CC - Item 3A - Attachment H - Initial Study Mitigated Negative DeclarationAttachment H
Initial Study/Mitigated Declaration with Mitigation
Monitoring Program
INITIAL STUDY
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Willard & Garvey
Residential Project
Lead Agency:
City of Rosemead
Contact: Lily T. Valenzuela, Planning & Economic Development Manager
8838 E. Valley Blvd.
Rosemead, CA 91770
Phone: (626) 569-2142; Email: ltrinh@cityofrosemead.org
Prepared by:
Comprehensive Planning Service
Contact: Joann Lombardo, Principal
Phone: (949)243-5274; Email: joann@jalcps.com
September 18, 2020
This page is intentionally blank.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................ 1
SECTION 1.0 – INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................... 2
1.1 INITIAL STUDY REQUIRED ................................................................................................. 2
1.2 STATUTORY AUTHORITY ..................................................................................................... 2
1.3 INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE .................................................................................... 3
SECTION 2.0 – PROJECT DESCRIPTION ......................................................................... 5
2.1 PROJECT TITLE........................................................................................................................ 5
2.2 LEAD AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS ............................................................................. 5
2.3 CONTACT PERSON AND PHONE NUMBER ..................................................................... 5
2.4 PROJECT LOCATION .............................................................................................................. 5
2.5 PROJECT SPONSOR’S NAME AND ADDRESS ............................................................... 8
2.6 GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION ......................................................................................... 8
2.7 ZONING...................................................................................................................................... 8
2.8 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT ................................................................................................ 8
2.9 EXISTING AND SURROUNDING LAND USES ............................................................. 16
2.10 OTHER PUBLIC AGENCIES WHOSE APPROVAL IS REQUIRED ............................ 21
2.11 HAVE CALIFORNIA NATIVE AMERICAN TRIBES TRADITIONALLY AND
CULTURALLY AFFILIATED WITH THE PROJECT AREA REQUESTED CONSULTATION
PURSUANT TO PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE SECTION 21080.3.1? IF SO, HAS
CONSULTATION BEGUN? ............................................................................................................ 22
SECTION 3.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED ............ 23
SECTION 4.0 – DETERMINATION: (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE LEAD
AGENCY) ............................................................................................................................... 24
SECTION 5.0 – EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ............................. 25
SECTION 6.0 – ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ................................... 27
6.1 AESTHETICS ........................................................................................................................... 27
6.2 AGRICULTURE AND FOREST SERVICES ...................................................................... 30
6.3 AIR QUALITY .......................................................................................................................... 33
6.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ................................................................................................ 41
6.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES ..................................................................................................... 45
6.6 ENERGY .................................................................................................................................... 49
6.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS ........................................................................................................ 51
6.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ..................................................................................... 56
6.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS .................................................................. 60
6.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY .............................................................................. 65
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page ii
6.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING ............................................................................................... 70
6.12 MINERAL RESOURCES ........................................................................................................ 78
6.13 NOISE ....................................................................................................................................... 80
6.14 POPULATION AND HOUSING ........................................................................................... 89
6.15 PUBLIC SERVICES ................................................................................................................ 91
6.16 RECREATION .......................................................................................................................... 95
6.17 TRANSPORTATION ............................................................................................................... 97
6.18 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES ................................................................................... 108
6.19 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS ............................................................................ 111
6.20 WILDFIRE .............................................................................................................................. 114
6.21 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE ............................................................ 117
SECTION 7.0 – LIST OF PREPARERS ............................................................................ 119
7.1 PREPARATION – ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT..................................................... 119
7.2 PREPARATION - AIR QUALITY / GHG ANALYSIS ................................................... 119
7.3 PREPARATION - TRAFFIC ANALYSIS .......................................................................... 119
7.4 PREPARATION - NOISE ANALYSIS .............................................................................. 119
SECTION 8.0 – LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ............................... 120
APPENDICES
A. Native American Heritage Commission Sacred Lands File Check and
Consultation List, February 5, 2020.
B. AB52 Letters to the Gabrieleño-Tongva Tribe, Gabrieleño-Tongva Indians of
California Tribal Council, Gabrieleño/Tongva Nation, Gabrieleño/Tongva San
Gabriel Band of Mission Indians, and Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians-Kizh,
February 12, 2020.
C. “Willard & Garvey Residential Development Air Quality & Greenhouse Impact
Study, City of Rosemead”, prepared by RK Engineering Group, Inc., September
18, 2020.
D. South Central Coastal Information Center Records Search, April 17, 2020.
E. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment and Shallow Soil Sampling, Rosemead
(Willard & Garvey), prepared by Stantec Consulting Services Inc., May 13,
2019.
F. “Willard & Garvey Residential Development Traffic Study & On-Street Parking
Evaluation, City of Rosemead”, prepared by RK Engineering Group, Inc.,
September 14, 2020.
G. “Willard & Garvey Residential Development Noise Impact Study, City of
Rosemead”, prepared by RK Engineering Group, Inc., August 4, 2020.
H. “Geotechnical Due-Diligence Investigation and Percolation Study, Proposed
Multi-Family Residential Development, 3133, 3141 & 3149 Willard Avenue,
Rosemead, California”, prepared by Albus-Keefe & Associates, Inc., May 14,
2019.
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page iii
I. “Preliminary Low Impact Development (LID) Report, Tentative Tract No.
82875, 3133-3141 Willard, Rosemead, CA 91770”, prepared by Alan Short
P.E., September 30, 2019.
J. “Preliminary Hydrology Study for Rosemead, Tentative Tract No. 82875, 3133-
3141 Willard Avenue”, prepared by Alan Short P.E., October 4, 2019.
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
Figure 1. Project Regional Location Map .......................................................... 6
Figure 2. Project Site Aerial Location .............................................................. 7
Figure 3. Project Conceptual Site Plan ........................................................... 17
Figure 4. Project Schematic Landscape Plan ................................................... 11
Figure 5. Project Architecture – 2 Unit Townhomes ......................................... 12
Figure 6. Project Architecture – 7 Unit Townhomes ......................................... 13
Figure 7. Project Architecture – 12 Unit Townhomes ....................................... 14
Figure 8. Project Site Existing Conditions Aerial Map ....................................... 17
Figure 9. Project Site Existing Conditions Photo #1 ......................................... 18
Figure 10. Project Site Existing Conditions Photo #2 ....................................... 18
Figure 11. Project Site Existing Conditions Photo #3 ....................................... 19
Figure 12. View of Distribution Lines from Project Site Looking North on Willard
Avenue .................................................................................................... 20
Figure 13. General Plan Land Use Map Existing Designations ............................ 71
Figure 14. Noise Monitoring Locations ........................................................... 83
Figure 15. City of Rosemead Low VMT Areas ................................................. 103
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page iv
LIST OF TABLES
Page
Table 1: Plan Summary ................................................................................ 9
Table 2: Nearby Developments Contributing to Cumulative Projects .................. 20
Table 3: SCAQMD Regional Significance Thresholds ........................................ 34
Table 4: Comparison of Project Construction Emissions and Daily Criteria Values . 36
Table 5: Comparison of Project Operational Emissions and Daily Criteria Values .. 37
Table 6: Comparison of Project Construction and Operatoinal Emissions to SCAQMD
Localized Signficance Thresholds.................................................................. 38
Table 7: Construction Related Greenhouse Gas Emissions ................................ 57
Table 8: Operational Greenhouse Gas Emissions............................................. 58
Table 9: City of Rosemead Residential Noise Standards ................................... 82
Table 10: Noise Level Measurements ............................................................ 83
Table 11: Existing Plus Project Traffic Level Conditions ................................... 100
Table 12: Opening Year (2022) With Ambient Growth Plus Project Traffic Level
Conditions .............................................................................................. 101
Table 13: Opening Year (2022) With Ambient Growth Plus With Cumulative Projects
Plus Project Conditions Traffic Level Conditions ............................................. 101
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This Initial Study assesses the potential environmental impacts of a proposal by The
Olson Company to construct and operate the Willard & Garvey Residential Project,
which consists of a 31 residential unit townhome community, located at 3133 and
3141 Willard Avenue, Rosemead, California. This proposed Project includes the
following applications through the City of Rosemead Planning & Economic
Department:
• General Plan Amendment 19-01
• Zone Change 19-01
• Planned Development Review 19-01
• Vesting Tentative Tract Map 82875
This Initial Study finds with the imposition of mitigation measures related to Air
Quality, Cultural Resources, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Noise, Traffic, Tribal
Cultural Resources and Mandatory Findings of Significance, all potentially significant
impacts associated with the Project would be reduced to less than significant levels.
Consequently, a Mitigated Negative Declaration will be prepared for the Project.
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 2
SECTION 1.0 – INTRODUCTION
1.1 INITIAL STUDY REQUIRED
Following preliminary review of the proposed Willard & Garvey Residential Project (Project), the City of Rosemead (City) has determined that the Project is subject to the guidelines and regulations of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). This Initial Study addresses the direct, indirect, and cumulative environmental effects associated with the Project, as proposed.
1.2 STATUTORY AUTHORITY
This Initial Study has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Public Resources Code Section 21000-21177) and pursuant to Section 15063 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR).
Consistent with the statutory authority, the purpose of this Initial Study is to provide the Lead Agency (i.e. the City) with information to determine if the proposed Project would have a significant environmental impact. Specifically, this Initial Study will:
• Facilitate environmental assessment early in the design of the Project;
• Provide the City with information to use as the basis for deciding
whether to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) or Negative
Declaration;
• Enable the Applicant or City to modify the Project, mitigating adverse
impacts, thereby enabling the Project to quality for a Negative
Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration;
• Provide documentation of the factual basis for the findings in a Negative
Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration that the Project will not
have a significant effect on the environment.
The environmental documentation, which is ultimately selected by the City of Rosemead in accordance with CEQA, is intended as an informational document undertaken to provide an environmental basis for subsequent discretionary actions upon the Project. The resulting documentation is not, however, a policy document and its approval and/or certification neither presupposes nor mandates any actions on the part of those agencies from whom permits, and other discretionary approvals would be required.
The environmental documentation and supporting analysis is subject to a public review period. The proposed Project is not a project "of statewide, regional, or areawide significance" as prescribed in Section 15206 of the CEQA Guidelines because it does not meet the criteria for such projects. Furthermore, project implementation does not require any action by a State Agency (i.e., “responsible” or “trustee”
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 3
agency). Therefore, the document will not be submitted to the State Clearinghouse for review and the review period is determined to be 20 days in accordance with Section 15073 of the CEQA Guidelines. Following review of any comments received, the City of Rosemead will consider these comments as a part of the Project’s environmental review and include them with the Initial Study documentation for consideration by the City of Rosemead in accordance with Section 15074(b) of the CEQA Guidelines.
1.3 INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE
The information contained in this document is based, in part, on the following documents that include the Project site or provide information addressing the general project area or use:
• City of Rosemead General Plan, adopted April 2010 (General
Plan). The General Plan is a policy document designed to provide long-
range guidance for decision-making affecting the future character of
Rosemead. It represents the official statement of the community’s
physical development, as well as its economic, social, and
environmental goals. The General Plan is comprised of the following ten
elements: Land Use; Circulation; Resource Management; Public Safety;
Noise. The General Plan was used throughout this Initial Study as the
fundamental planning document governing development on the Project
site.
• City of Rosemead General Plan Environmental Impact Report
(EIR), certified October 2018 (General Plan EIR). The General
Plan EIR (State Clearinghouse Number 2007111090) was prepared in
support of the General Plan and in accordance with the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as amended (Public Resources Code
Section 21000 et seq.) and CEQA Guidelines (California Administrative
Code Section 15000 et seq.).
• City of Rosemead Housing Element 2014-2021, adopted
October 2013 (Housing Element). The Housing Element provides
the identification and analysis of existing and projected housing needs
and articulates the City’s official policies for the preservation,
conservation, improvement, and production of housing within the City
of Rosemead for the 2014-2021 planning period.
• City of Rosemead Zoning Code (Zoning Code). Chapter 17 of the City of Rosemead Municipal Code establishes the basic zoning regulations under which land is developed and utilized and by which the General Plan is systematically implemented. This includes allowable uses, building setback and height requirements, and other development standards. The basic intent of the Zoning Code is to promote and protect the public health, safety, convenience, and welfare of present and future citizens of the City.
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 4
• California Building Code (2019) (CBC). The 2019 California Building Standards Code (Cal. Code Regs., Title 24) was published July 1, 2019, with an effective date of January 1, 2020. It incorporates all parts of the state building standards, including the Residential Code and Green Standards Code.
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 5
SECTION 2.0 – PROJECT DESCRIPTION
2.1 PROJECT TITLE
The Willard & Garvey Residential Project
2.2 LEAD AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
City of Rosemead
8838 E. Valley Blvd.
Rosemead, CA 91770
2.3 CONTACT PERSON AND PHONE NUMBER
Lily T. Valenzuela
Planning & Economic Development Manager
Phone: (626) 569-2142
Email: ltrinh@cityofrosemead.org
2.4 PROJECT LOCATION Regionally, the Project site consists of approximately 1.2 acres located within the Los Angeles County, south of Interstate 10 (I-10) and north of State Route 60 (SR-60), within the jurisdiction of the City of Rosemead. (Reference Figure 1, Project Regional Location Map.)
Locally, the Project site is presently comprised of two parcels, addressed as 3133 and 3141 Willard Avenue, Rosemead, California 91770. Assessor parcel numbers for the properties are 5288-004-054, and 5288-003-057. Near the center of the Project site, Latitude and Longitude are 34°03’54/49” N / 118°05’01.87” W.
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 6
Figure 1. Project Regional Location Map
(source: Google Maps)
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 7
Figure 2. Project Site Aerial Location
(source: Google Maps)
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 8
2.5 PROJECT SPONSOR’S NAME AND ADDRESS
The Olson Company
3010 Old Ranch Parkway, Suite 100
Seal Beach, CA 90740
Contact: Steve Armanino
Director of Development
Phone: 562-596-4770 x218
Email: sarmanino@theolsonco.com
2.6 GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION
Current General Plan Land Use Map designation is Medium Density Residential with a
density of 0-12 dwelling units per acre.
2.7 ZONING
Current Zoning Map designation is R-2 Light Multiple Residential.
2.8 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT
2.8.1 SITE PLAN
The Project consists of 31 residential townhome units constructed within eight
buildings throughout the site. This includes one row townhome building with seven
units, one row townhome building with 12 units, and two-unit townhomes. The units
range in size from 1,232 square feet to 1,698 square feet with six different floor
plans. Of the 31 residential townhome units, 20 would be 2-bedroom and 11 would
be 3-bedroom. (Reference Figure 3. Project Conceptual Site Plan, and Table 1. Plan
Summary)
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 9
Figure 3. Project Conceptual Site Plan
(source: The Olson Company)
A two-car garage is proposed for each residential unit. In addition, the Project would
provide 16 guest parking spaces for a total of 78 parking spaces, an average of 2.5
spaces per unit.
Table 1: Plan Summary
Plan Type # Units Bedrooms Unit (sf)
P1 (Building 1) 2 2 1,232
P1x (Building 1) 2 2 1,284
P1 (Building 2) 2 2 1,242
P1x (Building 2) 2 2 1,352
P2 12 2 1,306
P3 6 3 1,424
P4 3 3 1,490
P4x 2 3 1,698
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 10
Open space within the Project would consist of 2,556 square feet of private open
space consisting of patios and balconies, and 11,542 square feet of common open
space consisting of a central community open space with a shade structure, barbeque
and seating and a secondary open space with fire pit and seating. A total of 14,098
square feet of open space would be provided with an average of 454.8 square feet of
open space per unit. (Reference Figure 4. Project Schematic Landscape Plan)
Landscaping would be located at the periphery and within the site and consists of
trees and shrubs. In addition, decorative paving would be provided at the open space
areas and Project driveway entrance. Sidewalks would be provided throughout the
site.
Primary entry to the Project site would be from Willard via a 26-foot private drive
aisle that would connect at a T-juncture to a 26-foot fire lane and hammer head, and
then a 20 and 24-foot drive aisle. All of the Project’s eight buildings would take
vehicular access from the drive aisles.
As shown in Figure 3, the Project site is irregular in shape. The front yard setback is
20’-0”. The side yard setbacks vary between 8’-0” to 13-3”. The rear yard setback
is 20’-0”. Walls within the Project development would be constructed of masonry
stucco material, and would be constructed between 4’-0” to 5’-9” high along each of
the site’s boundaries. In addition, the walls will be finished with a flat stuff cap.
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 11
Figure 4. Project Schematic Landscape Plan
(source: The Olson Company)
2.8.2 PROJECT ARCHITECTURE
The Project consists of a Spanish architectural style, enhanced with design elements
including balconies, decorative metal guard rails, decorative shutters, gabled roofs
with end details, arched entry doorways, exposed rafter tails, decorative lighting,
sectional garage doors, and concrete s-tile roofing. Three types of vibrant color
schemes are proposed for the Project elevations. (Reference Figures 5. Project
Architecture – 2-Unit Townhomes, 6. Project Architecture 7-Unit Townhomes, and 8.
Project Architecture 12-unit Townhomes) The maximum building height is 35’.
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 12
Figure 5. Project Architecture – 2-Unit Townhomes
(source: The Olson Company)
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 13
Figure 6. Project Architecture – 7-Unit Townhomes
(source: The Olson Company)
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 14
Figure 7. Project Architecture – 12-Unit Townhomes
(source: The Olson Company)
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 15
2.8.3 DEMOLITION AND GRADING
Development of the proposed townhomes requires demolition of the existing on site
structures and grading of the site. Approximately 1,470 square feet of existing
buildings would be excavated. Grading would consist of approximately 11,000 cubic
yards (CY) of onsite cut/fill (includes over-excavation) with approximately 1,000 CY
of import. These demolition and grading activities could create impacts related to air
quality emissions, (GHG) greenhouse gas emissions, noise and disturbance of
potential on-site hazardous substances. These potential impacts are considered
within this Initial Study as part of the Project.
2.8.4 PROJECT ENTITLEMENTS
The Project would require several entitlements:
• General Plan Amendment 19-01
• Zone Change 19-01
• Planned Development Review 19-01
• Vesting Tentative Tract Map 82875
Pursuant to Chapter 17.152.020 of the Zoning Code, an amendment to the General
Plan Land Use Map, Zoning Code, and Zoning Map may be initiated by the Planning
Commission, City Council or by the property owner. To facilitate development of the
Project, the Applicant has submitted an application to change the General Plan Land
Use Map designation of the property from Medium Density Residential, which allows
for a density of 0-12 dwelling units per acre, to High Density Residential, which allows
for a density of 0-30 dwelling units per acre. The Applicant is also requesting a change
to the Zoning Map from Light Multiple Residential (R-2) to Planned Development (P-
D). Project density would be 25.8 dwelling units per acre. Standards for the P-D would
be set by the Project precise development plan, and these standards would function
as the zoning for the site.
