CC - General Plan Amendment 00-04 - Housing Element of the Rosemead General Plan to meet state 1998-2005 Planning period - Box 066Aq .
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR
AND MEMBERS
ROSEMEAD CITY COUNCIL
FROM: FRANK G. TRIPEPI, CITY MANAGER
DATE: DECEMBER 12, 2000
SUBJECT: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 00 -04 — AMENDING THE HOUSING
ELEMENT OF THE ROSEMEAD GENERAL PLAN TO MEET THE
STATE REQUIREMENT FOR 1998 -2005 PLANNING PERIOD.
BACKGROUND
General Plan Amendment 00 -04 is an amendment to the Housing Element of the Rosemead
General Plan to meet the State requirement for 1998 -2005 planning period. Rosemead and all
local jurisdictions are required by State law to complete a housing element update every five (5)
years. The Housing Element provides analysis to meet the Regional Housing Needs Assessment
(RHNA) as set by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). This analysis
notes that the majority of potential housing development is through infill and recycling of lots.
Staff finds that the element is able to meet the regional allocation numbers set by SCAG using
the existing zoning standards.
An initial study was completed on October 10, 2000. This study has been prepared in
accordance with state and local environmental regulations to analyze the potential environmental
impacts that could be created from the proposed project.
Staff finds that the proposed housing element will serve to reduce potential environmental
impacts to a level of insignificance without eliminating business opportunity. Therefore, a
Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA). The study was noticed in 10 public locations and a locally circulated
newspaper, soliciting comments for more than a 30 -day period prior to the Planning Commission
hearing on November 20, 2000.
COW CIL AC:14t
DEC 12 2000
Rosemead City Council
December 11, 2000
Page 2 of 2
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a Negative Declaration and approve General Plan
Amendment 00 -04, adopt Resolution No. 2000 -66.
EXHIBITS
A. Letter to HCD, dated December 6, 2000
B. Letter from HCD, dated November 3, 2000
C. Draft Housing Element
D. Environmental Analysis / Initial Study
E. Staff Report, dated November 20, 2000
F. Planning Commission Minutes, dated November 10, 2000
G. Resolution No. 2000 -66
ti
MAYOR:
MARGARET CLARK
1 �
MAYOR PRO 11,M: JAY T IMPERIAL
COUNCILMEMBERS:
ROBERT W BRUESCH
GARY A. TAYLORI
JOE VASOUEZ;-
i �
September 14,
2000
Il \VsemeM4
8838 E. VALLEY BOULEVARD • P.O. BOX 399
ROSEMEAD, CALIFORNIA 91770
TELEPHONE (626) 569 -2100
FAX (626) 307 -9218
J
Ms. Cathy Creswell.
Acting Deputy Director
''Division of Housing Policy Development
Department of Housing and Community Development
P.O. Box 952053
Sacramento, CA 94252 -2053
;a{
Dear Ms. Creswell:
:Enclosed for your review is the updated Housing Element of the Rosemead General
`Plan. This draft document has been prepared in compliance with Article 10.6 of the
California Government Code and was reviewed by our Planning Commission, prior
to submission to your office. Upon completion of your review of this document, the
element will be revised as necessary and submitted to our City Council for formal
r � adoption. A copy of the final element will be forwarded to you upon adoption by the
1 City Council.
e If you have any questions, please contact me between 7:00 am to 6:00 pm, Monday
."through Thursday at (626) 569 -2140 or Ms. Lisa Baker, of Baker Street Associates, at
"(310) 842 -9770.
i- Sincerely,
; l.
"Bradford W. Johnson
, Director
f'
e- s`
n rest nvw.e- uncrntacc ry emwnuTe'r nw enrn unite . n ru ev nevrc r.�, ...,,,.
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING ND COMMUNITY DEVELOPME' 5 ' "C M�
0
Division of Housing Policy Development
1800 Third Streit, Suite 430
P.O. Box 952053
Sacramento, CA 94252 -2053
w hrd.
(916) 323 -3176 FAX:327 -2643
o °p z
, 7.O t
"6'n�
November 3, 2000
Mr. Bradford W. Johnson, Planning Director
City of Rosemead
8838 E. Valley Boulevard
Rosemead, California 91770
Dear Mr. Johnson:
RE: Review of the City of Rosemead's Draft Housing Element Amendment
Thank you for submitting Rosemead's draft housing element amendment, received for our review
on September 19, 2000. As you know, we are required to review draft housing elements and report
our findings to the locality pursuant to Government Code Section 65585(b). .
Our review was facilitated by our telephone conversation with you on October 23, 2000. This letter
and Appendix summarize the results of that conversation and our review.
The draft housing element provides the basic framework for future residential development in
Rosemead as well as the City's housing plan for the 2000 -2005 planning period. However, certain
sections of the draft should be revised in order to comply with State housing element law (Article
10.6 of the Government Code). In particular, the element's programs should be expanded to better
demonstrate the City's commitment to address the housing needs of its residents, especially lower -
income households. This and other required changes are discussed in greater detail in the enclosed
Appendix.
For your information, we have enclosed a brief description of new and existing housing and
community development programs administered by the Department of Housine and Community
Development (HCD) along with funding levels for the current fiscal year. We are pleased to report
a historic increase in housing funds available though HCD. A number of the programs such as the
Jobs - Housing Balance Improvement Program, the CalHome Program and the Downtown Rebound
Program are new and under current development. Please consult our homepage at xv xw hrrl ra gov
for program information updates.
In closing, we appreciate the input you provided during the review process. We would be pleased
to provide any assistance necessary to facilitate the City's efforts to comply with State law. If you
would like to schedule a meeting or have any questions or concerns, please contact Don Thomas, of
our staff, at (916) 445 -5854.
� EX N /8i T '•8 ..
Mr. Bradford Johnson, Planning Director
Page 2
In accordance with requests pursuant to the Public Records Act, we are forwarding copies of this
letter to the persons and organizations listed below.
Sincerely,
Cathy Creswell
Acting eputy Director
Enclosure
cc: Lisa Baker, Baker Street Associates
Catherine Ysrael, Supervising Deputy Attorney General
Terry Roberts, Governor's Office of Planning and Research
-Juan Acosta, California Building Industry Association
Marcia Salkin, California Association of Realtors
Marc Brown, California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation
Rob Weiner, California Coalition for Rural Housing
Susan DeSantis, The Planning Center
Data Schur, Western Center on Law and Poverty
Michael G. Colantuono, Attorney at Law
Carlyle W. Hall, Hall & Phillips Law Firm
Jonathan Lehrer - Graiwer, Attorney at Law
Fair Housing Council of the San Fernando Valley
Mark Johnson, Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles
Ana Marie Whitaker, California State University at Pomona
Dennis Rockway, Legal Aid Foundation of Long Beach
David Booher, California Housing Council
Stephanie Knapik, Westside Fair Housing Council
Karen Warner, Cotton/Beland/Associates
Joe Carreras, South California Association of Governments
Tony Rodriguez, Neighborhood Legal Services
Mona Tawatao, San Fernando Valley Neighborhood Legal Services
Jonathan Lehrer - Graiwer, Attorney at Law
Won Chang, Attorney at Law, Davis and Company
APPENDIX
City of Rosemead
The following changes would bring Rosemead's housing element into,compliance with Article 10.6 of the
Government Code. Accompanying each recommended change we cite the supporting section of the
Government Code.
�. MTT MWITiTiA i
1. Review the previous element to evaluate the appropriateness, effectiveness, and progress in
implementation, and reflect the results of this review in the revised element (Section 65588(a)
and (b)).
The review requirement is one of the most important features of the element update. The
analysis will enable the City to evaluate its success in remedying substandard housing
conditions, conserving affordable housing, and providing housing opportunities for all income
groups, including lower- income households.
We note that some of the prior housing enhancement and production program objectives (June
1996) were not accomplished (i.e., Low Interest Loan Program, the Rebate Program, the
Handyman Program, and the Direct Housing Construction program). However, the City is again
proposing similar programs for the next planning period. The element should describe how
these programs will be strengthened to be more effective during the forthcoming planning
period.
