Consulting Engineers MH 347 provided access to a 10 inch vitrified clay pipe; gas levels were good. The flow at Site 2 also remained consistent throughout the duration of the study. The now began increasing around 6 am in the morning and flowed consistently until around 2 am the next morning, which is representative of a commercial area with businesses with a minimum of a first and second shift or an area where the residents are home during the day. The residential flow pattern was more pronounced at this site, showing a more characteristic morning and evening peak each day. The scatter plot depicted the relationship between the level and the velocity in the pipe, which was not as good as at Site 1, because the mixed flow (commercial and residential) was not as well blended at this site. Site 3: Located on a residential street, Site 3 had minimal traffic; therefore, traffic control consisted of using cones and signs. Figures: Sewer Flow Monitoring Site 3 (MH 348), mid -road location with minimal traffic during installations and removals MH 348 also provided access to a 10 inch vitrified clay pipe with good gas levels. The flow at Site 3 also remained consistent throughout the duration of the study with one exception. On 9/25/2014 at 2:30 pm, there was an anomalous spike in flow, but with this site, it was most likely only a bug or some floating waste; no need for concern. As with the other sites, flow began increasing around 7 am in the morning and flowed consistently until around 1 am the next morning, which is representative of this area. The residential flow pattern was evident, but not pronounced. The scatter plot depicted the relationship between the level and the velocity in the pipe as almost ideal, showing no signs of processed flow, only the blending of the residential and commercial flows during the peak flow periods. The data was analyzed from each of the three sites and statistically represented in the next section. Utility Systems Science & Software IIS l MH 294, MH 347 & MH 348 KPFF Consulting Engineers 1.4 Site Statistics Site 1 graphs from US' Flow Monitoring Website (http: / /flodar.uscubed.com) Is 2p i J S 0 Sep 29 Sep 30 Oct OR 02 V¢Vf ua u4 ua oo uc, uo • Level • Velouty • Flow • Pipe Crown • Rain 400 300 200 e 4 3 z o a s- 4 yQ+• 3 • b t J 2 .. • i•^ I: it I 0.5 1.0 I.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 15 _ ftby emch 0 Veb ity Descnptlan More.: 2516 N. San Gabne Manhole No: 299 6tY: Rosemead Pipe Diameter: 12 Ste ID: 391 Group: Rosemead O .ID: 0 Figure: Site 1 graph of flow, level & velocity and scatter plot of level in relation to velocity To summarize the site statistics presented on the following page: • During peak flows, -31% of the pipe's capacity is utilized. • Average flows utilize -17% of the pipe's capacity. • A minimum velocity of 2 fps is generally required during peak flow to re- suspend solids. This site averages over 3 fps; therefore, blockage due to settlement of normal system solids should not be an issue. • The d/D ratio for gravity drains of 12 inches in diameter should be no greater than 0.50 for the ultimate peak flow condition. The average d/D ratio during this week was 0.24 and the maximum was 0.35. Therefore, this site still has capacity available. Utility Systems Science & Software I I� MH 294, MH 347 & MH 348 OFF Consulting Engineers Site 1 statistics from data analysis Flow Stats Level Stats Velocity Stats 4.16 •AVe�+a•Lr+al 4 IN •Mm1e+N 3 IN 2'86 2 IN •Max VNOnh 0.97 1 IN IN 2. MGD 4 FPS 3.94 •ave evm 'Fn'OP •Mln VelaW .Max HOW 1.5 MGD 3.05 3 FPS 1. MGD 2 FPS 1.32 0.5 MGD 1 FPS FPS 0. MGD Site 1 Level (depth) vs Pipe Diameter 1.00 0.80 0.60 ♦ d/D 0.40 0.20 gum 0.00 a a a a e O O N m m m 5 IN •Mai Level 4.16 •AVe�+a•Lr+al 4 IN •Mm1e+N 3 IN 2'86 2 IN 0.97 1 IN IN Utility Systems Science &Software , MH 294, MH 347 & MH 348 Site 2 graphs from US' Flow Monitoring Website is 1a 0 KPFF Consulting Engineers Sep 29 Sep 30 OR Oct 02 oR 03 oa o< t,cc w va w ♦ Level ♦ Velcaty ♦ Flow ♦ Pipe Crown ♦ Rain -6 a > e x LL p, 2 p, 0 Figure: Site 2 graph of flow, level & velocity and scatter plot of level in relation to velocity To summarize the site statistics presented on the following page: • During peak flows, —37% of the pipe's capacity is utilized. • Average flows utilize —23% of the pipe's capacity. • A minimum velocity of 2 fps is generally required during peak flow to re- suspend solids. This site averages over 4 fps; therefore, blockage due to settlement of normal system solids should not be an issue. • The d/D ratio for gravity drains of 10 inches in diameter should be no greater than 0.50 for the ultimate peak flow condition. The average d/D ratio during this week was 0.29 and the maximum was 0.40. Therefore, this site still has capacity available; however, it is the site with the least available capacity. Utility Systems Science & Software HS J 4 Y V 3 �r 1 2 3 4 515 char. by anCM1arts 0 Velociq Descriptwn: Add.: 8120 N..l* Avenue Manhole No: 347 oty. Rosemead Pfpe Diameter: 10 SRe ID: 390 G.W Roearnead Device ID: 0 Figure: Site 2 graph of flow, level & velocity and scatter plot of level in relation to velocity To summarize the site statistics presented on the following page: • During peak flows, —37% of the pipe's capacity is utilized. • Average flows utilize —23% of the pipe's capacity. • A minimum velocity of 2 fps is generally required during peak flow to re- suspend solids. This site averages over 4 fps; therefore, blockage due to settlement of normal system solids should not be an issue. • The d/D ratio for gravity drains of 10 inches in diameter should be no greater than 0.50 for the ultimate peak flow condition. The average d/D ratio during this week was 0.29 and the maximum was 0.40. Therefore, this site still has capacity available; however, it is the site with the least available capacity. Utility Systems Science & Software HS J MH 294, MH 347 & MH 348 OFF Consulting Engineers Site 2 statistics from data analysis Flow Stats Level Stats Velocity Stats 5 IN 2.95 3 IN 2 IN 1 •Mi�VNO[Xy 1 IN 2. MGD IN •Max Level 5 FPS 4.84 •ne v 3.96 •aea¢e ie..i •MIn VeWty 4 IN 1.5 MGD Min 4 FPS 3 FPS 1. MGD 161 2 FPS 0.5 MGD 1 FPS FPS 0. MGD ji Site 2 Level (depth) vs Pipe Diameter 1.00 0.80 0.60 ♦ d/D 0.40 0.20 vvvv 0.00 O N N H 0 � N � m m m 11!R Utility Systems Science &Software J/ lent 2.95 3 IN 2 IN 1 1.62 1 IN IN Utility Systems Science &Software J/ MH 294, MH 347 & MH 348 KPFF Consulting Engineers Site 3 graphs from USa Flow Monitoring Website is � 5 0 Sep 29 Sep 30 00 01 oz Va m oa on as w .n.. w • Level • Veladry • Flow ♦ Pipe Crown • Rzin a 3 2 1L 1 a a 3 � > 3 �{ t j uir« 1 1 V� 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 35 d7o& b' 0 velocity Figure: Site 3 graph of flow, level & velocity and scatter plot of level in relation to velocity To summarize the site statistics presented on the following page: • During peak flows, -35% of the pipe's capacity is utilized. • Average flows utilize -15% of the pipe's capacity. • A minimum velocity of 2 fps is generally required during peak flow to re- suspend solids. This site averages over 3 fps; therefore, blockage due to settlement of normal system solids should not be an issue. The lower velocities at this site result in it having the lowest capacity of the three sites, but since this is the most upstream site, its reduced capacitance should not adversely affect downstream conditions. • The d/D ratio for gravity drains of 10 inches in diameter should be no greater than 0.50 for the ultimate peak flow condition. The average d/D ratio during this week was 0.23 and the maximum was 0.37. Therefore, this site still has capacity available. Utility Systems Science & Software �� J Descdplipn: Address: 2659 Rne Street Manhole No: 398 al Rosen ad Pipe Dian a ev 10 Site ID: 389 G.P: R .,mead D e ID: 0 Figure: Site 3 graph of flow, level & velocity and scatter plot of level in relation to velocity To summarize the site statistics presented on the following page: • During peak flows, -35% of the pipe's capacity is utilized. • Average flows utilize -15% of the pipe's capacity. • A minimum velocity of 2 fps is generally required during peak flow to re- suspend solids. This site averages over 3 fps; therefore, blockage due to settlement of normal system solids should not be an issue. The lower velocities at this site result in it having the lowest capacity of the three sites, but since this is the most upstream site, its reduced capacitance should not adversely affect downstream conditions. • The d/D ratio for gravity drains of 10 inches in diameter should be no greater than 0.50 for the ultimate peak flow condition. The average d/D ratio during this week was 0.23 and the maximum was 0.37. Therefore, this site still has capacity available. Utility Systems Science & Software �� J MH 294, MH 347 & MH 348 KPFF Consulting Engineers Site 3 statistics from data analysis Flow Stats Level Stats Velocity Stats . Avenge Lrvel 4 IN •Mln Lml 3 IN •MmVMOtlry 2 IN 0.93 1.5 MGD IN •fSi. GP 4 FPS •grxege velotlry 1.30 0IF'— .Mm vewan 3.14 • Avenge Raw 3 FPS 1. MGD 2.13 2 FPS 0.5 MGD OA6 32 1 FPS FPS 0. MGD Site 3 Level (depth) vs Pipe Diameter 1.00 0.80 0.60 ♦ d/D 0.40 0.20 0.00 a a a e � N � N N N 5 IN •Max leuN . Avenge Lrvel 4 IN •Mln Lml 3 IN 2.27 2 IN 0.93 1 IN IN MH 294, MH 347 & MH 348 KPFF Consulting Engineers US' is a California Corporation Federal ID No. 33 -0729605 and qualifies as a Minority Business Enterprise. US3 has certified as an MBE with the California Public Utility Commission's authorized clearinghouse, Verification Number: 97ES0008. US' is a specialty service company for the Water & Waste Water industry, providing monitoring and control for Utilities since 1996, who is in the forefront of this industry by taking the proven technological approaches, developed in other high tech industries and applying them to protect one of our most precious natural resources - our water. US' engineers and technical personnel have applied advanced instrumentation system technology to watertwaste water open channel flow monitoring, pipeline evaluation, engineering, and data analysis, all coupled to the power of the Internet This unique integrated systems approach allows the company to bring greater insight and intelligence gathering information about the water and waste water system performance of our clients, and in turn to support the fulfillment of their commitments to manage and cost effectively design, operate, and maintain these systems. Figure: US3 utilizes exclusively Hach March- McBirney Flo -Dar Meters Utility Systems Science & Software A1 !J MH 294, MH 347 & MH 348 KPFF Consulting Engineers Moreover, US' supports Municipalities, Consulting Engineering firms and other watertwaste water systems integrators by providing temporary technical services for engineering, software programming and technical site maintenance and calibration site support work, primarily in the Water and Waste Water industries. Figure: All technicians are certified for Confined Space Entry. Name, Title, Address and Telephone numbers of persons to contact concerning this report. Darlene Szczublewski Senior Civil Engineer PE, QSD, LEED AP dariene.szczublewski@uscubed.com 6190 Fairmount Ave., Suite E San Diego, CA 92120 619.546.4281 Work 855.USCUBED Toll Free 619 - 246 -5304 Cell 714.542.1332 Fax Tom Williams Engineering Manager Tom.williams@uscubed.com 6190 Fairmount Ave., Suite E San Diego, CA 92120 619.546.4281 Work 855.USCUBED Toll Free 619.398.7799 Cell 714.542.1332 Fax Utility Systems Science & Software USN' MH 294, MH 347 & MH 348 OFF Consulting Engineers Tab 2: Methods & Procedures & Equipment 2.1 Methods and Procedures Utility Systems Science & Software provided KPFF Consulting Engineers with an off the shelf, non - proprietary solution that included three state of the art Hach Flo-Dar® AV Sensor systems. The US' team followed the following procedure. • Reviewed the identified sites. • Validated the sites for suitability for flow monitoring and traffic control. • Calibrated and installed flow monitoring equipment per manufacturer recommendations. • Validated preliminary data. • Modified each system to further support the monitoring requirements. 2.2 Equipment Permanent Senses Wall Mount lTempoeary Mount Also AvallaWel - Ultrasonic Level Sensor Figures: Equipment installed as part of the Sewer Flow Monitoring Study Utility Systems Science & Software USN, MH 294, MH 347 & MH 348 KPFF Consulting Engineers W" Figure: Web - Enabled Flo -Dar® AV Sensor, Radar -Based Velocity /Area Flow Meter 2.2.1 SPECIFICATIONS • Enclosure o IP68 Waterproof rating, Polystyrene • Dimensions • 160. 5Wx432 .2Lx297Dmm(6.32x16.66x11.7in.), • With SVS, D = 387 mm (15.2 in.) • Weight o 4.8 kg (10.5 lbs.) • Operating Temperature o -10 to 50 °C (14 to 122•F) • Storage Temperature o AO to 60 °C (40 to 140•F) • Power Requirements o Supplied by FL900 Flow Logger, Flo- Logger, or Flo- Station Utility Systems Science & Software HS MH 294, MH 347 & MH 348 KPFF Consulting Engineers • Interconnecting Cable • Disconnect available at both sensor and logger or Flo- Station • Polyurethane, 0.400 (±0.015) in. diameter; IP68 • Standard length 9 m (30% maximum 305 m (1000 ft) • Cables —available in two styles: • connectors at both ends • connector from sensor with open leads to desiccant hub, desiccant hub with connector to logger. A potting /sealant kit will be included. This can be used to run the cable through conduit. • Certification o Certified to: FCC Part 15.245: FCC ID: VIC- FLODAR24 o Industry Canada Spec. RSS210. v7: IC No.: 6149A- FLODAR24 SURCHARGE DEPTH MEASUREMENT o Auto zero function maintains zero error below 0.5 cm (0.2 in.) • Method o Piezo - resistive pressure transducer with stainless steel diaphragm • Range o 3.5 m (138 in.), overpressure rating 2.5 x full scale VELOCITY MEASUREMENT • Method o Radar • Range o 0.23 to 6.10 m/s (0.75 to 20 fits) • Frequency Range o 24.075 to 24.175 GHz, 15.2 mW (max.) • Accuracy o ±0.5 %; ±0.03 m/s (10.1 fits) DEPTH MEASUREMENT • Method o Ultrasonic • Standard Operating Range from Flo -Dar Housing to Liquid o 0 to 152.4 cm (0 to 60 in.) • Optional Extended Level Operating Range from Transducer Face to Liquid o 0 to 6.1 m (0 to 20 ft.) with 43.18 cm (17 in.) dead band, temperature compensated. • Accuracy o ±1 %;10.25 cm ( ±0.1 in.) Utility Systems Science & Software �� MH 294, MH 347 & MH 348 KPFF Consulting Engineers FLOW MEASUREMENT • Method o Based on Continuity Equation • Accuracy o ±5% of reading typical where flow is in a channel with uniform flow conditions and is not surcharged, :0% full scale max. SURCHARGE CONDITIONS DEPTH/VELOCITY DEPTH (Std with Flo -Dar Sensor) • Surcharge depth supplied by Flo -Dar sensor. VELOCITY (Optional Surcharge Velocity Sensor) • Method o Electromagnetic • Range o 24.8 m's ( ±16 f Js) • Accuracy o ±0.15 ft/s or 4% of reading, whichever is greater. • Zero Stability o 20.05 ft/s The Flo -Dar Open Channel Flow Meters provide an innovative approach to open channel flow monitoring. Combining digital Doppler radar velocity sensing with ultrasonic pulse echo level sensing Flo -Dar provides accurate open channel flow monitoring without the fouling problems associated with submerged sensors. 2.2.2 Perfect solution for Difficult Flow Conditions: • Flows with High Solids Content • High Temperature Flc° • Caustic Flows • Large Man -Made Ch, • High Velocities • Shallow Flows Utility Systems Science & Software �1FS �� MH 294, MH 347 & MH 348 KPFF Consulting Engineers Vel Fol Level Footprint 2.3 Benefits 2.3.1 Personnel have no contact with the flow during installation. 2.3.2 Maintenance caused by sensor fouling is eliminated 2.3.3 Field Replaceable /Interchangeable Sensors and Monitors 2.4 How It Works Flo -Dar transmits a digital Doppler radar beam that interacts with the fluid and reflects back signals at a different frequency than that which was transmitted. These reflected signals are compared with the transmitted frequency. The resulting frequency shift provides an accurate measure of the velocity and the direction of the flow. Level is detected by ultrasonic pulse echo. Flow is then calculated based on the Continuity Equation: Q = V x A, Where Q = Flow, V = Average Velocity and A = Area 2.5 Accurate Flow Measurements Flo -Dar provides the user with highly accurate flow measurements under a wide range of flows and site conditions.By measuring the velocity of the fluid from above, Flo -Dar eliminates accuracy problems inherent with submerged sensors including sensor disturbances, high solids content and distribution of reflectors. Utility Systems Science & Software ��� A H Understanding the Flo -Darr" McBIxrMEY Flow Measuring S stem A Higher Level of Flow Measurement b Y Independent tests verify non - contact flowmeter is highly accurate under both open channel and surcharge conditions Flo-Dar is the only non - contact open channel velocity/area type flow meter available for measurement of flows in municipal wastewater and storm water sewers. Flo-Dar consists of a radar -based velocity measurement system and an ultrasonio-based pulse echo depth measurement system. Flo -Dar has an optional Flo-Dar combines the information from the velocity and depth systems along surcharge velocity sensor with sitespecific data (pipe siz, pipe shape, � p rofile ) and provides the (electromagnetic type) and user with highly accurate, reliable flow data under a wide range of flow depth sensor (pressure velocities and depths. Since the mdar velocity sensor and the ultrasonic depth transducer) that provides the sensor cease to provide useful data when submerged, Flo -Dar has an optional continuation of accurate flow surcharge velocity sensor (electromagnetic type) and depth sensor (pressure data where intermittent, transducer) that provides for the continuous measurement of accurate flow data surcharged flow conditions are where intermittent, surcharged flow conditions are experienced. experienced The data system merges the data from these two independent flow systems and provides the user with a single flow signal that accurately represents flow over a range from a dry pipe to extreme surcharge conditions. Accuracy tests performed at Alden Research labs have shown that the Flo -Dar is highly accurate under both open channel and surcharge (submerged) conditions. Accuracy tests performed at Alden Research Labs have Measurement of Flow Under Free Flow, shown that the Flo -Dar is Non - submerged Conditions highly accurate under both open channel and surcharge (submerged) conditions. Open Channel Velocity Open channel flow is any flow in a channel that has a free surface. Flo -Dar measures open channel flow as depicted in Figure 1. The radar velocity sensor measures flow in a manner similar to how radar guns measure the velocity of a baseball or an automobile. Copyright ® 2005 Marsh- Meahney, Inc. Understanding the Flo-Dv Flow Measuring system Fags I Copyright ®2005 Marsh - McBimey, Inc. Understanding the Rl Dar Flow M..ing Sy stem Fage2 A radar "horn" contained inside of the watertight housing transmits a microwave beam through the housing at a defined angle to the flow surface. Factors that influence the Disturbances on the surface reflect some of the microwaves back to the horn. accuracy and stability of the The frequency of these returning microwave signals have been shifted (the measured surface velocity Doppler effect) by an amount directly proportional to the speed of the Marsh - McBimey has moving surface. This frequency shift is detected and measured by the Flo - developed and patented a Dar flow meter and the data is stored as a measure of the surface velocity. process that yields an accurate 3. Angle of Microwave Beam - The sensor is placed in a rigid mount that is determination of the average Since the accurate measurement of open channel flow requires the accurate velocity from the measurement determination of the average velocity of the flow stream, the measured of the surface velocity at a surface velocity must be dynamically modified to obtain an accurate average known point on the flow velocity for use in the Continuity Equation, Q= Vav x A). Marsh - McBimey surface. has developed and patented a process that yields an accurate determination of the average velocity from the measurement of the surface velocity at a known point on the flow surface. Copyright ®2005 Marsh - McBimey, Inc. Understanding the Rl Dar Flow M..ing Sy stem Fage2 If one analyzes each of the four factors that influence the accuracy and stability of the measured surface velocity signal, it becomes obvious that a Factors that influence the Doppler Radar based velocity sensor is very accurate and stable: accuracy and stability of the measured surface velocity I . Transmitted Frequency - The transmitted frequency of 24.175 GHz is signal: controlled to an accuracy of +/- 0.065% 1. Transmitted Frequency 2. Speed of Microwaves in Air - Essentially constant at the speed of light 2. Speed of Microwaves in 3. Angle of Microwave Beam - The sensor is placed in a rigid mount that is Air positioned parallel to the water surface (i.e. nearly level). The sensor can 3. Angle of Microwave Beam be removed from the mount and reinstalled while easily maintaining its 4. Calculation of Mean original mounting location. velocity 4. Calculation of Average Velocity—The relationship between the sensed (surface) velocity and the average velocity varies with pipe size and water depth. Copyright ®2005 Marsh - McBimey, Inc. Understanding the Rl Dar Flow M..ing Sy stem Fage2 By applying algorithms developed through basic hydraulic principles and from actual flow data taken at Alden Labs and at various customer sites, the surface velocity is transformed into an accurate representation of the mean velocity. Since the location of the Since the location of the sensing region on the flow surface is known, the sensing region on the flow repeatability of the surface velocity measurement is excellent and its surface is known, the relationship to the mean velocity is predictable. repeatability of the surface velocity measurement is Figures 2a, 26, 2c and 2d depict the relationship that exists between various excellent and its relationship velocity contours and the mean velocity at different depth/Diameter ratios. to the mean velocity is very Note that the velocity gradients that exist throughout the flow cross section are generally represented at the flow's surface - essentially creating a "finger- predictable print" of the velocity contours that exist beneath the surface. As one might expect, the velocities near the wall are less than the mean velocity and those near the surface are greater than the mean velocity. Since a) the radar sensor measures surface velocity at a know location on the flow surface, and b) these various surface velocities have known relationships to the mean velocity, then the mean velocity can be reliably and accurately calculated. The transit time to the flow surface and back is recorded and the distance calculated by knowing the speed of sound at the site which has been corrected by an embedded temperature sensor. The accuracy of the depth measurement is 1 %, + / -0.1 inch. Measurement of Flow Under Submerged Conditions Electromagnetic (EM) Surcharge Velocity Sensor As stated previously, the radar based velocity sensor measures the surface velocity of the flowing stream by detecting the average speed of the surface irregularities. When the radar sensor becomes totally submerged, it becomes "blind" and is no longer capable of measuring the fluid velocity. Copyright O 2005 Marsh- MCairtey, Inc. Undmhutling the Flo-Dar Flow Meuuring System Page; Note that the velocities present on the surface are typically within 10% of the The accuracy of the calculated average velocity. The accuracy of the calculated mean velocity, after average velocity, after correction, is typically between 2% to 5 %. (See Note l.) correction, is typically between 2% to 501. Ultrasonic Pulse Echo Depth Measurement Ultrasonic pulse echo depth sensors operate by energizing a piezoelectric transducer with an electronic pulse. This pulse creates an ultrasonic pulse of energy that travels to the flow surface where a portion of the energy returns to the transducer. The transit time to the flow surface and back is recorded and the distance calculated by knowing the speed of sound at the site which has been corrected by an embedded temperature sensor. The accuracy of the depth measurement is 1 %, + / -0.1 inch. Measurement of Flow Under Submerged Conditions Electromagnetic (EM) Surcharge Velocity Sensor As stated previously, the radar based velocity sensor measures the surface velocity of the flowing stream by detecting the average speed of the surface irregularities. When the radar sensor becomes totally submerged, it becomes "blind" and is no longer capable of measuring the fluid velocity. Copyright O 2005 Marsh- MCairtey, Inc. Undmhutling the Flo-Dar Flow Meuuring System Page; Figures 2a, 2b, 2c and 2d depict the relationship that exists between various velocity contours and the mean velocity at different depth/Diameter ratios. Note that the velocity gradients that exist throughout the flow cross section are generally represented at the flow's surface — essentially creating 'finger-print "of the velocity contours that exist beneath the surface. �n�ta�at Mean Velouly Contour Figure 2a: d/D= 0.10 Figure 2c: d/D= 0.50 Figt 2b: d/D= 0.25 Figure 2d: d/D= 0.75 Copyright ®2005 Marsh- McBimcy, Inc. Undcrs ndmg Ne Flo -Dar Flow Mc ncg Systan ft, 4 To allow for the uninterrupted measurement of flow under conditions that change from open channel flow to submerged flow as experienced in sewers that surcharge, Marsh- McBimey has added an additional surcharge velocity sensor. Placed on the underside of the standard Flo -Dar sensor, this electromagnetic sensor becomes active when the flow level rises to within four inches of the Radar horn and remains activated until the flow once again falls beneath that depth. „+.,, Copyright 0 2005 Marsh- McBimry, Inc. Understanding the F]o-D Flow Masming System Page 5 The optional surcharge velocity sensor is based on the Faraday Principle of To allow for the uninterrupted Electromagnetic Induction. This is the same well - proven principle that "fall measurement offlow under bore" or "spool- piece" magmeters utilize, the most widely used method of conditions that change from measuring wastewater flow in full pipes. open channel flow to submerged In the Marsh- McBirrley design, an electromagnet embedded within the flow as experienced in sewers streamlined sensor generates a magnetic field in the flowing stream. The flow that surcharge, Marsh- McBirney of the water passing through this magnetic field generates voltages in the water has added an additional that are directly proportional to the speed of the water passing the sensor. surcharge velocity sensor. Marsh- McBimey uses an in -house 120 foot long towing basin for calibration of electromagnetic sensors. Tow carriage accuracy is better than +/- 0.5 %. Placed on the underside of the standard Flo-Dar sensor, this Surcharge Depth Sensor electromagnetic sensor becomes Once submerged conditions exist, the ultrasonic depth sensor ceases to provide active when the flow level rises useful depth information. To measure depth of the flow during surcharge to within 4 inches of the Radar conditions, a pressure transducer embedded in the Flo -Dar sensor is used in the horn and remains activated until system. the flow once again falls beneath that depth. The location of the surcharge velocity sensor relative to the crown of the pipe is shown in Figure 3. This location provides sensing of the velocity stream just below the crown of the pipe where the flow exits the upstream piping. Empirical data, verified by independent tests at Alden Labs in Holden, Massachusetts indicate that the velocity measured at this location, when multiplied by 0.9, is typically equal to the average velocity. „+.,, Copyright 0 2005 Marsh- McBimry, Inc. Understanding the F]o-D Flow Masming System Page 5 Laboratory Tests In September 2002 Marsh- McBitney contracted Alden Research Labs of Holden, Massachusetts to perform flow accuracy tests on the Flo -Dar sensor with an electromagnetic surcharge sensor. The Flo -Dar was subjected to a flow range of 400 gpm to over 9000 gpm in a pipe size of 23.5 inches. The pipe had a slope of approximately zero. The test results are shown in Figure 4, Figure 5, Figure 6 and Figure 7. 1000 900 SOD 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 Alden Flow (epm) ♦ Flodar Flow(Spm) a Miens Linear(Flodar Flow (gpm I) Figure 4 compares the Flo -Dar flow vs. the Alden Standard (weigh tank). The flow condition for this test was both open channel flow and surcharge (submerged) flow Copyright ®2005 Metsh- Mcnimry, Inc. Understanding the Flo-D. Flow Measuring System P4e6 The flow tests showed that the Flo -Dar compared very favorably with the Alden flow standard (weigh tank) over a wide range of flows where the open channel flow ranged from 400 gpm to 6000 gpm, and the surcharge The flow tests showed that the (submerged) flow ranged from 6000 gpm to 9000 gpm. Flo -Dar compared very favorably with the Alden flow Tests were also run to depict how Flo -Dar performs under transition conditions standard (weigh tank) over a where the flow goes from an open channel condition to a surcharge wide range of flows where the (submerged) condition. open channel flow ranged from Test results show that the data from the open channel radar sensor and 400 gpm to 6000 gpm, and the surcharge electromagnetic sensor overlay each other and the Alden Standard. surcharge (submerged) flow Tests were ran under both free flow conditions as well as where the pipe outlet ranged from 6000 gpm to 9000 was partially blocked so as to create an entirely different velocity/depth VAN relationship. Additional flow accuracy tests were nor on a 36' pipe at Alden on July 17, 2003. All of the data points were shown to be within 3.5% of the Alden Standard. Alden Flow Accuracy Test -23.6" Pipe ./Zero Slope 1000 900 SOD 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 Alden Flow (epm) ♦ Flodar Flow(Spm) a Miens Linear(Flodar Flow (gpm I) Figure 4 compares the Flo -Dar flow vs. the Alden Standard (weigh tank). The flow condition for this test was both open channel flow and surcharge (submerged) flow Copyright ®2005 Metsh- Mcnimry, Inc. Understanding the Flo-D. Flow Measuring System P4e6 Test results show that the data from the open channel radar sensor andsurcharge electromagnetic sensor overlay each other and the Alden Standard. 0 _ 7 5 4 3 2 M 1 Alden -- Velocity Crossover Test 0 5 10 15 20 25 Flow Depth (inches) ♦ Ruler Velocity (fps) a BA Velocity (fps) Figure 5 compares the velocity measured by the Radar sensor plotted against flow depth. Note that when the depth reaches approximately 18 inches the EM surcharge sensor has been activated. There is one data point where both sensors are active and then the EM surcharge sensor continues to measure after the radar sensor has become submerged and inoperative. 8 7 6 _$ 5 e 4 i 3 1 0 Alden Surcharge Test - -Open End 17.5 18 18.5 19 19.5 20 20.5 ❑ ♦♦ �7 ♦ 0 5 10 15 20 25 Flow Depth (inches) ♦ Ruler Velocity (fps) a BA Velocity (fps) Figure 5 compares the velocity measured by the Radar sensor plotted against flow depth. Note that when the depth reaches approximately 18 inches the EM surcharge sensor has been activated. There is one data point where both sensors are active and then the EM surcharge sensor continues to measure after the radar sensor has become submerged and inoperative. 8 7 6 _$ 5 e 4 i 3 1 0 Alden Surcharge Test - -Open End 17.5 18 18.5 19 19.5 20 20.5 Flow Depth (inches) CRadar Velocity ( fps) • EM Sensor Velocity (fps) A Alden Vav (fps) Figure 6 depicts a second surcharge test where the flow was incremented more slowly in order to achieve additional data points in the area where both the Radar sensor and the EM surcharge sensors are active simultaneously. Note that both the Radar sensor and the EM sensor are active between flow depths of 18 inches and 18.5 inches. Also, note how both the Radar and EM data points overlay each other and the Alden standard. Copyrighl ®2005 Marsh- McIicuy, Inc. Understanding the Fle-Der Flow Measuring System PW t The accuracy of Flo-Dar under both open channel conditions as well as surcharge (submerged) conditions is more than adequate for the most demanding of metering applications including open channel billing applications. Additional tests performed at Alden in 2003 on a 36 "pipe again validated Flo -Dar's accuracy under open channel and surchargeflow. Alden Surcharge Test - -With Blockage 2 1.75 1.5 Q 1.25 -- 1 0 0.75 m > 0.5 -' 0.25 0 10 12 14 16 15 20 22 Flow Depth (Inches) • radar Velocity (fps) • 9A Sensor Velocity (fpe) A Alden Vav (fps) Figure 7 depicts the result of a surcharge test at a lower flow rate. In this test, a round plate with multiple holes was placed at the cadet of the test pipe so as to achieve submerged flow a a lower velocity. Note the consistency of both the Radar velocity data and the EM velocity data as compared to the Alden standard. Figure 8 compares the Flo -Dar flow vs. the Alden Standard (weigh tank) for flow accuracy tests in a 36" pipe. These tests were performed on July 17, 2003. Note that at 17,000 gpm the sensor was under surcharge conditions. All of the data points were shown to be within 3.5% of the Alden Standard. Copyright 02005 Marsh- McBiraq, Inc. Understanding the Flo-Dar Flow Measuring System Page Alden Flow Accuracy Test -26" PIPS 20000 n 15000 a 0 10000 - -- LL O 5000 LL 0 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 Alden Flow (gpm) ♦ Floch r Flow (gpm) • Bd Sensor — Linear (Fkidar Flax (gpm)) Figure 8 compares the Flo -Dar flow vs. the Alden Standard (weigh tank) for flow accuracy tests in a 36" pipe. These tests were performed on July 17, 2003. Note that at 17,000 gpm the sensor was under surcharge conditions. All of the data points were shown to be within 3.5% of the Alden Standard. Copyright 02005 Marsh- McBiraq, Inc. Understanding the Flo-Dar Flow Measuring System Page Copyright 0 2005 Marsh- Mcahaey, Inc. Ondaslanding the Flo-Dar Flow Mmusing System Page 9 The Flo -Dar data logger records all four of the flow parameters - open channel surface velocity and depth, and surcharged velocity and depth. When the water depth is below the bottom of the Flo -Dar sensor, only the surface velocity and the flow depth of the open channel flow are used in the flow Flo -Dar measures open channel velocity and depth by calculation. non - contact means virtually the flow depth is such that both the surcharge depth sensor is activated eliminating the need to and a conductivity switch is activated, then flow is calculated using the full and periodically clean the sensors pipe dimensions for area and the surcharge velocity sensor for velocity. as required by all submerged type sensors. Conclusions Flo-Dar is a rugged, general purpose flow meter for use in most open channels such as sanitary sewers, storm water sewers and other man -made channels such as aqueducts as well as certain natural channels such as small streams. Flo -Dar measures open channel velocity and depth by non-contact means virtually eliminating the need to periodically clean the sensors as required by all submerged type sensors. Data recovery from Flo -Dar Data recovery from Flo -Dar deployments ranges between 98% to 100% even under site conditions that deployments ranges between render most submerged sensors inoperable. 