CC - Item 6A - General Plan Update and General Plan Update Draft Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR)•
ROSEMEAD CITY COUNCIL
STAFF REPORT
TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: OLIVER CHI, CITY MANAGER &-C
DATE: OCTOBER 14, 2008
SUBJECT: GENERAL PLAN UPDATE and GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT
FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (FEIR), STATE
CLEARINGHOUSE NUMBER 2007111090
SUMMARY
On September 29, 2008, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to discuss the General
Plan Update and associated draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR). Several members of the
public attended, and after much discussion, the Planning Commission unanimously moved the
General Plan forward for the Council's consideration.
The Final EIR consists of the Draft EIR combined with letters from members of the public and
organizations with responses. Several appendices are also included, such as the Notice of
Preparation/Initial Study, Notice of Preparation Comment Letters, the Air Quality Study, Noise
Study, and Traffic Study.
Staff received peer review comments of the proposed Public Safety Element and associated
Appendix A authored by Mr. Ken Wilson of Wilson Geosciences, Inc. The peer review was
conducted by Tania Gonzalez of Earth Consultants International, and it primarily contains
several minor editing changes. These comments have been addressed and the revised Public
Safety Element and associated Appendix A are attached for the Council's consideration.
In addition, staff has attached a matrix consisting of possible changes to the General Plan for
the Council's review. Among the requested changes by the Planning Commission, staff and the
public, this list contains three attachments regarding public transportation, revised land use and
population estimates, and a revised Land Use Map.
If the Council makes a motion to adopt the General Plan and associated documents, and to
certify the draft Final EIR, the Council must do so by adopting Resolution 2008-66 which will
CERTIFY the draft Final Environmental Impact Report, ADOPT the Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program, ADOPT the Statement of Overriding Considerations, and ADOPT the
General Plan.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council provide direction as it relates to the consideration of the
General Plan and the certification of the Draft Final EIR.
STEM NO. ~p, - -
APPROVED FOR CITY COUNCIL AGENDA: D*
• •
City Council Meeting
September 9, 2008
Page 2 of 2
Prepared
Matt Everling
City Planner
Attachment A: City Council Resolution No. 2008-66
Attachment B: Planning Commission Staff Report dated September 29, 2008 with PC Resolution No. 08-24
Attachment C: Matrix of Possible Changes to the General Plan
Attachment D: Public Safety Element Peer Review Revisions with Appendix A
Attachment E: Draft General Plan, June 2008 (previously distributed)
Attachment F: Draft Final Environmental Impact Report
Attachment G: Appendices to the Draft Final Environmental Impact Report
•
• 0
ATTACHMENT "A"
CC RESOLUTION 2008-66
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD, COUNTY OF
LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, CERTIFYING THE DRAFT FINAL
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT, ADOPTING A MITIGATION MONITORING AND
REPORTING PROGRAM, AND ADOPTING A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING
CONSIDERATIONS FOR THE ROSEMEAD GENERAL PLAN PURSUANT TO THE
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT; AND ADOPTING THE ROSEMEAD
GENERAL PLAN
WHEREAS, the City of Rosemead ("City") embarked on a comprehensive update of
its General Plan in 2003 to guide decision-making about land use, circulation, resource
management, public safety, noise, and the general quality of life in our City; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") (Public
Res. Code §§21000 et seq.) and State CEQA Guidelines (14 CCR §§15000 et seq.), the
City caused an Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") to be prepared for the Rosemead
General Plan ('Project') in order to analyze all potential adverse environmental impacts of
Project implementation; and
WHEREAS, the Public Hearing Draft of the General Plan and Draft Environmental
Impact Report (DEIR) were released for public review on July 31, 2008. The City has
received four comment letters from individuals and the San Gabriel and Lower Los
Angeles Rivers & Mountains Conservancy. Please note that all four letters address
General Plan policy and not the adequacy of the Draft Environmental Impact Report. The
Final EIR contains responses to those comments, as well as modifications to the text
based upon the comments and that those have been made available to the Council for its
review and consideration; and
WHEREAS, since public circulation of the Draft EIR, no significant new information
has been submitted pursuant to CEQA Guidelines §15088.5, and therefore recirculation of
the EIR is not required under CEQA, nor is a subsequent or supplemental EIR required
pursuant to Public Resources Code §21166; and
WHEREAS, the draft Final EIR identifies and discusses significant effects that may
occur as a result of the Project. With the implementation of the mitigation measures in the
draft Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, these effects can be mitigated to below
levels of significance except for the unavoidable significant impacts to population and
housing, recreation, utilities and service systems: solid waste, transportation, and air
quality; and
WHEREAS, CEQA Guidelines §15093 requires that if the Project will cause
significant unavoidable adverse impacts, the City must adopt a Statement of Overriding
Considerations prior to approving the Project. A Statement of Overriding Considerations
states that any significant adverse project effects are accepted if expected project benefits
outweigh unavoidable adverse environmental impacts; and
1
City Council Meeting
October 14, 2008
Page 2 of 7
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on
September 29, 2008 to consider the adoption of the General Plan, at which time all
persons wishing to testify in connection with the General Plan were heard; and
WHEREAS, on September 29, 2008, the Planning Commission of the City of
Rosemead, upon review and consideration of the information contained in the Draft EIR,
recommended adoption of the Draft EIR, adoption of environmental findings, a Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program, a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and
recommended approval of the General Plan to the City Council; and
WHEREAS, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on October 14, 2008
to consider the adoption of the draft Final EIR, adoption of environmental findings, a
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, a Statement of Overriding Considerations,
and adoption of the General Plan, at which time all persons wishing to testify in connection
with the General Plan were heard; and
WHEREAS, the City Council fully studied the proposed General Plan, draft Final
EIR, environmental findings, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and Statement
of Overriding Considerations, and considered all public comments;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD
HEREBY FINDS, DECLARES, AND RECOMMENDS AS FOLLOWS:
hereby finds that:
The City Council
1. The Final EIR has been completed in compliance with the California
Environmental Quality Act based on evidence presented in the staff report; and
2. The Final EIR was presented to the City Council and that the City Council
reviewed and considered the information contained in the Final EIR prior to
approving the project such that a City Council public hearing was held on
October 14, 2008.
3. The Final EIR reflects the lead agency's independent judgment and analysis in
that the EIR has been subject to comment and revision by City staff and reflects
the independent judgment of the Rosemead City Council.
Section 2 - CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 Findings. The City Council
declares that it has made a reasonable and good faith effort to eliminate or substantially
mitigate, through adoption of all feasible mitigation measures, all potential impacts that
may result from the Project. However, there are several areas in which there are
unavoidable significant impacts. These areas include population and housing,
transportation, recreation, air quality, and utilities and service systems: solid waste. CEQA
requires that the Council adopt at least one of the following three findings for each
unavoidable significant impact:
2
• •
City Council Meeting
October 14, 2008
Page 3 of 7
1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project
which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as
identified in the Final EIR.
2. Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of
another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes
have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such
other agency.
Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including
provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make
infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final
EIR.
The following have been identified as unavoidable significant impacts:
Population and Housing - The General Plan has the potential to result in a
substantial population and housing unit increase in comparison to population and
housing growth projections at the local, sub-regional, and regional levels. Mitigation
measures PH-1 and PH-2 in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan are
included to assist with coordination with regional policy makers; however, the
measures are not able to reduce the impacts to less than significant.
With regards to Population and Housing the City Council hereby adopts Finding No.
3.
Transportation - Implementation of the General Plan may result in a substantial
increase in traffic in relation to the existing traffic load and an individual or
cumulative level of service condition that exceeds standards established by the City.
Regional traffic growth and increased development intensities within the City will
result in increased through traffic volumes on Rosemead streets. While the
Circulation Element includes policies and physical roadway and control
improvements, that over time will improve service levels, the certainty and timing of
such cannot be established. Accordingly, the traffic impacts of General Plan
development will be significant and unavoidable.
While the General Plan has policies and programs that help minimize impacts, the
following impacts remain:
❑ Walnut Grove Ave. at Mission Dr, (a.m. and p.m. peak hours)
❑ Walnut Grove Ave. at Marshall St. (a.m. and p.m. peak hours)
❑ Rosemead Blvd. at Glendon Way (p.m. peak hour)
0 Del Mar Ave. at Hellman Ave. (a.m. peak hour)
❑ New Ave. at Garvey Ave. (a.m. and p.m. peak hours)
o Del Mar Ave. at Garvey Ave. (p.m. peak hour)
❑ Walnut Grove Ave. at Garvey Ave. (a.m. and p.m. peak hours)
❑ San Gabriel Blvd. at SR-60 westbound ramps (a.m. and p.m. peak hours)
3
• •
City Council Meeting
October 14, 2008
Page 4 of 7
That being said, the construction of new facilities and the acquisition of land will
take a concentrated effort by both city staff and local decision makers. At this time,
there is no guarantee that new facilities will be built. No feasible additional
measures are available to further mitigate impacts at the analyzed intersections.
With regards to Transportation the City Council hereby adopts Finding No. 3.
Recreation - Both the current and proposed General Plans note that the National
Parks and Recreation Association (NPRA) recommends 2.5 acres of parkland per
person and that the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG)
recommends 4 acres per person. The City currently provides 0.75 acres per person
and therefore has not yet met its goal of one acre per 1,000 people. The proposed
General Plan update anticipates an increase in population and coupled with the lack
of available land within the City, the issue of providing parkland will be exacerbated.
In order to meet the goal of one acre of parkland per 1,000 residents, the City will
need to acquire an additional 37.16 acres that can be used for public park and
recreation purposes. The lack of sufficient parks and recreation opportunities could
result in the accelerated deterioration of existing facilities due to potential overuse.
Additionally, the lack of adequate, local recreational facilities increases reliance on
the facilities of other jurisdictions that in turn could result in accelerated deterioration
of those facilities as well. The lack of available park and recreation facilities,
therefore, is considered a significant project-level and cumulative impact. Mitigation
measures R-1 and R-2 in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan are included
to assist with coordination with regional policy makers; however, the measures are
not able to reduce the impacts to less than significant.
With regards to Recreation the City Council hereby adopts Finding No. 3.
Air Quality - With implementation of the identified General Plan policies and
implementation measures, short-term and long-term air quality impacts will be
reduced. However, the degree to which these measures will reduce emissions
cannot be fully quantified. Cumulatively, emissions of all pollutant levels will
continue to exceed the SCAQMD threshold levels, although the cumulative
emissions of CO, VOG, and NOx are projected to decrease relative to current
levels. Emissions of PM10 and PM2.5 are projected to increase and continue to
exceed the SCAQMD threshold criteria for significance. Emissions of SOx are also
expected to increase, but not significantly. Commission of C02 will also increase.
Impacts associated with PM10 and PM2.5 emissions and cumulative impacts are
significant and unavoidable. GHG emissions will be reduced over the life of the
General Plan update. Therefore, impacts related to GHG emissions will be less than
significant. Impacts to sensitive receptors will be less than significant. Given the
extent of this project, impacts to air quality will be significant and unavoidable.
Additional mitigation was considered to reduce impacts associated with emissions
of particulate matter, however they have been found to be infeasible to implement at
this time due to the broad scope of the General Plan update. No mitigation has
been included.
4
• •
City Council Meeting
October 14, 2008
Page 5 of 7
With regards to Air Quality the City Council hereby adopts Finding No. 3.
Utilities and Service Systems: Solid Waste - Solid waste disposal is an issue of
regional concern. Many programs are in place at local and countywide levels to
reduce waste generation and increase landfill capacity (at existing and proposed
new sites). The Chiquita Canyon and Puente Hills Landfills are the end destination
of the City of Rosemead's solid waste. Both of these landfills have enough capacity
to accommodate the City's existing and future needs. However, Chiquita Canyon is
scheduled, to close in 2019 and Puente Hills in 2013. After their closures, waste
must be taken to alternative sites.
Despite the continued efforts of the Los Angeles Area Integrated Waste
Management Authority to increase its diversion rates, technologies are not currently
available to completely recycle, destroy, or reuse all solid waste. Likewise,
continued disposal of solid waste at landfills would contribute to the eventual
closure of existing landfills and any future landfill sites. Although the amount of solid
waste originating from Rosemead is very small relative to the volumes accepted
annually at each of the regional landfills, diminishing landfill space is a significant
regional issue, and cumulative impacts are considered significant.
With regards to Solid Waste the City Council hereby adopts Finding No. 3.
Section 3 - CEQA Guidelines Section 15093 Findings. The City Council
declares that, having reduced the adverse significant environmental effects of the
Rosemead General Plan to the extent feasible by adopting the mitigation measures in the
draft Final EIR, having considered the entire administrative record on the Project, and
having weighed the benefits of the Project against its unavoidable adverse impacts after
mitigation, the City Council has determined that the environmental, economic, and social
benefits of the Project outweigh the potential unavoidable adverse impacts and render
those potential adverse environmental impacts listed in Section 2 acceptable based upon
the following overriding considerations:
1. The Land Use Element will contribute toward the preservation of the City's
distinctive residential character and individual neighborhood identity by
preserving existing residential densities in long-established neighborhoods.
(Draft General Plan, p. 2-14)
2. The goals and policies in the Land Use Element support the maintenance and
stability of existing residential neighborhoods contributing to Rosemead's unique
character. (Draft General Plan, p. 2-14)
3. The goals and policies in the Land Use Element will provide for expanded
opportunities for concentrated commercial development that will reduce trip
generation and will establish additional direction regarding revitalization of the
key corridors. (Draft General Plan, p. 2-19)
5
City Council Meeting
October 14, 2008
Page 6 of 7
4. The anticipated enhancement of Valley Boulevard and the area's reinvention as
a vibrant, mixed-use area consistent with General Plan policy direction will lead
to a beneficial aesthetic result. (Draft General Plan, p: 2-19)
5. The anticipated in-fill development and redevelopment of properties along Valley
Boulevard and Garvey Avenue resulting from implementation of the goals and
policies of the Land Use Element are anticipated to have a beneficial impact on
jobs and tax revenues to the community. (Draft General Plan, p. 2-24.)
6. Implementation of the Land Use Element will create opportunities for high-
quality, well-designed mixed use residential and commercial projects that will
rely on appropriate Mixed Use Design Guidelines to achieve a quality product.
(Final EIR, p. 4-8)
7. Mixed Use development will result in reduced need for auto trips and will
encourage walking and bicycling by providing residences, jobs, and shopping
opportunities within close proximity of each other. (Draft General Plan, p. 2-27)
8. The General Plan will result in the beneficial effect of providing opportunities for
development of new housing and employment-generating uses. (Draft General
Plan, p. 2-25)
9. The implementation of in-lieu fees for public art will promote the Arts in public
spaces. (Final EIR, p. 4-9)
10. Implementation of transportation goals and policies in the General Plan will have
the beneficial impacts of increasing the use of alternative modes of
transportation, which also benefits air quality. (Final EIR, p. 4-174)
11. Requiring Transportation Demand Management (TDM) programs for major
projects as an in-lieu mitigation measure will benefit the City where physical
traffic mitigations are infeasible or undesirable to the City. (Final EIR, p. 4-174)
12. Preparing a Parkland Leasing Program, along with conducting a Parkland and
Recreational Facilities Acquisition and Development study will aid the City in
creating new passive and active open space areas and recreational amenities
for City residents. (Final EIR, p. 4-158, 4-159)
13. Implementation of the land use policies related to mixed use development will
encourage pedestrian activity and transit use. As a result, air quality and noise
benefits are anticipated as people walk or use the mass transit rather than
individual cars/trucks.
14. Implementation of the land use policies related to commercial and industrial
development will continue to provide an economic engine for both residents and
for the City without creating undue impacts on transportation systems, air quality
resources, and noise resources.
6
City Council Meeting
October 14, 2008
Page 7 of 7
15. Implementation of the land use policies regarding potential housing production in
both mixed use settings as well as neighborhood settings will assist the City in
meeting its housing "fair share" as determined by SCAG.
16.The implementation of a curbside commingled recycling program, together with
public education, will reduce waste generation and lessen impacts on local
landfills.
Section 4 - General Plan Consistency with State Law Determination. The City
Council finds that the Rosemead General Plan as proposed is consistent with the
requirements of State law governing general plans.
Section 5 - CEQA Document Adoption and Certification. Based on the
entire administrative record before the City Council on the Project, including the above
findings and all written and oral evidence presented to the City Council, the City Council
hereby takes the following actions: (i) certifies the draft Final Environmental Impact Report,
(ii) adopts a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Project pursuant to the
California Environmental Quality Act; and (iii) adopts a Statement of Overriding
Considerations for those impacts described herein that remain significant and unavoidable.
Section 6 - Adoption of the General Plan. Based on the entire administrative
record before the City Council on the Project, including the above findings and all written
and oral evidence presented to the City Council, the City Council hereby adopts the
Rosemead General Plan.
Section 7. The Mayor shall sign this resolution and the City Clerk shall attest to the
adoption thereof.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED THIS 14th DAY OF OCTOBER, 2008.
John Tran, Mayor
CERTIFICATION
I hereby certify that the foregoing is a true copy of a resolution adopted by the City Council
of the City of Rosemead at a meeting held on the 14th day of October, 2008 by the
following vote:
YES:
NO:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Gloria Molleda, City Clerk
0 0
•
•
ROSEMEAD PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
TO: HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE ROSEMEAD
PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: PLANNING DIVISION
DATE: SEPTEMBER 29, 2008
SUBJECT: GENERAL PLAN UPDATE and GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (DEIR), STATE
CLEARINGHOUSE NUMBER 2007111090
SUMMARY
The Public Hearing Draft of the General Plan and Draft Environmental Impact Report
(DEIR) were released for public review on July 31, 2008. The General Plan contains
significant revisions from the previous Preliminary Draft of the General Plan released in
February 2007. Many revisions are a result of comments submitted by the community
leaders, members of the public, community organizations, and outside agencies.
Since release of the Public Hearing Draft of the General Plan and the DEIR, the City
has received four comment letters from individuals and the San Gabriel and Lower Los
Angeles Rivers Mountains Conservancy. Please note that all four letters address
General Plan policy and not the adequacy of the Draft Environmental Impact Report.
These letters and the draft responses to these letters are included as Exhibit B to this
report and are for your review and consideration.
Staff requests that the Commission provide direction on which, if any, of these
suggested changes should be forwarded to the City Council for consideration. By State
law, the Planning Commission is the lead commission to make a formal
recommendation to the City Council regarding the eventual adoption of the General
Plan, Statement of Overriding Considerations, and Mitigation Monitoring Program. The
Planning Commission is also the lead commission to recommend environmental review
document certification.
Although not included in the comprehensive draft General Plan circulated for public
review, the City will initiate an update of the Housing Element to address housing
planning for the 2008-2014 Housing Element cycle for the region (which is the six-
county region of the Southern California Association of Governments, or SCAG).
Housing Element adoption is anticipated to occur subsequent to adoption of the
Special Planning Commission Meeting
September 29, 2008
Paae 2 of 9
comprehensive General Plan update. Housing Element policy will reflect land use
policy, meaning that the Housing Element will identify sites for future housing
opportunities consistent with the Land Use Policy Map in,the Land Use Element
necessary to meet the Regional Housing Needs Allocation, or RHNA, and otherwise
meet City housing goals. To the extent housing programs are known at the time of
preparation of the General Plan EIR; those programs have been addressed in the
General Plan DEIR.
If the Commission makes a recommendation to adopt the General Plan and associated
documents, and to certify the DEIR, the Commission must do so by adopting Resolution
08-24 which will recommend CERTIFICATION of the Draft Final Environmental Impact
Report, ADOPTION of a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, ADOPTION of a
Statement of Overriding Considerations, and APPROVAL of the General Plan to the
City Council. Notice of the City Council hearing on the General Plan will be given once
the Planning Commission has made its recommendation.
Environmental Determination
A DEIR has been prepared for the General Plan Update. The DEIR concludes that the
environmental impacts anticipated as a result of the General Plan's implementation are
less than significant or will be mitigated to a less than significant level except for
transportation, air quality, population and housing, recreation, and utilities and service
systems: solid waste. The DEIR also concludes that other reasonable alternatives have
been considered and rejected in favor of the proposed General Plan, and
environmental, economic, social, and other considerations make infeasible any
alternatives to the General Plan or further mitigation beyond those already included in
the General Plan and/or the DEIR. The Planning Commission must recommend
certification of the DEIR before the Planning Commission can recommend General Plan
adoption to the City Council. Furthermore, the Planning Commission must consider
DEIR certification and General Plan adoption before the City Council may certify the
DEIR and adopt the draft General Plan.
As the implementation of the Draft General Plan may have unavoidable significant
impacts, the City Council is required to adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations
before taking action to approve the General Plan. To adopt a Statement of Overriding
Considerations, the City must identify benefits from the General Plan that justify the
unavoidable significant environmental impacts.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission provide direction as it relates to the
consideration of the General Plan and the certification of the Draft Final EIR.
GENERAL PLAN SUMMARY
During the General Plan update process, which began in 2003, the City sought input
from the public and City Council regarding their vision for the community through 2025.
A four-page survey asked residents and business owners in Rosemead what they think
is special about Rosemead, and what changes they would like to see in the next 15 to
• •
Special Planning Commission Meeting
September 29, 2008
Page 3 of 9
20 years. The City Council was interviewed to provide direction for the Plan, and to
identify opportunities to enhance the quality of life in Rosemead. Also, the community
attended Planning Commission and City Council study sessions to provide further
direction. This input was used to draft goals and policies for the General Plan elements.
A Notice of Preparation for this EIR was issued on November 13, 2007 for a 30-day
period of public review.
The General Plan update addresses the six state-mandated general plan elements
(land use,\circulation, safety, open space, conservation, and noise). The updated
General Plan establishes an overall development capacity for the City and serves as a
policy guide for determining the appropriate physical development and character of the
City. The General Plan applies to all properties within the City of Rosemead, as well as
lands within the City's Sphere of Influence.
The current City of Rosemead General Plan was adopted in 1987. The City has
undertaken a comprehensive plan update to address issues relevant to Rosemead
today. Key new proposals contained in the draft General Plan include new mixed use
development land use categories and revised maximum residential densities. The draft
General Plan proposes three mixed use development land use categories: Mixed Use -
Residential/Commercial (MRC), Mixed Use - High Residential/Commercial (MHRC),
and Mixed Use - Industrial/Commercial (MIC). The update also allows greater
residential densities and infill opportunities within the revised residential density
permitted in the Medium Density Residential (MDR) designation. The project addresses
comprehensive plans for addressing regional and local'traffic growth in the Circulation
Element.
The draft General Plan consists of the following elements, or chapters.
Land Use
Land Use Characteristics
The Land Use Element, using text and illustrations, identifies the physical form of
Rosemead and how land will be used over time. This Element sets forth the location,
type, and intensity of development, and establishes the desired mix and relationship
between uses. The Land Use Plan identifies the planned pattern of uses.
Land use designations identify the types and nature of development permitted
throughout the planning area. The goals and policies contained in the Element provide
guidance to enhancing and maintaining existing residential neighborhoods, encouraging
new housing opportunities, accommodating a variety of commercial and industrial uses,
and revitalizing underperforming commercial corridors.
The Land Use Element establishes 11 land use designations intended to provide a
rational and ordered approach to land use development and the maintenance of public
uses and public open spaces. The land use designations are:
• •
Special Planning Commission Meeting
September 29, 2008
Pace 4 of 9
• LDR: Low Density Residential - accommodates low-density residential
neighborhoods consisting primarily of detached single-family dwellings on
individual lots. The maximum permitted density is 7.0 dwelling units per acre.
• MDR: Medium Density Residential - allows for. residential development at
densities up to 12 units per acre. Housing types within this density range include
single-family detached homes on smaller lots, duplexes, and attached units.
HDR: High Density Residential - accommodates many forms of attached
housing - triplexes, fourplexes, apartments, and condominiums/ townhouses -
and small-lot or clustered detached units. The maximum permitted density is 30
units per acre.
• MRC: Mixed Use - provides options for innovative approaches to land use and
development. Mixed Use allows for a mix of land uses in the same building, on
the same parcel of land, or side by side within the same area. Such
complementary use stimulates business activity, encourages pedestrian
patronage, and provides a broader range of options to property owners to
facilitate the preservation, re-use and redevelopment of structures. The General
Plan provides three mixed use categories:
• Mixed Use - Residential/Commercial (up to 30 units per acre with a
maximum 1.6 floor-area ratio, or FAR)"'
• Mixed Use - High Density Residential/Commercial (31 to 45 units per acre
with a maximum 2.0 FAR)
• Mixed Use - Industrial/Commercial (with a maximum 2.5 FAR)
• C: Commercial - applies to retail and service commercial centers located
along major arterials in the City: (1) Valley Boulevard west of Walnut Grove
Avenue and near Rio Hondo Avenue, (2) Garvey Avenue between Charlotte
Avenue and Ivar Avenue, (3) San Gabriel Boulevard north of Park Street, (4)
Walnut Grove Avenue at Rush Street, and (5) commercial areas south of the
Pomona Freeway. The maximum permitted FAR is 0.35.
• OLL Office/Light Industrial - applies to properties generally located at the
north and south edges of the City. This category provides suitable locations for
manufacturing, assembly, and limited food processing uses, as well office
buildings and business parks. Zoning regulations specify the uses permitted and
performance standards for industrial uses. The maximum permitted FAR is 0.5.
• PF: Public Facilities - applies to those land uses that are operated and
maintained for public benefit. Public facilities include educational facilities,
utilities, and buildings or areas that support government activities. This land use
category also includes quasi-public uses such as private utilities easements,
private schools, and institutional activities.
• •
Special Planning Commission Meeting
September 29, 2008
Pace 5 of 9
OS: Open Space/Natural Resources - applies to public properties set aside
for diverse recreational interests, including parks, baseball/soccer fields, and
picnicking areas, as well as open lands required for resource protection.
CEM: Cemetery - applies to the El Monte Cemetery property located along
Valley Boulevard. Permitted uses are limited to those ordinarily associated with
a cemetery, as defined specifically in the zoning ordinance.
Implications of Land Use Policy
The Land Use Policy Map in the Land Use Element establishes the general pattern of
uses for properties within the plan area and identifies maximum permitted land use
densities and intensities. These policy parameters can be used to identify the
anticipated level of development within the planning area over the long term, at so-
called "buildout". Since Rosemead is largely built out today, infill development
represents the only real opportunity for growth. The City anticipates that at focused
locations, older buildings and uses will be replaced with new mixed use and other
development consistent with newly established land use policy, which will allow for more
intense development within targeted areas. In addition, not every parcel in Rosemead
will be developed at the maximum level due to physical conditions and other constraints
that affect individual parcels, such as public right-of-way needs, placement of buildings,
zoning requirements, market desires, and other factors. Also, many residential
neighborhoods are expected to remain stable. For example, a single-family
neighborhood with a designation of Low Density Residential, which has a maximum
density cap of seven units per acre, may have been built at an overall density of four
units per acre, and the subdivision and development pattern would virtually preclude
any further land divisions. Thus, that neighborhood would not be expected to recycle to
seven units per acre. For this reason, the calculation of buildout does not assume the
maximum theoretical buildout.
Table 1 indicates "typical" densities and intensities that can be expected over the life of
this General Plan. Altogether, these factors are used to estimate the possible buildout
capacity of the City in terms of population, housing units, and square feet of
commercial, industrial, and other nonresidential uses. The typical densities and
intensities are for planning purposes only. Any development proposal involving a
density/intensity in excess of the typical but up to the maximum will not require a
General Plan Amendment.
0 •
Special Planning Commission Meeting
September 29, 2008
Page 6 of 9
Table 1
"Typical Buildout" Development and Population Estimates
Maximum
Development Potential Used for Environmental
Density/
Analysis.
Intensity
Non-
(a)
Typical
Residential
Net
Density/
Projected
Estimated
Potential
General Plan Land Use
Acre
Intensity
Dwelling
Population
Square
Category
s
(a)
Units (b)
(b,c)
Feet
LDR
Low Density Residential
956
7 DU/AC
7.0 DU/AC
6,693
25,945
0
Medium Density
566
12 DU/AC
8.5 DU/AC
4,810
18,644
0
MDR
Residential
HDR
High Density Residential
97
30 DU/AC
DU AC
1,917
7,431
0
C
Commercial
59
0.35 FAR
0.33 FAR
0
0
840,000
OLI
Office/Light Industrial
132
0.5 FAR
0.42 FAR
0
0
2,400,000
Mixed Use:
142
30
25.0
MRC
Residential/Commercial
DU/AC;
DU/AC;
1,769
6,858
4,930,000
(d)
1.6 FAR
1.6 FAR
Mixed Use: High Density
220
45
36.0
.
MHRC
Residential/Commercial
DU/AC;
DU/AC;
5,555
21,532
5,760,000
(e)
2.0 FAR
2.0 FAR
M/C
Mixed Use:
9
2.5 FAR
1.0 FAR
0
0
390,000
Industrial/Commercial
PF
Public Facilities
380
N/A
N/A
0
0
0
OS
Open Space/Natural
90
N/A
N/A
0
0
0
Resources
CEM
Cemetery
4
N/A
N/A
0
0
0
Total
2,654
20,744
80,410
14,320,000
Notes:
a) DU/AC: Dwelling Unit Per Acre, FAR: Floor-Area Ratio. The FAR is the ratio between the total gross floor area
of all buildings on a lot and the total land area. This measure does not include area within parking structures.
b) Based on "typical density/intensity".
c) Population is estimated based on an average household size of 3.997 persons per household and a vacancy
rate of 3.02% according to the 2007 California Department of Finance, Demographic Unit.
d) Mixed Use: Residential/Commercial category assumes 50% residential and 50% commercial mix.
e) Mixed Use: High Density Residential/Commercial category assumes 70% residential and 30% commercial mix.
It is highly unlikely that the City will achieve the maximum land use density or intensity
limits on all properties citywide. Therefore assuming the maximum densities/intensities
for the General Plan at buildout would not represent a reasonable future condition.
Also, such an assumption would result in a significant overestimation of long-term
infrastructure needs and systems.
When comparing the "typical buildout" under the proposed General Plan with
development that exists today, Rosemead may see 6,047 additional dwelling units,
7,310,000 square feet of additional commercial use, and a minimal net gain of
office/industrial use.
• •
Special Planning Commission Meeting
September 29, 2008
Page 7 of 9
In relation to a letter staff received attached to this report in Exhibit B, staff .discovered a
discrepancy related to three properties located at located at 8903, 8909, and 8915
Nevada Avenue. The General Plan designation for these properties was mistakenly
changed from Low Density Residential (LDR) to Mixed Use Residential/Commercial
(31-45 du/ac) (MRC). If the Commission elects to recommend approval of the Draft
General Plan to the City Council, staff recommends that these 3 properties remain Low
Density Residential.
In addition, the residential land use designations on page 2-10 of the proposed General
Plan will be revised to reflect maximum densities as stated with no minimum density
requirements.
Circulation Element
The Circulation Element guides the enhancement of the local circulation system to
support planned growth, enhance safety, and encourage transit use. This Element
addresses focused improvements to the roadway system that will be appropriate to
accommodate local mobility and public safety needs and to enhance connections to
adjacent communities. The Element identifies where comprehensive intersection
improvements will be needed to maintain acceptable service levels, as well as other
measures to ease traffic flow. Other circulation issues addressed include a bicycle
master plan and truck routes.
The Circulation Element includes five classifications of roadways: Freeway, Major
Arterial, Minor Arterial, Collector, and Local. Each classification is designed for a
certain purpose and capacity. Key transportation goals in the Circulation Element
include the maintenance of efficient vehicular and pedestrian movement and the
protection of residential areas from commercial and industrial traffic.
Resource Management Element
The Resource Management Element is a combination of the State mandated Open
Space and Conservation elements. In terms of open space, the project focuses on
existing parks and recreational facilities and goals for providing additional park and
open space areas. The City currently has 43.25 acres of park and recreational areas.
Water and air quality, energy conservation, global climate change, and mineral
resources are in the conservation portion of the Resource Management Element. Due
to the semi-arid nature of the plan area, the project highlights the need for water
conservation. Additionally, groundwater in the area is partially contaminated; therefore,
the Element provides for goals to prevent continued contamination. The project
recognizes that air quality is a regional problem and that each jurisdiction has a
responsibility in contributing to cleaner air. This Element includes goals to integrate air
quality planning into City development efforts and to support alternative modes of
transportation. The plan also recognizes the link between air quality and energy
conservation and the project presents goals to promote energy conservation. Finally,
the Element considers mineral resources and indicates that the built out nature of the
• 0
Special Planning Commission Meeting
September 29, 2008
Page 8 of 9
City and the lack of State designated Mineral Resource Zones (MRZ) prevents the
extraction of minerals from within the plan area.
Public Safety Element
The Public Safety Element establishes policies to minimize the potential danger to the
community from natural and human-caused hazards. The Element includes discussion
of those features within or near Rosemead that represent a potential danger to the
residents, structures, public facilities, and infrastructure. Natural hazards include
earthquakes and flooding. Human-caused hazards include fires and the discharge of
hazardous materials. The Element also provides goals and policies supporting law
enforcement and emergency response services.
Noise Element
The Noise Element focuses on minimizing community noise by identifying its sources
and assessing alternative methods to reduce impacts. The Element identifies current
noise levels in terms of the Community Noise Equivalent Level scale (CNEL). The
CNEL accounts for human sensitivity to sound at night therefore it includes a 5 decibel
penalty for noises between 7:00 am and 10:00 pm and a 10 decibel penalty between
10:00 pm to 7:00 am. The Element identifies the existing noise environment and the
projected noise environment in 2025. Goals and policies focus on the protection of
sensitive land uses from excessive noise and the reduction of noise from transportation
sources.
Implementation Program '
The General Plan includes an Implementation Program that provides the City Council,
Planning Commission, and staff with choices for translating each General Plan element
to specific action items. The identified actions will serve as a basis for making future
programming decisions related to the assignment of staff and the expenditure of City
funds.
PUBLIC NOTICE PROCESS
This item has been noticed through the regular agenda notification process. A notice of
the Planning Commission's special meeting on the General Plan was published in the
San Gabriel Valley Tribune on September 18, 2008, in addition to postings of the notice
at five (5) public locations throughout the City. Notices of the Commission's meeting on
the General Plan was mailed or electronically transmitted to persons and organizations
that submitted written comments on the Preliminary Draft General Plan and/or Draft
EIR.
In an effort to comply with State Senate Bill 18, staff contacted the Native American
Heritage Commission (NAHC) to obtain a list of California Native American Tribes for
the purposes of consultation to identify, protect and mitigate potential impacts to cultural
places that may lie within City limits and that may be affected by the General Plan
Update. On July 29, 2008, staff sent letters to all three Tribes listed on the Tribal
Consultation List provided by the NAHC. To date, staff has not received any comments
or requests for consultation.
Special Planning Commission Meeting
September 29, 2008
Page 9 of 9
Prepared & Submitted by:
Matt Everling
City Planner
Exhibits: A. Resolution 08-24/Statement of Overriding Considerations
B. Comment Letters and Draft Responses to Comments
C. Draft Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
D. Draft General Plan, June 2008 (previously distributed)
E. General Plan Update Draft Environmental Impact Report (SCH # 2007111090)
(previously distributed)
• •
EXHIBIT "A"
PC RESOLUTION 08-24
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD,
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, MAKING THE FOLLOWING
RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY COUNCIL: CERTIFY THE DRAFT FINAL
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT, ADOPT A MITIGATION MONITORING AND
REPORTING PROGRAM, ADOPT A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
FOR THE ROSEMEAD GENERAL PLAN PURUSANT TO THE CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT AND ROSEMEAD LOCAL QUIDELINES FOR
IMPLEMENTING THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT; AND APPROVE
THE ROSEMEAD GENERAL PLAN
WHEREAS, the City of Rosemead ("City") embarked on a comprehensive update of
its General Plan in 2003 to guide decision-making about land use, circulation, resource
management, public safety, noise, and the general quality of life in our City; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") (Public
Res. Code §§21000 et seq.) and State CEQA Guidelines (14 CCR §§15000 et seq.), the
City caused an Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") to be prepared for the Rosemead
General Plan ('Project') in order to analyze all potential adverse environmental impacts of
Project implementation; and
WHEREAS, on September 29, 2008, the Planning Commission of the City of
Rosemead recommended adoption of the draft Final EIR, adoption of environmental
findings, a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and a Statement of Overriding
Considerations, and recommended approval of the General Plan to the City Council; and
WHEREAS, the draft Final EIR identified and discussed significant effects which
may occur as a result of the Project. With the implementation of the mitigation measures in
the draft Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, these effects can be mitigated to
below levels of significance except for the unavoidable significant impacts to population and
housing, recreation, utilities and service systems: solid waste, transportation, and air
quality; and
WHEREAS, since public circulation of the Draft EIR, no significant new information
has been submitted pursuant to CEQA Guidelines §15088.5, and therefore recirculation of
the EIR is not required under CEQA, nor is a subsequent or supplemental EIR required
pursuant to Public Resources Code §21166; and
WHEREAS, CEQA §15093 requires that if the Project will cause significant
unavoidable adverse impacts, the City must adopt a Statement of Overriding
Considerations prior to approving the Project. A Statement of Overriding Considerations
states that any significant adverse project effects are accepted if expected project benefits
outweigh unavoidable adverse environmental impacts; and
Planning Commission Resolution 08-24
Page 2 of 5
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, having considered and weighed the benefits
of the Project against the Project's unavoidable adverse impacts, has determined that the
benefits outweigh the potential unavoidable adverse impacts, and recommends adoption of
a Statement of Overriding Considerations and approval of the Project; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on
September 29, 2008 to consider the adoption of the General Plan, at which time all persons
wishing to testify in connection with the General Plan were heard; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission fully studied the proposed General Plan and
considered all public comments on the General Plan;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ROSEMEAD HEREBY FINDS, DECLARES, AND RECOMMENDS AS FOLLOWS:
Section I. The Planning Commission hereby finds that the draft Final EIR has
identified and discussed significant effects that will occur as a result of the Rosemead
General Plan. With the implementation of the mitigation measures discussed in the draft
Final EIR, these effects can be mitigated to a less than significant level except for the
unavoidable significant impacts previously discussed. The Planning Commission hereby
recommends certifying the draft Final EIR and adopting environmental findings for the
Project to the City Council.
Section 2. The Planning Commission declares that it has made a reasonable and
good faith effort to eliminate or substantially mitigate, through adoption of all feasible
mitigation measures, all potential impacts that may result from the Project.
Section 3. The Planning Commission declares that, having reduced the adverse
significant environmental effects of the Rosemead General Plan to the extent feasible by
adopting the mitigation measures in the draft Final EIR; having considered the entire
administrative record on the Project, and having weighed the benefits of the Project against
its unavoidable adverse impacts after mitigation, the Planning Commission has determined
that the environmental, economic, and social benefits of the Project outweigh the potential
unavoidable adverse impacts and render those potential adverse environmental impacts
acceptable based upon the overriding considerations listed in Exhibit A.
Section 4. The Planning Commission finds that the Rosemead General Plan as
proposed is consistent with the requirements of state law governing general plans.
Section 5. Based on the entire administrative record before the Planning
Commission on the Project, including the above findings and all written and oral evidence
presented to the Planning Commission, the Planning Commission hereby recommends that
the City Council take the following actions: (i) certify the draft Final Environmental Impact
Report, making the required findings and adopt a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program for the Project pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act; and (ii) adopt
• •
Planning Commission Resolution 08-24
Page 3 of 5
a Statement of Overriding Considerations for those impacts that remain significant and
unavoidable; and (iii) approve the Rosemead General Plan.
Section 6. The Chair of the Commission shall sign this resolution and the
Commission's Administrative Secretary shall attest to the adoption thereof.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED THIS 29th DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2008.
Daniel Lopez, Chairman
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 a special meeting, held on the 2gth day of
September, 2008 by the following vote:
YES:
NO:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Matt Everling, Secretary
• •
EXHIBIT "A"
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
The environmental, economic, and social benefits of. the Rosemead General Plan
outweigh the potential unavoidable adverse impacts that may occur as a result the project
and render those potential adverse environmental impacts acceptable based upon the
following overriding considerations:
1. The Land Use Element will contribute toward the preservation of the City's
distinctive residential character and individual neighborhood identity by
preserving existing residential densities in long-established neighborhoods.
(Draft General Plan, p. 2-14)
2. The goals and policies in the Land Use Element support the maintenance and
stability of existing residential neighborhoods contributing to Rosemead's unique
character. (Draft General Plan, p. 2-14)
3. The goals and policies in the Land Use Element will provide for expanded
opportunities for concentrated commercial development that will reduce trip
generation and will establish additional direction regarding revitalization of the
key corridors. (Draft General Plan, p. 2-19)
4. The anticipated enhancement of Valley Boulevard and the area's reinvention as
a vibrant, mixed-use area consistent with General Plan policy direction will lead
to a beneficial aesthetic result. (Draft General Plan, p. 2-19)
5. The anticipated in-fill development and redevelopment of properties along Valley
Boulevard and Garvey Avenue resulting from implementation of the goals and
policies of the Land Use Element are anticipated to have a beneficial impact on
jobs and tax revenues to the community. (Draft General Plan, p. 2-24.)
6. Implementation of the Land Use Element will create opportunities for high-
quality, well-designed mixed use residential and commercial projects that will
rely on appropriate Mixed Use Design Guidelines to achieve a quality product.
(Final EIR, p. 4-8)
7. Mixed Use development will result in reduced need for auto trips and will
encourage walking and bicycling by providing residences, jobs, and shopping
opportunities within close proximity of each other. (Draft General Plan, p. 2-27)
8. The General Plan will result in the beneficial effect of providing opportunities for
development of new housing and employment-generating uses. (Draft General
Plan, p. 2-25)
1
0 •
9. The implementation of in-lieu fees for public art will promote the Arts in public
spaces. (Final EIR, p. 4-9)
10. Implementation of transportation goals and policies in the General Plan will have
the beneficial impacts of increasing the use of alternative modes of
transportation, which also benefits air quality. (Final EIR, p. 4-174.)