1. Include an inventor); of land suitable for residential development, including sites having the
potential for redevelopment, and an analysis of the relationship of zoning and public facilities and
services to these sites (Section 65583(a)(3)).
The draft element contains a parcel -by- parcel listing of vacant and underutilized sites within the
Citv (Appendix). This section should be expanded to include the following:
A description of the City's methodology for determining the actual buildout capacity of
available sites and how these sites can accommodate the remaining regional housing need,
especially for lower- income households.
An indication of whether these sites (vacant and underutilized) have or could have sufficient
infrastructure capacity (e.g., water and sewer) to allow development to occur by the end of
the current planning period.
As indicated in Table 35 (page H -45) the City's reuse development strategy is proposed to
account for the development of 815 dwelling units. Successful employment of this strategy is
essential to the City in terms of its ability to meet the regional housing need (776 units). As a
result, the element should be expanded to include the following:
A description of existing uses of underutilized sites and an analysis of the viability of
developing these sites with more intensive residential uses during the forthcoming planning
period, including market conditions that may affect recycling feasibility.
An analysis of the City's past successes in implementing a reuse strategy and /or information
regarding the City's incentives or regulatory concessions that would foster this type of
development strategy.
The element should also include a program to identify adequate sites for emergency shelters.
The eiement notes (page H -65) that the City ma} amend is zoning ordinance to permit
transitional housing in multifamily zones, as well as allow emergency shelters in commercial and
industrial zones. The element should specifically commit the City to such zoning changes as
well as describe how the City's conditional use permit process will encourage and facilitate the
development of emergency shelters and transitional housing.'
2. Analyze any special housing needs of elderly households (Section 65583(a)(6)).
The element indicates that a total of 4,592 elderly persons reside in the City. The element should
be expanded to include the number of elderly households including an indication of tenure (i.e.,
owner /renter). Please refer to the attached 1990 CHAS data sheets.
3. Analyze potential and actual governmental constraints upon the maintenance, improvement, and
development of housing for all income levels, including land use controls, and permit
procedures (Section 65583(a)(4)). The analysis shall also demonstrate local efforts to remove
governmental constraints that hinder the locality from meeting its share of the regional housing
need in accordance with Section 65584.
The element contains a listing of the basic development standards (setbacks, height, & parking)
for the R -1, R -2, R -3, and R -4 (PD) land use zones (Table 32, page H -43). This section of the
element should be expanded to include the following for each residential zone, as well as the PO
zone: density ranges, minimum lot sizes, floor area ratio (F. -AR.) requirements, and a listing of
permitted and conditionally permitted residential uses (i.e., single- family, multifamily,
mobilehomes, second units, and emergency shelters). In addition, the element should include an
analysis of the impact of these standards upon the development of housing. Of particular
concern is the 2.5 spaces per unit parking requirement for multifamily uses.
Table 34 (page H -44) provides an overview of the development permit timelines. The element
should be expanded to include a more detailed description of the City's application processes in
general. Of particular interest are the entitlement processes for second units, emergency shelters,
and multifamily projects (not in the R -3 zone). Identify the specific hearing body (Zoning
Administrator, Planning Commission, and/or City Council) and /or in -house review
requirements, such as preapplication meetings. Also, are tentative parcel maps and tentative
subdivision maps subject to the same processing procedures?
1
• i =ff TiSf2=
The element should establish quantified objectives the maximum number of housing units by income
category that can be constructed, rehabilitated, conserved, or preserved over the remaining
planning period of the element (Section 65583(c)).
According to the draft element, implementation of the proposed programs will provide for 304
rehabilitated units and 301 subsidized units, respectively. The element further indicates that there'
are no federally assisted, low- income units within the City at risk of converting to market rate
housing by 2010. The quantified objectives (page H -71) should be expanded to include the number
of new, rehabilitated, and conserved units by income. rarega , as shown in the sample matrix.
These objectives may include private activity as well as City planned activity.
Income Category
New Construction
Rehabilitation
Conservation
Very Low - Income
Low- Income
Moderate - Income
Above Moderate
Identify adequate sites which will be made available through appropriate zoning and
development standards and with public services and facilities needed to facilitate and encourage
the development of a variety of types of housing for all income levels,. including multifamily
rental housing, factory -built housing, mobilehomes, housing for agricultural employees,
emergency shelters and transitional housing. Where the inventory of sites, pursuant to
paragraph (3) of subdivision (a), does not identify adequate sites to accommodate the need for
groups of all household income levels pursuant to Section 65584, the program shall provide for
sufficient sites with zoning that permits owner - occupied and rental multifamily residential use b
right, including density and development standards that could accommodate and facilitate the
feasibility of housing for very low- and low- income households (Section 65583(c)(1)).
In an effort to increase new housing development, as well as foster more efficient use of the
City's underutilized sites the element describes a number of land use and financing strategies
(pages 46 and 47). However, the program section of the element does not reference these
strategies. If these are existing or proposed programs, the element should include specific
program actions that commit the City to initiate or continue implementation.
Also, depending on the results of a more detailed inventory (as requested in Item B.2), the
element may need to include a program to identify sites to accommodate housing for lower -
income households, The City could chose to increase the available acreage of sites zoned for
higher density development, develop and adopt regulatory tools that would foster more efficient
use of the available sites (i.e., a mixed -use ordinance and require or provide incentives for
underutilized sites to be developed to their full potential).
2. The housing element shall contain programs, which "assist in the development of adequate
housing to meet the needs of low -and moderate- income households (Section 65583(c) (2)).
Many of the programs in the element require revision to include more specifics regarding the
City's role in implementation as well as stronger program objectives. Those programs of note
include the following:
The element notes that no density bonus units were developed in the prior planning period,
yet this program remains unchanged. The element should specifically describe how
Rosemead will be more proactive in terms of encouraging the use of density bonus
provisions and informing developers of the City's program. In addition, the City's
homeownership programs should more specifically describe the action steps necessary to
implement each program, including timelines. To ensure consistency, this revised
information should also be carried forward to Table 39.
The element indicates that the Rosemead Housing Development Corporation (RHDC) is
responsible for the management and construction of senior housing projects located in the
City (pages H -62 and H -63). As indicated in Program No. 9, the City "will support the
formation of a non - profit corporation to facilitate the development and improvement of
senior citizen and other low cost housing ". Is it the City's intent to create another nonprofit
housing group? If so, the program language should be expanded to include more specific
information on the City's role in establishing this nonprofit, including the overall objective in
terms of addressing the needs of the lower- income households. As a suggestion, the City
may want to consider enlisting the assistance of one of the many existing nonprofit housing
associations located in Southern California (see the attached list).
The element indicates that a significant percentage of the total households consist of large
families (32.3 %) and are also overcrowded (35.6 %). The element further acknowledges that
overcrowding is predominant in the City's rental house stock. However, the element is
absent any specific programs that will address the need. The City could include
policies /programs that offer incentives (financial and administrative) that could encourage
prospective developers to construct some larger (3 or 4 bedroom) dwelling units that are
affordable to low- income residents, or target some of the rehabilitation programs to facilitate
room additions.
3. The housing element shall contain programs that address, and where appropriate and legally
possible, remove governmental constraints to the maintenance, improvement, and development of
housing (Section 65583(c)(3)).
Depending on the results of the analysis of governmental constraints (see B.3), the element may
need to include programs to mitigate or eliminate any identified constraints.
I
Local governments shall make a diligent effort to achieve public participation of all economic
segments of the community in the development of the housing element, and. the element shall
describe this effort (Section 65583(c)).
We note that the City's public outreach efforts are focused primarily around the public noticing and
hearing processes. However, the housing element should specifically describe how the City will
make a diligent effort to solicit public input from all economic groups (especially lower- income
households, their representatives, or advocates) during the development of the housing element.
I
City of Rosemead
California Environmental Quality Act
Negative Declaratio
The City of Rosemead has completed an initial study of the following project in accordance with State
environmental guidelines:
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT
Date:
Case No.:
Address of Project:
Applicant/Owner:
Address of Applicant/Owners:
Project Description and Location:
October 11, 2000
General Plan Amendment 00 -04
City Wide
City of Rosemead, Los Angeles County .