98% to 100 % even under site conditions that render most The accuracy of Flo -Dar under both open channel conditions as well as submerged sensors inoperable. surcharge (submerged) conditions is more than adequate for the most demanding of metering applications including open channel billing applications. Note 1. rAe accumry ojopen channel Jlow miters can be affected by adverse ca didom presentatarry metedngsai. the accuraryspec jmtaaw almost mangy craters aregenemde stated under ideal conditions. Copyright 0 2005 Marsh- Mcahaey, Inc. Ondaslanding the Flo-Dar Flow Mmusing System Page 9 Open Channel Flow Monitoring Study IR3 Utility Systems Science & Software 601 N. Parkcenter Drive Suite 209 Santa Ana, CA 92705 714 -564 -3494 PIN 105006001 Index Flow Monitoring parts ................................................. ..............................2 7) Extension Pipe, Tee Fitting, and Bushing Flo-Ware Software Configurat ion ................................... ..............................3 8) Clamp Set with qty. (8)'/.-20 Bolts Set up the Mounting Frame and lack -Bar Assembly .............. .............................3-6 9) Desiccant Capsule InstallSensor ............................................................ ..............................6 10) Laser - Alignment Tool Connectthe Data Logger .............................................. ..............................6 11) Installation & Operations Manual Configure the Data Logger using Flo-Ware ............................ ...........................7 -11 Collect Real Time Readings to Confirm Operation .............. ............................... 12 -13 Secure the Data Logger and Sensor Cable and Leave the Site ...... ..........................13.14 KeyInformation ..................................................... ............................... 15 1) Locate the following parts (See Figure 1) 1) Flo -Dar Sensor 7) Extension Pipe, Tee Fitting, and Bushing 2) Flo-Dar Logger 8) Clamp Set with qty. (8)'/.-20 Bolts 3) Flo-Dar Communication Cable 9) Desiccant Capsule 4) Flo-Ware Software CD 10) Laser - Alignment Tool 5) Sensor Mounting Frame 11) Installation & Operations Manual 6) Jack -Bar Assembly 12) Start-Up Guide (not pictured) Figure 1 Methods & Procedures 2) Flo -Ware Software Configuration. 1. Insert the "Flo -Ware For Windows Resources CD" into your drive. 2. Select (single- click) "floware4.exe" from the "Software" box on your screen. 3. Select "Save" from the "File Download—Security Warning' screen. 4. Select "Save" from the `Save As" screen. 5. Select "Run" from the "Download Complete" screen. 6. Select "Run" from the "Intemet Explorer — Security Warning" screen. 7. An installation wizard will initiate and load the files onto your hard drive. 8. Select the language you want to use from the `Select Language" screen. 9. Select "Next" from the "Welcome" screen. 10. Select "Next" from the "Choose Destination Location" screen. It. Select "Next" from the `Select Components" screen. 12. Select "Next" from the `Start Installation" screen. 13. Select "Finish" from the "Installation Complete" screen. 14. Scroll down the screen and find "Flo-Dar / SVS" on the left side of the screen. Select (single - click) "flodar.exe" from that box on your screen 15. Select "Run" from the "File Download —Security Warning" screen. 16. Select "Run" from the "Intemet Explorer — Security Warning" screen. 17. An installation wizard will initiate and install the files onto your had drive. 18. Select "Finish" from the "Flo-Dar / SVS File Driver Installation" screen. NOTE: There are ample help files on the "Flo -Ware for Windows Resources CD" 3) Set up the mounting frame and jack -bar assembly. A) Install thejack -bar assembly in the manhole. As a general rule, the jack -bar should be approximately 20" to 24" above the crown (top) of the pipe. In order to reduce move- ment of the jack -bar due to the cantilever action of the sensor, the jack -bar should be located as parallel to the pipe and invert of the manhole as possible. MOST Desirable Jack -Bar Mount LEAST Desirable Jack -Bar Mount B) Assemble the frame, clamp -set, bushing, tee, and extension as shown in figure 2. Position the frame as close as possible to the lip of the pipe by sliding the assembly along the jack -bar with the slide. Be sure to secure the set- screw. Figure 2 Q Set the elevation of the frame (measured to the top of the frame tubes) to be 6" above the inside crown of the pipe (for pipe I.D. under 25" ) or 5" above the inside crown of the pipe (for pipe I.D. of 25" and greater). An easy way to set the frame elevation is to measure the distance from the bottom of the manhole invert to the top of the mounting frame tubes. (This assumes that there is no drop a hydraulic jump from the lip of the pipe to the invert) Set the dimension to equal the pipe I.D. plus 6" (for pipe I.D. under 25") or the pipe I.D. plus 5" (for pipe I.D. of 25" or greater). Figure 3 D) If you are not interested in measuring flow under sur- charge conditions, or if you are sure the site will not sur- charge, you can mount the sensor at any elevation above the surface of the water as long as the frame is within 60" of the water surface. When the sensor is mounted at high- er elevations than those shown in Figure 3, it will still read normal velocity and level readings. Surcharge level will still be recorded properly, but surcharge velocity readings will not be possible. If you are mounting the sensor at higher elevations, it is still necessary to confirm the location of the velocity radar beam as described on pages 5 & 6 of this guide. E) Align and level the frame by placing the laser alignment tool in the frame as shown in figure 4. Utilize the bubble -level on the tool to level the frame. Figure 4 F) Snap the laser- pointer into the laser alignment tool as shown below in figure 5. It is a tight fit. Make sure the pointer is firmly and evenly seated in its slot as shown. Figure 5 G) With the laser- pointer snapped into the tool, as shown, place the alignment tool back into the frame. The laser is now set up to duplicate the velocity radar beam angle. Use the laser - pointer to shine the beam onto the surface of the water. Ideally, the beam should he aligned so that it lands in the middle of the surface of the water inside the pipe. NOTE: There are numerous adjustment points on the frame and jack -bar assembly. H) Remove the laser - pointer from the tool and re- install it into the tool as shown below in figure 6. With the laser- pointer in the position shown, it is now act up to duplicate the ultra -sonic level transducer beam location. 1) Align the beam so that it lands in the middle of the channel you are measuring. NOTE: You may have to check level, velocity laser alignment, and level laser alignment several times to ensure all three are correct. Adjusting one or more of the alignments will often affect one or more of the other adjustments! It is critical to remember to tighten all bolts on the jack -bar and clamp set to assure that the sensor frame does not move, once positioned correctly. Figure 6 4) Install the Sensor. A) Gently lower the sensor into the mounting frame and lock it in place by rotating the bail assembly (located on top of the sensor) 90 degrees. The two locking amts will extend out to engage the slots in the vertical side webs of the frame ensuring that the sensor will not dislodge from the frame, particularly if the manhole surcharges. NOTE: Make sure the sensor is placed in the frame so that the cables are exiting the sensor on the downstream (manhole effluent) side. (see Figure 7 below) 5) Connect the Data Logger. A) Connect the sensor cables to the data logger. Make sure the grey cable -end connects to the connector marked grey. Connect the yellow cable -end to the connector marked yellow. Tighten the threaded cable connector -ends securely to the data logger connect- ors. B) Remove the desiccant capsule from the vacuum - sealed bag and plug it onto the brass A.P.R. fitting (located next to the yellow cable connector) on the data logger. See Figure 8 below. Figure 7 Figure 8 6) Configure the Data Logger using Flo-Ware Software. A) Connect the interface cable from the data logger to the laptop's 9 -pin serial port. NOTE: If your laptop does not have a 9 -pin serial port, you will have to use a USB port with a USB -to- serial port adapter (not provided by Marsh- McBirney). B) Double -click the "Flo-Ware" icon on your computer's desktop. C) When Flo -Ware opens, you will see the screen shown below. D) Place your cursor on the line that says "Communicate with an instrument" and single - click. A small pop -up window will open. Place your cursor over the "Flo -Dar" line and single - click- A second pop-up window will appear. Single -click on the word "com- munications". The site set -up screen will appear as shown below. s... sm oaa.ss. smio l� cW.ra. is nn n..uar °7 si.nrw.�� .p im cc - R.msaw smasa,o s.w moo n s.a',i.n ow Eammesron� sm oe '1 X,1 E) Proceed to enter your specific site information into the appropriate boxes in the site set -up screen. M example of a typical set -up is shown below, along with explanations - actions of the input required from the user. SOS -. I peedM.I R"Tim I Vex DMaI PIO. —IA t,I Srue SO Defile See Re Seep SeMSeen SO ID M.Mb 415 MenuY Fwetl EYn S11- Sys CicW� Mpw. -_ DWOAv 2�[U C,b Tle.�1-5 m sm'.0W n S.mbe l' P.e� S_onm so . Cve.. Floe Dri Fm_GD7D L ExlvdaC Seep.__ S1.1Tene Inxmd'.le SM MJ¢b FU__ m CaIPUZ I Fex X CancA • Site I.D. and Location me self - explanatory. You MUST enter something in the site I.D. box in order for the program to work. Cycle time is the time interval between the start of each sample. • Number of samples is the number of I- minute samples that the instrument will take at the beginning of each cycle. • Flow Units can be selected by using the pull -down arrow to view the available choices. • Start Type is either immediate or delayed. If you choose a delayed start, you can use the pull -down arrow to reveal a calendar box and time box. You can use the pull down arrow on the calendar box to view convenient calendars which allow you to click on the date you desire. When using a delayed start, the instrument will "sleep" until the desired start-up date and time are reached. It will then "wake up" and start sampling. Multiplier should be left at 1.00 for most applications in round pipes. If you have a round pipe greater than 54" in diameter, or you we using the instrument in a square reetangular channel, or an odd - shaped channel, contact the Customer Support Department at 714 -542- 1004 for instructions about the multiplier. • Memory can be either "Fixed' or "Wrapped. If you choose "Fixed ", the instrument will stop collecting data once the memory is full. N `Wrapped' mode, when the memory be- comes full, the instrument will continue collecting data and will over -write the first data point, then the second, etc., with new data. This will continue indefinitely until a new set -up is downloaded to the instrument. • Shape is self - explanatory. If you are measuring flow in an odd- shaped conduit, please call the US3 at 714 -542 -1004 for detailed instructions. • Diameter is the INSIDE diameter of the pipe. This dimension should be measured in the field. Often, the pipe diameter is not what one assumes from the specs on a given pipe. Always measure the inside diameter to be sure of the dimension. • Sediment is the amount of non - flowing sediment that may be in the bottom of the pipe. The software will take sediment into account when calculating cross - sectional area for the flow calculation. If there is no sediment, leave the number at 0.00. • Sensor offset is the dimension from the top surface of the horizontal sensor mount- ing frame tubing, to the bottom of the invert or cannel. (see Figure 3, page 4) If you want to measure flow in a surcharge condition, or if you want to set the instru- ment up to measure flow in case the manhole surcharges, then the mounting frame should be located so that the sensor offset dimension is equal to the pipe diameter plus 6 inches for pipe diameters up to 24 ", or equal to the pipe diameter plus 5 inches for pipe diameters greater than 24 ". • Single -click on the "Extended Setup" button. • Single -click on `Surcharge Level Cal" • A window marked "Calculate Surcharge Level Cal will appear as shown below. SA Se IRe Mee Save SA SA ID I— Ez EA S" C,c im SAID �l5 Sembe I' FMM Ufi MGD FWD Wh Piewa i,aN,m.. Krum Fn SWTi Sew F—n rd•Saw Mao. aW n CM Js — a x fmcd M ,/ Or I�cFe X Ca , • Type 0.00 in the box marked "known ". • Single -click on the "Take Sample" box. • Allow the unit to perform a real time sample of the surcharge pressure transducer. This will take approx. 45 seconds. The software will fill in the box marked °Sensor" and the box marked "Level Cal" with the proper values automatically. 7)Save the site information to your hard drive by clicking on the "Save Site" button near the upper left -hand corner of the set -up screen. 8) Download the site information to the data logger by clicking on the "Send Setup" button near the upper right -hand corner of the site set -up screen. sLesmn I HMMde I MedT� IV DdIRd —I adN. S. Cycb T'M l "r Ilni ®nivNE 10"" NedGa la tls13vg5K $ertlee I' `le'eda S.T1 V ImmetliM Honey, SpmyNlurnrl Mlo cvmee Mgidmenoy fbv Unl MGD 6xletldva hdl be luimim to Lp EYa WTYYe r sm��e Letl MI � m r K_G,vdo Nene DK - Lem D" Ixne Tempaae.e on c.aw OK SvcFmge Levd OP Imlm X nG U_ awMY �mva 9) Turn on (check the boxes) both of the SVS channels as shown above. 10) Adjust the instrument clock to match your laptop computer clock as shown below. Use the pull -downs next to the date and time to help you set the instrument clock time. Click OK. 5ftSwJAP Mtlrl fled TinelV Ddal RdV-1 Pd]Anl Saw St. DeMeSlle R. S. Sdd S., SAa10 -WrA p5 MenwY fi d luer6an EImS4ed si­ RNa Cy Tme 1 Sspde[� 1"111-1 J11k 124IA05 LM U.I MGD P.—PM S.T1 V ImmetliM Lmlµlel auck F2VM 4103]PM MJpfa P'e' rck ✓ ly. 1 z Cercel InRw Cdcuc ./ DK InMss J( Cmcd 10 11) A warning screen will appear as shown below. Select whether or not you want to reset the logger flow totalizer, then click OK. sM sew MaaiMea Maal T,n I uewo.a A.ee� =ml aann I saasie o.M, se Meals.. seas.. swD ManMe pS Memory Iaatim EYn Seen sly O¢i6' Cy.eime�� ^•Warning••' Mwr WM MGO data. Continue anyway/ Set Typa I'"; MJ W lm r?ee�ow� Canml ./ OK InGe, J( camel 12) The "Send setup complete" screen (shown below) will appear, indicating that you have successfully sent the setup data to the instrument. The instrument will now begin collecting data. M✓tb I.W Ovede - -- ,\ sentl a.up mnpl.e IMw ./ OK mM1ex I(Cak. sae sew I Rem Me,., I ne.Tm l v Deal W0.-1 em I sae slle oeMe SO He Sl seas.. nelo M°^ee "•' Meaey f0etl La tlbn E1n5aee sM1� GeWa . n, uv. Gia,ee tam a Cµ Tin 15 srd,ei UCD . G+ I' W- MMMMMM�--J; 3LPO vv. M✓tb I.W Ovede - -- ,\ sentl a.up mnpl.e IMw ./ OK mM1ex I(Cak. 13) Collect real -time readings to confirm proper operation of the instrument before leaving the metering site. A) Single -click on the `Real Time" tab on the Communications Screen. The real time screen will appear as shown below. an useo F aa - s vmresa vW tl v Jo sM ees.,b Brows /N rlrbaLMa3 Bamyvafaye Batley ✓ OK zC. B) Single -click on the "Sample" button. You may or may not see the following pop up window appear. siasaeal BeMNae xaarmn v oaa Fmlee�adw�l . ea. i. i Bmwsiam mn j The :eteRed now mefFM maY � Mateh Y me flo., emoe an,ee , the ,eeted teary em. update the CurreM:etip from the mnnened ioanmelt? B X 131 �� ✓ OK fps Y 3(23.W x Cm a VdNy Sp sun FddNtlm 12 C) Single-click the "Sample" button. It will take about 45 to 60 seconds for the meter to sample velocity, level, and send the data packet to the data logger. It will then display the real time sample on the screen (see below). sn smc aeeanam amrm ]Vv Daele,xeeJA nl amtire Dae -- '. S.iPk seem sm. lm SM IFAIISIDIUS Iruli m 1(NINGlR31 fM Aaw5M DH41669N12 CyGnL� 1 MDT V, . BtlbyVtl 125/ Bak�p Bnery Gm 3100 -J > - 310raieVe. � I[« Ia11 > >I X 310 X 124 ✓ DK 1P. Y X313 J( ce<el V.1 lySpehum rm Nda D) Confirm the level reading on the screen matches the actual water level in the pipe. Confirm that the velocity reading on the screen matches the velocity you approximate in the pipe. 14) Close the real time window and Flo -Ware main screen. 15) Disconnect the communications cable from your laptop to the data logger. 16) Screw the protective metal cap onto the communications port connector. in order to protect the connector from damage due to water or dirt. 17) Coil the sensor cables and secure them to the top ladder rung. Hang the data logger from the top ladder rung. (See Figure 9 next page.) Figure 9 You have successfully installed the Flo -Dar Flowmeter. Please remember to secure the manhole lid prim to leaving the site. If you have any questions regarding this flowmeter, please contact US3. Please note that telephone support is available Monday through Friday between 9:00 AM and 5:00 PM U.S. Pacific Standard Time. 14 Marsh- McBirney FLO -DAR" Area/Velocity Radar Flow Meter Sensor me Flo -Dar Sensor Provides an ideal solution for non - contact, maintenance -free portable or permanent sewer flow monitoring. Features and Benefits The Flo -Dar AreaNelocity Radar Flow Meter provides a revolutionary approach to open channel flow monitoring. The sensor combines advanced Digital Doppler Radar velocity sensing technology with ultrasonic pulse echo depth sensing to remotely measure open channel flow. Use with FL900 Series Flow Logger or Flo- Logger /Logger M for portable monitoring; for permanent monitoring sites, the Flo -Dar can be connected to the Flo- Station which displays flow rate, velocity, and level. (Sae Lit. No. 2709 [standard] or Lit. No. 2711 [wireless] for Flow Logger product information, or Lit. No. 2616 for Flo- Station product information). Intrinsically safe models available. Accurate Flow Measurement Flo -Dar provides the user with highly accurate flow measurements under a wide range of flows and site conditions. By measuring the velocity of the fluid from above, Flo -Dar eliminates accuracy problems inherent with submerged sensors including sensor disturbances, high solids content and distribution of reflectors. Non - Contact Sensor Eliminates Lost Data No lost data with non - contact, above the flow sensor that is unaffected by fouling due to debris and grease. Easy Installation and Maintenance As the sensor is mounted above the flow, personnel have little or no contact with the flow during installation. Future sensor removal can be done without the need for confined space entry. Independent Accuracy / Long -Term Stability Verification Flo -Dar sensor accuracy end long -term stability (up to 3 years without need for she calibration) from low flow depths up to surcharge conditions has been independently verified w I 3 0 many times over the years including a formal evaluation by the Alden Research Laboratory, Inc. and recent field evaluations done by municipalities and consulting engineering firms. Perfect Solution for Difficult Flow Conditions Operates in the most difficult conditions including flows with high solids content, high temperature, shallow and caustic flows, large man -made channels, and high velocities up to 20 ills. Optional Surcharge Velocity Sensor During surcharge events Flo -Dar's optional electromagnetic sensor will continue to provide uninterrupted and accurate flow monitoring through dry and wet weather flows without 4 the need for routine sensor cleaning or maintenance. Applications Municipal • Sanitary Sewer Evaluation Studies • Collection Systems • Capacity Studies • Combined Sewer Overflows • Inflow and Infiltration 0 &1) Studies • Billing / Custody Transfer • Plant Influent and Effluent Industrial • Process Waste • Plant Influent • Plant Effluent • Non - confect Cooling Water • Stormwater Monitoring and Compliance DW =pMking wafer ww= waSlewafer municipal M =pure water /power IW=lndu.. water a. Wrsr -.nfal C=collecbons Fe =rood end Eeverega Specifications* FLO -DAR SENSOR SURCHARGE DEPTH MEASUREMENT Enclosure Auto zero function maintains zero error below 0.5 cm (0.2 in.) IP68 Waterproof rating, Polystyrene Method Piezo- resistive pressure transducer with stainless steel Dimensions tliaphra9 160.5 W x 432.2 L x 297 D mm (6.32 x 16.66 x 11.7 in.), Range with SVS, D = 387 mm (15.2 in.) 3.5 m (138 in.), overpressure rating 2.5 x full scale Weight 4.8 kg (10.5 lbs.) Operating Temperature -10 to 50 -C (14 to 122 °F) Storage Temperature -40 to 60 -C ( -40 to 140 °F) Power Requirements Suppled by FL900 Flow Logger, Flo- Logger, or Flo- Station interconnecting Cable -0isconnectable at both sensor and logger or Flo - Station Polyurethane, 0.400 (x0.015) in. diameter; IP68 Standard length 9M (30 ft), maximum 305 in (1000 ft) Cables are available in two styles: -connectors both ends connector from sensor with open leads to desiccant hub, desiccant hub with connector to logger. A potting/sealant kit will be included. This can be used to ran the cable through conduit. Important Note: The sensor cable assembly with desiccant hub is compatible with either the Marsh- McBirney Flo - Logger/Logger XT or the Hach FL900 Series Flow Loggers. When using this cable assembly with the Marsh- McBimey Flo- Logger, do not disconnect the desiccant cartridge that is attached to the Flo- Logger itself. It is important to keep the air tube plugged. If using Flo -Dar cable with Flo- Station, the cable will have bare leads to the Flo- Station (30 to 1000 ft. lengths) and there will be no desiccant hub, as the air tube terminates inside of the Flo- Station housing. Warranty 1 year Set -up /Data Retrieval Flo -Ware for Windows software Is the user on -site set -up, data management, and report generation software. It is compatible with desktop/laptop computers utilizing Windows operating system. Certification The Flo -Dar Transmitter is certified to the following requirements: - Transmitter type: Field Disturbance Sensor - Frequency: 24.125 GHz - Doppler pulse - Maximum rated power output: 126 dbuV (aye) ® 3 meters Certified to: FCC Part 15.245: FCC ID: VIC- FLODAR24 Industry Canada Spec. RSS210. v7: IC No.: 6149A- FLODAR24 Use of this device is subject to the following conditions: 1. There are no used serviceable items inside this device. 2. The user must install this device in accordance with the supplied installation instructions and must not modify the device in any manner whatsoever. 3. Any service involving the transmitter must only be performed by Hach Company. 4. The user must ensure that no one is within 20 cm of the face of the transmitter when operating. VELOCITY MEASUREMENT Method Radar Range 0.23 to 6.10 We (0.75 to 20 ft /s) Frequency Range 24.075 to 24.175 G -Hz, 15.2mW (max.) Accuracy m0.5 %; x0.03 m/s (x0.1 fVs) DEPTH MEASUREMENT Method Ultrasonic Standard Operating Range from Flo -Dar Housing to Liquid 0 to 152.4 cm (0 to 60 in.) Optional Extended Level Operating Range from Transducer Face to Liquid 0 to 6.1 m (0 to 20 ft.) with 43.18 cm (17 in.) dead band, temperature compensated. Accuracy x1 %; x0.25 cm (x0.1 in.) FLOW MEASUREMENT Method Based on Continuity Equation Accuracy x5% of reading typical where flow Is in a channel with uniform flow conditions and is not surcharged, ±1% full scale max. SURCHARGE CONDITIONS DEPTHNELOCITY DEPTH (Std with Flo -Dar Sensor) Surcharge depth supplied by Flo -Dar sensor VELOCITY (Optional Surcharge Velocity Sensor) Method Electromagnetic Range x4.8 m/s (x16 ft/s) Accuracy x0.15 his or 4% of reading, whichever is greater. Zero Stability > x0.05 f/s CERTIFICATION INTRINSICALLY SAFE The Flo -Dar and Surcharge Velocity Sensors are certified to Class I, Zone 1 Standards. They conform to ANSI /UL 60079 -11 and are certified to CAN /CSA E60079 -11 and EN 60079 -11 standards. CC The Flo -Dar sensor meets CE requirements. - Specifications subject to change without nodce. Engineering Specifications 1. The flow meter shall be capable of 5. The range of velocity measurement shall 9. Exterior dimensions of the sensor shall measuring level, average velocity and be 0.23 to 6.10 Ms (0.75 to 20 Ns). not exceed 160.5 W x 432.2 L x 297 D surcharge depth. B. The method of depth measurement shall mm (6.32 W x 16.66 L x 11.7 D in.) or 2. The method of velocity measurement be ultrasonic. 160.5 W x 432.2 L x 387 D mm (6.32 W x 16.66 L x 152 D in.) with shall be Doppler radar. W 7. The standard operating range for depth Surcharge Velocity option. 3. The sensor shall combine advanced measurement shall be 0 to 152.4 cm (0 to 10. The sensor shall be able to measure Doppler Radar velocity sensing 60 in.) with an optional operating range of bidirectional surcharge flow. technology with ultrasonic pulse echo 0 to 6.1 m (0 to 20 ft.) with 43.18 cm (17 depth sensing to remotey measure open in.) deadband, temperature compensated. 11. Optional Intrinsically Safe models channel flow. 8. The flow meter shall have a surcharge available for flow monitoring in 4. Flow shall be calculated based on the condition velocity sensor option. hazardous locations. Continuity Equation (0=V x A), where 12. The model shall be the Marsh- McBirney O =Flow, V- Average Velocity and A =Area. Flo-Dar Open Channel Flow Meter Sensor. Dimensions Flo -Oar Area /Velocity Radar Flow Meter The desiccant hub assembly includes a junction box to connect sensor cable to the desiccant and subsequently to the ec900 Logger. The desiccant can easily be replaced without need to purchase a separate desiccant module. LOGGER 70 SENSOR t. I. ■�■ly�� Desiccant Hub Assemblies for use with portable R.900 Series Loggers and Flo- Logger. (Sensor cable for use with Flo- Station will not contain a desiccant hub and will have bare wires on cable end.) Ordering Information Configure FLO -DAR Sensor to Logger (Portable) Ro -Dar Sensor IL 4_ -X I x 0 Flo -Dar Sensor with specified cable length 4 (need to add cable as separate line item) Non Extended Range Non Imrinsically $are 0 Extended Range Optioo-Allows use in flow depths up to 18 feel 0 1 Surcharge Velocity Sensor Option (IMPORTANT NOTE: SVS cable 3 length MUST MATCH FloOar Sensor Cable length) Remote Extended Range Option with O' sensor cable -Row depths 2 Non Extended Range 0 Extended Range Optio"Ilows use in flow depths up to 18 feet. 1 Allow for 18" deadband. Standard unit max depth is 60 ". SVS Option requires Remote Extended Range below. Remote Extended Range Option with 6' sensor cable -Flow depths 2 up to 18 feel. Allow for 18" deadband. Standard unit max depth is 60 ". Configure FLO -DAR Sensor to Flo- Station (Permanent) Flo-Dar Sensor Flo -Dar Sensor with specified cable length (need to add cable as separate line item) 9 Non Intrinsically Safe 0 Surcharge Velocity Sensor Option (IMPORTANT NOTE: SVS cable length 3 MUST MATCH Flo -Dar Sensor Cable length) Non Extended Range 0 Extended Range Optioo-Allows use in flow depths up to 18 feel 1 Allow for 18" deadband. Standard unit max depth is 60 ". SVS Option requires Remote Extended Range below. Remote Extended Range Option with O' sensor cable -Row depths 2 up to 18 feet. Allow for 18" deadband. Standard unit max depth is 60 ". Cables FD9000CBL -XXX' FL900 Seder Logger to Flo -Dar sensor Cable w/two connectors. FDJCTBOXCBL -XXX' FL900 Sense Logger to Flo -Dar sensor. Cable with connector to sensor, open end to desiccant hub, desiccant hub with connector to sensor. Includes finishing kit for potting/sealing desiccant hub. For use with conduit. 6000062%X' SVS Sensor with connector for use with FL900 Series Logger. 570011800 -XXX' Flo- Station to Flo -Dar sensor Cable with one connector Model 4000 -9 and bare leads. 6000059%X' SVS Sensor with bare leads for use with Flo- Station. 'Contact customer service for product numbers. Available Cable Lengths (in feet) 30 125 225 400 700 86 150 250 450 800 75 175 300 500 900 100 200 350 600 1000 See Lit. No. 2709 fstendartl modeto and Lit. No. 2711 (wlmless models) for rie00 Series Flow Logger ordering information. Sea Lit. No. M16 for RoSta6'on ordering imbnoetion. Mounting Hardware 800016701 Permanent Sensor Mount-Includes, sensor frame & all mounting hardware. Portable Sensor Mounts Available (Saes 34- 107 ") Contact Sales. Accessories & Spares 245000501 Sensor Retrieval Pole - Used to place and retrieve sensor from mounting bracket. Pole extends to 7.3 m (21 R.) 510012701 Sensor Retrieval Hook - Used with Sensor Retrieval Pole 570011401 Grounding Strap (required with Retrieval Pole and Hook when used with IS units 8755500 Bulk desiccant beads (1.5 pounds) Lk No. 27M Rev 2. For current price information, technical support, and ordering assistance, contact the Hach office or distributor serving your area. In the United States and all other countries except Europe, contact: HACH COMPANY 4539 Metropolitan Court Frederick, MD 21704 -9452, U.SA. Telephone: 800- 368 -2723 Fax: 301- 874 -8459 E -mail: hachflowsales4Fhach.com meww.hachflow.com in Eurooe contact Flow -Tronic Rue J.H. Cool 19a 8 -4840 Welkenmedt Belgium Telephone: +32-87-899799 Fax: +32-B7-899790 E -mail: site@Oow- tmnic.com nn4w.flow- tronic.com Hach FL900 Series Cellular Wireless Flow Logger Now! When combined with the Flo -Oar or Flo -rote 3 sensor, the Hach x900 Series Wireless Flow Logger takes flow monitoring to whole new level. with features that reduce site time and increase crew safety, the wireless flat monitoring system allows you to easily manage your flow data 2417, as well as your budget. The FL900 Wireless Flow Logger provides users with a reliable, budget saving open channel wireless flow monitoring solution for open portable flow monitoring applications. Flow data is accessible 24/7 with Hach FSDATA web -based software. When combined with the Flo -Dar or Flo -Tote 3 sensor, the system will drastically reduce site time and increase safety for monitoring crews. Increase Monitoring Crew Safety With the time saving features designed into the FL900 Wireless Flow Loggers, crews spend less time in the manhole and less time on site to decrease monitoring costs while increasing the safety of flow monitoring crews. Plug and Play Sensor Ports The FL900 Series Flow Logger is available with 1, 2 or 4 sensor ports. The sensor pons are "plug and play "; the logger auto - detects the type of sensor connected (Flo-Dar, Surcharge Velocity Sensor or Flo -Tote 3) to allow customers maximum flexibility for their Hach flow sensor inventories. Flow Monitoring Data at Your Fingertips with FsDATATM Web -Based Software Hach FSDATA web -based flow meter software is the ideal time - saving and economical solution for the management of your Hach wireless flow meters and data 24/7. With Fs DATA routine site visits to collect flow data are eliminated keeping flow monitoring crews safe. (See Lit. No. 2707 for additional information on rsDATA) c ww Easy InstallationNersatile Mounting Options The logger can be quickly attached to a wall, pole or 4 manhole ladder in minutes. Users can choose to hang logger from standard carabiner or optional 4 -bolt wall mount for pole, horizontal or vertical wall mount or ladder rung mount. LED Gives Quick Confirmation of Logger Status Get peace of mind the logger is ready to capture the next flow event, before you leave the site. The rugged FL900 Wireless Flow Logger includes a status LED panel. The indicator light on the top of the logger shows the status of the instrument and modem (if equipped with wireless option). The user can manually send a call to the server to make sure the network connection is good by simply swiping the magnet over the call initiation target. OW.aepem weler wW- wastewater municipal P4V. pwe wabr /powx IW � InOYSbial water E - MvhvnmenfN C - ccllectlana FB - /OOII BIM GBVB /ego FL900 SERIES FLOW LOGGER Alarm Actions PORTABLE DC POWERED ELECTRONICS Trigger sampler, change logging interval, change call interval, (Includes Models FL901, FL902 & FL904) send an e-mail, or send text message ISMS). Dimensions (W x D x H) 25.4 x 22 x 40 cm (10.0 x 8.7 x 16.0 in.) Enclosure PC /ABS structural foam Environmental Rating NEMA 6P (IP68) Weight (Using Model FL900) 4.5 kg (10 lb) --no batteries; 6.3 kg (14 lb)-2 batteries; 8.2 kg (I B lby -4 batteries Operating Temperature -18 to 60-C (0 to 140 °F7 at 95% RH Storage Temperature -40 to 60 °C ( -40 to 140 °F) Power Requirements 8 tol8 Vdc from batteries or external power source, 2.5W max. Battery Life a115 minute logging intervals (at room temperature) 185 days with 4 lantern batteries and a Flo -Dar sensor, 306 days with 4 lantern batteries and a Flo -Tote sensor The optional long life alkaline battery pack can be used to extend battery life, If the Flow Logger is ordered with the external power option connector. LED Status Indicator - Green Flashes every 3 seconds during normal operation. Flashes every 15 seconds during sleep mode. - Red Flashes when an attached sensor does not agree with the logger program, when an expected sensor is not found or the sensor is not working properly. LED Modem Indicator - Stays green during a call to the server. Goes blank after the call is successfully completed and terminated. - Flashes red if the call to the server failed. Sensor Ports 1, 2 or 4 ports Connectors Stainless steel connectors Datalog Channels 16 maximum Alarms Maximum of 16 channel alarms including high/high, high, low, low4ow and system alarms including low battery, low RTC battery, low slate memory, slate memory full. Logging Intervals 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 10, 12, 15, 20, 30 or 60 minutes Primary and secondary Intervals for dynamic logging. Data Storage Event Log: 1,000 events maximum in non - volatile flesh memory Sample History: 2,000 sample events maximum in non - volatile flash memory Datalog: 325,000 data points; 1128 days for 3 channels at 15- minute log intervals Local Communication USB RS232 (Baud rates: 9600, 19200, 38400, 57600, 115200) Remote Communication (optional) Wireless modem; CDMA or GPRS technology with a mobile provider, CDMA2000 1xRIT or GPRS. Protocols Modbus RTU; Modbus ASCII; Mobile - Terminated SMS; Mobile- Odginated SMS; TCP/IP Timebase Accuracy 30.002 %, synchronized every 24 hours with server software and modem Supported Sensors Flo -Tote 3, Flo -Dar, Flo -Dar with SVS, Rain Gauge Sampler Interface Compatible with Sigma 900 Standard, Sigma 900 Max, Hach SD900 to support set -paint sampling,flow- pacing, and logging sample history. Desktop Software Flo -Ware for Windows software is required for programming the logger, data management, and report generation software . It is compatible with desktop/lap top computers utilizing Windows operating system. Minimum resolution needed is 1024x768. Internet Application Software FsDATA web -based software for flow meter data management and report generation for wireless flow meters and data access 24/7. Certifications Logger: CE; optional AC power supply: UUCSA/CE Warranty 1 year CE The FL900 Series Loggers meet CE requirements. 