11.Requiring Transportation Demand Management (TDM) programs for major
projects as an in-lieu mitigation measure will benefit the City where physical
traffic mitigations are infeasible or undesirable to the City. (Final EIR, p. 4-174)
12. Preparing a Parkland Leasing Program, along with conducting a Parkland and
Recreational Facilities Acquisition and Development study will aid the City in
creating new passive and active open space areas and recreational amenities
for City residents. (Final EIR, p. 4-158, 4-159)
13. Implementation of the land use policies related to mixed use development will
encourage pedestrian activity and transit use. As a result, air quality and noise
benefits are anticipated as people walk or use the mass transit rather than
individual cars/trucks.
14. Implementation of the land use policies related to commercial and industrial
development will continue to provide an economic engine for both residents and
for the City without creating undue impacts on transportation systems, air quality
resources, and noise resources.
15. Implementation of the land use policies regarding potential housing production in
both mixed use settings as well as neighborhood settings will assist the City in
meeting its housing "fair share" as determined by SCAG.
16.The implementation of a curbside commingled recycling program, together with
public education, will reduce waste generation and lessen impacts on local
landfills.
The benefits listed above are sufficient justification for the City Council to override the
unavoidable environmental impacts that may occur as a result of the project.
2
0 •
Response to Comments
Response to Comments-Rosemead General Plan Update and Program EIR.
Rosemead General Plan 1 Program Environmental Impact Report
to Comments
Dominic Baracchini, July 18, 2008
This letter expresses an opinion opposing a proposed land use policy that would increase allowable
densities on Valley Boulevard and Garvey Avenue, but does not comment on the adequacy of the
draft EIR. This opinion is noted, and hereby incorporated into the public record for further
consideration by the Rosemead Planning Commission and City Council.
Program Environmental Impact Report 2 Rosemead General Plan
July 18, 2008
City of Rosemead
Attn: Matt Everling
Re: General Plan Changes
0
Received by
Planning Division
-7- S
DOM
1 am voicing my opinion as a 38 year resident of the City of
Rosemead, regarding your planned changes to the City General
Plan, to increase density on Valley Blvd and Garvey Ave from 14
units per acre to 45 units per acre.
Please endeavor to keep density at 14 units per acre.
Rosemead is now over-crowded with people and cars. This
increase in density will add to traffic congestion, parking
problems, air pollution, safety concerns and other negative
factors that overpopulation causes.
Thanks for your consideration
Dominic Baracchini
• •
Response to Comments
Jack L. Jackson, July 24, 2008
This letter expresses opinions concerning proposed land use policies and the conditions of the City's
parks, but does not comment on the adequacy of the Draft EIR. These opinions are noted, and
hereby incorporated into the public record for further consideration by the Rosemead Planning
Commission and City Council.
Program Environmental Impact Report 4 Rosemead General Plan
7/;Z y/o2
%a. 1 Y~ oSP. ~on.cQ Ci% C.ooAl
ce 1......
.
ThA% L Arr.... A .At,vdT.. V
PS %.o i e P Bern I./
Pl„NI spec-J.i v,r J"
oY.. Me~o'r...o.r S,~le... STr. eeZS V
Q. _.fu CL AS .c~Arvne~fY S~1~CjAl rfe
~ .OY ,'COSPr?r.nGl k3/J~~s , ..I ~C~
N.G el
D I -
C* 1.rN.... i??OYN. oN Y l1,.+~...
W 5...... NO~he/...
~a .v.e,.... Pss. PA
p
Toy ev-e~u Xrrgcems.
f, cQ.. w)L .,c -r-lie... ion rC5 v
p I'V
?
OSNMrAC~ o,77~n.o__._........
. o.. r.
- sa ye~AYs_
6a~ o a6.7
•
to Comments
San Gabriel & Lower Los Angeles RIVERS AND MOUNTAINS CONSERVANCY, September 15,
2008
This letter expresses several suggestions concerning potential open space, hydrology/water quality,
conservation, recreation and park planning policies that could be included in the Rosemead General
Plan Update. There are no comments concerning the adequacy of the Draft EIR. These suggestions
will be forwarded to the Planning Commission and City Council for further consideration. Please note
that the City has recently allocated funding for a comprehensive assessment of parks and recreation
space needs and strategies, and will consider a variety of performance standards as part of that
effort.
Program Environmental Impact Report 6 Rosemead General Plan
I!
5/2008 18:45 FAX` 6 '81512
RA RISOIRICH ACANCV
N
Rive rs BMOUnt ains c 02/005
AM
2008
' ning Board or the
l
ervaney
atthew Everling
l~ iw ~allaa
angling Administrator
.
ity of Rosemead
{ Worm, vice Chair $
S
nmentW Publb Member
38 E. Valley Boulevard
a Admtm
osemead, CA 91770
i.
imy
mle liadroammw Praraadm E
ry
E: City of Rosemead General Plan U
date, Draft Environmen
1
ea boaa
Impact Report
~ bdal vldley Coalmll or
'go`at D
ear Mr. Everling:
Cllfirnlml
by for nrem
rcm Agommy Agamy
i
T
a Rivers and Mountains Conservancy
(RMC) is grateful for t
dmja o
pportunity to provide comments on the
City of Rosemead Dr
nbd.l valby wmd Arm.dadn G
eneral Plan Program Environmental !
pact Report. The S
got C. Gencat G
abriel and Lower Los Angeles Rivers an
Mountains Conservam
aiaworl?f a or
Rivers and Mountains Conservancy (R
C) was established as
Grora in
dependent State agency within the Res
roes Agency of the Sts
e Co." Dimino orcbe Loss Bar of
mia rnim
California to preserve urban open spa
a and habitat's in order
JoftF pr
ovide for low-impact recreation and edu
ational uses, wildlife a
aw vaaaycoamilof h
abitat restoration and protection, and wall
rshed improvements.
a Molina
co As the office responsible for disbursemeSt of Proposition 84 (Se
naal., Calmq amrdaraupeMmn
:k O'Donnell Drinking Water, Water Quality and Supply; Flood Control, River a
rraa{ B..b Coastal Protection Bond Act of 20013), which provides funds for t.
'Um RMC grant program that funds local, state and federal agencies, l
ny (.boon Co,meil uraDvnwemla have an interest and concern about contemplated alterations of la
at
ion of do Can{m or use in the vicinity of the funded projects.
o Coanly Divir
fOtn QtiG
lfficio Mombera The RMC has reviewed the Draft General Plan Progro
Coleman Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the City of Rosemead al
mmn ar kdu and aemaadm has the following comments:
annenr General Plan Maps
rc Dkeemr
'cammvaun Board All General Plan Maps should depict exist
n
g parks and open spa
y
aaout
aador
within the city boundaries in order to i
form all elements of tl
atpmd,lm AgOw Dlmdd
yCm;rarlInlir.r. General Plan, Including proposed enha
ncements of parks al
ipaagia recreational space that may have an adv
rse physical effect on tl
(•almly emolive omor
environment-
.
'M'
nr W
del0.ivlvd amr Monet
d
ydrology and Water Quallty Section 4.
wemgl Fo
NalamaraA The RMC encourages projects that co
ply with existing vat
"s°"'l`° quality standards and waste discharge r
gulations set forth by tl
worm United States Environmental Protection
gency (EPA), the Sta
dvPobneceWQA$
r Department of Health Services (DH5), the
One, Water Quality
l Fa
8~ Goobrlal good Low. Los Arrples Rivers and Moan
a Conservancy
r&1 EnaW 100 Old Set Gabriel Callyon Road • Am'
CA 91102
Ph.tq: (626) 815-1019 • Fat: (626) 815-1269 • F awll.'
www.rme.a.gov
5/2006 16:46 FAX 0151268 RiversUountains 0111 1I 1 103/005
Everting
September 15, 2006
Page 2
RMC supports
Principles and
possible,
strategies that incorporate
the City to integrate these
into its
(LID)
where
Key Principles of Lowact Development j
A number of key principl s characterize low impact develo ment:
• Decentralize and mi manage urban runoff to integrate water anagementthroughoui
the watershed. j;
• Preserve or mimic the cosystem's natural hydrologic functions nd cycles.
• Emphasize a distribute , not concentrated, control of storrnwate . ii
• Account for a site's top graphic features in its design. j
• Reduce impervious ground cover and building footprint.
• Maximize infiltration o -site. (Current stormwater practices do just the opposite-they
aim to move water off sit as quickly as possible.)
• If infiltration is not possible, then capture water for filtration and/ r reuse.
I
Integrating LID principles into General Plan policies will help a. dress water quality and
quantity goals for the City and will also interface with agent open space; plans that
address these similar issues. In addition, the RMC generally enco rages projec I Is that
• Maintain and improve flood protection through natural an non-structural systems
and ecosystem restoration
• Establish riverfront greenways to cleanse water, hold floodwaters and extend open
space
• Optimize water resources by improving the quality of surface and ground water and
enhance ground water recharge, to reduce dependence on Imported water
• Coordinate watershed planning across jurisdictions and b undarles
• Utilizes cisterns or similar devices to collect and recycle ra nwater on site
• Encourage multi-objective planning and projects
• Involve the public through education and outreach progra is
RMC also encourages the city to become informed about the Integrated Regional Water
Management Plan ("IRWMP") for the Greater Los Angeles Co my Region, which has
been created and will be implemented in accordance with the In egrated Regional Water
Management Planning Act of 2002 (Division 6, Part 2.2 of the alifomia Water Code).
The IRWMP presents significant opportunities for integrated pproaches to planning,
funding, and lmplementl(1g projects with multiple benefds in area of water management,
water quality improvement, open space preservation, an low-impact recreation
development. Involvement in the Upper San Gabriel River an Rio Hondo sub-region
should be a priority, either directly with City staff, through active ngagement with the San
Gabriel Valley Council of Governments, or other means.
i
The RMC continues to plan and fund low-impact and passive rec ation opportunities in its
territory and, in the course of this pursuit, works with many c operating agencies with
similar agendas to leverage opportunities. RMC encourages t is City of Rosemead to
review the Agency's Grant Program Guidelines availabe from out website:
W Gabriel and Lower Los Angeles Rivas and Mountain Conservancy
` I Eneaato" 100 Old San Gabricl Canyon Road -A= s CA91702
Phanc;(626) 815.1019 • Fax: (626) 8i5-1269 • E-+++a~1: tau. 1no rrn oa. ov
i - www rnexa.gov
i
5/2008 16:48 FAH 82881512
Everling
September 15, 2008
Page 3
River" Mountains
for additional information
Iity improvements related
the
funding
parks and open space. i
Land Use and Planning Section 4.7
The General Plan Program EIR should include land that is als of regional s,gnifcani
The Program EIR shoud reflect sustainable development, for example, that which
promote the triple botto line (environment, economy, and eq ity) as referenced in t
Governor's Office of Planning and Research published benera Plan Guidelipes, pg,
(www.oor.ca.aoy). Open space can serve a dual purpose of d Ining urban communiti
and protection open space, working landscapes and environme tally sensitive lands.
addition, protection of Is a open space areas that are not neees arily in public ownersl
will assist in reducing th need for new Infrastructure. Where fea ible, General Plan goi
should state "green infr structure" as a design element that w' Id provide a network
open space and trailsi throughout the city. Identifying opportunities through futL
development projects to.build upon a green infrastructure will p vide the best; opportur
for addressing the lack of parks, open space and trails contempla ed in the EIR.
Recreation Section 4.11
The Environmental Impacts section indicates that the city has goal of 1 acre of pa
space per 1,000 people as recommended by the Nation I Recreation; and Pl
Association (NRPA) and 4 acres per person by the Southern California Association
Governments (SCAG) on page 4-151. However, the next par graph indicates that t
proposed General Plan removes the goal of providing one acre per person, with
increased emphasis on maintenance of facilities and the development of addition
recreation opportunities particularly in Resources Management ctions 1.2, 1.3, 1.6 a
1.7. It is the RMC' s understanding, that the National Racre t!on and Park no long
endorses national per capita standards for facilities/park acreage. While this basic spat
standard of 10 acres of park land per 1000 persons was initial y proposed to recreati
and park planners, there is general agreement that this goal is c fficult to reach given la
of land suitable for acquisition or development as parkland an recreational facilities.
addition, it was determined that a standard cannot be univer al, nor can one city
compared with another even though they have similar char cteriatics. The revis
approach in calculating park and open space needs requires cl ies to take a.communi
driven consensus of what constitutes an acceptable Level Of Service (LOS) that will hi
give a better understanding of how to determine recreation needs and preference
measure participation in recreation activities, monitor quality o_ the service and expa
and enhance on-site anti off-site benefits. Additional informatio regarding this topic c
be found in the publication a Roc eatio Open 5 ace aid Greenwa Guidelin
(1996, Mertes & Hall) published by the NRPA.' (See attached RMC recommends V
the City establish a LOS goal or a park goal in the General Plan. Without a stated goal
Increasing parks, trails, and open space in Rosemead, future pro rams and projects will
the City will not incorporate these elements that are so critical to uality of life of residen!
1 National Recreation and Park Association, Recreation. 0 e •e and reenwa v Guidelines (1996,
Mertes & Hats). (htt ///www nroa.otnroa.ot tore.
Soh Gabriel and Lower Los Angeles Rivas and Mountains Consa VRECY
4o 6nemio" 100 Old St1n 0abdel Canyon Rond • A¢u'a, CA 91702
Phone (626) 815-1019 9 Fax: (626) 815.1269"S-mti1: bfaukino-wilpm v
www,rme.oa.Aov
Od/005
5/2008 15:47 FAXii Sc 815128
Mr. Everling
September 15, 2008
Page 4
resources in the City
analysis of the poter
greater demand and
Plan should promote
appropriate, and in of
adjacent jurisdictions,
on Page 4-152. Thes
Recreation Elements
recreation and parklar
fliversgMountains
Included in this study, RMC
11 deterioration of parks and
e by a growing population in
e connectivity of parks and gi
rement with the idea of Joint-t,
tote agencies, utility companii
ideas should also be incorpon
the proposed EIR to effect
and anticipated population gn
facilities
agree ants with so
and of er agencies,
t into t e Land Use,
deal ith meeting
1 in th City of Rose
It should be noted thI the Whittier Narrows Recreational
southeast of the City Rosemead is. currently undergoing a
collaboration from sta eholders including the Army Corps
Department of Public orks, LA County Department of Parks
of Supervisor Gloria M tins, the City of Pico Rivera and the We
The update to the Me r Plan will address an area of 2pproxi
bounded by South EI M.onte, Pico Rivera, Montebello, Roaemee
Angeles County. Other significant elements to be considered it
Gabriel and Rio Hondo Rivers, and the major transportatic
Whittier Narrows by the 605 Freeway and Rosemead Boulev
participation in this process as well as any opportunity to consul!
on projects that may' impacted the Master Plan update it
appropriately in the General Plan Program Environmental Impac
Finally, RMC would like to encourage the City to consider
water conservation element to the General Plan. Altho
recreational and parks needs, developing an element to the
addresses open space and water conservation goals will su
described within this letter. Developing goals for the City's
account open space and water conservation goals will facilitt
development and environment for your residents.
goals
a, located
aster Plan
Engineers,
lately 1,400
, and uninoc
he study Inc
corridors t
rd. We inv
vith your prc
order to b
Report.
the OM
nt Distri
res that
)rated L
e the Si
sepam
the Citl
sting an open space a
the City does adds;
anal Plan thai specifiea
the strategies and got
ire growth that take it
more sustainable form
Thank you for your consideration of these comments. I look forward to a contin
dialogue with the City an these opportunities as the Plan beco es finalized. If you I
any questions, please contact Aline Bokde at 62616.1019 x101 or
abokdeftrmc.ca.cov.
Sincerely,
v r"
Belinda V. Fausbi
Executive Officer
Soh Gabriel and l.owa Los Angolet Rivers and Maunmink Commancy
4i:1 Bneanto" 100 Old San Gabriel Canyon Road • Azusa, CA 91702
Phone: (626) 813.1019 • Fox: (626) 815-1269 • e-mail: tnes~4yp,
wvrw,rmc,ca,gov
/005
0
Response to Comments
Julie & Les Gentry, September 16, 2008
This letter expresses a preference to retain existing land use policies for specific properties on
Nevada Avenue, but does not comment on the adequacy of the Draft EIR. These comments are
hereby incorporated into the public record for further consideration by the Rosemead Planning
Commission and City Council.
Rosemead General Plan 1-11 Program Environmental Impact Report
•
September 16, 2008
Julie & Les Gentry
8915 Nevada Ave.
Rosemead, CA 91770
626-572-4564
C
Received by
Planning Division;
Date. L~+L= (
Honorable Mayor John Tran, Mayor Pro-Tem John Nunoz, Councilmembers Polly Low,
Margaret Clark, Gary Taylor, City Manager Oliver Chi, and City Planner Matt Everling.
This letter is regarding the September 9'h City Council Meeting. At that meeting; I
requested that the Nevada Ave. properties of 8915, 8909 and 8903 remain zoned R-1 and
not be changed to mixed-use overlay.
City Manager Oliver Chi indicated that there had been some sort of error concerning this
intended-re-zoning designation.at the upcoming September 29'h Planning Commission.
meeting.
I am writing to requestAconfirmation that this error has been corrected.
Thank you for your time and effort on our behalf.
Julie & Les Gentry dz
nn
A/AlA (IV
I I ~q~ ZJ ,(/Qda~a Q've, 9~Ss~/~itQ~. C~ ~ ~ 7 7 r]
~yGR
-71
1/I ~6j6k 5 S'-~/Zwo
T
C(-~i7I0-(5ro2)ds~ (v(a7
~J7 7,0
~90~ ~/PI~a~Q.f1~~. x°1770
b o2 ~J/~ a U¢r~~ ~L(~ ../x/77 d
9(7
•
•
i c
31h~
City of Rosemead
MITIGATION MONITORING AND
REPORTING PROGRAM
City of Rosemead General Plan Update
Environmental Impact Report
State Clearinghouse # SCH2007111090
Date of Adoption
12008
Project Files May Be Reviewed at:
City of Rosemead
8838 East Valley Boulevard
Rosemead, CA 91170
626.288.6671
• •
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
for the
City of Rosemead General Plan Update EIR
Section 1: Authority
This Environmental Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program has been prepared
pursuant to Section 21081.6 of the California Environmental Quality Act, known as
CEQA (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.), to provide for the monitoring of
mitigation measures required of the City of Rosemead General Plan Update, as set
forth in the Final Environmental Impact Report (Final EIR) prepared for the project. This
report will be kept on file in the offices of the City of Rosemead, 8838 E. Valley
Boulevard, Rosemead, CA 91170.
Section 2: Monitoring Schedule
City staff will monitor compliance with the provisions of this program. City staff will
prepare or cause to be prepared reports identifying compliance with mitigation
measures. Such reports may consist of, as appropriate, annual General Plan
monitoring reports submitted to the City Council or other City decision making bodies.
Section 3: Changes to Mitigation Measures
Any substantive change in the monitoring and reporting plan made by City staff shall be
reported in writing to the City Planner. Reference to such changes shall be made in the
yearly Environmental Mitigation Monitoring Report prepared by City staff. Modifications
to the mitigation measures may be made by City staff subject to one of the following
findings, documented by evidence included in the record:
a. The mitigation measure included in the Final EIR and the Mitigation Monitoring
and Reporting Program is no longer required because the significant environmental
impact identified in the Final EIR has been found not to exist, or to occur at a level
which makes the impact less than significant as a result of changes in the project,
changes in conditions of the environment, or other factors.
OR
b. The modified or substitute mitigation measure to be included in the Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program provides a level of environmental protection equal to
or greater than that afforded by the mitigation measure included in the Final EIR and the
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program; and
Rosemead General Plan 1Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
•
The modified or substitute mitigation measure does not have significant adverse effects
on the environment in addition to or greater than those which were considered by the
City Council and other responsible decision making bodies in their decisions on the
Final EIR and the General Plan project; and
The modified or substitute mitigation measures are feasible, and the City,
through measures included in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program or other
City procedures, can assure their implementation.
Section 4: Support Documentation
Findings and related documentation supporting the findings involving modifications to
mitigation measures shall be maintained in the project file with the Mitigation Monitoring
and Reporting Program and shall be made available to the public upon request.
Section 5: Format of Mitigation Monitoring Matrix
The mitigation monitoring matrix on the following pages identifies the environmental
issue areas for which monitoring is required, the required mitigation measures, the time
frame for monitoring, and responsible monitoring agencies. Short term refers to 0 to 5
years from date of adoption. Mid-term refers to 5 to 10 years from date of adoption.
Ongoing refers to 0 to 20 years.
Rosemead General Plan 2Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
T
d~
E E
ma
m
0
0
Q Q
0 0
O
0
N
O
C
N r
r
N
4)
m m
C C
E
m m
U Q
a
m m
m00
CL
a-
C~
O
mm
m
E c c
w
U
m C O
O
0
m
LL
N
E
a) C d
O
(n
m O)
2
o
c c
L
U O
U)
N
m L
O M
c
LO
N
115
a C N
L
~ c m m
m m
.0 C N
_ .
.
°'Ow
90 T.N. EN c
0
00 Y L~=3N
c
m
1
c C= E m c c Q m w a 0
O 0-
=
0 0 m 0
O
Q
m m Co ° °
0 U
0
O
_
0
a)
cr
- E
EmCQV;ooE Om0UF
E
T
. 0
~v N =_~m
M 0 w
O = C m C Z`
.
O N
N
a)
E_
)c
0
0
wmL o'er
>Na3i>jc -`0E °-4 C-4 C
Y O E c
C
c ma °'E Q
m m
O
-°Qvt E.Em oo ¢Qmm
mvo>
V
vE
CD
-
m 'c d= 'c 0 0 0 Q O ° To 0 N
7FD
N O 0 m m o
m
y
0 5;
16 - a) j° w
C N U -
L (
Y j
O M- M 'o
0
U
0 a)
0
U
m m L 0 a) cu tt ° N O C 'm0 0
m
N
m N U N
Q L
"
co
m
. c
Q E
cUH
n 0a) Cc
E
C
a)
ma 0. .s
p
y a)
m
a)
cE =n Q) cD 'D 0-
a) (7 -00 0
C7
V = a) m N
"m
c N
a) m
m m d C m m
C .L...
0
)
0
L.. Q N a) QY E a Q
N 0
j
N
m
c
m O
N
O N
c0
` C) N o -0 N v m c°
C
U
.0 o m° E c= Co
U)
6 j
o
CL
Q N o c_ m? = O N> N
a-)
~
3
a
Q= O6 c 0
O
°
E
a
Ycmo Q
T
me
c
'
0 D E O
N S U w N 0
m0 E.2
°
N
aN
U L O m O
o N
T L
=
N
m
o
0
o
C .
N
°fOO-4m m
E E mc m ~ ~0E
'
(
1
/1
m.. :omj
w
Y
m
.
'0
N
C
0`= a) 0 -
n c
Q 2 E U N _
C t 0= N O 0 0' 0 0 0 0
U m 0
N, w U c U
U 0 Q w > m
N m
_
a) 'o > m .0 E O N 'C E O' c r>
0
0-
Om m = O
0 'D
Q '
CL c
a)
c
L CL
H =C7 0 m E a'yUC7 o(7
L
o
m
r m
~ V
0 y=
m > C
O
v N
C
mo W
= 2
a a
o
E
c m
`O N
!a -
w
"O C co N N
> 0 0
Cm
C L ' L> Co
m
3 vi
V D O N E Q c-
wm
N E m o
w
U)
V
P
,J
c 3
.Q 3
D 0 0 >~c0ON
-
0 m Q= E
=
~ cu
E
M
a)
m
N
.
I
N 0 0 o=z 0
Q
d
-
ma
)
O U U O C 0
V
U N O
N
N N c)o c)N- mm N m
.
S; a)
c
°
N N
dr 0 0 QC C
0
'N
w
N
=W W
3:
w
N
O N C N
Y o m =
C .
O
a m
N 6 -O Qcm L > N U O N
.
O _
m E a)
=
°
°c a ° =
mt
o~
E
E
0 U
c
of
naEvm
~Tmo
a
N 0 0 0 m -0 D U N E
EU
wwwzm
u7 0
C O- (n 4 p
.D C
C
m m C m c E O
O w
0
Co m c p O C U
p
L^
m O m
O 0)'0
o
;z
0 C._ c c co
c; Q y y
O
O
c
-
.
O
_
U a a o N L o O o m
.
-
:
0 Q
m
0
a)
0-t
- m m
N
0 m N m m" m 0 0 0
M
m
m
0-
ja N
m m m C 0 0
L
° L
`
O
> m C
C
0
cL
°
O) N o E
o c m m o
a)
w, E
m
U
Q
- O
L
O
.
L a
O Q N .
) o O m
=0
O a) m
Nil
N -c
N° c
v
m
a
O
N
'c O O
N
N
H Q Q C Q Q N
U)
t
0
m 0 Z Q N m Q Q m
0
w
H
0
v
a
b
ro
rn
q
H
H
0
L
.H
°
O
H
b
b
m
q
ro
ti
a
H
H
v
v
C~
b
ro
v
v
N
O
a
•
T
a_a
N
C C
Y
CL o
C E
(a a
0 a)
E
a' 0
y a7
V a3
`moan)
aao
ao
m 0)41
E
'C c
m .
0
`
O
u
.
. y
E
E
y c d
E
E 0
`
m
P: E
L
CO
O L o; o c o 6 o c v N co
'
v m
a) "
O C O C N Y
m
c
3
ca
C c
N
o c
o n o
N
a) Ca a) E o
C
J
N
V U C L~ U N f6 .C~ V U
E C C
0
U
C
- y O o`
'O J a)
0' a) c a) C 0.0
N
m x -
`
J
O
O
m t cU
s n a) J J~ J O- mN -
3
N
~
.
N
O
co
0
~
O)
a N a)
6 c c y N m
c
CU C C
m -
0a
N
O
u
c a)
c a) C
N
-
m
C
c O O o N W O O N N Co.- m J
m
E
N
L d y U Y O) J .2-0.2 C Co
E
N
7
a)
c
m
L m m
'O --OL nC d._ nv
m
w
J c m o- n
m N U N
U
w
c
NE
F
-
3
O
d
C
C a) U m.M y m:..
N MD N m._..,
fa
c
N U N .J. C U a) n c-
E mmm>°i
$ ~m
EmE~-
m
o.c
O
ow
°
c C n T C a) E U U C a) a) m 'N Z
U. T
m 0 0 = m C a) m o m r N J
U
co
a- a) C 'O a) Z m> m M
W > a)
O
a) v a t
'm ~v aE m ca~ Q
U m 0
°
m U O. my m m„ N c E m c E .0
.N
a)
ma m ° ? n
Tm m
g
,E
Q
.2
.
5
(D E
Qmnnaaxi~oE mv~
m°
O_
~~~a)
> E
a0
L L c
F3m-O3°
E U J
cu .0
to
3
'
CV
F
_
CL
O
y
d
- a) N° L... = N N
O 0
yJ
m (D
(a a) a) m U C m N
.
m
°
J U
T
C
~
N m J
U
U C w
. C a)
M
Y ,
O_ -O
C
m
ooCO>y E~UO~CE:-OOOCWod=° me
co
M
D
a
r
y
N
c T°
.
C) Ur
= o C U V o- ' "O m
n a) a) O tJi~ O
~ Co
N
y
m m is
0 m 0 y y .3 -a) N N N O C N fa m N N 0 c a) m
~
>
U
U N
.
m
d d m N.T. a O U C C U
U 'o ° V C°
0
N- U
°
)
N
N N
>
O.
E
.
N
Q) O U J Q) U ~a c O N co N o n N N `
N N w c o m
-
n
a)
C
n 0 Q O
m m L a) ° C O'
a) v y C a) U a) d
a) Y
U Q N O
E
`
L
°
(n
N C
-
w
o
nm ° QNYF Q) Na- o ° v 0.0 c m
mL a) cL
2 m
c
v
3 L m M 00 M U N N 'O 'C a m C O O N .
F- -m
m d a) C>
c
N
N C C
O O
0
C D O n m J a) N N U L m'
o U m
N 0 c
o
a
`
(A
E J
3°
°
F
N a c
m 3 o d o
o
a) 7 n
n c°._aYOm-JO'='= m`J
a
=
m o
"
rn°
ca)
C a) rn j
°
m `
>
d
X
0
od
'C
O
) r-
N N
a
> co
U
>
0 U U
O N ° o - X
O
n a C
n
L
C t`7 Cl CL n 0 m a) 0 m.
w w C 'O 3 m 0
Z)
L
O
U) 0 n m
_
.
0
^
m
ro
o,
a
a
0
H
•
E
a 6.
) co
v
C C
O'0
C
w m
0.
a)
O
QE
_
C
O
U Co
m ro
ao
m
E S c
m p
0
LL
y
_
a) C d
m
E0~
o
H
rn
c
O
o
c`o
3
'O
m Q)
C U c
- a) O
0 O a
C (
O
0)
C
n O
T« p
T
N
U °c) N L n
` N CL C d
U
a
0
U (D W N
C L - -
w a) C
a1
_O
0 N co .O
CU O C
J a m
U
O a) U
m m
3 co
O
a1
C C C
C
U
U C
C
> .O U O~
N
O C C
L O CL
E
T T
"O _ a) ca
d)
Y O- N O
0
U)
oc
o ) ` ) O EO
3 0
E U C ° 'O a)
c E y
m o o
N
a)
N
Ca) E G -0 0~ U
`
=p w j 0O O
rn m - C
v. , a y c
m o v m 3
o
c 3°
d m` c a) j °
(D
` o a
E c o .o
a.5 m v) w E a)
L
0 U a) 0 o
`
E
C m O c m
n
Cl
Y L L
a) a) E E
H.2,6 , E o-W 3 o E
nca~ c
v5)
N a)
oOa)E~.~Ea)
~;~m (D
N N
O 0 0
O U E C N a1 'O Y
J
O
O
a) E 9 U E Mn
o
U U
L
L -
cn w U L
) 'o mm
O.
)
0
~ o d
a
O
p U C >
• • •
• • • • •
O
p
W n T 0.0
a1
N
N c
N a S p
a O C U a)
'O c
"0 0 a) 41 ?
O A T a) y 0 y r? O
O T
> m
N O N
a)
C C
O 0 0 _ a) = 0 N
N= X S 3>
N m= T U m N O Z E
m
/i C U 3 U) U- Co
E c= W C
'O
N m
Cp
U C a)
0> -O r N «
p
0 1
w .0. L a) d -p 0 0- m L
`
_
(D
M
"
CO
a) a)
Sa a)
0 c 0
a)tc Co
--j
m 5m ToN 0_ 3
-
O
.ccu0 U°a)
v
-o x -a
~pyc~
,
(2 = o a a w aa"
Ey'~US
a
o
-O °Q c ° a)0-0 c cL
~~'c00W='O=>°~
m E o-° o_vi c`o
,0a)
A
°
and°m
y
.
°a)ma)--O~ca
y n
cQa)'ycQOd'opao
,
rn
rnTp~-aac
`
E
o n c d
T
O -co - a c c o
C m E N E y c m N w
N° d
o o n)
cc c~
i C
O
N C N Y
0
O 0
y°"
O O N N
N
E
N N
a)
C C U a1
'
L
)
T O O O N U° a) ~a
O
)
y c m ..N--. N O U d a)
)
O
a)
E...
a1 a> a)
m-
c
>
O
M
N
V a) Co w
O N
U co c E j N C Q O
C
O
Q
w
V)
a) O
y m O r 0
N
3
p
C . .
a) o
(
N
y
w 75 :5 3:
L
6
U
U
a) C O L m
co `m 0 C 00 O
Fu 0
0 a) a1 U U
a) Y
O C
N° a) E
3 iR n U J
0 3 L a) a7 0 U N E
>
O O
~ L.. .C 4: a1 -0 3 w 0 O 2
O d' co -0 N U
0
a
bl
a7
.H
N
0
W
a:
L
LO
C
~
m
d
c c
m m
OS
mz
G~
O
.
O a) a) O a) S m
r a) E r
r
c
'
O
c
d
O
- m s m m m
d W 0 d W 0
N
C
Q
r
E .E c
O
LL
" y
d C N
Lli
E 0
m
O
c
C V
(a
Z6
J O
m C O N
-
X O
7
0
N U U
C
N O
C
co
0
a o E E
N
N
N O C V
`
~
N N O m C
y
d
N ` n co
Ta
m
d
m
a 0 m
Y
n V C m
o
yU Eai
`
m
o
N d
V C
d
E c o 2 m
;O
N N m N
O
t!
>
Q
0 a) aim
E m
'
m
O
N N N T N
N
m
Co o C m
~a
V O. N
=I O O N L
U
Y
D F
U
R
m
cl
E
0) O
O
~
3mCD
O U m
O C N m
V
'
-
E
N ~
E
N
V
Co
V
0
w0,(D Nm
N
m
O'
w
]
N- m m
C U U)
E
C
cy,
C
w m w C
0
W
c m
a N
a)
0
a
v
w ° 0
CU
N
O
L
-O
N
w
C
N
W N U
m
N co
N
v
N
F A.E v
•
ro
w
m
a
b
ti
0
v
a
b
ro
ro
a
H
Ul
C
v
Mro
W
N
h
0
a
I or,
Memorandum
To: Planning Commission
From: Matt Everling, City Planner *cC.
Date: September 25, 2008
Subject: General Plan Public Safety Element Peer Review
The purpose of this memo is to inform the Commission that in conjunction with pending
litigation, staff has received peer review comments of the proposed Public Safety Element
and associated Appendix A authored by Mr. Ken Wilson of Wilson Geosciences, Inc. The
comments are attached for your reference.
The peer review was conducted by Tania Gonzalez of Earth Consultants International, and
it primarily contains several minor editing changes. Staff has referred the changes to Mr.
Wilson for review. In addition, the peer review recommends that the City create a Disaster
Mitigation Plan and conduct a HazUS-based loss estimation analysis that would analyze
potential losses in the event of a natural disaster. Staff recommends that these two items
become future goals as part of the General Plan implementation.
In the event that staff is advised of any material changes that may affect the Draft
Environmental Impact Report analysis prior to the September 29, 2008, meeting, staff will
advise the Commission at the time of the hearing.
8838 East Valley Boulevard Phone: 626-569-2400 Fax: 626-307-9218
Web: a .cityofrosemead.org
P U B L I C S A F E T Y
r5
P UBLIC SAFETY
ROSEMEAD GENERAL PLAN
i do.Y4Y~+ ca L"J
The Public Safety Element addresses v 'natural and
human-caused hazards that may influence the
development, redevelopment, and utilization of
properties in Rosemead. Foremost, thi Element identifies the
s. ways to reduce4r s1c~l~roperty damage, injuries,
or loss of life in the event of a natural or human-caused disaster.
According to the Governor's Office of Planning and Research, the
Safety Element works to "reduce the potential risk of death,
injuries, property damage, and economic and social dislocation
resulting from fires, floods, earthquakes, landslides, and other
hazards." This Public Safety Element sets forth policies designed
to minimize threats from natural and human-caused hazards. By
implementing the directives of the Public Safety Elem nt, the City
intends to use available planning methods in order to 4 inimize risk
exposure, te2'6vide timely emergency service d livery to all
residents and businesses when the need arises, and maintain an
optimal environment for personal security. While population
growth and changing needs within the community will continue to
place demand on resources, Rosemead is committed to enhancing -V"
neighborhoods, business districts, and public places"ea4+y.
The Public Safety Element is one of the required General Plan
elements. The City emphasizes a proactive approach to planning,
P A G E S- I
DRAFT JUNE 2008
P U B L I C S A F E T Y
which involves identifying and avoiding or mitigating hazards
present in the environment that may adversely affect property and
threaten lives. Government Code Sections 65302(8) and 65302(f)
identify several issues to consider in such planning efforts, as does
California Health and Safety Code Section 56050.1. In Rosemead,
E
safety issues of concern include: (riot,-scta.+~~~s *9
M Z O-f-As d i n cL4~s~ i-Jr ~Co r
• Geologic r Wil
, o
~rt}etner3~ e~ g°{zznsie~,~- yvJ
ovatcr~
■ Seismic (earthquake) hazards, including surface fault
rupture, ground shaking, seis~~e liquefaction,
crr~G
F -L. -^-t yt ■ Flooding (inundation) from seismically induced dam
OO u t failureX-
L~ L~ L~+ ALti ~ri
Q Urban fires; and
■ Presence of hazardous materials.
Geologic, Seismic, and
F'loo 't*-'onditions
Introduction and General Setting
The information on the geologic, seismic, and flooding conditions
within and around the City are summarized briefly in this section.
Information is derived from readily available technical documents
that can be referred to for more details as necessary to evaluate and
analyze individual projects; additional technical background
information is presented in Appendix XA. -Issues due to hazards
arising from the geologic, seismic, and flood'ctnditions in the City
are discussed in a following section.
SKyYiJl.~r~i dw Cl
w, Xt;Lr .
OxIA e-",Ak•-trJw-&c1 %L f--
A,, J j
This summary level information describes the technical issues that ham -rko-
wii4 potential) aTfect tie persons and property in the City in the
event of a geologic, seismic, or floodin & t that may impact a
0.S 4 K i
ortion of the City, for exampleAmmajor loc earthquake. ese
issues are the basis for establishing the goals and policies to protect
lives and property. Discussion is also provided regarding the
buildings and infrastructure most important to the citizens and
City personnel in the event earthquake effects are particularly
severe in the City.
P A G E 5- 2
too
mAur,A
DRAFT JUNE 2008
P U B L I C S A F E T Y
The technical issues --•-RtioN ^-'a summarized in Appendix A
must be taken into account as the City of Rosemead expands, fills
in, and re-develops. Existing building codes and land use planning
requirements can address most of the hazards inherent in the
geologic setting of the City. As newer, more accurate geology`soils,
and seismic information has been develo,peed s rrr 2e the last General S+ ~y
Plan update, it is~ 'possible to identify}- th }areas and +e
account for \t~MM yi,n.,, future development. Sources for this
information range rt oYh generalized regional reports and maps
(including the previous General Plan Seismic Element) to project-
specific geotechnical and engineering geology reports.
Geology and Soils a A nv_4~r -r► - u ~.a , {AJ"f cn Q °scw.. uc~
j ° 9 Gity are presented by Yerkes and
Geologic units 1'
Campbell (2005; Figure 5-1). The sQuthemm st ~ortio aoftthe
City abuts the Montebello Hills
(firibol Ti Ififfd4eI+_-' s:46~a 2nd 'Q The
Us,
remainder of the CityI to-t4e nort~,is underlain by older (Qof, Qof1,
and Qoa) and younger alluvial fan deposits (Qyf) shed from
-the. surrounding hills, various young stream wash deposits (Qw, Qyw),
landslide deposits associated with the Fernando Formation, and
artificial fill (Qaf) along the freeways-tas d in at least one large tract
development. These {AS$LLdL= gave physical characteristics that
can produce hazards such as landslides, mudslides, collapsible or
AV ns~W+ I%LGI rAS f
-k1nL -porn a...d o ~O ~^^a~~O'"
expansive soils, subsidence, or shallow groundwater. Appendix VA PbJiAx}
Ores more detailed descriptions of the geologic units (Table 5-1) and
-ef the hazards associated with the a*t characteristics-VA ++W-se 081'OL° _61;_
Seismicity/Earthquake Groundrhaking, and Faults
Figure 5-2 (Shaw et al. 2002; California Geological Survey [CGS,
formerly the California Division of Mines and Geology-CDMG],
2005) shows the regional faults that would impact th City should,a
moderate to large. earthquake be generated on anyA~thin aoust`'21 ~
mile;S earthquakes
ien a be expected on the Whittier (magnitude [M]
6.8), Puente Hills (M 7.) Upper Elysian Park (M 6.4), Raymond
(M 6.5) Sierra MadrItCity 7.2), Verdugo (M 6.9), San Jose (M 6.4),
Hollywood (M~6.4~, if aTlshell-Sawpit (M 6.5) faults. The only -is.~o,..rr~
faulttwrt in (Figure 5-3; CDMG, 1991) is the
Alhambra Wash (also known as the East Montebello and zoned as
an Al ist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone [APEFZ]). f~ere are
100= unnamed fault segments r sus te E'lis of -ThI_
unknown age of last movementA i ure 5-4; Treiman,
Potential seismic/earthquake hazards include surface fault rupture, .c.o d a~`tA'~-
ground shaking, earthquake-induced liquefaction an an s r esd,,~
(shown on Figure 5-5; CDMG, latefel-spread , -t., _ s n
PAGES-3
DRAFT JUNE 2008
P U B L I C SA F E T Y
P A G E 5- 4
0
This page intentionally left blank.
•
DRAFT JUNE 2008
0 0
4
nr..ir.~.rw/0
QY(
General Plan
1
clef
C
'M
=
1 ~
~
h
e
<
t,av r A
.
e
>
<
I
tY •
\
`
Qof
Yall•
y elv
1
Str•N St
- - -
-
l
>
m
Gt1• St
z
<I
E
e Ralph 31 \
\
Marshall St
'
I M
-
m
no
_
L
Unfon
P•eMfCReflrl~.
- -
IRV
awo
:
1 a
Dorathy t l m
= Qo/
lti
'•'3
\
z
o
E
11 t•: ~
p
W
I
a
Qy( C
C
I
GEM Av
Qaf
_
A
&Yf
`EI Avc
• ,
u
3
2
_
Fe
< <
Hl heliff St
Gr Y Tfl
I
-
Uf-
TFL;i
Jzr~
:
•
TTu '•:Qywa~:
f0 -ti
^
yJ •
-
q'{Qaf t
Qe
Tluc
_
Qofl
Q..
t • _
. •
•
09
'f
Q
Po
mona F
y
R
QY( ♦
♦
.
1
QI
_
` ~~N
lo Blvd • .
QI
QI, ,
Tfuc
1
Tfu
_ y Lake QYf
Tfu
L
y
y%
Tfuc
For more information of the Geologic Units within the City refer to Table 6-1.
®
Qaf
Qof
Qyf
0 Qyws
® Reservoir
QI
Qof1
Qyfg
Tfl
Rosemead City Boundary
Qls
Qof2
Q Qyw
Q Tfu
......I Sphere of Influence Boundary
Qls;
Qw
Q Qywa
Tfuc
Major Roads
Q
Qoa
Qwa
Q Qy`^'9
0 Tfuf
i F+T+~ Railroad
Source:
. (.LO-,k. a r+a) C A f 64AA,
12
ure 5-1
Fi
zoos.
g
?