Pursuant to Chapter 17.152.060 of the Zoning Code, approval of the General Plan
Land Use Map amendment will require the Planning Commission to recommend and
the City Council to make the following findings which are evaluated in Section 6.11
of this Initial Study:
(1) The amendment is internally consistent with all other provisions of the
General Plan.
(2) The proposed amendment will not be detrimental to the public interest,
health, safety, convenience or welfare of the City.
(3) The affected site is physically suitable in terms of design, location,
operating characteristics, shape, size, topography, and the provision of
public and emergency vehicle access, and public services and utilities
and is served by highways and streets adequate in width and
improvement to carry the kind and quantity of traffic the proposed use
would likely generate, to ensure that the proposed use(s) and/or
development will not endanger, jeopardize, or otherwise constitute a
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 16
hazard to the property or improvements in the vicinity in which the
property is located.
For Zoning Code changes and Zoning Map amendments, Chapter 17.152.060 of the
Code requires the Planning Commission to recommend and the City Council to make
the following findings which are evaluated in Section 6.11 of this Initial Study:
(1) The proposed amendment is consistent with the General Plan and any
applicable specific plan; and
(2) The proposed amendment will not be detrimental to the public interest,
health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City.
(3) Additional finding for Zoning Code Amendments. The proposed
amendment is internally consistent with other applicable provisions of
this Zoning Code.
(4) The affected site is physically suitable in terms of design, location,
operating characteristics, shape, size, topography, and the provision of
public and emergency vehicle access, and public services and utilities
and is served by highways and streets adequate in width and
improvement to carry the kind and quantity of traffic the proposed use
would likely generate, to ensure that the proposed use(s) and/or
development will not endanger, jeopardize, or otherwise constitute a
hazard to the property or improvements in the vicinity in which the
property is located.
For P-D zoning, Chapter 17.24 of the City Zoning Code states that the P-D district is
intended to provide for residential, commercial, industrial, or
institutional developments that are characterized by innovative use and design
concepts. This zone provides for a new development to offer amenities, quality,
design excellence and other similar benefits to the community and not be inhibited
by strict numerical development standards. Chapter 17.24.040 of the Code outlines
the requirements for approval of a P-D. These requirements are discussed in Section
6.11 of this Initial Study.
Pursuant to Chapter 16.04 of the Municipal Code, a Tentative Tract Map (TTM) is
required to subdivide a property into 5 or more legal parcels or condominium
ownerships. TTM 82875 has been initiated by the Project Applicant as required by the
Municipal Code, which also outlines requirements for TTMs which are subject to
review and approval by the Planning Commission. These requirements are discussed
in Section 6.11 of this Initial Study.
2.9 EXISTING AND SURROUNDING LAND USES
2.9.1 EXISTING LAND USES
The Project site consists of two parcels totaling approximately 1.2 acres of land developed with two existing residential structures, one is boarded up and the other is unoccupied. The two existing residential structures are located along the eastern portion of the site facing Willard Avenue, and addressed as 3133 and 3141 Willard
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 17
Avenue. The western portion of the site contains no structures and is covered with weeds and scattered vegetation. A few non-native trees are located on the site. (Reference Figure 8, Project Site Existing Conditions Aerial Map, and Figures 9-11, Project Site Existing Conditions Photos.)
Historically, the first records available of site development date to 1928 and show that the site was developed as an orchard with the 3133 Willard Avenue residential structure developed.1 By 1948, the site is cleared of orchards and the residential structure at 3141 Willard Avenue is developed.
Figure 8. Project Site Existing Conditions Aerial Map
(Source: Google Maps)
**
1 Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment and Shallow Soil Sampling, Rosemead (Willard & Garvey), prepared by
Stantec Consulting Services on behalf, May 13, 2019 and contained as Appendix E.
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 18
Figure 9. Project Site Existing Conditions Photo #1
(Source: Stantec)
Figure 10. Project Site Existing Conditions Photo #2
(Source: Stantec)
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 19
Figure 11. Project Site Existing Conditions Photo #3
(Source: Stantec)
2.9.2 SURROUNDING LAND USES
As shown in Figure 8, the Project site is located immediately east of a Southern California Edison (SCE) easement which contains transmission towers, approximately 120 feet in height and overhead lines. (Reference Figure 12, View of Distribution Lines from Project Site Looking North on Willard Avenue.) Portions of the easement adjacent to the site are developed with a wholesale nursery and Zapopan Park. Willard Elementary School is located immediately east of the site across Willard Avenue. Single family residential is located immediately north and south of the site.
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 20
Figure 12. View of Distribution Lines from Project Site Looking North on
Willard Avenue
2.9.2 CUMULATIVE PROJECTS
Nearby developments considered in this Initial Study’s analysis of cumulative impacts are listed in Table 2, below:
Table 2: Nearby Developments Contributing to Cumulative Impacts
Address Proposed Project Status
7419-7459 Garvey Avenue
Phase I: Residential/Commercial
Mixed Use:
• 48,000 Square Feet Commercial • Three Commercial
Buildings (office, retail,
restaurant)
Phase II: 90 Residential Units
(rear)
Phase I: In Building Plan Check Phase II: A-Sheets submitted to
Building
7801-7825 Garvey Avenue
Residential/Commercial Mixed
Use:
• 15,553 Square Feet
Commercial (office, retail,
restaurant)
• 60 Residential Units
• 9 low income
condominiums
Under Construction
(permits issued June 2018)
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 21
Table 2: Nearby Developments Contributing to Cumulative Impacts
Address Proposed Project Status
8002 Garvey Avenue
Residential/Commercial Mixed
Use: • 88,449 Commercial
(hotel, office, retail, restaurant)
• 92 Residential Units
A-Sheets submitted to Building
8408 Garvey Avenue
Residential/Commercial Mixed
Use: • 11,500 Square Feet
Commercial (office and retail) • 46 Residential Units
• 7 low-income apartments
Under Construction
8449 Garvey Avenue
Residential/Commercial Mixed
Use:
• 7,200 Square Feet
Commercial (office, retail,
restaurant)
• 35 Residential Units
• 6 low-income apartments
In Building Plan Check
Demo Permit Issued
8900 Glendon Way
Hampton Inn & Suites Hotel:
• Five-Stories
• 123 Guest Rooms
In Building Plan Check
500 Montebello Boulevard
Marriott Dual Hotel
• 6 Stories
• 199 Guest Rooms Discretionary Applications Submitted
3001 Walnut Grove
Avenue
Residential/Commercial Mixed Use
• 4 Stories
• 17,394 Square Feet
Commercial
• 42 Residential Condos (7
Low Income)
Discretionary Applications Submitted
3035 San Gabriel Blvd
Residential/Commercial Mixed Use
• 6 stories
• 50,849 Square Feet
Commercial 144 Residential Units
Site Plan Review
4316 Muscatel Ave. Residential Project
• 10 Condominiums Pre-Application Submitted
2605-2607 San Gabriel
Blvd.
Conditional Use Permit
• Proposal to operate a
pre-school day care
facility.
Discretionary Applications Submitted
2.10 OTHER PUBLIC AGENCIES WHOSE APPROVAL IS REQUIRED
Entitlement of the Project will require approval of this Initial Study/Mitigated Negative
Declaration by the City of Rosemead City Council, acting as lead agency. The Project
also requires a series of entitlements that will require review and approval by the City
of Rosemead Planning Commission and City Council. These entitlements include:
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 22
General Plan Land Use Map Amendment, Zoning Code and Map Amendment, Planned
Development Plan Review, and Tentative Tract Map.
No approval from other public agencies will be required.
2.11 HAVE CALIFORNIA NATIVE AMERICAN TRIBES TRADITIONALLY
AND CULTURALLY AFFILIATED WITH THE PROJECT AREA
REQUESTED CONSULTATION PURSUANT TO PUBLIC RESOURCES
CODE SECTION 21080.3.1? If so, has Consultation Begun?
Yes. In correspondence dated February 5, 2020, the Native American Heritage
Commission (NAHC) provided the results of a Sacred Lands File check which was
positive for potential Native American resources. (Reference Appendix A.) The NAHC
advises consultation with the following tribes: Gabrieleno/Tongva San Gabriel Band
of Mission Indians, the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation, Gabrielino
/Tongva Nation, Gabrielino Tongva Indians of California Tribal Council, Gabrielino-
Tongva Tribe.
On February 12, 2020, letters were sent to representatives of each of the NAHC listed
tribes inviting each to request formal consultation (attached in Appendix B). This
consultation process was completed as of April 29, 2020. The consultation process
and potential Project impacts to Tribal Resources are discussed in Section 18 of this
Initial Study.
NOTE: Conducting consultation early in the CEQA process allows tribal governments, lead
agencies, and project proponents to discuss the level of environmental review, identify and
address potential adverse impacts to tribal cultural resources, and reduce the potential for
delay and conflict in the environmental review process. (See Public Resources Code section
21080.3.2.) Information may also be available from the California Native American Heritage
Commission’s Sacred Lands File per Public Resources Code section 5097.96 and the California
Historical Resources Information System administered by the California Office of Historic
Preservation. Please also note that Public Resources Code section 21082.3(c) contains
provisions specific to confidentiality.
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 23
SECTION 3.0 – 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 Agriculture and Forestry Resources Air Quality
Biological Resources Cultural Resources Energy
Geology/ Soils Greenhouse Gas Hazards & Hazardous
Materials
Hydrology/Water Quality Land Use/ Planning Mineral Resources
Noise Population/ Housing Public Services
Recreation Transportation Tribal Cultural Resources
Utilities/Service Systems Wildfire Mandatory Findings of
Significance
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 24
SECTION 4.0 – DETERMINATION: (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE LEAD
AGENCY)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed Project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed Project could have a significant effect on the environment, there
will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the Project have been made by or agreed to by the Project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that the proposed Project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed Project MAY have a “potentially significant impact” or “potentially
significant unless mitigated” impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been
adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has
been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached
sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that
remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed Project could have a significant effect on the environment,
because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or
mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or
mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.
Signature Date
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 25
SECTION 5.0 – 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 where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect
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 measures
from “Earlier Analyses,” as described in (5) below, may be cross-referenced).
5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or
other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR
or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief
discussion should identify the following:
a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for
review.
b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above
checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier
document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether
such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the
earlier analysis.
c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are “Less than Significant with
Mitigation Measures Incorporated,” describe the mitigation measures
which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the
extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project.
6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to
information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 26
ordinances). Reference to a previously prepares or outside document should,
where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the
statement is substantiated.
7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other
sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion.
8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different
formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from
this checklist that are relevant to a project’s environmental effects in whatever
format is selected.
9) The explanation of each issue should identify:
a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each
question; and
b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less
than significance.
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 27
SECTION 6.0 – ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
The following section the environmental topics contained in the Initial Study,
Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. For each environmental topic, the thresholds of
significance are presented and the finding relative to each threshold is checked. An
analysis supporting each finding is then presented along with an assessment of
cumulative impacts and applicable mitigation requirements.
6.1 AESTHETICS
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
No
Impact
AESTHETICS. Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section 21099, would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on
a scenic vista?
X
b) Substantially damage scenic
resources, including but not limited
to, trees, rock outcroppings, and
historic buildings within a state scenic
highway?
X
c) In nonurbanized areas, substantially
degrade the existing visual character
or quality of public views of the site
and its surroundings? (Public views
are those that are experienced from
publicly accessible vantage point). If
the project is in an urbanized area,
would the project conflict with
applicable zoning and other
regulations governing scenic quality?
X
d) Create a new source of substantial
light or glare which would adversely
affect day or nighttime views in the
area?
X
6.1.1 ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
a) Would the Project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
No Impact. The City of Rosemead General Plan (General Plan) does not identify
scenic vistas. Views of the San Gabriel Mountains from the Project site could be
considered scenic, but these views are not protected by the City and are generally
limited to looking north down road corridors. Development of the Project would
not alter views to mountains. The Project would be compatible with the existing
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 28
single-family residential uses in the surrounding neighborhood. Consequently, the
Project would not have an adverse effect on a scenic vista.
b) Would the Project substantially damage scenic resources, including but not
limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic
highway?
No Impact. The General Plan does not identify scenic resources, historic resources
or state scenic highways within the City. Chapter 17.96.04 of the Zoning Code
establishes policies to preserve oak trees. Included in the definition of “oak tree”
is a tree of the genus Quercus, including, but not limited to, Valley Oak (Quercus
lobata), California Live Oak (Quercus Agrifolia), Canyon Oak (Quercus
chrysolepis), Interior Live Oak (Quercus wislizenii), and Scrub Oak (Quercus
dumosa). Although there are a few scattered trees on the site, none of the trees
are native or oak tree of the genus Quercus.
Historical records indicate that the 3133 Willard Avenue residential structure was
built in 1928, and the 3141 Willard Avenue residential structure was built in
1948.2 As discussed in Section 6.5.a of this Initial Study, although the two
existing residential structures are 92 and 72 years, respectively, both are in
disrepair and neither are designated historic buildings. Consequently, the Project
would not damage scenic resources.
c) Would the Project substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of
the site and its surroundings?
No Impact. Figures 10 and 11, above, show the existing condition of the Project
site and two existing residential structures. One of the existing residential
structures is boarded up and the grounds of both existing residential structures
are generally unkept. As proposed, the Project would develop 31 residential
townhome units within an architecturally cohesive development, including
landscaping and amenities. The Project would be compatible with the existing
single-family residential uses in the surrounding neighborhood. The Project would
improve the visual character and quality of the site, and no significant adverse
impacts to the site or surroundings would occur.
d) Would the Project create a new source of substantial light or glare which would
adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
No Impact. Existing light sources in the vicinity of the Project site include exterior
lighting from surrounding uses. Vehicles on the adjacent street also have
nighttime lighting. The Project would create new exterior lighting associated with
the townhomes, interior private streets and Project entry. Project lighting would
be regulated by Chapter 17.88 (Lighting) of the Municipal Code which requires
exterior lighting to be adequately controlled and shielded to prevent glare and
**
2 Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment and Shallow Soil Sampling, Rosemead (Willard & Garvey), prepared by
Stantec Consulting Services on behalf, May 13, 2019 and contained as Appendix E.
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 29
undesirable illumination to adjacent properties or streets. Compliance with this
regulation would ensure that the new light sources created by the Project would
not create glare or adversely affect the surrounding uses. Consequently, the
Project would not create a new source of substantial light or glare which would
adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area.
6.1.2 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
The analysis determined that the proposed Project would not result in significant
adverse aesthetic impacts. The Project would improve the visual character of the site
and surrounding area and would be consistent with existing residential development
north and south of the site. Aesthetic impacts are generally site specific. None of
the cumulative projects listed in Table 2 are within the immediate the vicinity of the
Project site, and each of the projects will be subject to their own entitlement review.
Consequently, the Project would not result in significant adverse cumulative
aesthetics impacts.
6.1.3 MITIGATION MEASURES
The analysis determined that the proposed Project would not result in any significant
adverse impacts regarding aesthetics. Consequently, no mitigation is required.
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 30
6.2 AGRICULTURE AND FOREST SERVICES
AGRICULTURAL/FOREST 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. In determining whether
impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies
may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection
regarding the state’s inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project
and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided
in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
No
Impact
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique
Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide
Importance (Farmland), as shown on
the maps prepared pursuant to the
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring
Program of the California Resources
Agency, to non-agricultural use?
X
b) Conflict with existing zoning for
agricultural use, or a Williamson Act
contract?
X
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or
cause rezoning of, forest land (as
defined in Public Resources Code
Section 12220(g)) or timberland (as
defined in Public Resources Code
Section 4526)
X
d) Result in loss of forest land or
conversion of forest land to non-
forest use?
X
e) Involve other changes in the existing
environment which, due to their
location or nature, could result in
conversion of Farmland, to non-
agricultural use or conversion of
forest land to non-forest use?
X
6.2.1 ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
a) Would the Project convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of
Statewide Importance?
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 31
No Impact. Although the Project site was used for agricultural purposes, as an
orchard, from about 1928 until 1948, the City of Rosemead inclusive of the
Project site is developed with urban land uses. No active agricultural uses are
identified in the General Plan. The state of California Department of Conversation
classifies the Project site and its surrounding areas as “urban and built-up land”.3
Consequently, the Project would not convert farmland to a non-agricultural use.
b) Would the Project conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson
Act Contract?
No Impact. The Williamson Act (Cal. Govt. Code, §51200 et seq.) allows county
governments to enter into contracts with private landowners who agree to
restrict parcels of land to agricultural uses or uses compatible with agriculture
for at least ten years. In return, landowners receive property tax assessments
that are much lower than normal because they are based upon income derived
from farming and open space uses as opposed to full market value of the
property. There is no dedicated agriculture use currently within the City and no
agricultural zoning designation or Williamson Act contracts. Consequently, the
Project would not conflict with an agricultural use or Williamson Act contract.
c) Would the Project conflict with existing zoning for or cause rezoning of, forest
land?
No Impact. The City, inclusive of the Project site, is developed with urban land
uses. There are no forest, timberlands or forest zoning in the City. Consequently,
the Project would not conflict with zoning for forest land.
d) Would the Project result in the loss of forest land or the conversion of forest land
to a non-forest use?
No Impact. As discussed in Section 6.2.c of this Initial Study, above, the City,
inclusive of the Project site, is developed with urban land uses. There are no
forest, timberlands or forest zoning in the City. Consequently, the Project would
not result in the loss or conversion of forest land.
e) Would the Project involve other changes in the existing environment that, due
to their location or nature, may result in conversion of farmland to non-
agricultural use
No Impact. As discussed in Sections 7.2.a, b and c of this Initial Study, above,
the City, inclusive of the Project site, is developed with urban land uses. There
are no farmlands or forests in the City. Consequently, the Project would not
result in the loss or conversion of farmland or forest land.
**
3https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/ciff/; accessed February 23, 2020.
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 32
6.2.2 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
There are no agriculture nor forest resources within the City. Consequently,
development within the City would not cause impacts to agriculture or forest
resources; and the Project would not result in significant adverse cumulative
agriculture and or forest resource impacts.
6.2.3 MITIGATION MEASURES
The analysis indicated that the implementation of the proposed Project would not
result in any significant impacts on agriculture and or forest resources. As a result,
no mitigation is required.
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 33
6.3 AIR QUALITY
AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality
management district or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following
determinations. Would the project:
Potentially
Significant Impact
Less Than
Significant with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
No Impact
a) Conflict with or obstruct
implementation of the applicable air
quality plan?