'Specifications subject to change without notice. Engineering Specifications 1. Exterior dimensions of the Flow Logger shall be 25.4 W x 22 D x 40 cm (10.0 W x 8.7 D x 16.0 in. H) 2. The Flow Logger enclosure material shall be PC/ABS structural foam with NEMA 6P (IP68) rating. 3. The operating temperature for the Flow Logger shall be -18 to 60oC (0 to 140°F) at 95% relative humidity and storage temperature of -40 to 60-C (-00 to 14D F). 4. Power requirements of the Flow Logger shall be 8 tol8 Vdc from batteries or external power source, 2.5W max. 5. When used with a Flo-Dar sensor, the Flow Logger shall have a battery life of 185 days utilizing 4 6v alkaline batteries at a 15 minute logging interval (at room temp.). When used with a Flo-Tote sensor, the Flow Logger shall have a battery life of 306 days utilizing 4 6v alkaline batteries at a 15 minute logging interval (at room temperature). A long -life battery for longer deployments shall be available option. 6. The Flow Logger shall have 1, 2 or 4 sensor ports with stainless steel connector, 1 communications port and 1 auxiliary port. 7. The Flow Logger shall have primary logging intervals of 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 10, 12, 15, 20, 30 or 60 minutes. 8. The Flow Logger shall have secondary logging intervals available to modify the logging rate based on a defined channel alarm condition or trigger. 9. Optional remote communication shall be available on the FL900 Series Loggers via Wireless modem; CDMA20001 xRTT or GPRS. 10. The Flow Logger data storage event log shall be 1,000 events maximum in non- volatile flash memory. 11. Tlmebase Accuracy of the Flow Logger shall be 0.002% synchronized every 24 hours with server software and modem. 12. The Flow Logger shall support the Flo -Dar, Flo -Dar with SVS, Flo -Tote 3 Sensors and Rain Gauge. 13. The Flow Logger shall be compatible with Sigma 900 Standard, Sigma 900 Max and Hach SD900 to support set point sampling, flow- pacing and sample history logging. a 14. The Flow Logger shall be able to connect to a lap top or desk top PC using either USB or R9232 serial connection. 15. The Flow Logger shall have an LED indicator for operating /programming status visible on the topmost horizontal surface of the logger. 16. The internet data management software shall indicate sites in alarm condition in either a map view or list view. 17. When connected to an external power source, the FL900 series logger shall be capable of power switching, i.e. drawing power from the external source and conserving the alkaline batteries inside the logger base. At the time the external power source reaches a low alarm condition, it will then switch the power drew to the alkaline batteries mounted inside the base of the logger. 18. The internist software for flow data management shall be Hach tsDATA. 19. The logger will be a Hach rL901, F1902, or FL904 Flow Logger. Flow Logger Suspension Cable with Carabiner(Standard) .d 9 Flow Logger Wall Mount Flow Logger Ladder Rung Mount Prod. No. 8542700 Prod. Ab. 854450 (Optional) (Optional) Ordering Information Flo -Ware Desktop Software Sensor Connectors) Country Code Modem Hain Gauge Electron) 1 Sensor Connector Battery pack top cap adaptor and cable 1 97_ 6542800 _ 2 Sensor Connectors 4 Sensor Connectors - 2 _ 4 None X AT &T *Noted) A GPRS no SIM G Sprint lnaclive) R Sprint (Activated) S No Rain Gauge Connector X WM Rain Gauge Connector R 8528700 Cable, External power, 2 wire, 9 ft. 8528200 Cable, Communication, RS232 8528300 Cable, Communication, USB 8528400 Cable, Aux, 7pin MIL 5015 (Connect to Sigma Sampler), 9 R. 8528401 Cable, Aux, 7pin MIL 5015 (Connect to Sigma Sampler), 25 ft 5228400 Antenna, Half Wave (824 -894, 1850 -1990 MHz) —US for Venzon, Sprint, AT &T, T- Mobile (IS attached to Logger) 6241804 Antenna, Mini -Wing, Quad (824-960,1710-2170 MHz) —US for Vedzon, Sprint, AT &T, T- Mobile (Customer to Mount) 6683000 Antenna, Traffic Rated In Road/Buda] (1850 -1990 MHz) —US for use with Sprint only wireless service 6246200 Antenna, Traffic Rated In Road/BUnal (824 -896 MHz) —US for use with Venzon only wireless service 5255400 Antenna, Traffic Rated Manhole Lid (824-896,1850-1990 MHz) —US for Verizon, Sprint, AT &T, T- Mobile Model T200 -200 Flo -Ware Desktop Software FS- HOSTING Monthly data hosting service for fsDATA FS- DATAXFR Monthly wireless service Mountina Hardware 9543800 Wall mount bracket (304 Stainless) 8545600 Wall mount bracket with ladder hanger (304 Stainless) 8542700 Wall mount bracket with AC Power Supply shelf (304 Stainless) 8544500 Wall mount bracket with AC Power Supply Shelf with ladder hanger (304 Stainless) Replacement Parts 87555110 Desiccant refill beads, Bulk 1.516 11013M Battery, 6V lantern 8542900 Battery, long -life alkaline 854300D Battery pack top cap adaptor and cable (for long -life alkaline battery pack 80001 7701) 6542800 Rain Gauge with 100 ft. cable U. No. 2711 G101.5 Pnnted in U.S.A For current price information, technical support, and ordering ` assistance, contact the Hach office or distributor serving your area. In the United States and all other countries except Europe, contact: HACH COMPANY 4539 Metropolitan Court Frederick, MD 21704 -9452, U.S.A. Telephone: 800 -368 -2723 Fax: 301- 874 -8459 E -mail: hachflowsales@hach.com www.hschffow -Cora In Europe contact Flow -Tronic Rue J.H. Cool 19a 8 -4840 Welkertmedt Belgium Telephone: +32-87-899799 Fax: +32-87-899790 E -mail: siteRflow- tronic.com w ..flow- tronic.com User Instructions Antennas for flow products Precautionary labels Read all labels and tags attached to the instrument. Personal injury or damage to the instrument could occur if not observed. Electrcal equipment marked with this symbol may not be disposed of in European public disposal systems after 12 August of 2005. In conformity with European local and national regulations (EU Directive 200219&EC), European electrical equipment users must now return old or end-of -Iffe equipment to the Producer for disposal at no charge to the user. No N: Forretum forrecycling, please contact the equipment producerorsupplier forinskucflons on how to mtum endoNits equipment, producer- supplied electrical accessories, and all auxiliary dams for pmper disposal. Product components Make sure that all components have been received. If any items are missing or damaged, contact the manufacturer or a sales representative immediately. Required equipment/software Make sure that the following requirements are available: FL900 Series flow logger with modem option or Sigma 930T Remote host computer operating FSDATA or Telogers for Windows server software Portable computer operating FSDATA, Flowers or Telogers for Windows Activated wireless account FL900 Series Flow Logger Verify the telemetry (wireless option) The user can manually send a call to the server to make sure that the network communication is good. 1. Temporarily attach the antenna to the logger to test the antenna and the cell coverage at the site location before installation. 2. Touch the magnet to the call initiation target (Figure 1). The modem LED indicator changes to green. 3. Look at the modem LED indicator during the call (45 to 90 seconds) and wait for a change: • LED goes off —the connection to the server is good. • LED flashes red —the connection to the server failed. Note: If the connection hailed, refer to the instrument user manual for mom information. Figural Call the server 1 Call initiation target 2 Magnet 930T Flow meter Verify the wireless connection The tamper button is used to examine if the wireless connection is working. 1. Temporarily attach the antenna to the logger to test the antenna and the cell coverage at the site location before installation. 2. Attach the tamper module to the RS232 connector on the flow meter (Figure 2). 3. Push the tamper button to start a cellular call from the flow meter to the remote host computer. 4. Go to the event log in Telogers for Windows to make sure that the data was successfully downloaded from the flow meter to the remote host computer. Refer to the 930T documentation for further information about telemetry troubleshooting. Figure 2 Tamper module connected to the 930T Flow meter 1 RS232 connector 2 Tamper module Installation Half wave antenna AWARNING Electromagnetic radiation hazard. To meet the requirements of the FCC Grant, CE Mark and other regulatory bodies, do not use or install the device with an antenna that is not supplied by the manufacturer. Make sure that all antennas are kept at a minimum distance of 20 cm (7.9 in.) from all personnel in normal use. Test the antenna and cell coverage at the site location before installation. Make sure that the flow meter is programmed to call the host PC before installation. The half wave antenna is intended for above - ground use. 7. Unpack the antenna (Figure 3). 2. Bend the antenna at the joint to a 90 degree angle between the antenna and the swivel fitting. 3. Put the antenna extension inside of the logger handle (Figure 4). 4. Align the threads from the antenna fitting to the antenna receptacle on the logger. Hand- tighten by turning the swivel end. Figure 3 Half wave antenna Figure 4 Half wave antenna attached Traffic rated manhole lid antenna Required tools: 31.75 mm (1'/. in.) open -end wrench Large nylon Ty -wrap cable ties 1. Unpack the antenna (Figure 5) or disassemble the antenna from the instrument. 2. Make sure that the manhole lid has a 25.4 mm If in.) hole for the antenna neck to fit into. Note: Do not use the pick hole. Use a drill, motorail for lubrication and increasing size drill bits to drill the 25.4 mm (f in.) hole ifneeded. Make sure that the location of the hole does notcoincide with the ribs on the underside of the manhole lid. 3. Remove the manhole lid and put the lid in a stable position where the lid top and bottom are accessible. 4. Remove the nut and washers from the threaded neck on the base of the antenna (Figure 6). S. Put the antenna cable and neck through a hole on the manhole lid until the base of the antenna is against the top of the manhole lid. 6. Install the flat washer, then the lock washer and then the nut on to the threaded neck of the antenna. 7. Tighten the nut with the open-end wrench until both washers are flush against the base of the manhole lid and the antenna is tight (Figure 6). 6. Connect the antenna cable to the instrument connector labeled "Antenna ". To make sure proper transmission, hand - tighten the connections. 9. Attach any excess cable to the access ladder or another non-obstructing location with Ty -wrap cable ties. 10. Replace the manhole lid. Figure 5 Traffic rated manhole lid antenna Figure 6 Manhole lid Installation 1 Antenna top 5 Antenna cable 2 Manhole lid 6 Antenna threaded neck 3 Flat washer 7 Lock washer 4 31.75 mm (1 Y4 in.) nut Wing Quad antenna The Wing Quad antenna can be attached to an interior wall or to a window for a longer term deployment or the antenna can be attached to a manhole lid for a short tens deployment. Required tools: • Large nylon Ty -wrap cable ties 1. Unpack the antenna (Figure 7). 2. To attach the antenna to a window or a wall, remove the adhesive backing and push the antenna to a clean surface. 3. To attach the antenna to a manhole, make sure that the manhole lid has a hole large enough for the antenna connector to fit into. Note: Do not use the pick hole. Use a drill, motor oil for lubrication and increasing size drill bits to drill the I' hole if needed. Make sure that the location of the hole does not coincide with the ribs on the underside of the manhole lid. 4. Remove the manhole lid and put the lid in a stable position where the lid top and bottom are accessible. 5. Put the antenna cable and neck through a hole on the manhole lid until the base of the antenna is against the top of the manhole lid. 6. Attach the antenna to the manhole lid with heavy tape or tar tape. 7. Connect the antenna cable to the instrument connector labeled "Antenna ". To make sure proper transmission, hand - lighten the connections. S. Attach any excess cable to the access ladder or another non-obstructing location with Ty -wrap cable ties. 9. Replace the manhole lid. Figure 7 Wing Quad antenna Traffic rated in- road /burial antenna Required tools: • Asphalt saw or auger: saw capable of cutting 127 mm (5 in.) in diameter and 76.2 mm (3 in.) deep into a road surface or ground • Asphalt chisel • Hammer drill with 19.1 to 25.4 mm (' /. to 1 in.) asphalt drill bit (for antenna cable installation) • Sakrete asphalt mix (Asphalt patch) • Bondo; Mar -Hyde P606 Traffic Detector Wire Loop Sealer or equal • Shovel, if placing in the ground The traffic rated in- road /burial antenna is intended for burial beneath the road surface or ground adjacent to a manhole or vault that is being monitored (Figure 9). The antenna should be installed in the road approximately 152.4 to 203.2 mm (6 to 8 in.) inches from the manhole or vault containing the flow meter. 1. Unpack the antenna (Figure 8) or disassemble the antenna from the instrument. 2. Excavate a hole or trench in the road surface or ground approximately 127 mm (5 in.) in diameter (or square) and 76.2 mm (3 in.) deep. 3. Select the closest position from the excavated hole to the manhole. Drill a 19.1 to 25.4 mm (' /. to 1 in.) hole from the selected position to the manhole. Make sure to drill the hole below the steel manhole cover support ring (Figure 9, List item. on page 7). 4. Put the antenna cable through the drill hole into the manhole or vault. 5. Install the antenna in the excavated hole. Pull the antenna cable taut. Locate the antenna so that the ceramic side of the antenna is approximately 6.4 (1/. in.) to 12.7 mm (% in.) maximum below the road or ground surface. Make sure the antenna sits safely in the hole. 6. Attach the antenna cable to the antenna connector. 7. Make sure that the antenna is working by placing a call from the instrument (refer to Verify the wireless connection on page 2). 8. When the operation of the antenna is confirmed, permanently bury the antenna. a. Insert asphalt mix around the antenna and pack it in place. Make sure the antenna is sifting firmly on a solid base and cannot be rocked back and forth. b. Install the asphalt mix around the antenna. The mix should be level with the road surface but not over the antenna surface. c. Pour the Bondo sealer on and over the asphalt mix and over the top of the antenna. There should be no more than 6.4 mm (1/. in.) of Bondo sealer over the top of the antenna. d. Connect the desired sensors and options to the flow meter. Calibrate the sensors and install the flow meter in the manhole. Figure 8 Burial antennas 1 Traffic rated in- road/burial antenna (Verimn) 2 Traffic rated in- road/burial antenna (Spri nt) Figure 9 Burial antenna assembly 1 Manhole cover 14 Trench or hole for antenna 2 19.1 to 25.4 mm (% to 1 in.) hole 5 Antenna cable 3 Antenna 6 Flow meter Replacement Parts Note: Product and Article numbers may vary for some selling regions. Contact the appropriate distributor or refer to the company website for contact information. Description Item no. Half wave, 824 -894 & 1850 -1990 MHz, 3 dBi 5228400 Half wave European, 870 -960 & 1710 -1880 MHz, 3dBi 5255300 Traffic rated manhole lid quad, 824 -896 & 1850 -1990 MHz, 3 dBi 5255400 Wing Quad, 824 -960 & 1710 -2170 MHz, 2.15 dBi 6241804 Traffic rated in- road/burial antenna (Verizon), 824-896 MHz, 3 dBi 6246200 Traffic rated in- road/burial antenna (Sprint), 1850 -1990 MHz, 3 dBi 6683000 www.hachfiow.com oo c WWW. C Hach Company, 2010. All rights reserved. Printed in the U.S.A. 0812010, Edition 1 MH 294, MH 347 & MH 348 OFF Consulting Engineers Tab 3: Calibration Site Sheets 3 Utility Systems Science & Software /. II I ;_ i%l . Site Report 10 -08 -2014 Confidential Proprietary Information KPFF In the vacant field due east of 2518 N. San Gabriel Blvd, adjacent to a tennis court, under a large tree Site 1 MH 294 Manhole No.294 Access: Manhole System Type: sanitary ❑K storm ❑ Install Date: 9/17/2014 Map Technology IL Traffic Plan t Flow Meter Meter Depth ":8' Meter SN Avg Velocity Avg Measured Level Multiplier 3.0 3" 1 Gas 02 1125 cc LEL 20.3 0 0 0 Notes Vacant lot secured with fence Traffic Safety t No traffic or pedestrian traffic within the fenced field Land Use : ,.., .:....., Residential commercial IndustrialP Trunk X X X Manhole Depth " Pipe Size " 9' 12" Inner Pipe Size" (In /Out) 12712" Pipe Shape Round Pipe Condition Good Manhole Material Brick Silt (inches) 0 Velocity Profile Data Velocity Profile Taken Sensor Offset 19" Sensor Dist. to Crown 7" Flow Direction Upstream Flow Heading South IW Meter Site Document KPFF Site 1 MH 294 In the vacant field due east of 2518 N. San Gabriel Blvd, adjacent to a tennis court, under a large tree Temporary Flow Study KPFF Site 1 MH 294 Meter Start Date From 9/17/2014 12:00:00 AM Meter Stop Date To 10/6/2014 12:00:00 AM Velocity (fps) Level (in) Flow (mgd) Average 3.050 2.857 0.315 Maximum 3.940 4.164 0.589 Minimum 1.320 0.970 0.028 Pipe Size 12.000 Estimated Capacity (mgd) 1.885 Capacity Used 31.26% Sensor Type Hach - Flodar Estimated Capacity Usage a %Capacity Used Estimated Capacity Available 0 Utility Systems, Science and Software 6190 Fairmount Ave. Suite E San Diego, CA 92021 601 N. Parkcenter Drive Suite 209 Santa Ana, CA 92705 4!m Rw b a Flow � v o O s�a a W s m a t c I N � _ m � ILL R <n g a C M n o o; 0 0 0 LL m 8 C O N s m M m o 0 0 Q y N V J a Q V o m V O M N m N C d N O AVM19A PUB level E o� E m E E > 'c Q a Flav n a 0 V N O O O O N O O m O \ o MI N+ O Q N N W O O p O � t U C _ Q Z b O> O LL 7t ri N p _ N v � N O y 0 a °o + O O p LL o O O V v N ul m O O O Ori O N W y J N V 0 N T h O V 01 N M O d m cl i AI�I -A W- lanai d °' E a Flax r Vj t0 V N O O O O a O r O O aD O N+ N d a o o O 8 � t U Q O V N C4 ri a � r O L � d .. y r a o 0 + a E ° C1 m N M O O 0 0 E 0 0 0 Q VV O O W y J N O N _6 T U O O O Iq 0 O N M O d M N N V m N r O 4MIOA Pue W-1 m m E E E E Q � � al Flmv ^I t0 R N v O O O O E-0 ° M N a 0 N s� N O O O O d V C Q a 3 O - N N N a v N J LL r d o X10 � Na° °o d o N D iy rn o v^i d o o N_ V 1Il _ N W O O y J N V N d T o m a o d ci vi WI O c1 N � O 4-1-A N-1- -1 m ° E Q w 01 N 2 r w (A �� f*Illl o of 'J. f•� . . N i E � • • O • a S4 t o N r m (w,) 1e 01 9 a r N M V O N O bTW71•I:IBZYI Access: Manhole J Site Report 10 -08 -2014 Confidential Proprietary Information Map KPFF 8120 Newmark Avenue Manhole No.347 System Type' sanitary Storm ❑ Install Date: 9/1712014 Flow Meter Meter Depth ":80" Meter SN Technology Traffic Plan Measured Level Gas 02 H25 CO LEL 20.3 0 0 0 Notes Traffic Safety On residential street, but in front of the post office adjacent to Garvey Square Shopping Center; therefore, cones, signs and bagger used. z.s. Land Use Faesitlential I Commercial Industrial Trunk Size" 10" Pipe Size" 10 "110" Pipe Condition Good Manhole Material Brick Velocity Profile Data Velocity Profile Taken Sensor Offset 16.2" Sensor Dist. to Crown 6.2" Flow Direction IUDstream Meter Site Document KPFF Site 2 MH 347 8120 Newmark Avenue Temporary Flow Study KPFF Site 2 MH 347 Meter Start Date From 9/17/2014 12:00:00 AM Meter Stop Date To 10/6/2014 12:00:00 AM Velocity (fps) Level (in) F _ (mgd) Average 4.188 2.946 0.379 Maximum 4.840 3.960 0.611 Minimum 2.790 1.620 0.103 Pipe Size 10.000 Estimated Capacity (mgd) 1.640 Capacity Used 37.25% Sensor Type Hach - Flodar Estimated Capacity Usage M %capacity Used il Estimate] capacity Available 0 — Utility Systems, Science and Software 6190 Fairmount Ave. Suite E San Diego, CA 92021 601 N. Parkcenter Drive Suite 209 Santa Ana, CA 92705 J �� a Flow a tp V N m O E-0 S O s� a ` m s a � 3 M LL 8 N d m g � a E m m 8 N 0 0 0 0 LL m m m r � N m 8 J gi 6 p O V N N i N V m N O 4Og9A Pue level w E m E Q � � a Flan a N 0 R N O O O O O � O O O M N O O o MIV s� N N T O O O O 4 N L V _ Q O O LL Nf a N N � N m A LL C 'gyp y x a o � o °o + °0 a 30 n 0 m 0 0 N O LL j M W fa0 d O N J N d o v r 6 m c�i d of E E N.-PA N- P-1 Q � � a Flan al t0 O N O � N m O O a 0 s� N O O O O N � U � # Q ; O M a N j a � LL N d o I � ',p R' !+ fA D $ o � o v w °o + V LL C j OJ W O N O f0 V O N �rOj p� y J N CJ N O d 4.. -I-A Pue larval m Fb C (p V N O O O O 8 MIN � O m O °o N s� N O O O O t U C 3 O ILL !h it a a x i s s N O A LL C N d o �p � Ui g � S I � m NI N O O p N_ 0 �y 0 0 0 lV O N n C d th rn O m O n O y J N t'J N _6 p d V O N N V M N O 4MIOA Pue level m E � w c M x N 4) CO) (u) ..j 0 H 2 81111 N a N V O N 2 O r � _ L a 0 N n m 19— %, Site Report 10 -08 -2014 � Confidential Proprietary Information Site 3 MH 348 Access: Manhole Map KPFF 2659 Pine Street Manhole No.348 System Type: Sanitary ❑X Storm F1 Install Date: 9/17/2014 Flow Meter Meter Depth ":98" Meter SN ":` Technology Traffic Plan Avg Velocity Avq Measured Level Multiplier 3.12 2.4" 1 Gas Traffic Safety On residential street behind Garvey Square Shopping Center; therefore, cones, signs and flaggerused. Land Use Residential I Commercial I Industrial I Trunk Pipe Size" 10'. Inner Pipe Size" 10 "110" (In /Out) Pipe Shape Round Pipe Condition Good Manhole Material Brick Velocity Profile Data Velocity Profile Taken Sensor Offset Sensor Dist. to Crown Flow Direction Flow Heading s w.l. 1II \Y, i �' l Temporary Flow Study KPFF Site 3 MH 348 Meter Start Date From 9/17/2014 12:00:00 AM Meter Stop Date To 10/6/2014 12:00:00 AM Velocity (fps) Level (in) Flow (mgd) Average 3.139 2.273 0.201 Maximum 3.850 3.705 0.456 Minimum 2.129 0.928 0.035 Pipe Size 10.000 Estimated Capacity (mgd) 1.300 Capacity Used 35.11 % Sensor Type Hach - Flodar Estimated Capacity Usage Iil %Capacity Used il Estimated Capacity 0 Available Utility Systems, Science and Software 6190 Fairmount Ave. Suite E San Diego, CA 92021 601 N. Parkcenter Drive Suite 209 Santa Ana, CA 92705 3 4!0 0 911 b a M flay N ro 8 ? 7 M N N O 0 0 0 o c o 0 oa � o 1 0 all a s� 8P � L a � 3 LL co _ I a 3 LL M P I y a g" I � a n rn E °o m n ON 6 O O O O LL N N n 0I J N p T CJ O r W � () M N d NI�IaA Pue IGA91 N E E E E m E Q � � Flan a Lp a O O O O O O O d W � O a N N W O O O O y L U C 2 N L LL co � M = d o+ d _ N M d � li C .t It a o � o °o + Q N o W E oo Cl! O m d O m O O N It d li O W d N M O J N d JO m W th N d i m E E d M N O 4WIQA Pue lenal Q m � � � Flow a n O O # � a N m O C6 N a s� N V O O O O O # y C V � LL co M m � o > lL d C � m o � o v rn E 30 O con O o C °o + � N N LL N N N N N (7 ONi O pOj W J N _2 p M O A ci Ol lV N i d JE 4.I JOA POe lanai a M Flow a 7 N N O O O O O O O O 00 O O + a a 0 fo 0 w °o t o � o - Q3 N LL � O I M 2 ° m o n LL N C M o I m d IY^ V VI O O � O I O + a LL _N C C N 6 N O O r f0 N Q M CJ N N 4-PA We lanai 0 > j m E E 'c Q 2 2 00 dT M 2 M N N (up l.nej Cl 0 I 2 a 1 \1 \1 e s� ci 0 N O_ J y V O N n m m N MH 294, MH 347 & MH 348 KPFF Consulting Engineers Tab 4: DVD with Excel Data Utility Systems Science & Software ,SM. MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GARVEY/DEL MAR PLAZA General Plan Amendment 12 -02, Zone Change 12 -02 Tentative Tract Map 72529, Design Review 12 -05 Lead Agency: City of Rosemead 8838 E. Valley Boulevard Rosemead, CA 91770 (626) -569 -2142 ' Project Proponent: Gerard Ngo 120 E. Valley Boulevard San Gabriel, California 91776 ' (626) 307 -0062 Environmental Consultant: Phil Martin & Associates 3002 Dow Avenue, Suite 122 Tustin, California 92780 ' (714) 454 -1800 1 1 1 1 May 19, 2014 EXHIBIT "H" Cm dRoumeae minel..0 " ale"a..'.ye Cenennan Gamy —Del W a Plaza - General Pon NnendineM 12.02, IDne Change 12A$, TeMttXe Tntl We No, R@B. DeLgn ReNaw IILa TABLE of CONTENTS SECTION PAGE 1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................. ............................... 1 1.1 Purpose ............................................................................... ............................... 1 1.2 Location ............................................................................... ............................... 1 1.3 Project Description ............................................................... ............................... 1 1.4 Intended Use of This Document ........................................... ............................... 7 1.5 Environmental Setting ........................................................... ..............................7 1.6 Cumulative Projects ............................................................. ............................. 11 2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST .................................................... ............................. 13 3.0 DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION ................... ............................... 16 3.1 Aesthetics .......................................................................... ............................... 16 3.2 Agricultural Resources ....................................................... ............................... 23 3.3 Air Quality .......................................................................... ............................... 24 3.4 Biological Resources .......................................................... ............................... 34 3.5 Cultural Resources ............................................................. ............................... 36 3.6 Geology and Soils .............................................................. ............................... 37 3.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials ..................................... ............................... 39 3.8 Hydrology and Water Quality .............................................. ............................... 42 3.9 Land Use ............................................................................ ............................... 46 3.10 Mineral Resources ............................................................... ............................. 52 3.11 Noise .................................................................................. ............................... 53 3.12 Population and Housing ..................................................... ............................... 62 3.13 Public Services .................................................................. ............................... 63 3.14 Recreation .......................................................................... ............................... 64 3.15 Transportation/ Traffic ......................................................... ............................... 65 3.16 Utilities and Service Syst ems ............................................. ............................... 77 3.17 Mandatory Findings of Significance .................................... ............................... 79 4.0 REFERENCES .............................................................................. ............................... 81 Appendices Appendix A — Photometric Study Appendix B — Air Quality/Greenhouse Gas Analysis Appendix C — Geotechnical Report Appendix D — Phase 1 /II Environmental Site Assessments Appendix E — Noise Report Appendix F — Traffic Report 11 P"ot CMy W R—mead In111a1.udyl.M11.1ed Negtllve..1 —bn Garvey -OelMn Plaxe- Genenl plan 5mendmaT II -01. Zone Cl,a,pe11A3. TenWrve in[t Mep Na. II519,p ,Re 4 -05 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 PURPOSE The City of Rosemead ( "Lead Agency ") has prepared this Mitigated Negative Declaration for the purpose of identifying and evaluating the potential impacts that could occur with a proposed General Plan Amendment (GPA) 12 -02, Zane Change (ZC) 12 -02, Tentative Tract Map (TTM) 72529, and Design Review (DR) 12 -05 for the construction of a mixed use project that includes 60 residential units, including 12 low income units, 15,553 square feet of retail /restaurant use, and 211 parking spaces, including compact and handicap, in a five - story building with two levels of subterranean parking. It is the intent of this environmental document to identify the potential environmental impacts that can be expected to occur with the development of the proposed project, including the demolition of the existing buildings and site improvements, and provide feasible mitigation measures, when required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), to reduce impacts to less than significant levels. A general plan amendment, zone change (Zone Change), and Tentative are required for the project as proposed. 1.2 LOCATION The project site totals approximately 49,850 square feet (1.14 acres) and is located in the City of Rosemead, Los Angeles County, California as shown in Figure 1, Regional Map. The project site consists of six parcels and is located at the northeast comer of the intersection of Garvey Avenue and Del Mar Avenue and west of Brighton Street as shown in Figure 2 — Local Vicinity Map. An aerial photograph of the site is shown in Figure 3 — Aerial Photo. The project site is currently designated in the General Plan as Commercial and Medium Density Residential and on the zoning map it is designated C -3 (Medium Commercial) and R -2 (Light Multiple Residential). The applicant is requesting to change the zoning and land use designation to Mixed Use. The General Plan land use designations adjacent to the site include Commercial and Medium Density Residential to the north, Commercial to the south and west, and Commercial and Medium Density Residential to the east. The zoning is C -3 (Medium Commercial), with the exception of the single - family residence at the northeast corner of the site that is zoned R -2 (Light Multiple Residential). 1.3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The project consists of the demolition of all existing structures to construct a five -story, mixed use development with 15,553 square feet of retail /restaurant space on the basement/first and second floors and 60 residential units on the third through fifth floors, comprising 54,609 square feet, for a total built area of 70,162 square feet. Of the 60 units, the project proposes 12 low- income rental units. An outdoor seating area is proposed in the central area of the ground level on the north side of the building. New landscaping will be provided within the building setbacks around the perimeter of the site and throughout the outdoor seating area. The project is requesting two concessions to allow the development as proposed. Due to the slope of the property, a concession is requested to allow a building height of 50 feet at Brighton Street, exceeding the allowable building height of 50 feet. A second concession is requested to allow the north side of the building to extend into a 20 degree angle that extends onto the site from the north property line because the project abuts existing residences north of the site. The proposed Tentative Tract Map No. 72529 is shown in Figure 4. Building elevations of the proposed building are shown in Figure 5. A I ® Phil Martin & Associates, Inc. c —� a1Wb q. w.• -- lu $mlp GARVEY DEL MAR PLAZA t e i t i a0 e i t � o ' � O w� . •M 0 0 Soave: Ad Martin &Anoointm. Ina, 000gu maps sou Figure 1 ® Regional Map r 51S OWTIO MmbMb lrudi Du Glmbt• �� �• un Y�•v umn j_ ti �• Iwnpe Cary i 7 and Plumb• Cmn•LYwn B•�n M•btT PAY � n• N `E • t e i t i a0 e i t � o ' � O w� . •M 0 0 Soave: Ad Martin &Anoointm. Ina, 000gu maps sou Figure 1 ® Regional Map 51S OWTIO MmbMb awE+ ° [ �•. 7 N GT•aa uh" �' MnMe JP•b• bQ ww� t e i t i a0 e i t � o ' � O w� . •M 0 0 Soave: Ad Martin &Anoointm. Ina, 000gu maps sou Figure 1 ® Regional Map PhYMartin &Associates, Inc. GARVEY DEL MAR PLAZ/ 9 F Saxon A.e ° s Anson St s rHllmvn All ma,'. A,+ s � HelLnan AVe .....r. oogu- nays, wu R Figure 2 ® Local Vicinity Map m ,ARVEv s z CC Ave HalptyA- H F — iGwvi'.a i z Cdy oI Angels n - WgMhtr St o n a' z Medical £ Melrose Ave � ueoler Ingleside Yes Ave Graves Ave IE Mooney or z GrdvES Ave ` IE r' o` L' [tl 44 d i �. F Emerson Ave Aw Emery::.: FI • Garvey Perk t �e c Mv'- A g n `4 n Keim Sr qt• . = Los Angeles Dr Low (n v "> > tto� .yam pry9Ae oGt � > BuddMst LlnK At' WO e n n o .� wtylmore St � rt d m $ avmngP s ire pt N,naUno OABHIEL °Boca Gharma 'Seal Rosemead o na,v st tW Re� > q 7empk a t�Ce plp'WS St s > > — Garvey Del Mar IePq • Mixed Use Project Par ' Garvey Ave Garvey Ave MaCel Ave N 0 N f9 Lyle, Ave > N<w"art Ave > n Newman Ave n p C Fprn Ale Fern Ave NevmMt Av[ � Fenn Ave op .....r. oogu- nays, wu R Figure 2 ® Local Vicinity Map m ,ARVEv s z CC Ave F — iGwvi'.a i ww""'% n - WgMhtr St o n a' £ Melrose Ave � n Yes Ave Graves Ave Mooney or GrdvES Ave o Iry Rd r' o` L' [tl 44 d i �. �S Aw c n' N �e c Mv'- A g n `4 n Keim Sr qt• poi °9,e, ; s is Dr Low (n tto� .yam pry9Ae oGt � Rush At' WO ,,�trss, y y�tl n Tales 19e, e'ey �g d m avmngP ire pt N,naUno OABHIEL ✓' 4 > tW Re� q Tegnet p a t�Ce plp'WS St > — .....r. oogu- nays, wu R Figure 2 ® Local Vicinity Map r. i r RI, TIM71 n ae LNO- CQ G d OL ea, Evelyn -qvE dg a N Q J a a i J W 0 r W a v s g z 4 ex, esF:eAeiaxe�.