City of Rosemead
8838 East Valley Blvd., Rosemead, CA 91770
The City of Rosemead is updating its Housing Element that sets forth the City's strategy to preserve and
enhance the community's residential character, expand housing opportunities for all economic sectors,
and provide guidance and direction for local government decision - making in all matters relating to
housing.
11. DETERMINATION
In accordance with the City of Rosemead's procedures or compliance with the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA), the City has conducted an Initial Study to determine whether the proposed project
located within The City of Rosemead may have a significant adverse effect on the environment. On the
basis of that study, the City makes the following determination:
9 The proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment and a NEGATIVE
DECLARATION is hereby adopted.
❑ Although the project, as proposed, could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be
a significant effect in this case because mitigation measures have been added to the project, and,
therefore, a MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION is hereby adopted.
The attached Initial Study incorporates all relevant information regarding the potential environmental
effects of the project and confirms the determination that an EIR is not required for the project.
III. FINDINGS
Based on the findings of the Initial Study, the proposed project will not have a significant effect on the
environment for the following reasons:
evilaiT
1. As discussed in the preceding sections, General Plan Amendment 00 -04/ Housing Element Draft,
does not have the potential to significantly degrade the quality of the environment, including
effects on animals or plants, or to eliminate historic or prehistoric sites.
2. As discussed in the preceding sections, both short-term and long -term environmental effects
associated with General Plan Amendment 00 -04/ Housing Element Draft will be less than
significant.
3. When impacts associated with General Plan Amendment 00 -04/ Housing Element Draft are
considered alone or in combination with other impacts, the project - related impacts are
insignificant.
4. The above discussions do not identify any substantial adverse impacts to people as a result of
General Plan Amendment 00 -04/ Housing Element Draft.
5. This declaration reflects the independent judgment of the City of Rosemead.
IV. PUBLIC HEARING
The Rosemead Planning Commission will consider the project and the draft negative declaration at its
meeting on Monday. November 20, 2000, at 7:00 p.m. The meeting will be held at the Council
Chambers, 8838 E. Valley Blvd., Rosemead, CA. If the Rosemead Planning adopts the draft negative
declaration, the project may proceed without preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR).
Copies of the draft negative declaration and related documents are on file and available for public review
in the Planning Department, Rosemead City Hall, 8838 East Valley Boulevard. This notice will also
posted in the Los Angeles County Recorder's Office.
Any interested person or agency may commen! on this matter by submitting their written comments
before Monday. November 20, 2000 Comments should be sent to: Planning Director, City Hall, 8838
E. Valley Boulevard, Rosemead, CA 91770, or call for more information (626) 569 -2140.
Na m / e n/
y /
1 /u'aK�V V /i!'CL / fir
Title
Date
Publication Date
I
NOTICE OF PREPARATION OF
PROPOSED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
The City of Rosemead has completed an initial study of the following project in
accordance with City and State environmental guidelines:
Case No.: General Plan Amendment 00 -04
1998 -2005 Rosemead Housing Element Update
Project Location: Rosemead, California (Los Angeles County)
Project Description: The City of Rosemead is updating its Housing Element that sets
forth the City's strategy to preserve and enhance the community's
.residential character, expand housing opportunities for all
economic sectors, and provide guidance and direction for local
government decision - making in all matters relating to housing. .
The City prepared this study to determine the project's impact(s) on the environment. A
draft negative declaration has been proposed, stating that the project will not have any
significant negative impact(s) on the environment.
The Planning Commission will consider the project and the draft negative declaration at
its meeting on November 20, 2000, at 7:00 PM . The meeting will be held at the Council
Chambers 8838 E. Valley Boulevard. If the Planning Commission adopts the draft
negative declaration, the project may proceed without preparation of an Environmental
Impact Report (EIR).
Copies of the draft negative declaration and related documents are on file and available
for public review in the Planning Department, Rosemead City Hall, 8838 E. Valley
Boulevard. This notice will also be posted in the Los Angeles County Recorder's Office.
Any interested person or agency may comment on this matter by submitting their written
comments before Monday. November 20, 2000 Comments should be sent to: Planning
Director, Rosemead City Hall, 8838 E. Valley Boulevard, Rosemead, CA 91770, or call
for more information (626) 569 -2140.
Bradford W. Johnson
Name
Planning Director
Title
Date: October 11. 2000
Al.e ta' Sute Clunngnnusc.. !400 Tenth 4rc SacramcntD, CA 95614 - 916/445-0615
Notice of Completion and Environmental Document Transmittal Form SCR {
See N07E below
13. Funding [appm,,) Federal S
State S
Total S
1E, Present Land Use and Zoning f}ll LU,f'!Cf (.(Se d PSl y �a * Oki � �'` '
------------------------- ------
04 is updcLf�nr� /ts y ff �5 q y the
1E. Project Description se f` (-�-1� -f-i�4 �t�
Cornvnkc.nrty-5 r'esr en /
e coy orn c $ec fors a� 1 e u.r dance d t� _t eb � r /ocetl o �nvn
r-(�L7"�`iSY7 = - muA5z ,rr r TS -- tuts - `o- -�rac�s - Ba t -- -- - °- - - - - --
16. Signature of Lead Agen..' Representative Date'
NOTE: Clcarirgnousc mill aesicn identification num err for an nrcu prol%, s. L' a SCH number already wins for a prolcm (e.g. from a Notice of
'Frep=uun or previous doh document) Please fui i•. in.
Form Raoisei S /SC - A'rnlaru CJ.l P9 Mark Lis[nduaron or, Rnx*se
- 7 .. Con:ac. Ycson
7�S/ !�)/ /mil HJ ✓f
i
Froica Titi; IQ
5/I
.
OCei'Y1P0.d
j. Con:a�
(}C Q hav>-
_.
/.cadAgcn nF
p•
Gn Two
•4cq
+2.
3c.
Strce[Addr3
Gounp' GOS 479 /eS 3d. zip
----------- ---------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------
Project Location
4.
Counn'
42.
Clry /GOIIIIDOnI[f a
4b.
Ass:ssor': Farcd No.
4c.
scuion /T Twp 14
Aangc X 1 A
T
'
5b.
For Rural, Nurev, Comanumn'
51
. Cross Svcc[s
6.
WW[hic 2 mil =: a. Sum Hv'
b.
Airpors
c. Railway:
Ci d.
s'a[crw'a 1 �(I{"Ih/1 �Ch
1.
Document Type
CEDA CL D NOP 05
D supp1nmendSubscq.eni FIR
NEPA 09, J NOI OTHER
] j. J loin[ Document
t ] 0. D FONS]
14. J Final Document -
C'_. 0 Fsrh Guns
«•nay sa na.
11. D D, ft Fls
15. D Omer
• 03. XNcg Dcc W.
J NOE
04. D Dnh IIR 07,
J NOC
BA
1 =� J'
o6
❑ NOD
E.
Local Action Type
'8' General Plan Updatt
05, D Annexation
09. J Rezone
i ?. D V° a Mgner Plan
0I.
06. D s odic Plan
Pc
10. D and DII•ISlon (Subdivision,
15. J' Gncd At pm cr c
. 0:.
D Nev' Pal
07. .1 Community' Plan
Parcel Map, 7ue N.ap -, ucj
14 D O:be
(!5.
O Gcncnl P1ar. Amcndmcn:
PeI
04.
---- -- Plan
E)
06. D Reocvelo meat
P
11. ^ '05C Permit
_______________________________
_
________________________________________________________________________________
S.
Development Type
01.
D Resiornbal: Unix
_ Acres _
0 i. J Ninin£:
Llinerai
W.
J Uffmc; Sq.fi.
_ Acres Employees 06. ❑ Fowc.
•aR
Type
05.
D shupping/Cammcrcia!: Sq.L_
- Acres _ Emplovees _ 09. ❑ Wawa 7ruuncn[
Typt
04,
D Industrial: Sc.h.
Acres _ Emplq'ecs _ 10. 'J OCS Rdat_ed
IPYYle/C�-
_-
11. Omer:
05,
J tit "ate Facilities'.. MGD
�1--
06.
D Transpor ooc: Tlyc
___________ ____________________
____________________________
__ __________________________________________________________
�VIAJ�de-
11, Total Jobs Created
4-
in.