Feet
4
2
,
boo
4
800
PreliminaryGeologic Map
,
00
o ,,Zoo
,
,
City of RnrPmend
June 2008
General Plan Update
P U B L I C S A F E T Y
P A G E 5- 6
•
This page intentionally left blank.
•
DRAFT JUNE 2008
0 0
June 2008
twee 101310 a-~! ~ots+~fibl 'to J.., y.,.r ,.rr...,...,._._,
C,*-"~
C*-"~ indicate the depth contours (e.g., conc#d (Bryant, 2005)
yt,alati-N t~u~~~ 5 km = 5 kilometers deep) on the a
fault surface (Shaw el al, 002).
Sources: Shaw of al. 002, and Bryant, 2005. Figure 5-2
F---7 -i Feet
0 19,000 38,000 57,000 76,000 Earthquake Faults
P U B L I C S A F E T Y
P A G E 5- 8
•
This page intentionally left blank.
i
DRAFT JUNE 2008
7 T1
f =--t - _ ~1~~-~ \ 09%eneral Plan
IF' -
I P
w --J
~LLI -I 1
Ellv L~ L 1
irk • ~ ~~2 _ ^ _ a-St.el. st /
S. st
Its\L L1~ rw.n.l se a - -
f
L I
/ I ~ \'\I. _ -san B.ma~dlna ~ ~ \ J A. ~UrJen AadllclPaNrwd ~ -
-I 11T-t
V~hkmww St
L AV
IF
F+m Av ~ j I I
~Ga~I.RV i_{~j LLf I 15 ~ : .;_~I 1 ■ ~ i ~ ~ -i - I F
Ii ,--Lgnooest j - j ~ .--~"f-rl ~ ~ li
• ~I' , l~`. j` ~I IGimt' I .j 51
fn SL~
'
~ - ,-ate •r.~}
1 r 6P ~ / ~ej~ . I. j- PvmanrFY~ I - -
Pamano TL
~C a .6N B . 1 • ,.i••. I `lc
gg --z Lake
i
- - • Rosemead City Boundary Active Faults = Alquist-Priolo
Sphere of Influence Boundary 'wrr w"A Locrw Earthquake Fault Zone
Major Roads Approximot en Loc&-"
Railroad Inferred Location 0 Turning Point
- - River/Wash Query indicates acloonal uncertainty.
Sources: California Division of Mines 3
Geology (CDMG), November 1, 1991. Figure 5-3
1-4 F-1 F°°'
0 1,200 2,400 3,600 4,800 Local Faults/Alquist-Priolo -4av,."
City of Rosemead June 2008
General Plan Update
P U B L I C S A F E T Y
P A G E S- 1 0
•
This page intentionally left blank.
•
DRAFT JUNE 2008
•
•
General Plan
t-i..... > ~ ~ 1yy ~ a~ ~_~I ~`y~rpiu~a '""•4` aro' F _ r+
.~7
_~i2i I ..a
1 .0
i -1~-^ I p c
V.11. 13,i~v
-7 st"Iest
- - - ~J, T 1.•.p ` -R'- of Gwae31
avl
_j L
-I Y I s ill '\~~•6 -Sr-~r--E~--_ p, Ralph St~:`a(
_j r
~ III •~~I I. rll^I r ! I ~J`Glendon. I I ~ FI -~i,--I 1 ''r
• '~--I-I /I h : ' I _ • I_ ~1 L I I Unkn dfie Rallmad'
I [ \ ~ [ j San ea ~no Fvy- ~ \ ,
Do St IN
i r ~ ' ~ I a i S_ eJ 11'f i 2: I /~,y~. .t~,' ,-,',-T•I
~Em onBlSj_~_._t71 :u l• ~j ml_ _ t~~°--';I I• j~~ \`•••_1,
i
I a.ry~ll_.. - L_ C!nyAv - ! i -
r. .9
`c _ f f~,aa-Ar j . 11 I j
jregneoiist
i I ~ < 'w i t I~ f
AA-L ` ; -I ,j nfirrn1310. $h~~ I : -I--
hst-
[ N.
/p fq
LL,
~ j id►~~ I 'V1R,~r"~•~I Gabya~ '1. j j
.l, oil. ~ i ; ~ . a`~. 7 • r-~~ , ~
%
99
Pomona Fwy :r••°'a~ ` • _ /
rds
MO bN t . ~
Fault Hazard Management ® ® ® Approximate location of escarpment Photolineaments P'i't x"
euv".) C j4 -trc. rorTk-= of Bullard and Lettis (1~~ Possible ef-Rra~lable fault
Q Alqulisst Priokrart hquave 0 Q O Inferred faults from California well-defined
Fault Zone Department of Water Resources less well-defined
2oru,~ (1966)
indicate downside of scarp
~ ~ w r fq 1a~ -t h;~~ ye.o,.A.t r,k•Q Figure 5-4
6 _ R ryV46.
Sources: C MG, Y991,TraAan, FER-222. Fault Hazard
Feet
0 1,200 2,400 3,600 4,804 Management Zones (FHMZ'
City of Rosemead June 2008
General Plan Update
P U B L I C S A F E T Y
P A G E 5- 1 2
0
This page intentionally left blank.
0
DRAFT JUNE 2008
• •
General Plan
100 _ _ I s wm aaa
%
Jp I y... -
17
461a t a,!`'-°•---' M` Wes.
valley Blvd
1 r j - . - - sta■N st--
I I ,y ~Sa-• I .RI - - v~ Gwaa St
at JE
- ,-'L-•AO it I _YI I -i -1 =I --I ul 3 .I i• ,
Nanshad st J I _7
,\GMndan My _ I I 1 J.'! ':1 -(rl-\: - 1 -San ear,>•l i wy- \ I t I Union P■dllo Raprosd 1 I
n f3
TI IF""
~A
N Do at
Itmareat_
L -.1 I ~ _0 8t t e Pad 3 I %r ' i. .
I Ga Av
00,
a.
i
J~ I I f0
%
lei
y~,: ice., l I ! F I_
Source: - _ / f 6\~ f Pa~riaa.' " _ _ ';/1`~
CDMG, 1996, Saiamic Ho tad Evaluation of Iha
El Mont■ 7.5-minuto quadrangle, tos Angeles L• Maya / 1
County, California: California Division of Minas
and Geology, Open-File Report 98-15, / / _ - "1~,`----'• ' Legg l~ lsbl /
hnpJ/pmv+.mnarv.m.por/ahmp/dovmload/ ~ ~ 1
y
evolrpl/alma avvl.pdf. ! ~ ~I /
s ` i x t jj~.,
CDMG, 1999, Seismic Hazard Zones Map of the ballo Blvd
El Morita 7.5-minute Owdrangla, Los Angela. County, ~y f pj o - .ti.
/J
California, March 25, 1999, ' ( : + f Lapp Lak■
http://gm .consrv.co.gov/shmWdw lood/ • j ? `
pdf/om oIma.pdf, GIS data 1 'v' l'
ftltp://www.wnsarvafion.m.pov/Ws/sfzp/ • ; 1~~, 1
Pagea/Index.asptL ( -
- . • Rosemead City Boundary a Liquefaction Zones -Tk4.e 44-.V"U W c-f p"'A-J
sphere of Influence Boundary Landslide Zones 1 Zones of Required Investigation _W ba
c+Y-44 s 1 a. _ s.+►ai
~C
Major Roads -30- Historically Highest Groundwater Contours (Depth in Feet)
tI F+i I+ Railroad }ycb v:. CD ^^ti
River/Wash r.,A.L:.4o"
Figure 5-5
1--l P_~ I Fast Earthquake-Induced
0 1,200 2,400 9,600 4,800 Liquefaction & Landslides
City of Rosemead June 2008
General Plan Update
P U B L I C S A F E T Y
P A C E 5- 1 4
•
This page intentionally left blank.
•
DRAFT JUNE 2008
P U B L I C
fsilre, These hazards and local earthquake faults (Table 5-2) are
discussed further in Appendix ¢(A.
Flooding Dam Failure Inundation
Several dams, which continually or sometimes impound water, have
the potential to fail during a large earthquake and flood portions of
the City. These are the Whittier Narrows Dam, Santa Fe
Dam/Reservoir, and Garvey Dam/Reservoir. Failure of e`rr;~bf these
dams during a time when significant water is impounded could
cause inundation of residences, businesses, and infrastructure.
Figure 5-6 (California Office of Emergency Services, 2007; USGS,
2007) shows the potential flood areas associated with this potential
hazard, which is discussed further in Appendix/A.
Hazards Due to Human
Activities
Businesses and residents in Rosemead are subject to potential
hazards associated with earthquakes, hazardous materials incidents,
fires, and other conditions that may impact infrastructure and
impede emergency response. Each type of disaster requires focused
planning to minimize the risks to life and property when a disaster
occurs. The period following a disaster is often very difficult for
communities and can be, at times, as devastating as the disaster
itself. Cities that prepare ahead of time can reduce the fear,
confusion, and loss resulting from catastrophic incidents. Pla ng
effor4 nee % ccess to critics A acilities such as utiWes,
freeks, ro ays, sXls, and emergeWy care facilities.
Rosemead participates in the Standardized Emergency
Management System (SEMS) that provides a statewide framework
for coordinating multi-agency responses to emergencies and
disasters. The City's SEMS incorporates mutual aid agreements
with other jurisdictions, establishes lines of communication during
emergencies, and st ndardizes incident command structures. The
City
r'also complies with the Federal Emergency Management
AgeriFX's FE. A requirements to prepare a disaster mitigation
11 plan watt the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000. The plan
represents Rosemead's commitment to reducing the risk from
natural hazards and serves as a guide for the use of available City
resources. This plan also helps the State provide technical
assistance and prioritize project funding.
S A F E T Y
~S G
k ~r`'1 P needs +v 6- -rTiJ' a~ rd
P A G E S- 1 5
DRAFT JUNE 2008
P U B L I C S A F E T Y
P A G E 5- 1 6
0
This page intentionally left blank.
0
DRAFT JUNE 2008
• Rosemead City Boundary
Sphere of Influence Boundary
Maior Roads
Railroad
- • River/Wash
Flood Inundation Areas Aunt +0 C-t7A-*wr4--- ~-0"~*t- ~ 'L`~^^
Whittier Narrows AAxv-%
Garvey Reservoir
0 Santa Fe Dam
Figure 5-6
0 1,200 2,400 3,600 4,800 Dam Failure Inundation Areas
City of Rosemead June 2008
General Plan Update
P U B L I C S A F E T Y
P A G E 5- 1 8
•
This page intentionally left blank.
DRAFT JUNE 2008
•
•
P U B L I C S A F E T Y
Rosemead contracts with the Los Angeles County Sheriff and the
Los Angeles County Fire Department for provision of emergency
response and law enforcement services. This arrangement allows
the City to more readily adjust staffing to meet7i'allnging needs of
businesses and residents. Also, County agencies can easily provide
supplemental responses from any other Sheriff or Fire Department
stations.
Fire Hazards
Structural fires represent the primary fire hazard in Rosemead.
Structural fires are generally caused by faulty equipment or lack of
knowledge of fire prevention precautions. The potential for fire
hazards increases when flammable and explosive materials are
improperly stored, handled, or used. Planning for adequate fire
protection and suppression in a densely built community like
Rosemead becomes increasingly important due to aging buildings,
and proximity of residences to commercial and industrial uses.
O
s k* -6e .4:s
S
The County of Los Angeles Fire Department has two fire stations a i
in Rosemead: AZ- 0L,,~
wwLcr - 50
• Station 4, located at 2644 N. San Gabriel Boulevard ~,C p~ou
C-1
■ Station 42, located at 9319 E. Valley Boulevard b'
,.5rr~~ (n0..r( min ~ da.y
As noted above, any County fire unit may respond to incidents in ? 0U
Rosemead, depending on need and availability, articular
special hazardous materials response units from the station are •
available. The City will coordinate with the County Fire
Department to implement fire hazard education and fire protection an ~L p~;~ ~,e„~ ?
programs. In addition, the City will coordinate with local water Q
districts to ensure water pressure is adequate for fire fighting
purposes.
Hazardous Materials
Commercial and industrial businesses in Rosemead and adjacent
communities use hazardous materials incitiding usinesses."
dry cleaners, film processors, auto service providers, landscape
contractors, and paint shops. Larger businesses can generate, use,
and/or store large quantities of hazardous products. The current
regulatory environment provides a high level of protection from the
hazardous materials manufactured, transported to businesses, and
stored within Rosemead. Federal, State, and County agencies
P A G E 5- 1 9
DRAFT JUNE 2008
0 0
P U B L I C S A F E T Y
enforce regulations for hazardous waste generators and users.
According to the California Environmental Protection Agency, Q-, °i ~,°Oro"
approximately 49 hazardous waste generators &*ist within the City
of Rosemead `.,Cpc_O
Rosemead's land use pattern generally separates industry from
residential uses. However, commercial freight carriers transporting
hazardous substances along the I-10 and SR-60 freeways, along
major truck routes such as Rosemead Boulevard, or along railways
present potential hazards. All motor carriers and drivers involved in
the transportation of hazardous materials must comply with the
requirements of federal and State regulations, and must apply for
and obtain a hazardous materials transportation license from the
California Highway Patrol. When transporting explosives,
inhalation hazards, and highway route-controlled quantities of
radioactive materials, safe routing, and safe stopping plac are ?
required. The City has established truck routes (see Figur 5-4 tom) °
roadways that must be used by larger trucksA and ~16J
speGi isal}y any vehicleXprrying hazardous wastes and materials.
The Los Angeles County Fire Department, Health Hazardous
Materials Division tracks hazardous materials handlers to ensure
appropriate reporting and compliance. The Division inspects
businesses that generate hazardous waste, conducts criminal
investigations, provides site mitigation oversight, and undertakes
emergency response operations. Such inspections reduce risks
associated wit _ exposure to hazardous materials and adverse
environment,{Z kcts. The County Fire Department's Emergency
Operations Section provides 24-hour emergency response services
to hazardous materials incidents. Emergency responders identify
unknown substances, monitor spills and releases for safe and
immediate mitigation, and identify responsible parties for payment
of cleanup costs. Thspection Division of the Fire Department's
Emergency Operati ^s ction inspects hazardous material handling
and hazardous waste-generating businesses to assure compliance
with applicable laws. Additionally, Inspection Division staff
responds to medical waste emergencies, assists law enforcement
agencies with response to illegal drug labs, and investigates resident
and business complaints.
The City hosts "Household Hazardous Waste Roundup" events
sponsored by the Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County and
the Los Angeles County of Public Works. The County's
Household Hazardous Waste Collection Program collection events
allow residents to dispose of hazardous materials safely and at no
costs +t.~ .
P A G E 5- 2 0
we...4 are +~-.~a rt+.~.~
DRAFT JUNE 2008
0 0
P U B L I C S A F E T Y
Statutes and Plans of Other
Agencies
The federal and State governments - in recognition of safety issues
affecting broad geographic areas - have adopted programs with
their public safety planning efforts.
California Building Code
Begin ' in 2007, rather than using the Uniform Building Code,
Calif is instead adopted the 20016 International Building Code
(IBC). The IBC is developed and published by the International
Code Council (ICC), which was formed in 1994 by a merger of the
three national building code publishers. During January and
February 2007, the California Building Standards Commission
(http-//www.bsc.ca.gov) adopted, in sections, the 2001E<iIntemational
Building Code (IBC). The new California Building Code (CBC)
became effective July 1, 2007, and local codes were adopted 180
dayslater. ~x .l. 100%, 0-U real cw.at~r.~~+'s•~ -
4rA #.o ALA AGCIr~1n.~fi *6'-C ao0-+ Gar- .
The 2007 California Building Code (CBC) is a fully integrated code
based on the 2006 International Building Code. Part 2 now also
includes Title 24, Part 8 (California Historical Building Code) and
Title 24, Part 10 (California Existing Building Code). The
California Building Standards Code is comprised of twelve parts
that incorporate public health and safety standards used in the
design and construction of buildings in California. The codes also
include standards for energy efficiency and access compliance for
persons with disabilities. Structures such as dams and freeways fall
under criteria developed by various State and Federal agencies.
Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act
The 1972 Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act 1(thc-A-e
seeks to mitigate the hazard of fault rupture by prohibiting the
f.tace..~t tueen ie of structures for human occupancy across the trace of an
active fault. The State Geologist is required to compile.maps that
delineate earthquake fault zones (AP zones) along faults that are
"sufficiently active" and "well defined." Cities and counties are
responsible before issuing building permits for a Project to assure
that a geologic investigation is performed to demonstrate that
proposed buildings will not be constructed across active faults. The
P A G E S- 2 1
DRAFT JUNE 2008
• •
P U B L I C S A F E T Y
fault evaluation and written report for the specific site must be
prepared by a geologist registered in the State of California. If an
active fault is found, a structure for human occupancy cannot be
placed over the trace of the fault and must be set back from the
fault ){Bj• A Project is carefully defined, but
generally includes all land divisions and most structures for human
occupancy, although some exceptions are allowed and local
agencies can be more restrictive than state law requires. An AP
zone map has been compiled by the State Geologist for the City of
Rosemead area (CDMG, El Monte Quadrangle, 1991; Figure 5-3)
and defines an AP zone for the Alhambra Wash fault within the
City.
Seismic Hazards Mapping Act
California's 1990 Seismic Haz wd's Mapping Act
(http://www.consrv.ca.gov/cgs/shzp) r uires the State Geologist
(CGS) to cpmpile maps identify and describing seismic hazard
zones Californian Guidelines prepared by the State
Mining and Geology Board identify the responsibilities of State and
local agencies in the review of development within seismic hazard
zones. Development on a site that has been designated as a seismic
hazard zone requires a geotechnical report and local agency
consideration of the policies and criteria established by the Mining
and Geology Board. ,
i -
se y' 1 a• .a•crnccP i , d„1r1ti1
' with
a I, a is t•c a
~L - n-1-j
maps. A seismic hazard zones maplh. s ~P-- rn 'l a r- ,
r r /TT__r_R_T
04 Rusell-l'a-A
Tlit. 1C11~1~,1.1~J V~ ,y ~ . . ~.Q L.f. /tnbr`r~
- -IY~ti~ ~•~il~ ~ Qre'iA/~ {rrrl 'Tr.~/~ pr N~'~
V 1 il.s~a .v+
'`~'`'9s~'
Unreinforced Masonry Building Law
In 1986, California enacted a law that required local governments
in Seismic Zone 4 to inventory unreinforced masonry (URM)
buildings, to establish a URM loss reduction program and report
progress to the state by 1990. Each local government can tailor its
program to its own specifications to allow for each jurisdiction to
take political, economic, and social priorities into account. This
law requires 366 local governments in the highest Seismic Zone 4
to:
P A G E 5- 2 2
4o
U+rc4WYt
Sn..r, m.~2a.o a...d Sa..Sa Glr+.reL
,~i r.ck...%~•t
DRAFT JUNE 2008
•
•
P U B L I C S A F E T Y
Inventory URM buildings within each jurisdiction.
Establish loss reduction programs for URM buildings by
1990.
Report progress to the California Seismic Safety
Commission.
In addition, the law recommends that local governments:
Adopt mandatory strengthening programs by ordinance.
Establish seismic retrofit standards.
Enact measures to reduce the number of occupants in
URM buildings.
California's Seismic Safety Commission (2006) monitors local
government efforts to comply with this law and reports to the
state's Legislature. The City of Rosemead had seven URMxs, -of-
wt five have been strengthened and two were demo] ished?he
City is in compliance with mitigation requirements.
National Flood Insurance Program
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) administers
the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). Participating
jurisdictions must exercise land use controls and purchase flood
insurance as a prerequisite for receiving funds to purchase or build
a structure in a flood hazard area. Rosemead has participated in
the prograrri since 1979 and as of 2007, no special flood hazard
areas i en ►fied in the City. The NFIP provides federal flood
insurance subsidies and federally financed loans for eligible
property owners in flood-prone areas. Rosemead is identified on
the National Flood Insurance Program's Flood Insurance Rate
Maps as being within Zone X, an area outside the 100- and 500-
year flood zones, and thus subject to minimal flooding.
tGosd O .nsuwut~ - iMlk a.. o.,., a..e~u~ •.+7 ~eeru.n+•d
016° -rte
-010 00 - 4,J EDO - d • ~,3~ ua.,~ ~ ~cn4tis ? $1..o eQ wt th.~
Standardized Emergency anagement System
(SEMS)
All cities in California are required to adopt a SEMS plan to
establish procedures and responsibilities of various City staff in the
event of an emergency. A SEMS Plan all s cities to quickly
respond to any large-scale disaster that requi multi-agency and
multi-jurisdictional response.
P A G E S- 2 3
DRAFT JUNE 2008
• •
PUBLIC SAFETY V
National Incident Management System (NIMS)
NIMS is the federal equivalent to the MS response plan. The
Governor's Office of Emergency Serv VAentation ES) is the lead agency
for the adoption, promotion, and implof NIMS.
Federal Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000
The Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 provided a new set of
mitigation plan requirements that emphasize State and local
jurisdictions to coordinate disaster mitigation planning and
implementation. States are encouraged to complete a "Standard"
or an "Enhanced" Natural Mitigation Plan. "Enhanced" plans
demonstrate increased coordination of mitigation activities at the
State level, and if completed and approved, will increase the
amount of funding through th Hazard Mitigation Grant Program. p~,,, wc►.~ ~.J
California -updat its State Hazard Mitigation Plan„ 0vbdrr --j ApU4-
which will require approval by the Federal Emergency Management -te -FrnnA- F~•.~`M
Agency (FEMA) by October 8, 2007.
-TL.i ~ ~ /yti~~.rh' rz-a►'1 ~''C.? J • ~ .1,~„ ~ 14:1 170 ,-Ga...i
U. S Patriot Act P L4,.,
At s o,bt ! nsi~j to cJ" pTid -Yt~a Q
Signed into law on October 26, 2001, the U.S. Patriot Act expanded -,,v, Lxvc.j icc~-^-^~ .
the authority of U.S. law enforcement. The Act included the
7 creation of federal crimes for attacks on public transportation and
the use of biological weapons, and increased government
surveillance powers to track activities related to homeland security
and terrorism.
Relationship to Other General Plan Elements
The Public Safety Element relates most closely to the Land Use
Element. Policies and plans in the Public Safety Element are
designed to protect existing and planned land uses from specific
types of hazards.
Issues, Goals, and Policies
Certain human activities and natural conditions in Rosemead
create risks to individuals and properties that affect how we may
develop and use property. Risk from such hazards can be reduced
P A G E 5- 2 4
DRAFT JUNE 2008
•
•
P U B L I C S A F E T Y
or avoided by recognizing the hazards and adopting and
implementing land use and emergency response policies that
provide the degree of protection the community desires.
These goals, policies, and implementation actions focus on: (1)
reducing risks from natural hazards ceaditieas; (2) preparing for
emergency situations; and (3) reducing risks from hazards
associated with hazardous materials.
Natural Hazards
This section presents information on hazards related to geologic
and soil units, active and potentially active faults, earthquakes,
secondary seismic effects, and dam inundation flooding that affect
policy and long-range planning in the City of Rosemead.
Geology and Soil Hazards
Geotechnical and engineering geology reports prepared for
development and re-development projects in the City are required
to identify geologj"and soil hazards, as well as routine geolo ` and
soils conditions important to the design and construction wi4kia I -K-i P_:r
4 wi ins (Figure 5-1). These reports -.e rc r,. ,`ro-A +v
undergo review by qualified professional engineers and geologists to
assure that the information, results, conclusions, and
recommendations meet the state of the professional practice.
Primary hazards considered are landslides, mudflows, general slope
instability, unstable soils due to expansion or consolidation,
subsidence, and shallow groundwater. Where these hazards are
present `r iem ean- ,damage to st~ctures and otentiall serious
injuries to individu4'-f'fie Cit" yYfarining, Building and Safety, and ~pr+,K,-ct. •r nae~~
Public Works Departments shall continue to collectively assure ,p.aQ da.Y.••~. -Ea s+-+'~
that proper reports are prepared, reviewed, and approved in
accordance with City, County, State, and Federal guidelines, as
applicable. t
~G.tisuJ-n .sib,, c~rw. 30 r--A, °Q
Seismic) arthquake Groundshaking azar
As ' above, there are eleven faults hown on Figure 5-2)
that 69= earthquake groundshaking hazard within
the City of Rosemead. Standard construction (e.g., residential,
commercial, industrial) is governed by the 1 r Building
Code (currently the 2007 version) and the City shall adopt
measures necessary to assure that these codes are followed.
The expected moment magnitudes and median peak horizontal
ground accelerations shown in Table 5-1 (Appendix A) are for
planning purposes~~&Ad individual projects ff e&y require,,specific
Iscr.. -
P A G E S- 2 5
DRAFT JUNE 2008
0 0
P U B L I C S A F E T Y
design earthquake determinations depending upon the uses
associated with the project and whether the project is considered
an essential services facility or other type of important structure.
Projects in the City may fall within the jurisdiction of County,
State, or Federal agencies (e.g., Caltrans, Division of the State
Architect, and the Federal Emergency Management Agency) with
more or less stringent earthquake design criteria. It is the
responsibility of the City to protect the lives and property of the
citizens of Rosemead by submitting input to these agencies to
assure, to the maximum degree possible, their consideration for the
application of the proper earthquake design factors.
Active and Potentially ActivelFauZtLHazardl
Based on the geolo ic, seismic, group er, and tectonic/fault
studies iin` an d)acen to tie it y of Rosemead it is
,A i concluded that: (1) the Alhambra Wash ( the East Montebello Q
fault is the only -1-A s' active fault crossing the City and
studies required by the APEFZ Acta &,!,-,31,,a e n_ ec~s a2~~1
the northwest-trending escarpmen arious aeria p otograph
lineaments described by Treiman (1991; (Figure 5-4)) should be
considered as potentially active with 200-foot wide "fault hazard 'elf AI,,-%&A,.j eAg-
evaluation zones" requiring special investigation on a case-by-case rJlA+o _ ,,t hh sE,.~
basis for new or significantly modified "important" facilities
(defined below), and (3) the Ledreek groundwater barrier (CDWR,
1966) is not considered to be active, but should be evaluated for -L+
important facilities defined below planned within 100 feet of the
ma ed location. Total damage/collapse of structures and severe
injury can result if surface rupture occurs beneath or in the
immediate vicinity of a building. c~ 5t -1 4
Secondary Seismic Hazards
Local geological conditions may, _ create Jdryi~tiQonal azards
associated with seismic activity. art qua es pro duce ground-
shaking effects thatpwitla-~afger-gtiakes7 may result in ground
failure. Figure 5-5 shows areas susceptible o seismically induced
+ofae LI,
liquefaction. In locations where rou~cn. water levels i.,4,.n„
loose, unconsolidated soil a on ition called li uefaction can
occur ,s,•~+y.r~ sf''".`'M.e• l
Liquefaction s,~wde .-r-'G
presents the most prominent secondary earthquake ground failure
issue in Rosemead. Seismically induced landslide otential e.*FA-SA mci-y 5,v.,L et•Lftnk
in a limited area in the south of Rosemead, but the generally level
topography and proper investigation ill minimize these hilljlope
~ sG~rj
hazards. l.►' mwl t"
qz-4,, - CA-t
P A C E 5- 2 6
D R A F T J U N E 2008
:R &na deep
~read.~ ca„ oee..rw4.cb'Le
and .v.; a~ vF,`e-✓~ .~~-.Y 4st, c.~.a,....~a %A .I.LLp
rvn:At a,
,aos .{a..ls (.a+{*+~~ syr-e~-d~~ can
e a•..we e v k -T, uL •.,w.~4 iv men
k.;; l,~tuo , -2.*i elm, , rV c..s~ a.+c~ o-tt~.i s~lv►.~...~
•
. C µnAA-C 5disr+~-.u r-~ fi e.►+q /
PUBLIC SAFETY
California law (Seismic H zard Mapping AKstability requires
identification of liquefaction zones, where the of
foundation soils must be investigated, and seismically-induced
landslide zones, where the stability of hill slopes must be evaluated.
Within these areas, geologic studies must be completed and
countermeasures undertaken in the design and construction of
important infrastructure and buildings for human occupancy.
California law also requires disclosure of these hazards as a part of
all real estate transactions within„`dentified areas. The City shall
continue to (1) apply the State seismic hazard zoning regulations at
the earliest possible stage in the development process, (2) identify
these hazards at the project development permit stage to assure
proper design measures are implemented, and (3) inform at an
early stage applicants planning to develop heavy structures or
structures over two-stories that the areas with historic high
groundwater less than 30-feet deep are most susceptible to
liquefaction and lateral spread landslides where adjacent to
channel-type slopes.
w..d
FloodinB~Dam Inundation Hazards
Rosemead does not have natural floodplain areas, although it is
bordered bathe Rio Hondo in its eastern and southextem
extremes.We City's distance from the Pacific Ocean 44&4ata
exposure to, ace n-rovave-{tsunami hazards resulting fr om offshore
earthquake -bam failure can be induced by strong earthquake
groundshaking or a seiche event, erosion, improper siting and/or
design, and rapidly rising floodwate?during heavy storms. Such a
failure can be instantaneous or gradual, depending on many factors
(e.g., the cause and building materials), with either potentially
causing loss of life, property damage, displacement of persons
residing within the inundation path, and damage to infrastructure.
Portions of the City are located within dam inundation areas for
the Whittier Narrows Dam, Santa Fe Dam/Reservoir, and Garvey
Dam/Reservoir (Figure 5-6).
Natural Hazard-Related Goals and Policies
The overarching natural hazard related goal is stated below to
provide the basic purpose and strategy adopted by the City of
Rosemead to address safety concerns posed by natural hazards.
Goal 1 has several policies that are more specific guidelines and
tactics that will be used to meet Goal 1. Finally, implementation
actions, the specific steps to be taken to satisfy the goal and
policies, are presented in a subsequent section.
Underlying Goal 1 is the precept that all buildings and structures in
the City of Rosemead should conform to the appropriate building
standards in order to protect every citizen to the degree practical.
P A C E 5- 2 7
DRAFT JUNE 2008
• •
P U B L I C S A F E T Y
In consideration of certain hazard zones referred to in the Safety
Element, the City has defined the category "Important" building or
structure in considering new or substantially refurbished existing
facilities that should receive increased consideration for geologic,
soil, seismic/earthquake, and flood hazard avoidance. An important
facility, which would not apply to existing buildings of the types
described below unless substantial refurbishment were proposed,
would be defined by the City Planning Director, the City Engineer,
and the City Building Official for each case as appropriate. In
general "Important" would include, but not necessarily be limited
to:
(1) One whose function is judged as essential following a
severe natural hazard such as an earthquake, e.g.,
police, fire, City communications center, and hospitals,
in order to provide for the safety and well-being of the
citizens of Rosemead;
(2) A structure that is critical to the City's recovery
following a severe earthquake, i.e., key transportation/
evacuation routes, bridges, over/underpasses, electrical
substations and towers, natural gas/fuel pipelines;
(3) Structures that may be sensitive to earthquake hazards
(e.g., liquefaction and groundshaking), e.g., buildings
greater than 2-stories, pre-1971 tilt-ups, non-retrofitted
buildings, soft-story construction, non-ductile
reinforced concrete, and parking garages; and (4) Buildings that may have significant populations, and/or
high-population densities, i.e., schools/pre-schools and 0-^,j
nursing homes.
Goal 1: The City of Rosemead will act in cooperation with
federal, State, and County agencies responsible for
the enforcement of planning statutes,
environmental laws, and building codes to
minimize, to the extent practical, risks to people
and property damage, risks relatedtconomic and
social disruption, and other impacts resulting from
1) geologic and soil hazards, 2) seismic hazards
including primary and secondary effects of seismic
shaking, fault rupture, and other earthquake-
induced ground deformation in Rosemead, and 3)
flood and inundation hazards, while reducing the
disaster recovery time due to hazard incidents in
Rosemead.
P A G E 5- 2 8
DR A F T J U N E 2 0 0 8
P U B L I C S A F E T Y
Policy 1.1:
Geology and Soil Hazards
a) Encourage development in low hazards areas and
implement actions that minimize changes to the
natural topography and drainages, while protecting
public safety and reducing potential property
damage due to geologic and soil hazards through
the use of proper design and construction
techniques.
b) Assure that all aspects of the geotechnical and
engineering geology evaluation process (planning,
investigation, analysis, reporting, review,
construction, and operations) for new development
and redevelopment are conducted, and
independently reviewed, by qualified professionals.
Policy 1.2:
Earthquake and Fault Hazards
a) Minimize the exposure of people and property to
primary and secondary earthquake-related hazards,
while allowing properly designed projects to be
developed in appropriate locations.
b) Assure that all aspects of the earthquake, fault
rupture, liquefaction, and related seismic hazard
evaluation process (planning, investigation,
analysis, reporting, review, construction, and
operations) for new development and
redevelopment are conducted, and independently
reviewed, by qualified professionals.
Policy 1.3
Dam Inundation Flood Hazards
a) Minimize habitable development in flood-prone
areas to protect public safety and reduce potential
.2rO°'
property damage due to flooding.
area s
b) Assure that all aspects of the surface hydrologic
and flood evaluation process (planning,
investigation, analysis, reporting, review,
construction, and operations) for new development
W ,z U 4-:, ec A,,„
and redevelopment are conducted, and
-fits
independently reviewed, by qualified professionals.
P
Policy 1.4
Disaster Preparedness and Communication
a) Create and maintain emergency preparedness
and evacuation plans; create public
inform ation/education programs to help assure
coordinated response, recovery, and mitigation
efforts carried out by the City and other
govemmental agencies.
P A G E S- 2 9
DRAFT JUNE 2008
0 0
P U B L I C S A F E T Y
b) Foster cooperation with neighboring cities and
agencies to enhance mutual aid opportunities
following natural hazard events.
Hazards Due to Human Activities
Goal 2: Ensure safety of all City residents and local
workers from hazardous wastes and the hazards
associated with the transport of such wastes.
Policy 2.1: Work with the County Fire Department to identify 4..,
a~ all producers, users, and transporters of hazardous
materials and wastes.
Policy 2.2: Strictly enforce the use of designated truck routes
for vehicles transporting hazardous materials(Figure
5-7) dcoo-r
' a,A fAA:C p._G,in
Policy 23: Support Asafety hazard awareness
programs that provide for the safe and efficient
collection and disposal of household hazardous
wastes.
Policy 2.4: Review in detail any industrial development
proposed to be located adjacent to a residential use
to ensure that anp necessary safeguards are included
to minimize "hsk to residential uses. Safeguards
may include, for example, appropriate siting of
buildings and loading areas, on-site emergency
response equipment or supplies, and barrier walls.
P A C E 5- 3 0
DRAFT JUNE 2008
Important Facilities
Hospital/Nursing Home
®
Public Facility
®
School
ID
Place of Worship
Source: City of Rosemea OMI
0 1,200 2,400 3,600
General Plan Update
June 2008
Emergency Shelters (9(E)
0 Medical Facilities
® Fire Station
Potential Emergency Center
F Al Emergency Shakers are Important Facilities.
The colors are associated to the categories listed
under portonffrpciIRies. For more information
Feet
Evacuation Routes
T~ Truck/Hazardous Materials
Transport Routes
-ZZZ--.t Evacuation Routes
Truck and Evacuation Routes may
overlap in some areas.
Figure 5-7
Important Facilities
nirt Pn I^"- Llcl:;,
0 0
P U B L I C S A F E T Y
This page intentionally left blank.
P A G E 5- 3 2
DRAFT JUNE 2008
P U B L I C S A F E T Y
Law Enforcement CC
-D., •5 t+.~ar~ t h,ci,~ , r~ a, y; i t r,,o ~G ~Il a rl yr r,/t "rr~ ,w~ 4 o x ~+..-std
The Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department serves the `City of
Rosemead from the nearby Temple Station. In addition to
providing patrol and investigative services, the Sheriff offers a broad
range of support services, including Neighborhood Watch
coordination, community education programs, drug prevention
education for school children, and homeland security. A key crime
prevention program the Department runs is the Community/Law
Enforcement Partnership Program, or CLEPP. Sheriff's
Department staff shall help communities mobilize and organize
against gangs, drugs, and violence by working through schools,
community-based organizations, local businesses, churches,
residents, and local governments.
Goal 3: Provide high levels of public safety, emergency
response, and law enforcement services.
Policy 3!>' Work with local water service providers to ensure
3.►f that private water distribution and supply facilities
have adequate capacity to meet both the water
supply needs of the community and required fire
flows.
Policy 3!Z': Provide for all street signs and property address
3 S signs to be clearly marked and visible to emergency
personnel.
Policy 3e3,: Include the Fire Department in the review process
3.2 of proposed projects to ensure that fire prevention
and suppression features have been considered in
the overall design.
Policy' 4: Require that any structures identified as deficient
3.3 in fire protection or lacking adequate suppression
devices .to make t-ke recommended improvements
in a time frame established by the Fire
Department.
Policy.,3: Ensure that current applicable building codes and
3. fire codes are maintained and implemented.
W t- JL yb ew'L ,~+r`'
4v w.aht o4vr-re
.(&~,:1.~
P A G E 5- 3 3
DRAFT JUNE 2008
P U B L I C S A F E T Y
Policy 3.6: Annually assess the level and quality of services
provided by the County Sheriff and County Fire
Department, and adjus mice levels as needed to
meet changing community needs.
Policy 3.7: Take full advantage of community policing,
education, and crime prevention programs available
through the County Sheriff's Department.
Policy 3.8: Incorporate crime prevention considerations into
the development project review process, where
applicable.
Policy 3.9: Develop and implement a periodic inspection
program for multi-family units over three units and
mixed-use projects.
Policy 3.10: Consider the adoption of a citywide emergency
evacuation plan and emergency shelter plan.
Policy Map and Plan
f~W R1M~ f{~t ~..~+.y
- Q J
Rosemead's approach to mitigating public safety hazardsl
tocuses on
emergency preparedness ~~~ii of the less ei f@ __y,
The policies contained in this
element include requirements that the City maintain an up-to-date
regional emergency response system, procedures for educating the
public about the importance of emergency preparedness, and
proposals to ensure that emergency equipment and supplies are
maintained to adequately meet the needs Y in an emergency
a'„ situation.
~r.pas
Implementation of the goals and policies in this Element will have
beneficial effect of reducing potential fire haz~ar, s in the City.
The replacement of older, deteriorating structures- the requirement
that owners maintain their properties and incorporat*%rvf up-to-
date fire-suppression devices in structures will reduce the
occurrence of structural fires in the City.
Figure 5-7 identifies designated hazardous materials transport
routes and evacuation routes, as well as fire stations, medical
facilities, and potential emergency centers. The City has identified
local schools as potential sites for emergency centers. Having
recommended sites will expedite the time necessary to set up
emergency centers such as shelters.
P A G E 5- 3 4
DRAFT JUNE 2008
0 0
P U B L I C S A F E T Y
Implementation Actions
Natural Hazard Safety
Goal 1: The City of Rosemead will act in cooperation with
federal, State, and County agencies responsible for
the enforcement of planning statutes,
environmental laws, and building codes to
minimize, to the extent practical, risks to people
and property damage, risks related4geonomic and
social disruption, and other impacts resulting from
1) geologic and soil hazards, 2) seismic hazards,
including primary and secondary effects of seismic
shaking, fault rupture, and other earthquake-
induced ground deformation in Rosemead, and 3)
flood and inundation hazards, while reducing the
disaster recovery time due to hazard incidents in
Rosemead.
Action 1.1 Review County and special district capital
improvement plans for consistency with the seismic
safety policies governing the location of critical
public facilities.
Action 1.2 Inspect critical public facilities for structural
integrity, and require correction as necessary.
+V
Action 1.3 Require all private roads.,conform to the existing
City standards concerning safety and the
movement of emergency vehicles.
Action 1.4 A veRdnet a public information program on
p L a° and ^a; to a: `E , ~'Ly " P.r~r..4is~v~ a,,A .4 sa-"Q...f
and ' disseminate information .+l>.t,..,,,
o+,. ~,.X-e►.: s to all residents and businesses in the City,
ON% C'
wcl.s,t,~
Action 1.5 Create a y~ebsite or websi~e link on the City of
Rosemeadfii ncludey,links to eke readily available
published geologic, soil, and earthquake hazard
maps covering the City and links to the City
statutes, plans, and codes governing development
and re-development projects; use the site to
P A G E S- 3 5
DRAFT JUNE 2008
P U B L T C S A F E T Y
-ID i~ Py
communicate information about geologic and soil,
seismic, and dam inundation flood hazards and
City requirements te-thpuWie, including but not
limited to a) State-certified engineering geologists
references, b) seismic design and construction
requirements for individuals and developers
applicable to new and existing property
improvements, c) City emergency preparedness
plans, and d) home or businessAbased emergency
preparedness procedures and resources.
~
Action 1.6 P.~ep3are e a ation routes and update on a regular
basis the Emergency Preparedness and Evacuation
Plan (as required by Government Code Section
65302) that addresses structural hazards, landslides
and slope stability, liquefaction 16 6te 4--spread
dos, inundation from w dam failure, seismic
activity, and other natural disasters.
Action 1.7 Encourage only the minimum grading necessary to
create suitably sized and safe building areas.
Action 1.8 Avoid grading and development that requires filling
natural drainages or changing natural surface water
flow patterns.
0
.~a..,..C-o.r ~.ri~• -tt~,0 v ~ 0
lwl-.Q.,1 •a n a--Q,
~o l acs, r.~'ciP
Action 1.9 As required by law and statute, the City shall
implement applicable federal, State; and County
regulations related to geolog"°' and soils
investigations, analyses, designs, and construction, • U
including but not limited to maintainin .t a most
up-to-date California Building Code (CBC)
provisions regarding lateral forces (Chapter 23) and
grading (Chapter 70)x' L.
C Los G B G ~c "I_ r.e-k
Angeles County amendments ar~alJ.
t to+9.~ Gf3C.