X
b) 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?
X
c) Expose sensitive receptors to
substantial pollutant concentrations?
X
d) Result in other emissions (such as
those leading to odors)adversely
affecting a substantial number of
people?
X
6.3.1 ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Data presented in this Air Quality section is based on the “Willard & Garvey
Residential Development Air Quality & Greenhouse Impact Study, City of Rosemead”,
prepared by RK Engineering Group, Inc. (Air Quality Impact Study) and contained
as Appendix C to this Initial Study.
a) Would the Project conflict with or obstruct the implementation of the applicable
air quality plan?
Less Than Significant Impact. The City of Rosemead is within the South Coast
Air Basin (SCAB), which is bounded by the Pacific Ocean to the south and west
and mountains to the north and east. Air quality in the South Coast Air Basin is
managed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). The
SCAQMD and the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) are
the agencies responsible for preparing the Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP)
for the SCAB. The AQMP was designed to comply with State and federal
requirements, reduce the high level of pollutant emissions in the SCAB, and
ensure clean air for the region through various control measures.
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 34
The regional AQMP is updated periodically with the most recent SCAB AQMP
adopted in March 2017 and referred to as the 2016 AQMP. According to the
2016 AQMP, the most significant air quality challenge in the SCAB is to reduce
nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions sufficiently to meet the upcoming ozone
standard deadlines. The 2016 AQMP suggests that total SCAB emissions of NOx
must be reduced to approximately 141 tons per day (tpd) in 2023 and 96 tpd
in 2031 to attain the 8-hour ozone standards. This represents an additional 45
percent reduction in NOx in 2023, and an additional 55 percent NOx reduction
beyond 2031 levels.
In compliance with the 2016 AQMP, the SCAQMD establishes air quality
emissions thresholds for criteria air pollutants for the purposes of determining
whether a project may have a significant effect on the environment per Section
15002(g) of the Guidelines for implementing CEQA. By complying with the
thresholds of significance, the Project would be in compliance with the SCAQMD
AQMP as well as federal and state air quality standards.
Table 3 lists the air quality significance thresholds for the six criteria air
pollutants, including NOx, that are relevant to the Project and analyzed in the
Air Quality Impact Study.
Table 3: SCAQMD Regional Significance Thresholds
Pollutant 1 Construction
(lbs/day) 2
Operation
(lbs/day)
NOX 100 55
VOC 75 55
PM10 150 150
PM2.5 55 55
SOX 150 150
CO 550 550
1 ROG (reactive organic gases); NOx (oxides of nitrogen); CO (carbon monoxide);
PM-10 (respirable 10-micron diameter particulate matter); PM-2.5 (respirable 2.5-
micron diameter particulate matter; SOx (oxides of sulfur).
2 pounds (lbs)/day
As discussed in Section 6.3.b, below, neither the construction nor the operation
would exceed NOx thresholds set by the 2016 AQMP or any of the other air
pollutant thresholds set by the SCAQMD and listed above in Table 3.
Consequently, the Project is consistent with the goals of 2016 AQMP and its
potential impacts are less than significant.
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 35
b) Would the Project 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
Less Than Significant Impact. A violation of an air quality standard could occur
over the short-term during construction, or over the long-term during its
subsequent operation. Each is addressed below.
Construction Impacts: Project construction raises localized ambient pollutant
concentrations. Construction air quality impacts are considered significant if
they exceed any of the construction thresholds listed in Table 3.
During construction air quality impacts may occur during demolition, site
preparation, and construction activities associated with the project. Major
sources of emissions during construction include exhaust emissions, fugitive
dust generated as a result of soil and material disturbance during site
preparation, and grading activities, and painting of the structures.
Table 4 presents the calculation of daily emissions projected for site
construction. The calculations presented in the Table are the results of the
CalEEMod Model which applies typical construction equipment, labor, phasing
and materials to the project, based on its size, location and proposed timing.
The CalEEMod Model is not intended as an exact accounting of what equipment
will ultimately be used and what emissions are produced by a project. Rather,
the model represents a “yard stick” by which projects may be compared on a
one-to-one basis. The methodology applied by the CalEEMod Model are based
on studies performed by the SCAQMD for construction projects in the southern
California. The SCAQMD recommends use of the CalEEMod Model for typical
construction projects.
To assess air quality construction impacts for the Project, the Air Quality Impact
Study inputted the following assumptions into the CalEEMod Model: (1)
Construction of the Project is assumed to begin in year 2021 and last
approximately 12 months; (2) Approximately 1,470 square feet of buildings,
site preparation, grading, building construction, paving, and architectural
coating will be removed from the site during demolition; (3) Grading will require
soil import of approximately 1,000 cubic yard of fill materials; (5) Construction
phases are not expected to overlap (Reference Appendix C).
Construction impacts are estimated by construction phase: demolition, site
preparation, grading, building construction, paving and architectural coating. As
shown in Table 4, all construction related emissions are within their respective
threshold values and the impact is less than significant.
Table 4: Comparison of Projected Construction Emissions and Daily Criteria
Values (Pounds/Day)
Activity VOC NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
Demolition 2.06 19.83 14.99 0.03 1.22 1.02
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 36
Table 4: Comparison of Projected Construction Emissions and Daily Criteria
Values (Pounds/Day)
Site Preparation 1.59 17.45 7.88 0.02 3.07 1.86
Grading 1.59 22.84 8.71 0.04 3.19 1.75
Building
Construction
1.93 14.00 13.86 0.03 0.95 0.73
Paving 0.84 7.78 9.38 0.01 0.56 0.42
Architectural
Coating
19.64 1.54 1.98 0.00 0.14 0.11
Maximum 20.47 22.84 13.86 0.04 3.19 1.86
SCAQMD
Threshold
75 100 550 150 150 55
Exceeds
Threshold (?)
No No No No No No
Operational Impacts: The major source of long-term air quality impacts is
that associated with the emissions produced from project-generated vehicle
trips. Stationary sources add only minimally to these values.
Mobile Source Emissions: To assess the traffic impacts associated with the
Project, a traffic impact study was prepared (“Willard & Garvey Residential
Development Traffic Study & On-Street Parking Evaluation, City of Rosemead”,
prepared by RK Engineering Group, Inc. (Traffic Impact Study) and contained
as Appendix F to this Initial Study). According to the Traffic Impact Study, the
Project is estimated to generate 169 average daily vehicle trips (ADT) during
the weekday. Based on CalEEMod estimates, the Project is estimated to
generate 152 ADT on Saturday and 127 ADT on Sunday.
Stationary Source Emissions: In addition to vehicle trips, the future Project
occupants would produce emissions from on-site sources including the
combustion of natural gas for space and water heating and the use other heating
sources (e.g., hearths). Additionally, the structures would be maintained and
this requires repainting over time, thus resulting in the release of additional
emissions. Also, the use of consumer aerosol products, such as cleaners, is
associated with the Project and these release emissions. Finally, the landscape
would require maintenance and this equipment produces combustion emissions.
The resultant emissions are projected by the Air Quality Impact Study CalEEMod
computer model and included in Table 5. As discussed above, the CalEEMod
Model methodology is based on studies performed by the SCAQMD for typical
projects in the southern California and represents a “yard stick” by which
projects may be compared on a one-to-one basis. As shown in Table 5, all
operational related emissions are within their respective threshold values and
the impact is less than significant.
In accordance with SCAQMD methodology, projects that do not exceed or can
be mitigated to less than the daily threshold values do not add significantly to a
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 37
cumulative impact. Neither the construction nor the operation of the Project
would exceed the recommended SCAQMD threshold levels and this impact is
less than significant.
Table 5: Comparison of Projected Daily Operational Emissions and Daily
Criteria Values (Pounds/day)1
Activity VOC NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
Mobile Sources 0.30 1.49 4.14 0.02 1.24 0.34
Energy
Sources
0.01 0.10 0.04 0.00 0.01 0.01
Area Sources 0.80 0.47 2.75 0.00 0.05 0.05
Total 1.11 2.06 6.93 0.02 1.30 0.40
SCAQMD
Threshold 55 55 550 150 150 55
Exceeds
Threshold (?) No No No No No No
1 Maximum daily emissions during summer or winter; includes both on-site and off-site project emissions.
c) Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. Project construction
and operation have the potential to raise localized ambient pollutant
concentrations. This could present a significant impact to sensitive receptors if
these concentrations were to exceed the State or federal ambient air quality
standards at receptor locations. Sensitive receptors adjacent to the Project site
include Willard Elementary School located directly east of the site, and residential
to the north and south.
Localized Significance Thresholds: SCAQMD establishes localized significance
thresholds (LSTs) based on the ambient concentrations of four applicable air
pollutants for source receptor area (SRA) 8 – West San Gabriel Valley. The
nearest existing sensitive receptors are the single family houses immediately
adjacent to the site and the elementary school located about 30 feet away on the
east side of Willard Avenue. Pollutants with the greatest potential to impact
adjacent sensitive receptors come from diesel fuel operated trucks and
equipment, and particulate dust.
To measure LSTs, the Air Quality Study utilized SCAQMD’s significance tables
which measures the approximate amount of pollutants that reach nearby
properties. These calculated LST thresholds are presented in Table 6 for both
construction and operational emissions. As shown in the Table, emissions would
be below levels of significance. However, because of the close proximity to
sensitive receptors, including children at Willard Elementary School, the Air
Quality Study recommends several standard dust control measures to be applied
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 38
during Project construction. These measures have been added to the Project as
Mitigation Measures AQ-1 and AQ-2. With inclusion of this measure, Project
impacts to sensitive receptors would be less than significant.
Table 6: Comparison of Projected Construction and Operational
Emissions to SCAQMD Localized Significance Thresholds1 (LST)
(Pounds/day)
Pollutant
NOx CO PM10 PM2.5
Project Construction Maximum
Emissions
17.42 12.90 2.98 1.83
LST Construction Thresholds 98.0 812.0 6.0 4.0
Exceeds LST Construction
Thresholds? No No No No
Project Operation Emissions 0.65 3.00 0.12 0.07
LST Operational Thresholds 114.0 861.0 2.0 1.0
Exceeds LST Operational
Thresholds? No No No No
Toxic Air Contaminants: Other potential impacts that could affect sensitive
receptors are Toxic Air Contaminants (TACs) is defined as air pollutants that may
cause or contribute to an increase in mortality or serious illness, or which may
pose a hazard to human health, and for which there is no concentration that does
not present some risk. The primary source of TACs from non-industrial land use
development projects would include diesel particulate matter (DPM) generated
from diesel exhaust emissions. The Project would consist of residential uses. This
type of project does not include major sources of toxic air contaminants (TAC)
emissions that would result in significant exposure of sensitive receptors to
substantial pollutant concentrations. Therefore, the Project TAC impact is
considered less than significant.
CO Hot Spot Emissions: A CO hot spot is a localized concentration of carbon
monoxide (CO) that is above the state one-hour standard of 20 ppm or the eight-
hour standard of 9 ppm. At the time of the publishing of the 1993 CEQA Air
Quality Handbook, the SCAB was designated nonattainment, and projects were
required to perform hot spot analyses to ensure they did not exacerbate an
existing problem. Since this time, the SCAB has achieved attainment status and
the potential for hot spots caused by vehicular traffic congestion has been greatly
reduced. In fact, the SCAQMD AQMP found that peak CO concentrations were
primarily the result of unusual meteorological and topographical conditions, not
traffic congestion. Additionally, the 2003 SCAQMD AQMP found that, at four of
the busiest intersections in SCAB, there were no CO hot spots concentrations.
Furthermore, the Traffic Impact Study (Appendix F), found that all significant
Project traffic impacts would be mitigated to less than significant levels.
Therefore, the Project would not significantly increase traffic congestion in the
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 39
vicinity of the site that would lead to the formation of CO Hot Spots. The Project
impact to CO Hot Spots is less than significant.
d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a
substantial number of people?
Less Than Significant Impact. Project construction would involve the use of heavy
equipment creating exhaust pollutants from on-site earth movement and from
equipment bringing concrete and other building materials to the site. Odors
associated with this exhaust would be confined to the immediate vicinity of the
equipment itself. By the time such emissions reach any sensitive receptor sites
away from the Project site, they will be diluted to well below any level of air
quality concern. Additionally, some odor would be produced from the application
of asphalt, paints, and coatings. Any exposure to these common odors would be
of short-term duration and, while unpleasant and potentially adverse, are not
associated with a specific health hazard and are less than significant. Operational
odors could be produced from on-site cooking or barbeque typical of a residential
use. Because these odors are common in the environment, they would not
constitute a significant impact.4
6.3.2 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
As discussed above, in accordance with SCAQMD methodology, projects that do not
exceed or can be mitigated to less than the daily threshold values do not add
significantly to a cumulative impact. Neither the construction nor the operation of
the Project would exceed the recommended SCAQMD threshold levels and
consequently, the Project would not create significant cumulative impacts relative to
air quality.
6.3.3 MITIGATION MEASURES
The following mitigations are recommended to further reduce potential construction
air pollutant impacts to sensitive receptors.
Mitigation Measure AQ-1: Fugitive Dust Control.
Timing: Prior and During Construction.
Department Responsible: Community Development.
The project must follow the standard SCAQMD rules and requirements with
regards to fugitive dust control, which includes, but are not limited to the
following:
1. All active construction areas shall be watered two (2) times daily.
**
4 SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook, Figure 5-4, Land Uses Associated with Odor Complaints identifies potentially
significant odor impacts from such uses as agriculture (farming and livestock), a wastewater treatment plant, a food
processing plant, a chemical plant, a composting facility, a refinery, a landfill, or a dairy. No significant odor impacts
are identified from residential uses.
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 40
2. Speed on unpaved roads shall be reduced to less than 15 mph.
3. Any visible dirt deposition on any public roadway shall be swept or washed
at the site access points within 30 minutes.
4. Any on-site stockpiles of debris, dirt or other dusty material shall be covered
or watered twice daily.
5. All operations on any unpaved surface shall be suspended if winds exceed
15 mph.
6. Access points shall be washed or swept daily.
7. Construction sites shall be sandbagged for erosion control.
8. Apply nontoxic chemical soil stabilizers according to manufacturers’
specifications to all inactive construction areas (previously graded areas
inactive for 10 days or more).
9. Cover all trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials, and
maintain at least 2 feet of freeboard space in accordance with the
requirements of California Vehicle Code (CVC) section 23114.
10.Pave or gravel construction access roads at least 100 feet onto the site from
the main road and use gravel aprons at truck exits.
11.Replace the ground cover of disturbed areas as quickly possible.
12.A fugitive dust control plan should be prepared and submitted to SCAQMD
prior to the start of construction.
Mitigation Measure AQ-2: Construction Management Plan.
Timing: Prior and During Construction.
Department Responsible: Community Development and Public Works.
Prepare and implement a Construction Management Plan which will include
Best Available Control Measures for review and acceptance by the Community
Development and Public Works Department. The plan shall include strategies
for ensuring the following measures are implemented:
1. Require all construction equipment to have Tier 3 modified to Tier 4 or Tier
4 low emission “clean diesel” engines that include diesel oxidation catalysts
and diesel particulate filters that meet the latest CARB best available control
technology.
2. All construction vehicles shall be prohibited from excessive idling. Excessive
idling is defined as five (5) minutes or longer.
3. Minimize the simultaneous operation of multiple construction equipment
units.
4. The use of heavy construction equipment and earthmoving activity should
be suspended during Air Alerts when the Air Quality Index reaches the
“Unhealthy” level.
5. Establish an electricity supply to the construction site and use electric
powered equipment instead of diesel-powered equipment or generators,
where feasible.
6. Establish staging areas for the construction equipment that are as distant
as possible from adjacent sensitive receptors (residential land uses).
7. Use haul trucks with on-road engines instead of off-road engines for on-site
hauling.
8. Utilize zero VOC and low VOC paints and solvents, wherever possible.
9. Provide perimeter green screen construction fencing, with perimeter block
walls to be constructed with the first phase of production residential units.
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 41
6.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
No
Impact
a) Have a substantial adverse effect,
either directly or through habitat
modification, on any species
identified as candidate, sensitive or
special status species in local or
regional plans, policies or regulations,
or by the California Department of
Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and
Wildlife?
X
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on
any riparian habitat or other sensitive
natural community identified in local
or regional plans, policies or
regulations, or by the California
Department of Fish and Game or U.S.
Fish and Wildlife?
X
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on
federally protected wetlands as
defined by Boulevard 404 of the
Clean Water Act (including but not
limited to marsh, vernal pool, coastal,
etc.) through direct removal, filling
hydrological interruption, or other
means?
X
d) Interfere substantially with the
movement of any native resident or
migratory fish or wildlife species or
with established native resident or
migratory wildlife corridors, or
impede the use of native wildlife
nursery sites?
X
e) Conflict with any local policies or
ordinances protecting biological
resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
X
f) Conflict with the provisions of an
adopted Habitat Conservation Plan,
Natural Conservancy Conservation
X
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 42
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
No
Impact
Plan, or other approved local,
regional, or state habitat
conservation plan?
6.4.1 ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
a) Would the Project adversely impact either directly or through habitat
modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status
species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California
Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
No Impact. The Project site is disturbed and developed with residential structures.
Onsite vegetation consists of weeds, and scattered non-native shrubs and trees.
Surrounding areas are fully urbanized, including the adjacent SCE easement which
is occupied by a park and wholesale nursery. The General Plan does not identify
any biological resources within the City. There are no species identified as
endangered, candidate, sensitive, or special status species within the limits of
either the site or in the immediate area. Consequently, no significant impact would
occur to any sensitive species designated by the resources agencies as a result of
Project implementation.
b) Would the Project have a substantial impact on any riparian habitat or other
sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies,
regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service?
No Impact. As noted above, the Project site is disturbed and developed with
residential structures. Onsite vegetation consists of weeds, and scattered non-
native shrubs and trees. Surrounding areas are fully urbanized, including the
adjacent SCE easement which is occupied by a park and wholesale nursery. No
riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community are known to occur on the
site or surrounding area. Although some small rodents and mammals that adapt
to urban development may exist on the site, no native habitat or grasslands occur
on the site that would represent a significant source of foraging for raptors and
other sensitive or protected species. No significant biological resources are
identified in the General Plan. Consequently, Project implementation would not
result in significant adverse impacts to riparian or other sensitive natural
community
c) Would the Project have a substantial impact on federally protected wetlands as
defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to,
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 43
marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological
interruption, or other means?