Total Acres
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
12.
Project issues Discussed in Document
01.
D ACSmenC/VISU21
0-. D G[OID,l'IC /�oSRLC
11. J.SDCial
25_ J waland/1Gp2nan
02.
D Agriculmnl and
10. D lobs /dousing R31aneC
1E, J' Soil Erosion
36. J �'iitlWc
11. D Mme.-als
:9. D Solid Waste
27. D Grnwmb Induang
Oj.
J Ai: Quality'
D Noise
. D Tozie/Hcurtlom
2E. D Ineumpadblc L nd Use
(w.
❑ Arehaeologi�l/Hinond
._,
D Pubbc Ser ecce
21. J'r:afnUCireuiavon
?9. J Gumulatiyc ED.=
U5.
-
-' Coasal Zone
i i.
4, D School:
D VI!g=won
30. J Ome
06.
07.
D Economic
J Fuc Hand
15. D septic Synems
]3. -' u'ate: Ql In'
06.
D F1oDding/D.amagc
16. D Sew Canaan'
24. D W21c" SupPly
13. Funding [appm,,) Federal S
State S
Total S
1E, Present Land Use and Zoning f}ll LU,f'!Cf (.(Se d PSl y �a * Oki � �'` '
------------------------- ------
04 is updcLf�nr� /ts y ff �5 q y the
1E. Project Description se f` (-�-1� -f-i�4 �t�
Cornvnkc.nrty-5 r'esr en /
e coy orn c $ec fors a� 1 e u.r dance d t� _t eb � r /ocetl o �nvn
r-(�L7"�`iSY7 = - muA5z ,rr r TS -- tuts - `o- -�rac�s - Ba t -- -- - °- - - - - --
16. Signature of Lead Agen..' Representative Date'
NOTE: Clcarirgnousc mill aesicn identification num err for an nrcu prol%, s. L' a SCH number already wins for a prolcm (e.g. from a Notice of
'Frep=uun or previous doh document) Please fui i•. in.
Form Raoisei S /SC - A'rnlaru CJ.l P9 Mark Lis[nduaron or, Rnx*se
Reviewing Agencies
❑ Resources Agenn;
C Boating / ulamra•ays ,
J Consnn•ation `
J Fish and Game
.rJ Forests
D Colorado River Board
O Debt. Water Resources
=J Reclamation
J Paris and Recrearion
J Office of Historic Prescn�tion
G Native American Henage Commission
J S.F. Bay Conscrvation and Development Commission
J Coastal Commission -
J Energy Commission
❑ State lands Commission
Air Resoures Board
❑ Solid Waste Mlanagemem Board
J Su•'RCB: Sacramento
D RV)QCB: Rcgion=
❑ Water Righrs
J Water Qualin
"❑ Caltmn<_ District
J Dept. of 7ranspon2tion Planning
J Aeronautics
J CalJO:nla Highway Patrol
-1 ousine and Communing Development
❑ Statewide Health Planning
Health
tj Food and Agriculture
❑ Public Utilities Commission
❑ Public Works
❑ Corrections
O General Services
El OLA
J Santa Monica Mountains
TRPA
OPR — OLGA
U OPR — Coastal
❑ Bureau of Land Management
J Forest Sen'tce
❑ nrr,rr
J Other
Date Received at S
Date Review Stars
Date to Aerncie<_ _
Date to SCY,
Clearance Date
/votes:
Phone
For SCH Use Only:
Caaloc Number
Appiicant
Consul.am
Contact
1
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
1. Project title:
General Plan Amendment 00 -04
Housing Element Draft
2. Lead agency name and address:
3. Contact person and phone number:
4. Project location:
5. Project sponsor's name and address
6. General plan designation:
7. Zoning:
City of Rosemead
8838 East Valley Blvd.
Rosemead, CA 91770
Planning Department
(626) 569 -2140
Jessica Wilkinson. Associate Planner
City -Wide
City of Rosemead
County of Los Angeles
City of Rosemead
8838 East Valley Blvd.
Rosemead, CA 91770
All land use designations
All zoning districts
8. Description of project. (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to
later phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off -site features necessary for its
implementation. Attach additional sheets if necessary.)
The City of Rosemead is updating its Housing Element that sets forth the City's strategy to
preserve and enhance the community's residential character, expand housing opportunities for all
economic sectors, and provide guidance and direction for local government decision - making in
all matters relating to housing.
9. Surrounding land uses and setting. (Briefly describe the project's surroundings.)
The City of Rosemead is an urban suburb located in the San Gabriel Valley, 10 miles east of the
City of Los Angeles. It is bounded on the north by the cities of Temple City and San Gabriel, on
the west by South San Gabriel, on the south by Montebello, plus by El Monte and South El
Monte on the east. The city is 5.5 square miles or 2,344 acres in size. Rosemead is home to a
resident population of approximately 57,328 people.
10. Other Agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or
participation agreement).
Approval by other agencies is not required as part of this project.
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least
one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact' as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
❑
Aesthetics
❑
Noise
❑
Biological Resources
❑
Recreation
•
Hazards & Hazardous Materials
❑
Mandatory Findings of
•
Mineral Resources
Significance
❑
Public Services
❑
Air Quality
❑
Utilities / Service Systems
❑
Geology / Soils
❑
Agriculture Resources
❑
Land use / Planning
❑
Cultural Resources
❑
Population / Housing
❑
Hydrology /Rater Quality
❑
Transportation / Traffic
DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
Z I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
❑ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there
will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or
agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be
prepared.
❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
❑ I find that the proposed project may have a "potentially significant impact' or "potentially
significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been
adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has
been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached
sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL MPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the
effects that remain to be addressed.
❑ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or
NEGATIVE DECLARATION' pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or
mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revision or
mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.
/O -
(O - oy
Signature Date
J(55'CA ASdk
Printed Name
For
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
1. A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact' answers that are adequately
supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question.
A "No Impact' answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the
impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault
rupture zone). A "No Impact' answer should be explained where it is based on project- specific
factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants,
based on a project - specific screening analysis).
2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off -site as well as on -site,
cumulative as well as project- level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational
impacts.
3. Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist
answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with
mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact' is appropriate if there is
substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially
Significant Impact' entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required.
4. "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies inhere the
incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an from "Potentially Significant Impact' to a
"Less Than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly
explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation from Section XVII,
"Earlier Analyses ", may be cross - referenced).
5. Earlier analysis may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an
effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063 (c) (3)
(D). Earlier analyses are discussed in Section 17 at the end of the checklist.
6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for
potential impacts (e.g. general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or
outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the
statement is substantiated.
7. Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or
individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion.
S. This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different ones.
9. The analysis of each issue should identify: (a) the significance criteria or threshold used to evaluate
each question; and (b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than
significant.
Less Th<n
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant With Mitigation Significant No
ISSUES Impact Incorporatation Imp Impact
1) AESTHETICS. Would the project:
a)
Have a substantial adverse effect on a
scenic vista?
❑
❑
y ❑
❑
b)
Substantially damage scenic resources,
_
including, but not limited to, trees, rock
outcropping, and historic buildings within
❑
❑
❑
21
a state scenic highway?
c)
Substantially degrade the existing visual
character or quality of the site and its
❑-
❑
❑
Q
surroundings?
d)
Create a new source of substantial light or .
glare, which would adversely affect day or
nighttime views in the area?
❑
❑
123
❑
2) AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES. In
determining whether impacts to agricultural
resources are significant environmental effects,
lead agencies may refer to the California
Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site
Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the
- California Dept. of Conservation as an optional
model to use in assessing impacts on
agriculture and farmland. Would the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique
Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide
Importance (Farmland), as shown on the
maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland
Mapping and Monitoring Program of the .