~n
Action 1.10 Require roper geotechnical and engineering cz.,s
a
geolo i vestigations and reports that iaeleEleIdAv-c~ ,..J
necessary analyses of (for example) soil conditions e--jr
(i.e., expansivity, collapse, seismic settlement),
slope stability, surface and subsurface water, and
Prv.4AA_ necessary design recommendations for grading and
site stability, such as excavation, fill placement, and
stabilization or remediation measures.
P A G E 5- 3 6
DRAFT JUNE 2008
0 0
P U B L I C
Action 1. 11 Require routine inspection of grading operations by
properly qualified City representatives to assure site
safety and compatibility with approved plans and
specifications.
Action 1.12 Regularly review the technical data on public safety
and seismic safety for use in the planning process
and undertake revisions or updates to the Public
Safety Element, as needed.
Action 1.13 Enact ordinances for the evaluation and abatement
of structural hazards (i.e., parapet ordinance and
hazardous building ordinance requiring repair,
rehabilitation, or demolition of hazardous
structures following structural evaluation). As
appropriate, prepare multi-lingual m2terials.;t4a r v sc-,-z k
.prrvi~ g v~lrtf-rte sr ~o -to-r- -N+. rr,t+.~~c o,. .t
Action 1.14 Required geological studies shall be conducted by 0
State-certified engineering geologists following the
guidelines published by the California Geological
Surve and geotechnical studies shall be conducted
by Catfornia-registered geotechnical engineers.
a-A -K.. SC-06 kn&'ni^j 4..-.A 6t..Co9-w
Action 1.15 Required liquefaction assessment studies shall be
conducted in accordance with the California
Geological Survey's Special Publication 117:
Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic
Hazards in California, afrd the Southern California
Earthquake Center's (1999 or subsequent
document, as amended) procedures to implement
Special Publication 117 - Liquefaction Hazards,
Required slope stability analyses shall be conducted
in accordance with California Geological Survey's
Special Publication 117: Guidelines for Evaluating
and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California, and
the Southern California Earthquake Center's (2002
or subsequent document, as amended) guidelines
for evaluating and mitigating landslide hazards.
Action 1.16 As required by law and statute, the City shall
implement applicable federal, State, and County
regulations related to earthquake hazard
investigations, analyses, designs, and construction,
including but not limited to the adoption of
applicable sections of the current California
Building Code and the County of Los Angeles
Geotechnical Guidelines, and compliance with the
Ow"
ar a Lye Ee- ~ ~ 'k
R,ta a a.r cd_ ~ A.. ~ m o .
~CY~G - x:003-(o f
A- tti•,.) ar.d! C.~,.a.a
S A F E T Y
P A G E S- 3 7
DRAFT JUNE 2008
P U B L I C S A F E T Y
State Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act
and the Seismic Hazards Mapping Act
requirements.
•
Action 1.17 Ensure that no structure for human occupancy,
other than single-family wood-frame and steel- ,A-'e -t- e,&cePti
frame dwellings that are less than three stories and 4W--'-cA to C►C
are not part of a development of four units or more, Sro tex-t-
shall be permitted within fifty~et of an active fault k---
trace as
I'll by geologic investigation`' "4
r the Al uist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning
,,~,-t q g
Act, &--,A -VC • x.R
-tw av 4 8 ---t 4 4 .
Action 1.18 Encourage Imo t newffuction in are with a
minimum of identified earthquake-related hazards.
Action 1.19 Minimize to the maximum extent practical the
construction of important structures (e.g., critical,
essential, sensitive, and high-occupancy buildings
and critical infrastructure) within known, or
suspected earthquake-related hazard zones.
Action 1.20 The City shall require geologic a ismic studies
as part of development proposals within established
200-foot wide Fault Hazard Management Zones`
(FHMZ) along possible or suspected fault-related 4i,,-a-w ~c~cc~,p~`er•o ,*d;~
features (100-feet on either side) identified in the
State Fault Evaluation Report 222 (Treiman, 1991;
as shown on Figure 3), in other peer ;reviewed
reports (e.g., Bullard and Lettis 199A, and in
future City fault management hazard zone study
reports (as applicable). Investigation and reporting
requirements for FHMZs shall mirror those for
Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones and
California Ceological Survey Notes 48 and 49.
FHMZs shall be updated periodically based on the
results of studies conducted in the City, which may
cause the FHMZs to the expanded, reduced, or
removed.
Action 1.21 Where construction of important structures (e.g.,
critical, essential, sensitive, and high-occupancy
buildings and critical infrastructure) within known,
or suspected earthquake-related hazard zones is
proposed, require proper geotechnical and
engineering geology investigations and reports that
P A G E 5- 3 8
DRAFT JUNE 2008
•
P U B L I C S A F E T Y
include''ecessary analyses of (for example) strong
groundshaking, fault rupture, In uefaction, lateral
spreading, ground subsidence,, slope instability, r=4
and %necessary design ,dam ~,r9i,, _
recommendations for grading and site stability,
such as building setbacks, special foundation
considerations, dewatering, ground improvement,
and other stabilization or remediation measures.
Action 1.22 Require routine and special inspection of
investigation sites (e.g., fault exploration trenches)
and grading operations by properly qualified City
representatives to assure scientifically adequate
methods, site safety, and compatibility with
approved plans and specifications.
Action 1.23 The City shall monitor engineering and scientific
studies affecting development or re-development in
areas of known or suspected earthquake-related
hazards that may impact the City, and shall ensure
that site-specific data, up-to-date geologic
knowledge, and expert peer (independent third
party) review are incorporated into the planning,
design, construction, and inspection stages of
important project structures (e.g., critical, essential,
sensitive, and high-occupancy buildings and critical
infrastructure).
Action 1.24 As required by law and statute, the City shall
implement applicable federal, State, and County
regulations related to hydrology and flood n oRr~
investigations, analyses, designs, and construction, o T 0
including but not limited to participation in the __3
National Flood Insurance Program.
Action 1.25 Minimize to the maximum extent practical the
construction of important structures (e.g., critical,
essential, sensitive, and high-occupancy buildings
and critical infrastructure) within potential flood P `""e
and dam-induced inundation areas.°
Action 1.26 Require proper hydrology and flooding
investigations and reports that include necessary
analyses of (for example) pre- and post-
development flow characteristics, changes to
surface drainage network, potential environmental
impacts on existing development down-gradient
P A G E S- 3 9
DRAFT JUNE 2008
• 0
P U B L I C S A F E T Y
from new construction in upstream areas, and
adequacy of current and proposed culverts, debris
basins, and storm drain systems.
Action 1.27 Establish procedures for reviewing subdivisions and
other development permit applications to ensure
safety from seismic and geologic hazards, including
liquefaction areas, slope stability, and
groundshaking zones. The City shall retain a
California certified engineering geologist(s) and a
California registered geotechnical engineer(s),
either on staff or on a contract basis, to review all
engineering geologic and geotechnical studies and
grading operations for new development or
redevelopment, including but not limited to
geotechnical evaluations, liquefaction studies, and
fault rupture evaluations. Each reviewer shall have
a minimum of 10 years of practical experience in
their respective fields, shall be independent of
development work being conducted in the City
within 12 months before or after the subject
reviews, and shall otherwise not have a conflict-of-
interest regarding the project or the project
participants.
P A G E 5- 4 0
DRAFT JUNE 2008
0 •
Human Activities Hazard
Safety
Goal 2: Ensure the safety of all City residents and workers
from hazardous wastes and the hazards associated
with the transport of such wastes.
L*r'
Action 2.1 Coordinate with the.A County Fire Department's
Health Hazardous Materials Division to identify
and mitigate hazardous materials dangers.
Action 2.2 Enforce the use of designated routes for truck travel
with signage, information provided to businesses
and coordination with Sheriff's Department staff.
Action 2.3 Require that producers, users, and transporters of
hazardous materials comply with State and federal
regulations requiring identification of these
materials on signs posted on the exterior of
buildings or storage facilities containing such
materials ALMA 0-•, -*TL&,-ks ew u~s•~~•,
-r6..
Action 2.4 Coordinate with the Los Ange es County
Department of Public Works to increase outreach
and participation in the County's Household
Hazardous Waste Collection events within the
City. Increase visibility of the County's program
through newspapers, the City's website, and posted
information at public facilities and City-sponsored
events.
Action 2.5 Prohibit new businesses that produce or transport
hazardous wastes from locating in or adjacent to
residential neighborhoods. Update the City's
zoning ordinance to limit these businesses to
industrial zones not adjacent to residential areas,
and limit the permitted uses for business in or
adjacent to residential areas.
P U B L I C S A F E T Y
P A C E 5- 4 1
DRAFT JUNE 2008
0 0
P U B L IC S A F E T Y
Goal 3: Provide high levels of public safety, emergency
response, and law enforcement services.
Action 3.1 Cooperate with the Los Angeles County Fire
Department in the preparation of a Fire Prevention
Program to reduce the extent of damage resulting
from fire.
Action 3.2 Meet annually, if not more frequently, with County
Fire Department officials to assess how services are
provided and whether any changes are required in
response to City and/or County needs.
Action 3.3 Use public education activities to inform residents,
businesses, and City staff about community
policing and crime prevention
Action 3.4 Implement Crime Prevention through
Environmental Design (CPTED) features with the
establishment of specific design criteria, and apply
those criteria to proposed projects through the
development project review process.
Action 3.5 Continually address expected effects of climate
change that may impact public safety, including
increased risk of wildfires, flooding and sea level
rise, salt water intrusion; and health effects of
increased heat and ozone, through appropriate
policies and programs.
Action 3.6 Consider adopting programs for the purchase,
transfer or extinguishment of development rights in
high- ,4 areas. _ Q -j, JA, It ri -te- -
Action 3.7 Monitor the impacts of climate change. Use
adaptive management to develop new strategies,
and modify existing strategies, to respond to the
impacts of climate change.
P A G E 5- 4 2
wild~,'rs, ,~*t soh •t:s~,.~-a•~~
Sew. C~,~•P ~ u ~
DRAFT JUNE 2008
0 0
A P P E N D I X A
--r~'N /LP"'A'`x s4,,V-U
~'L~ C'
Appendix A
GEOLOGIC, SEISMIC, AND FLOODwq
TECHNICAL BACKGROUND
INFORMATION
Geologic and Soil Hazards
ROSEMEAD GENERAL PLAN
-f6erthe geologic and soil potential hazards considered are:
■ Landslides and mudslides (slope instability)
■ Collapsible and expansive soils
■ Groundwater epth (also discussed under liguejactm*
above
■ Subsidence
In certain hydrologic environments, subsidence due to groundwater
withdrawal is possible when there is substantial pumping over
extended periods; however, there are no records of such an
occurrence in the City of Rosemead. No subsidence within the
City was noted inlel'erences reviewed. Slope instability, unstable
soils, and shallow groundwater issues are discussed below.
rvt~.d au -t+v Qo~t,.,ca.d strut
In general, the-Gity geologic units igure 5-1)s#1 artificial
fill (along the I-10 freeway), wash deposits (e.g., am ra and
Eaton Washes), younger and older alluvial fan deposits (most of
the area of the City), and relatively soft bedrock formations (in the
a
Sus u,QttS4_ -t9 S ~n:d+•.~cA
o~,~p u.r•dl.•.,a~tar ~4r+~,,; n eeuk~{-~-.
0.?, .
P A G E A- I
DRAFT JUNE 2008
0 0
A P P E N D I X A
south and southeast). The granular nature of the wash and alluvial
deposits generally results in fewer soil-related hazards, and the lack
of extensive exposed bedrock formations generally results in leers a 9-0
slope stability hazard. In some areas, granular alluvium and
historically high groundwater can increase the liquefaction
potential.
Landslides, Mudslides, and Slope Instability O'L
Slope instability under non-earthquake (static) conditions is
considered to be a potentially significant hazard in the hillside
areas, which &FAy occur along the southernmost edge of the City
°r^4
and the sphere of influence. 0-0.6
area (CDMG, 1998, Plate 1.2)~she~s-eAly-eR landslide
that lies Oor just south of the City~~n4ftry east of Montebello
l,~S Boulevard, west of Darlington Street, and north of Plaza Drive i~
wiz the upper Fernando Formation (Tfu). The general slope
stability hazard for natural slopes is discussed in the CDMG report.] h« , r-a*kw- -rc-
With the exception of locations such as bluff areas east of Walnut
Grove Avenue and north of the State Route SR 60 and as the
l may continue to the northwest),A~4itystopography is moderately flat,
and with the exception of minor areas with bedded formations, the
remainder of the City is underlain b younger and older alluvial p l"N
deposits with no evidence of natural slope instability, Earthquake- t
induced landslide hazards are discussed in a later section.
7 -tG." bC"1d' ta.,t o~ ~.Jel~....~ ~,o•►~
In hillside terrain and areas adjacent to river bluffs (e.g., the Rio (sR) bo -1~..
Hondo), an appropriate engineering geology and geotechnical slope
stability investigation (performed by properly licensed
professionals), including field data collection, laboratory testing,
and slope stability analysis, should be conducted considering both
fo&_bath static and dynamic (earthquake) forces. Mitigation
options include, but are not limited to, building setbacks, landslide
debris removal/replacement, slope angle reduction, earth or
engineered buttresses, protective barriers, retaining/slough walls,
debris fences, and run-out/catchment areas.
P A G E A- 2
DRAFT JUNE 2008
0 •
A P P E N D I X A
City of Rosemead Geologic Unit Descriptions (Yerkes and Campbel4 2005
L.tA,r ren,aYe
rr a.dZd
MAP
MAP SYMBOL AND GEOLOGIC
GEOLOGIC UNIT DESCRIPTION
COLOR
UNIT
Qaf
Deposits of san silt and vel resulting from human
j
Artificial fill (late Holocene)
rrying activities; includes compacted
construction, mitfing or qu
engineered and non-compactedlnon-engineered fill. Only large
deposits are shown.
Qw
Unconsolidated gravel, sand and silt in active or recently active
Wash deposits (late Holocene)
streambeds; chiefly stream deposited, but includes some
debris-flow deposits; episodes of bank-full stream flow are
frequent enough to inhibit growth of vegetation. Fisee9fiatly
Feta+ne~.
Qls
Rock detritus from bedrock and surficial materials, broken in
Landslide deposits (Holocene and late
varying degrees from relatively coherent large blocks to
Pleistocene?)
disaggregated small fragments, deposited by landslide
processes including slides, slumps, falls, topples and flows;
generally unconsolidated; some dissected landslides may be
as old as late P i tocene. A few large landslides present
outside the C' the south.
Qyw
Unconsolidated sand, silt and gravel; gravel and boulders more
Young wash deposits (Holocene and
common near mountain fronts. In art dig ' wished from wash
late Pleistocene?
deposits Qw on asis o relative terrace levels. 'e*A^-'r,
Qyf
Unconsolidated gavel, sad and s oulderY near mountain
Young alluvial-fan deposits, undivided
fronts; deposited chiefly444 floodi streams and debris
(Holocene and late Pleistocene)
flows; surfaces can show slight to moderate pedogenic soil
development.
Qoa
Unconsolidated to moderately indurated gravel, sand and silt;
Old alluvium, undivided (late to middle
surfaces can show moderate to wellideveloped pedogenic soil,
Pleistocene)
including a distinctive reddish °13° soil horizon; surfaces
moderate) to well-dissected.
Qof
Slightly to moderately consolidated silt, sand and gravel
Old alluvial-fan deposits, undivided
deposits on alluvial fans; surfaces dissected in varying
(late to middle Pleistocene)
degrees; surfaces can show moderately to well-developed
do enic soils.
Q0f1
Oldest of at least three subunits of Qof that can be
Old alluvial-fan deposits, Unit 1
distinguished in some areas. In part distinguished on theta s
middle Pleistocene
o relative terrace levels. ~ 7
Tf
Includes the following members:
Fernando Formation Pliocene
Tfu
Massive silty sandstone: Tfuf, fossiliferous; Tfuc, pebbly
Fernando Formation, Upper
sandstone and conglomeratlo
Member
Tfl
Interbedded silty sandstone and massive pebble
Fernando Formation, Lower
conglomerate: Tflc, conglomerate
Member
Tf3
Coarse pebble-cobble conglomerate
Fernando Formation member 3
Tf2
Massive sandstoneb
Fernando Formation member 2
P A G E A- 3
DRAFT JUNE 2008
•
A P P E N D I X A
Collapsible and Expansive Soils
Collapsible and expansive soil issues are recognized in standard
eotechnical invesRgations mandated by the City and other
regulatory bodies. Expansive soils are fomn associated with fine-
grained soils, alluvium, and bedrock formations that contain clay
minerals susceptible to expansion under wetting conditions and
contraction under drying conditions. Depending upon the type
and amount of clay present in a geologic deposit, these volume
changes (shrink and swell) can cause severe damage to slabs,
foundations, and concrete flatwork. Due to the granular (sandy)
nature of the yoUM, alltyvi~um ( f i th^ fl tter areas of the
expansive clays
f r ,,,,th u~
No
soil maps are available for the City.
Collaps~'e soils undergo a volume reduction when the pore spaces
become saturated ~c~ausing loss of grain-to-grain contact and
possibly dissolving~'in~erstitial cement holding the grains apart. The
weight of overlying structures can cause uniform or differential
settlement and damage to foundations and walls. The most likely
locations for collapsible soils are the younger alluvial deposits (Qw,
Qyw, and Qyf) associated with current and pre-development
drainage channels, including the Rio Hondo river floodplain.
4.ra mac..
rou v'90 4xpn.r.t.J~
Damage due to and Q44&~ soils can be mitigated by
delineation of em saQils uring a proper eotechnical
w.e o3 r.Ss ZA4-Y;or, t+~+Rn ro Sk.J+ 4-
on new engineered fi material, ressi~ pre-saturating the subject
soils, and provi~`e a Io oper surface drainage away from structures
and building foundations.
Potentially Shallow Groundwater
Data on historically high (potentially shallow) groundwater are
discussed here and reviewed in the liquefaction discussion. The
concern is the potential to intercept shallow or perched
groundwater in subsurface excavations, such a basements, utility
trenches, deep foundations, or tunnels. In its liquefaction hazard
reports, the CDMG (1998, Plat 1.2 moire 5-5) delineates prey
historically high groundwater which is primarily
along the Rio Hondo a d 'n the Whittier Narrows Flood C n~~
Basin (I'Mr3- LID t Me ri5e r area, ro~ u~ndwatcr may
have at t e surface aiid in other areas.a`s ranging
5, Ojeet areas where potentially shallow groundwater
is indicated on these maps, planning for each project should
P A G E A- 4
DRAFT JUNE 2008
consider shallow water levels in determining how to best implement
construction or exploration programs. Depths to water of less than
15 feet are considered a high hazard because water may be
encountered even in routine project excavations; depths of 150
30,~eet are considered a moderate hazard because only the more
significant excavations (e.g., subterrane n parking garages) for
larger project structures would likely exte4 to these depths.
Surface (open cuts and pits) or underground (tunnels, vertical
large-diameter borings) excavations can encounter shallow
groundwater inflows, which may be perched and local, or
widespreadfin extent. This will affect excavation stability, and
therefore short- and long-term safety for workers, as well as post-
construction stability of structturei a~sssociated with these excavation
areas. The 4egree-of hazard cr the City is generally low because
current water levels are deeper than the historically high levels, but
should be determined on a case-by-case basis if projects requiring
deep excavations are proposed.
C ,
Other Geology Related Hazards
Volcanic Erudition - The southern California area has no active
volcanoes and no known dormant volcanoes that could reactivate to
cause eruptions, and therefore, the hazard in the City deermvt•
A P P E N D I X A
M~......oi L
exist. Las ~C~c "'WX.o
A_,A u,o~..rJ~'9'r~L } G ~ .L •,-.O.L -Tp fir. kt r+,. C
Tsunami or Seiche - Tsunamis are lonGperiod
sea waves caused by seafloor displacements faulting or landslides
Since the City is located over 20 miles fr i the shoreline, notsunami hazard is present. r,c,,µ.a•,} I
Seiches are generated by the "sloshing" of water in an enclosed, or
partially enclosedg%ody of water caused by displacement within the eo Qs c,.-..Qa
water body, or more likely ,longer period earthquake motions. The
flooding section discusses the potential impacts to the City of a
failure of nearby dams, which could be caused by a Seiche event.
Asbestos - Naturally gccurring asbestos is found in California in roc.rc-
formations serpentine and tremolite, a.R.d-ire-strah crop
fofffi9#fi(~R,S aIP knllttm 1P }~P !l~ ~T „ni}c nr ~r~T na } }d}} L U l~Q~ -r..
site-
Radon-222 Gas - In California, radon gas is typically found within
organic-rich marine shale, phosphate-rich sedimentary rock,
diatomaceous shale, light-colored volcanic rock, and some granite.
While such rock types are present in southern California, the Los
Angeles Basin region is classified by the United States
Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA; 2007) as a moderate
L
P A G E A- 5
DRAFT JUNE 2008
1--]
A P P E N D I X A
potential for radon (between 2 and 4 pico-Curies per liter). Radon
gas can be mitigated by proper engineering design based on site-
specific radon testing conducted as part of a site-specific
engineering geology/geotechnical investigation.
No other geologic hazard not discussed above was noted in the
City.
Seismic, Earthquake, and Fault Hazards
Earthquake Groundshaking
Rosemead is within the southern San Gabriel Valley, which like the
rest of southern California, is a seismically active region where
geologic conditions include active faults and the potential for large
earthquakes with associated potential adverse affects. Numerous
active and potentially active faults within 62 miles (100 kilometers)
were apse evaluated for thg,potential strong groundshaking affects
Aor~n ' --pa a3+., -044W4404-in ,.4A , ~oa omputer
at the
program
-r-aue s3
of~- and Walnut Grove Avenue (latitude 34.0723 north and
longitude 118.0821 west). Distance measurements to the various
faults can va depending upon the ^F'^^~ *^^aP r^~°
attenuation relationship selected, in this case Boore et al,(1997; see
Blake, 1989). The California Geological Survey c assifies seven of
t ese au is as activ and all of these faults lie within a 30-mile
radius of Rosemead and are capable of producing high levels (0.18
to 0.798) of groundshaking within the City. The earthquake faults
- are shown on Figure 5-2 and are discussed generally below.
•
may. ~ .cam
t
o 3
Pwt a tF~t C 4 S o...AJr •v~...tX.. s 't ~aee C,Ga .20
P A G E A- 6
DRAFT JUNE 2008
•
L'
A P P E N D I X A
✓
Earthquake Groundshaking Parameters for Eleven Active Faults near the City of
Rosemead'
Fault Name
Distance
Miles
(Kilometers)
Maximum
Magnitude
Peak Horizontal
Ground
Acceleration
Modified
Mercalli
Intensity 2
Puente Hills Bind Thrust
0.0 0.0
7.1
0.790
XI
Upper Elysian Park Blind thrust
1.1 1.7
6.4
0.528
X
Raymond
3.9 6.2
6.5
0.421
X
Verde
5.8 9.3
6.9
0.424
X
Whittier
5.9 9.5
6.8
0.326
IX
Sierra Madre
7.2 11.6
7.2
0.434
X
Clamshell-Saw it
8.7 14.0
6.5
0266
IX
Hollywood
9.1 14.6
6.4
0.245
IX
San Jose
10.5 16.9
6.4
0221
IX
Newport-Inglewood L. A. Basin) 1
15.8 25.5
7.1
0.195
VIII
San Andreas -1857 Rupture
29.0 46.6
7.8
0.179
VIII
1. blabs, I nomas 1-., ZuuZ, tUr-/AUK I 1~.ompumr rrogram for taMICluaKe A55e55men15, upoeie or i uou prugram,
attenuation relationship Boore et al. (1997) Horizontal - NEHRP D (250), median value.
2. Bolt, Bruce A., 1993, Abridged Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale. Earlbquakes - Newly Revised and Expanded,
Appelxicc C, W.H. Freeman and Co., 331 pp.
The three major surface fault zones located nearest the City are the
Raymond (or Raymond Hill) fault (approximately four miles to the
north), the Verdugo fault (approximately six miles to the
northwest), and the Whittier fault (approximately six miles to the
southeast). The Alhambra Wash fault is accounted for as a ?
potential earthquake source by association with the Upper Elysian
Park blind thrust As is t Elie case with many cities in the region,
osemea sits atop the Puente Hills blind thrust fault (noted as
zero miles based on the Boore et aL 1997 attenuation relationship)
and immediately adjacent to the upper Elysian Park blind thrust
roughly one mile from the centralized point selected ese five
faults, and the other faults listed above,
Y
fat4ts `h earthquake shaking threat to the City.
,vs lA.r, aRxe -tfv wc~-t ....ems r
yp ~Iv io~,ar+v 4- -61 -
-Itv c.lc.. o~. -Cf.. 19 S
~..te,,o
three eaitFi uake epicenters of 111- 4-" ire hl. +e
magnitude greater than 4.0 that have been recorded within the City W jA aZ / 6,-t: -0, .1,4..E
boundaries; two of these are the October 1, 1987 "Whittier'lri'a...~'r
earthquake main shock of magnitude (M) 5.9 and the October 4, vcc"4"re °7 J
1987 M5.3 aftershock of that event. The main shock (a thrust Qw,~tc- +tiuPs d-o't~ "'dam
event) caused a peak horizont l o,~u id~accelet2ttiio~y,, of
approximately 0.3g within the City moderttesize oY he V
earthquake. The main aftershock was a right-lateral strike-slip
event. Based on the eleven faults shown on Figure 5-2 and Table 5-
2, a median peak-horizontal ground acceleration (PHGA) off V
can be expected the Puente Hills blind thrust~v tan~iall"y- -
more damage in the City than oce-ifr the 1987 event. This is
at,Eso higher than the 0.548 PHGA with a 10% probability of being
exceeded in 50 years (CGS, 2007). The 2006 CGS loss estimation
`V :y-14
Q~4ry.~ti
PAGEA-7
DRAFT JUNE 2008
~c►.-ce~sQ
A P P E N D I X A
scenario (Rowshandel et al, 2006) for a Puente Hills blind thrust 7.1
magnitude earthquake shth-southeast of the City suggests
"Heavy" damage in the City with accelerations and intensities
similar to those shown in Table 5-2.
L.sT At r f" "'AFL
.{.F ayl.l .S - ,Q~J ,.Q.-r, •y,-h,Y.a.~l'av~
Surface Fault Rupture
General Fault Location Considerations - Deep oil well and seismic `I,<-
data were used by Yeats (2004) to relate the subsurface geology to e.,~ WJ~,
the basement rock exposures of the San Gabriel Valley, to resolve d a~.d„~
the tectonic evolution of the region within this framework, and to
evaluate the earthquake potential of the blind and surface faults in 6
this region. As this study relates to the City, Yeats shows the East
~ .ce . -r~..►~
Montebello fault as it offsets the basement rocks (generally 1000-
4/11'
2750 meters deep) and the Fernando Formation (5.1 million years S. I MA ; +1v -top .0
old--generally 500-2000 meters deep) in a location slightly P2..~ bc..t efu-~
v~
southwest of the surface trace of the Alhambra Wash fault (Figures J--J-11
5-2 and 5-3). (The Alhambra Wash fault is considered to be the ~54,,,t..
surface trace of the East Montebello fault, which is believed to
form the eastern boundary of the Upper Elysian Park blind thrust.) r`~ei4cQ"~O t
Yeats indicates that the Workman Hill fault does not offset the
base of the Fernando Formation, which is in general agreement
with the groundwater data cited by Treiman (1991; CDWR, 1966). C,~~ ooy P~ , tl4-C,
No other faults are mapped by Yeats beneath the City within the
basement rock or the Pliocene Fernando Formation. PmAA t* E.s -ts•n.-yam ,
Some previous investigators have speculated that the Whittier fault
continues as an active strike-slip fault across the City to the active t,J L..stt++~""
Raymond fault near Pasadena.ears(IL004) cites specific evidence
to indicate that he found "no evidence to support the continuation T~4-o`-~~,,~
of these-4&"4s 4Workman Hill, ~'Vchit~t*er ei hts and kid~orf rw-~V""'''"~"~}i
faults northwestward~o 'tlie Rayrf~ond fault: adds that
"lineations and broad topographic fgaturleobferged _by Tr~iman
(1991) north of the Repetto Hillsnlge`nera ly alo g the groundwater barrier/Alhambra Wash fault shown on Figure 5-3 and discussed
below] may represent an incipient northwest propagation of a
reactivated fault, but there is no evidence that the active fault
continues to the Raymond fault." In his description of the active
tectonic features of the San Gabriel Basin he indicates that
"Although active faults constitute the margins of the San Gabriel
Basin [this would include the East Montebello-Alhambra Wash
fault], the cities in the interior of the basin are not underlain by
active earthquake sources." With the exception of the Puente Hills a.. d~ E4,47
blind thrust (not a surface fault), t is would characterize the City Lj
of Rosemead with
-
Wesh-faal~bwhich bounds the Upper Elysian Park fault on the east r~c..ce_.,,~ ,
C 5 -ri4 eG C-0- n, card B►. ~r , ` r-rd,' $ I.o s.s e_k.;S~ a r. o ~,ar
P A G E A- B t -tcA-0.6- r*r,41_a d
DRAFT JUNE 2008 Lj, d, Ww,d Fc GO1~`~ r"`O''~
0 0
From: Robert Yeats <yeatsr(@aeo.oregonstate, edu>
Date: August 12, 2008 1:49:23 PM PDT
To: Tania Gonzalez <tgonza1ez0earthconsultants.com>
Cc: Robert Yeats <Yeatsr(@aeo,oreaonstate.edu>
Subject: Rosemead
Dear Tania,
I have spent some time looking over the literature and my own data for the Rosemead area to
see if I could shed light on those parts of Wilson's report that are "giving you grief." Here are some
notes based on the pages of Wilson's report that you sent me.
1. The Fernando Formation is NOT 5.1 Ma old. Yeats (2004, GSA Bull. 116:1158-1182)
calibrates the stratigraphy in the left-hand strat section in Fig. 5, which shows that 5.1 Ma Is the
age of the base Fernando (Repetto-Delmontian contact). The top is almost certainly Pleistocene,
although not dated by ash beds younger than 2.4 Ma. It is older than the Brunhes-Matuyama
chron boundary.
2. The depth of the base Fernando of 500-2000m must be taken from fig. 8 of Yeats 2004 and
in the city limits of Rosemead is more or less correct east of the East Montebello fault, although
west of that fault and west of Alhambra Wash, the depths are locally less than 500 m.
3. The Workman Hill fault does not offset the base of Fernando north of NW Puente Hills based
on outcrop relations published in Daviess and Woodford (1949) and illustrated in fig. 8 of Yeats
(2004). Wilson is making the point that the EMF is the only surface fault they need to worry about,
and I don't disagree with his conclusion.
4. How far NW does the East Montebello fault go? The report makes it sound like this is largely
interpretive, whereas Yeats (2004) summarized in detail the geomorphic evidence described by
Treiman (1991, FER 222). It doesn't mean there is no fault NW to the Raymond, it means that
there is no evidence for a fault N of 1-10. The gravity mapping of Langenheim does not support a
fault to the north, either.
5. My biggest gripe is the statement that "the Alhambra Wash fault.. is believed to form the
eastern boundary of the Upper Elysian Park blind thrust." (italics mine.) Believed by whom? No
reference. Yeats (2004) made no such claim, nor was such a claim made in a synthesis of LA
metro area faulting put out by SCEC about that time. The hard data on which such a claim must
rest would be the anticlines masking blind thrusts, like the Santa Fe Springs anticlines and Coyote
folds to E, and Montebello anticline and Las Cienegas structures to W.
think that most people, including Shaw, believe that some major change must occur between
Santa Fe Springs and folds to the W For example, see Griffith and Cooke (2004, SSA Bull.
94:493-505), whose interpretation of the blind thrusts is based on Shaw et al. (2002, BSSA
92:2946-2960). Fig. 1 of Shaw et al. shows the LA segment of this structure stepped right (north)
from the Santa Fe Springs segment, with support from multichannel and high-resolution shallow
seismic profiles. The aftershocks and mainshocks of the 1987 earthquake also define the fault
plane in the Santa Fe Springs segment. Shaw et al. make no attempt to relate the east boundary
of the LA segment to the East Montebello fault or any other fault. Figure 1 of Griffiths and Cooke
show these same structures on a map with the East Montebello and Whittier faults, and they make
no attempt to relate the blind thrust to any surface fault. So "is believed to" is highly misleading
and should be removed or documented from the literature.
This leads to the misleading statement at the end of par. 2 that "the East Montebello-Alhambra
Wash fault, which bounds the Upper Elysian Park fault on the east."
6. The statement "that the Whittier fault occasionally (possibly 5000 year intervals) ruptures
through the Whittier Narrows and into the right-lateral MacArthur Park/Coyote Pass structures,
which turns westward at the Narrows into the Montebello Hills" is totally without foundation, or if he
knows something I don't, he has not referenced it. He is mentioning the possibility of an
earthquake cascade, which has been discussed at SCEC, but Wilson has not given any of these
references. And where the 5000 year figure comes from is unknown. Dolan's Geology paper on
•
times of activity in LA basin relative to times of quiescence should be cited and discussed if he
wants to pursue this line of reasoning; I wrote a Research Topic discussion of this paper in
Geology a few months ago.
In summary, I found this report relatively poor in quality, showing only a superficial knowledge of
the literature.
If you want to talk about this, you can call me either at the office or on my cell phone.
Bob
•
A P P E N D I X A
Tectonic modeling of the Los Angeles and San Gabriel Valley
basins, including the Whittier fault and Puente Hills blind thrust,
has been performed to understand the forces acting on the regio
n
and to classify the earthquake potential (slip rat o in ivi ua
faults. Griffith and Cooke (2004) indicate that the Puente Hills
blind thrust appears to truncate/displace the Whittier fault, which
remains active to the base of the seismogenic crust. Another study
(Cooke and Marshall, 2006, Table 3) estimates that the East
Montebello fault ar
blindthnLs4 has a reverse dip slip rate of approximately 0.3
millimeters per year (mm/yr) and a right-lateral strike-slip rate of
approximately 0.5 mm/yr. These rates are less than the nearby
r,~ rro^-'
Whittier fault (0.4 and 1.8 mm/yr) and similar to the Upper Elysian
awe
,,,,.u~,
Park blind thrust (0.3 and 0.1 mm/yr) suggesting that the
Alhambra-East Montebello fault rupture probability should be
similar to the Upper Elysian Park blind thrust, and should be
`44-A ac.P .
substantially less than the .Whittier fault.
Gath et al,(1994) performed a detailed APE-FZ studylin Rosemead
south of Alhambra Wash bounded by Walnut Grove Avenue on
on the north, angl Delta Street on the west.
the east, Rush Street.
/ ±
They defined two~Faul`ts each with ro sets of a few to several meters
and esti*ated right-lateral and vertical (down to the east) slip rates
-TIA
` (~~4
of O.15c~ to 0.255mm/yr and 0.08 mm/yr, respectively. Based on the?
th
d
i
t th
t
i
di
t
th
f th
Wh
tt
d
h
war
ex
a
e nor
ens
on o
e
e
i
ier
stu
y t
ey
n
ca
fault terminates at the Whittier Narrows into a dilational structure
L~e a:ti CI-00-4);,
of which the Alhambra Wash fault system may be the westward
margin. Also it may be possible that the Whittier fault occasionally
-t
(possibly 5000 year intervals) ruptures through the Whittier
W"e, 4,-A-C'
Narrows and into the right-lateral MacArthur Park/Coyote Pass
~a-'ji-eI "A..: CA, y
structures which turns westward at the Narrows into the
,,,,r-{•&--$IJ 4~k.,ers
Montebello Hills.
Alquist-Piiolo Earthquake Fault Zones - One active surface fault
has bean mapped within the City,(the Alhambra Wash fault)travers" the southern portion of the City on a northwest to
southeast trend (Figure 5-3). The East Montebello faulS-&13&ao73
04-Lb p 00
€at4. The Alhambra Wash-East Montebello fault is considered an
oblique slip (right-lateral/reverse) fault.
The State of California, pursuant to the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake
Fault Zoning (APEFZ) Act, requires the delineation of earthquake
fault zones along faults that are sufficiently active and well-defined-
The Act requires cities and counties to withhold development
M ~CQnb p-4 S
P A G E A- 9
DRAFT JUNE 2008
Pi
A P P E N D I X A
permits for sites within an earthquake fault zone until geological
investigations demonstrate that the sites are not threatened by
surface displacement from future faulting. In Rosemead, a portion
of the Alhambra Wash fault meets this definition, and the fault
zone boundaries shown in Figure 5-3 reflect State-delineated
boundaries.
The 1994 Gath et al, APEFZ study report provides the best
available detailed visual observations of the Alhambra Wash fault.
Subsequent reports refined data for the remainder of the Rush
Street site. Collectively, these indicate that the fault zone consists
of a series of discontinuous fault segments difficult to trace
between widellpseparated trenches, displaying branching, gaps,
stepovers, and local zones of compression.
Fault Hazard Management Zones -In addition to the faults shown
on Figures 5-2 and 5-3, t>' h~~°_ ^
ther active or potentially active faults that could
pose earthquake and fault rupture hazards to the Cit he
scientific understanding of the location and character of faults in
the southern San Gabriel Valley is evolving in the context of new
and old studies to define the limits of other possible surface faults
not shown on these two figures. These studies include (a) aerial LcttLk 1l4alji~
photographic and topographic map analyses (Treiman, 199 ; figure
5-4) to define young-looking lineaments based on vegetation/tonal
contrasts and geomorphic features (e.g., aligned washes or deflected
drainages), (b) analysis of groundwater levels( reiman, 1991) and
deep oil well drilling data (Yeats, 2004), and (c) modeling studies
to define the crustal strain conditions (Cooke and Griffith, 2005)
that might favor the development of certain faults in this area.
The California Geological Survey studieA aerial photographs and
A ~gr hic maps (Treiman, 1991; FER-222) to define faults that
A FZ requirements for active faults and designated the
Alhambra Wash fault~(Pigure`3). They also identified several
other features that were too vague to qualify as APEFZ faults; these
are shown on Figure 5-4. One of these features shown by Treiman
(1991) ups identified as a "northwest trending escarpment" along
the northeast edge of the Montebello Hills thought to be "the
surface expression of an extension of the Whittier fault" and
terminates on the northwestr,within the City near Emerson Place
and Isabel Avenue. Roughly the south one-half of this escarpment
is within the APEFZ for the Alhambra Wash fault. Aerial
s t re,~r+1.~.~0~
photographic and topographic map analyses by Treiman did not
find the northwest;trending escarpment to ave su icient evr ence
of activity to designate it an active fault.
P A G E A- 1 0 ~VI 1 {/Jf
D 1
D R A F T T U N E 2008
k~-•~-law-4+-~ ~,.'lcv,~'~ -tTj ~h`tj~r. -hr'ct' /
0 0
A P P E N D I X A
In FER-222 Treiman (1991) also shows possible buried fault
features identified by groundwater investigations, one partially
coincident with the Alhambra Wash fault (and extending farther
northwest into San Gabriel at Newby and Stevens Avenues) and
the other considered a possible northwest extension of the
Workman Hill fault (Figure 5-4). The so-called Workman Hill~o.<~f-
exte Sion Crosse, the City, has offset Tertiary bedrock formations,
oess oott a cc groundwater flow (Treiman, 1991), suggesting }~~,,,wer
the fault may be inactive. amt:
Other less extensive and less prominent features were defined by
aerial photographic and topographic map analyses presented by
Treiman (1991). Although he found insufficient evidence to
classify these features as active faults, their subdued expression and
the lack of data to rule them out as potential fault features
indicates that they should be considered in the planning and
permitting stages for new or substantially upgraded Important
facilities as defined herein. Therefore, Figure 5-4 shows these
features within 200-foot wide Fault Hazard Management Zones
(FHMZs) requiring investigations similar in scope to Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Act investigations mandated by the State
of California.
Secondary Seismic Hazards-Liquefaction
Liquefaction-induced ground failure can involve a complex
interaction among seismic, geologic, soil, topographic, and
groundwater factors. Failures can include ground fissures, sand
boils, ground settlement, loss of bearing strength, buoyancy effects,
ground oscillation, and lateral spreadS(Bartlett and Youd, 1992).
These, in turn, can affect off- surface and subsurface structures.
kateral spread is a liquefaction-induced landslide of a fairly
coherent block of soil and sediment 4ep ttia Tp cs laterally
(along the liquefied zone) by gravitationa]Aforceh
orb 1c, often toward as oPPo raphic low such s a
depression or a valley area ,Each type' iqueactio fai uie canes
cause damage to surface and subsurface structures, with the
severity dependent upon the type and magnitude of failure, and the
relative location of the structures.
For planning purposes, it is only possible to designate areas where
the likelihood of liquefaction failures, as a group, is greatest (the
light green areas in Figure 5-5) where historically high groundwater
levels are 40-feet deep or less. In addition, since liquefaction-
induced lateral spread failures are more prevalent adjacent to
topographic depressions or valley areas that form unsupported
slopes or "free faces," it is possible to conclude for Rosemead that
slopes into Rio Hondo or Alhambra, San Gabriel, and Eaton
~'ir
i
U.V al:v-
wt~
+6-. rt~-v w. Paire A--& I
GLwf G-a~ ww~ _-,+D re
-Qr~si -tom A Q ha ri.ic b a-~
Inr 4',, 44-1 c &111 -t qt-L-4 f k r
lv--~ . ` LI-4-p sr-to-d" ~
O's
w,o1 3 U
P A G E A- I I
DRAFT JUNE 2008
A P P E N D I X A
Washes would be the most susceptible to experience a lateral
spread landslide failure. These failures have occurred in areas with
very low slope gradients; at juvenile Hall and the Sylmar Converter
Station in Sylmar (1971), the average ground surface gradient was
1.5 degrees and the maximum was 3 degrees (O'Rourke, Roth, and
Hamada, 1992. Lateral spreads in the San Francisco earthquake
of 1906 occurred associated with surface gradients of 0.4 to 2.10
percent, or about 0.2 to 1 degree (O'Rourke, Beaujon, and
Scawthorn, 19921. In the latter case, the slope of the liquefied
subsurface layer may have been as low as zero degrees. Presently
the Seismic Hazard Mapping Act (SHMA) requires that
liquefaction studies for most new structures for human occupancy
(with some exceptions) be conducted and independently reviewed
by qualified professional engineers and/or geologists.