No Impact. Wetlands are defined under the federal Clean Water Act as land that is
flooded or saturated by surface water or groundwater at a frequency and duration
sufficient to support, and that normally does support, a prevalence of vegetation
adapted to life in saturated soils. Wetlands include areas such as swamps, marshes,
streams, lakes, and bogs. According to the USFWS National Wetlands Mapper5,
there no wetlands within the vicinity of the Project site. Further as discussed above,
the adjacent channel is concreted sided. The Project site and its surrounding area
are fully development and do not contain riparian habitat or non-channelized water
courses. Consequently, the Project would not cause a substantial adverse effect on
federally protected wetlands.
d) Would the Project interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident
or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory
life corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
Less Than Significant. As discussed above, the Project site is surrounded by urban
land uses and does not contain identified native or sensitive species, riparian or
sensitive habitats or wetlands. There are a number of non-native trees on the
site, but because they are surrounded by urban uses, the trees are unlikely to
provide suitable habitat, including nesting habitat, for migratory birds under the
federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and under Section 3513 et. seq. of the
CDFW Code.6 The site and surroundings provide no evidence of burrows or rodent
populations to support burrowing owls. Consequently, Project impacts regarding
substantial interference with the movement of a species would be less than
significant.
e) Would the Project conflict with any local policies or ordinances, protecting
biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
No Impact. Existing vegetation on the site consists of weeds, and scattered
shrubs and trees. The General Plan does not identify the Project area as
supporting sensitive habitat and/or important biological resources. Oak trees are
protected by Chapter 17.96.04 of the Zoning Code, but no oak trees occur on
site. Consequently, the Project would not conflict with a policy that protects
biological resources such as a tree preservation policy.
f) Would the Project conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation
Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or
State habitat conservation plan?
**
5 http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/data/mapper.HTML; accessed February 23, 2020.
6 Migratory birds include all native birds in the United States, as listed in 50 CFR (Code of Federal Regulations) 10.13
(List of Migratory Birds).
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 44
No Impact. The City does not have any adopted Habitat Conservation Plans,
Natural Community Conservation Plans or other conservation plans within its
corporate boundaries. Consequently, the Project would not conflict with provisions
of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan or Natural Community Conservation Plan.
6.4.2 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
The impacts on biological resources are typically site specific. The proposed Project
would not involve any loss of protected habitat since no such habitat is found within
the Project site’s boundaries. As a result, no significant cumulative impacts on
biological resources will be associated with the proposed project’s implementation.
6.4.3 MITIGATION MEASURES
The Project would not have significant impacts relative to biological resources, and
no mitigation is required.
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 45
6.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES
CULTURAL AND RESOURCES. Would the project:
Potentially Significant
Impact
Less Than Significant with
Mitigation Incorporated
Less Than Significant
No
Impact
a) Cause a substantial adverse change
in the significance of a historical
resource as defined in § 15064.5?
X
b) Cause a substantial adverse change
in the significance of an
archaeological resource pursuant to §
15064.5?
X
c) Disturb any human remains including
those interred outside of formal
cemeteries?
X
6.5.1 ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
a) Would the Project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a
historical resource as defined in § 15064.5 of the CEQA?
No Impact. The CEQA Guidelines, Section 15064.5, define “historic resources” to
include the following:
(1) A resource listed in, or determined to be eligible by the State Historical
Resources Commission, for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources
(Pub. Res. Code § 5024.1, Title 14 CCR, Section 4850 et seq.).
(2) A resource included in a local register of historical resources, as defined in
section 5020.1(k) of the Public Resources Code or identified as significant in an
historical resource survey meeting the requirements section 5024.1(g) of the
Public Resources Code, shall be presumed to be historically or culturally
significant.7
(3) Any object, building, structure, site, area, place, record, or manuscript which
a lead agency determines to be historically significant or significant in the
architectural, engineering, scientific, economic, agricultural, educational, social,
political, military, or cultural annals of California may be considered to be an
historical resource, provided the lead agency’s determination is supported by
substantial evidence in light of the whole record. Generally, a resource shall be
considered by the lead agency to be “historically significant” if the resource meets
**
7 California Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k), Section 5024.1(g).
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 46
the criteria for listing on the California Register of Historical Resources (Pub. Res.
Code § 5024.1, Title 14 CCR, Section 4852) including the following:
(A) Is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the
broad patterns of California’s history and cultural heritage; (B) Is associated
with the lives of persons important in our past; (C) Embodies the distinctive
characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or
represents the work of an important creative individual, or possesses high
artistic values; or (D) Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information
important in prehistory or history.
The two existing residential structures on site were constructed between 1928 and
1948. However, although they are 92 and 72 years old, respectively, these
structures are not listed on any local, state or national register. Nor are the
structures associated with a significant event in American history, architecture,
archaeology, engineering, or culture, and have no identified historical value. The
General Plan does not identify any national, state or locally identified historic
resources in the City. Consequently, the Project would not result in an impact to
a historical resource.
b) Would the Project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an
archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines?
Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. This Section discusses
potential impacts to other “unique archaeological resources” which are defined by
§15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines as an archaeological artifact, object, or site
about which it can be clearly demonstrated that, without merely adding to the
current body of knowledge, there is a high probability that it meets any of the
following criteria:
(1) Contains information needed to answer important scientific research
questions and that there is a demonstrable public interest in that information.
(2) Has a special and particular quality such as being the oldest of its type or
the best available example of its type.
(3) Is directly associated with a scientifically recognized important prehistoric
or historic event or person.
To identify potential archaeological resources on the Project site and its vicinity, a
records search by the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC) was
conducted and the results are summarized in an April 17, 2020 letter from SCCIC,
contained in Appendix D of this Initial Study document. The SCCIC search included
a review of all recorded archaeological and built-environment resources as well as
a review of cultural resource reports on file. In addition, the California Points of
Historical Interest (SPHI), the California Historical Landmarks (SHL), the California
Register of Historical Resources (CAL REG), the National Register of Historic Places
(NRHP), and the California State Historic Properties Directory (HPD) listings were
reviewed for the Project site.
As summarized in the SCCIC letter, no archaeological studies have been conducted
in the Project area and as a result, no archaeological resources have been
identified. SCCIC notes that buried resources could potentially be unearthed
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 47
during Project grading activities, and therefore, customary caution and a halt-
work condition should be in place for all ground-disturbing activities. In the event
that any evidence of cultural resources is discovered, all work within the vicinity
of the find should stop until a qualified archaeological consultant can assess the
find and make recommendations. Mitigation Measure CUL-1, below, is added to
the Project to incorporate SCCIC’s recommendations and protect potential
archaeological resources. With inclusion of these measures, potential impacts
relative to archaeological resources would be reduced to less than significant
levels.
c) Would the Project disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of
formal cemeteries?
Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. As discussed in Section 6.5.b,
above, the Project site is not within the vicinity of identified archaeological
resources, has already been graded and developed, and does not include
substantial excavation. There are no cemeteries within Rosemead. However,
similar to many communities within the region, Native Americans historically
occupied the region. Should human remains be encountered during Project
grading and construction activities, pursuant to state of California Health and
Safety Code provisions (notably § 7050.5-7055), all construction activities must
cease, and the Los Angeles County Coroner, City Planning & Economic Division
and Sheriff’s Department shall be immediately contacted. Mitigation Measure CUL-
2, below, is added to the Project to reduce the potential impacts related to
encountering or disturbing human remains to less than significant levels.
6.5.2 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
Impacts to cultural resources are site specific. None of the cumulative projects listed
in Table 2 are within the immediate the vicinity of the Project site, and each of the
projects will be subject to their own entitlement review. Consequently, no significant
cumulative impacts relative to cultural resources would occur as a result of the
Project.
6.5.3 MITIGATION MEASURES
The following mitigation will be required to protect potential archaeological resources:
Mitigation Measure CUL-1: Unanticipated Discovery of Archaeological
Resources.
Timing: Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits.
Division Responsible: Planning.
If an archaeological resource is encountered during ground-disturbing
activities, work within 50 feet of the find must halt and a qualified archaeologist
meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards
for archaeology must be contacted immediately to evaluate the find. If the
discovery proves to be significant under CEQA, additional work such as data
recovery excavation may be warranted. The on-site monitoring shall end when
the project site excavation activities are completed, or sooner if the
archaeologist indicates that the site has a low potential for archeological
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 48
resources. During monitoring, the archaeologist shall complete monitoring logs
on a daily basis. The logs will provide descriptions of the daily activities,
including construction activities, locations, soil, and any cultural materials
identified. Following completion of monitoring, the archaeologist shall prepare
a summary memorandum of finds, their significance under CEQA and their
disposition. (*Note: The California Historical Resources Information System
contains a listing of qualified archaeologists at www.chrisinfo.org.)
Mitigation Measure CUL-2: Unanticipated Discovery of Human Remains.
Timing: Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits.
Division Responsible: Planning.
The discovery of human remains is always a possibility during ground-
disturbing activities. If human remains are found, the State of California Health
and Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that no further disturbance shall occur
until the county coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition
pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. In the event of an
unanticipated discovery of human remains, the county coroner must be
notified immediately. If the human remains are determined to be prehistoric,
the coroner will notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC),
which will determine and notify a most likely descendant (MLD). The MLD shall
complete the inspection of the site within 48 hours of notification and may
recommend scientific removal and nondestructive analysis of human remains
and items associated with Native American burials.
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 49
6.6 ENERGY
ENERGY. Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
No
Impact
a) Result in potentially significant
environmental impact due to
wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary
consumption of energy resources,
during project construction or
operation?
X
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or
local plan for renewable energy or
energy efficiency?
X
6.6.1 ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
a) Would the Project result in potentially significant environmental impact due to
wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during
project construction or operation?
No Impact. The Project is an infill development, replacing two existing residential
structures with 31 residential townhome units. Multifamily infill projects such as
this Project are by their nature energy efficient. High density housing provides
housing for more people on less land, and infill housing links to existing
infrastructure without the added energy cost of extending roads or water and
sewer lines.
In addition, as a new development, the Project would be required to comply with
the CBC, including Green Building Code requirements that require energy efficient
appliances, low water use plumbing and solar. The Project would incorporate
required energy efficient measures such as the following:
• Drip irrigation
• Low flow plumbing fixtures
• Energy efficient appliances and light fixtures
• Net Zero 2020 (enhanced Title 24 standards)
• Solar
Consequently, the Project would not result in the potentially significant wasteful
consumption of energy resources.
b) Would the Project conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable
energy or energy efficiency?
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 50
No Impact. The General Plan contains a number of policies that promote energy
efficiency. The energy related General Plan policies most applicable to the Project
include:
• Action 5.5 Ensure that new developments construct buildings that exceed
minimum statewide energy construction requirements beyond Title 24
energy requirements.
• Action 5.6 In new residential developments, promote and/or provide
incentives for the use of Energy- Star rated appliances.
• Action 5.8 Encourage new development to employ passive heating and
cooling design strategies to the extent feasible. Strategies to be considered
include orientation; natural ventilation, including cross-ventilation in
residential units; high insulation values, energy efficient windows with high
performance glass; light-colored or high-albedo (reflective) roofing and
exterior walls; window shading; and landscaping that provides shading
during appropriate seasons.
• Action 5.9 Encourage new developments to implement U.S. EPA Certified
WaterSense labeled or equivalent faucets and high-efficiency toilets in
residential uses, and implement water conserving shower heads to the
extent feasible.
As noted above, the Project would be incorporate CBC and Green Building Code
requirements that require energy efficient appliances, low water use plumbing and
solar. Consequently, the Project would not conflict with or obstruct a plan for
renewable energy or energy efficiency.
6.6.2 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
As an infill development built in accordance with the CBC, the Project would not have
adverse impacts relative to energy. Other development projects within the City
would be required to incorporate energy efficient measures consistent with the CBC
and City policies. As a result, no significant cumulative impacts relative to energy
will be associated with the proposed Project’s implementation.
6.6.3 MITIGATION MEASURES
The analysis indicated that the implementation of the proposed Project would not
result in any significant impacts relative to energy. As a result, no mitigation is
required.
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 51
6.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
No
Impact
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential
substantial adverse effects, including
the risk of loss, injury, or death
involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake
fault, as delineated on the most
recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake
Fault Zoning Map issued by the
State Geologist for the area or
based on other substantial
evidence of a known fault? Refer to
Division of Mines and Geology
Special Publication 42.
X
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? X
iii) Seismic-related ground failure,
including liquefaction?
X
iv) Landslides? X
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or
the loss of topsoil?
X
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?
X
d) Be located on expansive soil, as
defined in Table 18-1-B of the
Uniform Building Code (1994),
creating substantial risks to life or
property?
X
e) Have soils incapable of adequately
supporting the use of septic tanks or
alternative wastewater disposal
systems where sewers are not
available for the disposal of
wastewater?
X
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 52
GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
No
Impact
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or
unique geologic feature?
X
6.7.1 ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Data presented in this Geology and Soils section references information contained
in the “Geotechnical Due-Diligence Investigation and Percolation Study, Proposed
Multi-Family Residential Development, 3133, 3141 & 3149 Willard Avenue,
Rosemead, California”, (Geotechnical Investigation) prepared by Albus-Keefe &
Associates; and contained in Appendix H.
a) Would the Project cause exposure of people or structures to potential substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving rupture of a
known earthquake fault (as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based
on other substantial evidence of a known fault), ground-shaking, liquefaction, or
landslides?
(i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent
Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or
base on other substantial evidence of a known fault?
No Impact. The City of Rosemead is within the seismically active Southern
California region. Within a 25 mile radius, the General Plan Public Safety Element
identifies active faults that could affect Rosemead: Whittier, Puente Hills, Upper
Elysian Park, Raymond, Sierra Madre, Verdugo, San Jose, Hollywood, and
Clamshell-Sawpit faults. The only known active fault at the surface within the City
is the Alhambra Wash fault, which is located generally along the Alhambra Wash
and at its closest point is about one 0.75 mile southwest of the Project site. The
Alhambra Wash fault is within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. Enacted
by the state of California in December 1972, the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault
Zone Act (Act) is intended to prevent the construction of buildings used for human
occupancy on the surface trace of active faults. In accordance with the Act, before
a new project is permitted, all California cities and counties must require a
geologic investigation to demonstrate that proposed buildings will not be
constructed on active faults8. In addition to the Alhambra Wash Fault, the General
**
8 https://earthquake.usgs.gov/education/geologicmaps/apfaults.php; accessed June 26, 2020.
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 53
Plan Public Safety Element identifies other unnamed fault segments or suspected
faults of unknown age of last movement mapped across the City.
Potential seismic/earthquake hazards include surface fault rupture, ground
shaking, earthquake-induced liquefaction and landslides that includes nearby
faults. The Geotechnical Investigation found that no seismic faults are known to
occur on the Project site and the site does not lie within an Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zone.9 The nearest fault to the Project site identified by
geotechnical evaluation is the Workman Hill Fault located approximately 0.60
miles southwest. Because of no active faults are on or adjacent to the Project
site, there is no potential for a Project building to be constructed on a fault zone.
Consequently, Project impacts related to rupture of a known earthquake fault as
delineated on the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Map would not be significant.
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
Less Than Significant Impact. As discussed above, the site is situated in a
seismically active area and near several seismically active faults that could
generate ground shaking in Rosemead. As required by the CBC, additional
geotechnical and soils studies are required prior to Project grading. Project
construction must then comply with the requirements of the approved
geotechnical report and CBC. Compliance with these measures would mitigate
potential adverse impacts from strong seismic ground shaking. Consequently,
Project impacts related to rupture of a known earthquake fault would be less than
significant.
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction?
Less Than Significant Impact. Liquefaction can be defined as the loss of soil
strength or stiffness due to a buildup of pore-water pressure during a seismic
event and is associated primarily with relatively loose, saturated fine- to medium-
grained unconsolidated soils. Seismic ground shaking of relatively loose, granular
soils that are saturated or submerged can cause the soils to liquefy and
temporarily behave as a dense fluid. A relatively shallow groundwater table
(within approximately 50 feet below ground surface) or completely saturated soil
conditions that contribute to liquefaction.
Figure 5-5 of the General Plan Public Safety Element shows that most of the City,
including the Project site, are within areas susceptible to earthquake induced
liquefaction and landslides. The Geotechnical Investigation performed subsurface
exploratory borings to a depth of 51.5 feet, with no ground water found. The
**
9 Geotechnical Due-Diligence Investigation and Percolation Study, Proposed Multi-Family Residential Development,
3133, 3141 & 3149 Willard Avenue, Rosemead, California, prepared by Albus-Keefe & Associates, Inc., May 14, 2019;
and contained on Appendix H.
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 54
Geotechnical Investigation also performed a liquefaction analyses based on the
soil profile from onsite borings, which indicated that the site is not prone to
liquefaction. As discussed above, Project construction must comply with the
requirements of the approved geotechnical report and CBC. Compliance with
these measures would reduce potential adverse impacts from potential
liquefaction areas. Consequently, Project impacts related to seismic-related
ground failure including liquefaction are less than significant.
iv) Landslides?
Less Than Significant Impact. As discussed above, according to Figure 5-5 of the
General Plan Public Safety Element, the majority of the City including the Project
site is within areas susceptible to earthquake induced landslides. However, the
Project site and surrounding areas are generally flat, and as noted above,
groundwater levels are at least 51.5 feet below the existing ground surface.
Project construction must comply with the requirements of the approved
geotechnical report and CBC, and compliance with these measures would reduce
potential adverse impacts from landslides. Consequently, Project impacts related
to landslides are less than significant.
b) Would the Project cause substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?
No Impact. Topsoil is generally defined as the upper, outermost layer of soil,
usually the top 5–10 inches with a high concentration of organic matter and
microorganisms. The Project site is currently developed with two residential
structures, and was previously an orchard. The Geotechnical Investigation found
that soils on the site consists of artificial fill materials overlying alluvial deposits.
No topsoil are onsite are identified. The Project would remove the two existing
residential structures and grade to an expected depth of 6-8 feet, and cover the
site with buildings, paving and landscaping. Consequently, the potential Project
impacts relative to soil erosion or loss of topsoil would not be significant.
c) Would the Project cause location on a geologic unit or a 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?
Less Than Significant Impact. As discussed above, although groundwater levels
on the Project site are at least 51.5 feet below the existing ground surface. The
Geotechnical Investigation performed a liquefaction analyses based on the soil
profile from onsite borings, which indicated that the site is not prone to
liquefaction. As discussed above, Project construction must comply with the
requirements of the approved geotechnical report and CBC. Compliance with
these measures would reduce potential adverse impacts from potential unstable
soils or liquefaction areas. Consequently, Project impacts related to unstable
soils, including liquefaction or collapse liquefaction are less than significant.
d) Would the Project be located on expansive soil, creating substantial risks to life or
property?