California Resources Agency to non- ❑ ❑ ❑ Q
agricultural use?
b) Conflict with existing zoning for
agricultural use, or a Williamson Act
contract? ❑ ❑
c) Involve other changes in the existing
environment, which, due to their location
or nature, could result in conversion.of
Farmland, to non - agricultural use? ❑ ❑ ❑
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts — Housing Element
Less Th..,
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant With Mitigation Significant No
ISSUES Impact Incorporatation Impact Impact
3) AIR QUALITY. Where available, the
significance criteria established by the
applicable air quality management or air
pollution control district may be relied upon to
make the following determinations. Would the
project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation
of the applicable air quality plan? ❑ ' ❑ ❑ Q
b) Violate any air quality standard or
contribute substantially to an existing or
projected air quality violation? ❑ ❑ ❑ Q
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net
increase of any criteria pollutant for which _
the project region is non - attainment under
an applicable federal or state ambient air .
quality standard (including releasing
emissions which exceed quantitative
thresholds for ozone precursors)? _❑ ❑ _ ❑ 2
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
pollutant concentrations?
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a
substantial number of people? . ❑ ❑ ❑ Q
4) BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the
project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either
directly or through habitat. modifications, _
on any species identified as a candidate, .
sensitive, or special status species in local
or regional plans, policies, or regulations,
or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife ❑ ❑ ❑ Q
Service?
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any
riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regional
plans, policies, and regulations or by the
California Department of Fish and Game
or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? ❑ ❑ ❑ 2
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts — Housing Element
d) Interfere substantially with the movement
of any native resident or migratory fish or
wildlife species or with established native -
resident migratory wildlife corridors, or
impede the use of native wildlife nursery ❑ ❑ ❑ Q
sites?
e) .
Conflict with any local policies or
Less Th_
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
-
Significant
With Mitigation
Significant No
ISSUES
I
Incorporatation
Impact Impact
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on
. E
ordinance?
federally protected wetlands as defined by
-
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
Conflict with the provisions of an adopted
.
(including, but not limited to, marsh,
Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural
vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct
removal, filling, hydrological interruption,
Community Conservation Plan, and other
❑
❑
or other means?
❑
❑
❑
d) Interfere substantially with the movement
of any native resident or migratory fish or
wildlife species or with established native -
resident migratory wildlife corridors, or
impede the use of native wildlife nursery ❑ ❑ ❑ Q
sites?
e) .
Conflict with any local policies or
ordinances protecting biological resources,
-
.
such as a tree preservation policy or
❑
❑
❑
. E
ordinance?
-
f)
Conflict with the provisions of an adopted
Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural
Community Conservation Plan, and other
❑
❑
❑
Q
approved local, regional, or state habitat
conservation plan?
5) CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the
project:
a)
Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource as
❑
❑
❑
defined in § 15064.5?
b)
Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource
❑
❑
❑
0
pursuant to § 15064.5?
c)
Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
❑
❑
❑
Q
paleontological resource or site or unique
geologic feature? .
d)
Disturb any human remains, including
those interred outside of formal
❑
❑
❑
Q
cemeteries?
6) GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the
Project
a) Expose people or structures to potential
substantial adverse effects, including the
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts —Housing Element
ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Th...
Significant
With Mitigation
Incorporatation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
substantial adverse effects, including the
the environment through the routine
transport, use, or disposal of hazardous
risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
0
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment through reasonably
i) Rupture a known earthquake fault, as
foreseeable upset and accident conditions
involving the release of hazardous
❑ ❑ ❑
Z
delineated on the most recent Alquist-
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle
hazardous or acutely hazardous materials,
Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map
-
-
mile of an existing or proposed school?
issued by the State Geologist for the area _
or based on other substantial evidence of a
known fault? Refer to Division of Mines
❑
❑
❑ -
& Geology Special Publication 42.
it.) Strong seismic ground shaking?
❑
❑
❑
0
in.) Seismic- related ground failure,
including liquefaction?
❑
❑
❑
0
iv.) Landslides?
❑
❑
❑
'Q
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss
of topsoil?
❑
❑
❑
0
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is
unstable, or that would become unstable as
a result of the project and potentially result .
in on- or off-site landslide, lateral
-
spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or
collapse?
❑
❑
❑
0
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in -
Table 18 -1 -B of the Uniform Building
code (1994), creating substantial risks to ❑ ❑ ❑ Q
life or collapse? .
7) HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS
MATERIALS. Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment through the routine
transport, use, or disposal of hazardous
materials? ❑ ❑ ❑
0
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment through reasonably
foreseeable upset and accident conditions
involving the release of hazardous
❑ ❑ ❑
Z
materials into the environment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle
hazardous or acutely hazardous materials,
substances, or waste within one- quarter ❑ ❑ ❑
O
mile of an existing or proposed school?
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts — Housing Element
e) For a project located within an airport land
use plan or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public
airport or public use airport, would the
project result in a safety hazard for people
residing or working in the project area ? ❑ ❑ ❑ Z
f) For a project within the vicinity of a -
private airstrip, would the project result in
a safety hazard for people residing or -
working in the project area? ❑ - ❑ ❑ 0
g) Impair implementation of or physically
interfere with an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation ❑ ❑ ❑ 0
plan?
h) Expose people or structures to the risk of
. loss, injury or death involving wildland
fires, including where wildlands are
adjacent to urbanized areas or where _ ❑ ❑ ❑ 0
residences are intermixed with wildlands?
S) HYDROLOGY AND WATER
QUALITY. Would the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or
waste discharge requirements? ❑ ❑ - ❑ 0
b) Substantially degrade groundwater
supplies or interfere substantially with
groundwater recharge such that there -
would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or
a lowering of the local groundwater table
level (e.g., the production rate of pre-
existing nearby wells would drop to a level
which would not support existing land uses
or planned uses for which permits have ❑ ❑ ❑ 0
been granted)?
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage
pattern of the site or area, including
through the alteration of the course of a
stream or river, in a manner, which would
result in substantial erosion or siltation on- ❑ ❑ ❑ 0
or off -site?
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts — Housing Element
Less Thau
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
Significant
With Mitigation
Significant No
ISSUES
Impact
Incorpo
Impact Impact
d) Be located on a site, which is included on a
list of hazardous materials sites compiled
pursuant to Government Code Section
65962.5, and, as a result, would it create a .
❑
❑
❑ ❑
significant hazard to the public or the
_
-
environment?
e) For a project located within an airport land
use plan or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public
airport or public use airport, would the
project result in a safety hazard for people
residing or working in the project area ? ❑ ❑ ❑ Z
f) For a project within the vicinity of a -
private airstrip, would the project result in
a safety hazard for people residing or -
working in the project area? ❑ - ❑ ❑ 0
g) Impair implementation of or physically
interfere with an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation ❑ ❑ ❑ 0
plan?
h) Expose people or structures to the risk of
. loss, injury or death involving wildland
fires, including where wildlands are
adjacent to urbanized areas or where _ ❑ ❑ ❑ 0
residences are intermixed with wildlands?
S) HYDROLOGY AND WATER
QUALITY. Would the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or
waste discharge requirements? ❑ ❑ - ❑ 0
b) Substantially degrade groundwater
supplies or interfere substantially with
groundwater recharge such that there -
would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or
a lowering of the local groundwater table
level (e.g., the production rate of pre-
existing nearby wells would drop to a level
which would not support existing land uses
or planned uses for which permits have ❑ ❑ ❑ 0
been granted)?
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage
pattern of the site or area, including
through the alteration of the course of a
stream or river, in a manner, which would
result in substantial erosion or siltation on- ❑ ❑ ❑ 0
or off -site?
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts — Housing Element
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant With Mitigation Significant No
ISSUES Impact - Inco rporatation Impact Impact
or off -site?
d)
Substantially alter the existing drainage
pattern of the site or area, including
through the alteration of the course of a
stream or river, or substantially increase
'
the rate or amount of surface runoff in a
manner, which would result in flooding on- _
❑
❑
❑
Q
or off -site? -
e)
Create or contribute runoff water, which
would exceed the capacity of existing or
planned stormwater drainage systems or
provide substantial additional sources of
❑
❑
❑
Q
polluted run -off?
f)
Otherwise substantially degrade water
E
El
El
Q
quality?
g)
Place housing within a 100 -year flood
.
hazard area, as mapped on a federal Flood
Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate
Map or other flood hazard delineation
El
E3
El
map?
h)
Place within a 100 -year floodplain
structures, which would impede or redirect
❑
❑
❑
Q
flood flows?
i) Expose people or structures to a significant .
risk of loss, injury or death involving _
flooding, including flooding as a result of
the failure of a levee or dam? ❑ ❑ ❑ Q
j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami mudflow? ❑ ❑ ❑ Q
9) - LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would .
the project: -
a) Physically divide an established ❑ ❑ ❑ Q
community? -
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan,
policy or regulation of an agency with .
jurisdiction over the project (including, but
not limited to the general plan, specific
plan, local coastal program, or zoning
ordinance) adopted for the purpose of
avoiding or mitigating an environmental
effect? ❑ ❑ ❑ Q
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat .
conservation plan or natural community
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts — Housing Element
Less Tl._.,
°
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
Significant
With Mitigation
Significant
No
ISSUES
Imp act
Incorporatation
Impact
Impac
conservation plan?