� j .LS No wotuff —. � .... � I F l .a - I -------------- 8AV XVA MT e j \CL \ \ � k \ # � \§ �\ \ 2 : � ƒ�� � SEP - : -( \a ^ : | � � \ \ \, : \LI \° \\ f \] U ! �� � 4 ■ \�: � *m \§ �\ \ 2 City of Rose nxa Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration Garvay0al Mar Islaaa - General plan Amendment 13 42, Zone Change 13-02, Tentative Tract Map No. 72529, Design Review conceptual landscape plan showing the types of landscape materials proposed for the site is shown in Figure 6. Parking is proposed as a combination of surface and two stories of subterranean basement parking. The project will incorporate an existing alley that extends east -west through the middle of the site from Brighton Street on the east to Del Mar Avenue on the west. Access to the proposed project will be provided via the rear of the structure with one entrance each on Del Mar Avenue and Brighton Street. The project also includes a density bonus application under Senate Bill (SB) 1818, which amended the state bonus law to allow density bonuses up to 35% 1.4 INTENDED USE OF THIS DOCUMENT This document is intended to be used by the City of Rosemead as the Lead Agency to ' evaluate the project's environmental impacts and to develop appropriate mitigation measures to reduce those impacts, if any, to less than a significant level, according to the regulations set forth in the California Environmental Quality Act and Guidelines (Public ' Resources Code §21000 — 21177, and California Code of Regulations §1500 — 15387). 1.5 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING , The City of Rosemead is a suburb within the Greater Los Angeles area located 10 miles east of the City of Los Angeles. It is bounded on the north by the City of Temple City , on the we st by the City of San Gabriel and the County of Los Angeles, on the south by the City of ' Montebello, and the City of El Monte and South El Monte on the east. The City of Rosemead is 5.5 square miles in size with a residential population of 53,764 people. ' The project is located at the northeast corner of the intersection of Del Mar Avenue and Garvey Avenue. There are single - family detached homes to the north, commercial uses to the west, commercial uses to the south, south of Garvey Avenue, and commercial and ' single - family detached residents to the east, east of Brighton Street. Photographs of the project site and the surrounding land uses are shown in Figures 7 and 8, respectively. As shown, the site is located in an area that is developed and urbanized. The land uses surrounding the site include the following: ' North General Plan — Commercial and Medium Density Residential ' Zoning — C-3 (Medium Commercial) and R -2 (Light Multiple Residential) Land Use — Residential , South General Plan - Commercial Zoning - C -3 (Medium Commercial) Land Use - Commercial ' East General Plan - Commercial ' Zoning - C -3 (Medium Commercial) and R -2 (Light Multiple Residential) Land Use - Commercial and Residential West General Plan - Commercial Zoning - C -3 (Medium Commercial) Land Use - Commercial t I 1 1 1 Q N J d a J w } a I Z i c� G d p � o ppPPpp td�j�0i LU it a _ ej r e 3 a o !E ! O � lio P 1 f mCL LL CL m v N t C m J e e 41 Ea 4= �f W Q .i a Q c o` E m G X d L. 'N •. d N L d w � O C � > v Q N T N � U (O S E O O w L m 5 C C_ 0 O y J j Q 9 v L O E v � o ai •- C L Y. h N Q a+ J � _ � v a Q ^ Y , kn I 0 W Q .i a Q c o` E m G X d L. 'N •. d N L d w � O C � > v Q N T N � U (O S E O O w L m 5 C C_ 0 O y J j Q 9 v L O E v � o ai •- C L Y. h Q N Q J a J W W Q rt S a L O N L C C a C N L L" O C d U C N a v t A m c 0 ai L O m N d N E E 0 v L N m s J a Mirr v O 0 s O u L W.. 7: C C 4 i h City of Rosemead Initial StudynWitigated Negative Declaration Garvey /Del Mar Plaza - General Plan Amendment 15 -02, ions Change 10 -02, Tentative Tract Map No. 72529, Design Room 1.6 CUMULATIVE PROJECTS The City of Rosemead identified two projects that, along with the proposed project, could have cumulative impacts. The two projects include: A. Garvey Market Place — The project proposes to develop a 3.43 acre site at 7419- 7459 Garvey Avenue as a shopping center with three buildings totaling 48,000 square feet. The site is currently developed with a travel agency office that will be demolished. B. Garvey 168 Plaza - The project proposes to develop a 0.698 acre (30,397 square feet) site at 8479 Garvey Avenue with two buildings totaling 36,100 square feet with 24,725 square feet of residential condominiums and 11,375 square feet of commercial use. An aerial photograph showing the location of the two cumulative projects is provided in Figure 9. There are no additional cumulative projects that along with the proposed project would have potential cumulative impacts. s 9 �o N Y 5 0 ms C, CL m M a N Y V d 0 O L CL a Y m V Q w ate®A City of Rosemead Initial StuCylMiegatee Negative Declaration GarveylDel Mar Plaza - General Plan Amendment 13 -02, Zone Change 13 -02, Tentative Tract Map No. 72529, Design Review 2.0 Environmental Checklist Environmental Factor That Could Result in a Potentially SgraSCatt Impact I The environmental factors listed below are not checked because the proposed project would not result in a "potentially significant impact' as indicated by the preceding Checklist and supported by substantial evidence provided in this document. ❑ Aesthetics ❑ Agricukure Resources ❑ Air Quality ❑ Siological Resources ❑ Cultural Resources ❑ Geology /Soils ❑ Hazards 8 Hazardous Materials ❑ Hydrology/Water Quality ❑ Land Use/Planning ❑ Mineral Resources ❑ Noise ❑ Population/Housing ❑ Public Services ❑ Recreation ❑ Transportation/Traffic ❑ Utilities /Services Systems ❑ Mandatory Findings of Significance EnviroranoW DeMnninsdon On the basis of this initial evaluation: ❑ I find that the proposed project could not have a significant effect on the environment, and a Negative Declaration will be prepared. ® I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A Mitigated Negative Declaration will be prepared. ❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, ' and an Environmental Impact Report is required. ❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measure based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An Environmental Impact Report is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. ❑ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or Negative Declaration, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. Signed Date Page 13 1 1 I t City of Rosemead Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration Garvey /Del Mar Plaza - General Plan Amendment 13 -02, Zone Change 1302, Tentative Tract Map No. 72529, Design Review ' EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 1) CEQA requires a brief explanation for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are ' adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer ' should be explained where it is based on project - specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis). ' 2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off -site as well as on -site, cumulative as well as project- level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. has determined that a physical impact may occur, and 3) Once the lead agency particular then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant ' Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. ' 4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where "Potentially the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than ' significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVII, "Earlier Analyses," may be cross- referenced). 5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other ' CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration (Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following: ' a) Earier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to t applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation ' Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site - specific conditions for the project. 6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference ' to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. ' 8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmental effects in whatever format is selected. Page 14 City of Rosemead Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration Garvey /Del Mar Plaza - General Plan Amendment 10 -02, Zone Change 13 -02, Tentative Tract Map No. 72529, Design Review 3.0 DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION 3.1 AESTHETICS a) No Impact. The project site and the surrounding properties are not designated as a scenic vista by the City of Rosemead General Plan. The most predominant scenic vista open to the Rosemead community in general is the San Gabriel Valley mountain range, which is approximately 8 miles north of Rosemead. The project will not block or interrupt any direct views of the San Gabriel Mountains by existing residents south of the site. No existing residences adjacent to or north of the site will have to look across the site to view the San Gabriel Mountains. The project will not have any significant scenic vista impacts. b) No Impact. The pro act site is not located adjacent to or near a state - designated, or eligible scenic highway. The project will not affect or impact any existing scenic resources, historic buildings, etc., within a state scenic highway. c) Less Than Significant With Mitigation. The project site is developed with five commercial buildings and a one -story single - family residence. One building is vacant and the four remaining buildings are occupied with commercial uses. An occupied single - family residence is located at the northeast corner of the property and will be demolished along with the other on -site buildings. A paved alley separates the paved parking lot at the northwest corner of the site and the single -family detached residence at the northeast corner of the property from the commercial uses south of the alley and north of Garvey Avenue. The alley will be removed and incorporated into the project. The building setbacks will be landscaped. The project landscaping will provide some aesthetic buffering of the site for motorists and pedestrians on Del Mar Avenue, Garvey Avenue and Brighton Street. The landscaping will improve the aesthetics of the site for the residents north and northeast of the site compared to the existing landscaping. 1 State of California Officially Designated State Scenic Less Than htto: /tww+. dot . ca am /ha /LandArch/scenichiahways/ Potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Significant No Environmental Issues Impact Mitigation Impact Impact 3.1 Aesthetics Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic ❑ ❑ ❑ vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources including, but not limited to trees, rock ❑ ❑ ❑ outcroppings, and historic building within a state scenic highway? _ _ c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its ❑ ® ❑ ❑ surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect day or ❑ IN ❑ ❑ nighttime views in the area? 3.1 AESTHETICS a) No Impact. The project site and the surrounding properties are not designated as a scenic vista by the City of Rosemead General Plan. The most predominant scenic vista open to the Rosemead community in general is the San Gabriel Valley mountain range, which is approximately 8 miles north of Rosemead. The project will not block or interrupt any direct views of the San Gabriel Mountains by existing residents south of the site. No existing residences adjacent to or north of the site will have to look across the site to view the San Gabriel Mountains. The project will not have any significant scenic vista impacts. b) No Impact. The pro act site is not located adjacent to or near a state - designated, or eligible scenic highway. The project will not affect or impact any existing scenic resources, historic buildings, etc., within a state scenic highway. c) Less Than Significant With Mitigation. The project site is developed with five commercial buildings and a one -story single - family residence. One building is vacant and the four remaining buildings are occupied with commercial uses. An occupied single - family residence is located at the northeast corner of the property and will be demolished along with the other on -site buildings. A paved alley separates the paved parking lot at the northwest corner of the site and the single -family detached residence at the northeast corner of the property from the commercial uses south of the alley and north of Garvey Avenue. The alley will be removed and incorporated into the project. The building setbacks will be landscaped. The project landscaping will provide some aesthetic buffering of the site for motorists and pedestrians on Del Mar Avenue, Garvey Avenue and Brighton Street. The landscaping will improve the aesthetics of the site for the residents north and northeast of the site compared to the existing landscaping. 1 State of California Officially Designated State Scenic Highways, htto: /tww+. dot . ca am /ha /LandArch/scenichiahways/ page 16 1 1 11 City of Rosemead Initial StudylMi igateel Negative Declaration Garvey /Del Mar Plaza - General Plan A ehdment 12 402, Zone Change 12 42, TeMativa Tract Map No. 72529, Design Review A 10 foot wide landscape setback is proposed along the entire length of the north project boundary. This 10 foot landscape setback will provide some aesthetic buffer of the project for the existing residences adjacent to and north of the project. The north ten -foot landscape setback, along with the courtyard proposed for the first floor on the north side of the building, will provide a 50 foot distance from the north property line to the front of the north side of the proposed building. Thus, there will be a 50 foot separation between the closest residence north of the site and the actual residential units and project residents. Figure 10 is an artistic rendering of the south building elevation as seen from the shopping center south of Garvey Avenue. As shown, the project will be visible to the land uses south of the site. The project will be visible to the residents and businesses north and northeast of the project. Figure 11 is an artistic rendering of the north building elevation as seen northwest of the site. The project proposes to maintain four existing trees along the north project boundary and two along the east project boundary. Four existing street trees along the south project boundary, adjacent to Garvey Avenue, will be removed along with three trees on the residential lot at the northeast corner of the property. None of the trees to be removed are oak trees. In their place, the project proposes to plant 13 new street trees, including three along the west boundary adjacent to Del Mar Avenue, eight along the southern boundary adjacent to Garvey Avenue, and two along the east project boundary adjacent to Brighton Street. In addition to planting 13 new trees, the project proposes to plant vines, shrubs and other landscape materials within the 10 foot landscape setback along the north project boundary to buffer the project from the residents adjacent to and north of the project. Additional landscaping consisting of vines, trees will be planted along the west, south, and east project boundary to improve the aesthetics of the project from the adjacent streets. The proposed project landscaping will improve the aesthetics of the property compared to the existing condition. The project will improve the existing aesthetics of the site. Most of the buildings on the site are single -story. However, several buildings are two stories in height similar to other two story buildings in the project area. The project will increase the height of the existing one and two -story buildings to a four story building. Due to the existing slope of the site, the height of the proposed building will be 50 feet above the ground at the west elevation and 65 feet tall at the east elevation. The project will be the tallest building in the immediate project vicinity. The proposed building will be more visible to area residents and businesses due to its height. As stated previously, the new building is four stories in height compared to the one and two-story buildings on the site. The residents north and east of the site will have more direct and unobstructed views of the property due to the increased height of the proposed building. The project will also be more visible to existing residents further from the site than the existing buildings. While the project will be more visible the project is not anticipated to significantly degrade the existing visual characteristics of either the site or the surrounding areas. The project will change and reduce the privacy of the residents north and east of the project due to the height of the proposed building. The proposed building will allow residents on the second, third and fourth floors to have greater views of the residential area north and east of the site compared to the existing condition. Views by the project residents to the north and reg. t Q N Q a Q J W r W Q l7 Y `a N N e `a iF v C L o a+ C ar C O r la a7 W L Y L I J 1 Y O s t �_ a �m v� s- ma LL� a 0 Y R N W S a. 7 O N S W tt a h Cxy of aoaemead Initial atueylMltigated Negative Declaration Gamy/Dal Mar Plaza - General Plan Amendment 13-02, Zone change 12 42, Tentative Trani Map No. 72629, Design Review east could reduce the existing privacy of residents closest to the site. Similarly, residents north and east of the she will have direct views of the residential units on the north side of the project. Per Rosemead Municipal Code 17.74.505.A.1, the project is required to provide a minimum twelve foot setback from the adjacent curb face to the building. Within this twelve foot setback is a required five foot wide amenity zone. The amenity zone shall include street trees, landscaping, public art, street lighting, street furniture and other pedestrian- oriented amenities. Required street trees have a maximum distance of 30 feet or less, on center. Street trees are proposed along all three sides of the project adjacent to streets. The City will require that street trees are provided to comply with RMC 17.74.50.A.1. Per Rosemead Municipal Code 17.74.050.A.4.a, the corner of the proposed building at Del Mar Avenue and Garvey Avenue must provide special treatments to enhance the pedestrian experience, and create visual interest and focal points at the entryways, such as, but not limited to, building cut -offs and corner entrances with additional architectural detail, decorative landscaping, hardscape, planters, canopy, overhang or other architectural covering over the building entry. In addition, the building shall have a five -foot angled corner setback measured from both intersecting property lines. As shown previously in Figure 4, the building provides the required building cut -offs and angled corner setbacks. During site plan review, the City will ensure the building provides the proper angled corners and cut -offs in compliance with RMC 17.74.050.A.4.a. The approval of the requested Residential /Commercial Mixed Use Development Overlay Zone (RCMUDO) will require the project to integrate on -site public art work into the project.' At this time, the applicant is not proposing any on -site public art work. The following measure is recommended to ensure that public art work is incorporated into the project. Mitigation Measure No. 1 Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall obtain an approved public art plan by the City Council. The existing structures on the site are older buildings and not consistent in their design and architecture. The buildings show signs of delayed maintenance and repair compared to other buildings in the area. There is a vacant parcel of land at the southwest corner of the site that is enclosed with chain -link fencing. A small paved parking lot at the northwest corner of the site provides parking for on -site business and also provides temporary parking for area residents. Compared to the existing development, the proposed project would improve the aesthetics of the site with a new building that is current in its design and architecture. The elimination of the vacant parcel enclosed with chain link fencing and the replacement of the small paved parking lot with the proposed improvements, including a new building, with landscaping and other proposed site improvements will significantly improve the existing aesthetics of the site. Project compliance with all applicable development standards in RMC 17.74.050 will reduce project aesthetic impacts for adjacent residents, businesses, pedestrians, and motorists on Del Mar Avenue, Garvey Avenue, and Brighton Streets to less -than- significant. d) Less Than Significant With Mitigation. The project will generate new sources of light and glare compared to the existing conditions due to the increase in the amount of , development proposed for the site. Due to the increase in development proposed for the site compared to the existing development, the project will increase light and glare. 2 Rosemead Municipal Code 17.74.060(A). Page 1 i ' City of ROaemeed Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Garvey/Del Mar Plaza - General Plan Amendment 13 -02, Zone Change 13 -02, Tentative Tract Map No. 72529, Design Rwiev ' Light ' In compliance with RMC 17.74.050.A.12, a photometric study' was prepared. The photometric study was based on the proposed types and electronic technologies of the outdoor lighting fixtures, including light pole heights, to illuminate the site. The results of the photometric study are shown in Figure 12. Due to the slope of the site and the 18 -foot -tall pole- mounted parking fixtures (specified by the architect with "roadway" and "forward throw" lighting distributions, respectively), the project would generate incidental backward - directed light and impact the residences north of the property. The photometric analysis shows the row of 18- foot -tall light poles along the north side of the site contributed to measurable light beyond the north property line. The photometric analysis shows the project lighting will spill onto the properties north of the site greater than 0.2 foot candles. The photometric analysis shows that off -site project light intensities by the project will range from a low of 0.0 foot candles adjacent to and north of the block wall along the north property line to a high of 0.8 foot candles. The lighting industry recognizes a maintenance horizontal illuminance of 0.2 foot - candles. For comparison purposes, a medium to bright moon light is approximately 0.3 foot candles. Based on the photometric study the project lighting plan, as currently proposed, will generate light hotspots both on and off the site with accompanying glare resulting in a combination of floodlight effects that could impact project guests, adjacent residents, pedestrians and other off -site land uses. In an effort to reduce potential off -site light impacts to the residents north of the site, an alternate lighting configuration was modeled, which included: (1) converting the 18- foot -tall light poles to a forward -throw distribution; and (2) equipping the light poles with a manufacturer option house -side shields to further reduce backlight. The results are shown in the photometric analysis at the top of Figure 12. As shown, the light intensities with the alternative lighting configuration will be 0.1 foot - candles. The following measure is recommended to reduce on- and off -site lighting impact to 0.1 foot candles and less- than - significant. Mitigation Measure No. 2 Prior to the issuance of a building permit the project applicant shall submit a lighting plan for approval by the Planning Division that incorporates any of the following light reducing measures as applicable: • Improved physical barriers such as increased wall height • Relocate and /or change the height and /or orientation of proposed lighting fixtures. • Select lighting fixtures with more - precise optical control and /or different lighting distribution. • Add external shielding and/or internal reflectors to fixtures. • Select lower- output lamp /lamp technologies • A combination of the above. ' a Outdoor Lighting Study - Garvey Del Mar Plaza Mixed Use Development, OMe Electrical, letter dated October 15, 2013. See Appendix A. Page 21 a N Q J a cQ L J w } W a 0 a f i 0 3n, al S N01N'J /— .a.m +. !4 0 J � 3 i _ a d t� a ;;8:' I 9 9 O aas t 5 Ri Lt E� i nj Yda � � u 8Bit _ F y� - _ it• 8pp gg f! 39 3 1 4 t3 'j i� S eS JA MYM 730 t� �i d� P! !t i i d 1 6 §li � i - et tI a b ^+ T � M LL V �L d O O L a ,' ' City of Rosemead Initial Studylleitigated Negative Declaration Garvey /Dal Mar Plaza - General Plan Amendment 13 42, Zone Change 13 -02, Tentative Tract Map No. 72529, Design Review ' Glare from the windows and metal surfaces of the proposed building could impact adjacent land uses that are glare- sensitive, especially residences north and northeast of the site. A proposed 3-6 foot block wall along the north project boundary will block and eliminate ' ground level glare impacts to the residents adjacent to and north of the site. Glare from windows and metal building materials of the upper levels of the building could extend to the residents north and northeast of the site. Although anticipated to be minimal, some glare from the ground level of the building could extend to the motorists and pedestrians on Del ' Mar Avenue, Garvey Avenue, and Brighton Street. For the most part, all large windows on all four floors that could generate glare and impact residents north and northeast of the project are recessed into the building. Being recessed, the glare from the building windows will be minimal. Overall, project generated glare to area residents, pedestrians, and motorists will be less- than - significant. 1 1 11 Less Than - Potentially Significant Less Than signMcant With slgnMcant No Environmental Issues impact Mitigation Impact Inspect Agricultural Resources In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. ::..Would the protect _ _... a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland ❑ ❑ ❑ Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non- agricultural use? _... _. _..... b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural ❑ ❑ use, or a Williamson Act contract? - - - - -_ __ c) Involve other changes in the existing environment, which, due to their location or ❑ ❑ nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use? 3.2 AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES a) No Impact. The project site is developed with existing buildings, except for a small area in the southwest corner of the site that is vacant. There are no agricultural uses on the site or within the vicinity of the site. The California State Department of Conservation was contacted to determine the California State Important Farmlands Map designation for the site. The Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) considers the City of Rosemead an urban area. Therefore, none of the soils have been mapped and the NRCS has no plans to map the soil in the future. Therefore, the project site has no farmland designation. Because there are no agricultural uses on or in close proximity to the site, the project will not impact existing farmland. Page 23 City of Rosemead Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Garvey)Del Mar Plaza - General Plan Amendment 13 -02, Zone Change 13 -02, Tentative Tract Map No. 72529, Design Review b) No Impact. The project site is not zoned for agricultural use and the project applicant is not requesting a zone change to allow agriculture use. Because the site and the surrounding properties are developed, located in an urbanized area, and not used for agriculture, none of the properties are in a Williamson Act contract. The project will not have a conflict or impact any agricultural use or land that is in a Williamson Act contract. c) No Impact. None of the proposed project activities could result in or encourage the conversion of agricultural uses to non - agricultural uses since there are no agricultural uses either on or adjacent to the site. 3.3 AIR QUALITY An air quality and greenhouse assessment was prepared by Giroux & Associates. A Copy of the air quality and greenhouse gas assessment is included as Appendix B. a) No Impact. The City of Rosemead is in the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB), which is bounded by the San Gabriel, San Bernardino, and San Jacinto Mountains to the north and , east, and the Pacific Ocean to the south and west. Air quality in the South Coast Air Basin is managed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). The 1990 Federal Clean Air Act Amendment (CAAA) required that all states with air -sheds ' with "serious" or worse ozone problems submit a revision to the State Implementation Plan (SIP). Amendments to the SIP have been proposed, revised and approved over the past ' decade. The most current regional attainment emissions forecast for ozone precursors (ROG and NOx), carbon monoxide (CO) and particulate matter are shown in Table 1. Substantial reductions in emissions of ROG, NOx and CO are forecast to continue throughout the next several decades. Unless new particulate control programs are ' implemented, PM -10 and PM -2.5 are forecast to slightly increase. Page 21 1 Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than Signifinant with Significant N¢` Environmental Issues Impact Mitigation Impact Im 3.3 Air Quality Wirers available, the significance crdeda established by the applicable air quality manage or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would, the project - + - a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of El EJ El the applicable air quality lane b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or ❑ ❑ ® ❑ _ejected air quality violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non - attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air ❑ ❑ ® ❑ quality standard (including releasing emissions, which exceed quantitative _. thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial 71 11 ® El concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a L1 Cl ® El number of eo le? 3.3 AIR QUALITY An air quality and greenhouse assessment was prepared by Giroux & Associates. A Copy of the air quality and greenhouse gas assessment is included as Appendix B. a) No Impact. The City of Rosemead is in the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB), which is bounded by the San Gabriel, San Bernardino, and San Jacinto Mountains to the north and , east, and the Pacific Ocean to the south and west. Air quality in the South Coast Air Basin is managed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). The 1990 Federal Clean Air Act Amendment (CAAA) required that all states with air -sheds ' with "serious" or worse ozone problems submit a revision to the State Implementation Plan (SIP). Amendments to the SIP have been proposed, revised and approved over the past ' decade. The most current regional attainment emissions forecast for ozone precursors (ROG and NOx), carbon monoxide (CO) and particulate matter are shown in Table 1. Substantial reductions in emissions of ROG, NOx and CO are forecast to continue throughout the next several decades. Unless new particulate control programs are ' implemented, PM -10 and PM -2.5 are forecast to slightly increase. Page 21 1 City of Rosemead Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration Garveyl0el Mar Plaza - General Plan Amendment 13 -02, Zone Change 13 -02, Tentative Tract Map No. 72529, Design Review ' South Coast Air Basin Emissions Forecasts (Emissions Tons /Day) 1 i 1 1 Pollutant Y006a 2010" 2015° 2020" NOx 917 836 667 561 ROO 632 596 545 525 CO 3,344 3,039 2,556 2,281 PM -10 308 314 328 340 PM -2.5 110 110 111 113 '2008 Base Year, bwth anent emissions reduction Programs and adopted growth forecasts. Source: Califomla Air Resources Board, California Emieaions Proledion Anatysis Model. 2009 ' The Air Quality Management District (AQMD) adopted an updated clean air "blueprint" in August 2003. The 2003 AQMP was approved by EPA in 2004. The Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) outlined the air pollution measures needed to meet federal health -based standards for ozone by 2010 and for particulates (PM -10) by 2006. The 2007 AQMP was adopted on June 1, 2007, after extensive public review. The 2007 AQMP recognizes the interaction between photochemical processes that create both ozone ' and the smallest airborne particulates (PM -2.5). The 2007 AQMP is therefore a coordinated plan for both pollutants. ' Development, such as the proposed mixed -use project, do not directly relate to the AQMP in that there are no specific air quality programs or regulations governing "general" development. Conformity with adopted plans, forecasts and programs relative to population, 1 housing, employment and land use is the primary yardstick by which the impact significance of planned growth is determined. If a given project incorporates any available transportation control measures that can be implemented on a project- specific basis, and if the scope and phasing of a project are consistent with adopted forecasts as shown in the Regional 1 Comprehensive Plan (RCP), then the regional air quality impact of project growth would not be significant because of planning inconsistency. The SCAQMD, however, while acknowledging that the AQMP is a growth- accommodating document, does not favor ' designating regional impacts as less-than-significant just because the proposed development is consistent with regional growth projections. Air quality impact significance for the proposed project has therefore been analyzed on a project- specific basis. The project will not significantly affect regional air quality plans because the project will not generate new or additional vehicle trips that could generate increased quantities of emissions and impact the AQMP. The project will not generate any emissions that will ' exceed AQMD adopted thresholds. As a result, the project will not impact the implementation of the AQMP. 1 ' Page 25 City of Rosemead Initial StudylMitigated Negative Declaration Garvey /Dal Mar Plaza - General Plan Amendment 13 -02, Zone Change 13-02, Tentztive Tract Map No. 72529, Design Review b) Less Than Significant Impact. The air emissions that will be generated by the project are associated with the demolition of the existing on -site improvements, project construction and the operation of the project upon completion of construction. Because the project is located in the South Coast Air Basin, the SCAQMD sets and enforces regulations for stationary sources in the basin. The California Air Resources Board (CARB) is charged with controlling motor vehicle emissions. Lang -term air quality monitoring is carried out by SCAQMD at various monitoring stations. There are no nearby stations that monitor the full spectrum of pollutants. However, ozone, carbon monoxide, PM-2.5 and nitrogen oxides are monitored at the Pico Rivera facility, while 10- micron diameter particulate matter (PM -10) is measured at the Azusa air monitoring station. Table 2 summarizes the last five years of monitoring data from a composite of these data resources. Table 2 Air Quality Monitoring Summary (2008 -2012) Pollutant/Standard 2008 2009 2010 1 2011 2012 (hone 1 -Hour > 0.09 ppm (S) 7 8 1 1 5 8- Hour >0.07 ppm S 12 6 1 1 6 8- Hour > 0.075 ppm (F) 5 3 1 0 0 Max. 1-Hour Conc.