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 55
Less Than Significant Impact. Expansive soils are generally defined as soils that
expand when water is added, and shrink when they dry out. This continuous
change in soil volume can cause residential structures built on this soil to move
unevenly and crack. The Geotechnical Investigation found that soils on the site
consists of artificial fill materials overlying alluvial deposits, and possess a Very
Low expansion potential. As part of subsequent geotechnical and soils studies
required for Project development, additional testing for soil expansion will be
conducted. These studies would ensure that any potential for expansive soils are
identified and if required the project geotechnical report would recommend
remediation. Consequently, Project impacts related to expansive soils are less
than significant.
e) Would the Project cause soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic
tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available
for the disposal of wastewater?
No Impact. An existing City sanitary sewer line runs along Willard Avenue
adjacent to the Project site. The Project proposes to connect to the existing sewer
line. The Project would connect to the existing public sewer line and not use septic
tanks or an alternative wastewater disposal system.
f) Would the Project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource
or site or unique geologic feature?
No Impact. The Project site is located within an urbanized area of Rosemead and
the site and surrounding area have been previously graded and developed. Any
near‐surface paleontological resources that may have existed at one time have
likely been disturbed and/or destroyed by prior development activities.
Development of the Project would require only surficial excavation to 6 to 8 feet
as needed to lay out utility lines and flatten pads. The site is also flat with no
identified unique geologic features. Consequently, the Project would not destroy a
unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature.
6.7.2 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
The potential cumulative impacts related to geology and soils are site specific.
Furthermore, the analysis presented above determined that the implementation of
the Project would not result in impacts to geology or soils. Consequently, no
significant cumulative impacts relative to geology or soils are expected to occur as a
result of the Project.
6.7.3 MITIGATION MEASURES
The Project would not have significant impacts relative to geology and soils, and no
mitigation is required.
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 56
6.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
No
Impact
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions,
either directly or indirectly, that may
have a significant impact on the
environment?
X
b) Conflict with any applicable plan,
policy or regulation of an agency
adopted for the purpose of reducing
the emissions of greenhouse gases?
X
6.8.1 ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Data presented in this Greenhouse Gas Emissions section is based on the “Willard &
Garvey Residential Development Air Quality & Greenhouse Impact Study, City of
Rosemead”, prepared by RK Engineering Group, Inc. (Air Quality Impact Study) and
contained as Appendix C to this Initial Study.
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions either directly or indirectly, that may have a
significant impact on the environment.
Less Than Significant Impact. Greenhouse gases (GHGs) comprise less than 0.1
percent of the total atmospheric composition, yet they play an essential role in
influencing climate. Greenhouse gases include naturally occurring compounds
such as carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), water vapor (H2O), and nitrous
oxide (N2O), while others are synthetic. Man-made GHGs include the
chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) and perfluorocarbons
(PFCs), as well as sulfur hexafluoride (SF6). Different GHGs have different effects
on the Earth's warming. GHGs differ from each other in their ability to absorb
energy (their "radiative efficiency") and how long they stay in the atmosphere,
also known as the "lifetime".
To provide guidance to local lead agencies on determining significance for
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in their CEQA documents, the SCAQMD has
convened a GHG CEQA Significance Threshold Working Group. The SCAQMD is in
the process of establishing a threshold for GHG emissions to determine a project’s
regional contribution toward global climate change impacts for California. On
December 5, 2008, SCAQMD adopted a threshold of 3,000 metric tons (Mtons)
of CO2e per year for residential and commercial projects for which it is the lead
agency under CEQA.
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 57
Construction: As presented in the Air Quality Impact Study, greenhouse gas
emissions are estimated for on-site and off-site construction activity using the
CalEEMod. Table 7 shows the construction greenhouse gas emissions, including
equipment and worker vehicle emissions for all phases of construction. Because
impacts from construction activities occur over a relatively short-term period of
time, they contribute a relatively small portion of the overall lifetime project GHG
emissions. By itself, the construction activities from this Project are less than
significant when compared to the thresholds recommended by SCAQMD.
However, SCAQMD recommends that construction emissions be amortized over
a 30-year project lifetime and added to the overall project operational emissions.
As demonstrated in the Table, total construction emissions would be 228.62
Mtons of CO2e or 7.62 Mtons averaged over 30 years. These estimated Project
construction GHG emissions are well within the 3,000 Mtons threshold and
therefore below a level of significance.
Table 7: Construction-Related Greenhouse Gas Emissions
(Mtons/year)
Activity
Emissions (MTons C02e)1
On-site Off-
site
Total
Demolition 21.21 1.55 22.76
Site Preparation 1.52 0.08 1.60
Grading 2.50 4.93 7.43
Building
Construction
182.36 29.18 211.54
Paving 5.93 0.64 6.57
Architectural
Coating
1.28 0.20 1.48
Total 193.59 35.03 228.62
Averaged over
30 years2
6.45 1.17 7.62
Threshold 3,000 Total
Notes:
1 MTCO2e = metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalents (includes carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and/or hydroflurocarbons).
2 The emissions are averaged over 30 years and added to the operational emissions, pursuant to
SCAQMD recommendations.
Site Operations: SCAQMD describes a five-tiered approach for determining GHG
operational significance thresholds:
Tier 1 - If a project is exempt from CEQA, project-level and cumulative GHG
emissions are less than significant.
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 58
Tier 2 - If the project complies with a GHG emissions reduction plan or
mitigation program that avoids or substantially reduces GHG emissions in the
project’s geographic area (i.e., city or county), project-level and cumulative
GHG emissions are less than significant.
For projects that are not exempt or where no qualifying GHG reduction plans
are directly applicable, SCAQMD requires an assessment based on the
following tiers.
Tier 3 - Consists of screening values that are intended to capture 90 percent
of the GHG emissions from projects. If a project’s emissions are under the
screening thresholds, then the project is less than significant. For residential
projects, SCAQMD sets a screening value threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e/year.
Tier 4 - Includes three performance standard compliance options to
demonstrate that a project is not significant for GHG emissions.
As presented in the Air Quality Impact Study, the Tier 3 threshold is applied for
this Project. To calculate greenhouse gas emissions for on-site and off-site
operational activity, the Air Quality Impact Study used the CalEEMod. During
Project operation, the majority of greenhouse gas emissions, and specifically CO2,
is due to vehicle travel and energy consumption. As shown in Table 8, total
operational emissions would be 220.55 Mtons of CO2e, below the 3,000 Mtons
threshold and therefore below a level of significance.
Table 8: Operational Greenhouse Gas Emissions (Mtons/year)
Emission Source Unmitigated
GHG Emissions (MTCO2e)1
Mobile Source 232.62
Energy Source 62.42
Area Source 6.90
Water 15.68
Waste 7.17
Construction (30 year average) 7.62
Total Annual Emissions 220.55
SCAQMD Tier 3 Screening Threshold2 3,000
Exceed Tier 3 Threshold? No
Notes:
1 MTCO2e = metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalents
2 Per South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Draft Guidance Document - Interim CEQA
Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Significance Threshold, October 2008
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 59
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of
reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases.
Less Than Significant Impact. In 2006, California passed the California Global
Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (Assembly Bill (AB) 32; California Health and
Safety Code Division 25.5, Sections 38500, et seq.), which requires the California
Air Resources Board (CARB) to design and implement emission limits, regulations,
and other measures, such that feasible and cost-effective statewide greenhouse
gas emissions are reduced to 1990 levels by 2020 (representing an approximate
25 percent reduction in emissions). Statewide strategies to reduce GHG emissions
include reduced building emission requirements specified in the 2013 Building
and Energy Efficiency Standards and California Green Building Standards Code.
Additionally, the California legislature passed Senate Bill (SB) 375 to connect
regional transportation planning to land use decisions made at a local level. SB
375 requires the metropolitan planning organizations to prepare a Sustainable
Communities Strategy (SCS) in their regional transportation plans to achieve the
per capita GHG reduction targets. For the SCAG region, the 2016 Regional
Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) was adopted
as a long-range visioning plan that balances future mobility and housing needs
with economic, environmental and public health goals. Infill development is
included as a strategy for achieving SB375 compliance. An update to the
RTP/SCS, currently proposed by SCAG through the Draft Connect SoCal Plan,
continues to include infill development as a strategy. Consequently, the Project
would not conflict with policies or regulations aimed at reducing greenhouse gas.
6.8.2 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
The analysis indicated that the implementation of the proposed Project would not
result in any significant impacts relative to greenhouse gas emissions. Consequently,
no significant cumulative impacts relative to no greenhouse gas mitigation is
expected to occur as a result of the Project.
6.8.3 MITIGATION MEASURES
The Project would not have significant impacts relative to greenhouse gas emissions,
and no mitigation is required.
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 60
6.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project:
Potentially Significant
Impact
Less Than Significant with
Mitigation Incorporated
Less Than Significant
No
Impact
a) Create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment through
the routine transport, use, or disposal
of hazardous materials?
X
b) Create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment through
reasonably foreseeable upset and
accident conditions involving the
release of hazardous materials into
the environment?
X
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle
hazardous or acutely hazardous
materials, substances, or waste
within one-quarter mile of an existing
or proposed school?
X
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?
X
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 or excessive noise for
people residing or working in the
Project area?
X
f) Impair implementation of or
physically interfere with an adopted
emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
X
g) Expose people or structures to a
significant risk of loss, injury or death
involving wildland fires?
X
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 61
Data presented in this Hazards and Hazardous Materials section references
information contained in the “Phase I Environmental Site Assessment and Shallow
Soil Sampling, Rosemead (Willard & Garvey)”, prepared by Stantec Consulting
Services Inc.”, (Phase I Assessment) prepared by Stantec Consulting Services Inc.;
and contained in Appendix E of this Initial Study.
a) Would the Project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment
through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. The Project is a proposed
residential use and would not create a significant hazard to public health.
However, existing and past uses on the Project site and adjacent uses may create
hazards. To assess these potential hazards, a Phase I Assessment was prepared
for the Project site.10 It identified historical uses of the Project site, which was
residential and walnut orchard starting from 1928, with the orchard cleared by
1938.
Historic agricultural use can be a potential concern due to the possible use of
pesticides and herbicides containing heavy metals. Accordingly, the Phase I
Assessment included collection of soil samples for chemical analysis to determine
if pesticides or heavy metals associated with herbicides were present at levels
that represent a Recognized Environmental Condition (REC) or that are of concern
to residential development.
The results of the analysis of the soil samples reported minor detections of the
following organochlorine pesticides at concentrations below their corresponding
United States Regional Screening Levels (US EPA RSLs) for residential sites:
Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane (4,4’-DDD), Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene
(4,4'-DDE), Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (4,4’-DDT), alpha-Chlordane,
Chlordane, and gamma-Chlordane. Additionally, the cumulative total
concentration for each soil sample location is below the California Hazardous
Waste Level. Therefore, the residual organochlorine pesticide concentrations are
not considered an environmental concern to the Property.
No other REC’s were identified on the Project site. However, given the age of the
two existing residential structures on the site, the Phase I Assessment finds there
is a potential for the structures to contain lead-based paint (LBP) and asbestos
containing materials (ACMs). The greatest ACMs related human health risks are
associated with friable asbestos which can become airborne and inhaled, and has
been associated with specific types of respiratory disease. Health issues
associated with LBP include health effects such as learning disabilities and
behavioral problems in children caused by low levels of exposure to the lead in
**
10 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment and Shallow Soil Sampling, Rosemead (Willard & Garvey), prepared by
Stantec Consulting Services Inc.”, (Phase I Assessment) prepared by Stantec Consulting Services Inc.; and contained
in Appendix E of this Initial Study.
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 62
the paint. The manufacturing and use of both ACMs and LBP in most building
products was curtailed during the late 1970s.
To ensure any ACMs or LBP on the two existing residential structures are
identified, and if present removed, the Phase I Assessment recommends surveys
prior to demolition. This recommendation is added to the Project as Mitigation
Measures HAZ-1 and HAZ-2, below. With incorporation of HAZ-1 and HAZ-2,
potential Project impacts regarding on-site hazardous materials would be reduced
to less than significant levels.
b) Would the Project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment
through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the
release of hazardous materials into the environment?
Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. As a residential development,
the Project is not associated with the transport or use of hazardous materials.
However, the two existing residential structures on the site may contain ACMs or
LBP. As discussed in Section 6.9.a, above, this potential hazard would be
mitigated through Mitigation Measures HAZ-1 and HAZ-2. With inclusion of these
measures, potential Project impacts regarding significant hazards from the
release of hazardous materials would be reduced to less than significant levels.
c) Would the Project emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely
hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing
or proposed school?
Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. The closest school to the
Project site is the Willard Elementary School located immediately across Willard
Avenue, west of the site. As discussed above, the proposed residential Project is
not associated with the transport or use of hazardous materials. No REC’s are
identified from past uses on the site. Potential health hazards associated with
ACMs and LBP are site specific and require continued exposure, making risks to
the nearby school unlikely. However, Mitigation Measures HAZ-1 and HAZ-2
would ensure any ACMs and LBP are identified and if found, removed. With
inclusion of these measures, Project impacts regarding emitting hazardous
emissions, materials, substances or waste within one-quarter mile of a school
would be reduced to less than significant levels.
d) Would the Project 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?
No Impact. The Phase I Assessment conducted for the Project site did not identify
the Project site as being listed as a hazardous materials site pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5. This finding is supported by the state of
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 63
California Department of Toxic Substances Envirostar website.11 Consequently,
the Project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment
pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5.
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 or excessive noise for people residing or working
in the Project area?
No Impact. The closest airport to the Project site is El Monte Airport, which is
approximately 4 miles northeast. The Project would not impact airport operations
at El Monte Airport or result in any safety hazards for project residents and
employees.
f) Would the Project impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted
emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Primary entry to the Project
site would be from Willard via a 26-foot private drive aisle that would connect at
a T-juncture to 26-foot fire lane and hammer head, and then a 20 and 24-foot
drive aisle. All of the Project’s 8 buildings would take vehicular access from the
drive aisles. The fire lane and hammer head are built to Fire Code standards and
would supply adequate emergency access for the Project.
However Project construction activities could temporarily impact street traffic
adjacent to the site due to roadway improvements and potential extension of
construction activities into the right-of-way. This could reduce the number of
lanes or temporarily close certain street segments. Any such impacts would be
limited to the construction period and would affect only adjacent streets or
intersections. With implementation of construction traffic plan, temporary street
closures would not affect emergency access in the vicinity of future
developments, and potential impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation
Measure HAZ-3 is added to require a construction traffic plan. Consequently, with
implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-3, the Project would not impair
implementation or interfere with the City’s emergency response or evacuation
plans.
g) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving
wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where
residences are intermixed with wildlands?
No Impact. The Project site is neither within nor adjacent to a designated
wildland area and would not, therefore, be exposed to the potential for wildland
fire. The County of Los Angeles Fire Department provides fire protection to the
**
11http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/mapfull.asp?global; accessed February 29, 2019.
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 64
City and would respond to fire and/or emergency situations occurring in the
project area, including the subject site. Consequently, the Project would not
expose people or structure to a significant risk from wildland fires.
6.9.2 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
The Project could disturb hazardous materials that were used in the construction of
the two existing residential structures onsite. Mitigation Measures HAZ-1 and HAZ-2
are added to the Project to reduce potential impacts related to hazardous materials
to less than significant levels. In addition, Mitigation Measure HAZ-3 is added to
require a construction traffic control plan to ensure emergency access routes are not
obstructed. As a result, no significant cumulative impacts relative to hazards or
hazardous materials will be associated with the proposed Project implementation.
6.9.3 MITIGATION MEASURES
The following measures will be required to mitigate potential Project impacts related
to hazards or hazardous materials to less than significant levels:
Mitigation Measure HAZ-1: Lead-Based Paint (LBP).
Timing: Prior to Issuance of Demolition Permits.
Department Responsible: Planning & Economic.
Prior to issuance of any demolition permit for the Project, the Applicant shall
demonstrate that the two existing residential structures onsite have been
surveyed for LBP, and that any identified LBP have been prior to activities with
the potential to disturb painted surfaces, in accordance with all applicable
laws.
Mitigation Measure HAZ-2: Asbestos Containing Materials (ACM).
Timing: Prior to Issuance of Demolition Permits.
Department Responsible: Planning & Economic.
Prior to issuance of any demolition permit for the Project, the Applicant shall
demonstrate that the two existing residential structures onsite have been
surveyed for ACM. The survey shall include sampling of suspect ACM which
shall be collected for laboratory analysis of asbestos in order to determine the
need for compliance with EPA National Emission Standard for Hazardous Air
Pollutants regulations. All ACM shall be removed from the site prior to
activities with the potential to disturb affected surfaces, in accordance with all
applicable laws.
Mitigation Measure HAZ-3: Traffic Control Plan.
Timing: Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits.
Department Responsible: Public Works.
Prior to any grading or construction activities, the Applicant shall be provide
for review and approval of the City Engineer a construction traffic control plan
to ensure emergency access routes are not obstructed.
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 65
6.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
No
Impact
a) Violate any water quality standards or
waste discharge requirements or
otherwise substantially degrade
surface or groundwater quality?
X
b) Substantially decrease groundwater
supplies or interfere substantially
with groundwater recharge such that
the project may impede sustainable
groundwater management of the
basin?
X
c) Substantially alter the existing
drainage pattern of the site or area,
including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river or through
the addition of impervious surfaces,
in a manner which would:
i) Result in a substantial erosion or
siltation on- or off-site;
X
ii) Substantially increase the rate or
amount of surface runoff in a
manner which would result in
flooding on- or offsite;
X
iii) Create or contribute runoff water
which would exceed the capacity of
existing or planned stormwater
drainage systems or provide
substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff; or
X
iv) Impede or redirect flood flows? X
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche
zones, risk release of pollutants due
to project inundation?
X
e) Conflict with or obstruct
implementation of a water quality
control plan or sustainable
groundwater management plan?
X
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 66
6.10.1 ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Data presented in this Hydrology and Water Quality section references information
contained in the “Preliminary Low Impact Development (LID) Report, Tentative Tract
No. 82875, 3133-3141 Willard, Rosemead, CA 91770”, prepared by Alan Short P.E.,
and contained in Appendix I of this Initial Study; and “Preliminary Hydrology Study
for Rosemead, Tentative Tract No. 82875, 3133-3141 Willard Avenue”, (Preliminary
Hydrology Study) prepared by Alan Short P.E., and contained in Appendix J of this
Initial Study.
a) Would the Project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge
requirements?