Flood Hazard— Dam Failure Inundation
The past failures (Baldwin Hills and St. Francis) and near-failures
(Van Norman) of southern California dams point out the
importance of considering dam safety. Dams may fail for seismic or
geologic reasons, either of which could lead to the results described
in this section. The City lies downstream from dams and large
debris basins whose drainages ultimately flow into either San
Gabriel River, Rio Hondo, or overland from the west (Garvey
Reservoir).
Portions of Rosemead lie within the dam inundation area of the
Whittier Narrows Dam. Whittier Narrows Dam (located in
Montebello, and Santa Fe Dam and Reservoir (located in
Irwindale) are flood control projectl, and water conservation facilities
constructed and operated by the U.S. Army Corps of En ineers
(USACE), Los Angeles District. The am is a 1949 earth-filled
USACE dam, which is approximately 17,000 feet long and could
contain approximately 250,000 acre-feet of water. In the unlikely
event of a Whittier Narrows Dam or Santa Fe Dam failure, the
inundation risk to Rosemead is considered small due to the low
percentage of time that these dams/reservoirs contain very much
water. Areas located within the inundation footprints of these two
structures are within the eastern portion of the City as indicated on
Figure 5-6.
Portions of Rosemead located south of Garvey Avenue and west of
the Alhambra Wash lie within the dam inundation area of the 44 -
acre, 525-million-gallon Garvey Dam/Reservoir in Monterey Park
(Figure 5-6). The Metropolitan Water District of Southern
California completed a substantial overhaul of the facility in 1999
P A G E A- 1 2
•
DRAFT JUNE 2008
•
•
A P P E N D I X A
to address seepage and to ensure overall reservoir integrity,
therefore the chance of a dam failure is considered small. The area
of inundation risk is larger than for the Whittier Narrows/Santa Fe
Dams and is focused south of Garvey Avenue and west of the
Alhambra. Wash.
Inundation hazards range from high to low with distance away from
these various water sources. Limited areas immediately along the
natural drainage courses would be the most susceptible to damage
from rapidly flowing water, severe erosion, and associated floating
debris related to Santa Fe Dam. Higher areas and those farthest
from the channels would suffer more from sheet flow and rising
water. Man-made barriers, such as the I-10 and SR-60 freeways,
major east-to-west highways and railroads, would locally deflect
sheet flow in ways not anticipated by the USACE modeling.
Failure of this dam when substantially full represents a low
probability, worst-case inundation scenario.
The regulation of these dams reduces substantially the chance of
catastrophic failure, however, under the most severe scenario
earthquakes for the various fault mentioned above, these dams
would be in danger of damage that could cause a release of water.
For severe flooding to result, the earthquake and the high water
levels would have to occur simultaneously, which makes the chance
very remote. Mitigation of flooding realistically would consist of
evacuation planning for the potentially flooded areas of the city and
elevating new critical facilities above the predicted flood level fai-its
location. Of course, upgrading the structural integrity of the dams
would also provide an added safety margin for all but the most
severe earthquake events.
Potential Natural Hazards and Important
Facilities within the City
Important facilities, as defined herein, include, but are not
necessarily limited to, public facilities, hospitals and nursing
homes, schools, and places of worship; these facilities are shown on
Figure 5-7 and listed below. The map numbers in the table
correspond to the various colored/numbered circles in the figure.
For each location it is noted whether one of the following potential
hazards are present:
Fault Zone (with rupture potential; Figures 5-3 and 5-4)
Historically high groundwater depth (shallow water; Figure
5-5)
P A G E A 13
DRAFT JUNE 2008
0 0
A P P E N D I X A
Geologic Hazards at Locations of Concern within the City of Rosemead
~
Z
W
me
dress
'a
n
a
c
~a
O
(9
C
r
o
o
c
7
m
N
r
7
as
HOSPITALS
New Fern Guest Hone
2608 New Ave.
H
50-100
GR
Springfield Manor
2526 New Ave.
H
50-100
FHMZ
Ingleside Hospital
7500 Hellman Ave.
H
50-100
Alhambra Behavioral Health
Center
4619 N. Rosemead Blvd.
H
40-W
NURSING HOMES
Mission Care Center
4800 Delta Ave.
NH
50-100
Del Mar Convalescent Hospital
3136 Del Mar Ave.
NH
30-40
FHMZ
PLACES OF WORSHIP
Rosemead Church of Nazarene
2703 Walnut Genre Ave.
W
5-10
X
Lord of Universe Church
9200 Glendon Wa
W
5-10
X
Evergreen Baptist Church
1255 San Gabriel Blvd.
W
5-10
Church of Jesus Christ of LDS
7505 Garvalia Ave.
W
50-100
GR
FHMZ
Rosemead Christian Center
2713 Jackson Ave.
W
50-100
GR
Chinese Neighborhood
Covenant
7656 Graves Ave.
W
50-100
FHMZ
Branches Fellowship
7712 Graves Ave.
W
50-100
FHMZ
First Ba fist Church
8618 Mission Dr.
W
50-100
Christian Harvest Church
4930 Earle Ave.
W
50-100
Faith Christian Church
2518 San Gabriel Blvd.
W-
-10-20
X
GR
APEFZ
Bread of Life Church
2524 San Gabriel Blvd.
W
10-20
X
GR
APEFZ
Tensho Kotai Jin u Kyo, SoCal
3926 Rio Hondo Ave.
W
10-20
X
Church In Rosemead
2451 Glad Ave.
W
10-20
GR
APEFZ
Los Angeles Buddhist Union
7833 Emerson PI.
W
20-30
X
Open Bible Church
7915 Heilman Ave.
W
20-30
X
First Evangelical Church
3658 Walnut Grove Ave.
W
20-30
X
San Gabriel Valley Buddhist
3846 Walnut Grove Ave.
W
30-40
X
FHMZ
Rosemead Christian Church
8705 Valle Boulevard
W
30-40
X
Rosemead Korean SDA Church
4203 Rosemead Blvd.
W
30-40
X
Rosemead United Methodist
9032 Mission Dr.
W
30-40
X
United Methodist Church
9032 Mission Dr.
W
30-40
X
Buddhist Ortho-G7eed Assn
3039 Del Mar Ave.
W
30-40
FHMZ
First Presbyterian Church
7732 Emerson PI.
W
30-40
FHMZ
Bethel Temple
3253 Del Mar Ave.
W
30-40
Church of God Prophecy
823 Muscatel Ave.
W
0-5
X
APEFZ
P A G E A- 1 4
DRAFT JUNE 2008
01 0
A P P E N D I X A
Geologic Hazards at Important Facilities within the City of Rosemead
m
7
ame
ddress
'c.
wN
a
00
0
O
R
J
C
O
E R
c
C
N
R
LL
Jehovah's Witnesses
2754 Del Mar Ave.
W
40-50
GR
FHMZ
Rosemead Foursquare Church
8714 Mission Dr. I
N
40-50
SCHOOLS
Savannah Elements
3720 N. Rio Hondo Ave.
S
5-10
X
SFD
Sanchez Elements
8470 Fern Ave.
S
5.10
X
Temple Intermediate
8470 E. Fern St
S
5-10
X
Rosemead Education Center
2662 Walnut Grove Ave.
S
5-10
X
Rice Elementary
2150 N. Angelus Ave.
S
5-10
GR
APEFZ
University of The West
1409 Walnut Grove Ave.
S
5-10
APEFZ
Don Bosco Technical Institute
1151 San Gabriel Blvd.
S
5.10
Bites Elementary
7501 E. Fern Ave.
S
50-100
GR
FHMZ
Wilriams Elements
2444 N. Del Mar
S
50-100
GR
Garvey Intermediate School
2720 N. Jackson Ave.
S
50-100
GR
Logsdon School
7600 Graves Ave.
S
50-100
FHMZ
Emerson Elementary
7544 E. Emerson Pl.
S
50-100
Shue ementary
8472 Wells St.
S
50-100
Berean Christian School
8618 Mission Dr.
S
50-100
Sunshine Educational Center
3107 Gladys Ave.
S
10-20
X
Janson Elementary
8628 E. Marshall
S
20-30
X
FHMZ
Rosemead Elementary SD
3907 Rosemead Blvd.
S
20-30
X
Rosemead Beau School
8531 Valle Blvd.
S
30-40
X
FHMZ
Rosemead College of English
8705 Valley Blvd.
S
30-40
X
Rosemead Adult Education
4105 Rosemead Blvd.
S
30-40
X
Muscatel Intermediate School
4201 N.lvarAve.
S
30-40
X
Rosemead High School
9063 E. Mission Dr.
S
30-40
X
Encinita Elements
4515 N. Encinita Ave.
S
30-40
X
Duff Elements
7830 Dorothy St
S
30-40
FHMZ
Garvey School District
2730 N. Del Mar Ave.
S
40-50
GR
Little People Pre- drool
4715 Rosemead Blvd.
5
40-50
1
-j
NOTES: (1) H = Hospital; W = Place of Worship; NH = Nursing Home: S = School; (Z) Historically High Groundwater = depth range
In feet; (3) GR = Garvey Reservoir and SFD = Santa Fe Dom: (4) FHMZ = Fault Hazard Management Zone; APEFZ = Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zone.
P A G E A- 1 5
D R A F T J U N E 2 0 0 8
0 0
A P P E N D I X A
• Liquefaction (Figure 5-5)
■ Dam Inundation (Figure 5-6)
These are primarily earthquake-related hazards. It is important to
point out that these potential hazards do not necessarily indicate
that buildings at these locations will either certainly experience the
hazard indicated for the location, or that if 0/-
large city did experience a
large earthquake that significant damage e#- injury would occur at
the individual locations. Secondly, there is no retroactive
application of FHMZ policies that came into place after a facility
was built. awua' M 0
The pi. rpose of identifying these locations is to use this as one tool*
t the city to ' tere prioritize its response to a
severe earthquake event by knowing which important facilities may
be impacted by known potential hazards affecting areas of the city.
In addition, the city can evaluate whether or not special efforts
should be made to evaluate facilities and their emergency response
plans where some unique safety concern is presented.
References Cited
Geology and Sons
-~Califomia Department of Water Resources (CDWR), 1966,
Planned utilization of ground water basins; San Gabriel
Valley, Appendix A: Geohydrology, Bulletin 104-2, Areal
Geology-Plate 9A, 1-inch = 2-miles.
United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), 2006,
Website,
http://www.epa.gov/radordzonemap/california.htm.
Yeats, R. S, 2004, Tectonics of the San Gabriel Basin and
surroundings, southern California, Geological Society of
America Bulletin; September/October 2004; v. 116; no.
9/10; p. 1158-1182.
Yerkes, R. F., and R. H. Campbell, 2005, Preliminary Geologic Map
of the Los Angeles 30' x 60' Quadrangle, Southern
California, Version 1.0, Open-File Report 2005-1019,
littp://pubs.usps.goy/of/2005/1019.
Seismicity/Earthquakes and Faulting
Bartlett, S. F., and T. L. Youd, 1992, Case Histories of Lateral
Spreads Caused by the 1964 Alaska Earthquake, in Case
Studies of Liquefaction and Lifeline Performance During
P A G E A- 1 6
l" r^ fo
'f f~ h
14T A,;"
DRAFT JUNE 2008
A P P E N D I X A
Past Earthquakes--Volume 2 United States Cases, edited by
O'Rourke and Hamada, pages 2-1 through 2-127.
Blake, T. F., 2002, EQFAULT-Computer Program for Earthquake
Assessments, update of 1989 program; attenuation
relationship Boore et al. (1997) Horizontal - NEHRP D
(250), median value.
Bolt, B. A., 1993, Abridged Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale,
Earthquakes - Newly Revised and Expanded, Appendix C,
W.H. Freeman and Co., 331 pp.
Boore, D. M., W. B. Joyner, and T. E. Fumal, 1997, Equations for
estimating horizontal response spectra and peak
acceleration from western North American earthquakes: A
summary of recent work, Seismological Research Letters,
68,128-153.
Bryant, W. A. (compiler), 2005, Digital Database of Quaternary
and Younger Faults from the Fault Activity Map of
California, version 2.0: California Geological Survey Web
Page,
http://www.consrv.ca.gov/CGS/inforrnation/publications/Ou
aternaryFaults ver2.htm; (date downloaded from web site).
California ~
Geological Survey (CGS), 2007, Peak Ground
Acceleration Map - 10% Probability of Being Exceeded in
50 Years (October 2006), CGS website -
http://www.consrv.ca.gov/CCS/r-ghnVpsha/pga.htm#PGA
California Seismic Safety Commission, 2006, Status of the
Unreinforced Masonry Law, 2006 progress Report to the
Legislature, SSC-2006-04, appendices A and B,
httD://Www.seismic.ca.~zov/pub/CSSC%202006%20URM%2
0Report%20Final.pdf
CDMG, 1991, Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zones, El Monte
Quadrangle, November 1, 1991, scale 1:24.000.
CDMG, 1998, Seismic Hazard Evaluation of the El Monte 7.5
minute quadrangle, Los Angeles County, California:
California Division of Mines and Geology, Open-File
Report 98-15,
httD:HEmw.consrv.ca. ov shmp/doNr-nl_oad/evalrr)t/elmo eval
r` - P A G E A- 1 7
D R A F T T U N E 2 0 0 8
A P P E N D I X A
CDMG, 1999, Seismic Hazard Zones Map of the El Monte 7.5-
Minute Quadrangle, Los Angeles County, California,
March 25, 1999,
httpJMw.consrv.ca.gov/shmp/download/pdf/ozn elmo.pdf
Cooke, M. L., and S. T. Marshall, 2006, Fault slip rates from three-
dimensional models of the Los Angeles metropolitan area,
California, Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 33, L21313,
2006.
Gath, E. M., 1994, A Paleoseismic Investigation at the Northern
Terminus of the Whittier Fault Zone, in the Whittier
Narrows Areal Rosemead, Califomia--Technical Report to
the Southern California Earthquake Center, DRAFT
Version 5/18/94.
Griffith, W. A. and M. L. Cooke, 2004, Mechanical Validation of
the Three-Dimensional Intersection Geometry between the
Puente Hills Blind-Thrust System and the Whittier Fault,
Los Angeles, California, Bulletin of the Seismological
Society of America, Vol. 94, No. 2, pp. 493-505, April 2004.
Griffith, W. A. and M. L. Cooke, 2005, How Sensitive Are Fault-
Slip Rates in the Los Angeles Basin to Tectonic Boundary
Conditions?, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of
America, Vol. 95, No. 4, pp. 1263-1275, August 2005.
O'Rourke, T. D., Beaujon, P. A., and Scawthom, C.R., 1997.. "Large
ground deformations and their effects on lifeline facilities:
1906 San Francisco earthquake." Case Studies of
Liquefaction and Lifeline Performance during Past
Earthquakes, Volume 2: United States Case Studies, Tech.
Rep. NCEER-92-0002, T. D. O'Rourke, and M. Hamada
(eds.), February 17, 130 pages.
O'Rourke, T. D., Roth, B. L., and Hamada, M., 199, "Large ground
deformations and their effects on lifeline facilities: 1971
San Fernando earthquake." Case Studies of Liquefaction
and Lifeline Performance during Past Earthquakes, Volume
2: United States Case Studies, Tech. Rep. NCEER-92-
0002, T. D. O'Rourke, and M. Hamada (eds.), February 17,
85 pages.
Rowshandel, B. et al, 2006, Estimation of Future Earthquake
Losses in California, California Geological Survey,
ftp://ftp.consrv.ca.gov/pub/dnlgZrgmp/CA-Loss-Paper.pdf:
P A G E A- 1 8
DRAFT JUNE 2008
0
0
A P P E N D I X A
Puente Hills 7.1 earthquake,
ft p:!/ftp.consrv.ca.gov/pub/dmgLgmp/loss/s 15.pdf.
Shaw, J. H., et al, 2002, Puente Hills Blind-Thrust System, Los
Angeles, California, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of
America, Vol. 92, No. 8, pp. 2946-2960, December 2002.
Treiman, J. A., 1991, Whittier fault zone, Los Angeles and Orange
counties, California: California Division of Mines and
Geology Fault Evaluation Report FER-222, scale 1:24,000.
iz . S. 10 011 Te cy, b,- . ►
Flooding Dam Inundation S^°~t C- ~
California Office of Emergency Services, 2007 P (~,~QQ]r.+• J.R, l~L~ 1-~d. 4~to~ K. t158- 1t8a1
USGS, 2007 2 ?
O
P A G E A- 1 9
D R A F T J U N E 2 0 0 8
A P P E N D I X A
P A G E A- 2 0
0
This page intentionally left blank.
•
e
DRAFT JUNE 2008
• •
Comments on the Rosemead General Plan Safety Element
Matt Everling, Director of Planning
Rosemead Planning Commission
Gentlemen:
I made extensive comments on the First Draft of the General Plan. Subsequently the City
retained, through his prior association with our General Plan Consultant, Mr. Ken
Wilson, CEG, of Wilson Geosciences, Altadena CA. Mr. Wilson did an excellent re-
write and complied several excellent MAPS.
I have submitted comments to the City on the Safety element which you should find in
your packets. (around January 5) which are not repeated here but included by reference.
Subsequently the City Special Council retained Earth Consulting International (ECI),
Santa Ana, CA to peer review the Draft and to comment thereon. Thisprocess should
give us an excellent Safety Element.
The ECI Redline has recently been submitted to the City and there has been no
opportunity to review the redline or comments or any subsequent revisions to the
document by the City's consultants. I am assuming that it will be accomplished.
There were several items, which were not covered in the Draft, and therefore may not
have received peer review comments.
First is the issue of "BASIN DEPTH"
Consideration of "Basin Depth" is mandatory for the generation of ground motion
(seismicity) for SHMA (landslide and liquefaction) and for compliance with the Building
Code. The Current USGS database is NOT adjusted for "Basin Depth Amplification"
Eventhough there have many studies in Southern California going back over 10 years.
Rosemead is shown as a "Hot Spot" in the SCEC Phase III report c.a. 1998 indicating
that events on the Palos Verdes and Newport Inglewood faults could produce high levels
of "Basin Depth Amplification" (and which manifested itself in the distant but
widespread damage in the Northridge earthquake- 10 freeway collapse as an example).
The hazard in Rosemead could be 4 times what had been expected by conventional
methods.
Most of the US does not have nationwide Basin Depth Data so it was not considered
nationwide by USGS for its recently released database. Data IS available for Southern
California from the Southern California Earthquake Center (SCEC).
I suggest that a Basin Depth Map be added to the Draft
The side effect of the above is that the USGS website cannot be utilized without
modification in Southern California and comply with the 2% exceedence in 50 years
• •
"event" requirements of the 2007 building code. The CGS/USGS databases have not
been "adopted" as part of the building code and they are not "regulatory."
A GOAL could be that data compliant with the Code be generated for the City of
Rosemead to aid our developers and building official in the performance of his duties.
Second is the Consideration of distant large duration/ large magnitude earthquakes.
Special Consideration of the San Andreas Fault from Gorman to the Salton Sea is
required. Earthquakes on portions of the San Andreas is the most likely Seismic Hazard
with a re-occurrence rate in the 250 year time frame. This implies that there will be
around 10 events, some large, some small, and maybe one largest (Maximum Considered
Event MCE) , in the timeframe required to be considered by the 2007 building Code (2/3
of MCE in around 2500 years).
Current widely available data is generated using distance/ magnitude relationships
commonly called "attenuation relationships" new ones (Next Generation Attenuation
NGA) have just been published and are included in the CGS and USGS databases.
However they are not adjusted for Basin Depth and they do not consider the complex
"source effects" and the "path effects" of San Andreas Fault rupture.
Such data is now available from multiple sources. There is a CalTech study on the 1857
event and subsequent studies on the Southern San Andreas. One of the first by San
Diego State (TerraShake) Shows that the Whittier Narrows Golf Course site (WNGC)
has the most destructive shaking possibility of any site in all of Los Angeles and Orange
Counties.
The Zone of severe shaking follows the edge of the San Gabriel Valley Basin and
correlates with Basin Depth. This "red zone" coincidentally follows the course of the Rio
Hondo River putting much of East and North East Rosemead in this High Hazard Zone.
All of Rosemead is near enough to this "hot spot" and "red zone" to be greatly effected.
Not only will the level of shaking far exceed that shown by the NGA methods but as the
basin is seismically "excited" (like a bowl of jello) both the amount and duration of
shaking is amplified.
Without Consideration of the source and path effects (GEOLOGY) (and site effects
GEOTECHNICAL/Soils) of The San Andreas (and other Seismic Sources) compliance
with the building Code is not possible.
Compliance with the Seismic Hazards Mapping Act Requires consideration of large
distant events. Long duration events can have a great effect in the hazards of liquefaction
and landslide
The Governor's Disaster Drill this year and the Southern California Shake Out this
November are focused to consider the hazard of this risk.
• •
I suggest that as a planning document that this risk must be identified in the General Plan
with Goals to investigate and mitigate the effect upon Rosemead
There is a map with a Seismogram centered on the WNGC site that could be included in
the General Plan. I included the reference in my previous comments.
All of our Disaster Planning will end up being dependent upon the San Andreas
Examples:
One of the greatest risk from this risk will be the disruption of services especially Water.
System wide pipe breakage can be expected due to the large ground waves and flexible
alluvial soil. Replacement pipe in the amount required for Southern California repairs
cannot be made available for at least six months. Planning requires the consideration that
Rosemead may be without water distribution for up to six months.
In addition to earthquake damage there is a great risk of Fire and even more than the
Shake Out Scenario projects if Santa Ana Winds are present.
Water to fight major fires will not be available.
I am not suggesting that detailed discussion of these items need to be included in the
general plan
We have a disaster Hazards Mitigation Plan which is more suitable for that purpose
Also required there will be a discussion of the Whittier fault through Rosemead and the
effect of being directly over the Puente Hills Thrust fault. Both of these were involved in
the 1987 Whittier Earthquake which was actually centered in Rosemead.
Removal of fire prone invasive species such as Ailanthus and Eucalyptus may be
considered.
I do think that a brief statement on the San Andreas Risk is appropriate.
Jim Flournoy
Relationship of these Guidelines to Local General Plans
and Permitting Ordinances
Public Resources Code Section 2699 directs cities and counties to "take into account the
information provided in available seismic hazard maps" when it adopts or revises the
safety element of the general plan and any land-use planning or permitting ordinances.
Cities and counties should consider the information presented in these guidelines when
adopting or revising these plans and ordinance
Similar text for Alquist Priolo
•
LI
Unfortunately the references found on page 22 of the 2008 SP-117 are still based on
earlier data and do NOT comply with the 2007 Rosemead Building Code
Clarification of this could be put in the DHMP
Page 22 also states
PGA estimated by the above procedures may still require additional adjustment to
account for topographic and basin effects.
Use of the SPPV method is not recommended for sites located very near to seismic
sources, where reliable ground-motion estimates may require consideration of near-field
source effects
All of Rosemead is effected by the above statement
The Comments above are reflected in CGS SP-117 2008 page 23 -24 which could be
referenced
• •
City of Rosemead
SEPTEMBER 25, 2008
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBER OF THE ROSEMEAD
PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: OLIVER CHI, CITY MANAGER f~p ol(o~ C.
SUBJECT: GENERAL PLAN TRAFFIC ANALYSIS
As part of the preparation of the General Plan and related Environmental Impact
Report (EIR), a detailed traffic study was prepared that analyzed all potential
impacts related to any changes proposed in the General Plan. For the purposes
of providing a comparative traffic analysis between the existing General Plan and
the proposed Plan, an additional cursory traffic study was prepared for the
existing General Plan. Summaries of each of the traffic studies are attached to
this memo (Attachment A - Impacts generated by the existing General Plan,
Attachment B - Impacts generated by the proposed General Plan).
Based upon the information contained in the traffic studies, it appears that the
impacts generated by the existing General Plan are more severe than those of
the proposed General Plan. This was confirmed by the City's traffic consultant
(KOA Corporation) and is mainly due to the existing General Plan allowing for a
greater floor-to-area ratio (FAR) in commercial and industrial areas.
In either case, the City Council will be required to adopt a Statement of
Overriding Considerations acknowledging that there are traffic impacts that may
not be feasible to mitigate.
If you would like any further information, please let me know.
0 •
Existing General Plan Traffic Impacts
City of Rosemead General Plan
Significant Impact Calculations - Cursory Analysis of Existing General Plan Land Use
AM Peak Hour
ntersection
Existing Conditions
Year(2007)
Future Ambient
Growth Conditions
Year(2025)
Future With
Projects
Conditions
Year(2025)
/C
OS
V/C
LOS
V/C
LOS
V/C
LOS
Diff.
Impact?
Impact?
I
Walnut Grove Ave at Mission Dr.
0.744
C
0.874
D
2.136
F
1.262
I cs..`,
Yes
2
Rosemead Blvd. at Lower Azusa Rd.
0.772
C
0.906
E
1.252
F
0.346
- ez`
Yes
3
Rosemead Blvd. at Mission Dr.
0.937
E
1.105
F
2.391
F
1.286
Yes
Yes
4
Walnut Grove Ave, at Valley Blvd.
0.846
D
0.995
E
2.613
F
1.618
Yes
Yes
5
Rosemead Blvd. at Valley Blvd.
0.967
E
1.141
F
4.644
F
3.503
Yes
Yes
6
Valley Blvd. at Mission Dr.
0.504
A
0.584
A
1.548
F
0.964
c _ r
7
Valley Blvd. at Rio Hondo Ave
0.578
A
0.673
B
1.926
F
1.253
6 Y
Yes"
8
Valley Blvd. at Temple City Blvd.
1.147
F
1.356
F
2.091
F
0.735
Yes
Yes
9
Walnut Grove Ave at Marshall St
0.909
E
1.072
F
3.072
F
1000
Yes
Yes
10
Rosemead Blvd. at Marshall St
0.861
D
1.013
F
3.379
F
2366
Yes
Yes
I I
Rosemead Blvd. at Glendon Way
0.840
D
0.989
E
3.364
F
2.375
Yes
Yes
12
Temple City Blvd. at Loftus Dr.
0.749
C
0.878
D
1.308
F
0.430
Yes
13
Del Mar Ave. at Hellman Ave.
0.831
D
0.979
E
2.347
F
1.368
Yes
Yes
14
San Gabriel Blvd. at Hellman Ave.
0.998
E
1.177
F
2.955
F
1.776
Yes
Yes
15
Walnut Grove Ave. at Hellman/Ramona
0.820
D
0.965
E
2.120
F
L I SS
Yes
Yes
16
Rosemead Blvd. at Telstar Ave.
0775
C
0.91 1
E
2.424
F
1.513
Yes
17
Rosemead Blvd. at Whitmore St
0.697
B
0.815
D
2.380
F
1.565
18
New Ave. at Garvey Ave
0.786
C
0.923
E
2.496
F
1.573
Yes
Yes
19
Del Mar Avd. at Garvey Ave.
0.596
A
0.695
B
3.076
F
2.381
Yes
20
San Gabriel Blvd. at Garvey Ave.
0.712
C
0.834
D
3.375
F
2.541
Y
Yes
21
Walnut Grove Ave. at Garvey Ave
0.800
D
0.941
E
4.330
F
3.389
yes
Yes
22
San Gabriel Blvd. at Rush SL/Potrero Grande
0.769
C
0.904
E
2.204
F
1.300
23
Walnut Grove Ave. at Rush St
0.598
A
0.697
B
1.667
F
0.970
Y s
Y`-
24
Walnut Grove Ave. at Landis View Ln.
0.480
A
0.557
A
0.857
D
0.300
No
No
25
Walnut Grove Ave. at San Gabriel Blvd.
0.743
C
0.870
D
1.641
F
0.771
Yes
26
San Gabriel Blvd. at SR-60 WB Ramps
0.844
D
0.992
E
1.800
F
0.808
Yes
E
own Center Dr. at SR-60 EB Ramps
0.600
B
0.699
B
1.021
F
0.322
28
Sa
n Gabriel Blvd. at Town Center Dr.
0.735
C
0.863
D
1.349
F
0.486
: a
es
Note Bolded text represents impacts under current/new General Plan EIR Shaded text represents additional impacts that would be caused by the current general plan
land use. 9 fully implemented
JA3095 Rosemead LOS Y5 FactorAcresNew2.xls
AM 9/242008 1 &.29 AM
•
Existing General Plan Traffic Impacts
City of Rosemead General Plan
Significant Impact Calculations - Cursory Analysis of Existing General Plan Land Use
PM Peak Hour
Intersection
Existing Conditions
Year(2007)
Future Ambient
Growth Conditions
Year(2025)
Future With
Projects
Conditions
Year 2025
/C
OS
V/C
LOS
V/C
LOS
V/C
LOS
Diff.
Impact?
Impact?
I
Walnut Grove Ave at Mission Dr.
0.793
C
0.931
E
2.500
F
1.569
Yes
Yes
2
Rosemead Blvd. at Lower Azusa Rd.
0.872
D
1.025
F
1.568
F
0.543
Yes
Yes
3
Rosemead Blvd. at Mission Dr.
0.973
E
1.147
F
3.284
F
2.137
Yes
Yes
4
Walnut Grove Ave, at Valley Blvd.
1.208
F
1.429
F
2.886
F
1.457
Yes
Yes
5
Rosemead Blvd. at Valley Blvd.
0.917
E
1.079
F
4.556
F
3.477
Yes
Yes
6
Valley Blvd. at Mission Dr.
0.482
A
0.558
A
1.791
F
1.233
7
Valley Blvd. at Rio Hondo Ave.
0.753
C
0.884
D
3.599
F
2.715
Yes
Yes
8
Valley Blvd. at Temple City Blvd.
0.865
D
1.018
F
1.775
F
0.757
Yes
Yes
9
Walnut Grove Ave at Marshall St.
0.926
E
1.090
F
6.464
F
5.374
Yes
Yes
10
Rosemead Blvd. at Marshall St.
0.977
E
1.153
F
4547
F
3.394
Yes
Yes
I I
Rosemead Blvd. at Glendon Way
0.773
C
0.909
E
2.791
F
1.882
Yes
Yes
12
Temple City Blvd. at Loftus Dr.
0.873
D
1.027
F
1.463
F
0.436
Yes
Yes
13
Del Mar Ave. at Hellman Ave
0.633
B
0.741
C
2560
F
1.819
Yes
14
San Gabriel Blvd. at Hellman Ave.
0.920
E
1.084
F
2.975
F
1.891
Yes
I
Yes
15
Walnut Grove Ave. at Hellman/Ramona
0.976
E
1.151
F
3.494
F
2.343
Yes
Yes
16
Rosemead Blvd. at Telstar Ave.
0.879
D
1.035
F
3.098
F
2.063
Yes
Yes
17
Rosemead Blvd. at Whitmore St.
0.767
C
0.900
E
2.787
F
1.887
Yes
18
New Ave. at Garvey Ave
0.621
B
0.725
C
2.960
F
2.235
Yes
Yes
19
Del Mar Ave. at Garvey Ave
0.822
D
0.967
E
4.233
F
3.266
Yes
Yes
20
San Gabriel Blvd. at Garvey Ave
1.100
F
1.300
F
4.695
F
3.395
Yes
Yes
21
Walnut Grove Ave. at Garvey Ave
1.255
F
1.486
F
4.561
F
3.075
Yes
Yes
22 2
San Gabriel Blvd. at Rush St./Potrero Grande
0.738
C
0.866
D
2443
F
1577
Yep
Y
23
Walnut Grove Ave. at Rush St.
0.558
A
0.650
B
1.757
F
1.107
Yes
'
24
Walnut Grove Ave. at Landis View Ln.
0.411
A
0.473
A
0.848
D
0.375
PJ o
'~o
25
Walnut Grove Ave. at San Gabriel Blvd.
0.936
E
1.101
F
2.438
F
1.337
Yes
Yes
26
San Gabriel Blvd. at SR-60 WB Ramps
0.768
C
0.901
E
1.706
F
0.805
Yes
Yes
27
own Center Dr. at SR-60 EB Ramps
0.626
B
0.732
C
1.095
F
0.363
Yes
Y
1 28
San Gabriel Blvd. at Town Center Dr.
0.681
B
0.797
C
1.376
F
0.579 I
Ycs .
Yes
Note: Bolded text represents impacts under current/new General Plan EIR. Shaded text represents additional impacts that would be caused by the current general plan
land use, if fully implemented.
JA3095 Rosemead LOS v5 FactorAcresNew2.xls
PM 912412008 10:29 AM
Proposed General Plan Traffic Impacts
Significant Traffic Impacts of General Plan Development
Table 14 - Significant Impacts to Stuffy Intersections - Future (2025)
with General Plan Development - PM Peak
ntersection
Existing Conditions
Year (2007)
Future Ambient
Growth Conditions
year (2025)
Future With
Projects Condition
Year (2025)
IC
OS
VIC
LOS
VIC
LOS
VIC
LOS
Diff.
Impact!
Impact?
I
Walnut Grove Ave at Mission Dr.
0.793
C
0.931
E
1.047
F
0.116
Yes
Yes
2
Rosemead Blvd. at Lower Azusa Rd.
0.872
D
1.025
F
1.099
F
0.074
Yes
Yes
3
Rosemead Blvd. at Mission Dr.
0.973
E
1.147
F
1299
F
0.152
Yes
Yes
4
Walnut Grove Ave. at Valley Blvd,
1108
F
1.429
F
1.693
F
0.264
Yes
Yes
5
Rosemead Blvd. at Valley Blvd.
0.917
E
1.079
F
1.320
F
0.241
Yes
Yes
6
Valley Blvd. at Mission Dr.
0.482
A
0.558
A
0.698
B
0.140
No
No
7
Valley Blvd, at Rio Hondo Ave.
0.753
C
0.884
D
1.204
F
0.320
Yes
Yes
8
Valley Blvd. at Temple City Blvd.
0.865
D
1.018
F
1.097
F
0.079
Yes
Yes
9
Walnut Grove Ave at Marshall St
0.926
E
1.09D
F
2.074
F
0.984
Yes
Yes
10
Rosemead Blvd at Marshall St
0.977
E
1.153
F
1.386
F
0133
Yes
Yes
I I
Rosemead Blvd. at Glendon Way
0.773
C
0.909
E
1.151
F
0142
Y.
Yes
12
Temple City Blvd at Loftus Dr.
0.873
D
1.027
F
1.061
F
0.034
Yes
Yes
13
Del Mar Ave. at Hellman Ave.
0.633
B
0.741
C
0,981
E
0140
No
Yes
14
San Gabriel Blvd at Hdlran Ave.
0.920
E
1.084
F
1.302
F
0118
Y.
Yes
15
Walnut Grove Ave at Hellman/Ramona
0.976
E
1.151
F
1.692
F
0541
Yes
Yes
16
Rosemead Blvd. at Telstar Ave
0.879
D
1.035
F
1.133
F
0.098
Yes
Yes
17
Rosemead Blvd at Whitmore St
D.767
C
0.900
E
0.966
E
0.066
No
Yes
18
New Ave. at Garvey Ave.
0.621
B
0.725
C
1.134
F
0.409
Yes
Yes
19
Del Mar Ave. at Garvey Ave
0.822
D
0.967
E
1.351
F
0.384
Yes
yes
20
San Gabriel Blvd at Garvey Ave
1.100
F
1.300
F
1.514
F
0.214
Yes
Yes
21
Walnut Grove Ave. at Garvey Ave.
1,255
F
1.486
F
1.735
F
0149
Yes
Yes
22
San Gabriel Blvd at Rush SLIPotrero Grande
0.738
C
0.866
D
0.859
D
-0007
No
No
23
Walnut Grove Ave. at Rush St
0558
A
0.650
B
0.690
B
0.040
No
No
24
Walnut Grove Ave, at Landis Vie. Ln.
0.411
A
0.473
A
0526
A
0.053
No
No
25
Walnut Grove Ave. at San Gabriel Blvd
0.936
E
1.101
F
1.275
F
0.174
Yes
yes
26
San Gabriel Blvd. at SR-60 WB Ramps
0.768
C
0.901
E
1.034
F
0.133
Yes
Yes
27
Town Center Dr. at SR-60 EB Ramps
0.626
B
0.732
C
0.809
D
0.077
No
No
28
San Gabriel Blvd at Town Center Dr.
0.681
B
0.797
C
0.872
D
0.075
No
No
KOA CORPORATION Rosemead Circulation Element Update
Traffic Impact Analysis
May 19, 2008 - Page 66
c
Proposed General Plan Traffic Impacts
Signifcont Traffic Impacts of General Pion Deveiohment
Table 13 - Significant Impacts to Study Intersections - Future (2025)
with General Plan Development -AM Peak
Intersection
Existing Cond'rciorts
Year (2007)
Future Ambient
Growth Conditions
Year (2025)
Future With
Projects Condition
Year (2025)
VIC
LOS
VIC
LOS
VIC
LOS
VIC
LOS
Dili.
Impact
Impact
I
Walnut Grove Ave at Mission Dr.
0.744
C
0.874
D
0.937
E
0.063
No
Yes
2
Rosemead Blvd. at Lower Anna Rd.
0.772
C
0.906
E
0.943
E
0.037
No
Yes
3
Rosemead Blvd. at Mission Dr.
0.937
E
1.105
F
1.199
F
0.094
Yes
Yes
4
Walnut Grove Ave, at Va1ky Blvd.
0.846
D
0.995
E
1.177
F
0.182
Yes
Yes
5
Rosemead Blvd. at Valley Blvd.
0.967
E
1.141
F
1266
F
0.125
Yes
Yes
6
Valley Blvd_ at Mission Dr.
0.504
A
0.584
A
0.669
B
0.085
No
No
7
Valley Blvd at Rio Hondo Ave.
0578
A
0.673
B
0.824
D
0.151
No
No
8
Valley Blvd. at Temple City Blvd.
1.147
F
1.356
F
1.409
F
0.053
Yes
Yes
9
Walnut Grove Ave at Marshall St
0.909
E
1.072
F
1.601
F
0529
Yes
Yes
10
Rosemead Blvd at Marshall St
0.861
D
1.013
F
1.094
F
0.081
Yes
Yes
I I
Rosemead Blvd. at Glendon Way
DIM
D
0.989
E
1.154
F
0.165
Yes
Yes
12
Temple City Blvd at Loftus Dr.
0.749
C
0.878
D
0.898
D
0.020
No
No
13
Del Mar Ave at Hellman Ave
0.831
D
0.979
E
1.135
F
0.156
Yes
Yes
14
San Gabriel Blvd. at Hellman Ave
0.998
E
1.177
F
1187
F
0.110
Yes
Yes
15
Walnut Grove Ave at Helhran%mona
0.820
D
0,965
E
1.135
F
0.170
Yes
Yes
16
Rosemead Blvd. at Telstar Ave.
0.775
C
0.91 1
E
0.980
E
0.069
No
Yes
17
Rosemead Blvd, at Whitmore St
0.697
B
0.815
D
0.854
D
0.039
No
No,
18
New Ave at Garvey Ave.
0.786
C
0.923
E
1.1 15
F
0.192
Yes
Yes
19
Del Mar Ave. at Garvey Ave
0596
A
0.695
B
0.902
E
0207
No
Yes
20
San Gabriel Blvd at Garvey Ave
0.712
C
0.834
D
0.932
E
0.098
No
Yes
21
Walnut Grove Ave at Garvey Ave.
0.800
D
0.941
E
1.117
F
0.176
Yes
Yes
22
San Gabriel Blvd. at Rush StJPotrero Grande
0.769
C
0.904
E
0.898
D
-0.006
No
No
23
Walnut Grove Ave at Rush St
0598
A
0.697
B
0.723
C
0.026
No
No
24
Walnut Grove Ave. at Landis View Ln.
0.480
A
0557
A
0.585
A
0.028
No
No
25
Walnut Grove Ave. at San Gabriel Blvd.
0.743
C
0.870
D
0.981
E
0.111
No
Yes
26
San Gabriel Blvd at SR-60 WB Ramps
0.844
D
0.992
E
1.063
F
0.071
Yes
Yes
27
Town Center Dr. at SR-60 EB Ramps
ObDO
B
0.699
8
0.749
C
0.050
No
No
1 26
San Gabriel Blvd. at Town Center Dr.
0.735
C
0.863
D
0.912
E
0.049
No
Yes
KOA CORPORATION Rosemead Circulation Element Update
Traffic Impact Analysis
May 19, 2008 - Page 65
9 0
z
Q
J
CL
J
cc
w
z
w
0
W
H
O
N
W
z
Q
U
W
J
m
N
M0
z
O
Q
w
0
N
z
U
J_
V
z
m
O
U
U
0
Q
W
W
U)
w
W
O
LL
LL
U.
Q
V1
X
r
_
V
U LL
m
V
W
m
0
U2
0
U)
-
z
W
z
W
z
z O
0
z en
X
X
X
X
X
X
V
a~
O
U
W W U
m ~ J
m
boa
a)
U
U
U
U
U
M
U
0
0
`O
o
o
a
2 E =
o
d
Q
7
a
Q
7
n
7
7
3 N
v
a
-D
_0
"a
O o_.~
v
'0
E
E
E
E
E
~ C
O
E
O
a)
Q O
a)
O
w
O
a)
O
U
~
0
O
N
.0
O
LU
3a~i
3aUi
3aUi
3N
3N
vi 3aUi
3a~i
z
.0~
0-p
.0 'a
O"a
.9 'D
0 0'a
.0-0
a
OE U
w c
W
00
0
00
00
00
N° d O
00
~
UU
0
L) L)
UU
UU
UU
C
. D
(n
„
~
:3
(D
E a)
C
o
E
:3
>
O E
C
N
G
O
a) w
>
N h
O W .M
(n
E
:3
C O
E C
; d J
(n E
Q
r-
U ~
d O O
x rn cn
3 'C
04C)
o
y 3 E
E
~
m
c E
o
LO
i
a) cn
2a) CL
M
r E O
v E~
Cl.
N CD
o
rnc0
C cn 6
_
N ca
a
o
C
p
-
6 an >
N
E
o
p
U
U~
V...
-0
7
o
D
N
a -
C=
N
cc)
o
CN
a)
O
Z
Q
?