(ppm) 0.11 0.13 0.11 0.10 0.11 Max. 8 -Hour Conc. m 0.09 0.10 0.09 0.07 0.08 Carbon Monoxide 1- Hour >20. ppm S) 0 0 0 0 0 1 -Hour > 9. ppm (S, F) 0 0 0 0 0 Max 1 -Hour Conc. m) 2.9 2.5 2.3 2.7 1 xx Max 8 -Hour Conc. m 2.1 2.1 1.9 2.4 2.2 Nitrogen Dioxide 1- Hour >0.18 ppm S 0 0 0 0 0 Max. 1 -Hour Conc.( m ) 0.10 0.10 0.08 0.09 0.08 Inhalable Particulates (PM -10 24 -Hour > 50 pg/m (S) 12149' 7/52 5/55 8A61 6161 24 -Hour > 150 p /m' (F ) 0/49 0/52 0/55 0B1 0161 Max. 24 -Hr. Conic. (µ m 96 72 68 63 78 Ultra -Fine Particulates (PM -2.5) 24 -Hour > 35 fug/m' (F) 1 41114 1 21118 0/117 1/114 1/119 Max. 24 -Hr. Conc. (lug/nn) 47.2 71.0 34.9 41.2 45.3 u - data no BPmlaMe, S=ffiam Standard, v= vederal sladard ' Numher of days standards viers exceeded and madmum levels during violations. Entries shown as ratios = samples , exceeding stardardlsamples taken) Source: South Coast AQMD - Rod Rivera Air Monitoring Station for Ozone, CO, NOx and PM -2.5 Azusa Monitonng Station for PM -10 data :y arbra.00yladam/ Because of the chemical complexity of primary versus secondary pollutants, the SCAQMD has designated significant emissions levels as surrogates for evaluating regional air quality impact significance independent of chemical transformation processes. Projects with daily ' emissions that exceed any of the emission thresholds shown in Table 3 are recommended by the SCAQMD to be considered significant under CEQA guidelines. 11 1 1 1 1 1 City of Rosemead Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration GarveylDel Mar Plavr - General Plan Amendment 1342, Zone Change 13 -02, Tentative Tract Map No. 72529, Design Review Table 3 Dally Emission Thresholds Pollutant I Construction Operations ROG 75 55 NOx 100 55 CO 550 550 PM -10 150 150 PM -2.5 55 55 sox 150 150 Lead 3 3 Source: SCAQMD CEQA Air QuMhy Handbook, November, 1993 Rev. Construction Emissions Dust is typically the primary pollutant of concern during grading activities. Because such emissions are not amenable to collection and discharge through a controlled source, they are called'Yugftive emissions." Emission rates vary as a function of many parameters (soil silt, soil moisture, wind speed, area disturbed, number of vehicles, depth of disturbance or excavation, etc.). Average daily PM -10 emissions during site grading and other disturbance average about 10 pounds per acre. This estimate presumes the use of reasonably available control measures (RACMs). The SCAQMD requires the use of best available control measures (BACMs) for fugitive dust from construction activities. With the use of BACMs, fugitive dust emissions can be reduced to 1 -2 pounds per day per disturbed acre. ' Current research in particulate- exposure health suggests that the most adverse effects derive from ultra -small diameter particulate matter comprised of chemically reactive ' pollutants such as sulfates, nitrates or organic material. A national clean air standard for particulate matter of 2.5 microns or smaller in diameter (called "PM -2.5 ") was adopted in 1997. A limited amount of construction activity particulate matter is in the PM -2.5 range. PM -2.5 emissions are estimated to comprise 10 -20 percent of PM -10. ' In addition to fine particles that remain suspended in the atmosphere semi - indefinitely, construction activities generate many larger particles with shorter atmospheric residence times. This dust is comprised mainly of large diameter inert silicates that are chemically non - reactive and are further readily filtered out by human breathing passages. These fugitive dust particles are therefore more of a potential soiling nuisance as they settle out on parked cars, outdoor furniture or landscape foliage rather than causing any adverse health hazard. The CaIEEMod was developed by SCAQMD to provide a model to calculate construction ' emissions and operational emissions for a residential or commercial project. CaIEEMod calculates both the daily maximum and annual average emissions for criteria pollutants as well as total or annual greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The CaIEEMod 2013.2.2 computer model was used to calculate emissions from the default construction equipment fleet and schedule anticipated by CaIEEMod as shown in Table 4. 1 Page 27 City of Rosemead Initial 6tudylrAiti9ated Negative Declaration Garvey /Del Mar Plaza - General Plan Amendment 13 -02, Zone Change 13-02, Tentative Tract Map No. 72629, Design Revlaw 1 CYIC Y ' Construction Activity Equipment Fleet Phase Name and Duration Equipment Demolition (20 days) 1 Concrete Saw 3 Excavators 2 Dozers Grading (8 days) 1 Grader 1 Excavator 1 Dozer 3 loader /Backhoes Construction (230 days) 1 Crane 3 Forklifts 1 Generator Set 1 Welder 3 Loader /Backhoes Paving (18 days) 2 Mixers 2 Paving Equipment 1 Paver 2 Rollers Utilizing the equipment fleet in Table 4, the following estimated worst case daily construction ' emissions are listed in Table 5. Table 5 , Construction Activity Emissions Maximum Daily Emissions (poundsiday) Maximal Construction Emissions ROG NOx CO SO: PM -10 PM -2.5 2014 Unmitigated 4.7 50.4 38.0 0.0 9.1 5.6 Mitigated 4.7 50.4 38.0 0.0 5.1 3.5 2015 Unmitigated 22.7 32.7 27.1 0.0 12.3 7.9 Mitigated 22.7 32.7 27.1 0.0 3.2 2.3 SCAOMD Thresholds 75 100 350 150 150 55 As shown in Table 5, the peak daily construction activity emissions are estimated to be below SCAQMD CEQA thresholds without the need for mitigation. The only model -based mitigation measure applied to the project was to water all exposed dirt at least three times per day during construction as required per SCAQMD Rule 403 (Fugitive Dust), to minimize the generation of fugitive dust. The incorporation of the following measure will reduce project construction emission impacts to less- than - significant. 1 1 City of Rosemead Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Garvey /Del Mar Plaza - General Plan Amendment 13 42, Zone Change 13 -02, Tentative Tract Map No. 72529, Design Review Mitigation Measure No. 3 During construction, the contractor shall apply water three times daily, or non -toxic soil stabilizers according to manufacturers specifications, to all unpaved parking or staging areas, unpaved road surfaces, and active construction areas. Operational Emissions The operational emissions for the proposed uses were calculated using CaIEEMod2013.2.2 for a project build -out year of 2015. The operational emissions for the project are shown in Table 6. Table 6 Daily Operational Impacts ' Page 29 O ra8onal Emissions (IbsJtl ) Source ROG NOx CO S02 I-il I Fill I CO2 Area 3.6 0.1 5.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 1,159.6 Energy 0.1 0.8 0.6 0.0 0.1 0.1 1,009.7 Mobile 7.9 16.1 70.1 0.0 8.9 2.5 11,857.5 Total 11.6 17.0 75.8 0.1 9.1 2.7 14,026.8 SCAOMD Threshold 56 55 560 150 150 55 - Exceeds Threshold? No No No No No No NA ' Page 29 Source: CalEEMod Output in Appendix In addition to motor vehicles, general development causes smaller amounts of "area source" ' air pollution to be generated from on -site energy consumption (primarily landscaping) and from off -site electrical generation (lighting). These sources represent a minimal percentage of the total project NOx and CO burdens, and a few percent other pollutants. The inclusion ' of these emissions adds negligibly to the total significant project - related emissions. As shown in Table 6, the project will not exceed any SCAQMD CEQA significance ' thresholds. As a result, the project operational emission impacts will be less -than- significant. ' Microscale Impact Analysis Exhaust fumes from vehicular traffic are the primary source of CO. CO is a localized gas that dissipates very quickly under normal meteorological conditions. There is a direct ' relationship between traffrAcirculation congestion and CO (carbon monoxide) impacts. Therefore, CO concentrations decrease substantially as distance from the source (intersection) increases. The highest CO concentrations are typically found in areas directly ' adjacent to congested roadway intersections. These areas of vehicle congestion have historically had the potential to create pockets of elevated levels of CO which are called "hot spots." However, with the turnover of older vehicles, introduction of cleaner fuels and implementation of control technology on industrial facilities, CO concentrations in the project ' vicinity have steadily declined. Micro -scale air quality impacts have traditionally been analyzed in environmental documents where the region was a non - attainment area for carbon monoxide. However, the SCAQMD ' Page 29 City of Rosemead InMal study/MhigaWd NegMlve Daclaradon Garvey /Del Mar Plaza - General Plan Amendment 13 42, Zone Change 13 -02, Tentative Tract Map No. 72029, Design RevlW has demonstrated in the CO attainment redesignation request to EPA that there are no "hot spots" anywhere in Southern California, even at intersections with much higher volumes, much worst congestion, and much higher background CO levels than the project area. A project is considered to have significant CO impacts if project - related mobile- source emissions exceed the California one -hour and eight -hour CO standards, which are: 1 -hour = 20 ppm 8 -hour = 9 ppm The existing peak one -hour local CO background level in 2011 in the project area vicinity was 2.7 ppm. The maximum ambient 8 -hour CO concentration in 2012 was 2.2 ppm. The project will have less-than-significant CO impacts. LOCAL SIGNIFICANCE THRESHOLDS The SCAQMD has developed analysis parameters to evaluate ambient air quality on a local level in addition to the more regional emissions -based thresholds of significance. These analysis elements are called Localized Significance Thresholds (LSTs). LSTs were developed in response to Governing Board's Environmental Justice Enhancement Initiative 14 and the LST methodology was provisionally adopted in October 2003 and formally approved by SCAQMD's Mobile Source Committee in February 2005. For the project, the primary source of possible LST impact would be during demolition and construction. LSTs are only applicable to the following criteria pollutants: oxides of nitrogen (NOx), carbon monoxide (CO), and particulate matter (PM -10 and PM -2.5). LSTs represent the maximum emissions that are not expected to cause or contribute to an exceedance of the most stringent applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard, and are developed based on the ambient concentrations of that pollutant for each source receptor area and distance to the nearest sensitive receptor. The SCAQMD has issued guidance on applying CalEEMod to LSTs. LST pollutant screening level concentration data is currently published for 1, 2 and 5 acre disturbance sites for varying distances. CalEEMod calculates construction emissions based on the number of equipment hours and the maximum daily soil disturbance activity possible for each piece of equipment used at the site. Table 7 shows the maximum daily disturbed - acreage for comparison to LSTs. Table 7 Maximum Daily Disturbed Acreage per Equipment Type E ul mend T Acres/8-hr-day Crawler Tractor 0.5 Graders 0.5 Rubber Tired Dozers 0.5 Scrapers 1 1 1 1 plaps30 1 CDy of Rosemead InMal Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration Gamey/Dal Mar PMZa - General Plan Amendment 110; zone Change 13.02, Tentative Tract Map No. 72529, Design Review t Based on the equipment listed in Table 7 for the project and the CaIEEMod default, the equipment fleet will disturb one acre daily during peak construction grading activity as shown below: (1 dozer x 0.5 + 1 grader x 0.5 = 1.0 acre disturbed). The applicable thresholds and project construction emissions are shown in Table 8. The ' LST emissions thresholds were compared to the maximum daily construction activities. As shown in Table 8, all on -site project emissions are below the LST for demolition and construction. The project will have less-than-significant LST emissions. ' Table 8 LST and Project Emissions (pounds /day) 11 LST 1 acres/ 25 meters S. San Gabriel Valley CO NOx PM -10 PM -2.5 Max On-Site Emissions • 673 83 5 4 Demolition Unmitigated 50 36 3 2 Mitigated 50 36 3 2 Grading Unmitigated 27 41 9 6 Mlti ated 27 41 5 3 Construction Unmiti aced 19 31 2 2 Mitigated 19 31 2 2 Paving Unmitigated 13 20 1 1 Mitigated 13 20 1 1 CalEEMod Output in Appendix 'excludes construction cmnmudng, vendor deliveries and possible emissions assoaated with haul trucking. Greenhouse Gas Emissions "Greenhouse gases" (so called because of their role in trapping heat near the surface of the earth) emitted by human activity are implicated in global climate change, commonly referred to as "global warming." Greenhouse gases contribute to an increase in the temperature of the earth's atmosphere by transparency to short wavelength visible sunlight, but near opacity to outgoing terrestrial long wavelength heat radiation in some parts of the infrared spectrum. The principal greenhouse gases (GHGs) are carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, ozone, and water vapor. For purposes of planning and regulation, Section 15364.5 of the California Code of Regulations defines GHGs to include carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons and sulfur hexafluoride. Fossil fuel consumption in the transportation sector (on -road motor vehicles, off - highway mobile sources, and aircraft) is the single largest source of GHG emissions, accounting for approximately half of GHG emissions globally. Industrial and commercial sources are the second largest contributors of GHG emissions with about one -fourth of total emissions. AB 32 is one of the most significant pieces of environmental legislation that California has adopted. A unique aspect of AB 32, beyond its broad and wide- ranging mandatory Page 11 City of Rosemead Inidal StudylMitigaled Negative Declared" GamaylDel Mar Plaza -General Plan Amendment 13 -02, Zone Change 1102, Tenlative Tract Map No. 72529, Design Review provisions and dramatic GHG reductions are the short time frames which it must be implemented. Statewide, the framework to develop implementing regulations for AS 32 is under way. Maximum GHG reductions are expected to derive from increased vehicle fuel efficiency, from greater use of renewable energy and from increased structural energy efficiency. Greenhouse Gas Emissions Significance Thresholds In response to the requirements of SB97, the State Resources Agency developed guidelines for the treatment of GHG emissions under CEQA. These new guidelines became state laws as part of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations in March, 2010. The CEQA Appendix G guidelines were modified to include GHG as a required analysis element. A project would have a potentially significant impact if it: • Generates GHG emissions, directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment, or • Conflicts with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted to reduce GHG emissions. Section 15064.4 of the Code specifies how significance of GHG emissions is to be evaluated. The process is broken into quantification of project- related GHG emissions, making a determination of significance, and specification of any appropriate mitigation if impacts are found to be potentially significant. At each of these steps, the new GHG guidelines afford the lead agency with substantial flexibility. Emissions identification may be quantitative, qualitative or based on performance standards. CEQA guidelines allow the lead agency to "select the model or methodology it considers most appropriate ". The most common practice for transportation /combustion GHG emissions quantification is to use a computer model such as CaIEEMod. The selection of a threshold of significance must take into consideration the level of GHG emissions that would be cumulatively considerable. In September 2010, the SCAQMD Working Group recommended a threshold of 3,000 MTCO2(e) for mixed use projects. This 3,000 MT /year recommendation has been used as a guideline for this analysis. Construction Activity GHG Emissions The build -out timetable for this project is estimated by CaIEEMod to be slightly less than two years. During project construction, the CaIEEMod2013.2.2 computer model predicts that the construction activities will generate the annual CO2(e) emissions shown in Table 9. Table 9 Construction Emissions (Metric Tons CO2(e)) 'CaIEEMod Output provided in appendix 1 Pap 32 1 CO2(e) Year 2014 491.1 Year2015 30.2 Overall Total 521.4 Amortized 17.4 'CaIEEMod Output provided in appendix 1 Pap 32 1 City of Rosemead Initial studylhilitigated Negative Declaration GarveylDel Mar Plaza - General Plan Amendment 13 42, Zone Change 13.02, Tentative Tract Map No. 72529, Design Review The SCAQMD GHG emissions policy for construction activities is to amortize construction emissions over a 30 -year lifetime. As shown, the estimated GHG emissions from project construction activities are 17.4 MTCO2(e) per year, which is less than the threshold of 3,000 MTCO,(e). Therefore, the project GHG impacts are less- than - significant. Operational GHG Emissions The total operational and annualized construction emissions were calculated and are shown in Table 10. The total annual project GHG emissions are calculated to be 2,255.7 metric tons CO2(e) /year, which is less than the significance threshold of 3,000 MT. The project operational GHG emissions would be less- than - significant. Table 10 Operational Emissions Consumption Source MT C0 2(e) ton ear Area Sources 30.1 Energy Utilization 415.0 Mobile Source 1,683.3 Solid Waste Generation 73.1 Water Consumption 461 Annualized Construction 17.4 Total 2,255.7 Significance Threshold 3,000 Consistency with GHG Plans, Programs and Policies ' The City of Rosemead has not developed or adopted a Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan for the purpose to reduce GHGs. Therefore, the applicable GHG planning document for the project is AB -32. As shown above, the project will not have a significant increase in construction or operational GHG emissions. As a result, the project will generate GHG emissions below the recommended SCAQMD 3,000 ton threshold. Thus, the project would not conflict with any applicable plan, policy, or regulation to reduce GHG emissions. c) Less Than Significant Impact. As discussed in 3.3 "b)" above, the air emissions generated by the project during demolition, construction and the life of the project will not exceed any Stale air emission thresholds. SCAQMD neither recommends quantified analyses of cumulative construction or operational emissions, nor provides separate methodologies or thresholds of significance to be used to assess cumulative construction or operational impacts. Rather, SCAQMD recommends a project's contribution to cumulative ' impacts should be assessed using the same significance criteria as those for the project's specific impacts. Since none of the project's daily construction or operational air emissions will exceed the thresholds recommended by SCAQMD, the project will not result in a ' cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant. d) Less Than Significant Impact. Air quality impacts are analyzed relative to those persons with the greatest sensitivity to air pollution exposure. Such persons are called "sensitive receptors ". Sensitive population groups include young children, the elderly and the acutely and chronically ill (especially those with cardio-respiratory disease). 1 Page 33 City of Rosemead Initial StudylMRigaled Negative Declaration GameylDei Mar Plaza - General Plan Amendment 13 42, Zone Change 1102, Tentative Tract Map No. 72529, Design Review Residential areas are considered to be sensitive to air pollution exposure because they may be occupied for extended periods, and residents may be outdoors when exposure is highest. Existing off -site residences abutting the site are considered pollution- sensitive to any project related emissions. The residences north and northeast of the project are considered sensitive receptors to air emissions. Although air emissions will be generated during project construction, as presented in the air quality assessment, the project emissions will not exceed adopted air emission thresholds. The project will not exceed air emission thresholds as discussed in section 3.3 "b)" above, and as a result, will not expose sensitive receptors to any substantial pollutant concentrations. e) Less Than Significant Impact. During construction the residents adjacent to the construction activity may detect some odors from the operation of the on -site motorized construction equipment. There will be less than five pieces of construction equipment operating on the site at any time so the odors generated will be minimal and are not anticipated to significantly impact area residents. Once construction is completed all odors from the operation of construction equipment will cease. The California Building Code (CBC) will require the installation of mechanical equipment to reduce odors of any restaurants that operate within the building. The installation of all CBC required mechanical equipment for all restaurants will reduce odors as required by the CBC. The project is not anticipated to have any odors that would significantly impact area residents or pedestrians in the area. Odors by the project will be less-than-significant. Less Than Significant Less Than With Significant Environmental blues 3.4 Biological Resources a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local ❑ ❑ ❑ E or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional ❑ ❑ ❑ E plans, policies, and regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal ❑ ❑ ❑ E pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling hydrological interruption or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native ❑ ❑ ❑ E resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of wildlife nursery sites? ice' 11 City of Rosemead Initial StudylMMgatee Negative Declaration GarveylDel Mar Plaza - General Plan Amendment 13 -02, Zone Change 13 -02, Tentative Tract Map No. 72529, Design Review 3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES a) No Impact. The site is disturbed and developed with a paved parking lot, a single - family residence, commercial buildings and other site improvements. A small vacant lot is located at the southwest corner of the site due to the demolition of a previous building at that location. There is no native habitat on the site to support native wildlife. The existing vegetation includes introduced urban landscaping, street trees and non - native grasses. The existing urban landscape materials are not classified or considered to be rare or endangered plant species. In addition, there are no wetlands on or adjacent to the site. Any wildlife that may exist on the site would be non - native wildlife associated with urban development, such as domestic dogs and cats, rabbits, opossum, raccoons, mockingbirds, etc. There are no plants or wildlife on the site that are designated or will qualify as a sensitive or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations by the California Department of Fish and Game or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The project will not impact any biological resources, including plants or animals. b) No Impact. The project site and the surrounding area are developed with residential and commercial uses. There is no riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities on the site or surrounding properties. The project will not impact riparian or sensitive habitat. c) No Impact. There are no wetlands either on the site or surrounding properties. The project will not impact wetlands. d) No Impact. The project is developed with commercial buildings, a single - family residence, a paved alley, and other site improvements. The surrounding properties are developed with residential and commercial land uses. There is no native vegetation or bodies of water on or surrounding the site. Therefore, neither the project site nor adjacent properties support the movement of migratory fish or wildlife or support a nursery for wildlife. The project will not impact or interfere with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of wildlife nursery sites. e) No Impact. Four street trees along Garvey Avenue will be removed during project demolition. In their place, 8 new street trees will be planted along Garvey Avenue. There are no oak trees on the site. Therefore, no oak trees will require protection or replacement in compliance with the Rosemead Oak Tree Preservation Ordinance. The project will not have any oak tree impacts. rage as Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than WKEnvironmental Issues e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, ❑ ❑ ❑ such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? __. f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other ❑ ❑ ❑ approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? 3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES a) No Impact. The site is disturbed and developed with a paved parking lot, a single - family residence, commercial buildings and other site improvements. A small vacant lot is located at the southwest corner of the site due to the demolition of a previous building at that location. There is no native habitat on the site to support native wildlife. The existing vegetation includes introduced urban landscaping, street trees and non - native grasses. The existing urban landscape materials are not classified or considered to be rare or endangered plant species. In addition, there are no wetlands on or adjacent to the site. Any wildlife that may exist on the site would be non - native wildlife associated with urban development, such as domestic dogs and cats, rabbits, opossum, raccoons, mockingbirds, etc. There are no plants or wildlife on the site that are designated or will qualify as a sensitive or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations by the California Department of Fish and Game or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The project will not impact any biological resources, including plants or animals. b) No Impact. The project site and the surrounding area are developed with residential and commercial uses. There is no riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities on the site or surrounding properties. The project will not impact riparian or sensitive habitat. c) No Impact. There are no wetlands either on the site or surrounding properties. The project will not impact wetlands. d) No Impact. The project is developed with commercial buildings, a single - family residence, a paved alley, and other site improvements. The surrounding properties are developed with residential and commercial land uses. There is no native vegetation or bodies of water on or surrounding the site. Therefore, neither the project site nor adjacent properties support the movement of migratory fish or wildlife or support a nursery for wildlife. The project will not impact or interfere with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of wildlife nursery sites. e) No Impact. Four street trees along Garvey Avenue will be removed during project demolition. In their place, 8 new street trees will be planted along Garvey Avenue. There are no oak trees on the site. Therefore, no oak trees will require protection or replacement in compliance with the Rosemead Oak Tree Preservation Ordinance. The project will not have any oak tree impacts. rage as City of Rosemead Initial studylMltigated Negative Declaration GarveylDel May Plaza - General Plan Amendment 1342, Zone Change 1342, Tentative Tract Map No. 72529, Design Review 0 No Impact. The City of Rosemead is not located within any adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. The project will not impact any habitat or natural community conservation plan. 3.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES a) No Impact. The existing buildings are not classified as or a candidate for designation as a historical resource by either the City of Rosemead or the State. The demolition of the existing buildings, including commercial and the single - family residence, would not have any historical resource impacts. b) No Impact. There are no known archaeological resources on or adjacent to the site that could be impacted by the project. If archaeological resources are discovered during grading, construction, or utility trenching, all construction activity shall cease and the resources evaluated pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5, which addresses impacts to unique archaeological resources. c) No Impact. Based on the Rosemead General Plan, there are no known paleontological resources in Rosemead. If paleontological resources are discovered during grading or construction, all grading and construction activity shall cease and the resources evaluated pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5. The project would not have paleontological resource impacts. d) No Impact Neither the site nor the surrounding area are or have been used as a cemetery. Thus, there are no known human remains on the site that will be disturbed by the project. The project will not impact human remains. Page 30 Environmental Issues potentially significant Impact Less Than significant With Mitigation Lese Slgnlaunt +'. Impact hti 3.5 Cultural Resources Would the project a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as ❑ ❑ ❑ —defined _ _ in §15064.5? ..._ b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource ❑ ❑ ❑ pursuant to §15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique ❑ ❑ ❑ ,. geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those ❑ ❑ ❑ interred outside of formal cemeteries? 3.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES a) No Impact. The existing buildings are not classified as or a candidate for designation as a historical resource by either the City of Rosemead or the State. The demolition of the existing buildings, including commercial and the single - family residence, would not have any historical resource impacts. b) No Impact. There are no known archaeological resources on or adjacent to the site that could be impacted by the project. If archaeological resources are discovered during grading, construction, or utility trenching, all construction activity shall cease and the resources evaluated pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5, which addresses impacts to unique archaeological resources. c) No Impact. Based on the Rosemead General Plan, there are no known paleontological resources in Rosemead. If paleontological resources are discovered during grading or construction, all grading and construction activity shall cease and the resources evaluated pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5. The project would not have paleontological resource impacts. d) No Impact Neither the site nor the surrounding area are or have been used as a cemetery. Thus, there are no known human remains on the site that will be disturbed by the project. The project will not impact human remains. Page 30 City of Rosemead Initial StudylMxigated Negative Declaration Gerveyloel Mar Plaza - General Plan Amendment 13 -02, Zone Change 13 -02, Tentative Tract Map No, 72529, Design Review 3.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS A geotechnical engineering investigation was prepared by Geotechnical Engineering Investigation .4 A copy of the geotechnical investigation is included in Appendix C. a i -iii) Less Than Significant Impact. The City of Rosemead is in a seismically active region. All known or suspected strike -slip faults in this area trend northwesterly. The primary local fault, designated the Alhambra Wash and/or the East Montebello fault, is southeast of the site and includes an inferred northwesterly extension that passes within 2,000 feet east of the project site. Southeast of the project, this fault is designated an Alquist - Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone and lies approximately 2,800 feet southeast of the site (Figure 5-4 of 4 Geotechnical Engineering Investigator, Pacific Geotech, Inc. September 27, 2013, ' Page 37 Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Significant No Environmental Issues Impact Mitigation Impact Impact WGeology and Soils ould the project a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, Injury or death involving:__ ___ __.._... 1) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist - Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for ❑ ❑ ® ❑ the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ iii) Seismic-related ground failure, - ❑ ❑ ® ❑ _ including liquefaction? _ iv) Landslides? ❑ ❑ ❑ b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the Ins ❑ ❑ ❑ oftopsoolll ?_ _ c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project and potentially result ❑ ❑ ❑ in on- or off -site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence,, Iuefaction or collapse? __ d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18 -1 -B of the Uniform Building Code ❑ ❑ ❑ (1994), creating substantial risks to life or propel_ e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems ❑ ❑ ❑ where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? 3.