❑
❑
❑
Q
lo) MINERAL
RESOURCES. Would the
project:
a)
Result in the.loss of availability of a known
mineral resource that would be.of value to.
the region and the residents of the state?
❑
❑
❑
Q "
b)
Result in the loss of availability of a
locally - important mineral resource
recovery site delineated on a local general
❑
❑
Q
plan, specific plan or other land use plan?
.
11) NOISE. Would the project result in:
a)
Exposure of persons to or generation of
noise levels in excess of standards
established in the local general plan or
noise ordinance, or applicable standards of
-
other agencies?
13-
❑
❑
b)
Exposure of persons to or generation of
excessive groundbome vibration or
❑
❑
❑
Q
'
groundbome noise levels?
c)
A substantial permanent increase in
-
ambient noise levels in the project vicinity
above levels existing without the project?
❑
❑
1
❑ -
d)
A substantial temporary or periodic
increase in ambient noise levels in the
project vicinity above levels existing
without the project? -
❑
❑ -
21
❑
e)
For a project located within an airport land
use plan or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public
airport or public use airport, would the
project expose people residing or working
-
-
" in the project area to excessive noise
❑
❑
❑
levels?
f)
For a project within the vicinity of a
,
private airstrip, would the project expose
,
. people residing or working in the projeci
area to excessive noise levels?
❑
❑ -
❑
21
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts — Housing Element
.
ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Th—
Significant
With Mitigation
Incorporatation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
12) POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would
b)
Police protection?
❑
❑
the project:
0
c)
Schools?
❑
a) Induce substantial population growth in an
❑
0
d)
Parks?
area, either directly (for example, by
❑ _
❑
0
e)
,proposing new homes and businesses) or
❑
- ❑
❑
0
indirectly (for example, through extension
of roads or other infrastructure)?
❑
❑
z
❑
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing
existing neighborhood and regional parks
-
housing, necessitating the construction of
or other recreational facilities such that
replacement housing elsewhere?
-
substantial physical deterioration of the .
c) Displace substantial numbers of people,
❑
❑
❑
z
necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?
❑
❑
❑
0 -
13) PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project
result in substantial adverse physical impacts
associated with the provision of new or
physically altered government facilities, need
for new or physically altered governmental
- facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental impacts, in order to
maintain acceptable service ratios, response
times or other performance objectives for any
of the public services:
a)
Fire protection?
❑
❑
❑
0
b)
Police protection?
❑
❑
- ❑
0
c)
Schools?
❑
❑,
❑
0
d)
Parks?
❑ .
❑ _
❑
0
e)
Other public facilities? -
❑
- ❑
❑
0
14) RECREATION. Would the project:
a)
Would the project increase the use of
-
existing neighborhood and regional parks
or other recreational facilities such that
substantial physical deterioration of the .
facility would occur or be accelerated?
❑
❑
❑
z
b) Does the project include recreational
facilities or require the construction or
expansion of recreational facilities, which
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts —Housing Element
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than
_ Significant With Mitigation Significant No
ISSUES Impact Incorporatation Impact Impact
miuht have an adverse physical effect on
the environment?
❑ ❑ ❑
u
15) TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC.
Would the project:
a) Cause an increase in traffic, which is
substantial in.relation to the existing traffic
load and capacity of the street system (i.e.,
result in a substantial increase in either the
number of vehicle trips, the volume to
capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at
intersections)?
b) Exceed either individually or
cumulatively, a level of service standard
established by the county congestion
management agency for designated roads
or highways? -
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns,
including either an increase in traffic levels
or a change in location that results in
substantial safety risks?
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a
design feature (e.g., sharp curves or
dangerous intersections) or incompatible
uses (e. g. farm equipment)?
e) Result in inadequate emergency access?
f) Result in inadequate parking capacity?
16) UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS.
Would the project:
. a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements
of the applicable Regional Water Quality
Control Board?
b) Require of result in the construction of new
water or wastewater treatment facilities or
expansion of existing facilities, the
construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
c) Require or result in the construction of new
storm water drainage facilities or
expansion of existing facilities. the
construction of which could cause
❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑.
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ❑
0
0
0
u
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts — Housing Element
Less Thai
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant With Mitigation Significant No
I SSUES Impact Incorporatation Impact Impact
17) MAIA DATORY FINDINGS OF
SIGNIFICANCE.
a) Does the project have the potential to -
degrade the quality of the environment,
substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or
wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self - sustaining
levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or
animal community, reduce the number or
restrict the ranee of a rare or endangered
plant or animal or eliminate important
examples of the major periods of
California history or prehistory? ❑ ❑ ❑ 0
b) Does the project have impacts that are
individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? ( "Cumulatively
considerable" means that the incremental
effects of a project are considerable when
viewed in connection with the effects of
the past projects, the effects of other
current projects, and the effects of probable ❑ O ❑ ❑
future projects)?
c) Does the project have environmental
effects, which will cause substantial
adverse effects on human beings, either ❑ ❑ ❑ 0
directly or indirectly?
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts — Housing Element
construction of which could cause
❑
❑
❑
0
significant environmental effects?
"
d)
Have sufficient water supplies available to
serve the project from existing entitlements
and resources, or are new or expanded
entitlements needed?
❑
❑
❑ -
Q
e)
Result in a determination in the wastewater
treatment provider, which serves or may
serve the project, determined that it has
-
adequate capacity to serve the project's
projected demand in addition to the,
provider's existing commitments?
❑
❑ "
❑
f)
Be served by a landfill with sufficient
permitted capacity to accommodate the
project's solid waste disposal needs?
g)
Comply with federal, state, and local
statutes and regulations related to solid
waste?
❑
❑
❑
17) MAIA DATORY FINDINGS OF
SIGNIFICANCE.
a) Does the project have the potential to -
degrade the quality of the environment,
substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or
wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self - sustaining
levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or
animal community, reduce the number or
restrict the ranee of a rare or endangered
plant or animal or eliminate important
examples of the major periods of
California history or prehistory? ❑ ❑ ❑ 0
b) Does the project have impacts that are
individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? ( "Cumulatively
considerable" means that the incremental
effects of a project are considerable when
viewed in connection with the effects of
the past projects, the effects of other
current projects, and the effects of probable ❑ O ❑ ❑
future projects)?
c) Does the project have environmental
effects, which will cause substantial
adverse effects on human beings, either ❑ ❑ ❑ 0
directly or indirectly?
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts — Housing Element
EXPLANATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
1: AESTHETICS
The implementation of the Housing Element will not damage nor degrade the scenic
resources and visual character of existing residential areas. However, any proposed
development has the potential to create new light and glare to the surrounding properties.
Visual impacts depend on the location and physical characteristics of a proposed project.
Therefore, a proposed project cannot be evaluated properly until a location is established.
2. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES
The city is highly urbanized and all properties zoned for agriculture are not currently utilized
for farmland purposes. Such properties consist of vacant lots, parkland, nurseries, and an
elementary school. Potential impacts related to agricultural resources are site - specific and
cannot be assessed properly until a proposed project is determined.