Q
~
N
ti
CO
0),t in =
0
o Q)
a
W~ C
O W O
Lu
H
na)O
.Q m
uS(D (D
r
0) (n0
X d
Laca>,0
X
-D aa)
o~
N O-
f) R. E
"
Y
C y
c Co p u)
CL "
C
Q) 0 O
fl
- C .r
m
_
co
-0 U)
a)
SE
p
0
a C
a
.5
O
C
0
C
•rn
7
O
V
0)
Q
aUd
cy) "6 O
a<
O1
O
d f0 a) y
Q cau <
d y
C
m'n
X O a) U
W WZ -N
M
O
-LLl•O O
N
C"
c0
CX)
0
0
N
Oi
N
a
E
a
m
U)
0 0
c
O
w
A `
a~
` c
d O
CU
d -
C7
d c
w O
O V
U)
4) L)
m ~
v E`4
d W O
O N
O O to
0. LL a.
U.
U.
H
U)
X
U
U w
m
U
w
0
w
z 0
E ~n
z N
a~
0
U
W W U_
=
M
J
M
X
boa
0
U
a)
a
o
ao 0
M
o co
^L
,
a)
N
E
to
D1 0
J
C
U
O
c
L 0
W
O
`
c
47
z
-
c
.O
O C
:3
a
t5 ai
rn O
U
Lu
` 7
cn _T
O'
UU
aU
m
v
E a)
O
.n O
D
7
a `m
a)
o~
N U (n
ca a) v
p
f0 c
c
0 =
0 'n (UO
m
N a) a) a) a)
c
~
a
~cc (
)
mo n=
a~3
m
E.y 6-0
E ~-j a) aaa
a) 'o in d
W W Y
a) 0 Q ca ca m
W e 0`'0-0-0
w
y~N°M.S -
a)
a)
5 c N
L
Loa)
a)(DCD a
)
~ a)zzz
L
7
ro
~
U) 0) m
z
c
U N
C
J
r
O C)
c
c x
m
U
O LL W m
U co OD Go
'
'
F--
T,o
Fo)
I
~
M
l
~
l
l
l
I
0 0
z
J
IL
J
Q
w
z
w
w
2
H
O
N
w
a
z
Q
w
J
m
N
N
O
IL
z
O
Q
w
0
V5
z
O
N
U
z
m
U
H
V
O
Q
w
W
N
w
w
O
LL
i
LL
U.
cn
X
U
w
I
U
Z m
O
U p
W
N
U ~
z
w
O ,
z cn oc
O
U
z 2 zO
X
X
X
X
X
X
J V
W w U
m J
m
w L
O G
.
U
U
U
U
U
a~
C m
U
C
C
C
C
C
C
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
(D C:
U
c
c
c
c
c
O
c
>
>
)aa)0
a
m
v
m
~o
m
v
m
m
m 0 0
_0
E
E
E
E
E
0-
E
C . U
(p C C
w
3
3
3
3
3
N~~j
3
V)
z
C
C
0 C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C U
0 m .w
C
O C
Oa
0.2
U
o
a) U
` U
t5 -L:)
~ U
o
~ U
UQU
C
o
a) U
w
O
O
O
O
O
cu N n
.
0.-
L)
U~
Ua
U=o
Uv
F- (n :3
U v
U)
E
C
.2
CD
c o
-0
U) M
fn -0 C
E
0) n
Q
fV U
-
m
O_
L
6
i0
CL
a=
c m
(A Q
a~
U
-6
CL V)
o co
ui
N
'0
00
M a)
C:) 0
w
't w 0
L m
:3
N O)-
U.) m
M 3: E
en
-
1
~
2
0
=3
O
Q)C ¢
0
rn"O
5
c .
U
n.UCL
a¢
r
04
CY)
C
O
C
m d
a~
A C
O
C U
m-
~ C
d ~
O
pU
dU
c~
tv m
v Ew
G) N O
d Q N
N ~ L7f
O O m
0. LL 0.
11
U_
U.
a
vn
x
x
U
J ~
U W
z m
_
U 0 w
U~
0
zcn~
w
z
a 0
~
v
X
X
a
W w U
_
m = J
x
boa
o
C
O a) p
U
4)
-a
_
T m O C
o
o 'L O OL
CL
L M O
3
O O 7
M~
fl
~w r)
to a) p
U
c~
~Ea)
.
R1 Lo C C O
C` C
m
w
=
O O 7 N m m c
ULT, -am
o
O a) N
n
a)
U
C
3
C 0 0 C C a) N
•
rn
•
a) cA
c
to
a a) j
O
C
C
E
f0 co .t o W
a)
_
CL
O C
:r to O C
~
3 ~v C) a) E
cu
a) _
L C) a) E
m cUp c
E
C U
3 N C Q O c ca c
~
~z 3 .o
'a
a) af
0 3=
-0 C: 0 C14 o
L) r- C
N
`
C U N _(D L a)
> O C L
'a
=
V
C C
C)
O r a)
N a)
ns
4) fn x C L
C)
cn
-
CD C)- M
L) E•-
a) :3
Eo
m
CD M 3-
o
o l
0 E" -
W
Lo
C LL U C U C
C
Y
0 0 U c U C
N
N
z
(D OL = N m 7
C
U T
yv
M cnn
a)
m m:3
L C N a
Q) w
a
c0-0 Q X °U
a~
a~i .2
QV
-00 iv m m Q x~U
a)
v7
L
_
o~=
rnoa aa))
o ff
aa)ia) 0 0-
a)
°"-`o>wa
ai-`~'
fnQ cvU
U~
=
U)
c~J OU C7 cna cvU
t:
t0
L
7
V
-
a a)
O
a
O
-
C
U
0 0
Or-
of
O 'D
•
.
3 C
d
v
tv C
N
V
cn
C: W
'
c
U
N
a)
U
C
O U
c W N
Od
_
cv w C
'
U
)
N O
M
U L
tn f0
C
L
0 NCO
C LL
E
F-aca
'0~ Q
C a)
tea)
'D N C C C
~C C a) .c)
a) O a =
.0
E
N
a -o ~
a)
Q° E
cv in a
L
c o 3 ,a) a) a) a)
a) O > > >
E ~J o<<<
.
o
~ -0 in a
W W Y
0_0 a)
-o a) W
a) L
E a) N
N .0 O a cv Co cv
W C D
N
N
Z
w
O Y (v •C
N N Q O
m C a)
T in
n C w
W O N C
N
a) (v in O
>
In a) a) a) m a)
a)
C a)
=3
j
T)
a) *2'a
fn
C-0 N E
cn
z z z
'D C w Lo 0)M
C N U N
U_ C
J
O
2 N C E
CC a) 0
L)
C m x_ "-CDC)
J
J0LL W m
Q
fn
C U
UG 0000w
co
I
O
•
Possible Changes to the General Plan
Attachment 1
Public Transportation
Public transportation in the City of Rosemead consists of fixed route bus service and
demand responsive shuttles. Some modes of transportation serving Rosemead provide
viable alternatives to use of the private automobile. These include regional transit
services as well as local transit service:
Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) - Metro operates bus and rail services for
the greater Los Angeles region. Presently, the City of Rosemead is served by six local
bus routes operated by Metro.
Montebello Municipal Bus Line - Montebello Bus Lines is responsible to provide
transportation services to residents of Montebello and the neighboring cities.
Rosemead Shopping Express - Rosemead Shopping Express is a local bus service that
connects residents in neighborhoods south of the 1-10 freeway and the Garvey
Boulevard shopping corridor to the shopping districts north of the freeway.
The following table summarizes the operating characteristics of these routes.
Local Transit Routes
Route
Origin/Destination and Description
Metro 70/370
Los Angeles to El Monte via Garvey
Avenue. Line 370 provides limited stop
service.
Metro 76
Los Angeles to El Monte via Valley
Boulevard and Rosemead Boulevard.
Metro 266
Lakewood to Pasadena via Rosemead
Boulevard.
Metro 287
El Monte to Sierra Madre Villa Station via
Garvey Avenue and Rosemead Boulevard.
Metro 487
Sierra Madre to Downtown Los Angeles
via Valle Boulevard and Del Mar Avenue.
Metro 489
Rosemead to Downtown Los Angeles via
Rosemead Boulevard.
Montebello Municipal Bus Line 20
Telegraph & Gage to Sierra Madre Villa
Station via San Gabriel Boulevard.
Rosemead Shopping Express
Rosemead Square via Garvey Avenue,
Jackson Avenue, Walnut Grove Avenue,
Valley Boulevard, and Rosemead Place.
• •
Possible Changes to General Plan
Attachment 2
Table 2-3
Land Use and Population Estimates
for General Plan Buildout
Estimated
Estimate
Estimated
Density/
d
Estimated
Potential
General Plan Land Use
Net
Intensity
Dwelling
Population
Square
Cate orv
Acres
(a)
Units
(b)
Feet
LDR
Low Density Residential
- n'
.o DU AC
o Deleted: 956
MDR
Medium Density
566
8.5 DU/AC
4,810
18,644
0 Deleted: 6,693
Residential
HDR
High Densitv Residential
7
1g.8 DU AC
1,917
7,431
0 Deleted: 25,945
C
Commercial
59
oo.33 FAR
o
0
840,000
OLI
Office/Light Industrial
132
0.42 FAR
o
0
2,400,000
Mixed Use-
DU/AC;
o
MRC
Residential/Commercial
142
11.60
FAR
.6
1,769
6,858
4,930,000
c
Mixed Use-High Density
36.0 DU/AC;
MHRC
Residential/ Commercial
220
2 0o FAR
.5,546
.1>>4R8
.?ksU•1" 11) Deleted:.5,555
(d)
Mixed Use-
Deleted: 21.532
MIC
Industrial Commercial
9
1.0o FAR
o
0
390,000
Deleted: 5,760,000
PF
Public Facilities
^
N/A
o
0
0
D
l
d
t
8
OS
Open Space/Natural
8_3
N/A
o
0
. 3
e
e
e
0
0
Resources
Deleted: 90
CEM
Cemetery
N/A
o
0
0
Total 2,654 Deleted: e0.744
Notes:
a) DU/AC: Dwelling Unit Per Acre, FAR: Floor Area Ratio. Deleted: iio,glo
b) Population is estimated based on an average household size of 3.997 persons per household and a vacancy rate i Deleted: 14,320,000
3.02% according to the 2007 California Department of Finance, Demographic Unit.
e) Mixed Use-Residential/Commercial category assumes So% residential and 50% commercial mix.
d) Mixed Use-High Density Residential/Commercial category assumes 70% residential and 30% commercial mix.
Attachment 3
~+0
\
R F M F ~►1r1
djeneral Plan
Union A
17
Of
~a~on
,tr. ~ ash
"-"I
•
•
a
3
v
z
/A\//I---
6.
Q
C'1 ~ 6
Q~q6,` F,~c:ti
)eye r.,-!.!
r
ift
Jt,
fil
r
Legg Lake
Y'ir 4
f f 4 7 ' Legg
i tr
'4.1
w ti
Lake
Legend
Low Density Residential (0-6 du/ac) ® Mixed Use:Residential/Commercial (0-30 dulac) Public Facilities
- Medium Density Residential (0-12 du/ac) Mixed Use Residential/Commercial (31-45 du/ac) Open Space
- High Density Residential (0-30 du/ac) Mixed Use:lndustrial/Commercial Cemetery
- Commercial Office/Light Industrial
Source: City of Rosemead, DMP Inc.
Feet
0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000
Whittier Narrows Recreational Parks
Rosemead City Boundary
Sphere of Influence Boundary
Figure 2-1
General Plan Land Use
•
•
City of Rosemead
General Plan Update October 2008
0 0
•
Chapter 5
PUBLIC SAFETY
RosHMEAD
The Public Safety Element identifies and addresses
the natural and human-caused hazards that may
influence the development, redevelopment, and
utilization of properties in Rosemead. Foremost, this Element
identifies the ways to reduce the risk of property damage,
injuries, or loss of life in the event of a natural or human-
caused disaster.
•
P U B 1. 1 C S A 1 E T Y
GENERAL PLAN
Deleted: important risks and
Deleted:,
According to the Governor's Office of Planning and Research,
the Safety Element works to "reduce the potential risk of death,
injuries, property damage, and economic and social dislocation
resulting from fires, floods, earthquakes, landslides, and other
hazards." This Public Safety Element sets forth policies
designed to minimize threats from natural and human-caused
hazards. By implementing the directives of the Public Safety
Element, the City intends to use available planning methods in
order to_ 0minimize risk exposure, 21-provide timely
emergency service delivery to all residents and businesses when
the need arises, and;3j_maintain an optimal environment for
personal security. While population growth and changing
needs within the community will continue to place demand on
resources, Rosemead is committed to enhancing the safety of
neighborhoods, business districts, and public places,
The Public Safety Element is one of the required General Plan
elements. The City emphasizes a proactive approach to
planning, which involves identifying and avoiding or mitigating
Deleted: to
Deleted: to
P A G E g- 3
R E V 1$ Ka U Q T E ,
2 0 0 8
• Deleted: 'safety.
Deleted: nRA1•TJUNE 2oo8
• •
P U 13 L I C S A F E T Y
hazards present in the environment that may adversely affect
property and threaten lives. Government Code Sections
653o2(g) and 65302(f) identify several issues to consider in
such planning efforts, as does California Health and Safety
Code Section 56o5o.i. In Rosemead, safety issues of concern
include:
• Geologic J>azards, including (non-seismic) slope _
Deleted: and soil (non-seismic)
failures; collapsible compressible or expansive soils
instability and ground movements,
and shallow
t
dw
ter umin
b
id
d
slope instability,
as landslides.
such
'
o groun
a
su
s
ence
ue
g P P g
:
x
soil settlement o orr expansion,
ground water.
subsidence, and shallow
■ Seismic (earthquake) hazards, including surface fault
I groundwater;
rupture, ground shaking, Jiquefaction effects, and
•
1 Deleted: seismicauy-induced
earthquake-induced slopeinstabilitv
Deleted: lateral spreading, and
■ Flooding (inundation) from seismicallyjnduced dam
ground failure
failure;
Deleted: -
■ Urban fires; and
oelet>ed.
Presence of hazardous materials.
Geologic, Seismic, and
Flooding Conditions
Introduction and General Setting
The information on the geologic, seismic, and flooding
conditions within and around the City are summarized briefly
in this section. Information is derived from readily available
technical documents that can be referred to for more details as
necessary to evaluate and analyze individual projects; Deleted:6
additional technical background information is presented in { Deleted:Thissummary-
Appendix A Issues due to hazards arising from the geologic, Deleted:
seismic, and dam failure-induced floodin conditions in the
Ci are discussed in a followin section. Deleted: level information describes
1) g the technical issues that have
A geologic, seismic, or dam failure-induced flooding event that
"CIe ;"Ill
would impact a portion of the City has, the potentia4 tq affect
Deleted: ly
persons and property in the City,. These issues and their
Deleted: the
potential impacts are the basis for establishing the goals and
Deleted: in the event of a geologic,
policies to protect lives and property. Discussion is also
seismic, or flooding event that may
provided regarding the buildings and infrastructure most
impact a ortion of the City, for
important to the citizens and City personnel in the event
earthquake effects are particularly severe in the City.
Deleted: in a
Deleted: as a result of major local
F
The technical issues summarized in Appendix A must be taken
earthquake
into account as the City of Rosemead expands, fills in, and re-
Deleted: mentioned and
develops. Existing building codes and land use planning
Deleted: a
requirements can address most of the hazards inherent in the
Deleted: DRAFT JU" .8
P A G E 5- 2
}t F-V I's -E D
0 C 10 13- r R 2 o o 8
.
•
geologic setting of the City. As newer, more accurate geologic„
soils, and seismic information has been developed since the last
General Plan update, it is now possible to identify many of the
,areas in the City vulnerable to natural hazards, and,account for
the hazard. in future development. Sources for this
information range from generalized regional reports and maps
(including the previous General Plan Seismic Element) to
project-specific geotechnical and engineering geology reports.
Geology and Soils
Geologic units,at and near the ground surface in Rosemead are
presented by Yerkes and Campbell (2005; Figure 5-1). The
southernmost portion of the City abuts the Montebello Hills,
which consist of sandstone. siltstone and conelolnerate of the
•
P U B L I C S A F E T Y
Deleted: y
Deleted: hazard
Deleted: to
Deleted: them
l "O1°`ed: underlying the City
Deleted: occupied by Fernando
Formation (symbol TI) sandstone,
siltstone, and conglomerate
1 Deleted: to the
Fernando formation (map sy-nbol TfL The remainder of the
City, north of the hills, is underlain by older alluvium (Qof,
Qofi, and Qoa) and younger alluvial fan deposits (Qyf) shed
from the surrounding hills, various young stream wash deposits
(Qw, Qyw), landslide deposits (Qls) associated with the
Fernando Formation, and artificial fill (Qaf) along the freeways
and in at least one large tract development. These, geologic
units have physical characteristics that can produce hazards
such as landslides, mudslides, collapsible or expansive soils,
subsidence, or shallow groundwater. Appendix A provide
more detailed descriptions of the geologic units (Table 5-1)
andXhe hazards associated with the unit characteristics of these
geologic units.
Seismicity/Earthquake Ground shaking,
and Faults
Figure 5-2 (Shaw et al., 2002; California Geological Survey
[CGS, formerly the California Division of Mines and Geology-
CDMG], 2005) shows the regional faults that would impact the
City should a moderate to large earthquake be generated on any
of these seismic sources within about 25 miles of Rosemead.
on the wmtuer (magnitnae LM1 tms), ruente nuts (m
er Elysian Park (M 6.4), Raymond (M 6.5), Sierra
1 7.2), Verdugo (M 6.9), San Jose (M 6.4), Hollywood
(M 6.4), B Clamshell-Sawpit (M 6.5) faults. The only known
active fault at the surface within the City (Figure 5-3; CDMG,
i9gi) is the Alhambra Wash fault (,zoned as an Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zone [APEFZ]). However.2here are ever I
other unnamed fault segments or suspected faults of unknown
age of last movement mapped across the Cit) (Figure 5-4;
Treiman, i9gi: Yeats, 2004). Potential seismic/earthquake
hazards include surface fault rupture, ground shaking,
earthquake-induced liquefaction (including lateral spreading
and ground failure) and landslides (shown on Figure 5-5;.
9 M.-
Deleted: formations
Deleted:6
Deleted: has
I- Deleted: of
Deleted: Groundshaking
Deleted: Such e
Deleted: producing greater that 20%
g horizontal acceleration could
Deleted: or
Deleted: surface
Deleted: also known as the East
P A G E 5- 3
J& F. V
a9_ 4 _8
_
Deleted: T
Deleted: , lateral spreading, and
ground
Deleted: The City is also underlain
by two buried thrust faults that,
although they don't reach the ground
surface have the potential to cause
'I strong ground shaking in Rosemead.
P U B L I C S A F E T Y
This page intentionally left blank.
Deleted: ¶
Deleted: DRAFrJUNE 2oo8
P A G E 5- 4
gEV ISI? D_
0 C T 0 B E R 2 0 8
r-11
Source: Yerkes and Campbell, 2005;
CDMG, 1998, SHZR 024, Plate 2.1. Figure 5-1
0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 et City Area Geology Map
City of Rosemead June 2008
General Plan Update
For more information of the Geologic Units within the City refer to Table A-l.
_ Qof Q Qof Q Qyf Q Qyws Reservoir
Q QI 0 Qofl Q Qyfg Q Tfl - Rosemead City Boundary
Q Qls Q Qof2 Q Qyw Q Tfu I Sphere of Influence Boundary
i Qls? Qw Q Qywo Q Tfuc Major Roods
Q Qoo Q Qwo Q Qywg Q Tfuf ~ Railroad
P U B L I C S A F E T Y
•
This page intentionally left blank.
•
Deleted: I
Deleted: DRAFT JUNE 2oo8~
P A G E y- 6
R E V I S E D
0 C T 0 B E R 2 o o 8,,
AdIlk
Primary Road
Potential Earthquake Faults
n n n (See Table 5-2) - Could cause
strong ground shaking in
Rosemead.
Faults are buried below the surface;
small triangles indicated fault dip
direction (north) and thin gray lines
indicate the depth contours (e.g.,
5 km = 5 kilometers deep) on the
fault surface (Show el al, 2002).
Sources: Shaw et al. 2002, and Bryant, 2005.
Feet
0 18,000 36,000 54,000
Faults exposed at the ground surface;
solid where well located, dashed where
approximate, and dotted where
concealed (Bryant, 2005)
Figure 5-2
Earthquake Faults
June 2008
Rosemead City Boundary Blind Thrust Faults - ^ n n Surface Faults -
P U R L I C S A F E T Y
•
This page intentionally left blank.
•
Deleted: I
1 Deleted: DRAFT JUNE zoo8
P A G E 5- 8
,E V I S E V _
0 C TO BE R 2 0 o 8.
Adk
Figure 5-3
Sources: California Division of Mines &
Geology (CDMG), November 1, 1991. Alquist-Priolo
Feet
Earthquake Fault Zone
o 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000
City of Rosemead June 2008
General Plan Update
- • Rosemead City Boundary Active Foults Q Alquist-Priolo
Sphere of Influence Boundary Well Located Earthquake Fault Zone
Major Roads Approximate Located
~++++4 Railroad Inferred Location Turning Point
River/Wash Query indicates additional uncertainty.
• 0
P U B L I C S A F E T Y
This page intentionally left blank.
Deleted: T
Deleted: DRAFT' JUNE 2008
P A G E 5- i o
EJj I S E D .
0 C T 0 B E R soo8~
Q Alquist-Priolo Earthquake
Fault Zone
Sources: CDMG, 1991, Treimon, FER-222;
Bullard and Lettis, 1992; CDWR, 1966.
Feet
0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000
Approximate location of escarpment Photolineaments defining
of Bullard and Lettis (1992) Probable or Possible fault
Inferred faults from California Well-defined
Department of Water Resources Less well-defined
(1966)
Indicate downside of score
Figure 5-4
Fault Hazard
Management Zones (FHMZ)
City of Rosemead June 2008
General Plan Update
Fault Hazard Management 0 ® •
Zone (FHMZ) for Important
Facilities 000
PUBLIC SAFETY
0
This page intentionally left blank.
•
Deleted: ~
Deleted: DRIFTJUNE.2oo8
P A G E 5- f 2
u y I S E u
OCTOBER 2oo8,,
Zones of Required Investigation:
K Liquefaction
Areas where historic occurrence of liquefaction, or local geological,
geotechnical and groundwater conditions indicate a potential for
permanent ground displacements such that mitigation as defined
in Public Resources Code Section 2693(c) would be required.
Lam:, Earthquake-Induced Landslides
Areas where previous occurrence of landslide movement, or local
topographic, geological, geolechnicol and subsurface water
conditions indicate a potential for permanent ground displacement}
such that mitigations as defined in Public Resources Code Section
26931c) would be required.
Feet
0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000
-30- Historically Highest
Groundwater Contours
(Depth in Feet)
- - • Rosemead City Boundary
Sphere of Influence Boundary
Major Roads
Railroad
River/Wash
Figure 5-5
Areas Susceptible to Earthquake-
Induced Liquefaction & Landslides
City of Rosemead June 2008
General Plan Update
P U B L I C SAFETY •
This page intentionally left blank.
Deleted: 1
Deleted: DRAFT JUNE 2oo8
P A G E 5- 1 4
A EV, I S E D
_
0 C•I.O B ER soo8T
•
Flooding-Dam Failure Inundation
Several dams, which continually or sometimes impound water,
have the potential to fail during a large earthquake and flood
portions of the City. These are the Whittier Narrows Dam,
Santa Fe Dam/Reservoir, and Garvey Dam/Reservoir. Failure
of4Liy of these dams during a time when significant water is
impounded could cause inundation of residences, businesses,
and infrastructure. Figure 5-6 (California Office of
Emergency Services, 2007; USGS, 2007) shows the potential
flood areas associated with this potential hazard, which is
discussed further in Appendix,
Hazards Due to
Human Activities
Businesses and residents in Rosemead are subject to potential
hazards associated with earthquakes, hazardous materials
incidents, fires, and other conditions that may impact
infrastructure and impede emergency response. Each type of
disaster requires focused planning to minimize the risks to life
and property when a disaster occurs. The period following a
disaster is often very difficult for communities and can be, at
times, as devastating as the disaster itself. Cities that prepare
ahead of time can reduce the fear, confusion, and loss resulting
from catastrophic incidents. Planning efforts need to ensure
access to critical facilities such as police and fire, hospitals and
emergency care facilities, schools. utilities, roadways, and
freeways..
Rosemead participates in the Standardized Emergency
Management System (SEMS) that provides a statewide
framework for coordinating multi-agency responses to
emergencies and disasters. The City's SEMS incorporates
mutual aid agreements with other jurisdictions, establishes
lines of communication during emergencies, and standardizes
incident command structures. The Cit}, has also complied with
the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA)
requirements to prepare a disaster mitigation plan jn
accordance with the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000. The plan
represents Rosemead's commitment to reducing the risk from
natural hazards and serves as a guide for the use of available,
0
P U B L I C S A P E T V
Deleted: failure
Deleted: .
Deleted: 6
Deleted: one
I.. -[Deleted:6
Deleted: freeways,
Deleted: , and schools
Deleted: , and emergency care
facilities
Deleted: complying
Deleted: City resources. This plan
also helps the State provide technical
assistance and prioritize project
ow,-:- - .
P A G E 5
t5
_
JR D 0 C_ 1 0 B E__R
a 0 0 8
P U B L I C S A F E T Y
This page intentionally left blank.
•
i Deleted:
Deleted: DRAFT JUNE 200$
P A G E S- 1 6
A LEVA_*_lx-P
OCTOBER 2 008•
Feet
0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000
City of Rosemead
General Plan Update
Figure 5-6
Dam Failure Inundation Areas
June 2008
- . • Rosemead City Boundary Flood Inundation Areas -
Sphere of Influence Boundary Due to Catastrophic Dam Failure
Major Roads Whittier Narrows Dam
Railroad ® Garvey Reservoir
- - River/Wash Q Santa Fe Dam
P U B L I C S A F E T Y
•
This page intentionally left blank.
Deleted: 9
Deleted: DRAFT JUNE zoos
P A G E 5- t 8
E 4~_ I SD
OCTOBER z o o g,
0 •
P U B 1. 1 C S A F E T Y
Citv resources This plan also helps the State provide technical
assistance and prioritize project f nding.
Rosemead contracts with the Los Angeles County Sheriff and
the Los Angeles County Fire Department for provision of
emergency response and law enforcement services. This
arrangement allows the City to more readily adjust staffing to
meet the changing needs of businesses and residents. Also,
County agencies can easily provide supplemental responses
from any other Sheriff or Fire Department stations.
Fire Hazards
Structural fires represent the primary fire hazard in Rosemead.
Structural fires are generally caused by faulty equipment or lack
of knowledge of fire prevention precautions. The potential for
fire hazards increases when flammable and explosive materials
are improperly stored, handled, or used. Planning for adequate
fire protection and suppression in a densely built community
like Rosemead becomes increasingly important due to aging
buildings, and proximity of residences to commercial and
industrial uses.
The County of Los Angeles Fire Department has two fire
stations in Rosemead:
■ Station 4, located at 2644 N. San Gabriel Boulevard
■ Station 42, located at 9319 E. Valley Boulevard
As noted above, any County fire unit may respond to incidents
in Rosemead, depending on need and availability. In
particular, special hazardous materials response units from the
stations are available. The City will coordinate with the County
Fire Department to implement fire hazard education and fire
protection programs. In addition, the City will coordinate with
local water districts to ensure water pressure is adequate for
fire fighting purposes.
Adequate water flow and pressure is determined through the
application of Regulation No. 8 of the Fire Code. This code sets
standards for new development and existing development.
Hazardous Materials
Commercial and industrial businesses in Rosemead and
adjacent communities use hazardous materials, _ These
businesses ,jnclude dry cleaners, film processors, auto service
P A G E$ - 1 9
I Deleted:, including such
Deleted: as
Deleted: DRAFT JUNE 2oog
' V U B E R
2 0 0 8
• •
P U B L I C S A F E 'r v
providers, landscape contractors, and paint shops. Larger
businesses can generate, use, and/or store large quantities of
hazardous products. The current regulatory environment
provides a high level of protection from the hazardous
materials manufactured, transported to businesses, and stored
within Rosemead. Federal, State, and County agencies enforce
regulations for hazardous waste generators and users.
According to the California Environmental Protection Agency,
as of 2oo6, approximately 49 hazardous waste generators jre
located within the City of Rosemead,
Rosemead's land use pattern generally separates industry from
residential uses. However, commercial freight carriers
transporting hazardous substances along the I-io and SR-6o
freeways, along major truck routes such as Rosemead
Boulevard, or along railways present potential hazards. All
motor carriers and drivers involved in the transportation of
hazardous materials must comply with the requirements of
federal and State regulations, and must apply for and obtain a
hazardous materials transportation license from the California
Highway Patrol. When transporting explosives, inhalation
hazards, and highway route-controlled quantities of radioactive
materials, safe routing, and safe stopping places are required.
The City has established truck routes, licsc , roadways that
must be used by larger truck4 and any vehicle, specifically
carrying hazardous wastes and materials.
The Los Angeles County Fire Department, Health Hazardous
Materials Division tracks hazardous materials handlers to
ensure appropriate reporting and compliance. The Division
inspects businesses that generate hazardous waste, conducts
criminal investigations, provides site mitigation oversight, and
undertakes emergency response operations. Such inspections
reduce risks associated with exposure to hazardous materials
and adverse environmental 4ffects. The County Fire
Department's Emergency Operations Section provides 24-hour
emergency response services to hazardous materials incidents.
Emergency responders identify unknown substances, monitor
spills and releases for safe and immediate mitigation, and
identify responsible parties for payment of cleanup costs. The
Inspection Division of the Fire Department's Emergency
Operations section inspects hazardous material handling and
hazardous waste-generating businesses to assure compliance
with applicable laws. Additionally, Inspection Division staff
responds to medical waste emergencies, assists law
enforcement agencies with response to illegal drug labs, and
investigates resident and business complaints.
The City hosts "Household Hazardous Waste Roundup" events
sponsored by the Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County
and the Los Angeles County of Public Works. The County's
P A G F. 5-20
Deleted: exist
Deleted: as Of 2006.
Deleted:
Deleted: to designate those
Deleted: a
Deleted: I
Deleted: DRAFT JUNE 2008
E V I E D
0 C T 0 B E R 2 o 0
•
Household Hazardous Waste Collection Program collection
events allow residents to dispose of hazardous materials safely
and at no cost to them.
Statutes and Plans of
Other Agencies
The federal and State governments - in recognition of safety
issues affecting broad geographic areas - have adopted
programs with their public safety planning efforts.
California Building Code
Beginning in 2007, rather than using the Uniform Building
Code, California instead adopted the 2004, International
Building Code (IBC) with substantial local amendments. The
IBC is developed and published by the International Code
Council (ICC), which was formed in 1994 by a merger of the
three national building code publishers. During January and
February 2007, the California Building Standards Commission
(http://www.bsc.ca.gov) adopted, in sections, the 2007
International Building Code (IBC). The new California
Building Code (CBC) became effective July 1, 2oo6, and local
codes were adopted 18o days later. Effective January 1. 2008.
all new construction in Rosemead musLbe dome in accordance
with the 2oo7 CBC.
•
P U B L I C S A F E T Y
{ Deleted: 7
Deleted: 7
Deleted: has to
The 2007 California Building Code (CBC) is a fully integrated
code based on the 2oo6 International Building Code. Part 2
now also includes Title 24, Part 8 (California Historical
Building Code) and Title 24, Part 1o (California Existing
Building Code). The California Building Standards Code is
comprised of twelve parts that incorporate public health and
safety standards used in the design and construction of
buildings in California. The codes also include standards for
energy efficiency and access compliance for persons with
disabilities. Structures such as dams and freeways fall under
criteria developed by various State and Federal agencies.
Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault
Zoning Act
The 1972 Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act seeks to Deleted: nheAd)
mitigate the hazard of fault rupture by prohibiting the Deleted: location
,placement of structures for human occupancy across the trace Deleted: DRAF'r JUNE 2008
Lam, PAGES-2 1
~t_ li_ 1 S lam: 1 l l 0 B R_
2 O U 8
•
P U B L I C S A F E TV
of an active fault. The State Geologist is required to compile
maps that delineate earthquake fault zones (AP zones) along
faults that are "sufficiently active" and "well defined." Cities
and counties are responsible before issuing building permits for
a Project to assure that a geologic investigation is performed to
demonstrate that proposed buildings will not be constructed
across active faults. The fault evaluation and written report for
the specific site must be prepared by a geologist registered in
the State of California. If an active fault is found, a structure for
human occupancy cannot be placed over the trace of the fault
and must be set back a safe distance from the fault_A Project is
carefully defined, but generally includes all land divisions and
most structures for human occupancy, although some
exceptions are allowed and local agencies can be more
restrictive than state law requires. An AP zone map has been
compiled by the State Geologist for the City of Rosemead area
(CDMG, El Monte Quadrangle, 1991; Figure 5-3) and defines an
AP zone for the Alhambra Wash fault within the City.
Seismic Hazards Mapping Act
California's 19go Seismic Hazards Mapping Act
(littp://www.consrv.ca.gov/cgs/shzp) requires the State
Geologist (CGS) to compile maps identifying and describing
seismic hazard zones, n California with emphasis given to the
0
Deleted:,
Deleted: tgenerally5ofeet)
Deleted:
Deleted: throughout
1 Deleted:
State and local agencies in the review of development within
seismic hazard zones. Development on a site that has been
designated as a seismic hazard zone requires a geotechnical
report and local agency consideration of the policies and
criteria established by the Mining and Geology Board. A
seismic hazard zones map (Figure 5-,) delineates the areas
within or near Rosemead that may be susceptible to
liquefaction and earthquake-induced landslides
Unreinforced Masonry Building
Law
Deleted: Over the years, the
program has expanded to include
mapping of seismic-related hazards
such as liquefaction- and earthquake-
induced landslide areas. The Natural
Hazards section of this Element
discusses seismic hazards associated
with seismic and related hazards, as
identified on State seismic hazard
Deleted: has been compiled for the
City of Rosemead area (El Monte
Quadrangle, 1999; Figure 5-5) and
defines liquefaction and earthquake-
induced landslide areas within the
City.
Deleted: that
In 1986, California enacted a law that required local
governments in Seismic Zone 4 to inventory unreinforeed
masonry (URM) buildings, to establish a URM loss:,reduction
program and report progress to the state by 199o. Each local
P A G E 5- 2 2
Deleted: is shown on Figure 5-5
Deleted:
Deleted: T
Deleted: DRA1.7JUNE zoo8
v8 aI_~ E D
0 CTOB ER 2 006,
0
government can tailor its program to its own specifications to
allow for each jurisdiction to take political, economic, and
social priorities into account. This law requires 366 local
governments in the highest Seismic Zone 4 to:
• Inventory URM buildings within each jurisdiction.
• Establish loss reduction programs for URM buildings by
1990.
■ Report progress to the California Seismic Safety
Commission.
In addition, the law recommends that local governments:
Adopt mandatory strengthening programs by
ordinance.
Establish seismic retrofit standards.
Enact measures to reduce the number of occupants in
URM buildings.
California's Seismic Safety Commission (20o6) monitors local
government efforts to comply with this law and reports to the
state's Legislature. The City of Rosemead had seven UM.-
five have been strengthened and two were demolished, the
City is in compliance with mitigation requirements.
National Flood Insurance
Program
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)
administers the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP).
Participating jurisdictions must exercise land use controls and
purchase flood insurance as a prerequisite for receiving funds
to purchase or build a structure in a flood hazard area.
Rosemead has participated in the program since 1979 and as of
2007, no special flood hazard areas av been identified in the
City. The NFIP provides federal flood insurance subsidies and
federally financed loans for eligible property owners in flood-
prone areas. Rosemead is identified on the National Flood
Insurance Program's Flood Insurance Rate Maps as being
within Zone X, an area outside the loo- and Soo-year flood
zones, and thus subject to minimal flooding. Nevertheless,
nearlY25 Dereentof the flood claims received by FEMA on an
annual basis occurred in areas outside the too- and Soo-year
flood zones. Associated hazards in hillside areas and at the
base of hills or bluffs can include severe erosion. mudflows and
debris flows.
P U R L OIS .A P E T Y
Del Dej leted: '
I Deleted: , of which
Deleted:
Deleted: t
P A G E 5- 2 3
R E V I S E D O C T O B E R ,
2 0 0 8
. Deleted: were
Deleted: %
Deleted: DRAFT JUNE2OO8
•
P U B L I C S A F E T Y
Standardized Emergency
Management System (SEMS)
All cities in California are required to adopt a SEMS plan to
establish procedures and responsibilities of various City staff in
the event of an emergency. A SEMS Plan allows cities to
quickly respond to any large-scale disaster that require4 a
multi-agency and multi-jurisdictional response.
National Incident Management
System (NIMS)
NIMS is the federal equivalent to the SEMS response plan. The
Governor's Office of Emergency Services (OES) is the lead
agency for the adoption, promotion, and implementation of
NIMS.
Federal Disaster Mitigation Act
of 2000
The Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 provided a new set of
mitigation plan requirements that emphasize State and local
jurisdictions to coordinate disaster mitigation planning and
implementation. States are encouraged to complete a
"Standard" or an "Enhanced" Natural Mitigation Plan.
"Enhanced" plans demonstrate increased coordination of
mitigation activities at the State level, and if completed and
approved, will increase the amount of funding through the
Hazard Mitigation Grant Program. California Eecently updatcc
its State Hazard Mitigation PlaR which will require approval by
the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) by
October 8, 2007. The State of California. Plan was adopted on
USA PATRIOT Act
Signed into law on October 26, 2001, the USA PATRIQTact
expanded the authority of U.S. law enforcement. The Act
included the identification of federal crimes for attacks on
public transportation and the use of biological weapons, and
increased government surveillance powers to track activities
related to homeland security and terrorism.
P A G E S- z 4
•
- { Deleted: S
Deleted: is
Deleted:
Deleted: S. Patriot Act
HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 1
THE CnY IS TO RECEIVE
FUNDING FROM THE STATE AND
FEDERAL GOVERNMENTS Pl TTI I
EVENT OF A NATURAL. DISASMR
THE PLAN NEEDS TO BE ADOPTE
BYTHECrrYASPARTOFITs
Deleted: U.S. Pat
Deleted: creation
Deleted: I
Deleted: DRAFrJL"KE2oo8
Jt EV ISED
OCTOBER 2 oo B_
Relationship to Other General
Plan Elements
The Public Safety Element relates most closely to the Land Use
Element. Policies and plans in the Public Safety Element are
designed to protect existing and planned land uses from
specific types of hazards.
Issues, Goals, and
Policies
Certain human activities and natural conditions discussed in
the Public Safety Element create hazards in Rosemead. These
hazards in turn posh risks to individuals and properties that
affect how we may develop and use property. Risk from such
hazards can be reduced or avoided by recognizing the hazards
and adopting and implementing land use and emergency
response policies that provide the degree of protection the
community desires.
These goals, policies, and implementation actions focus on: (1)
reducing risks from natural hazards; (2) preparing for
emergency situations; and (3) reducing risks from hazards
associated with hazardous materials.
Natural Hazards
This section presents information on hazards related to
geologic and soil units, active and potentially active faults,
earthquakes, secondary seismic effects (e.e., liquefaction and
dam inundation flooding) that affect policy and long-range
planning in the City of Rosemead.
Geology and Soil Hazards
Geotechnical and engineering geology reports prepared for
development and re-development projects in the City are
required to identify geology and soil hazards, as well as routine
geology and soils conditions important to the design and
construction of the project IFigure 5-1). These reports are
rewired to undergo redew by qualified professional engineers
and geologists to assure that the information, results,
conclusions, and recommendations meet the state of the
professional practice. Primary hazards considered are
landslides, mudflows, general slope instability, unstable soils
due to expansion or consolidation, subsidence, and shallow
~'y1
f~
PUBLPI SAFETV
Deleted: create
I. Deleted: conditions
Deleted: y
{ Deleted: y
j Deleted: within the geologic units
that ewer the City
P A G E S- 2$
2 0 0 8 Deleted: DRAFrJUNE 2008
aEV1$F, D OCTOBER-.I
• •
P U B L I C S A F E T Y
groundwater. Where these hazards are present, damage to
I Deleted: there can be
structures and potentially serious injuries to individuals can
uired to
ation of these hazards is re
P
iti
~1; o,dd
q
occur.
roper m
g
reduce the potential dame to Structures, iniurieS.
prevenLor
Deleted:d
.
and the loss ofJife. The City Planning, Building and Safety, and
Deleted: lirng or
Public Works Departments shall continue to collectively assure
that proper reports are prepared, reviewed, and approved in
accordance with City, County, State, and Federal guidelines, as
applicable.
Seismic/Earthquake Ground Shaklril;
Deleted: Groundshaking
Hazards
As iscus a above, there are eleven known faults within about
t Deleted: introduced
3o miles of Rosemead (shown on Figure 5-2) thatpose an
1 Deleted:highlightthelowl
earthquake ground shaking hazard , to the City of Rosemead.
Deleted: Rrou"dshaldng
Standard construction (e.g., residential, commercial, industrial)
is governed by the California Building Code (currently the 2007
Deleted: "'cn'"
version) and the City mus adopt measures necessary to assure
Deleted: International
that these codes are followed. Knowledge of the sedimentarv
I Deleted: stall
motions.
The expected moment magnitudes and median peak horizontal
ground accelerations shown in Table 5-1 (Appendix A) are for
planning purposes; individual projects, require site-specific Deleted: and
design earthquake determinations depending upon the uses Deleted, may
associated with the project and whether the project is -
considered an essential services facility or other type of
important structure. Projects in the City may fall within the
jurisdiction of County, State, or Federal agencies (e.g., Caltrans,
Division of the State Architect, and the Federal Emergency
Management Agency) with more or less stringent earthquake
design criteria. It is the responsibility of the City to protect the
lives and property of the citizens of Rosemead by submitting
input to these agencies to assure, to the maximum degree
possible, their consideration for the application of the proper
earthquake design factors.