Less Than Significant Impact. In its current condition, the Project site is
approximately 9.2% impervious. Topography varies with elevations of
approximately 263 to 266 feet above mean sea level (MSL). Site drainage is via
sheet flow directed easterly toward Willard Avenue. In this existing condition,
there are no water quality measures to provide treatment for the storm water
runoff generated by this site. During Project construction, silt and other debris
could be generated that could mix with surface water runoff transmitting
pollutants into local storm drains, especially when rainfall occurs. During Project
operation, water runoff from impervious surfaces (buildings and paving) could
similarly send pollutants into local storm drains.
Storm water discharge from development projects is regulated by the federal
Water Pollution Control Act (also known as the Clean Water Act) and the National
Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). As required by NPDES, new
developments are required to include the development and implementation of a
Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for the construction phase of a
project, and a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) for the operation phase
of a project. In the City of Rosemead, SWPPPs and WQMPs are under the
jurisdiction of the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board and new
developments must comply with the County of Los Angeles National Pollution
Discharge Elimination Permit (Order No. R4-2012-0175-A01).
In compliance with the City NPDES requirements, the Project Applicant has
submitted the LID report which presents a plan to control storm water runoff
from Project post-construction operations. Post construction, the approximately
74.7% of site would be impervious. The LID report proposes to collect Project
runoff via a private drainage system consisting of PVC pipes and area drain inlets,
and then conveyed into an existing Los Angeles County storm drainpipe within
Willard Avenue. Before conveying the runoff into the County storm drain, the
water would be collected in onsite catch basins and treated by biofiltration, with
a Modular Wetlands System. The treated runoff would ultimately drain to the Rio
Hondo Channel at Whittier Narrows Dam and ultimately to the Los Angeles River.
All downstream channels are considered engineered channels with concrete side
slopes. With implementation of this collection and treatment system, the LID
report which serves as the Project preliminary WQMP, finds that there would be
no hydrologic conditions of concern from the site.
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 67
The Project would also be required to submit a SWPPP for City Engineer review
and approval prior to construction. The required preparation and implementation
of the SWPPP and WQMP would reduce potential Project violations of water
quality standards and waste discharge requirements to less than significant
levels.
b) Would the Project substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere
substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in
aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the
production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not
support existing land uses or planned used for which permits have been granted)?
No Impact. The LID report identifies groundwater depth at the Project site below
a depth of 51.5' below the existing ground surface. As discussed above, the LID
report finds that the Project proposed stormwater collection and treatment
system would adequately control the flow and quality of runoff, and would not
interfere with groundwater recharge. The Project would not directly use and
would not deplete groundwater supplies. Consequently, the Project would not
substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater
recharge.
c) Would the Project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or
area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through
the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
i) Result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site?
No Impact. The Project site resides within the Los Angeles River Watershed, which
covers an area of approximately 834 square miles. The watershed encompasses
and is shaped by the path of the Los Angeles River, which flows from its
headwaters in the mountains eastward to the northern corner of Griffith Park.
Here the channel turns southward through the Glendale Narrows before it flows
across the coastal plain and into San Pedro Bay near Long Beach. The Los Angeles
River has evolved from an uncontrolled, meandering river providing a valuable
source of water for early inhabitants to a major flood protection waterway.
The existing site condition drains easterly toward a public storm drain along
Willard Avenue. The storm drain then ties into the line at Garvey Avenue flowing
east. This line then discharges into the Rio Hondo Channel approximately 1.3
miles from the project site. The Rio Hondo Channel then flows southwest until it
reaches the Los Angeles River approximately 15 miles downstream. As discussed
above, the Project proposed stormwater collection and treatment system would
adequately control the flow and quality of runoff. Consequently, no Project
impacts would occur relative to substantial alteration of the existing drainage
pattern of the site or area or substantial erosion.
ii) Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which
would result in flooding on- or offsite?
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 68
No Impact. As discussed above, the Project proposed stormwater collection and
treatment system would adequately control the flow and quality of runoff.
Consequently, the Project would not increase the rate of surface runoff in a
manner that would result in any flooding.
iii) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing
or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional
sources of polluted runoff?
No Impact. As discussed above, the Project would retain the site flow and filter
the runoff water in compliance with the Project WQMP. Consequently, the Project
would not exceed capacity of existing stormwater drainage systems or add
polluted runoff.
iv) Impede or redirect flood flows?
No Impact. The Project would retain the existing easterly drainage flow of the
site. Post development, as discussed above, the Project would retain and filter
the drainage flow and then convey primary overflow to the existing County storm
drain. Consequently, the Project would not impede or redirect flood flows or
exceed capacity of existing stormwater drainage systems or add polluted runoff.
d) Would the Project in flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of
pollutants due to project inundation?
No Impact. According to the Preliminary Hydrology Study, the Project site is
within Flood Zone “X” which indicates an area of minimum flood hazard per the
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Map. The General Plan
Public Safety Element further notes that the City as a whole is in areas of minimal
flood risk.
A tsunami is a tidal wave or sea wave caused by seismic activity. Rosemead is
located inland approximately 20 miles from the Pacific Ocean and is not subject
to tsunamis. A seiche involves the oscillation of a body of water in an enclosed
basin, such as a reservoir, storage tank, or lake. According to the General Plan
Public Safety Element, the City is bordered by Rio Hondo Dam on its eastern and
southeastern borders and portions of Rosemead are within inundation areas for
Whittier Narrows Dam, Santa Fe Dam/Reservoir and Garvey Dam/Reservoir.
As discussed above, the Project proposed stormwater collection and treatment
system would adequately control the flow and quality of runoff. Consequently,
the Project would not result in risk of pollutant release during flood hazard,
tsunami or seiche.
e) Would the Project conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality
control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
No Impact. The LID report identifies groundwater depth at the Project site below
a depth of 51.5' below the existing ground surface. As discussed above, the LID
report finds that the Project proposed stormwater collection and treatment
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 69
system would adequately control the flow and quality of runoff, and would not
interfere with groundwater recharge. Consequently, the Project would not
conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control or groundwater
management plan.
6.10.2 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
The required preparation and implementation of the SWPPP and WQMP would reduce
potential Project impacts to stormwater runoff and water quality. As a result, no
significant cumulative impacts relative to hydrology and water quality will be
associated with the proposed project’s implementation.
6.10.3 MITIGATION MEASURES
The analysis indicated that the implementation of the proposed Project would not
result in any significant impacts on hydrology or water quality. As a result, no
mitigation is required.
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 70
6.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING
LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
No
Impact
a) Physically divide an established
community?
X
b) Cause a significant environmental
impact due to a conflict with any land
use plan, policy, or regulation
adopted for the purpose of avoiding
or mitigating an environmental
effect?
X
6.11.1 ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
a) Would the Project physically divide an established community?
No Impact. The Project site is currently developed with two existing residential
structures, one is boarded up and the other is unoccupied. The two existing
residential structures are located along the eastern portion of the site facing
Willard Avenue, and addressed as 3133 and 3141 Willard Avenue. The western
portion of the site contains no structures and is covered with weeds and scattered
vegetation. As shown in Figure 8 in Section 2.92 of this Initial Study, the Project
site is located immediately east of a Southern California Edison (SCE) easement
which contains transmission towers. Portions of the easement adjacent to the site
are developed with a wholesale nursery and Zapopan Park. Willard Elementary
School is located immediately east of the site across Willard Avenue. Single family
residential is located immediately north and south of the site. Townhome
residential developments are located about 200 feet south of the site on both the
west and east sides of Willard Avenue.
The Project would replace the two existing residential structures with 31
residential townhome units within an architecturally cohesive development,
including landscaping and amenities. This transition requires a change to the
General Plan Land Use Map designation of the property from Medium Density
Residential, which allows for a density of 0-12 dwelling units per acre, to High
Density Residential, which allows for a density of 0-30 dwelling units per acre.
The Applicant is also requesting a change to the Zoning Map from R-2 Light
Multiple Residential to PD Planned Development. Project density would be 25.8
dwelling units per acre.
As shown Figure 13, below, existing General Plan land use designations surrounding
the site are a mix of low density residential, medium density residential, high density
residential, mixed use, commercial and public facility. Changing the land use
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 71
designation of the Project site is consistent with the mixed residential densities of the
area. Consequently, the Project would not physically divide an established
community.
Figure 13. General Plan Land Use Map Existing Designations
of Project Site and Surrounding Areas
b) Would the Project cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with
any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental effect?
Less Than Significant Impact. The Project requires the following entitlements:
• General Plan Amendment 19-01
• Zone Change 19-01
• Planned Development Review 19-01
• Vesting Tentative Tract Map 82875.
General Plan Amendment / Zone Change. As discussed above, the Project
would replace the two existing residential structures with 31 residential townhome
units within an architecturally cohesive development, including landscaping and
amenities. This transition requires a change to the General Plan Land Use Map
designation of the property from Medium Density Residential, which allows for a
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 72
density of 0-12 dwelling units per acre, to High Density Residential, which allows
for a density of 0-30 dwelling units per acre. The Applicant is also requesting a
change to the Zoning Map from R-2 Light Multiple Residential to PD Planned
Development. Project density would be 25.8 dwelling units per acre.
Pursuant to Chapter 17.152.020 of the Zoning Code, an amendment to the
General Plan Land Use Map, Zoning Code and Zoning Map may be initiated by the
Planning Commission, City Council or by the property owner. To facilitate
development of the Project, the Applicant has submitted application to the City
for the required General Plan and Zoning map amendments. Approval of these
amendments will require the Planning Commission to recommend and the City
Council to make the following findings:
(1) The amendment is internally consistent with all other provisions of the
General Plan.
(2) The proposed amendment will not be detrimental to the public interest,
health, safety, convenience or welfare of the City.
(3) The affected site is physically suitable in terms of design, location,
operating characteristics, shape, size, topography, and the provision of
public and emergency vehicle access, and public services and utilities
and is served by highways and streets adequate in width and
improvement to carry the kind and quantity of traffic the proposed use
would likely generate, to ensure that the proposed use(s) and/or
development will not endanger, jeopardize, or otherwise constitute a
hazard to the property or improvements in the vicinity in which the
property is located.
The General Plan Land Use Element contains a number of goals and policies that
address the conversion of properties to multifamily. These goals and policies and
a brief analysis of the Project’s compliance are presented below:
Goal 1: Maintain stable and attractive single-family residential neighborhoods.
• The Project would replace two existing residential structures which are in a
deteriorating state with 31 residential townhome units within an
architecturally cohesive development. As discussed in Section 6.11.a of this
Initial Study, existing General Plan land use designations surrounding the
site are a mix of low density residential, medium density residential, high
density residential, mixed use, commercial and public facility. Changing the
land use designation of the Project site is consistent with the mixed
residential densities of the area.
Policy 1.1: Discourage the entitlement and construction of multiple-family
units in neighborhoods that are predominately single-family.
• The Project would increase the density of the site but would provide single-
family attached residential units consistent with the mixed residential
character of the area.
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 73
Policy 1.2: Provide guidelines and standards to ensure adequate buffering
and screening between lower density residential uses and adjacent higher
density residential or non-residential uses to mitigate potential land use
conflicts.
• As shown in Figure 3 in Section 2.8 of this Initial Study, the Project site is
8 sided. On its western side where it abuts Zapopan Park, Project buildings
would be setback 10 feet. On its northern sides, Project buildings would be
setback 8 feet from the existing single family properties. On its eastern
sides, Project buildings would be setback 12’5” where it is adjacent to an
existing single family property, and 20 feet at its front setback that is
adjacent to Willard Avenue. On its south side, Project buildings are setback
8 feet from existing single family properties; and on its southwest side,
which is the rear setback, Project buildings are setback a minimum of 20
feet from existing single family properties. The Project would provide
landscaping consisting of trees and shrubs at the periphery and within the
site, and decorative paving would be provided at the open space areas and
Project entry. Walls within the Project development would be constructed
to 6-feet high along each of the site’s boundaries, except along Willard
Avenue where the walls would not exceed 4-feet in height. The landscape
and walls would provide screening from adjacent properties.
Policy 5.1: Encourage revitalization of Garvey Avenue east of the SCE
easement by promoting mixed-use development that integrates commercial
uses with higher-density multiple-family residential uses.
• The Project site is located about 600 feet north of Garvey and is directly
east of the SCE easement, which is in the general area discussed in the
above policy. The Project would replace two existing residential structures
existing which are in a deteriorating condition with 31 residential townhome
units within an architecturally cohesive development and would be
consistent with the mixed character of the area that includes low density
residential, medium density residential, high density residential, mixed use,
commercial and public facility.
For Zoning Code changes and Zoning Map amendments, Chapter 17.152.060 of
the Code requires the Planning Commission to recommend and the City Council
to make the following findings:
(1) The proposed amendment is consistent with the General Plan and any
applicable specific plan; and
(2) The proposed amendment will not be detrimental to the public interest,
health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City.
(3) Additional finding for Zoning Code Amendments. The proposed
amendment is internally consistent with other applicable provisions of
this Zoning Code.
(4) The affected site is physically suitable in terms of design, location,
operating characteristics, shape, size, topography, and the provision of
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 74
public and emergency vehicle access, and public services and utilities
and is served by highways and streets adequate in width and
improvement to carry the kind and quantity of traffic the proposed use
would likely generate, to ensure that the proposed use(s) and/or
development will not endanger, jeopardize, or otherwise constitute a
hazard to the property or improvements in the vicinity in which the
property is located.
Information provided in this Initial Study supports the Project’s consistency with
the above findings, including:
• As discussed previously, the Project complies with applicable goals and
policies of the General Plan Land Use Element.
• This Initial Study evaluates whether the Project would be detrimental to the
public interest, health and safety, and finds that subject to the mitigation
measures recommended in this document, the Project would have a less
than significant impact on the surrounding environment.
• The Applicant is also requesting a change to the Zoning Map from R-2 Light
Multiple Residential to PD Planned Development. Standards for the PD
would be set by the Project precise development plan, and these standards
would function as the zoning for the site. Information presented in this
Initial Study supports that the Project would be consistent with provisions
of the Zoning Code.
• This Initial Study evaluates whether the Project would be endanger,
jeopardize, or otherwise constitute a hazard to the property or
improvements in the vicinity in which the property is located; and finds that
subject to the mitigation measures recommended in this document, the
Project would have a less than significant impact on the surrounding
environment.
Planned Development (PD). Pursuant to Chapter 17.24 of the City Zoning
Code, the P-D district is intended to provide for residential, commercial,
industrial, or institutional developments that are characterized by innovative use
and design concepts. This zone provides for a new development to offer
amenities, quality, design excellence and other similar benefits to the
community and not be inhibited by strict numerical development standards.
Chapter 17.24.040 of the Code outlines the requirements for approval of a PD.
These requirements, which require the Planning Commission to recommend and
the City Council to approve, are presented below:
(1) Location of each existing and location and dimensions of each proposed
structure in the site, the use or uses to be contained therein, the number
of stories, gross building and floor area, location of entrances and
loading points thereof.
(2) Location of proposed parks, playgrounds, school sites, public buildings
and other such uses within the zone.
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 75
(3) All streets, points of access, curb cuts, garage door locations, driving
lanes, parking areas, and in commercial developments, the ratio of off-
street parking to building floor area, loading area, public transportation
points, and illumination facilities for same.
(4) All pedestrian walks, malls and open areas for the use of occupants and
members of the public.
(5) Location, height and material of all walls and fences. Location and height
of all screen planting in front, side and rear yards.
(6) Types of surfacing, such as paving, turf or gravel, to be used at the
various locations.
(7) Landscaping and tree planting plan including type and location of plant
materials to be used and an irrigation plan, in accordance with the City's
Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance.
(8) Plans and elevations of structures indicating architectural, building
materials and construction standards.
(9) The gross land area of the site and of the footprints of the structures,
and land use of the area within three hundred (300) feet of the
perimeter of the site, including the location of structures and other
improvements.
(10) Such other information as may be required by the Planning &
Economic Department to assist in the consideration of
the development plan.
(11) A map or grading plan showing the proposed grading and topography of
the site.
(12) Such application shall be processed and heard in accordance with the
provisions of Article 5, Chapter 17.120 (Applications and Processing).
The Planning Commission and City Council may impose reasonable
conditions to the approval of the development plan.
Through the entitlement process, City Planning staff have reviewed the
proposed PD, recommended conditions of approval and found it in general
compliance with each of the above requirements.
Tentative Tract Map. Pursuant to Chapter 16.04 of the Municipal Code, a
Tentative Tract Map (TTM) is required to subdivide a property into 5 or more legal
parcels or condominium ownerships. Vesting TTM 82875 has been initiated by the
Project Applicant as required by the Municipal Code, which also outlines
requirements for TTMs which are subject to review and approval by the Planning
Commission. These requirements are presented below:
(1) The size, area, dimensions and record boundaries of the property to be
divided, including all contiguous property under one ownership, together
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 76
with a legal description of such total ownership as shown on the latest
equalized county assessment roll;
(2) Sufficient elevations and contours to determine the general slope of the
land and the high and low points thereof;
(3) The north point, scale and date of the map;
(4) The location and width of abutting streets and alleys, any easements on
or adjoining the property, and the purpose of such easements;
(5) The location of existing sewers, water, gas electric and telephone lines
on or adjoining the property;
(6) The existing use or uses of the property;
(7) The size, dimensions and construction, and relative location of existing
improvements thereon, (including without limitation, buildings,
structures, driveways, parking areas and trees. Buildings or other
improvements on adjacent property shall also be shown if such building
or improvements affect the division of the property. Each building shown
shall be identified by house number or other identifying feature,
including a notation of each building or improvement to be retained or
completely removed;
(8) The size, area, dimensions and boundaries of each proposed parcel;
(9) The proposed use or uses of each proposed parcel;
(10) Proposed dedications, easements and improvements, (including,
without limitation, buildings, structures, utilities, drainage facilities,
driveways and parking areas), showing the size, dimensions,
construction and location on each parcel;
(11) The names, addresses and telephone numbers of the property owners,
the person filing the map, and the registered civil engineer or licensed
surveyor who prepared the map;
(12) Such other information as may be determined by the Planning
Commission to be necessary to properly consider the proposed division.
Through the entitlement process, City Engineering and Planning staff have
reviewed the proposed Vesting Tentative Tract Map, recommended conditions
of approval and found it in general compliance with each of the above.
As presented in this Initial Study, the Project is consistent with the General Plan,
and in compliance with the findings required for a General Plan and Zoning map
amendment. The Project is in general compliance with requirements for the PD
and Vesting Tentative Map. Upon approval of the proposed Project entitlements,
Project conflicts with an applicable land use plan, policy or regulation would be
less than significant.
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 77
6.11.2 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
The Project would change the General Plan Land Use and zoning designations of the
site from medium to a high density. This change would facilitate the transition of an
underutilized and blighted site to a 31 residential unit townhome community. Other
nearby properties could initiate a similar change. However, each proposed General
Plan Land Use Map and Zoning Map amendment would be subject to its own review
including review under CEQA. Consequently, cumulative impacts relative to land use
and planning would be less than significant.