AIR QUALITY
The implementation of the Housing Element will not violate air quality standards or conflict
with the execution of air quality plans. Individual air quality impacts depend on the project
location and magnitude of the project. Therefore, it is tentative to evaluate appropriately on
such factors that are site specific. Proposed development plans are thoroughly reviewed so
as not to impose environmental impacts to an existing community, including the creation of
objectionable odors
4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
There is no existing habitat or wetland with endangered and rare in the city that may
be affected. The implementation of the Housing Element will not create adverse impacts to
the biological resources.
5. CULTURAL RESOURCES
Rosemead is a highly urbanized city with few properties in the city with significant historical
and archaeological resources. Potential impacts cannot be evaluated properly until a project
location is known. Once a location is established, a detailed analysis of known cultural
resources is subject to review.
6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS
The entire City of Rosemead lies in a seismically active region. There are various properties
in the city that are situated in the Alquist -Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act. Geological
impacts cannot be assessed properly until the project location is known. Once a location is
determined, all projects located within the Alquist -Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone would
require a geologic study to be completed. This geologic study would provide'a detailed
analysis suitable of an environmental review.
According to the State of California Seismic Hazard Zones, most of the City of Rosemead is
located within an identified liquefaction zone. There are older structures throughout the city,
either not built or reinforced to meet earthquake standards, that are susceptible to loss by
liquefaction.
Explanation ofEnvironnienial Evaluation — Housing Element
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
The implementation of the Housing Element does not include the creation and transportation
of hazardous materials. Potential impacts cannot be evaluated properly until a project
location is known. Once a location is established, a detailed analysis of known cultural
resources is subject to review. The Housing Element promotes residential development that
does not qualify as.sources for hazards and hazardous materials.
8: HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
The implementation of the Housing Element will not create adverse impacts to the hydrology
and water quality of the area. Water- quality impacts depend on the conditions of the
community where a project will be located. Individual water quality impacts cannot be
evaluated appropriately unless a project location is established. There are six companies in
the city that provide water service and based on each one's capabilities, maintain and
upgrade water systems to meet current and projected demands.
Though the Los Angeles County Flood Control has identified twenty -two locations in the
city that are deficient in storm drainage capacity, there is few existing housing or residential -
zone land affected by flood -prone areas. Since the City of Rosemead has been declared by
the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to be in Zone "C ", flood insurance is
not mandatory and there is no community panel flood map for the city.
9. LAND USE AND PLANNING
Land use impacts can only be evaluated based on project locations and the type of land use
proposed. Once a location and land use are established, potential impacts can be evaluated
properly. Proposed residential developments must meet the zoning standards for which the
project is situated.
10. MINERAL RESOURCES
The Rosemead General Plan and Municipal Code does not include an approved land use plan
that indicates a locally important mineral resource. Impacts to mineral resources cannot be
evaluated properly without a specific project location. Once a location is established, all
projects can be studied appropriately in a detailed environmental review.
11. NOISE
Potential noise impacts can only be assessed according to a project's specific site and the
proposed use. Noise - related impacts cannot be evaluated appropriately until a project
location is established. Until then, all located projects can be analyzed at a level suitable for
an environmental review.
12. POPULATION AND HOUSING
According to the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), the population in
Rosemead will grow at a rate of 1.5 percent each year between 1994 and 2005. Potential
impacts cannot be evaluated properly until the scale of a property is determined.
Explanation of Environmental Evaluation — Housing Element -
f�
13. PUBLIC SERVICES
The city is not currently planning the construction of new or altered government facilities
needed to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, etc. Impacts to law or fire
enforcement, parks, and public facilities are area or community- specific. Impacts to schools
depend on the site and magnitude of the project, by the student population generated per
household and the capacity of facilities in a give n school district. Therefore, this project
cannot be evaluated properly until the magnitude of a proposed project is determined.
14. RECREATION
According to projections in the Housing Element, the population will increase in several
years though not substantial enough to create physical deterioration or the construction of
new recreational facilities. Potential impacts cannot be evaluated properly until the scale of a
property is determined.
15. TRANSPORTATION /TRAFFIC
According to projections in the Housing Element, the population will increase in several
years though not substantial to increase traffic relative to the existing pattern and capacity.
Impacts to traffic and transportation depend on the extent of the proposed project and local
conditions.
16. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Though projections in the Housing Element have assessed that the population will increase in
the next several years, it will not be substantial enough to exceed established level -of- service
standards of the utilities and service systems. Impacts to utilities and service systems are
assessed on a local level, including facility capacities, and service providers.
17. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
The implementation of the Housing Element will not degrade the environmental quality of
any fish and wildlife habitat or threaten to eliminate any plant or animal community. The
past, current, or future housing projects will have individually limited but not cumulatively
significant environmental effects. Potential impacts cannot be assessed properly until the
extent of a proposed project is determined. Therefore, it is premature to consider project
proposals until the scope of a project is established.
Explanation of Environmental Evaluation — Housing Element
ROSEMEAD PLANNING COMMISSION
November 20, 2000
CASE NO.: General Plan Amendment 00 -04
REQUEST: Amend the Housing Element of the Rosemead General
Plan to meet the State Requirement for the 1998 -2005
Planning Period.
LOCATION: City Wide
APPLICANT: City of Rosemead, Planning Department
8838 E. Valley Blvd.
Rosemead, CA 91770
PUBLIC HEARING: Notices were posted at ten public locations on October 11,
2000 and published in the San Gabriel Valley Tribune on
October 20, 2000.
EXHIBITS: A. Draft Housing Element
B. Zoning Summary
C. Initial Environmental Study
L BACKGROUND
Rosemead and all local jurisdictions are required by State law to complete a housing element
update every five (5) years. The Housing Element provides analysis to meet the Regional
Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) as set by the Southern California Association of
Governments (SCAG). This analysis notes that the majority of potential housing development is
through infill and recycling of lots. Staff finds that the element is able to meet the regional
allocation numbers set by SCAG using the existing zoning standards.
Development without an approved housing element is subject to legal action. If an element is
found to be inadequate, the courts can place a moratorium on all development until the issues are
addressed. Staff finds that Rosemead needs an adopted Housing Element in order to:
Apply for outside housing funds (e.g. CDBG, HOME);
Develop low- moderate income housing (e.g. senior housing); and
Issue building permits.
Exl isl r 'w of
Rosemead Planning Commission
General Plan Amendment 00 -04
Page 2 of 3
On September 5, 2000, a Planning Commission Workshop was held to review the Draft Housing
Element. Subsequent to this meeting, an Initial Study was completed followed by public
notification. The State Department of Housing & Community Development, HCD has reviewed
this draft document and has provided several comments and additions. The attached Draft
Housing Element has been revised to reflect the State's comments. Once the State has approved
this Draft Housing Element, certification of this document will follow.
II. ADMINISTATIVE ANALYSIS
Statutory Requirements -Local government is required under State law to create and maintain a
housing element. The purpose of such an element is to: 1) provide a framework for responding
to locally identified housing needs, and 2) fulfill the statutory and regulatory requirements of the
State of California. Section 65583 of the California Government Code defines a housing
element.
The intent with this housing element is to address Rosemead's housing goals and to comply with
these findings and the requirements of Article 10.6 of the California Government Code. State
law sets specific direction of local housing elements. They limit the types of analysis used to
assess existing and projected housing needs. In addition, laws specify the nature of the
community housing goals and the detail required in their objectives and policies. Finally, the
State specifies the content and effect of programs that are identified to implement the element.
Summary of Issues — Analysis of existing demographic and housing characteristics in the City of
Rosemead identified the following trends for the 1998 -2005 planning period:
• A need for affordable units with three or more bedrooms for large families.
• A lack of larger, new housing developments that would attract more moderate -
and above - moderate income households to the City.
• Currently there is an aging housing stock and there has been little new residential
development in the last five years.
Proposed Housing Element — The Rosemead General Plan is comprised of seven (7) elements,
including a housing element. State law requires all of the elements to be internally consistent.
A comprehensive revision of the entire general plan was completed in 1987.
Section 65588(e) requires local governments within the regional jurisdiction of the Southern
California Association of Governments (SCAG) to revise their element by December 31, 2000.
Therefore, this element is designed to complete the process and meet the requirement of Section
65588 for the planning period starting in 1998.