Active and Potentially Active Surface Fault
Rupture Hazard Deleted: s
Total damage/collapse of structures and severe iniua can
result if surface rupture occurs beneath or in the immediate
vicinity of a building. Based on the geologic, seismic,
groundwater, and tectonic/fault studies that have been
conducted to date within and adjacent to the City of Rosemead, + Deleted: abo
it is concluded that: (i) the Alhambra Wash fault tr c f Deleted: fauh
Whittier fault as is the East Montebello fauk) js the only mown Deleted: aernonauabb,
active surface fault crossing the City and studies required by the -
APEFZ Act (Figure 5-3) are necessary; (2) the northwest-
iteted: DRAFTJUNEZOOB
Del
P A G E 5- z 6
0 C 1 0 11 I. R 2 0 0 8
.
•
as
requiring special investigation on a case-by-case basis for new
or significantly modified "important" facilities (defined below),
and (3) the northwest trending groundwater barrier (CDWR,
1966) in east-central Rosemead is not considered to be active
and is not included kith a 1. 1
,
Secondary Seismic Hazards
Local geological conditions may create additional hazards
associated with seismic activity. Large and moderate
_earthquakes produce ground-shaking effects that may result in
ground failure. Figure 5-5 shows areas susceptible to
seismically induced liquefaction. In locations where shallow
groundwater levels And loose, unconsolidated soils occur
together, a condition called liquefaction can occur,_ hen the
area is subjected to strong zround shaking. Soils that liquefy
lose the ability to support structures; buildings ntay sink or tilt
with the potential for extensive stnictural danulgc.
Liquefaction presents the most prominent secondary
earthquake ground failure issue in Rosemead. Seismically
induced landslideshav%the potential o occur in a limited area
in the south of Rosemead. butproper investigation
and mitigation will minimize these secondan seismic hazards.
California law (Seismic Hazard Mapping Act) requires
identification of liquefaction-susceptible zones, where the
dynamic (under seismic conditions) stability of the foundation
soils must be investigated, and seismically-induced landslide
zones, where the stability of hill slopes must be evaluated.
Within these areas, geologic studies must be completed and
countermeasures undertaken in the design and construction of
important infrastructure and buildings for human occupancy.
California law also requires disclosure of these hazards as a part
of all real estate transactions within the identified areas. The
City shall continue to (1) apply the State seismic hazard zoning
regulations at the earliest possible stage in the development
process, (2) identify these hazards at the project development
permit stage to assure proper design measures are
implemented, and (3) inform at an early stage applicants
planning to develop heavy structures or structures over two-
stories that the areas with historic high groundwater less than
3o-feet deep are most susceptible to liquefaction and lateral
spread landslides where adjacent to channel-type slopes.
•
P U B 1,112 S A F E T Y
Deleted:
Deleted: ,
Formatted: Not
-
- Deleted:
Deleted:
' Deleted:
Deleted: evaluation
Deleted: , but should be evaluated
for important facilities (defined
below) planned within loo feet of the
mapped location
Deleted: Total damage/collapse of
stnictures and severe injury; can resul
if surface rupture occurs beneath or ii
- the immediate vicinity ofa building.
Deleted: 3:
Deleted: , with larger quakes,
Deleted: interact with
I Deleted: e
Deleted: s
Deleted: exists
Deleted: the ge
topographyand
Deleted, hill
Deleted.
Deleted: No maps exist for lateral
spread landslide potential, but such
failures can occur adjacent to steam
channels and deep washes.
Deleted: DRAFT JUNE 2008
P A G E S- 2 7
JF. V 1 S E D O C :r- V B. )i--_R
2 0 013
P U B L I C S A F E T Y •
Pam Inundation Flooding Hazards
Rosemead does not have natural floodplain areas, although it is
bordered by the Rio Hondo in its eastern and southeastern
extremes. Pam failure can be caul by strong earthquake
Zround shaking or a seiche event, erosion, improper siting
and/or design, and rapidly rising floodwaters during heavy
storms. Such a am failure can be instantaneous or gradual,
on many tactors (e.g., the cause
causing injuries, loss of life, property damage, displacement of
persons residing within the inundation path, and damage to
infrastructure. Portions of the City are located within dam
inundation areas for the Whittier Narrows Dam, Santa Fe
Dam/Reservoir, and Garvey Dam/Reservoir (Figure 5-6).
Given the City's distance from the Pacific Ocean it's exposure
to tsunami hazards resulting from offshore earthquakes is nil
Natural Hazard-Related Goals and Policies
The overarching natural hazard related goal is stated below to
provide the basic purpose and strategy adopted by the City of
Rosemead to address safety concerns posed by natural hazards.
Goal t has several policies that are more specific guidelines and
tactics that will be used to meet Goal i. Finally,
implementation actions, the specific steps to be taken to satisfy
the goal and policies, are presented in a subsequent section.
Underlying Goal i is the precept that all buildings and
structures in the City of Rosemead should conform to the
appropriate building standards in order to protect every citizen
to the degree practical. In consideration of certain hazard
zones referred to in the Safety Element, the City has defined the
category "Important" building or structure in considering new
or substantially refurbished existing facilities that should
receive increased consideration for geologic, soil,
seismic/earthquake, and flood hazard avoidance. An important
facility, which would not apply to existing buildings of the types
described below unless substantial refurbishment were
proposed, would be defined by the City Planning Director, the
City Engineer, and the City Building Official for each case, as
appropriate. In general "Important" would include, but not
necessarily be limited to:
(t) One whose function is judged as essential following
a severe natural hazard such as an earthquake, e.g.,
police, fire, City communications center, and
hospitals, in order to provide for the safety and well-
being of the citizens of Rosemead;
(2) A structure that is critical to the City's recovery
following a severe earthquake, i.e., key
P A G E s- 2 8
•
- Deleted: -
Deleted: Gi,en
Deleted: the Cit's distance from the
Deleted: eliminates
Deleted: ii s e~wosure to
Deleted: ocean wave(
Deleted: tsunami
Deleted: )
Deleted: hazards resulting from
Deleted: 11
Deleted: DRAFT JUNE 2008
a1• V ISL. D
0 C T 0 B E R 2 o o 13.
transportation/,evacuation routes, bridges,
over/underpasses, electrical substations and towers,
natural gas/fuel pipelines;
(3) Structures that may be sensitive to earthquake
hazards (e.g., liquefaction and,g_round shaking), e.g.,
buildings greater than 2-stories, pre-1971 tilt-ups,
non-retrofitted buildings, soft-story construction,
non-ductile reinforced concrete, and parking
garages; and
(4) Buildings that may have significant populations,
and/or high-population densities, i.e., schools/pre-
schools, nursing homes, and locations with limited
mobility populations.
Goal is The City of Rosemead will act in
cooperation mith federal, State, and
County agencies responsible for the
enforcement of planning statutes,
environmental laws, and building codes
to minimize, to the extent practical, risks
to people and property damage, risks
related economic and social disruption,
and other impacts resulting from i)
geologic and soil hazards, 2) seismic
hazards including primary and secondary
effects of seismic shaking, fault rupture,
and other earthquake-induced ground
deformation in Rosemead, and 3) dam
failure-induced flood and inundation
hazards, while reducing the disaster
recovery time due to hazard incidents in
Rosemead. The City of Rosemead will consider
undertakinE a HAZUS-based loss estimation
analysis to more fully quantify potential physical
cl:Inlat'e, economic loss, and social impacts from
these events.
U B L I C S A F E T Y
P A G E 5- 2 9
. - Deleted:
Deleted: Rroundshaking
t Deteted: and
Formatted: Font: Bold
Deleted: DRAFT JUTNE2008
REV I S E D QCTOB t•:R
2 0 0 8
P U B L I C S A F E T T
Policy i.i: Geology and Soil Hazards
a) Encourage development in low hazards areas
and implement actions that minimize changes to
the natural topography and drainages, while
protecting public safety and reducing potential
property damage due to geologic and soil
hazards through the use of proper design and
construction techniques.
b) Assure that all aspects of the geotechnical and
engineering geology evaluation process
(planning, investigation, analysis, reporting,
review, construction, and operations) for new
development and redevelopment are conducted,
and independently reviewed, by qualified
professionals.
Policy 1.2: Earthquake and Fault Hazards
a) Minimize the exposure of people and
property to primary and secondary earthquake-
related hazards, while allowing properly
designed projects to be developed in appropriate
locations.
b) Assure that all aspects of the earthquake,
fault rupture, liquefaction, and related seismic
hazard evaluation process (planning,
investigation, analysis, reporting, review,
construction, and operations) for new
development and redevelopment are conducted,
and independently reviewed, by qualified
professionals.
Policy 1.3 Dam Inundation Flood Hazards
a) Minimize development of Important
Facilities in flood-prone areas to the extent
possible in order to protect public safety and
reduce potential property damage due to dam
failure-induced flooding.
b) Assure that all aspects of the dam failure
flood/ inundation evaluation process (planning,
investigation, analysis, reporting, review,
construction, and operations) for new
development and redevelopment are conducted,
and independently reviewed, by qualified
professionals.
Policy 1.4 Disaster Preparedness and
Communication
a) Create and maintain emergency preparedness
and evacuation plans; create public
information/education programs to help assure
coordinated response, recovery, and mitigation
P A G E 5- 3 0
0
{ Deleted: habitable
Formatted: Highlight
Deleted: surface hydrologic and
Deleted: 11
Deleted: DRAFT JUNE 2oo8
AC'V I$F. R
O C T 0 B E R 2 0 0 9 ,
•
P U B L I C S A F E T Y
efforts carried out by the City and other
governmental agencies.
b) Foster cooperation with neighboring cities
and agencies to enhance mutual aid
opportunities following natural hazard events.
Hazards Due to Human Activities
Goal 2: Ensure safety of all City residents and
local workers from hazardous wastes and
the hazards associated with the transport
of such wastes.
Policy 2.1: Work with the Los Angeles County Fire
Department to identify an maintain an up-to-
date database of all producers, users, and
transporters of hazardous materials and wastes.
Policy 2.2: Strictly enforce the use of designated truck
routes for vehicles transporting hazardous
materials (Figure 5-71.
Policy 2.3: Support, develop and participates in safety
hazard awareness programs that provide for the j Deleted: and participate in
safe and efficient collection and disposal of
household hazardous wastes.
Policy 2.4: Review in detail any industrial development
proposed to be located adjacent to a residential
use to ensure that necessary safeguards are I Deleted: any
included to minimize the risk to residential uses.
Safeguards may include, for example,
appropriate siting of buildings and loading
areas, on-site emergency response equipment or
supplies, and barrier walls.
Deleted: DRAFT JUNE 20o8
P A G E 5 3 1
N
20 0
Emergency Shelters
All Emergency Shelters are Important Facilities. The colors are
Evacuation Routes
associated to the categories listed above under Important Facilities.
Medical Facilities Potential Emergency Center
Fire Station
Source: City of Rosemead, DMP Inc.
Figure 5-7
000 4
000
0 1
000 2
000 3
Important Facilities
,
,
,
,
City of Rosemead
June 2008
General Plan Update
Important Facilities: Evacuation Routes
For more information on Important Facilities see site number and refer to Table 5-3. Truck and Evacuation Routes may
40 Hospital/Nursing Home 0 School overlap in some areas.
Public Facility Q Place of Worship Truck/Hazardous Materials
Transport Routes
• •
P U B L I C S A F E T Y
This page intentionally left blank.
D.I.Wd: DRAFT JUNE 2008
P A G E 5- 3 3
E 1 1) T B F, R
4-o Q-0-
P U B L I C SA F E T Y
Fire Protection and Law
Enforcement
The Los Angeles County Fire Department provides service from
two stations in Rosemead.
The Los Angeles Count,. Sheriff's Department serves the City of
Rosemead from the nearby Temple Station. In addition to
providing patrol and investigative services, the Sheriff offers a
broad range of support services, including Neighborhood
Watch coordination, community education programs, drug
prevention education for school children, and homeland
security. A key crime prevention program the Department runs
is the Community/Law Enforcement Partnership Program, or
CLEPP. Sheriff's Department staff shall help communities
mobilize and organize against gangs, drugs, and violence by
working through schools, community-based organizations,
local businesses, churches, residents, and local governments.
Goal 3: Provide high levels of public safety,
emergency response, and law
enforcement services.
Policy •;.1: Ensure that current applicable building codes
and fire codes are maintained and implemented.
Polio -1.2: Include the Fire Department in the review
process of proposed projects to ensure that fire
prevention and suppression features have been
considered in the overall desim,
Policy Require that any structures identified as
deficient in fire protection or lacking adequate
suppression devices make recommended
improvements in a time frame established by the
Fire Department.
Policy 3.4; Work with local water service providers to
ensure that private water distribution and
supply facilities have adequate capacity to meet
both the water supply needs of the community
and required fire flows. Service planning should
include methods to address earth quake induced
damage to water storage and distribution
facilities_
P A G E 3 4
•
A E V 1 5 E D _
0 C T 0 B E R 2 o o 8.
' Formatted: Border: Top: (No
border)
Formatbed: Border: Top: (No
border)
Deleted: I
Meted:.
:E leted: It
[Deleted: DRAFTJUNE2oo8
P U B L I C S A F E T Y
Policy 3.5: Provide for all street signs and property address
Deleted: z
signs to be clearly marked and visible to
emergency personnel.
Deleted: Policy 3.3: Include the
Fire Department in the review process
Policy 3.6: Annually assess the level and of services
Cy 3 y quality
of proposed projects to ensure that
fire prevention and suppression
provided by the County Sheriff and County Fire
features have been considered in the
Department, and adjust the service levels as
I
overall design.¶
¶
needed to meet changing community needs.
Policy 3.q:. Require that any
structures identified as deficient in
Policy 3.7: Take full advantage of community Policing,
e
e or ppression o deva
s s uupp
ke the the
ssioviceices to ma
education, and crime prevention programs
recommended improvements in a
available through the County Sheriff s
time frame established by the Fire
Department.
Department.9
Deleted: Policy 3.5: Ensure that
Policy 3.8: Incorporate crime prevention considerations
1 current applicable building codes and
fire codes are maintained and
into the development project review process,
implemented.9
where applicable.
Policy 3.9: Develop and implement a periodic inspection
program for multi-family units over three units
and mixed-use projects.
Policy 3.10: Consider the adoption of a citywide emergency
evacuation plan and emergency shelter plan.
Policy Map and Plan
Rosemead's approach to mitigating public safety hazards and
reducing loss of life iniurv and property damage in the Citk
focuses on emergency preparedness, The policies contained in
Deleted: in the reduction of the loss
this element include requirements that the City maintain an
of life. injury, and property damage to
f
l
d
i
the City
ures
or
emergency response system, proce
up-to-date reg
ona
educating the public about the importance of emergency
preparedness, and programs o ensure that emergency
{ Deleted: proposals
equipment and supplies are maintained to adequately meet the
needs of the Cit~- in an emergency situation.
Implementation of the goals and policies in this Element will
have Ae-beneficial effect of reducing potential fire hazards in
I
Deleted: a
the City. The replacement of older, deteriorating structure4and
{Deleted; ,
the requirement that owners maintain their properties and
incorporat!; of up-to-date fire-suppression devices in structures
Deleted: ion
will reduce the occurrence of structural fires in the City.
Figure 5-7 identifies designated hazardous materials transport
routes and evacuation routes, as well as fire stations, medical
facilities, and potential emergency centers. The City has
Deleted: DRAFT JUNE zoos
P A G E 5 - 3 5
E V I S E D C T O B F R
2 0o R
0 0
P U B L 1 C S A F E T Y
identified local schools as potential sites for emergency centers.
Having recommended sites will expedite the time necessary to
set up emergency centers such as shelters.
Implementation
Actions
Natural Hazard Safety
Goal 1: The City of Rosemead will act in
cooperation with federal, State, and
County agencies responsible for the
enforcement of planning statutes,
environmental laws, and building codes
to minimize, to the extent practical, risks
to people and property damage, risks
related to economic and social
disruption, and other impacts resulting
from 1) geologic and soil hazards, 2)
seismic hazards, including primary and
secondary effects of seismic shaking, fault
rupture, and other earthquake-induced
ground deformation in Rosemead, and 3)
dam failure-induced flood and
inundation hazards, while reducing the
disaster recovery time due to hazard
incidents in Rosemead. The Citv of
Rosemead will consider undertaking a HAZI S-
based loss estimation analysis to more fully
quantifN potential physical damage, economic loss,
and social impacts from these events.
Action i.1 Review County and special district capital
improvement plans for consistency with the
seismic safety policies governing the location of
critical public facilities.
Action 1.2 Inspect critical public facilities for structural
integrity, and require correction as necessary.
Action 1.3 Require all private roads to conform to the
existing City standards concerning safety and
the movement of emergency vehicles.
P A G E 5- 3 6
J Deleted: .
Deleted: -
Deleted: DRAFT JUNE 2oo8
L V I L D
OCTOBER 2oo8,
P_J
0
P U R 1, 1 C S A F t: T Y
Action 1.4 beveloa a public information program on,
I Deleted: Conduct
hazard prevention and disaster response and
Deleted: preventing hazards and
disseminate information on public safeh-_to all
responding to a disaster
residents and businesses in the City on a regular
j Deleted: institute a program to
basis.
Action 1.5 Create a website or Jink on the City of Rosemead
I Deleted: website
website that includes links to readily available
Deleted: to
published geologic, soil, and earthquake hazard
-
Deleted: the
maps covering the City, and links to the City
I
statutes, plans, and codes governing
development and re-development projects. JUse
Deleted: ;
the site to communicate to the public
Deleted: u
information about geologic and soil, seismic, and
dam inundation flood hazards and City
requirements„ including but not limited to a)
licensed professionals
sources to identif
ecif
s
Deleted: tothepublic
y
y
p
such as California Aegistered Geotechnical
Deleted: State-
Engineers and Certified Fngineeringgeologists,
Deleted: c
b) seismic design and construction requirements
Deleted: e
for individuals and developers applicable to new
and existing property improvements, c) City
Deleted` g
emergency preparedness plans, and d) home- or
Deleted: references
business,-based emergency preparedness
Deleted:
procedures and resources.
Action 1.6 denti evacuation routes and update on a
regular basis the Emergency Preparedness and
Evacuation Plan (as required by Government
Code Section 65302) that addresses structural
hazards, landslides and slope stability,
liquefaction„ inundation from ;dam failure,
Deleted: and lateral spread
seismic activity, and other natural disasters.
landslides
Deleted: a
Action 1.7 Encourage only the minimum grading necessary
to create suitably sized and safe building areas.
Action 1.8 Avoid grading and development that requires
filling natural drainages or changing natural
surface water flow patterns.
Action 1.9 As required by law and statute, the City shall
implement applicable federal, State, and County
regulations related to geology and soils
( ( Deleted: y
investigations, analyses, designs, and
construction, including but not limited to
jmolementing the most up-to-date California
( Deleted: maintaining
Building Code (CBC) provisions regarding
j Deleted:. Continue to upgrade the
lateral forces (Chapter 23) and grading (Chapter
CsC on a tri-annual basis and update
`„th
70), and incorporate and adopt Jos Angeles
County amendments to the B
Deleted: annually.
Deleted: DRAFr JUNE 2oo8
P A G E S- 3 7
V E F. R
?la08
P U B L I C S A F E T Y
Action 1.10
Require proper geotechnical and engineering
geolo ica investigations and reports that,
address and evaluate necessary analyses of (for
example) soil foundation conditions (i.e.,
expansivity, collapse, seismic settlement), slope
stability, surface and subsurface water, and
provide necessary design recommendations for
grading and site stability, such as excavation, fill
placement, and stabilization or remediation
measures.
Action 1.11
Require routine inspection of grading operations
by properly qualified City representatives to
assure site safety and compatibility with
approved plans and specifications.
Action 1.12
Regularly review the technical data on public
safety and seismic safety for use in the planning
process and undertake revisions or updates to
the Public Safety Elementas needed.
Action 1.13
Enact ordinances for the evaluation and
abatement of structural hazards (i.e., parapet
ordinance and hazardous building ordinance
requiring repair, rehabilitation, or demolition of
hazardous structures following structural
evaluation). As appropriate, prepare multi-
lingual materials that discuss hazardous
structures and provide suggestions for the
mitigation of structural hazards.
Action 1.14 Required geological studies shall be conducted
by California certified F,ngineering Geologists
following the guidelines published by the
California Geological Survey and the State
Mining and Geology Board, and geotechnical
studies shall be conducted by California
_Registered.Qeotechn ical,Engineers.
Action 1.15 Required liquefaction assessment studies shall
be conducted in accordance with (the
California Geological Survey's Special
Publication 117: Guidelines for Evaluating and
Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California, th)_ he
Southern California Earthquake Center's (1999
or subsequent document, as amended)
procedures to implement Special Publication 117
- Liquefaction Hazards, and W the Earthquake
Engineering Research Center's Report No.
EERC-2oo~-6: Recent Advances jn Soil
P A G E 5- 3 B
0
A E V I S E 1)
OCTOBER soo6-
Deleted: v
Deleted: include
Deleted: State-c
1 Deleted: e
Deleted: g
Deleted: -
Deleted: r
Deleted: g
Deleted: e
1 Deleted: and
Deleted: I
Deleted: I
Deleted: DRAFT JUNE aoo8
• P U R 1. 0 S A F E T Y
Liquefaction Fn_zineering: _1 _Unified and I ; Deleted:A
Consistent Framework. Required slope stability
analyses shall be conducted in accordance with
California Geological Survey's Special
Publication 117: Guidelines for Evaluating and
Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California, and
the Southern California Earthquake Center's
(2002 or subsequent document, as amended)
guidelines for evaluating and mitigating
landslide hazards.
Action 1.16 As required by law and statute, the City shall
implement applicable federal, State, and County
regulations related to earthquake hazard
investigations, analyses, designs, and
construction, including but not limited to the
adoption of applicable sections of the current
California Building Code and the County of Los
Angeles Geotechnical Guidelines, and
compliance with the State Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Act and the Seismic
Hazards Mapping Act requirements.
Action 1.17 Ensure that no structure for human occupancy,
other than single-family wood-frame and steel-
frame dwellings that are less than three stories
and are not part of a development of four units
or more, shall be permitted within fiftyfeet of an Deleted: -
active fault trace as defined by geologic _ Deleted: designated on maps
investigations conducted in accordance with the ~compiled bytheState Geologist, oras
intent o the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault . _ C Deleted: , under
Zoning Act, and the guidelines contained in the
California geological survey notes 48 and ag.
Action 1.18 Encourage most new construction in areas with
a minimum of identified earthquake-related
hazards.
Action 1.19 Minimize to the maximum extent practical the
construction of important structures (e.g.,
critical, essential, sensitive, and high-occupancy
buildings and critical infrastructure) within
known, or suspected earthquake-related hazard
zones.
Action 1.2o The City shall require geologic and seismic
studies as part of Important Facilities
development proposals within established 200-
foot wide Fault Hazard Management Zones
(FHMZ) along possible or suspected fault-
related features (loo-feet on either side)
Deleted: DRAFr JUNE 2008
P A G E 5- 3 9
' r ~15 I. I~ (l C T O B E K
-o 0 8-
P U B L I C S A F E T Y
identified in the State Fault Evaluation Report
222 (Treiman, 1991; as shown on Figure 5:3), in
other peer,reviewed reports (e.g., Bullard and
Lettis, 1993), and in future City fault hazard
investigations. Investigation and reporting
requirements for FHMZs shall mirror those for
Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones and
California Geological Survey Notes 48 and 49-
FHMZs shall be updated periodically based on
the results of studies conducted in the City,
which may cause the FHMZs to the expanded,
reduced, or removed.
Action 1.21 Where construction of important structures
(e.g., critical, essential, sensitive, and high-
occupancy buildings and critical infrastructure)
within known, or suspected earthquake-related
hazard zones is proposed, require proper
geotechnical and engineering geology
investigations and reports that include necessary
analyses of (for example) strong ground-shaking,
fault rupture, liquefaction, lateral spreading,
ground subsidence and slope instability, and
that provide necessary design recommendations
for grading and site stability, such as building
setbacks, special foundation considerations,
dewatering, ground improvement, and other
stabilization or remediation measures.
Action 1.22 Require routine and special inspection of
investigation sites (e.g., fault exploration
trenches) and grading operations by properly
qualified City representatives to assure
scientifically adequate methods, site safety, and
compatibility with approved plans and
specifications.
Action 1.23 The City shall monitor engineering and scientific
studies affecting development or re-
development in areas of known or suspected
P A G E 5- 4 0
s
OCTOBER 2 oo
Deleted:
Deleted: 2
1 Deleted: 3
Meted: hazard
Deleted: ,
Deleted: and ground cracking,
Deleted:
Deleted: DRAFT JUNE zoo8
earthquake-related hazards that may impact the
City, and shall ensure that site-specific data, up-
to-date geologic knowledge, and expert peer-
(independent third party) review are
incorporated into the planning, design,
construction, and inspection stages of important
project structures (e.g., critical, essential,
sensitive, and high-occupancy buildings and
critical infrastructure).
Action 1.24 As required by law and statute, the City shall
implement, where applicable, federal, State, and
County regulations related to hydrology and
flood investigations, analyses, designs, and
construction, including but not limited to
continued participation in the National Flood
Insurance Program.
•
P U B L I C SAFETY
Action 1.25 Minimize to the maximum extent practical the
construction of Jmportant Facilities_ (e.g.,
critical, essential, sensitive, and high-occupancy
buildings and critical infrastructure) within
potential dam failure-induced flood,~inundation
areas.
Action 1.26 Require proper hydrology and flooding
investigations and reports that include necessary
analyses of (for example) pre- and post-
development flow characteristics, changes to
surface drainage network, potential
environmental impacts on existing development
down-gradient from new construction in
upstream areas, and adequacy of current and
proposed culverts, debris basins, and storm
drain systems.
Action 1.27 Establish procedures for reviewing subdivisions
and other development permit applications to
ensure safety from seismic and geologic hazards,
including liquefaction areas, slope stability, and
,ground shaking zones. The City shall retain a
California certified engineering geologist(s) and
a California registered geotechnical engineer(s),
either on staff or on a contract basis, to review
all engineering geologic and geotechnical studies
and grading operations for new development or
redevelopment, including but not limited to
geotechnical evaluations, liquefaction studies,
and fault rupture evaluations. Each reviewer
shall have a minimum of to years of practical
experience in their respective fields, shall be
---------J-- Deleted: i
Deleted: structures
I _ - - - Deleted: and dam-induced
P A G E S- 4 1
E V I S ' "I' E
2 0 0 8
Deleted:groundshaldng
Deleted: DRAFT JUNE 2008
P U B L I C S A F E T Y
is
•
Deleted: 9
Deleted: I
Deleted: DRAFT JANE 2oo8
P A G E 5- 4 2
E V 1 D
OCTOBER zoo 8,
independent of development work being
conducted in the City within 12 months before or
after the subject reviews, and shall otherwise not
have a conflict-of-interest regarding the project
•
P U B L I OS A F E T Y
Human Activities
Hazard Safety
Goal 2: Ensure the safety of all City residents and
workers from hazardous wastes and the
hazards associated with the transport of
such wastes.
Action 2.1 Coordinate with the Los Angeles County Fire
Department's Health Hazardous Materials
Division to identify and mitigate hazardous
materials dangers.
Action 2.2 Enforce the use of designated routes for truck
travel with signage, information provided to
businesses and coordination with Sheriffs
Department staff.
Action 2.3 Require that producers, users, and transporters
of hazardous materials comply with State and
federal regulations requiring identification of
these materials on signs posted on the exterior of
buildings or storage facilities containing such
materials, and on trucks or x Aides transporting
hazardous substances through the City.
Action 2.4 Coordinate with the Los Angeles County
Department of Public Works to increase
outreach and participation in the County's
Household Hazardous Waste Collection events
within the City. Increase visibility of the
County's program through newspapers, the
City's website, and posted information at public
facilities and City-sponsored events.
Action 2.5 Prohibit new businesses that produce or
transport hazardous wastes from locating in or
adjacent to residential neighborhoods. Update
the City's zoning ordinance to limit these
businesses to industrial zones not adjacent to
residential areas, and limit the permitted uses
for business in or adjacent to residential areas.
Deleted: DRAF IF JUNE 2008
P A G E5-43
,R L _K_ J_ u Q B E L
2 0 0 8
•
P U B L I C S A F E T Y
Goal 3: Provide high levels of public safety,
•
emergency response, and law
enforcement services.
Action 3.1
Cooperate with the Los Angeles County Fire
Department in the preparation of a Fire
Prevention Program to reduce the extent of
damage resulting from fire.
Action 3.2
Meet annually, if not more frequently, with
County Fire Department officials to assess how
services are provided and whether any changes
are required in response to City and/or County
needs.
Action 3.3
Use public education activities to inform
residents, businesses, and City staff about
community policing and crime prevention
Action 3.4
Implement Crime Prevention through
Environmental Design (CPTED) features with
the establishment of specific design criteria, and
apply those criteria to proposed projects through
the development project review process.
Action 3.5
Continually address expected effects of climate
change that may impact public safety, including
increased risk of wildfires, flooding and sea level
{ Formatoed: Undedine
rise, salt water intrusion; and health effects of
Formatted: Underline
increased heat and ozone, through appropriate
policies and programs.
Action 3.6
Consider adopting programs for the purchase,
transfer or extinguishment of development
rights in high.~jrisk areas.
Deleted:
Action 3.7
Monitor the impacts of climate change. Use
adaptive management to develop new strategies,
and modify existing strategies, to respond to the
impacts of climate change.
Deleted: I
Deleted: DRAFT JUNE 2008
P A G E
5 4 4
~L_ I_. 1 S IS 1)
0 -C T_4 - L__R 2 o o 8_
•
•
A P P C- N D I X A
Comment [AA1]: THE.NPPENDDC
SHOULD INCLUDE A GLOSSARY
Comment MW22R1]: We have
chosen not to include glossaries in
any of the General Plan sections or
Technical Background Reports
because such information is readily
,,-ihhh, (including multiple
it iii, it in is Ivariations) in manv form
1
issues areas.
IC, SEISMIC, AND
1G TECHNICAL
OUND INFORMATION
Geologic and Soil Hazards
The geologic and soil potential hazards considered are:
■ Landslides and mudslides (slope instability)
Collapsible and expansive soils
■ GroundwaterAeptk
■ Subsidence
In certain hydrologic environments, subsidence due to
groundwater withdrawal is possible when there is substantial
pumping over extended periods; however, there are no records
of such an occurrence in the City of Rosemead. No subsidence
within the City was noted in the references reviewed.
However, the thick alluvial deposits underlying some sections
Qf the City may be susceptible to §ubsidence should rapid
groundwater withdrawal occur in the groundwater basin
beneath the Cite. Slope instability, unstable soils, and shallow
groundwater issues are discussed below.
In general, the geologic units that occur at or near the ground
surface in the Rosemead area (Figure 5-1) include artificial fill
(along the I-io freeway), wash deposits (e.g., Alhambra and
Eaton Washes), younger and older alluvial fan deposits (most
P A G E A- 1
V 1 55 ; D O C T B E
2 0 0 8
RosEMEAD GENERAL PLAN
' Deleted: Fort
Comment [AA3]: WHERE IS
Deleted: s
Deleted: CAN,
Deleted: consist of
leted: DRAFT JUNEaoo8
•
AP P E N D I X A
of the area of the City), and relatively soft bedrock formations
(in the south and southeast). The granular nature of the wash
and alluvial deposits generally results in fewer soil-related
hazards, and the lack of extensive exposed bedrock formations
generally results in o low slope stability hazard. In some areas,
granular alluvium and historically high groundwater can
increase the liquefaction potential.
Landslides, Mudslides, and Slope
Instability
Slope instability under non-earthquake (static) conditions is
considered to be a potentially significant hazard only-in the
hillside areas, which occur along the southernmost edge of the
City and the sphere of influence. Onh one landslide has been
mapped in the area (CDMG, 1998, Plate 1.2), this landslide ies
at_or just south of the City, east of Montebello Boulevard, west
of Darlington Street, and north of Plaza Drive, in bedrock of the
upper Fernando Formation (Tfu). The general slope stability
hazard for natural slopes in the City is low City since the
0
Deleted: less
Deleted: onh
Deleted: 11n, distnki ,)n ~,I
Deleted: shows only one
Deleted: that
1 Deleted: lies at
IJelecea: On
Deleted: boundary
-
Deleted: within
It
section.
are discussed In a
In hillside terrain and areas adjacent to river bluffs (e.g., the
Rio Hondo), an appropriate engineering geology and
geotechnical slope stability investigation (performed by
properly licensed professionals), including field data collection,
laboratory testing, and slope stability analysis, should be
conducted considering both for both static and dynamic
(earthquake) forces. Mitigation options include, but are not
limited to, building setbacks, landslide debris
removal/replacement, slope angle reduction, earth or
engineered buttresses, protective barriers, retaining/slough
walls, debris fences, and run-out/catchment areas.
P A G E A- 2
Deleted: is discussed in the CDMG
Deleted:. With thee
Deleted: of locations such as
Deleted: (and as they may continue
the
D R A F T J U N E 2008
• •
A P P E N D I X A
TABLE 6-2 - City of Rosemead Geologic Unit Descriptions (Yerkes and Campbell, 2005)
MAP SYMBOL AND GEOLOGIC
GEOLOGIC UNIT DESCRIPTION
UNIT
Qaf
Deposits of sand, silt, and gravel resulting from human construction,
Artificial fill (late Holocene)
mining or quarrying activities; includes compacted engineered and non-
com actedinon en ineered fill. Only large deposits are shown.
ow
Unconsolidated gravel, sand and silt in active or recently active
Wash deposits (late Holocene)
streambeds: chiefly stream deposited, but includes some debris-flow
deposts: episodes of bank-full stream flow are frequent enough to inhibit
growth of vegetation.
Qls
Rock detritus from bedrock and surficial materials, broken in varying
Landslide deposits (Holocene and late
degrees from relatively coherent large blocks to disaggregated small
Pleistocene?)
fragments, deposited by landslide processes including slides, slumps,
falls, topples and flows; generally unconsolidated; some dissected
landslides may be as old as We Pleistocene. A few large landslides
resent outside the City to the south
Qyw
Unconsolidated sand, silt and gravel: gravel and boulders more common
Young wash deposits (Holocene and
near mountain fronts. In part distinguished from wash deposits (Ow) on
late Pleistocene?)
basis of river terrace elevation differences and soil characteristics.
Qyf
Unconsolidated gavel, sand, and silt; boulder-rich near mountain fronts;
Young alluvial-fan deposits, undivided
deposited chiefly by flooding streams and debris flows; surfaces can
Holocene and late Pleistocene
show slight to moderate edo nic soil development.
Qoa
Unconsolidated to moderately indurated gravel, sand and silt: surfaces
Old alluvium, undivided (late to middle
can show moderate to well-developed pedoger is soil, including a
Pleistocene)
distinctive reddish "B' sal horizon; surfaces moderate) to well-dissected.
Qof
Slightly to moderately consolidated sift, sand and gravel deposits on
Old alluvial-fan deposits, undivided
alluvial fans; surfaces dissected in varying degrees; surfaces can show
late to middle Pleistocene
moderate) to well-devel eel pedogenic soils.
00111
Oldest of at least three subunits of Oof that can be distinguished in some
Old alluvial-fan deposits, Unit 1
areas based of alluvial fan surface elevation differences and sal
middle Pleistocene
characteristics.
Tf
Includes the following members:
Fernando Formation (Pliocene)
Thu
Massive silty sandstone: Tfuf, fossiliferous; Tfuc, pebbly sandstone
Fernando Formation, Upper
and conglomerate.
Member
TrI
Interbedded silty sandstone and massive pebble conglomerates Tflc,
Fernando Formation, Lower
conglomerate.
Member
T13
Coarse pebble-cobble conglomerate.
Fernando Formation, member 3
Tf2
Massive sandstone.
Fernando Formation, member 2
P A G E A- 3
Deleted: DRAFT JUNE 2008
E V E D B E R ,I
2 0 o 9
•
A P P E N D 1 X A
Expansive soils are associated with fine-grained soils, alluvium,
and bedrock formations that contain clay minerals susceptible
to expansion under wetting conditions and contraction under
drying conditions. Depending upon the type and amount of
clay present in a geologic deposit, these volume changes (shrink
and swell) can cause severe damage to slabs, foundations, and
concrete flatwork. Due to the granular (sandy) nature of the
younger alluvium (Qyf) in the flatter areas of the City,
expansive clays are not anticipated in large sections P.f
Rosemead. However. fine-grained, expansive soils may be
associated with the bedrock formations that crop out in the
hillside areas, and with the older alluvial fan deposits (Qoa and
of). No soil maps are available for the City.
barrage due to_ _ _ 1 i_ le and expansive soils can be mitigated
by delineation of problem soils during a proper geotechnical
investigation, and the use of mitigation measures such as over-
excavation of the subject soils and recompaction on new
engineered fill material, pre-saturating the subject soils, and
providing fo proper surface drainage away from structures and
building foundations.
Potentially Shallow Groundwater
Data on historically high (potentially shallow) groundwater are
discussed here and reviewed in the liquefaction discussion. The
concern is the potential to intercept shallow or perched
groundwater in subsurface excavations, such a basements,
utility trenches, deep foundations, or tunnels. In its
liquefaction hazard reports, the CDMG (1998, Plate 1.2; Figure
5-5) delineates the areas ivithin the City where historically high
groundwater as been reported, which is primarily along the
Rio Hondo and in the Whittier Narrows Flood Control Basin
around surfacc). In the river area, groundwater may have
Accurred at the surface, whereas in other areas. groundwater
P A G E A- 4
0
1 Deleted: c
Deleted: would be unlikely, but may
be present in bedrock formation soils
in the hillside areas. The distribution
and character of geologic units within
the City suggest that expansive soils
Deleted: Collapsible soils undergo a
volume reduction when the pore
. spaces become saturated causing loss
of grain-to-grain contact and possibly
dissolving interstitial cement holding
the grains apart. The weight of
5 overlying structures can cause
uniform or differential settlement and i
damage to foundations and walls.
The most likely locations for
collapsible soils are the younger
alluvial deposits (Qw, Qyw, and Qyf)
associated with current and pre-
development drainage channels,
including the Rio Hondo river
tloodplain.
Deleted: 7
Deleted: expansive
Deleted: collapsible
Deleted: lion of
Deleted: within the City
Deleted: less than 5-feet deep
Deleted: existed
Deleted: and
D R A F T J U N E 2008
Collapsible and Expansive Soils
Collapsible and expansive soil issues are recognized in standard
geotechnical investigations mandated by the City and other
regulatory bodies.
occurred at depths ranging j2etween Sand 3o-feet. In areas
where potentially shallow groundwater is indicated on these
maps, planning for each project should consider shallow water
levels in determining how to best implement construction or
exploration programs. Depths to water of less than 15 feet are
considered a high hazard because water may be encountered
even in routine project excavations; depths of 15, to 30jeet are
considered a moderate hazard because only the more
significant excavations (e.g., subterranean parking garages) for
larger project structures would likely exten-,to these depths.
Surface (open cuts and pits) or underground (tunnels, vertical
large-diameter borings) excavations can encounter shallow
groundwater inflows, which may be perched and local, or
0
A P P E . N D I X A
L Deleted: from
Deleted: -
Deleted: to
Deleted: -
Deleted: -
Deleted: t
widespread, in extent. This will affect excavation stability, and
Deleted:, J
therefore short- and long-term safety for workers, as well as
post-construction stability of structures associated with these
excavation areas. The hazard Wised t<L the City is generally low
Deleted; degree of
because current water levels are deeper than the historically
Deleted: for
high levels, but potential hazard should be determined on a
case-by-case basis if projects requiring deep excavations are
proposed.
Other Geology Related Hazards
Volcanic Eruption - The southern California area has no active
volcanoes and no known dormant volcanoes that could
reactivate to cause eruptions, and therefore, the hazard in the
City is lows Large eruptions from volcanic sources farther
Deleted: does not exist.
away, including Mammoth and Yellowstone. could impact the
southern California area.
Tsunami or Seiche - Tsunamis are longiperiod, sea waves
Deleted:
caused by seafloor displacements (as a result of faulting or
I Deleted: , seismically generated
landslides, for example). Since the City is located over 20 miles
from the shoreline, no tsunami hazard is present.
Deleted:,
Seiches are generated by the "sloshing" of water in an enclosed,
Comment [AA14]: SEICHINGOF
POOLS DURING AN EARTHQUAKE
or partially enclosed, body of water (e.g.. water tanks reservoirs
COULD IMPACT NEARBY
and swimming pools) caused by displacement within the water
STRUCTURES
body, or more likely, longer period earthquake motions. rThe~
mment [KLw21SR14]: A
flooding section discusses the potential impacts to the City of a
mment to that affect has been
~m
failure of nearby dams, which could be caused by a seiche
ade
'
ev
ent.
Deleted:
Deleted: associated with
Asbestos - Naturally occurring asbestos is found in California in
Deleted: , and no such formations
rock ormations containinx serpentine and tremolite, The
are known in the geologic units ator
geologic units that crop out withigor adjacent to the City do
adjacent to the site.
not contain these asbestos containing ni.ncrals.
- - - - _ Deleted: at
Radon-222 Gas - In California, radon gas is typically found
j Deleted:
Deleted:
within organic-rich marine shale, phosphate-rich sedimentary
Deleted: DRAFT JUNE2oo8
P A G E A- 5
E V I S E D OCTOBER
9t_9_QA_
•
A P P E N D I X A
rock, diatomaceous shale, light-colored volcanic rock, and some
granite. While such rock types are present in southern
California, the Los Angeles Basin region is classified by the
United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA;
20o7) as having a moderate potential for radon (between 2 and
4 pico-Curies per liter). Radon gas can be mitigated by proper
engineering design based on site-specific radon testing
conducted as part of a site-specific engineering
geology/geotechnicalinvestigation.