6.11.3 MITIGATION MEASURES
The analysis determined that the proposed Project would not result in any significant
adverse impacts regarding land use and planning. Consequently, no mitigation is
required.
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 78
6.12 MINERAL RESOURCES
MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
No
Impact
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?
X
b) Result in the loss of availability of a
locally important mineral resource
recovery site delineated on a local
general plan, specific plan or other
land use plan?
X
6.12.1 ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
a) Would the Project 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?
No Impact. The State Mining and Geology Board classify land in California on the
availability of mineral resources. There are four Mineral Resources Zone (MRZ)
designations for the classification of sand, gravel, and crushed rock resources.
According to Figure 4-2 of the General Plan Resource Management Element, the
Project site is within the MRZ-3. The MRZ-3 classification states the significance
of mineral deposits cannot be determined from the available data. As Rosemead
is completely urbanized and the State has not identified any significant
recoverable mineral resources, no mineral extraction activities are permitted
within the City limits. There are no mining activities on the site or the properties
surrounding and adjacent to the site. Consequently, Project impacts relative to
mineral resources will not be significant.
b) Would the Project result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral
resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, proposed project, or
other land use plan?
No Impact. As discussed above, there are no mineral resources, including locally
important mineral resources, in Rosemead. Consequently, the Project would not
result in the loss of a locally important mineral resource recovery site.
6.12.3 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
The analysis determined that the proposed Project would not result in any significant
adverse impacts to mineral resources. Consequently, no significant adverse
cumulative impacts to mineral resources would occur as a result of the project.
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 79
6.12.4 MITIGATION MEASURES
The analysis indicated that the implementation of the proposed Project would not
result in any significant impacts on mineral resources. As a result, no mitigation is
required.
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 80
6.13 NOISE
NOISE. Would the project result in:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
No
Impact
a) Generation of a substantial temporary
or permanent increase in ambient
noise levels in the vicinity of the
project in excess of standards
established in the local general plan
or noise ordinance, or applicable
standards of other agencies?
X
b) Generation of excessive groundborne
vibration or groundborne noise
levels?
X
c) For a project located within the
vicinity of a private airstrip or an
airport land use plan or, where such a
plan has not been adopted, within
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?
X
6.13.1 ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Data presented in this Noise section is based on the “Willard & Garvey Residential
Development Noise Impact Study, City of Rosemead”, prepared by RK Engineering
Group, Inc. (Noise Impact Study), and contained as Appendix G of this Initial Study.
a) Would the Project generate a substantial temporary or permanent increase in
ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established
in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other
agencies?
Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Noise Measurements: Since
the human ear is not equally sensitive to all sound frequencies within the entire
auditory spectrum, human response is factored into sound descriptions by
weighting sounds within the range of maximum human sensitivity more heavily
in a process called “A-weighting,” written as dB(A). Any further reference in this
discussion to decibels written as "dB" should be understood to be A-weighted.
Time variations in noise exposure are typically expressed in terms of a steady-
state energy level equal to the energy content of the time varying period (called
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 81
LEQ), or alternately, as a statistical description of the sound pressure level that
is exceeded over some fraction of a given observation period.
Typical human hearing can detect changes in sound levels of approximately 3
dBA under normal conditions. Changes of 1 to 3 dBA are detectable under quiet,
controlled conditions, and changes of less than 1 dBA are usually indiscernible.
A change of 5 dBA is discernable to most people in an exterior environment while
a change of 10 dBA is perceived as a doubling of the noise. Because people are
generally more sensitive to unwanted noise intrusion during the evening and at
night, state law requires that, for planning purposes, an artificial dB increment
be added to quiet time noise levels in a 24-hour noise descriptor called the Ldn
(day-night) or the Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL). The CNEL metric
has gradually replaced the Ldn factor, but the two descriptors are essentially
identical.
Noise Standards: A noise level of 65 dB is the level at which ambient noise
begins to interfere with one's ability to carry on a normal conversation at
reasonable separation without raising one's voice. A noise exposure of 65 dB
CNEL is typically recommended as the exterior noise land use compatibility
guideline for new residential dwellings in California. CNEL-based standards
generally apply to usable outdoor recreational space at backyards, patios or
balconies. Interior exposures of noise-sensitive uses are controlled through
adequate structural attenuation.
An interior CNEL of 45 dB is mandated by the State of California Noise Insulation
Standards (CCR, Title 24, Part 6, Section T25-28) for multiple family dwellings
and hotel and motel rooms. In 1988, the State Building Standards Commission
expanded that standard to include all habitable rooms in any residential use,
included single-family dwelling units. Since normal noise attenuation within
residential structures with closed windows is 25-30 dB, an exterior noise exposure
of 70-75 dB CNEL allows the interior standard to be met without any specialized
structural attenuation (dual paned windows, etc.), but with closed windows and
fresh air supply systems or air conditioning in order to maintain a comfortable
living environment.
Local Noise Standards: The City of Rosemead outlines their noise regulations
and standards within the Chapter 6 Noise of the General Plan and Chapter 8.36
Noise Control of the Municipal Code. Relevant goals and policies of the General
Plan Noise Element include:
GOAL 1: Effective incorporation of noise considerations into land use planning
decisions.
• Policy 1.1: Ensure compliance with standards for interior and exterior
noise established within the Noise Element and Zoning Code.
• Policy 1.2: Require new multiple-family residential development to comply
with State regulations if they are to be located in areas where ambient
noise levels exceed 60 dB.
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 82
• Policy 1.3: Periodically review and update the Existing Noise Contours Map
to ensure that any future noise increases not considered in the Noise
Element will be identified.
• Policy 1.4: Encourage acoustical design in new construction.
• Policy 1.5: Require sound walls to be constructed in designated mixed-
use districts where noise-sensitive land uses are located on adjacent
properties.
GOAL 3: Effective implementation of measures to control non-transportation
noise impacts.
• Policy 3.1: Enforce provisions of the Community Noise Ordinance to
mitigate noise conflicts.
• Policy 3.2: Require that potential sources of noise be considered when
approving new development to reduce the possibility of adverse effects.
• Policy 3.3: Evaluate noise generated by construction activities to ensure
compliance with the Community Noise Ordinance.
• Policy 3.4: Establish and maintain coordination among the City
departments involved in noise abatement.
The General Plan Noise Element also contains noise compatibility guidelines that
indicate the acceptability of noise exposure levels for different land uses. The
Noise Element indicates that projects should incorporate noise mitigation
measures if they will exceed normally acceptable levels as defined by the
guidelines.
Local noise standards are set by Chapter 8.36.060 of the Municipal Code, and are
shown in Table 9 for residential districts. Applicable noise standards must be met
at the nearest residential property line. As shown in Table 9, the residential
exterior noise standard is 60 dBA daytime and 45 dBA nighttime, and the interior
residential noise standard is 45 dBA anytime.
Table 9: City of Rosemead Residential Noise Standards
Time Period
Noise Standard1
Exterior
Daytime (7am - 10pm)
60 dBA
Nighttime (10pm – 7am)
45 dBA
Interior Anytime 45 dBA
In accordance with Section 8.36.030 of the Municipal Code, noise associated with
construction related activities is restricted between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and
7:00 a.m. on weekdays, including Saturday, or at any time on Sunday or a federal
holiday.
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 83
Baseline Noise: Major noise sources in the Project area are from vehicle traffic.
To determine existing noise levels in the Project area, the Noise Impact Study
conducted baseline noise 24-hour measurements on March 4 and 5, 2020 from two
meters at the locations shown in Figure 14. Meter 1 was located on the northeastern
area of the site adjacent to one of the two existing residential structures and Willard
Avenue. Meter 2 was located and the southcentral portion of the site adjacent to
existing residential properties. As shown in Table 10, below, the measurements
obtained from the two meters show a 24 hour CNEL of 55.1 dBA and 58.2 dBA,
respectively.
Figure 14. Noise Monitoring Locations
Table 10: Noise Level Measurements
Time Interval Leq (dBA) Meter 1 Leq (dBA) Meter 2
12:00 AM 45.6 49.6
1:00 AM 38.1 44.4
2:00 AM 45.0 50.4
3:00 AM 51.5 55.1
4:00 AM 50.8 55.0
5:00 AM 49.4 54.2
6:00 AM 50.4 52.6
7:00 AM 52.2 51.4
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 84
Table 10: Noise Level Measurements
Time Interval Leq (dBA) Meter 1 Leq (dBA) Meter 2
8:00 AM 51.9 51.0
9:00 AM 51.2 47.3
10:00 AM 52.1 52.0
11:00 AM 48.7 48.2
12:00 PM 49.6 45.0
1:00 PM 47.6 45.5
2:00 PM 50.3 50.4
3:00 PM 50.7 50.5
4:00 PM 51.7 50.1
5:00 PM 49.3 46.3
6:00 PM 47.9 49.8
7:00 PM 47.3 49.4
8:00 PM 45.5 44.6
9:00 PM 47.4 48.0
10:00 PM 45.7 46.8
11:00 PM 44.7 46.7
24-Hour CNEL 55.1 58.2
1 The Leq represents the equivalent sound level and is the numeric value of a constant
level that over the given period of time transmits the same amount of acoustic energy
as the actual time-varying sound level.
On-Site Impacts – Construction Noise: Temporary construction noise impacts
vary because the noise strength of construction equipment ranges widely as a
function of the equipment used and its activity level. Short-term construction
noise impacts tend to occur in discrete phases dominated by large, earth-moving
equipment sources for demolition and grading. During construction and paving,
equipment is generally less noisy. The closest existing sensitive uses to the
Project site are the single family residences immediately north and south of the
site.
In compliance with the City’s Municipal Code, it is assumed construction would
not occur during the noise-sensitive nighttime hours. However, because the
Project construction would be directly adjacent to existing residential uses, the
Noise Impact Study recommends a series of measures including:
• All construction equipment shall be equipped with mufflers and other
suitable noise attenuation devices (e.g., engine shields).
• Grading and construction contractors shall use quieter equipment as
opposed to noisier equipment (such as rubber-tired equipment rather than
track equipment), to the maximum extent feasible.
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 85
• If feasible, electric hook-ups shall be provided to avoid the use of
generators. If electric service is determined to be infeasible for the site,
only whisper-quiet generators shall be used (i.e., inverter generators
capable of providing variable load.
• Use electric air compressors and similar power tools rather than diesel
equipment, where feasible.
• Locate staging area, generators and stationary construction equipment as
far from the adjacent residential structures as feasible.
• Construction-related equipment, including heavy-duty equipment, motor
vehicles, and portable equipment, shall be turned off when not in use for
more than 5 minutes.
• Post a sign in a readily visible location at the project site that indicates the
dates and duration of construction activities, as well as provide a telephone
number where residents can enquire about the construction process and
register complaints to an assigned construction noise disturbance
coordinator.
These measures are incorporated into Mitigation Measures NOI-1, below. With
inclusion of these measures, construction noise impacts from the Project would
be reduced to less than significant levels.
On-Site Impacts – Operational Noise: Major noise sources from the Project will
be typical of residential uses including mechanical noise from stationary sources,
vehicular noise going to and from the dwellings and people talking and gathering
outside. The Project is proposing to construct a six (6) foot noise barrier wall along
the northern, southern and western property line of the site which is expected to
attenuate most of these noise studies. However, HVAC equipment for the Project’s
residential units will be generally located on the exterior ground floor area, and in
some instances, in relatively close proximity to existing adjacent residential
properties. The closest HVAC units are expected to be located approximately eight
(8) feet from the northern property line, approximately nine (9) feet from the
southern property line, approximately ten (10) feet from the eastern property line
and approximately twenty (20) feet from the western property line.
To assess the impact of Project HVAC units on adjacent residential properties, the
Noise Impact Study calculated expected increases in noise levels at the property
lines. The Noise Study found that noise generated by Project HVAC units would not
impact existing residential properties north and east of the site. For the existing
residential properties directly south of the site, the Project HVAC units would
increase nighttime ambient noise levels approximately 2.1 dBA to 14.5 dBA Leq
during the nighttime hours (10 p.m. to 7 a.m.). Typically, the human ear can
perceive the change in the noise level of 5 dB, and therefore the impact is
considered perceptible and more than significant.
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 86
To mitigate noise impacts associated with the Project HVAC units adjacent to the
southern property line, the Noise Impact Study recommends the following
measures:
The final building plans shall ensure that HVAC units are not located within an
area of the Project site that would contribute to a noise level exceedance at any
adjacent property line, per the City of Rosemead Municipal Code requirements.
To meet the City’s noise standards the following measures should be followed:
• The combined noise level of all units operating simultaneously shall not
exceed 60 dB(A) during daytime hours (7 a.m. to 10 p.m.) and 45 dB(A)
during nighttime hours (10 p.m. to 7 a.m.).
• HVAC units should be rated at 76 dB or less.
These measures are added to the Project as Mitigation Measure NOI-3. The Noise
Impact Study finds that with inclusion of these measures, Project operational noise
impacts would be less than significant.
b) Would the Project generate excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise
levels?
Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Vibration is most commonly
expressed in terms of the root mean square (RMS) velocity of a vibrating object.
RMS velocities are expressed in units of vibration decibels (VdB). Typically,
developed areas are continuously affected by vibration velocities of 50 VdB or
lower. These continuous vibrations are not noticeable to humans whose threshold
of perception is around 65 VdB. Outdoor sources that may produce perceptible
vibrations are usually caused by construction equipment and traffic on rough
roads, while smooth roads rarely produce perceptible ground-borne noise or
vibration. To counter the effects of ground-borne vibration, the Federal Transit
Administration (FTA) has published guidance relative to vibration impacts.
According to the FTA, buildings, even older fragile buildings, can be exposed to
ground-borne vibration levels of 0.3 inches per second without experiencing
structural damage.
During construction, noticeable vibration can occur during jackhammering or
blasting activities. Construction of the Project is not expected to require the use
of substantial these or other vibration inducing equipment or activities., such as
pile drivers or blasting. The main sources of vibration impacts during Project
construction would be the operation of equipment such as bulldozer activity
during site preparation, loading trucks during grading and excavation, and
vibratory rollers during paving.
The Noise Impact Study calculated potential Project construction vibration and
found that ground-borne vibration levels would not exceed 0.3 inches per second.
Although construction vibration would likely be perceptible, it would not impact
to adjacent existing structures. Consequently, Project construction vibration
impacts are less than significant.
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 87
c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use
plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within 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?
No Impact. The closest airport to the Project site is El Monte Airport, which is
approximately four miles northeast. The Project would not expose people to
excessive airport or airstrip noise levels.
6.13.2 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
Potential noise impacts associated with the Project construction and operation could
affect the future residents of the site. These impacts are site specific and not
cumulative in nature. Mitigation Measures NOI-1 and NOI-2 are added to the Project
to reduce potential noise impacts to Project residents and adjacent properties to less
than significant levels. Consequently, no cumulative impacts relative to noise would
occur from or to the Project.
6.13.3 MITIGATION MEASURES
The following mitigations will be required to ensure City noise land use compatibility
standards are met:
Mitigation Measure NOI-1: On-Site Impacts – Construction Noise.
Timing: During all Grading and Construction Activities.
Department Responsible: Community Development (Planning and
Building and Safety Divisions)
• All construction equipment shall be equipped with mufflers and other
suitable noise attenuation devices (e.g., engine shields).
• Grading and construction contractors shall use quieter equipment as
opposed to noisier equipment (such as rubber-tired equipment rather than
track equipment), to the maximum extent feasible.
• If feasible, electric hook-ups shall be provided to avoid the use of
generators. If electric service is determined to be infeasible for the site,
only whisper-quiet generators shall be used (i.e., inverter generators
capable of providing variable load.
• Use electric air compressors and similar power tools rather than diesel
equipment, where feasible.
• Locate staging area, generators and stationary construction equipment as
far from the adjacent residential structures as feasible.
• Construction-related equipment, including heavy-duty equipment, motor
vehicles, and portable equipment, shall be turned off when not in use for
more than 5 minutes.
• Post a sign in a readily visible location at the project site that indicates the
dates and duration of construction activities, as well as provide a telephone
number where residents can enquire about the construction process and
register complaints to an assigned construction noise disturbance
coordinator.
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 88
Mitigation Measure NOI-2: On-Site Impacts – Operational Noise.
Timing: Prior to Issuance of a Building Permit for a Residential
Structure.
Division Responsible: Planning.
The final building plans for the Project shall ensure that HVAC units are not
located within an area of the Project site that would contribute to a noise level
exceedance at any adjacent property line, per the City of Rosemead Municipal
Code requirements. To meet the City’s noise standards the following measures
should be followed:
• The combined noise level of all units operating simultaneously shall not
exceed 60 dB(A) during daytime hours (7 a.m. to 10 p.m.) and 45 dB(A)
during nighttime hours (10 p.m. to 7 a.m.).
• HVAC units should be rated at 76 dB or less.
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 89
6.14 POPULATION AND HOUSING
POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project:
Potentially Significant
Impact
Less Than Significant with
Mitigation Incorporated
Less Than Significant
No
Impact
a) Induce substantial population growth
in an area, either directly (for
example, by proposing new homes
and businesses) or indirectly (for
example, through extension of roads
or other infrastructure)?
X
b) Displace substantial numbers of
existing people or housing,
necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?
X
6.14.1 ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
a) Would the Project induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly
(for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example,
through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
Less Than Significant Impact. The Project would convert the General Plan Land
Use Map designation for the Project site from Medium to High Density
Residential, and the Zoning Map designation from R-2 Light Multiple Residential
to PD Planned Development. Assuming an average household size of 3.76
persons12, the Project would generate 117 additional persons in the City, which
represents a 0.2% increase over the City’s current 54,363 person population.
This increase is nominal. As discussed in Section 6.11.1, this change would
facilitate the transition of an underutilized and blighted site to a 31 residential
unit townhome community. Other nearby properties could initiate a similar
change. However, each proposed General Plan Land Use Map and Zoning Map
amendment would be subject to its own review including review under CEQA.
Consequently, Project impacts relative to inducement of substantial population
growth would be less than significant.
**
12 State of California, Department of Finance, E-5 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties and the State
— January 1, 2011-2018. Sacramento, California, May 2018.
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 90
b) Would the Project displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating
the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
No Impact. The Project site consists of two parcels totaling approximately 1.2
acres of land developed with two residential structures, one is boarded up and
the other is unoccupied. The Project would replace these two residential
structures with 31 residential townhome units, increasing the available housing
supply on the site. Consequently, the Project would not displace existing housing.
c) Would the Project displace substantial numbers of people?