This review shall evaluate the appropriateness, effectiveness and progress in implementation of
the previous element (1996) pursuant to Section 65588. The development of housing relates
Rosemead Planning Commission
General Plan Amendment 00 -04
Page 3 of 3
directly to the standards contained within the land use element as to density, location, and
development standards. Projected housing developments must be achieved within the limitations
set forth by both land use and housing elements. Therefore, the two elements support one
another in the common goal of achieving quality development. Similar relationships exist
between all elements of the general plan.
Rosemead Housing Element has been completed in the following format:
1. Assessment of existing conditions and future needs. Review of the existing
housing stock condition, its characteristics, the population and employment
projections.
2. Inventory of available resources and development constraints (e.g. land supply,
zoning, public services and facilities, local procedures, housing costs, etc.).
3. Programs for the implementation from 1998 -2005. Set forth a 5 -year schedule of
actions which the City of Rosemead intends to undertake in order to meet their
goals.
4. Statement of community goals, objectives and policies. Set the priorities and
criteria for housing development, maintenance and improvement.
I11. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
An initial study was completed on October 10, 2000. This study has been prepared in
accordance with state and local environmental regulations to analyze the potential environmental
impacts that could be created from the proposed project.
General Plan Amendment 00 -04 has been created to update the Housing Element that sets forth
the City's strategy to preserve and enhance the community's residential character, expand
housing opportunities for all economic sectors, and provide guidance and direction for local
government decision - making in all matters relating to housing.
Staff finds that the Ordinance itself will serve to reduce potential environmental impacts to a
level of insignificance without eliminating business opportunity. Therefore, a Negative
Declaration has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA). The study was noticed in 10 public locations and a locally circulated newspaper,
soliciting comments for more than a 21 -day period prior to the Planning Commission hearing on
November 20, 2000.
IV. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt a Negative Declaration and recommend
City Council Approval of General Plan Amendment 00 -04.
City of ftsad -
8838 (East VaQey Boulevard
ftsewea4 Cafzforuia
PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
November 20, 2000
CALL TO ORDER: The regular meeting of the City of Rosemead Planning Commission was called to order
by Chairman Ortiz at 7:00 p.m. in the council chambers of the Rosemead City lirdl at 8838 East Valley
Boulevard, Rosemead
Vice- Chairman Breen led the Pledge 'ofAllegiance.
Commissioner Ruiz delivered invocation. ,
ROLL CALL:
PRESENT: Chairman Ortiz, Vice - Chairman Breen, Commissioners Alarcon, Loi, and
Ruiz
ABSENT: None
EX OFFICIO: Crowe, Price, Johnson, Wilkinson, and Romanelli
1. APPROVAL OF MINU'T'ES Regular Meeting of November 6, 2000
(1110) Motion by Commissioner Ruiz seconded by Commissioner Alarcon, that the minutes of the
City of Rosemead Regular Planning Commission Meeting of November 6, 2000, be
APPROVED as submitted.
Vote results:
YES:
ORTIZ, BREEN, ALARC6N, LOI, RUIZ
NO:
NONE
ABSTAIN:
NONE
ABSENT:
NONE
Chairman Ortiz declared said motion duly carried and so ordered
2. EXPLANATION OF HEARING PROCEDURES AND APPEAL RIGHTS
Deputy City Attorney Stan Price explained the public hearing process and the right to appeal
planning commission decisions to the city council.
3. ADMINISTRATION OF OATII
The commission secretary administered the oath to members of the audience wishing to speak before
the planning commission.
4. PUBLIC HEARING:
r .. : t•k _ r .�_ . t yL . � IT
�;A. GEN FICA L,PLAMAMENDM ENT 00- 04 Ci(ytvule' V
A staff- initiated amendment to update the General Plan Housing Element for the City of
Rosemead.
.r e
AOOO
Presentation: Planning Director Johnson
:. Majjrecormnendation: ADOPT a Negative Declaration and RECOMMEND CITY
}" COUNCIL APPROVAL of General Plan Amendment 00 -04.
iKt
NovENIFIER 20, 2000
PLANNaJG COMMISSION MI S
PAGE 2'
Questions from the commissioners to the staff
None.
Chairman Ortiz opened the public hearing to those IN FAVOR of this application:
None.
Public hearing was opened to those who n fished to OPPOSE the application:
None.
There being no one further wishing to address the conunission, Chairman Ortiz closed the
public hearing segment for this project
(1110) Motion by Commissioner Breen, seconded by Commissioner Alarcdn, to ADOPT ;
Negative Declaration and to RECOMMEND CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL of General I
Plan Amendment 00 -04.
Vote results:
YES:
ORTIZ, BREEN, ALARC6N, LOI, RUIZ
NO
NONE
ABSTAIN:
NONE
ABSENT:
NONE
Chairman Ortiz declared said notion Judy carried and so orderer!.
B. "^ CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 00- 810 1547North Slat Gabriel Boulevard, UnitA
A request by Long Uuynh, dba "La Vie Restaurant," for the issuance of a beer and wine
(Type 41) ABC license in conjunction with an eating establishment located in the C -3, Medium
Commercial zone.
Presentation: Associate Planner Wilkinson
Staff recommendation: APPROVE- -for a period of one III year, subject to the
conditions listed in "Exhibit A."
Applicart(s): In the audience.
Questions frog the commissioners to the staff.
Commissioner Loi inquired as to the permit issuance timeframe; whereupon, Associate
Planner Wilkinson confirmed that issuance is based upon commission approval.
Chairtnan Ortiz opened the public hearing to Dose IN FAVOR of this application.
None.
Public hearing was opened to those who wished to OPPOSE the application:
None.
There being no vine further wishing to address the commission, Chairman Ortiz closed the
public hearing segunent for this project
RESOLUTION NO. 2000 -66
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD,
APPROVING THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND AN AMENDMENT
TO THE HOUSING ELEMENT OF THE ROSEMEAD GENERAL PLAN
(GPA 00 -04).
WHEREAS, Section 65350 et seq. of the Government Code allows a City to amend all or
part of its General Plan, if it deems it to be in the public interest, and pursuant to this the City
Council must hold a public hearing on the proposed change; and
WHEREAS, the Housing Element update has been prepared in compliance with the
requirements of California State Law, and addresses all of the elements identified in Government
Code Section 65583; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code § 65585, the draft updated Housing Element was
submitted to the Department of Housing and Community Development and the updated Housing
Element has been modified to incorporate that Department's requested changes.
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of Section 15063 of the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA), an Initial Study was prepared which concluded there would be no potential for
a significant effect on the environment and a Negative Declaration was prepared; and
WHEREAS, on November 20, 2000, the Planning Commission held a public hearing and
recommended that the City Council adopt a resolution approving the proposed Housing Element
update; and
WHEREAS, the City is required to submit to the California Department of Housing and
Community Development on or before December 30, 2000, an updated Housing Element in
compliance with California Government Code Section 65566(e); and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Rosemead
as follows:
Section 1 . The findings for the Negative Declaration, contained in the staff report dated
November 20, 2000, and incorporated herein by reference, are hereby adopted.
Section 2 . The Negative Declaration prepared for General Plan Amendment 00 -04 is hereby
approved.
Section 3 . The findings for approval of General Plan Amendment 00 -04 which are
incorporated herein by reference, are hereby adopted.
Resolution No. 2000 -66
General Plan Amendment 00 -04
Section 4 . Staff is directed to submit the revised Housing Element to the California
Department of Housing and Community Development prior to the December 30, 2000 submittal
deadline.
Section 5 . The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution and shall cause
same to be published as required by law.
PASSED AND APPROVED this 12th day of December, 2000.
MARGARET CLARK, Mayor
ATTEST:
NANCY VALDERRAMA, City Clerk
Resolution No. 2000-66
General Plan Amendment 00 -04
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES )
CITY OF ROSEMEAD )
I, Nancy Valderrama, City Clerk of the City of Rosemead, do hereby certify that the
foregoing Resolution No. 2000 -66 being:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ROSEMEAD, APPROVING THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND
AN AMENDMENT TO THE HOUSING ELEMENT OF THE
ROSEMEAD GENERAL PLAN (GPA 00 -04).
was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council on the 12 day of December,
2000, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
'ABSTAIN:.
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NANCY VALDERRAMA, City Clerk