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS A geotechnical engineering investigation was prepared by Geotechnical Engineering Investigation .4 A copy of the geotechnical investigation is included in Appendix C. a i -iii) Less Than Significant Impact. The City of Rosemead is in a seismically active region. All known or suspected strike -slip faults in this area trend northwesterly. The primary local fault, designated the Alhambra Wash and/or the East Montebello fault, is southeast of the site and includes an inferred northwesterly extension that passes within 2,000 feet east of the project site. Southeast of the project, this fault is designated an Alquist - Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone and lies approximately 2,800 feet southeast of the site (Figure 5-4 of 4 Geotechnical Engineering Investigator, Pacific Geotech, Inc. September 27, 2013, ' Page 37 City of Roaemead Initial Study /Mhigated Negative Deelaresee Garvey /Del Mar Plaza - General Plan Amendment 13 -02, Zone Change 13 -02, Tentative Tract Map No. 72529, Design Reeler Rosemead General Plan). The entire City of Rosemead is underlain by the Santa Fe Springs segment of the Puente Hills blind thrust fault.' A northwesterly trending zone encompasses a series of Fault Hazard Management Zones (FHMZ) near the southeastern boundary of Rosemead. The FHMZ are 200 -foot wide zones and considered potentially active and require special investigations only for "important" facilities as defined in the City of Rosemead General Plan. The FHMZ are so designated due to lack of sufficient, significant evidence to indicate activity on these potential fault traces. The project is located within the eastern edge of the longest designated FHMZ. There is a low potential for surface faults to cross the site directly or very near the site as the faults within the FHMZ are considered potentially active, though no direct evidence of surface rupture or other features indicating the fault is active has been observed. The hazard to the project site of undergoing ground rupture from displacement on a surface fault is low to moderate even though the subject site could be underlain by a surface trace of a potentially active fault.a Seismic Shaking The site lies adjacent to or overlies the Alhambra Wash and/or the East Montebello fault and the Alquist - Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. New data indicate the earthquakes on these faults range in possible magnitudes from 6.4 to 7.1. The amount of seismic shaking in g's occurring to the site from earthquakes on these faults is primarily dependent on the distance of the origination of the earthquake from the site. Figure 5 -2 of the Rosemead General Plan indicates that the plane of the Puente Hills Blind Thrust lies at a depth of approximately 13 kilometers (km) below the ground surface. A TAM earthquake on the Puente Hills Blind Thrust fault would create the highest ground acceleration of all of the other faults in the area with an expected peak acceleration value at the site from such an earthquake approximately 0.79g and should be used in all site design criteria. Mitigation Measure No. 4 As recommended in the geotechnical engineering investigation prepared for the project and approved by the City Engineer, ' the project shall be designed for a peak acceleration value of 0.79g. Liquefaction Based on Figure 5 -5 of the City of Rosemead General Plan, the site is not located within an area susceptible to earthquake - induced liquefaction. The historically high groundwater ' under the subject site is more than 50 feet deep below ground surface. The project is not located in a liquefaction zone based on the State Seismic Hazard Zone map (El Monte). While a large portion of Rosemead is in an area where historic occurrences of liquefaction ' have occurred, the project site is not in the known liquefaction area. The project will not be significantly impacted by liquefaction. a iv) No Impact. The site is has a gentle slope from west to east and is not prone to slope ' instability hazards, such as landslides. The development surrounding the site is relatively ' Geotechnical Engineering Investigation, Pacific Geotech, Inc. September 27, 2013, page 4. ' ' [bid, page 5. Page 38 1 City of Rosemead initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Gamaylpel Mar Pleas - General Plan Amendment 19 42, Zone Change 1 }02, Tentative Tract Map No. 72529, Daegn Review flat and will not impact the site by a landslide on surrounding properties. The project will not be impacted by a landslide or impact any adjacent properties due to an on -site landslide. b) No Impact. The City will require the project developer to install and provide all appropriate erosion control measures prior to the start of any on -site demolition or construction and maintain the erosion control measures throughout project construction. The incorporation of all applicable standard erosion control measures such as the use of sand bags around the project perimeter and other measures deemed appropriate by the City will reduce and minimize soil erosion. The project will not have any significant soil erosion impacts. c) No Impact The site is developed with commercial buildings and a single - family detached residence and does not show any evidence of unstable soil conditions. The project proposes a new four story building with underground parking and other site improvements. Based on the geotechnical report, the grading and construction activities required to develop the project as proposed are not anticipated to Cause any unstable soil conditions either on or off the site based on the geotechnical report. The project will not have any significant unstable soil impacts. d) No Impact. The Rosemead General Plan does not identify any expansive soils on the site or the project area. The subsurface soils at the basement garage floor level consist generally of fine to coarse, silty to slightly silty to clean sand. The sandy materials will have no expansion potential! The project will not be impacted by expansive soils. e) No Impact. The site is currently served by the public sewer system. The City will require the project to connect to and continue to be served by the public sewer system. The project will not impact any soils resulting from alternative disposal systems. Less Than Potentially Significant Lacs Than Significant With Significant No Environmental Issues Impact Mitigation Impact Impact Hazards and Hazardous Materials a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine ❑- ❑ transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions ❑ ❑ ❑ involving the likely release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, ❑ ❑ ❑ substances, or waste within one - quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? 7 Geotechnicai Engineering Investigation, Pacific Geotech, Inc. September 27, 2013, page 8. Page 39 City of Rosemead Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration , GarveylDel Mar Plaza - General Plan Amendment 13 -02, Zone Change 13 -02, Tentative Tract Map No, 72529, Design Review 3.7 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS A Phase Is and Phase I19 Environmental Site Assessments (ESA) were prepared for the site by Smith -Emery GeoServices (SEG). An updated Phase I1e ESA was recently prepared because the original Phase I ESA is more than one year old." The three reports are included in Appendix D. a) No Impact. The existing uses on the site do not use or generate any hazardous materials and significantly impact the public or the environment. Similarly, the project does not propose to use or generate any hazardous materials that would impact the public or the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, 7801 and 7825 Garvey Avenue, Rosemead California, Smith -Emery GeoServices, June 6, 2007. Phase II Environmental Site Assessment, 7801 and 7825 Garvey Avenue, Rosemead California, Smith -Emery GeoServices, August 9, 2007. 10 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, 7801 and 7825 Garvey Avenue, Rosemead California, SmiM -Emery GeoServices, February 20, 2014. " ASTM Practice E 1527-05. Page 40 Environmental 1puee Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Significant No '. Impact Mitigation Impact Mnyfla' d) Be located within one - quarter mile of a facility that might reasonably be anticipated to emit hazardous emissions or handle ❑ ❑ ® ❑ hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances or waste? e) Be located on a site of a current or former hazardous waste disposal site or solid waste disposal site unless wastes have been removed from the former disposal site; or 2) that could release a hazardous substance as identified by the State ❑ ® ❑ ❑ Department of Health Services in a current list adopted pursuant to Section 25356 for removal or remedial action pursuant to Chapter 6.8 of Division 20 of the Health and Safety Code? f) Be located on land that Is, or can be made sufficiently free of hazardous materials so ❑ ❑ ❑ as to be suitable for development and use as a school? g) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public ❑ ❑ ❑ airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? h) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety ❑ ❑ ❑ hazard for people residing or working in the project area? 3.7 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS A Phase Is and Phase I19 Environmental Site Assessments (ESA) were prepared for the site by Smith -Emery GeoServices (SEG). An updated Phase I1e ESA was recently prepared because the original Phase I ESA is more than one year old." The three reports are included in Appendix D. a) No Impact. The existing uses on the site do not use or generate any hazardous materials and significantly impact the public or the environment. Similarly, the project does not propose to use or generate any hazardous materials that would impact the public or the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, 7801 and 7825 Garvey Avenue, Rosemead California, Smith -Emery GeoServices, June 6, 2007. Phase II Environmental Site Assessment, 7801 and 7825 Garvey Avenue, Rosemead California, Smith -Emery GeoServices, August 9, 2007. 10 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, 7801 and 7825 Garvey Avenue, Rosemead California, SmiM -Emery GeoServices, February 20, 2014. " ASTM Practice E 1527-05. Page 40 City of Rosemead Initial studylMiti9ated Negative Declaration GarveylDel Mar Plaza - General Plan Amendment 13-02, Zone Change 13-02, Tentative Tract Map No 72529, Design Review environment. The project will not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. b) No Impact. As stated in 3.7 "a)" above, the proposed project will not create a significant hazard from a release of hazardous materials into the environment. c) No Impact. Garvey Intermediate School is approximately 700 feet southwest of the project. The project does not propose any uses that would emit or handle any hazardous or acutely hazardous materials or substances and impact Garvey Intermediate School. d) Less Than Significant Impact In the past, the site was occupied with an automotive repair /car wash, residential, and commercial uses including a dry cleaners, bar /restaurant, book store, and a used car lot. The dry cleaners and automotive repair uses generally include the use of various types of hazardous materials such as percholoroethylene, petroleum hydrocarbons and could cause a Recognized Environmental Condition (REC). Due to a potential for a REC based on the Phase I ESA, a subsequent Phase II ESA was conducted. The Phase It ESA included that soil vapor samples, soil samples and field observations. The soil vapor survey included 13 soil vapor probes that were advanced into the soil in the historical area of the former dry cleaning operations and the auto report/car wash operations. Five soil samples were taken in the areas of the soil vapor probe advances. Based on the analytical results of the soil vapor survey and soil samples the subsurface soils at the project site have not been significantly impacted by halogenated solvents, aromatic hydrocarbons, extractable hydrocarbons, or 17 other metals that were tested. As a result, no further environmental site assessment is necessary at this time. 12 The updated Phase I ESA reviewed the potential for hazardous materials to exist on the site. The updated Phase I ESA states, "Based on a 2007 SEG soil vapor survey and soil sampling report, the subsurface soils at the subject site have not been significantly impacted; hence, the former automotive repair /dry cleaning operations in our opinion are considered to be Historical Recognized Environmental Conditions. SEG does not recommend any further site investigation at this time. Based on the age of the onsite structures, SEG recommends complete asbestos and lead based surveys prior to any significant renovations and /or demolition activities that would potentially disturb the existing building materials "13 There are nine historical auto stations and one historical dry cleaner located within a quarter mile radius from the subject site. The remaining listed sites are considered to have a low potential for negative impact at the subject site. These sites are likely to be considered a de minimus condition, (under ASTM Standard E1527), as they "generally would not be the subject of an enforcement action if brought to the attention of appropriate government agencies" with regard to the subject site." The project will not be impacted by any known hazardous materials within one quarter mile of the site. e) Less Than Significant With Mitigation. As discussed in 3.7 "d" above, the project site is not located on a former or current hazardous waste site. Based on the Phase 1 /II ESA's and 12 Phase II Environmental Site Assessment 7801 and 7825 Garvey Avenue, Rosemead Califomia, Smith -Emery GaoServices, August 9, 2007, page 9. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment 7801 and 7825 Garvey Avenue, Rosemead California, Smith-Emery GeoServioes, February 20, 2014, page 32. 1° Ibid, page 25. Page 41 City of Rosemead Initial StudylMHigated Negative Declaration Ganmy /Del Mar Plana - General Plan amendment 1342, Zone Change 13-OZ Tentative Tact Map No. 72529, Design Revlw the updated Phase I ESA, the property does not contain any hazardous materials and has not been used as a hazardous waste site in the past. According to a Preliminary Title Report prepared by Ticor Title Company of California dated June 9, 2006, no environmental liens and /or activity and use limitations were found for the site. Furthermore, there are no liens listed in the United Sates Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA)'s Federal Superfund Liens List, and no known recorded land -use environmental deed restrictions pertaining to the subject site listed in the California Department of Toxic Substance Control (DTSC) liens database. Due to the age of some of the buildings, there is the potential for asbestos and lead based paint to exist. The following measure is recommended to mitigate the potential for the presence of asbestos and /or lead based paint to less than significant. Mitigation Measure No. 6 Prior to the issuance of a demolition permit for any structure, the project developer shall provide a building survey to determine if asbestos or lead paint are present. The asbestos and lead paint survey shall be conducted by a Cal -OSHA Certified Asbestos consultant in accordance with sampling criteria of the Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act (AHERA). If lead paint and /or asbestos containing materials are found, all lead containing paint and /or asbestos shall be removed and disposed by a licensed and certified lead paint and /or asbestos removal contractor, as applicable in accordance with local, state, and federal regulations prior to the start of activities that would disturb any ACM containing materials or lead paint. f) No Impact. The site is sufficiently free of hazardous materials. From a hazards standpoint, the site could be used as a school. There are no existing hazards or anticipated hazards associated with the proposed project that would prevent the site from being used as a school or the project, as proposed. g) No Impact. The closest airport to the project is El Monte Airport, which is approximately 4 miles to the northeast. The project will not impact airport operations at El Monte Airport or , result in any safety hazards for people living at and visiting the proposed Buddhist Temple. h) No Impact. There are no private airports within two miles of the project. The project will not impact or be impacted by operations at any private airport. ' Less Than Potentially Significant Less Tliiti ' Significant With Significant No a Environmental Issues Impact Mitigation Impact Im 8.8 Hydrology and Water Quality ' would ft project a) Violate any water quality standards or ❑ ❑ ® ❑ waste discharge requirements? ' 1 1 11 City of Rosemead Initial StudylMltigated Negative Declaration GarveylDel Mar Plaza - General Plan Amendment 13 -02, Zone Change 13 -02, Tentative Tract Map No 72529, Design Review 3.8 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY ' a) Less Than Significant Impact. The project could generate silt and other debris due to surface water runoff during demolition and construction, especially if demolition and construction occur during the winter months (November — April) when rainfall typically ' occurs. The quality of storm water runoff from the site is regulated under the National 11 Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Significant No L Environs rtal Issues Impact Mitigation Impact Impact b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the ❑ ❑ ® ❑ production rate of pre - existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses forwhich permits have been granted? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, El El ® El a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off- site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or ❑ ❑ ® ❑ amount of surface runoff in a manner, which would result in flooding on- or off- site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or ❑ ❑ ® ❑ provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water ❑ ❑ ® ❑ quality? g) Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood ❑ ❑ ❑ Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures, which would Impede or redirect ❑ ❑ ❑ flood Flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving ❑ ❑ ❑ flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by selche, tsunami, or mudflow? ❑ ❑ ❑ 3.8 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY ' a) Less Than Significant Impact. The project could generate silt and other debris due to surface water runoff during demolition and construction, especially if demolition and construction occur during the winter months (November — April) when rainfall typically ' occurs. The quality of storm water runoff from the site is regulated under the National 11 City of Rosemead Ini4al StudyNitigatad Negative Declaration Ga raylOol Mar Plaza - General Plan Amendment 1302, zone Change 1342 Tentative Tract Map No. 72539, Design RavMw Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). The NPDES storm water permit provides a mechanism for monitoring the discharge of pollutants and establishing appropriate controls to minimize the entrance of such pollutants into storm water runoff. As a co- permitee to the County of Los Angeles (NPDES No. CAS614001), the City requires all development projects in its jurisdiction to comply with the NPDES requirements for construction and operations as appropriate. Therefore, the project developer will be required to install and maintain all applicable soil erosion control measures, including Best Management Practices (BMP's), to reduce erosion and minimize water quality impacts during grading and construction. The developer will be required to submit a Standard Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan (SUSMP) to the City prior to the issuance of a grading permit to ensure that all applicable erosion control measures are installed and maintained during construction to control water quality impacts. To Control surface water pollution, the project will be required, by law, to install a surface storm water collection system to collect and treat the first % of an inch of surface water runoff from the site prior to off -site discharge. To comply with the law, the project proposes a dry well system to capture and discharge surface water runoff. In the northeast corner of the lower parking level, two underground water storage tanks totaling 3,500 gallons are proposed to collect most of the surface water runoff. Water in the storage tanks will be directed to a dry well located adjacent to the water storage tanks. The proposed dry well is 30 inches in diameter and approximately 39 feet deep. If the dry well fills up during a storm a sump pump located adjacent to the dry well will pump any overflow from the dry well into Brighton Street. In addition to the on -site water storage tanks, a catch basin with a filter is proposed to filter , the storm water prior to its discharge into the underground storage tanks. The catch basin and filter along with the incorporation of the required BMPs will allow the project to meet and comply with all applicable water quality and water discharge requirements. ' The following mitigation measures are recommended to reduce water quality impacts to less -than- significant. ' Mitigation Measure No. 6 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project developer shall submit a Standard Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan (SUSMP) to the City for approval. All applicable erosion , control measures including Best Management Practices (BMP's), to reduce erosion and minimize water quality impacts during grading and construction shall be installed and , maintained during construction to control water quality impacts. Mitigation Measure No. 7 Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the first ' residential unit or leasing the first retail space, the project developer shall install a surface storm water collection system to collect and treat the first % of an inch of surface water runoff ' from the site as approved by the City Engineer. Mitigation Measure No. 6 Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the first ' residential unit or leasing the first retail space, the project developer shall install two underground water storage tanks totaling 3,500 gallons and a dry well system to capture on -site surface water Flows. If the dry well fills up during a storm a ' Page" , 11 City of Rosemead Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration GarveylDel Mar Plaza - General Plan Amendment 1342 Zone Chang. 13-02, Tentative Tract Map No. 72529, Design Review sump pump located adjacent to the dry well will pump any overflow from the dry well into Brighton Street. Mitigation Measure No. 9 Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the first residential unit or leasing the first retail space, the project developer shall install a catch basin with a filter to filter the storm water prior to its discharge into the underground storage tanks. b) Less Than Significant Impact The project proposes landscaping around the perimeter of the. The perimeter landscaping will be available for and allow some on -site water percolation. The project also proposes a dry well that will allow low -flow surface water to be discharged on -site. The dry well will allow runoff from the site that is normally discharged into the local storm drain system to be directed to the ground beneath the site and recharge the local groundwater. The project will not substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge, but rather allow most project runoff to percolate into the local groundwater. c) Less Than Significant Impact. The existing storm water drainage pattern of the site is generally east to Brighton Street with some surface water flows south to Garvey Avenue. As discussed in 3.8 "a)" above, while small quantities of surface water runoff from sidewalks and driveways will continue to be directed towards Brighton Street and Garvey Avenue, the majority of the runoff will be collected and discharged into a dry well located in the northeast corner of the lower parking level for on -site percolation. The project will not alter the existing drainage pattern on the site or cause erosion or siltation of a stream or river because the dry well system will reduce the amount of existing runoff from the site that will be directed to the local storm drain system and eventually discharged to the ocean. Therefore, the project will have a less- than - significant impact to erosion or siltation either on or off the she. d) Less Than Significant Impact As discussed in 3.8 "c)" above, some drainage from the sidewalks and project driveways will continue to flow east and south to the existing curb and gutter system in Brighton Street and Garvey Avenue, respectively. The project is estimated to generate approximately 436 cubic feet of runoff more than the existing condition due to an increase in impermeable surfaces. The project will discharge most of the surface water runoff into an on -she dry well, reducing the amount of runoff that would be discharged to the local storm drain system. The proposed dry well would reduce the amount of surface water runoff that is currently generated from the site. By discharging most of the surface water runoff on -site, the potential flooding impact by the project would be less-than-significant. e) Less Than Significant Impact As discussed in 3.8 "d)" above, the incremental increase in surface water by the project will not exceed the capacity of existing and proposed storm water drainage system for the project. The existing local storm drain system in Brighton Street and Garvey Avenue along with the regional downstream storm drain facilities that serve this area of Rosemead have capacity to handle the surface water generated by the project. The discharge of most of the project runoff into the on -site dry well will reduce the amount of surface currently discharged from the site. The storm drain capacity impacts of the project will be less- than - significant. f) Less Than Significant Impact. As discussed in 3.8 "a)" above, the quality of storm water runoff from the project is regulated under the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). The project will be required by law to collect and treat the first % of an inch of storm water runoff to remove debris and other pollutants. The project proposes a EOUJ4 City of Rosemead Initial SludyR4itigated Negative Declaration Garveyl0ei Mar Plaza - General Plan Amendment 13 42, Zone CMnge 1302, Tentative Tract Map No. 72529, Design Review storm water collection system to collect and filter the project runoff and discharge the runoff into an on -site dry well system that will allow runoff to percolate into the soil. Most of the project runoff will be filtered and discharged into the on -site dry Well. During periods of high rainfall, storm water that overflows the dry well will be pumped to the local storm drain system in Brighton Street. The project impact to surface water quality will be less -than- significant. g) No Impact. The project site is not in a flood hazard zone. The City of Rosemead is designated by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to be in Zone "C ", which is outside the 100 -year flood plain." The project will not place any housing in a flood hazard area. h) No Impact As noted in 3.8 "g)" above, the project is not located in a 100 -year flood zone. The proposed project is not subject to flooding and will not have an impact by redirecting or impeding flood Flows. i) No Impact There are no levees or dams upstream of the project that will flood the site in the event of a levee or dam failure. j) No Impact. There are no water bodies either on or adjacent to the project site that will impact the site due to a seiche. The site is approximately twenty miles east of the Pacific Ocean and will not be impacted by a tsunami. The site and the surrounding areas are flat and will not be exposed to a mudslide. 3.9 LAND USE AND PLANNING a) No Impact. Examples of "dividing a community" include new roads, rail lines, transmission corridors, or a major development project encompassing numerous city blocks that creates a physical barrier between established neighborhoods or business districts. 1° Federal Emergency Management Agency, Flow Insurance Rate Map Panel No. 601410001C, Revised July 6, 1998. ' Page 46 ' Environmental Issues Potentially Significant Impact Less Than Significant With Mitigation Less Signt Im Not 3.9 Land Use and Planning iThan Would the Project a) Phys cally divide an established ❑ 11 ❑ community? b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, speck plan, ❑ ❑ ® ❑ local waste[ program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat Conservation plan or natural community's ❑ ❑ ❑ E Conservation plan? 3.9 LAND USE AND PLANNING a) No Impact. Examples of "dividing a community" include new roads, rail lines, transmission corridors, or a major development project encompassing numerous city blocks that creates a physical barrier between established neighborhoods or business districts. 1° Federal Emergency Management Agency, Flow Insurance Rate Map Panel No. 601410001C, Revised July 6, 1998. ' Page 46 ' ' City of Rosemead Initial StudylMdigated Negative Declaration GameylDel Mar Plaza - General Plan Amendment 13-0; zone Change 13 -02, Tentative Tract Map No. 72529, Design Review ' The project proposes to construct a mixed use project with retail on the first floor and 60 residential units on the second through fourth floors. The project will not divide the established surrounding community. ' b) Less Than Significant Impact. The Rosemead General Plan designates the site Commercial and the residence at the northeast corner as Medium Density Residential (0 -12 du /ac.) as shown in Figure 13, Land Use Map. The zoning for the site is C -3 Medium t Commercial, except the single -family residence at the northeast corner of the site that is zoned R -2 Light Multiple Residential as shown in Figure 14, Zoning Map. ' The project will require a General Plan Amendment to change the existing land use designations of the site to Mixed Use: Residential /Commercial (60 du /ac; 4 stories). The project will also require a zone change to C -3 Medium Commercial and add a ' Residential /Commercial Mixed -Use Development Overlay ( RCMUDO) and Design Overlay to allow the development of the project as proposed. General Plan Amendment The Mixed Use: Residential /Commercial (60 du /ac; 4 stories) land use designation allows a maximum development of 68 units.''. The land use designation allows a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of 2.0:1 and up to 87,120 square feet of commercial use. The project proposes 60 residential units, including 12 low income units, for a total of 54,609 square feet and 15,553 square feet of retail use on the first floor. The project proposes a total of 70,162 square feet of development with a FAR of 1.41, which is less than the maximum 2.0:1 FAR allowed for the site. The project is consistent with the requested Mixed Use: Residential /Commercial (60 du/ac; 4 stories) land use designation. Zoning The project is requesting a zone change for the residential lot at the northeast corner of the site from R -2 Light Multiple Residential to C-3 to be consistent with the C -3 zoning for the balance of the site. In addition, the project applicant is requesting a zone change to add a Residential/Commercial Mixed -Use Development Overlay and Design Overlay to the site to allow the development of the project as proposed. The applicability of the Residential/Commercial Mixed -Use Development Overlay and the Design Overlay to the project is discussed below. ResidentiaUCommercial Mixed -Use Development Overliev The purpose of the RCMUDO is to provide opportunities for well- designed development projects that combine residential with nonresidential uses, including office, retail, business services, personal services, public spaces and uses, and other community amenities designated with the mixed -use land use designations in the City of Rosemead General Plan, and consistent with the policy direction in the General Plan 17 ' t8 Based on a 1.14 acre site and 4060 du /acre, a maximum of 68 units can be developed on the site 17 RMC 17.74.010 A Page 47 ® Phil Martin& Associates, Inc. GARVEY DEL MAR PLAZA So...- Ros mrad Gearml Plan Figure 13 ' Land Use Map ' ® Phil Martin & Associates, Inc. GARVEY DEL MAR PLAZA �;c, e.•mee,..e. ti tAi _ I v - Eat -� as �_ � Project Site a �04I „ur.+s...e„v.,..w „ m, .,, ....n.�..,........,,.,..,....®. Cat of Rosemead Source: Rosemead General Plan R Figure 14 ® Zoning Map City of Rosemead Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration Garvey /Del Mar plaza - General plan Amsndmem 12 -02, tom Change 1}02, Tentative Tract Map No. 72529, Design Review The intent of the RCMUDO is to accomplish the following objectives: 1. Create a viable, walkable urban environment that encourages pedestrian activity and reduces dependence on the automobile, through a streetscape that is connected, attractive, safe and engaging. 2. Provide complementary residential and commercial uses within walking distance of each other. 3. Develop an overall urban design framework to ensure that the quality, appearance and effects of buildings, improvements and uses are compatible with the City design criteria and goals. 4. Create quality residential /commercial mixed -use development that maintains value through buildings with architectural qualities that create attractive street scenes and enhance the public realm. 5. Provide a variety of open space, including private, recreation areas and public open space and parks. 6. Revitalize commercial corridors with residential /commercial mixed -use developments that attract and encourage market- driven private investment. 7. Encourage parking solutions that are incentives for creative planning and sustainable neighborhood design. The RCMUDO is an overlay zone, which may be applied to existing zoning districts as designated in the General Plan. The RCMUDO Zone district provides the option of developing under the base zone district, or developing a residential /commercial mixed -use development under the overlay zone. In this case, the RCMUDO Zone would be applied to the C -3 zone and the site is proposed for development consistent with the RCMUDO Zone. Residential commercial mixed -use development shall combine and integrate residential uses with commercial, institutional, and office uses utilizing a strong pedestrian orientation. The mix of uses may be combined in a vertical residential /commercial mixed -use building or combined in separate buildings located on one property and/or under unified control. The mix of uses percentage shall be as designated in the General Plan.1B The types of uses allowed with the RCMUDO include a variety of commercial uses, including retail stores and businesses as allowed by RMC 17.74.040. The retail and business uses proposed for the project have not specifically been identified at this time. However, all future approved business for the site would have to comply with the businesses permitted by RMC 17.74.040. Consistent with RMC 17.74.040F.4, the proposed 60 residential units are located on the three floors above the proposed commercial use. The project, as proposed, meets and complies with all of the applicable RCMUDO development standards, with the exception of the types of commercial uses allowed for the site. As noted above, all allowed commercial uses must meet the permitted uses in RMC 17.74.040. 