Seismic, Earthquake, and Fault
Hazards
Earthquake Ground Shakins
Rosemead is within the southern San Gabriel Valley, which like
the rest of southern California, is a seismically active region
where geologic conditions include active faults and the
potential for large earthquakes with associated potential
adverse affects. Numerous active and potentially active faults
within 62 miles (loo kilometers) were evaluated for their
potential strong round shaking affects at the 'it si, ing [hg
computer program EQFAULT (Blake, 2002). Eleven known
faults are caDable of Droduciny gzigund shaking «ith median
the I-1o and Walnut Grove Avenue (latitude 34.0723 nort h and
longitude 118.0821 west). Distance measurements to the
various faults can F vary depending upon the attenuation
relationship selected, in this case Boore et al, (1997; see Blake,
1989). The California Geological Survey classifies all of ..these
faults as active, and all of these faults lie within a 3o-mile
radius of Rosemead and are capable of producing high levels
(o.18 to o.79g) of ground shaking within the City. The
earthquake faults are shown on Figure 5-2 and are discussed
generally below.
•
Deleted:
Deleted:groundshaldng
Deleted: site
Deleted: based on data contained in
Deleted: approximately 0.20 g "g =
force ofgravity) or greater median
peak horizontal ground acceleration
(PHGA) are shown in Table 5-2
" - below, for a centralized point in the
Deleted: s
Deleted: very
Deleted: aasumvtions made for the
Comment [AA181: ALL
Deleted:
PA G E A- 6
DRAFT JUNE 2008
No other geologic hazard not discussed above was noted in the
City.
• i
A P P E N D I X A
Deleted: Groundshal ing
Earthquake Ground Shaking Parameters for Eleven
AetivP Vniiltc near tiiP Vity of Rncemendl
Fault Name
Distance
Miles
(Kilometers)
Maximum
Magnitude
Peak Horizontal
Ground
Acceleration
Modified
Mercalli
Intensity 2
Puente Hills Blind Thrust
0.0 0.0
7.1
0.790
XI
Upper Elysian
Park Blind Thrust
I 1.1 1.7
8.4
0.528
X
_
Ra rnond
3.9 8.2
6.5
0.421
X
Verdu
5.8 9.3
6.9
0.424
X
Whittier
5.9 9.5
6.8
0.326
IX
Sierra Madre
7.2 11.8
7.2
0.434
X
ClamshellSa t
8.7 14.0)
6.5
0.266
IX
Hollywood
9.1 14.6
6.4
0.245
IX
_
San Jose
10.5 16.9)
6.4
0.221
IX
Newport- Inglewocd i.L A Basin)
15.8 25.5
7 1
0.195
VIII
San Andreas - 1857 Rupture
29.0 46.6)
7.8
0.179
VIII
1. blaKe. Ihomes I'*.. LUUZ. tUrAULI uomputer rrogram Tor tannquaKe Assessments. upoem or IVou program,
attenuation relationship Boore et al. (1997) Horizontal - NEHRP D (250). median value.
2. Bon. Bruce A.. 1993. Abridged Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale. Earthquakes - Newly Revised and Expanded.
Appendix C. W.H. Freeman and Co.. 331 pp.
Deleted: he t
ree major surface fault zones located nearest the City ca.pable
- - _ - - - - - - - - -
ALHAMB [ THE
~ ALHAMBRA W W ASH ASH FAULT Is
of producing large magnitude earthquakes are the Raymond (or
CONSIDEREDTHE
Raymond Hill) fault (approximately four miles to the north),
WESTERNMOST EXTENSION OF
THE WHI TIER FAULT (SEE
the Verdugo fault (approximately six miles to the northwest),
2004), SO THE DISTANCE
and the Whittier fault (approximately six miles to the
I TO THE WHITHER FAULT IS
southeast). The Alhambra Wash fault is considered the
THEOF
ZERO. QUAKE HD A RIGHE
Lg87 EARTH QUAKE HAD ARIGHT-
westernmost extension of the Whittier fault (Yeats, 2004) and
LATERAL SrRIKE-SLIP FOCAL
therefore is accounted for as a potential earthquake source` As
W
MECHANISM
ST
TENT
is the case with many cities in the region, Rosemead sits atop
AULT,
A
ALHAMBRA WAA
SH F
AULT,
THE
BUT THE MAIN SHOCK
the Puente Hills blind thrust fault (source of the 1987 Whittier
OCCURRED ON THE PUENTE
Narrows earth wake and noted as zero miles based on the
q
IIIIA-1; FAULT, NOTTHE UPPER
ELYSIAN PARKS FAULT.
Boore et al., 1997 attenuation relationship), The western half of
[K
~me
Ia W221R203: Fi
d
t
the City sits directly above the Upper Elysian Park blind thrust
n
[
xe
noted as~roughly one mile from the centralized point selected.
Deleted: by association %,ith the
These five faults, and the other faults listed above, pose the
Upper h7gsan Park blind thrust
eate earthquake shaking threat to the City.
Deleted: and immediately adjacent
to the Upper Elysian Park blind thrust
t least three earthquake epicenters of magnitude greater than
of the Citthat I Deleted: Nodirecthewea if
sitssdirectlyabovethe
e the
4.0 that have been recorded within the City boundaries; two of
y
upper F;lysian Park blind thrust
these are the October 1, 1987 "Whittier Narrows" earthquake
I Deleted: represent the primary
main shock of magnitude (M) 5.9 and the October 4, 1987 M5.3
faults that prornide an
aftershock of that event. The main shock (a thrust event)
Deleted: There may be no mom than
caused a peak horizontal ground acceleration of approximately
0.39 within the City, considtEd grong ground shaking given
Deleted`
the moderate size of the earthquake. The main aftershock was
Deleted: for this
a right-lateral strike-slip event. Based on the eleven faults
i Deleted: on
shown on Figure 5-2 and Table 5-2, a median peak horizontal
Deleted: with
ground acceleration (PHGA) Of 0.799 can be expected jf the
Deleted: then
Puente Hills blind thrustbreaks; this:would cause substantially
more damage in the City than xhe 1987 event. This level of
' Deleted: occurred in
Deleted: DRAFr JUNE 2ooti
P A G E A- 7
Jt.EV I S E D QQTQBER,
2 o o 8
•
A P P E N D I X A
shaking is also higher than the 0.549 PHGA with a Io%
probability of being exceeded in 50 years (CGS, 2007). The
20o6 CGS loss estimation scenario (Rowshandel et al, 2oo6)
for a Puente Hills blind thrust 7.1 magnitude earthquake south-
southeast of the City suggests "Heavy" damage in the City with
accelerations and intensities similar to those shown in Table 5-
2.
C
Surface Fault Rupture
General Fault Location Considerations - Deep oil well
and seismic data were used by Yeats (2004) to relate the
subsurface geology to the basement rock exposures of the San
Gabriel Valley, to resolve the tectonic evolution of the region
within this framework, and to evaluate the earthquake potential
of the blind and surface faults in this region. As this study
relates to the City, Yeats shows the East Montebello fault La
northwesterly trending continuation of the Whittier fault) as it
offsets the basement rocks (generally 1000-2750 meters deep)
and the Fernando Formation (the base of the formation is
approximately 5.1 million years old and approximately 5oo-
2000 meters deep) in a location slightly southwest of the
surface trace of the Alhambra Wash fault (Figures 5-2 and 5-3).
Me Alhambra Wash fault is considered to be strand of the
East Montebello fault . _ - JYeats 2 o indicates that the
Workman Hill fault does not offset the base of the Fernando
Formation, which is in general agreement with the
groundwater data cited by Treiman (1991; CDWR, 1966). Other
than the Puente Hills blind thrust M other faults are mapped
by Yeats beneath the City within the basement rock or the
cutting the base of the Pliocene Fernando Formation.
Previous investigators (McCulloch, 2001) .have considered
whether he Whittier fault (therefore its extension the East
Montebello fault) continues as an active strike-slip fault across
the City to the active Raymond fault near Pasadena. Yeats
(2004, page 1171) cites specific evidence to indicate that he
found "no evidence to support the continuation of these faults
[Workman Hill, Whittier Heights, and Handorf faults]
northwestward rfrom the Repetto HillsJlorth of Rosemeadlto
the Raymond fault, as shown by McCulloch et al (2001)." He
adds that "lineations and broad topographic features observed
by Treiman (1991) north of the Repetto Hills rand north of
Rosemead generally-along the groundwater barrier/Alhambra
Wash fault shown on Figure 5-3 and discussed below] may
represent an incipient northwest propagation of a reactivated
fault, but there is no evidence that the active fault continues to
the Raymond fault." In his description of the active tectonic
features of the San Gabriel Basin he indicates that "Although
active faults constitute the margins of the San Gabriel Basin
[this would include the East Montebello and hambra Wash
faults], the cities in the interior of the basin are not underlain
P A G E A- 8
Comment [AA22]: G
Deleted: --generally
Deleted: the surface trace
Comment [AA24]: THE
FERNANDO _ IS NOT 5. t
MILLION YEARS OLD. THE BASE
OF TH E FERNANDO IS 5.1 MA; THE
TOP IS CERTAINLY
BUTOLDER
THANTIIE
MA7WYA1MA BOUNDARY
THEALHAMBR-,\ WASH FAULT IS
Deleted: , which is believed to form
the eastern boundary of the Ups
D R A F T J U N E 2008
•
by active earthquake sources." With the exception of the
Puente Hills blind thrust (not a surface fault), and the East
Montebello-Alhambra Wash fault, this would characterize the
City of Rosemead
Tectonic modeling of the Los Angeles and San Gabriel Valley
basins, including the Whittier fault and Puente Hills blind
thrust, has been performed to understand the forces acting on
the region and to classify the earthquake potential (slip rate and
average recurrence interval) of individual faults. Griffith and
Cooke (2004) indicate that the Puente Hills blind thrust
appears to truncate/displace the Whittier fault, which remains
active to the base of the seismogenic crust. Another study
(Cooke and Marshall, 2oo6, Table 3) estimates that the East
Montebello fault has a reverse dip slip rate of approximately
0.3 millimeters per year (mm/yr) and a right-lateral strike-slip
rate of approximately o.5 mm/yr. These rates, based on
COMDuter models, are less than the model results for the nearby
!Whittier fault (0.4 and 1.8 mm/yr) and similar to the Upper
Elysian Park blind thrust (0.3 and o.1 mm/yr),
Gath et al (1994) performed a detailed study of the Alhambra
Wash fault in Rosemead, south of Alhambra Wash bounded by
Walnut Grove Avenue on the east, Rush Street on the north,
and Delta Street on the west. They defined two main faults,
each with total offsets of a few to several meters and estimated
right-lateral and vertical (down to the east) slip rates of o.15 to
Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones - One active
surface fault, (the Alhambra Wash fault,) has been mapped
within the City,,traversiDZ the southern portion of the City on a
northwest to southeast trend (Figure 5-3). The East
Montebello, fault which form§ a more prominent scarp to the
west (Yeats 2oo4) has not been studied but may also pose a
surface fault rupture hazard. The Alhambra Wash fault
(discussed below) js considered a strand of the East Montebello
fault. The Alhambra Wash-East Montebello fault is considered
an oblique slip (right-lateral/reverse) fault.
The State of California, pursuant to the Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning (APEFZ) Act, requires the delineation
of earthquake fault zones along faults that are sufficiently active
and well-defined. The Act requires cities and counties to
withhold development permits for sites within an earthquake
fault zone until geological investigations demonstrate that the
sites are not threatened by surface displacement from future
faulting. In Rosemead, a portion of the Alhambra Wash fault
•
A P P F. N D I X A
-
Comment [AA30]: REFERENCE
Comment CAA32]: SEETHE
WRITTEN COMMUNICATION BY
DR. YEATS REGARDING THE
SECTION ABOVE SPECIFICALLY,
ATI'ACH ED HEREIN. DR YEATS
Deleted: with the exception of the
East Montebello-Alhambra Wash
fault,
Deleted: (which bounds the Upper
Elysian Park fault on the east
Deleted: )
Deleted: (the eastern boundary of
the Upper Elysian Park blindthrust)
Comment [AA34]: THESE ARE
FtiTIMATFD NUMBERS BASED ON
COMPUrE:R MODELS. BOTH THE
WHrMER & UPPER ELYSIAN
PARK HAVE 1[AD GEOLOGIC SLIP
R A'1'1:C A-4WrQ1.n-RF'1-I'FR rVAN
Deleted: suggesting th
Deleted: similar to the
' Deleted: APEEZ
Deleted: e
Deleted: study_
Deleted: indicate t
Comment [AA36]
Comment [KLwY
Deleted*it maybe
i Deleted: intervals
( Deleted: ) rupture:
Deleted: the Alban
Deleted: es
Deleted: is shown as the bur
Deleted: t
Deleted: appears to be the aq
Deleted: DRAFT JUNE 2008
P A G E A- 9
E V I E D C T O B 15 ]a
2 o 0 8
meets this definition, and the fault zone boundaries shown in
Figure 5-3 reflect State-delineated boundaries.
The 1994 Gath et al. APEFZ study report provides the best
available detailed visual observations of the Alhambra Wash
fault. Subsequent reports refined data for the remainder of the
Rush Street site. Collectively, these indicate that the fault zone
consists of a series of discontinuous fault segments difficult to
trace between widely-separated trenches, displaying branching,
gaps, stepovers, and local zones of compression.
Fault Hazard Management Zones - In addition to the
faults shown on Figures 5-2 and 5-3,,other active or potentially Deleted: there has been some
active faults that could pose earthquake and fault rupture speculation that the City is crossed by
hazards to the Cityhave been map )ed or inferred through
portions of Rosemead. The scientific understanding of the
location and character of faults in the southern San Gabriel
Valley is evolving in the context of new and old studies to define
the limits of other possible surface faults not shown on these
two figures. These studies include (a) aerial photographic and
topographic map analyses (Treiman, 1991; Bullard and Lettis,
1993; Figure 5-4) to define young-looking lineaments based on Deleted: 1992
vegetation/tonal contrasts and geomorphic features (e.g.,
aligned washes or deflected drainages), (b) analysis of
groundwater levels (Department Water Resources, 1066:
Treiman, 1991) and deep oil well drilling data (Yeats, 2004),
and (c) modeling studies to define the crustal strain conditions
(Cooke and Griffith, 2005) that might favor the development of
certain faults in this area.
The California Geological Survey studied aerial photographs Deleted: s
and topographic maps (Treiman, 1991; FER-222) to define
faults that,tlieets the APEFZ requirements for active faults, and . Deleted: met
designated the Alhambra Wash fault is active (Figure 5-3)•
They also identified several other features that were too vague
to qualify as APEFZ faults; these are shown on Figure 5-4. One
of these features shown by Treiman (1991) , s identified as a Deleted: Was
"northwest trending escarpment" along the northeast edge of
the Montebello Hills thought to be "the surface expression of an
extension of the Whittier fault" and terminates on the
northwest, within the City near Emerson Place and Isabel
Avenue. Roughly the south one-half of this escarpment is
within the APEFZ for the Alhambra Wash fault. Aerial Deleted:
photographic and topographic map analyses by Treiman did
Deleted:,
not find the northwest trending escarpment, from Delta Street
Deleted:
Deleted: , and given _ surface
Deleted: for all types of new
•
further zuidance to the City on possible development
constraints posed by the escarpment feature.
In FER-222 Treiman (i99i) also shows possible buried fault
features identified by groundwater investigations, one partially
coincident with the Alhambra Wash fault (and extending
farther northwest into San Gabriel at Newby and Stevens
Avenues) and the other considered a possible northwest
extension of the Workman Hill fault (Figure 5-4). The so-called
Workman Hill extension crosses the City, has offset Tertiary
bedrock formations, and does not affect groundwater flow
(Treiman, iggi), suggesting the fault may be inactive.
However a lateral strike-slip fault may not affect groundwater
flow, or may not affect it sufficiently to be detected in widel
spaced groundwater wells.
Other less extensive and less prominent features were defined
by aerial photographic and topographic map analyses
presented by Treiman (i99i). Although he found insufficient
evidence to classify these features as active faults, their
subdued expression and the lack of data to rule them out as
potential fault features indicates that they should be considered
in the planning and permitting stages for new or substantially
upgraded Important facilities as defined herein. Therefore,
Figure 5-4 shows these features within 200400t wide Fault
Hazard Management Zones (FHMZs) requiring investigations
similar in scope to Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act
investigations mandated by the State of California. If future
information suggests that the currently assumed location of the
fault features controlling the location of a FHMZ is proven
incorrect. then the zone location or width should be adjusted
accordinOv.
Secondary Seismic Hazards--Liquefaction
Liquefaction-induced ground failure can involve a complex
interaction among seismic, geologic, soil, topographic, and
groundwater factors. Failures can include ground fissures,
sand boils, ground settlement, loss of bearing strength,
buoyancy effects, ground oscillation, and lateral spread
(Bartlett and Youd, 1992). These, in turn, can affect surface
and subsurface structures. "teral spread is a liquefaction-
induced landslide of a fairly coherent block of soil and sediment
ghat moves laterally_(along the liquefied zone) by gravitational
and inertial force,% often toward. a topographic low such as a
depression, a valley area, or a cut face such as a stream bank.
Lateral soreads most often occur on gentle sloves with
gradients between o.~ and ~ degrees. Each type of liquefaction
failure can cause damage to surface and subsurface structures,
with the severity dependent upon the type and magnitude of
failure, and the relative location of the structures.
APP E N D I x A
{ Deleted: on
Deleted: L
_
Deleted: deposits
Deleted: , sometimes on the order of
to feet
Deleted: or
Deleted: DRAFriu7N os
P A G E A- 3 t
E V D Q !Q T O B E R
2 0 o 8
A P P E N D I X A
For planning purposes, it is only possible to designate areas
where the likelihood of liquefaction failures, as a group, is
greatest (the light green areas in Figure 5-5) where historically
high groundwater levels are 4o-feet deep or less. In addition,
since liquefaction-induced lateral spread failures are more
prevalent adjacent to topographic depressions or valley areas
that form unsupported slopes or "free faces," it is possible to
conclude for Rosemead that slopes into Rio Hondo or
Alhambra, San Gabriel, and Eaton Washes would be the most
susceptible to experience a lateral spread landslide failure.
These failures have occurred in areas with very low slope
gradients; at Juvenile Hall and the Sylmar Converter Station in
Sylmar (1971), the average ground surface gradient was 1.5
degrees and the maximum was 3 degrees (O'Rourke, Roth, and
Hamada, 1992). Lateral spreads in the San Francisco
earthquake of 1906 occurred associated with surface gradients
of 0.4 to 2.10 percent, or about 0.2 to 1 degree (O'Rourke,
Beaujon, and Scawthorn, 1992). In the latter case, the slope of
the liquefied subsurface layer may have been as low as zero
degrees. Presently the Seismic Hazard Mapping Act (SHMA)
requires that liquefaction studies for most new structures for
human occupancy (with some exceptions) be conducted and
independently reviewed by qualified professional engineers
and/or geologists.
Flood Hazard-- Dam Failure
Inundation
The past failures (Baldwin Hills and St. Francis) and near-
failures (Van Norman) of southern California dams point out
the importance of considering dam safety. Dams may fail for
seismic or geologic reasons, either of which could lead to the
results described in this section. The City lies downstream
from dams and large debris basins whose drainages ultimately
flow into either San Gabriel River, Rio Hondo, or overland from
the west (Garvey Reservoir).
Portions of Rosemead lie within the dam inundation area of the
Whittier Narrows Dam. Whittier Narrows Dam (located in
Montebellol and Santa Fe Dam and Reservoir (located in
Irwindale) are flood control projects and water conservation
facilities constructed and operated by the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (USACE), Los Angeles District. Santa Fe Dam is A-
1949 earth filled USACE dam, which is approximately 17,000
feet long and could contain approximately 250,00o acre-feet of
water. In the unlikely event of a Whittier Narrows Dam or
Santa Fe Dam failure when the reservoirs are near capacity, the
inundation risk to Rosemead would be significant. However,
the likelihood for this condition is considered small due to the
P A G E A- 1 2
•
Deleted: a
Deleted: b
f Deleted:,
Comment [AA39]: WHICH?
WHITTIER NARROWS?
Comment CKLW240R391: Respons
e provided.
Deleted: Tlie
Deleted: d
D R A F T J U N E 2008
0 A PON D I X A
low percentage of time that these dams/reservoirs contain very
much water. Areas located within the inundation footprints of
these two structures are within the eastern portion of the City
as indicated on Figure 5,61. Comment [AA41]: THE
PRABABILTTY OF THESE DAMS
Portions of Rosemead located south of Garvey Avenue and west FAILING CATASTROPHICALLY
MAY BE LOW, BUT IF THEY DID
of the Alhambra Wash lie within the dam inundation area of FAIL, IT WOULD MOST LIKELY
the 44:4acre, 525:4171illion-gallon Garvey Dam/Reservoir in I OCCUR WHEN FULL OF WATER_
THEREFORE IN THAT CASE THE
Monterey Park (Figure 5-6). The Metropolitan Water District INUNDATION RISK IN ROSEMEAD
of Southern California completed a substantial overhaul of the WOULD BE IHGII. -
facility in 1999 to address seepage and to ensure overall Comment [aw242R41]: Comme
reservoir integrity, therefore the chance of a dam failure is nt addressed.
considered small. The area of inundation risk is larger than for Deleted:
the Whittier Narrows/Santa Fe Dams and is focused south of Deleted:
Garvey Avenue and west of the Alhambra Wash.
Inundation hazards range from high to low with distance away
from these various water sources. Limited areas immediately
along the natural drainage courses would be the most
susceptible to damage from rapidly flowing water, severe
erosion, and associated floating debris related to Santa Fe Dam.
Higher areas and those farthest from the channels would suffer
more from sheet flow and rising water. Man-made barriers,
such as the I-Ro and SR-6o freeways, major east-to-west
highways and railroads, would locally deflect sheet flow in ways
not anticipated by the USACE modeling. Failure of this dam
when substantially full represents a low probability, worst-case
inundation scenario.
The regulation of these dams reduces substantially the chance
of catastrophic failure, however, under the most severe scenario
earthquakes for the various fault mentioned above, these dams
would be in danger of damage that could cause a release of
water. For severe flooding to result, the earthquake and the
high water levels would have to occur simultaneously, which
makes the chance very remote. Mitigation of flooding
realistically would consist of evacuation planning for the
potentially flooded areas of the j~4 and elevating new critical Deleted: city
facilities above the predicted flood level at that location. Of Deleted: for its
course, upgrading the structural integrity of the dams would
also provide an added safety margin for all but the most severe
earthquake events.
Potential Natural Hazards and
Important Facilities within the
city
Important facilities, as defined herein, include, but are not
necessarily limited to, public facilities, hospitals and nursing
Deleted: DRAFT JUNE z008
P A G E A- 1 3
E V I ED TO BE R
2 0 0 8
A P P E N D I X A
•
homes, schools, and places of worship; these facilities are
shown on Figure 5-7 and listed below. The map numbers in the
table correspond to the various colored/ numbered circles in the
figure. For each location it is noted whether one of the
following potential hazards are present:
•
Formatted: Bullets and
Formatted: Normal
snoula De maae to evaluate raclnues ana weir emergency
response plans where some unique safety concern is presented.
References Cited
Geology and Soils
Bullard T.F., and Lettis. W.R.. 1993. Quaternary fold deformation
associated with blind thrust faulting. Los Aneeles Basin.
California: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 98, p. 8349-
8369.
Califomia Department of Water Resources (CDWR). 1466.
Planned utilization of ground water basins: San Gabriel
Valley. Appendix A: Geohydrology. Bulletin 104-2. Areal
Geology-Plate 9A. 1-inch = 2-miles.
United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA)
2oo6. Website,
http://www.epa.&ov/radon/-zonemap/califomia.htni.
P A G E A- 1 4
D R A F "r JUNE zoo 8
■ Fault Zone (with rupture potential; Figures 5-3 and 5-4)
■ Historically high groundwater depth (shallow water;
Figure 5-5)
• Liquefaction (Figure 5-5)
• Dam Inundation (Figure 5-6)
•
A POti D I ?t A
Deleted: a
Geologic Hazards at Locations of Concern within the City
2
CL
!0
ame
ddress
m
>
3t
~a
0a
o
2
J
E'
a°6
C
m
o
N
LL
HOSPITALS
New Fern Guest Home
2608 New Ave.
H
50-100
GR
Springfield Manor
2526 New Ave.
H
50-100
FHMZ
Ingleside Hospital
7500 Hellman Ave.
H
50-100
Alhambra Behavioral Health
Center
4619 N. Rosemead Blvd.
H
40-50
NURSING HOMES
Mission Care Center
4800 Delta Ave.
NH
50-100
T
Del mar convalescent Hos dal
3136 Del Mar Ave
NH
30-40
FHY,
PLACES OF WORSHIP
Rosemead Church of Nazarene
2703 Walnut Grove Ave.
W
510
X
Lord of Universe Church
9200 Glendon Way
W
5-10
X
Eve reen B tilt Church
1255 San Gabriel Blvd.
W
5-10
Church of Jesus Christ of LDS
7505 Garvalia Ave.
W
50-100
GR
FHMZ
Rosemead Christian Center
2713 Jackson Ave.
W
50-100
GR
Chinese Neighborhood
Covenant
7656 Graves Ave.
W
50-100
FHM;'
Branches Fellowship
7712 Graves Ave.
W
50-100
FH%I:'
First Baptist Church
8618 Mission Dr.
W
50-100
Christian Harvest Chum
4930 Earle Ave.
W
50-100
Faith Christian Church
2518 San Gabriel Blvd.
W
10-20
X
GR
APE=:-
Bread of Life Church
2524 San Gabriel Blvd.
W
10-20
X
GR
APE= -
Tensho Kotai Jln u K SoCal
3926 Rio Hondo Ave.
W
10-20
X
Church In Rosemead
2451 Glad Ave.
W
10-20
GR
APEF.
Los Angeles Buddhist Union
7833 Emerson Pl.
W
20-30
X
en Bible Church
7915 Hellman Ave.
W
20-30
X
First Evangelical Church
3658 Walnut Grove Ave.
W
20-30
X
San Gabriel Valle Buddhist
3846 Walnut Grove Ave
W
30-40
X
FHMZ
Rosemead Christian Church
8705 Valle Boulevard
W
3040
X
Rosemead Korean SDA Church
4203 Rosemead Blvd.
W
30-40
X
Rosemead United Methodist
9032 Mission Dr.
W
30-40
X
United Methodist Church
9032 Mission Dr.
W
30-40
X
Buddhist Ortho-Creed Assn
3039 Del Mar Ave.
W
30-40
FHMZ
First Presbyterian Church
7732 Emerson PI.
W
30-40
FHMZ
Bethel Temple
3253 Del Mar Ave.
W
30-40
Church of God Prophecy
823 Muscatel Ave.
W
0-5
X
APEFZ
Deleted: DRAFT JUNE 2008
P A G E A- 1 5
$_E V I S E D O T 8
2 o o 8
0 0
A P P E N D I X A
Geologic Hazards at important Facilities within the City of
a
Z
CL
g
me
dress
CL
F
m
t
O.
c a
r9`
c
?
m
J
~
c
0
OW
m
c
N.
1i
Jehovah's Witnesses
2754 Del Mar Ave.
W
40-50
GR
FHMZ
Rosemead Foursquare Church
8714 Mission Dr.
W
40-50
SCHOOLS
Savannah Elementary
3720 N. Rio Hondo Ave.
S
5-10
X
SFD
Sanchez Elementary
8470 Fern Ave.
S
5-10
X
Temple Intermediate
8470 E. Fern St.
S
5-10
X
Rosemead Education Center
2662 Walnut Grove Ave.
S
5-10
X
Rice Elementary
2150 N. Angelus Ave.
S
5.10
GR
APEFZ
University of The West
1409 Walnut Grove Ave.
S
5.10
APEFZ
Don Bosco Technical Institute
1151 San Gabriel Blvd.
S
5-10
Bitel Elementary
7501 E. Fern Ave.
S
50-100
GR
FHMZ
Williams Elementary
2444 N. Del Mar
S
50-100
GR
Gary Intermediate School
2720 N. Jackson Ave.
S
50-100
GR
Logsdon School
7600 Graves Ave.
S
50-100
FHMZ
Emerson Elementary
7544 E Emerson PI.
S
50-100
Shue Elementary
8472 Wells St.
S
50-100
Berean Christian School
8618 Mission Dr.
S
50-100
Sunshine Educational Center
3107 Glad Ave.
S
10-20
X
Janson Elementary
8628 E. Marshall
S
20-30
X
FHMZ
Rosemead Elementary SD
3907 Rosemead Blvd.
S
20-30
X
Rosemead Beau School
8531 Valle Blvd
S
3040
X
FHMZ
Rosemead College of English
8705 Valle Blvd.
S
30-40
X
Rosemead Adult Education
4105 Rosemead Blvd.
S
30-40
X
Muscatel Intermediate School
4201 N. Ivar Ave.
S
30-40
X
Rosemead High School
9063 E. Mission Dr.
S
30-40
X
Encinita Elementary
4515 N. Encinita Ave.
S
30-40
X
Duff Elementary
7830 Dorothy St.
S
30-40
FHMZ
Garvey School District
2730 N. Del Mar Ave.
S
40-50
GR
Little People Pre-School
4711, Rosemead Blvd.
S
40-50
NOTES: (1) H - Hospital; W = Place or Worship: NH = Nursing Home: S = School: (2) Historically High Groundwater = depth range
in feel: (3) GR = Garvey Reservoir and SFD = Santa Fe Dam; (4) FHMZ = Fault Hazard Management Zone: APEFZ = Alqulsi-Paolo
Earthquake Fault Zone.
I1.
P A G E A- t 6
f~
Comment [AA44]: FOR
FACILITIES BUILT BEFORE THE
FAULT ILAZARD MANAGEMENT
'LONE WAS DEFINED. FOR
FACILITIES LOCATED WITHIN AN
APEFZ, REQUIREMENTS
REGARDING FAULT STUDIES MAY
BE APPLICABLE IF TILE FACILITY
IS PROPOSED TO BE UPDATED OR
EXPANDED.
Comment CAA451: BULLARDAN1)
Deleted: <a>Liquefaction (Figureg-
5)1
<n>Dam Inundation (Figure 5-6)1
1
These are primarily earthquake-
related hazards. It is important to
point out that these potential hazards
do not necessarily indicate that
buildings at these locations will either
certainly, experience the hazard
indicated for the location, or that if
the city did experience a large
earthquake, that significant damage
or
Dele)ed: injury would occur at the
individual locations. Secondly, there
is no retroactive application of FHMZ
policies that came into place after a
facility, was built.1
1
The purpose of identifying these
locations is to use this as one tool to
allow the city to in some measure
prioritize its response to a severe
earthquake event byr knowing which
important facilities maybe impacted
by known potential hazards affecting
areas ofthe city. In addition, the city
can evaluate whether or not special
efforts should he made to evaluate
facilities and their emergency
response plans where some unique
safety concern is presented.1
References Cited9
Geology and Soilsll
California Department of Water
Resources (CDWR), 1966, Planned
utilization of ground water basins;
San Gabriel Valley, Appendix A:
Geohydrology, Bulletin 104-2, Areal
Geology-Plate 9A, 1-inch = 2-miles.l
1
United States Environmental
Protection Agency (USEPA), 2oo6,
Website,
11U,p- A,tivH'.cya.eov ra on zonm-
/california.htm.1
1
Yeats, R. S, 2004, Tectonics of the
San Gabriel Basin and surroundings,
southern California, Geological
Society of America Bulletin;
September/October 2004; v. 116; no.
9/10: P. 1158-1182.1
DRAFT JUNE 2 o o 8
•
Yeats. R. S. 2004, Tectonics of the San Gabriel Basin and
surroundings, southern California, Geological Society of
America Bulletin: September/October 2004: v. 116: no.
9/10: p. 11.ri8-1182.
Yerkes, R. F., and R. H. Campbell, 200.9, Preliminary Geologic
Map of the Los Angeles .,10' x 60' Quadrangle, Southern
California, Version 1.o, Open-File Report 2005-1019,
http: //pubs. USgS.ZOV /of/2o 05 / 1019.
Seismicity/Earthquakes and Faulting
Bartlett, S. F., and T. L. Youd, 1992, Case Histories of Lateral
Spreads Caused by the 1964 Alaska Earthquake, in Case
Studies of Liquefaction and Lifeline Performance
During Past Earthquakes--Volume 2 United States
Cases, edited by O'Rourke and Hamada, pages 2-1
through 2-127.
Blake, T. F., 2002, EQFAULT--Computer Program for
Earthquake Assessments, update of 1989 program;
attenuation relationship Boore et al. (1997) Horizontal -
NEHRP D (250), median value.
Bolt, B. A., 1993, Abridged Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale,
Earthquakes - Newly Revised and Expanded, Appendix
C, W.H. Freeman and CO., 331 pp.
Boore, D. M., W. B. Joyner, and T. E. Fumal, 1997, Equations
for estimating horizontal response spectra and peak
acceleration from western North American earthquakes:
A summary of recent work, Seismological Research
Letters, 68,128-153•
Bryant, W. A. (compiler), 2005, Digital Database of Quaternary
and Younger Faults from the Fault Activity Map of
California, version 2.0: California Geological Survey
Web Page,
httD: / /wtiv,Nti.mnsn .ca.cov/CGS/inforltiationl vublicatio
ns/QuaternaryFaults ver2.htm; (date downloaded from
web site).
A P ON D I X A
5369.
California Geological Survey (CGS), 2007, Peak Ground
Acceleration Map - 10% Probability of Being Exceeded
in 5o Years (October 2006), CGS website -
http://www. coiisiN.ca.goN,/CGS / rghm/psha/ pga.litm# P
GA.
P A G E A- 1 7
Deleted: B
Deleted: .hard and lettis, 199211
Deleted: DRAFT JUNE 2008
aEVI~ED OCTOBER _I
2 0 0 8
0 •
A P P E N D I X A
California Seismic Safety Commission, 2006, Status of the
Unreinforced Masonry Law, 20o6 progress Report to
the Legislature, SSC-2oo6-04, appendices A and B,
httD://www.seismic.ca.?-ov/Diib/C,SSC%202oo6%2oUR
M%2oReport%2oFinal.pdf
CDMG, 1991, Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zones, El Monte
Quadrangle, November 1, 1991, scale 1:24.000.
CDMG, 1998, Seismic Hazard Evaluation of the El Monte 7.5
minute quadrangle, Los Angeles County, California:
California Division of Mines and Geology, Open-File
Report 98-15,
httg//gmw.consrv.ca.&oN,/shmp/download/evalrpt/el
mo eval.pdf.
CDMG, 1999, Seismic Hazard Zones Map of the El Monte 7.5-
Minute Quadrangle, Los Angeles County, California,
March 25, 1999,
httD://emw.consrv.ca.v-ov/shnlD/download/Ddf/ozn el
mo.Ddf
Cooke, M. L., and S. T. Marshall, 20o6, Fault slip rates from
three-dimensional models of the Los Angeles
metropolitan area, California, Geophysical Research
Letters, Vol. 33, L21313, 20o6.
Gath, E. M., 1994, A Paleoseismic Investigation at the Northern
Terminus of the Whittier Fault Zone, in the Whittier
Narrows Areal Rosemead, California--Technical Report
to the Southern California Earthquake Center, DRAFT
Version 5/18/94•
Griffith, W. A. and M. L. Cooke, 2004, Mechanical Validation of
the Three-Dimensional Intersection Geometry between
the Puente Hills Blind-Thrust System and the Whittier
Fault, Los Angeles, California, Bulletin of the
Seismological Society of America, Vol. 94, No. 2, pp.
493-505, April 2004.
Griffith, W. A. and M. L. Cooke, 2005, How Sensitive Are Fault-
Slip Rates in the Los Angeles Basin to Tectonic
Boundary Conditions?, Bulletin of the Seismological
Society of America, Vol. 95, No. 4, pp. 1263-1275,
August 2005.
O'Rourke, T. D., Beaujon, P. A., and Scawthorn, C.R., 1992,
"Large ground deformations and their effects on lifeline
facilities: 1906 San Francisco earthquake." Case Studies
of Liquefaction and Lifeline Performance during Past
P A G E A- t 8
DRAFT JUNE 2 c o 8
Earthquakes, Volume 2: United States Case Studies,
Tech. Rep. NCEER-92-0002, T. D. O'Rourke, and M.
Hamada (eds.), February 17, 130 pages.
O'Rourke, T. D., Roth, B. L., and Hamada, M., 1992, "Large
ground deformations and their effects on lifeline
facilities: 1971 San Fernando earthquake." Case Studies
of Liquefaction and Lifeline Performance during Past
Earthquakes, Volume 2: United States Case Studies,
Tech. Rep. NCEER-92-0002, T. D. O'Rourke, and M.
Hamada (eds.), February 17, 85 pages.
Rowshandel, B. et al., 2oo6, Estimation of Future Earthquake
Losses in California, California Geological Survey,
ftp://ftjp.consn,.ca.gov/pub/dmg/mmp/`CA-Loss-
Paper.pd f; Puente Hills 7.1 earthquake,
ftp://ftp.consiT.ca.gov/pub/dm&/Mmp/loss/si.-,.pdf.
Shaw, J. H., et al, 2002, Puente Hills Blind-Thrust System, Los
Angeles, California, Bulletin of the Seismological Society
of America, Vol. 92, No. 8, pp. 2946-296o, December
2002.
Treiman, J. A., 1991, Whittier fault zone, Los Angeles and
Orange counties, California: California Division of
Mines and Geology Fault Evaluation Report FER-222,
scale 1:24,000.
Yeats. RS., 2oo4. Tectonics of the San Gabriel Basin and
surroundings. southern California: Geological Society of
America. Bulletin, Vol. 116. No. Q/lo. pp. 1158-1182.
Flooding-Dam Inundation
California Office of Emergency Services, 2oo7" Dam Inuit tion
Mans.
A P N U I X A
10
Formatted: Indent: Left: 0",
Hanging: 0.5"
Comment [AA"]: -
Comment [IdW247R"]: Hogle-
Ireland needs to provide this full
references for OES and USGS (digital
terrain models(?).
Formatted: Indent: Left: 0",
Hanging: 0.5"
Deleted: DRAFT JUNE 2008
P A G E A- 1 9
E V I E U Q f, T B E
2 0 0 8
A P P E N D I X A
P A G E A- 2 0
This page intentionally left blank.
D R A F T J U N E 2008
Page 8: [1] Comment [AA24] Annette Arredondo
9/30/2008 3:43:00 PM
THE FERNANDO IS NOT 5.1 MILLION YEARS OLD.
THE BASE OF THE FERNANDO IS 5.1 MA; THE TOP IS
CERTAINLY . BUT OLDER THAN
THE -MATWYAMA BOUNDARY
THE ALHAMBRA WASH FAULT IS ONE STRAND OF
THE EASST MONTEBELLO FAULT (EMF). THE EMF IS
THE NORTHWESTERLY CONTINUATION OF THE
WHITTIER FAULT (YEATS, 2004, PG. 1176)
Page 8:[2] Deleted Kenneth Wilson 2
10/6/2008 6:37:00 PM
which is believed to form the eastern boundary of
the Upper Elysian Park blind thrust.)
Page 8: [3] Comment [AA28] Annette Arredondo
9/30/2008 3:49:00 PM
COMMENTS ARE FOR THE AREA NORTH
OF ROSEMEAD
Page 8: [4] Comment [AA29] Annette Arredondo
9/30/2008 3:43:00 PM
REFERENCES?? RESEARCHERS HAVE MORE THAN
SPECULATED, IN FACT, YEATS SAYS "AT WHITTIER
NARROWS THE WHITTIER FAULT TURNS MORE
NORTHWESTERLY TO BECOME THE EAST
MONTEBELLO FAULT, AND AT ALHAMBRA WASH, A
STRAND OF THE EAST MONTEBELLO FAULT.......
Page 9: [5] Comment [KLW235R34] Kenneth Wilson 2
10/6/2008 8:09:00 PM
Comment addressed
Page 9: [6] Deleted Kenneth Wilson 2
10/6/2008 8:07:00 PM
suggesting that the Alhambra-East Montebello fault
rupture probability should be[AAii[KLw221
Page 9:17] Deleted Kenneth Wilson 2
10/6/2008 8:08:00 PM
similar to the Upper Elysian Park blind thrust, and
should be substantially less than the Whittier fault.
Page 9: [8] Deleted Kenneth Wilson 2
10/6/2008 7:52:00 PM
indicate that the northward extension of the Whittier
fault terminates at the Whittier Narrows into a
dilational structure of which the Alhambra Wash
fault system may be the westward margin. Also
Page 9: [9] Comment [AA36] Annette Arredondo
9/30/2008 3:56:00 PM
THIS WAS 1994• THE MOST CURRENT THINKIN GIS
SUMMARIZED BY YEATS (2004), WITH TH
EALHAMBRA WASH FAULT BEING ONE TRACE OF
THE EAST MONTEBELLO FAULT, WHICH IS
CONSIDERED THE NORTHWARD EXTENSION OF
THE WHITTIER FAULT.
Page 9: [10] Comment [KLW237R36] Kenneth Wilson 2
10/612008 8:09:00 PM
Response simplifies, but 5000 is based on the Gath study
Page 9: [11] Deleted Kenneth Wilson 2
10/6/2008 7:55:00 PM
it may be possible that the Whittier fault occasionally
(possibly
Page 9: [12] Deleted Kenneth Wilson 2
10/6/2008 7:55:00 PM
ruptures through the Whittier Narrows and into the
right-lateral MacArthur Park/Coyote Pass structures
0 0
which turns westward at the Narrows into the
Montebello Hills.
Page 9: [13] Deleted Annette Arredondo
9/3012008 3:57:00 PM
the Alhambra Wash fault, which
Page 9: [14] Comment [AA38] Annette Arredondo
9/30/2008 4:00:00 PM
NO. EAST MONTEBELLO FAULT HAS SURFACE
EXP NOT BURIED. UPPER ELYSIAN
PARK IS DEEP IN THE SUBSURFACE
Page 9: [15] Deleted Annette Arredondo
9/30/2008 3:58:00 PM
is shown as the buried fault forming the east edge of
the Upper Elysian Park blind thrust and
Page 9: x161 Deleted Annette Arredondo
9/30/2008 4:01:00 PM
appears to be the active surface expression of the
East Montebello fault