1a RMC 17.74.020. ' City or Rosemead Initial StudylMitigated Negative Declaration Garvey/Del Mar Plaza - General Plan Amendment 13 42, Zone Change 1302, Tentative Tract Map No. 72529, Design Review Design Ovensv The purpose of the design overlay zone is to assure orderly development and that buildings, ' structures, signs and landscaping will be harmonious within a specified area; to prevent the development of structures or uses which are not of acceptable exterior design or appearance or are of inferior quality or likely to have a depreciating or negative effect on the local environment or surrounding area by reasons of use, design, appearance or other ' criteria affecting value.19 The Design Overlay requires the precise plan for the project be approved by the Planning Director prior to the issuance of a building permit. The design review of the precise development plan includes architecture and design, number of stories, height, fences, landscape, color, signage, proposed uses, mechanical equipment screening, etc.20. The review and approval of the precise development plan in compliance with the design ' requirements of RMC Chapter 17.72 would ensure the project meets the City's design requirements for development in the Design Overlay Zone. ' Density Bonus The project proposes 12 low and moderate income units as part of the 60 residential units proposed for the site, which allows the project applicant a 35% density bonus. The ' proposed 12 low income residential units represent 20% of the 60 proposed units. ' Project Concessions The 35% density bonus allows the project applicant up to two development concessions, if necessary. Due to several site constraints, the project applicant is requesting two ' concessions from the RCMUDO development standards. 1. The RCMUDO zone allows a building height of 55 feet or 4 stories. Due to the existing slope, the proposed building will be 60 feet high and 5 stories at Brighton ' Street. The applicant is requesting a concession from the maximum allowable building height due to the existing slope. ' 2. The RCMUDO zone requires the second floor and above shall be stepped back from the rear property line as follows: establish a height at six feet above finished grade of the adjacent residential property line, a 20- degree incline plane is projected that establishes the height limitation of the residential /commercial mixed -use development 21 The project encroaches within the 20- degree incline plane. The applicant is requesting a concession from the 20- degree incline plane requirement. The project meets the development standards for the RCMUDO zone, with the exception of the two requested concessions. The development of the project as proposed, including the ' allowance of the two development concessions, would not result in any significant land use impacts. The compliance of the project with all other required development standards would ensure the project meets all requirements for development in the RCMUDO zone. 19 RMC 17.72.020. ' 2° RMC 17.72.04013. 2' RMC 17.74.050 C.11 ' Page 51 City of Rosemead Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration Garvey /Del Mar Plaza - General Plan Amendment 13 42, Zone Change 13 -02, Tentative Tract Map No. 72529, Design Review The land use impacts of the requested General Plan Amendment and Zone Changes would be less- than - significant. c) No Impact. The City does not have any areas with adopted habitat or natural community conservation plans. The project will not impact any natural communities or conservation plans since none exist on or adjacent to the project. Less Than Significant Less Than With Significant Environmental leaves 3.10 Mineral Resources wows the DMIecc a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to ❑ ❑ ❑I ❑ the region and the residents of the state? _ b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site El ❑ ❑ IS delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? 3.10 MINERAL RESOURCES a) No Impact. The State Mining and Geology Board classify land in California on the availability of mineral resources. There are four Mineral Resources Zone (MRZ) designations for the classification of sand, gravel, and crushed rock resources. According to the State Mining and Geology Board" the project site is within the MRZ-4 classification ". As Rosemead is completely urbanized and the State has not identified any significant recoverable mineral resources, no mineral extraction activities are permitted within the City limits. There are no mining activities either on the site or the properties surrounding and adjacent to the site. The project will not have a significant impact to mineral resources of value to the region or residents of the state. b) No Impact. Based on information in 3.10 "a)" above, there are no locally important mineral resources in Rosemead, which includes the project she. The project will not impact any locally important mineral resource. " Update of Mineral Land Classification of Portland Cement Concrete Aggregate in Ventura, Los Angeles, and Orange Counties — Part II, Los Angeles County. Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, 1994. " MRZ 4 — There is insufficient data to assign any other MRZ designation. Page 52 City of Rosemead Initial StudylMitigated Negative Declaration GarveylDel Mar Plaza - General Plan Amendment 13 -02, Zone Change 13 -02, Tentative Tract Map No. 72529, Design Review 3.11 NOISE A noise report" was prepared by Giroux & Associates. The noise report is included in Appendix E. a) Less Than Significant Impact. The project is located in an urbanized area and adjacent to Del Mar Avenue, which is a Minor Arterial and proposed to be a Major Arterial by the Circulation Element of the Rosemead General Plan. The project is also adjacent to Garvey Avenue on the south, which is a Major Arterial, and Brighton Street on the east, a local roadway. The existing noise levels on the site are due to the on -site activities, traffic on Del Mar Avenue, Garvey Avenue, and Brighton Street, and daily activities of residents and commercial uses in the vicinity of the site. For noise generated on one property affecting an adjacent use, the City of Rosemead limits the amount of noise crossing the boundary between the two uses. For regulated on -site sources of noise generation, the Rosemead noise ordinance prescribes limits that are considered an acceptable exposure for residential uses in proximity to regulated noise sources. The Lso 20 Noise Impact Analysis, Garvey Del Mar Plaza, Giroux & Associates, November S, 2013. Page 53 Lass Than Potentially significant Less Than significant With Significant No Environmental [nun Impact Mid ation Impact Impact �se W1 _: WoulNoid the t result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or ❑ ® ❑ ❑ noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ground bome vibration or ground ❑ ❑ ® ❑ bonne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity ❑ ❑ ® ❑ above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase In ambient noise levels in the project vicinity ❑ ❑ ® ❑ above levels existing without the project? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the ❑ ❑ ❑ project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people ❑ ❑ ❑ residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? 3.11 NOISE A noise report" was prepared by Giroux & Associates. The noise report is included in Appendix E. a) Less Than Significant Impact. The project is located in an urbanized area and adjacent to Del Mar Avenue, which is a Minor Arterial and proposed to be a Major Arterial by the Circulation Element of the Rosemead General Plan. The project is also adjacent to Garvey Avenue on the south, which is a Major Arterial, and Brighton Street on the east, a local roadway. The existing noise levels on the site are due to the on -site activities, traffic on Del Mar Avenue, Garvey Avenue, and Brighton Street, and daily activities of residents and commercial uses in the vicinity of the site. For noise generated on one property affecting an adjacent use, the City of Rosemead limits the amount of noise crossing the boundary between the two uses. For regulated on -site sources of noise generation, the Rosemead noise ordinance prescribes limits that are considered an acceptable exposure for residential uses in proximity to regulated noise sources. The Lso 20 Noise Impact Analysis, Garvey Del Mar Plaza, Giroux & Associates, November S, 2013. Page 53 City of Rosemead Initial StudylMlllgated NegMlve Declaration Garvey/Del Mar Plana - General Plan Amendment 13 42, Zone Change 13.02, Tentative Tract Map No. 72529, Design Review metric used in the Rosemead noise ordinance is the level exceeded 50% of the measurement period of thirty minutes in an hour. One -half of all readings may exceed this average standard with larger excursions from the average allowed for progressively shorter periods. The larger the deviation, the shorter the allowed duration up to a never - to-exceed 20 dB increase above the 50" percentile standard. Nighttime noise levels limits are reduced by 5 d6 to reflect the increased sensitivity to noise occurring during that time period. The City Lye noise standard is 60 dB during the day (7 a.m. — 10 p.m.), and 45 dB at night (10 p.m. — 7 a.m.). For commercial uses the Lw standard is 65 dB during the day (7 a.m. — 10 p.m.), and 60 dB at night (10 p.m. — 7 a.m.). These noise standards for residential and commercial uses are shown in Table 11. In the event the ambient noise level exceeds a noise standard, the standards shall be increased to reflect the ambient (existing) noise level. The noise that will be generated by the project will be similar to the noise levels generated by development in the project vicinity and throughout Rosemead. The sources of noise anticipated by the project include the movement of motor vehicles to and from the site, daily activities associated with residential development, similar commercial development, landscape maintenance, deliveries, etc. Table 11 Rosemead Noise Ordinance Limits (Exterior Noise Level not to be Exceeded) Source: Muridpal Code Section 8.30.060 Short term on -site noise measurements were taken October 31, 2013 to determine the existing baseline noise levels on the site and the project area. The existing baseline noise levels were used to calculate the future noise levels by the project to the surrounding community. The locations of the noise measurements are shown in Figure 15. The measured noise levels at the three locations are shown in Table 12. Table 12 Measured Noise Levels (dBA) Site No. Residential Use commercial Use Maximum Allowable Duration of Exceedance 7 A to 10 PM (Daytime) 10 PM to 7 AM (Nighttime) 7 A to 10 PM (Daytime) 10 PM to 7 A (Nighttime) 30 minutes/Hour L50 60 dB 45 dB 65 dB 60 dB 15 minutesrHour 1-25 65 dB 50 dB 70 dB 65 dB 5 minutes/Hour LB 70 dB 55 dB 75 dB 70 dB 1 minute/Hour 1-1 75 dB 60 dB 80 dB 75 dB Never (1-max) 80 dB 65 dB 85 dB 80 dB Source: Muridpal Code Section 8.30.060 Short term on -site noise measurements were taken October 31, 2013 to determine the existing baseline noise levels on the site and the project area. The existing baseline noise levels were used to calculate the future noise levels by the project to the surrounding community. The locations of the noise measurements are shown in Figure 15. The measured noise levels at the three locations are shown in Table 12. Table 12 Measured Noise Levels (dBA) Site No. Leq I Lmax I Lmin I L10 L33 L60 L90 1 66 80 54 70 66 64 60 2 68 78 52 88 64 63 58 3 61 77 48 63 55 54 52 Pegs sr City of Rosemead Initial Slutiy /MltigateE Negative Uedaration Garvey/Del Mar Plaza - General Plan Amendment 1302, Zone Change 13-02, Tentative Traot Meo No. 72529, Design Ravlax The existing CNELs range from 68 -70 dB on the nosiest areas of the site near Garvey Avenue and Del Mar Avenue and approximately 63 dB CNEL east of Brighton Street. The City of Rosemead considers CNELS of up to 70 dB to be conditionally acceptable for residential use with the requirement of a noise analysis. Noise levels of up to 75 dB CNEL are considered to be conditionally acceptable for commercial use. However, as noted previously, unless commercial projects include noise - sensitive uses such as outdoor dining, exterior noise exposure is generally not considered a commercial facility siting constraint. Meter location 1 is representative of noise levels along the Del Mar Avenue frontage. At approximately 50 feet from the Del Mar Avenue centerline, existing noise levels are expected to be approximately 68 dB CNEL. Meter 2 was located on the corner of Garvey and Del Mar Avenues. Measured noise levels at Meter 2 are indicative of the worst case existing on -site noise levels. The observed noise levels at Meter 2 are approximately 70 dB CNEL. Figure 15 Noise Measurement Locations Meter 3 '. Alley at Brighton Street City of Rosemead Initial StudylMitigated Negative Declaration Garvey/Del Mar Plaza - General Plan Amendment 13 -02, Zone Change 13 -02, Tentative Tract Map No. 72529, Design Review ON -Site Project - Related Vehicular Noise Impacts The long -term vehicle noise impacts of the project were determined using the California specific vehicle noise curves (CALVENO) in the federal roadway noise model (FHWA Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model, FHWA -RD -77 -108). Table 13 summarizes the calculated 24 -hour CNEL level at 50 feet from the roadway centerline along six roadway segments. Table 14 shows the change in the noise levels due to the project. As shown in Table 14, the opening year noise levels of the project do not significantly increase. The largest project related noise level increase is +0.1 dB CNEL at 50 feet from the centerline of the adjacent roadways. Under ambient conditions, people generally do not clearly perceive noise level changes until there is a 3 dB difference. A threshold of 3 dB is commonly used to define "substantial increase." An increase of +3 dBA CNEL in traffic noise would be considered a significant impact. The calculated noise level increase by the project is +0.1 dB CNEL and less than the +3 dB significance threshold. Thus, the project traffic noise level increases are less - than- significant. Table 13 Traffic Noise Impact Analysis (dBA CNEL at 50 feet from centerline) Segment 2013 No Project 2013 With Pro Oct 2015 No project 2015 Wlth Project Del Mar/ N of Emerson 71.9 72.0 72.0 72.1 Emerson -Garve 71.5 71.6 71.6 71.7 Garvey-Del Mar 70.1 70.2 70.2 703 S of Del Mar 69.9 70.1 70.1 70.2 Garvey/ W of Del Mar 72.1 72.1 72.2 72.2 E of Del Mar 72.1 72.2 72.2 72.3 Table 14 Project Traffic Noise Level Increases (dBA CNEL at 50 feet from centerline) Se ment 2013 Pro ect OnIv 2015 Protect Only Cumulative• Del Mar/ N of Emerson 0.1 0.1 0.2 Emerson -Garvey 0.1 0.1 0.2 Garvey-Del Mar 0.1 0.1 0.2 S of Del Mar 0.1 0.1 0.2 Garvey/ W of Del Mar 0.0 0.0 0.1 E of Del Mar 0.1 0.1 0.2 'The difference between "2015 with project" and "existing" traffic noise levels The cumulative analysis compares "future with project" to "existing" conditions. The largest cumulative impact is +0.2 dB CNEL at 50 feet from the centerline of the adjacent roadways. This noise level increase is less than the +3.0 dB threshold. Therefore, the project and cumulative noise impacts are less- than - significant. On -Site Project - Related Vehicular Noise Impacts At 50 feet from centerline of the roads adjacent to the site, the future traffic noise levels are calculated to be 72 dB CNEL along Garvey Avenue and Del Mar Avenues. The residential Page 56 City of Rosemead Initial StudylMltigated Negative Declaration ' GameylDel Mar Plaza - General Plan Amendment 13 -02, Zone Change 13-02, Tentative Tract Map No. 72529, Design Review component of the project is approximately 100 feet from the roadway centerlines with traffic ' noise levels calculated to be as high as 68 dB CNEL. Although the City of Rosemead guidelines allows exterior noise levels of up to 70 dB CNEL, a noise level of 65 dB is the level at which ambient noise begins to interfere with one's ability to carry on a normal ' conversation without raising one's voice. A noise exposure of 65 dB CNEL is typically the exterior noise land use compatibility guideline for new residential dwellings in California. Many of the proposed residential units have balconies facing the adjacent roadways. Therefore, it is recommended that all balconies facing Garvey Avenue or Del Mar Avenue be equipped with a 5 -foot transparent glass or plastic shield enclosure that would permit view while mitigating noise from the adjacent roadways. An enclosure would provide at least -5 dB of noise attenuation and reduce noise on any balcony with a direct view of Garvey Avenue or Del Mar Avenue to below 65 dB CNEL. ' The interior residential noise standard is 45 dB CNEL. For typical wood - framed construction with stucco and gypsum board wall assemblies, the exterior to interior noise level reduction is as follows: ' 12 dB . Partly open windows— . Closed single -paned windows — 20 dB ' . Closed dual -paned windows — 30 dB The use of dual -paned windows is required by the California Building Code (CBC) for energy conservation in new residential construction. The maximum 45 dB interior noise ' standards will be met by the project with a large margin of safety as long as residents have the option to close their windows. Where window closure is needed to shut out noise, supplemental ventilation is required by the (CBC) with some specified gradation of fresh air. ' Central air conditioning or a fresh air inlet on a whole house fan would meet this requirement. Because commercial uses are not occupied on a 24 -hour basis, the exterior noise exposure ' standard for less sensitive land uses is less stringent. Unless commercial projects include noise - sensitive uses such as outdoor dining, noise exposure is generally not considered a ' commercial facility siting constraint for typical project area noise. At this time the project does not proposed any outdoor dining space. The noise impacts to the retail uses proposed for the ground level will be less- than - significant. ' Site Operational Noise The daily operations of the project will generate a variety of noises from a several sources. In areas where commercial and residential uses share a common property line, it is often not ' the overall magnitude of the noise that leads to noise impacts, but rather some unique aspect of the noise event that causes a noise impact. Early morning deliveries and back -up alarms are several sources that can create noise impacts in a mixed use environment. Also, late evening commercial activities, such as restaurant clean -up operations when trash is dumped, water is sprayed under pressure to remove waste, etc. can generate noise and impact adjacent residents. Refuse collection vehicles could be restricted to daytime hours to reduce potential commercial noise activities to adjacent residential and other noise sensitive areas. All residential uses require sufficient distance separation from commercial buildings to ' prevent HVAC mechanical equipment on building roofs from being a nuisance. If not pap 51 CNy of Rosemead Initial StudylMitlgated Negative Declaration GarveyVel Mar Plaza - General Phan Amendment 13 42, Zone Change 13-02, Tentative Tract Map No. 72529, Design Review possible, the HVAC equipment will need to be shielded. A typical HVAC equipment noise level is 50 dB at 10 feet from the source. The City's daytime noise standard is 60 dB Lso and the nighttime residential ordinance standard is 45 dB Lso. The 45 dB Lso standard is met approximately 30 feet from a single mechanical equipment source. Multiple mechanical units may have a larger noise impact "envelope." The operation of multiple HVAC or other mechanical equipment units, therefore, must be screened from a direct line -of -sight to any off -site residences. The following mitigation measures are recommended to reduce noise impacts to less-than- significant. Mitigation Measure No. 10 Project related operational hours for the following activities are recommended to be restricted as follows: • There shall be no delivery vehicle (no trucks) deliveries between the hours of 10 p.m. to 9 a.m. • Refuse collection vehicles shall restrict activity to between the hours of 7 a.m. and 7 p.m. • Loading of boxes, crates and building materials is restricted to the hours of 7 a.m. and 10 p.m. adjacent to a residential property line. • Construction activities are restricted by the City of Rosemead Noise Ordinance. While construction noise is not expected to exceed 85 dB at the nearest sensitive use (residences north of the site), construction noise can be minimized with the implementation of the following conditions: • All motorized construction equipment shall be equipped with properly operating and maintained mufflers. • Equipment and materials shall be staged in areas that will create the greatest distance between construction - related noise sources and the noise - sensitive receptors nearest the project site during all project construction. • Haul truck and other construction- related trucks traveling to and from the project site shall be restricted to the same hours specified for the operation of construction equipment. • To the extent feasible, construction haul routes shall not pass directly by sensitive land uses or residential dwellings. Mitigation Measure No. 11 An acoustical study shall be submitted to the City prior to the issuance of a building permit to show that all balconies facing Garvey Avenue and Del Mar Avenue have a transparent glass or plastic shield to create outdoor space that achieves the 65 dB CNEL or less. b) Less Than Significant Impact. Vibration is a trembling, quivering, or oscillating motion of the earth. Like noise, vibration is transmitted in waves, but in this case through the earth or solid objects rather than the air. Unlike noise, vibration is typically at a frequency that is felt rather than heard. Vibration can be either natural (e.g., earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, sea waves, or landslides) or man -made (e.g., explosions, the action of heavy machinery, or heavy vehicles such as trains). Page 58 1 11 I' City of Roaemeatl Inibal studylMitigaietl Nega dive Declaration GamaylDel Mar Pleas - General Plan Amentlmenl 1342 zone Change 1}02, TentatWe Tract Map No. 7252e, Design Review Construction activities generate ground -borne vibration when heavy equipment travels over unpaved surfaces or when it is engaged in soil movement. The effects of ground -borne vibration include discernable movement of building floors, rattling of windows, shaking of items on shelves or hanging on walls, and rumbling sounds. Within the "soft" sedimentary surfaces of much of Southern California, ground vibration is quickly damped. Because vibration is typically not an issue, very few jurisdictions have adopted vibration significance thresholds. Vibration thresholds have been adopted for major public works construction projects, but these relate mostly to structural protection (cracking foundations or stucco) rather than to human annoyance. As with noise, vibration can be described by both its amplitude and frequency. Amplitude may be characterized in three ways, including displacement, velocity, and acceleration. Particle displacement is a measure of the distance that a vibrated particle travels from its original position and, for the purposes of soil displacement, is typically measured in inches or millimeters. Particle velocity is the rate of speed at which soil particles move in inches per second or millimeters per second. Particle acceleration is the rate of change in velocity with respect to time and is measured in inches per second or millimeters per second. Typically, particle velocity (measured in inches or millimeters per second) and /or acceleration (measured in gravities) are used to describe vibration. Vibration is most commonly expressed in terms of the root mean square (RMS) velocity of a vibrating object. RMS velocities are expressed in units of vibration decibels. The range of vibration decibels (VdB) is as follows: 65 VdB - threshold of human perception 72 VdB - annoyance due to frequent events 80 VdB - annoyance due to infrequent events 100 VdB - minor cosmetic damage To determine the potential vibration impacts of project construction activities, estimates of vibration levels induced by the construction equipment at various distances are presented in Table 15. Table 15 Vibration Levels from Project Construction Activities • (FTA Transit Noise 8 Vibration Assessment, Chapter 12, Contraction, 1N5) The on -site construction equipment that will create the maximum potential vibration is a large bulldozer. The stated vibration source level in the FTA Handbook for such equipment is 87 VdB at 25 feet from the source. At 50 feet the vibration level dissipates to 81VdB. Vibration levels from heavy equipment could be 75 VdB, which is less than the 80 VdB annoyance threshold. Furthermore, vibration levels will not exceed the building damage threshold and will be perceived as being "barely perceptible ". Vibration calculations assumed existing residences would be located approximately 25 feet from the vibration - generating sources on the project site. The project does not propose any activities that will Pass Approximate Vibration levels (VdB)* Equipment 25 feet 50 feet 120 feet 200 feet Large Bulldozer 87 81 75 69 Loaded Track 86 1 80 1 74 1 68 Jackhammer 79 1 73 1 67 1 61 Small Bulldozer 58 1 52 1 46 1 40 • (FTA Transit Noise 8 Vibration Assessment, Chapter 12, Contraction, 1N5) The on -site construction equipment that will create the maximum potential vibration is a large bulldozer. The stated vibration source level in the FTA Handbook for such equipment is 87 VdB at 25 feet from the source. At 50 feet the vibration level dissipates to 81VdB. Vibration levels from heavy equipment could be 75 VdB, which is less than the 80 VdB annoyance threshold. Furthermore, vibration levels will not exceed the building damage threshold and will be perceived as being "barely perceptible ". Vibration calculations assumed existing residences would be located approximately 25 feet from the vibration - generating sources on the project site. The project does not propose any activities that will Pass City of Rosemeaci Innbl atUdylMRlgate0 Negative Declaration Garvey/Del Mar Plait, - General Plan AmenOment 130; Zone Change 13-02, Tentattve Tract Map No. 72529, Design Review produce or generate significant ground borne impacts and significantly impact adjacent residents or commercial tenants. The project will have less- than - significant vibration impacts. c) Less Than Significant Impact. As discussed in Section 3.11 "a)" above, project generated noise must comply with the City of Rosemead Noise Ordinance in terms of the allowable noise levels crossing the boundary between the two uses, including noise from the movement of vehicles on private property. The speck noise limits that are considered an acceptable exposure for residential uses in proximity to regulated noise sources were shown in Table 12. As shown in Table 14 earlier, the project generated noise levels are not projected to increase significantly and impact area residents or businesses. Thus, the project will not significantly change or increase the existing levels of noise that exist on the site. The project will not have a substantial permanent increase in the existing (ambient) noise levels on or adjacent to the site. There will be noise generated within the subterranean parking structure. The noise that is typically associated with a parking structure include car starts, car doors shutting, people talking, car alarms, car horns, tire squeal, and cars entering and leaving the structure. Based on the estimated noise levels, the project is not anticipated to generate noise within the parking structure that will significantly impact residents north of the project. The noise generated by the project is not anticipated to substantially increase the ambient noise level either on the site or the immediate vicinity of the site and significantly impact area residents. The potential noise impacts of the project will be less- than - significant. d) Less Than Significant Impact. The project will generate short-term noise during project demolition of the existing site improvements and grading and construction of the project, including site improvements. Figure 16 shows the typical range of construction equipment noise during various construction phases. The earth - moving sources are seen to be the noisiest with equipment noise ranging up to about 95 dB(A) at 50 feet from the source. Existing buildings and other noise barriers to interrupt line -of -sight conditions, the potential "noise envelope" around individual construction sites is reduced. The Noise Ordinance also restricts hours of construction to hours of lesser noise sensitivity with heavy equipment to not operate from 8 p.m. to 7 a.m. during the week and on Saturdays, and to not exceed 85 dB at any residential property line (8.36.030.A.3). Construction is not permitted on Sunday or a federal holiday. Construction noise impacts can be mitigated to less- than - significant by compliance with RMC 8.36.030 A.3 that restricts construction from 7 AM to 8 PM Monday through Saturday and no construction on Sunday or a federal holiday. e) No Impact. The closest airport is El Monte Airport, which is approximately 4 miles northeast of the site. Operations at the El Monte Airport will not expose project residents, employees or customers to excessive noise levels. The project will not be impacted by or impact operations at the El Monte Airport f) No Impact. See response to 3.11 "e" above. pe"W ® Phil Martin & Associates, Inc. GARVEY DEL MAR PLAZA A- Weighted Sound Level (dQA)At 50 Feet Equipment 60 70 80 90 100 110 Compactor Roller Front Loader Backhoe Tractor Grader Scraper Paver Truck Concrete Mixer Concrete Pump Crane (Movable) Crane (Derrick) Pump Generator Compressor Pneumatic Wrench Jackhammer Rock Drill Pile Drivers (Peak Levels) Vibrator Saw L�BJD Ndaa y/ level Typical Wise WWI Sour,: Phd Marne &Arsoriatc, hu. 60 70 80 90 100 110 Durres by Cynl yM ok or Noise COnVOI 5y Hams, H]9 Trznst Noiseast dmnl Imoaa9seasxnam" by retlerol Transt Pamini9rotion, H95 Figure 16 Construction Noise Levels City of Rosemead Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration Garvey /Dal Mar Plaza - General Plan Amendment 11 -02, Zone Change 13 -02, Tentative Tract Map No. 72529, Design Review Lease Than Significant M6th Environmental Issues 3.12 Population and Housing would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (e.g., by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (e.g., ❑ LI ® ❑ through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of ❑ ❑ ID ❑ replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people necessitating the construction of ❑ ❑ ® ❑ replacement housing elsewhere? 3.12 POPULATION AND HOUSING a) Less Than Significant Impact. The project proposes to replace the existing commercial buildings and the single - family detached residence on the site with a mixed use building consisting of retail space and 60 residential units. Based on the type of units proposed, it is anticipated, at this time, that many of the future project residents are existing Rosemead residents and relocating to the project will not increase the city's population. For those future project residents that live outside Rosemead and move to the site, the city's population will subsequently increase. However, at this time, it is not anticipated that a significant number of the project residents currently live outside Rosemead and when they move to the site will significantly increase the population of the city. As a result, the project is not anticipated to substantially increase or induce a population growth in Rosemead. The project will have a less-than-significant impact to the population of Rosemead. b) Less Than Significant Impact. The project will require one existing single - family detached residence in the northeast area of the site to be demolished. While the demolition of the residence will displace a family, there is suitable replacement housing in Rosemead for the family that will be displaced. The displacement of a family will not require the construction of replacement housing. The proposed project, once constructed, could provide suitable housing for the family that would be displaced by the project. The project will not displace any existing housing that necessitates the construction of replacement housing. c) Less Than Significant Impact. As noted in 3.12 "(b)" above, there is suitable housing in Rosemead for the family that will be displaced without the need to construct suitable replacement housing. The housing proposed by the project could provide replacement housing for the displaced family. The project would have less- than - significant impacts to the displaced family. Page 62 11 I' City of Rosemead Initial StudylMRigatod Negative Declaration GarveylDel Mar Plaza - General Plan Amendment 13 -02, Zone Change 13 -02, Tentative Tract Map No. 72529, Design Review 1 Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Significant Environmental Issues Impact Mitigation Impact No Impact 3 Public Services - ).Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision -of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental :jinpacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance jeclives for any of the public services: a) Fire Protection? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ b) Police Protection? ❑ ® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ El Parks? El Parks? ❑ lie)Schools? Other public facilities? ❑ ❑ ❑ 3.13 PUBLIC SERVICES a) Less Than Significant Impact. Fire protection services are provided by the Los Angeles County Fire Department. Replacing the existing older buildings on the site with a new building that meets all applicable California Building Codes (CBC) could reduce the need for fire protection services by the Los Angeles County Fire Department in the future. As a result, the project is not anticipated to have a significant impact on the Los Angeles County Fire Department. b) Less Than Significant Impact. Police protection services are provided by the Los Angeles County Sheriff Department. The Temple Sheriff's Station located at 8838 Las Tunas Drive serves the project site With an average emergency response time for an on -site ' emergency of 4.4 minutes. Compared to the existing condition, the project is anticipated to increase calls for police protection due to more people and increased activity compared to existing conditions. The incorporation of security measures, such as surveillance cameras, proper lighting, and secure doors and windows will minimize the increase in service calls to ' the Los Angeles County Sheriff Department. The project will have less- than - significant impacts to the Sheriff Department with incorporation of the following mitigation measure. ' c) Less Than Significant Impact. The project is in the Garvey School District. The development of 60 residential units will generate students to schools in the District. The District does not have a student generation rate for the types of residential units proposed. ' Typically, multi - family residences generate fewer students than single - family detached residences. The District has stated they have capacity for the students that would be generated by the project.36 The District does not differentiate between single - family detached units and mufti- family units in terms of student generation. The District collects a development fee for residential and commercial development. The student impact fee is used by schools to provided additional classrooms to accommodate 1 the students generated by residential and commerciallindustrial development projects. The project developer will be required to pay the State mandated student impact fee to the I' 25 Captain Christopher Nee, County of Los Angeles Shenff Department Headquarters, letter dated October 15, 2011 Robert McEntire, Garvey School District letter dated October 18, 2013, Pegs 63 City of Rosemead Initial StudylMitigaled Negative Declaration WrveylDel Mar Pima - General Plan Amendment 15-02, Zone Change 13.02, Tentative Tract Map No. 72529, Design Review District before building permits are issued for construction. The following mitigation measure is recommended to mitigate the impact of the students generated by the project to the Garvey Unified School District to less- than - significant. Mitigation Measure No. 12 Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the project developer shall pay any required student impact fee to the Garvey Unified School District. d) Less Than Significant Impact. The project proposes approximately 9,510 square feet of open space. The proposed open space includes a common Central Garden proposed for the north side of the first floor. The Central Garden includes outdoor seating space and a central fountain for use by the residents. At this time, it is anticipated that the existing Rosemead residents that move to the project will not significantly increase their use of City park and recreational facilities. For those residents that move to the site from outside Rosemead, there could be an increase in the use of City park and recreational facilities. It is anticipated that most of the project residents will not use City park and recreational facilities to a level that will significantly impact the existing facilities. The project developer will be required to pay the city- required park fee per RMC 12.44.020. The park fee will be used by the City to provide new park and recreational facilities or upgrade existing facilities for use by the residents. The following mitigation measure is recommended to mitigate project impacts to City park and recreational facilities to less-than- significant. Mitigation Measure No. 13 Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the project developer shall pay any required park fee to the City of Rosemead. e) No Impact. There are no activities associated with the project that will require or need public facilities or result in an impact to public facilities. Significant Less Then Wflh significant 3.14 Recreation a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that ❑ ❑ ❑ substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which ❑ ❑ ❑ might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Ppsed City of Rosemead Initial atudylMltigateC Negative Declaration Garvey/Del Mar Plaza - General Plan Amendment 13 -02, Zone Change 13 -02, Tentative Tract Map No. 72529, Design Review 3.14 RECREATION a) No Impact. The residents of the project could increase the use of and impact existing neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities in Rosemead or other community in the area. The project residents could increase the use of area parks and include Garvey Park, a community park that is approximately a quarter mile northeast of the site and Zapopan Park, a neighborhood park that is approximately three - quarters of a mile to the east. Other parks in Rosemead that would be available to project residents include Rosemead Park and as well as other neighborhood and mini parks. Rosemead also has the 3.5 acre Jess Gonzales Sports Complex park for its residents. Rosemead residents can also use the Whittier Narrows Recreation Area which is a 1,000 regional park and located southeast of Rosemead and provides a mixture of recreational opportunities including a golf course, fishing, shooting ranges, picnic areas, etc. As discussed in Section 3.13 "d)" above, the project does not propose any public park or recreational facilities and payment of the required park fee will be used by the City to provide recreational facilities for use by the residents. The project is not anticipated to have any recreational impacts with the incorporation of Mitigation Measure No. 12. b) No Impact. As discussed in 3.14 "a)" above, the project does not propose to construct any recreational facilities. Therefore, the project will not construct new or expand existing recreational facilities that could have a physical effect on the environment. The project will not have any recreational facility construction impacts. Page as Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than significant With Signi icant No 7the Environmental lashes Impact Mitigation Impact Impact ransportation/Traffie project: a) Cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and Capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the ❑ ❑ ® ❑ number of vehicle trips, the volume to Capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by El E] ® ❑ the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative ❑ ❑ ® ❑ transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? d) Substantially Increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or ❑ ® ❑ ❑ dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) ..___— .___ -_ Result in inatlequate emergency access? ❑ ❑ ❑ Page as City of Rosemead Initial Sludyl6leigated Negative Declamation Garvey /Del Mar Plaza - General Plan Amendment 13 42, Zone Change 13 -02, Tentative Tract Map No. 72529, Design Review Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than Significant with Sig Emironlnental huue• Impact Mitigation I 0 Result in inadequate parking capacity? El ❑ ❑ 3.15 TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC A traffic report was prepared by VA Consulting to determine the potential traffic impacts of the project. The traffic report is included in Appendix F. a) Less Than Significant Impact. The traffic study estimates the project will generate approximately 1,973 average daily vehicle trips as shown in Table 16. The project is estimated to generate 116 AM peak hour trips and 106 PM peak hour trips. The project is proposed to be constructed in a single phase and completed by 2015. Baseline 2015 traffic volumes, the estimated opening year of the project, were developed by factoring existing 2013 volumes by an ambient growth rate of 2% and then adding traffic from future cumulative development projects in the area. As a mixed -use development, some internal trip capture can be expected such as tenants patronizing the proposed commercial uses. The credit of the internal trips would reduce the number of external trips occurring on the surrounding roadway network. During peak hours, the project internal capture rate is estimated to be 9.2% for the AM peak hour and 17.4% for the PM peak hour. However, for the worst case condition, no internal trip capture was considered. Although the project site is served by public transit and proposes on -site bike stalls and is within walking distance of other residential development in the immediate area, the traffic study assumed that all external trips arrive by motor vehicle. As a result, the estimated project trip generation reflects a worst -case condition. The traffic report studied 7 area intersections. The following intersections are included in the traffic study area: • Del Mar Avenue and Hellman Avenue (signalized) • Del Mar Avenue and Emerson Place (signalized) • Del Mar Avenue and Garvey Avenue (signalized) • Garvey Avenue and Jackson Avenue (signalized) • Del Mar Avenue and Highcliff Street (signalized) • Garvey Avenue and Brighton Street (2 -way stop control) • Garvey Avenue and Kelburn Avenue (signalized) Trip Distribution and Assignment Figure 17 shows the distribution and assignment of the estimated traffic by the project. As shown, 20% of the project traffic is assigned to/from both the east and west via the 1 -10 Freeway with 15% each assigned to the north, south, east and west along Del Mar Avenue and Garvey Avenue. vhilMarrin&ASSOdatea Inc. GARVEY DEL MAR PLAZA 1 -10 15 %� -10 EAST WEST N 21% 20% 10 XEumm AVE City of Ros mead EMERSON PL z SITE 15% FT 15% H GAROEY AYE tSTli A 15 ■n Source: ✓A Cov Ming. Ina. ® Figure Project Trip Distribution C 0 C r � m a a v d .Q a` j e e a` 7 N1 y N V 10 x m O x W Y � N e m e 0 W E I C N m pp f0 A ¢ o m of H e e e O O N e C m M Y Y' W E 1 _ N m m 0 fa0 r a > �gq ' m 0 � m p N M a � W f o� r r > > e o O O f0 r m i > W W r �W ryC qC W Q_' W c p E c W 1 E W~ LL E W i U K o i U K r N C) d fV Hi 11 ' cnyaeoaa,rem MMM dhMyr MndMad naa "emcaruon Wmy -O Mr Plan -General Plan nmandmrd 124Z IDm change 1242, Tanatlre TNq Nap No. ran, DWpn lte w I ae 1 1 Project Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement and Weekday Daily Traffic Volumes Based on the estimated trip generation and project trip distribution, the project traffic volumes are shown in Figures 18 and 19 for the AM and PM peak hours, respectively. To evaluate level of service at the 7 study area intersections with Existing 2013 and Baseline 2015 with project conditions, The Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) method was used to evaluate the existing and future levels of service. The target level of service to be maintained throughout the project study area has been established by the City of Rosemead as Level of Service D. As shown in Table 17, all 7 study area intersections operate at LOS D or better with the 2015 traffic volumes. And 5 of the 7 study area intersections, with the exception of Del Mar Avenue /Garvey Avenue and Del Mar Avenue /Hellman Avenue intersections, operate at LOS B or better during both the AM and PM peak hours. Table 17 2016 Intersection Levels of Service - Without Project Intersection Existing (2013) 2015 Baseline AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS 1. Del Mar Avenue /Heilman Avenue 0.80 C 0.70 B 0.81 D 0.71 C 2. Del Mar Avenue /Emerson Place 0.61 B 0.60 A 0.62 B 0.60 A 3. Del Mar Avenue /Garvey Avenue 0.84 D 0.81 0 0.87 D 0.86 D 4. Jackson Avenue /Garvey Avenue 0.62 B 0.60 A 0.63 B 0.62 B 5. Dal Mar Avenue/Highdiff Street 0.34 A 0.36 A 0.34 A 0.37 A 6. Brighton Street/Garvey Avenue 0.49 A 0.50 A 0.50 A 0.62 A 7. Keiburn Avenue /Garvey Avenue 0.54 1 A 1 0.56 1 A 1 0.55 1 A 0.58 A The 2015 baseline conditions without the project for the existing circulation network a growth factor of 2% was applied to the 2013 volumes and cumulative traffic from other known development projects that passes through the study area intersections has been added to the forecasts. The results of this analysis are shown in Table 18. An annual traffic growth factor of 2% was applied to the 2013 traffic volumes as a baseline for the opening year of the project, which is 2015. Table 18 shows the 2015 baseline peak hour volumes of the 7 study area intersections with the project will continue to meet the City's standard and operate at Level of Service D or better. Six of the intersections will have no LOS change during either the AM or PM peak hour with the project. Five of the intersections are calculated to continue to operate at either LOS A or B during the peak hours with the project with the exception of Del Mar Avenue /Garvey and Del Mar Avenue /Hellman Avenue, which will continue to operate at LOS D during both peak hours and the AM peak hour, respectively. ® Phl /hlartla &Assadates. Me. —12 11+ 0 53 } } N 53 GARVEY DEL MAR PLAZA City of %5323 �16 s i J X23 n� D + testy° m LEGEND 7+ i13 25�F� } n —25 28— /I s �� esDervnn LEGEND f i13 25�F� 53 0 — WEEKDAY AM PEAK HOUR n couurre nr TWO —WAY LINK VOLUME DWY 7� .N- cneuEV F� SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION A Del Mar Avenue Brighton Street ® STOP — CONTROLLED INTERSECTION are Project Access Project Access �- STOP SIGN Source. Garvey Del Mar Plaza Traffic Impact Awlysu, ✓A Coostanug, Inc. 2014 Figure 18 AM Peak Hour Trips ® Phil Martin & Associates, Inc 0 15y I 56 M GARVEY DEL MAR PLAZA City of Rosemead 1-1 0 1---- } N See !p 30 55 55 Fq_ 1 ® L23 46J rrf10 7. i x-33 22- /I 0 � 4 �7 4 L275 mJ < �J l� � w : n 7 WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR 4� 1 } (� o a— � Fq_ 1 ® L23 46J rrf10 7. i x-33 22- /I 0 � 4 �7 ra°eRnu LEGEND f `'3 aWY t3 ih� 58 0 — WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR e ca uueGU TWO —WAY LINK VOLUME 6ARYEY °wr 31 �F�',r' SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION -N- Del Mar Avenue Brighton Street ® STOP — CONTROLLED INTERSECTION �n Project Access Project Access �- STOP SIGN Source: Ca M Del Mar Plats Tuft lmpuctAnalyru. VA Comuuing, Inc. 2014 Figure 19 PM Peak Hour Trips d 'o a` r 3 I V 2 m N m O a m h m d J O u m n d C a N n m m O m C C m t O m m m m Q a < m m Y 0 V � U m 6 d Iml o N m `a m i 0 U 6 O m 6 Q Q Y_ 0 p r O O M1 m o Ri o o m v m a a a J Y! O q 6 QY V n O m p b p C � OO OO OO OO o O U m U m Q Q Q .20 J �JM y U a Y i 0 0 0 0 0 0 g i U m D m 6 Q a w p ♦ V V a o d c � � 4• u m � o E __ E m 2 E is 11 I' CNaRwamxa Y.S. Gm -O N Wv -Cw 1Plan PneMm 1242,2 wCMn e12 2, Ta,IIM Tmc WP NO. M".M AR6 1246 2015 Project Traffic Figure 20 shows that the roadways serving the project are estimated to operate below their design capacity based on 24 -hour volumes for year 2015 with the project, except for Del Mar Avenue south of Garvey Avenue. While the assumed capacity for this roadway segment is considered low, Table 6 confirms the Del Mar Avenue and Garvey Avenue intersection will operate at an acceptable LOS during peak hours based on the ICU analysis. Therefore, project traffic is not anticipated to have any operational deficiencies to any area roadways. Traffic Sional Warrant Analysis A traffic signal warrant analysis based on peak hour volumes was performed for the non - signalized study area intersection of Garvey Avenue at Brighton Street and the project driveways for year 2015 with project condition. The traffic signal warrants were not satisfied for all conditions and no new traffic signals are required by the project. The project traffic will not cause any of the studied intersections to exceed an unacceptable level of service or exceed their existing level of service. All area roadways will continue to operate within their design capacity. The project traffic will have less-than-significant traffic impacts. b) Less Than Significant Impact. As discussed in 3.15 "a)" above, the project is estimated to generate 1,973 daily vehicle trips. Seven area intersections were studied to determine If the project would impact any intersections. The traffic report utilized 2015 as the traffic analysis baseline based on the date the project will be completed. The 2015 baseline traffic volumes were developed by factoring the existing 2013 traffic volumes with an ambient growth rate of 2% and add traffic from two cumulative development projects. The 2% growth rate reflects increased traffic volumes with normal growth and the proposed Garvey 168 Plaza and Garvey Market Plaza projects, which are located to along Garvey Avenue at Willard Street and near New Avenue. The 2015 cumulative traffic volumes were used to determine the potential project traffic impact to the area transportation system. The 2015 traffic volumes shown previously in Figures 17 and 18 take into the account the 2% estimated growth in area traffic and traffic from the two identified cumulative projects. As discussed in Section 3.15 "a" above, the project will not have any significant cumulative traffic impacts. All area intersections will continue to operate at City acceptable levels of service with the project and the cumulative projects. The project will not cause any roadways or intersections to exceed, either individually or cumulatively, their current level of service. As a result, the project will have less-than- significant cumulative traffic impacts to any area intersections that will serve the project. c) Less Than Significant Impact. There are no bus turnouts on Del Mar Avenue, Garvey Avenue or Brighton Street. The project will not remove or eliminate any existing public or private bicycle racks. The project proposes to construct a new bus shelter with benches on Garvey Avenue near Del Mar Avenue adjacent to the project. The proposed bus shelter will serve the project as well as the existing surrounding development and encourage residents, retail employees, and customers to use public transportation to travel to and from the project. The project proposes 21 bicycle stalls as required by the RCMUDO zone overlay. The bicycle stalls are located on both of the subterranean parking levels with 10 bicycle Page 73 I ® vMYMartla &Ax ClOe ;Ynl GARVEY DEL MAR PLAZA , City of Rosemead 10 MFIWIN AYE 20y�AM (OA9) EYfl60N P 2 24,387 27,939 27977 (OAM A� 4 3 6 7 Y 17�0111 yg�� A � n,7�9 wa,arE s* 5 (OM !0 LEGEND 1�inlll 27AW WEEKDAY 24 HOUR TWO -WAY LINK VOLUME (OAS) - VOLUME TO CAPACITY RATIO (V /C) m Souse: VA Couukin& Ine. Figure 20 Baseline 2015 With Project Weekday Daily Traffic Volumes and Volume to Capacity Ratios The project proposes three levels of subterranean parking. Access to the subterranean parking for the retaiVcommercial uses is provided by driveways at Del Mar Avenue and Brighton Street. The driveway at Del Mar Avenue provides ingress/egress to the ground and second level (B-1) of parking. Access to level B -1 from the ground level is provided by an internal ramp. There are two separate driveways to the subterranean parking from Brighton Street. The southern Brighton Street driveway provides parking for the retaiVcommercial uses while the north driveway provides direct access to parking for the residential units. The Brighton Street driveway provides direct access to parking level B-2 with access to the ground floor parking by way of the internal ramp. The north driveway provides direct access to parking level B -2 for the project residents. There is no internal access to the other levels of parking from parking level B -2. The proximity of the project driveway at Del Mar Avenue to the Del Mar Avenue at Garvey Avenue intersection was studied to ensure that project traffic existing southbound from the site will not impact the existing southbound left -turn pocket. The southbound left-turn storage length on Del Mar Avenue at Garvey Avenue is 200 feet in length and the existing left -turn queuing may exceed this length during PM peak hour conditions. Future conditions with the proposed project traffic, left -turn volumes are anticipated to increase and the existing southbound left -turn pocket storage length may be exceed during both the AM and PM peak hours. The left -turn project traffic volumes at this driveway are forecast to be low, 10 vehicles in and 13 vehicles out during the PM (highest) peak hour. While the left -turn PM peak hour volumes are estimated to be low, an increase in left -turn volumes greater than estimated could impact the existing southbound left- turning vehicles at this intersection. If the existing southbound left -turn pocket is impacted in the future by the project, left -turns from the Del Mar Avenue project driveway could be restricted. The following measure is recommended to reduce potential southbound left -tums at the Del Mar Avenue project driveway to less- than - significant. Page 75 City of Rose neaE Initial studylMitigatea Negative Declaration Gamy /Del Mar Ptara - General Plan A enrMern 13 42, Zone Change 1302, Tentative Tran Map No. 72529, Design Review stalls on the first subterranean level (B -1) and 11 bicycle stalls on the lower parking level (B- ' 2). The project will have a positive impact by constructing a new bus stop and shelter to encourage the use of alternative transportation by project residents, on -site employees, and customers and providing 21 bicycle stalls for use by the project residents and on -site commercial uses. The following measure is recommended to reduce potential public transportation (bus stop) impacts to less- than - significant. Mitigation Measure No. 14 Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the first residential unit or leasing the first retail space, the project developer shall install a new bus stop and shelter on Garvey Avenue at a location determined by the City and 21 bicycle stalls, with 10 bicycle stalls on the first subterranean level (B- 1) and 11 bicycle stalls on the lower parking level (B -2). ' The project will not have any significant conflicts or impacts with any adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation, but rather a positive impact by constructing a new bus shelter and bench on Garvey Avenue and the 21 bicycle stalls. ' d) Less Than Significant With Mitigation. The project will be served by the existing adjacent streets and intersections without any changes or modifications. The project does not propose to change or modify any curves or other existing features to the adjacent streets that would create a traffic hazard. The project proposes three levels of subterranean parking. Access to the subterranean parking for the retaiVcommercial uses is provided by driveways at Del Mar Avenue and Brighton Street. The driveway at Del Mar Avenue provides ingress/egress to the ground and second level (B-1) of parking. Access to level B -1 from the ground level is provided by an internal ramp. There are two separate driveways to the subterranean parking from Brighton Street. The southern Brighton Street driveway provides parking for the retaiVcommercial uses while the north driveway provides direct access to parking for the residential units. The Brighton Street driveway provides direct access to parking level B-2 with access to the ground floor parking by way of the internal ramp. The north driveway provides direct access to parking level B -2 for the project residents. There is no internal access to the other levels of parking from parking level B -2. The proximity of the project driveway at Del Mar Avenue to the Del Mar Avenue at Garvey Avenue intersection was studied to ensure that project traffic existing southbound from the site will not impact the existing southbound left -turn pocket. The southbound left-turn storage length on Del Mar Avenue at Garvey Avenue is 200 feet in length and the existing left -turn queuing may exceed this length during PM peak hour conditions. Future conditions with the proposed project traffic, left -turn volumes are anticipated to increase and the existing southbound left -turn pocket storage length may be exceed during both the AM and PM peak hours. The left -turn project traffic volumes at this driveway are forecast to be low, 10 vehicles in and 13 vehicles out during the PM (highest) peak hour. While the left -turn PM peak hour volumes are estimated to be low, an increase in left -turn volumes greater than estimated could impact the existing southbound left- turning vehicles at this intersection. If the existing southbound left -turn pocket is impacted in the future by the project, left -turns from the Del Mar Avenue project driveway could be restricted. The following measure is recommended to reduce potential southbound left -tums at the Del Mar Avenue project driveway to less- than - significant. Page 75 City of Rosamsad Initial StudylMMgated Negative Declaration Gamey/Dol Mar Plaa - General Plan Amendment 13 42, Zone Change 13 42, Tentative Tract Map No. 72529, Design Review ensure that site access complies with all emergency access standards. Based on site plan review by the City's Traffic Consultant and Los Angeles County Fire Department, the project will not have any significant emergency access impacts. 0 No Impact. The project proposes 211 parking spaces (205 standard parking and 6 handicap), which exceeds Rosemead Municipal Code parking requirements by six spaces. The project also proposes a total of 21 bicycle stalls for the two subterranean parking levels to encourage the use of bicycles by project residents and the commercial uses. As required by RMC 17.74.050 B.3., the proposed 21 bicycle stalls represent 10% of the total project parking spaces. The project meets the parking requirements of the Rosemead Municipal Code. The project will not have any parking impacts. (. Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than Significant With Significant Environmental Issues Impact Mitigation Impact I ' 3.16 Utilities and Service Systems Would the project a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional ❑ ❑ ❑ Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing ❑ ❑ ❑ facilities, the construction of which could Cause signifcant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the ❑ ❑ ® ❑ construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing ❑ ❑ ® ❑ entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it ❑ ❑ ® ❑ has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the ❑ ❑ ® ❑ project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid ❑ ❑ ❑ waste? ' City of Rosemead Initial StudylMlNgaled Negative Declaration Garveylosl Mar Plaza - General Plan Amendment 1342, Zone Change 1102, Tentative Tract Map No. 72529, Design Review ' 3.16 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS a) No Impact. The project will not exceed any wastewater treatment requirements of the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board. The project will be required to connect to the same public wastewater treatment system that currently serves the site and will not ' generate a quantity or quality of wastewater that will impact the wastewater treatment requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board. The project will not impact wastewater treatment requirements. t b) Less Than Significant Impact. The project will consume more water and generate more wastewater than the existing uses on the site. The project is estimated to Consume approximately 14,577 gallons of water per day and 10,604 gallons of wastewater per day as ' shown in Tables 19 and 20, respectively. The project water and wastewater needs can be accommodated by the existing facilities and construction of new or expanded water or wastewater facilities will not be required. The project will be required to install State mandated low flow water fixtures to minimize water consumption and wastewater ' generation. The project will not require the construction of any sewer or water lines and have any significantly environmental impacts. ' Table 19 Estimated Project Water Consumption Table 20 Estimated Project Wastewater Generation c) Less Than Significant Impact As discussed in Section 3.8 "a ", the project will not generate more storm water runoff than the existing storm drain facilities can handle. The project will not be required to construct any new off -site storm drain or surface water collection facilities. The first % of an inch of rainfall of any rainfall event will be retained and discharged into an on -site dry well proposed in the northeast corner in the lower level of the subterranean parking structure. A dry well approximately 30- inches in diameter and 40 feet deep will collect and allow most of the project surface water to percolate into the local soil. A sump pump will pump any runoff overflow from the dry well into the local storm drain system in Brighton Street. The project includes a storm water collection system that will control the project surface water to no greater quantity than is currently generated from the site. The calculated increase of 436 cubic feet of surface water by the project will be retained on -site and metered to the dry well system for on -site percolation. The project will I' 27 City of Los Angeles, Bureau of Engineenng. se County of Los Angeles Sanitation District No. 15, Service Charge Loadings, July 1, 2014-June 30, 2014, rage ra City of Rosemead Initial StudyIMNlgateal Negative Declaration Garveylp l Mar Plaza - General Plan Amendment 1342 Zone Change 13 4); Tortillas Tract Map No. 72529, Design Review not require the construction of any storm water facilities that will have significant environmental impacts. The incorporation of Mitigation Measure No. 7 will ensure that project generated surface water does not impact existing storm drain facilities. d) Less Than Significant Impact. Water will be consumed by the retail stores, project residents and to irrigation the landscaping. The installation of State required low flow water fixtures in the retail stores and residences will reduce the quantity of water that is consumed on -site. The project will not have a significant impact on the local water supply or require new or expanded water supplies. e) Less Than Significant Impact. The project will generate more wastewater to the local sewer collection system than the current on -site uses. The project site is served by an 8- inch sewer line in Garvey Avenue and this sewer line will continue to serve the proposed project. The project will be required to install State mandated low -flow water fixtures to minimize water consumption and wastewater generation. The Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County has capacity to collect and treat the wastewater generated by the project without the need to install large sewer lines or expand the capacity of the existing wastewater treatment plant. The project is not anticipated to significantly impact the capacity of the local wastewater treatment plant with the implementation of the following mitigation measure to reduce wastewater impacts to less- than - significant. Mitigation Measure No. 19 Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the first residential unit or leasing the first retail space, the project developer shall install all State mandated low -flow water fixtures. 0 Less Than Significant Impact. The project will generate more solid waste from the site than the current uses. The solid waste from the project will be hauled to the Puente Hills Landfill. Solid waste collection will be required to conform to RMC 17.74.050 B.7 in terms of collection hours, trash enclosures, screening, etc. The project is not anticipated to have any significant solid waste impacts. No Impact. The project will comply with all applicable solid waste regulations and have no solid waste regulation impact. Loss Than Potentially Significant Lase Than a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or ❑ ❑ ❑ animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? Page 79 11 ' City of Rosemead Initial SludyRaRlgaled Negative Declaration Garvey /Del Mar Plaza - General Plan Amendment 13 -02, Zone Change 13 -02, Tentative Tract Map No. 72529, Design Review II Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than 5. Significant with Significant No �CL...........� L..... Impact Mitigation Impact Impact b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ( "Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a ❑ ❑ project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) c) Does the project have environmental effects, which will Cause substantial ❑ ❑ ® ❑ adverse effects on human beings, either 3.17 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a) No Impact. As discussed in Section 3.4, the project will not have any impacts to special status species, stream habitat, and wildlife dispersal and migration because no rare or endangered plant or animals exist on the site. The project will not affect the local, regional, or national populations or ranges of any plant or animal species and will not threaten any plant communities because no native plants or animals exist on the property. As discussed in Section 3.5, the project will not eliminate any examples of California history or prehistory or substantially impact historical, archaeological, or paleontological resources since none of these resources either exist or are suspected to exist on the site. The project will not have any biological or cultural resource impacts. b) Less Than Significant Impact. There are no aspects of the project that have the potential to contribute to cumulative hydrology (surface water runoff), water quality, air quality, noise, traffic, public service or public utility impacts due to the small scale of the project. The project will not have any cumulative considerable impacts. c) Less Than Significant Impact. There are no aspects of the project that will cause or expose people to environmental effects. The development of the project as proposed will not cause or have the potential to cause any adverse effects either directly or indirectly on human beings. rage as City of Rosemead Initial StudylMitigated Negative Detleration Garvey/Del Mar Plaza - General Plan Amendment 1342, Zone Change 13 -02, Tentative Tract Map No. 72529, Design Review 4.0 REFERENCES 1. City of Rosemead General Plan, April 13, 2012 2. City of Rosemead Municipal Code 3. Giroux & Associates, Air Quality and GHG Impact Analysis, Garvey Del Mar Project, City of Rosemead, California, October 30, 2013. 4. Giroux & Associates, Noise Impact Analysis, Garvey Del Mar Project, City of Rosemead, California, November 6, 2013. 5. OMB Electrical Engineers — Outdoor Lighting Study — Garvey Del Mar Project, October 15, 2013. 6. VA Consulting, Garvey Del Mar Project Traffic Study, City of Rosemead, California, January 2014. 7. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, 7801 and 7825 Garvey Avenue, Rosemead California, Smith -Emery GeoServices, June 6, 2007. 8. Phase II Environmental Site Assessment, 7801 and 7825 Garvey Avenue, Rosemead California, Smith -Emery GeoServices, August 9, 2007. 9. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, 7801 and 7825 Garvey Avenue, Rosemead California, Smith -Emery GeoServices, February 20, 2014. pw of