No Impact. As discussed above, the two existing residential structures are
unoccupied. The Project would replace these two residential structures with 31
residential townhome units, increasing the available housing supply on the site.
Consequently, the Project would not displace people necessitating the
construction of replacement housing.
6.14.2 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
The Project would change the General Plan Land Use and zoning designations of the
site from medium to a high density. This change would facilitate the transition of an
underutilized and blighted site to a 31 residential unit townhome community. Other
nearby properties could initiate a similar change. However, each proposed General
Plan Land Use Map and Zoning Map amendment would be subject to its own review
including review under CEQA. Consequently, cumulative impacts relative to
population and housing would be less than significant.
6.14.3 MITIGATION MEASURES
The analysis indicated that the implementation of the proposed Project would not
result in any significant impacts on population and housing. As a result, no mitigation
is required.
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 91
6.15 PUBLIC SERVICES
PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
No
Impact
a) Result in substantial adverse physical
impacts associated with the provision
of new or physically altered
governmental facilities, need for new
or physically altered governmental
facilities, the construction of which
could cause significant environmental
impacts, in order to maintain
acceptable service ratios, response
times or other performance objectives
for any of the public services:
i) Fire protection? X
ii) Police protection? X
iii) Schools? X
iv) Parks? X
v) Other public facilities? X
6.15.1 ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
a) Fire Protection?
Less Than Significant Impact. Fire protection services are provided by the Los
Angeles County Fire Department. The Fire Department has two stations in
Rosemead:
• Station 4, located at 2644 N. San Gabriel Boulevard, about 0.8 miles
southwest of the Project site.
• Station 42, located at 9319 E. Valley Boulevard, about 2.0 miles
northeast of the Project site.
Replacing the two older existing residential structures on the site with 31
residential townhome units constructed in accordance with all applicable
California Building Codes (CBC) could reduce the need for fire protection
services at the site. As a result, the project is not expected to create increased
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 92
demands for fire protection services. Consequently, Project impacts relative to
new or physically altered fire protection facilities would be less than significant
levels.
b) Police Protection?
Less Than Significant Impact. Police protection services are provided by the Los
Angeles County Sheriff’s Department. The Temple City Sheriff’s Station located
at 8838 Las Tunas Drive serves the City of Rosemead, including the Project
site. The Project would replace two vacant residential structures, one which is
boarded up, with a new residential development constructed to the latest
Development and Building Codes, including installation of contemporary
fencing and exterior lighting. The Project would increase City population by
approximately 117 persons or 0.02% which is a nominal increase. The
transition of the site to the proposed residential use is not expected to create
increased demands for police services. Consequently, Project impacts relative
to new or physically altered police protection facilities would be less than
significant.
c) Schools?
Less Than Significant Impact. A number of school districts serve the City of
Rosemead13:
• El Monte Union High School District: The High School District has six
different high schools under their jurisdiction including the one public
high school in the City, Rosemead High School.
• Garvey School District: The Garvey School District serves four square-
mile portions of Monterey Park, San Gabriel, Rosemead, and Los Angeles
County unincorporated territory. It is the second oldest elementary
school district in Los Angeles County.
• Rosemead School District: The Rosemead School District educates more
than 2,900 Preschool, Transitional Kindergarten through Eighth-grade
students on a traditional calendar schedule. The Rosemead School
District serves students who reside in Rosemead and portions of El
Monte, San Gabriel, and Temple City. The District is currently comprised
of four elementary schools and one middle school. All students from the
middle school continue on to attend Rosemead High School which is a
part of the El Monte Union High School District.
The transition of the Project site from two vacant residential structures to 31
residential townhome units could put new demands on school services.
However, per California Government Code (CGC), the Project would be subject
to the payment of school impact fees (Section 53080, CGC). As authorized
under Section 17620(a) of the California Education Code (CEC) and Section
65995(b) of the CGC, local school districts are authorized to impose and collect
**
13 http://www.cityofrosemead.org/contacts/resources/local_resources/school_districts; accessed June 25, 2020.
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 93
school “impact fees” for all residential and non-residential development
activities that occur within their jurisdiction to off-set the additional costs
associated with the new students that result directly from the construction of
new residential townhome units. Payment of school impact fees constitutes full
mitigation for the school impacts associated with new residential development.
Consequently, Project impacts relative to new or physically altered school
facilities would be less than significant.
d) Parks?
Less Than Significant Impact. The City of Rosemead Parks and Recreation
Department is responsible for maintaining the parks and recreation facilities
within Rosemead. The City currently operates and maintains several parks,
aquatic facilities and other recreational facilities that serve the residents of
Rosemead. Pursuant to City of Rosemead Ordinance No. 949, new development
in the City is charged development impact fees for services and facilities,
including park facilities, necessary to accommodate growth. Payment of the
City development impact fees would off-set the Project’s incremental demand
for park facilities. Consequently, Project impacts relative to new or physically
altered park facilities would be reduced to less than significant levels.
e) Other Public Facilities?
Less Than Significant Impact. Other public facilities include library and general
municipal services. The Rosemead Library, located at 880 Valley Boulevard, is
part of the Los Angeles County Library System. The transition of the Project
site from two unoccupied residential structures to 31 residential townhome
units could put new demands on other the library and other public facilities. As
indicated previously, the Project would generate 117 additional residents.
However, the potential increase in residents in the City is not anticipated to
result in significant adverse impacts on the existing library services and facilities
and/or other public services provided by the City due to the availability and
accessibility of electronic library services, which reduce the need and demand
for library facilities. Similarly, other municipal services are typically funded
through user fees, property tax or sales tax revenues to which the future Project
residents would contribute. Consequently, Project impacts relative to new or
physically altered public facilities would be less than significant.
6.15.2 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
The analysis determined that the proposed Project would not result in any significant
adverse public services impacts, as increased demand would be offset by payment
of school, park and user fees and property and sales tax. Consequently, the Project
would not result in significant adverse cumulative impacts to public services.
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 94
6.15.3 MITIGATION MEASURES
The analysis indicated that the implementation of the proposed Project would not
result in any significant impacts on public services. As a result, no mitigation is
required.
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 95
6.16 RECREATION
RECREATION.
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
No
Impact
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?
X
b) Does the Project include recreational
facilities or require the construction
or expansion of recreational facilities
that might have an adverse physical
effect on the environment?
X
6.16.1 ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
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?
Less Than Significant Impact. The City of Rosemead Parks and Recreation
Department currently operates and maintains several parks, aquatic facilities and
other recreational facilities. The transition of the Project site to 31 residential
townhome units could put new demands on recreational services. However, the
Project is also proposing open space and recreational amenities within its
development. It would provide 2,556 square feet of private open space consisting
of patios and balconies, and 11,542 square feet of common open space consisting
of a central community open space with a shade structure, barbeque and seating
and secondary open space with fire pit and seating. Combined, 14,098 square feet
of open space would be provided, an average of 454.8 square feet of open space
per unit.
In addition, the Project would be required to pay the applicable development
impact fees to offset the project’s demand for parks and recreational facilities.
Payment of the development impact fees would off-set the Project’s incremental
demand for park and recreational facilities. Consequently, Project impacts relative
to substantial physical deterioration of parks or other recreational facilities would
be less than significant.
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 96
b) Does the Project include recreational facilities or require the construction or
expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on
the environment?
Less Than Significant Impact. As discussed previously, the Project includes
common open space areas totaling 11,542 square feet. The potential
environmental impacts of these common open space are evaluated within this
Initial Study and are not found to have a significant effect on the environment.
In addition, the Project would be required to pay development impact fees which
offset the Project’s demand for parks and recreational facilities. Consequently,
Project impacts relative to construction or expansion of recreational facilities which
might have an adverse physical effect on the environment would be less than
significant.
6.16.2 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
The analysis determined that the proposed Project would not result in any significant
adverse recreation impacts subject to payment of development impact fees.
Consequently, the Project would not result in significant adverse cumulative impacts
to recreation facilities or services.
6.16.3 MITIGATION MEASURES
The analysis indicated that the implementation of the proposed Project would not
result in any significant impacts on recreation. As a result, no mitigation is required.
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 97
6.17 TRANSPORTATION
TRANSPORTATION. Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
No
Impact
a) Conflict with a program, plan,
ordinance or policy addressing the
circulation system, including transit,
roadway, bicycle and pedestrian
facilities?
X
b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA
Guidelines § 15064.3,subdivision (b)? X
c) Substantially increase hazards due to
a geometric design feature (e.g.,
sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses
(e.g., farm equipment)?
X
d) Result in inadequate emergency
access? X
6.17.1 ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Data presented in this Transportation/Traffic section is based on the “Willard & Garvey
Residential Development Traffic Impact Study, City of Rosemead, California”, (Traffic
Impact Study) prepared by RK Engineering Group Inc., contained as Appendix F to
this Initial Study.
a) Would the Project conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the
circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities?
Less Than Significant Impact. Transit Facilities. Transit is available to the City
through four providers: Access Service, Dial-A-Ride, Rosemead Explorer and
Regional Transportation.14 Access Services is Los Angeles County's ADA
(Americans with Disabilities Act) mandated paratransit services to Rosemead and
other Los Angeles County communities. Access Paratransit operates seven days
a week, 24 hours of the day in most areas of the County. It is a shared ride
service that operates curb-to-curb and utilizes a fleet of small buses, mini-vans
and taxis. The City offers a Dial-A-Ride service for Rosemead residents who are
55 years or older or have disabilities. Dial-A-Ride customers can schedule a
**
14 http://www.cityofrosemead.org/cms/One.aspx?portalId=10035075&pageId=10972373; accessed July 17, 2020.
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 98
personalized service to travel anywhere within a 5-mile radius of the City of
Rosemead.
The Rosemead Explorer operates Monday through Friday from 5:00 a.m. to 8:00
p.m. The Rosemead Explorer offers affordable transportation throughout the City
with many stops along its fixed-route, including the Garvey Community Center,
Rosemead Community Recreation Center, and major retail centers and shopping
and dining areas.
Regional transit service is available through the Metropolitan Transportation
Authority (MTA) bus services, which has eight fixed route lines that serve
Rosemead.
With the variety of transit options in the City, there will be ample transit available
to future Project residents, and the Project would not conflict with circulation or
mobility plans related to transit.
Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities. Exhibit 3-6, Existing Bicycle Routes and
Potential Future Routes, of the General Plan identifies existing and potential
bikeways in the City. An existing Class I bike trail, completely separated from the
street, is located along the Rio Hondo Channel, less than a mile west of the Project
site. Another potential bike line would be located along Garvey Avenue.
The Project proposes sidewalks and pedestrian areas within its site plan. With
existing and potential bikeways nearby and sidewalks and pedestrian areas within
the proposed site plan, the Project would not conflict with circulation or mobility
plans related to bicycle or pedestrian facilities.
Roadways. To determine the vehicular traffic impacts on local roadways, the
City of Rosemead applies level of service (LOS) thresholds, which rate traffic
congestion on a scale from A to F, based on the volume of traffic to the capacity
of the roadway (V/C):
A: Free Flow. Traffic flows at or above the posted speed limit and motorists
have complete mobility between lanes. (V/C=0-0.60)
B: Reasonably Free Flow. LOS A speeds are maintained, maneuverability
within the traffic stream is slightly restricted. (V/C=0.61-0.70)
C: Stable Flow, at or near free flow. Ability to maneuver through lanes is
noticeably restricted and lane changes require more driver awareness.
(V/C=0.71-0.80)
D: approaching Unstable Flow. Speeds slightly decrease as traffic volume
slightly increase. Freedom to maneuver within the traffic stream is much
more limited and driver comfort levels decrease. (V/C=0.81-0.90)
E: Unstable Flow, Operating At Capacity. Flow becomes irregular and speed
varies rapidly because there are virtually no usable gaps to maneuver in the
traffic stream and speeds rarely reach the posted limit. (V/C=0.91-100)
F: Forced or Breakdown Flow. Every vehicle moves in lockstep with the
vehicle in front of it, with frequent slowing required. Travel time cannot be
predicted, with generally more demand than capacity. The road is in a
constant traffic jam. (V/C>1.00)
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 99
In the City of Rosemead, traffic flow is considered acceptable if it moves at LOS
D or better. Any intersection operating at a LOS E or LOS F is considered deficient.
When evaluating a project’s impact to traffic flow, the City requires an analysis
of traffic “without Project” and the “with Project”. Projects that cause a V/C
increase as shown below would have a significant impact and would be required
to mitigate its contribution to a LOS deficiency:
For the Project, the Traffic Impact Study evaluated Project traffic impacts by
analyzing traffic levels on the following two intersections which were selected
by the City traffic consultant:
• Rockhold Avenue (NS) / Dorothy Street (EW) – Unsignalized; and
• Willard Avenue (NS) / Garvey Avenue (EW) – Unsignalized.
The Traffic Impact Study evaluated traffic conditions of the two study
intersections for the following scenarios in accordance with the County of Los
Angeles requirements and guidelines:
• Existing Conditions;
• Existing Plus Project Conditions;
• Opening Year With Ambient Growth Without Project Conditions;
• Opening Year With Ambient Growth With Project Conditions;
• Opening Year With Ambient Growth With Related Projects Without Project
Conditions; and
• Opening Year With Ambient Growth With Related Projects With Project
Conditions.
To determine existing traffic volumes at the intersections, AM, Mid-day and PM
peak hour traffic counts were taken in February 2020, when the Willard
Elementary School was in session. Based on these counts, the Traffic Impact
Study reports that the average daily traffic (ADT) along Willard Avenue between
Dorothy Street and Garvey Avenue is 1,636 vehicles. These traffic volumes
disperse to the two study intersections as show in Table 11, below. Rockhold
Avenue (NS) / Dorothy Street (EW) has an acceptable LOS A throughout the day;
and Willard Avenue (NS) / Garvey Avenue (EW) has an unacceptable LOS of F
during the AM and PM peak, and E during the Mid-day peak.
Pre-Project LOS Pre-Project V/C Project V/C Increase
C 0.71 – 0.80 0.04 or more
D 0.81 – 0.90 0.02 or more
E/F 0.91 or more 0.01 or more
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 100
The Project is forecast to generate approximately 169 trip-ends per day, including
approximately 11 trips during the AM peak hour, approximately 13 trips during
the Mid-day peak hour, and approximately 13 trips during the PM peak hour. As
shown in Table 11, the Project would not significantly alter the existing traffic
patterns at the two intersections. The Traffic Impact Study also calculated Project
traffic volumes at the Project entrance at Willard Avenue. As shown in Table 12,
traffic volumes at the Project entrance would be at acceptable LOS B in the AM,
and A in the Mid-day and PM.
Table 11: Existing Plus Project Traffic Level Conditions
Intersection
Existing Conditions
Existing Plus Project Conditions
Delay (Secs)1,2
Level of
Service
V/C Ratio 4
Delay (Secs)1,2
Level of
Service
V/C Ratio 4
Change in V/C
Ratio
Significant
Impact?
AM MID PM AM MID PM AM MID PM AM MID PM AM MID PM AM MID PM AM MID PM AM MID PM
1. Rockhold
Avenue
(NS) /
Dorothy
Street
(EW)
9.9 8.4 8.1 A A A 0.338 0.245 0.264 10.1 8.5 8.2 B A A 0.342 0.249 0.268 0.004 0.004 0.004 No No No
2. Willard
Avenue
(NS) /
Garvey
Avenue
(EW)
387.0 40.8 55.2 F E F 0.514 0.457 0.476 387.0 42.3 55.2 F E F 0.518 0.459 0.477 0.004 0.002 0.001 No No No
3. Willard
Avenue
(NS) /
Project
Access
(EW)
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 10.5 9.5 9.2 B A A 0.192 0.156 0.159 --- --- --- No No No
The Traffic Impact Study also assessed Project opening year 2022 conditions by
adding an annual ambient growth rate of 1% to existing traffic levels, and then
compared the 2022 ambient growth conditions to a plus Project condition. As
shown in Table 12, traffic levels remain the same at the two study intersections
and the Project entrance with and without the Project.
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 101
Table 12: Opening Year (2022) With Ambient Growth Plus Project
Traffic Level Conditions
Intersection
Existing Conditions
Existing Plus Project Conditions
Delay (Secs)1,2
Level of
Service
V/C Ratio 4
Delay (Secs)1,2
Level of
Service
V/C Ratio 4
Change in V/C
Ratio
Significant
Impact?
AM MID PM AM MID PM AM MID PM AM MID PM AM MID PM AM MID PM AM MID PM AM MID PM
1. Rockhold
Avenue
(NS) /
Dorothy
Street
(EW)
10.1 8.5 8.1 B A A 0.343 0.248 0.267 10.2 8.5 8.3 B A A 10.2 8.5 8.3 0.004 0.004 0.004 No No No
2. Willard
Avenue
(NS) /
Garvey
Avenue
(EW)
440.8 44.3 58.9 F E F 0.523 0.465 0.483 452.1 44.3 59.7 F E F 452.1 44.3 59.7 0.003 0.001 0.001 No No No
3. Willard
Avenue
(NS) /
Project
Access
(EW)
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 10.6 9.6 9.2 B A A 10.6 9.6 9.2 --- --- --- No No No
The Traffic Impact Study then added the cumulative projects listed in Table 2 of
this Initial Study. Combined, the cumulative projects would generate
approximately 17,725 trip-ends per day, including approximately 1,214 trips
during the AM peak hour, approximately 1,990 trips during the Mid-day peak
hour, and approximately 1,502 trips during the PM peak hour. As shown in Table
13, with the addition of the cumulative projects and ambient growth, Rockhold
Avenue (NS) / Dorothy Street (EW) maintains an acceptable LOS with B in the
AM and A in the Mid-day and PM. The Project entry also maintains an acceptable
LOS with B in the AM and A in the Mid-day and PM.
Willard Avenue (NS) / Garvey Avenue (EW) maintains the unacceptable LOS of
F during the AM and PM peak, and raises Mid-day traffic from an LOS E to LOS
F. However, this increase is .001 V/C, which is below the City threshold of
significance 0.01 or more V/C increase for intersections where the pre-project
LOS is E or F. Based on this City threshold of significance, the Project contribution
to year 2022 traffic volumes with ambient growth and the cumulative projects
does not result in a significant traffic impact. Consequently, the Project would
not conflict with applicable plans or policies relative to circulation or mobility.
Table 13: Opening Year (2022) With Ambient Growth With Cumulative
Projects Plus Project Traffic Level Conditions
Intersection
Existing Conditions
Existing Plus Project Conditions
Delay (Secs)1,2
Level of
Service
V/C Ratio 4
Delay
(Secs)1,2
Level of
Service
V/C Ratio 4
Change in V/C
Ratio
Significant Impact?
AM MID PM AM MID PM AM MID PM AM MID PM AM MID PM AM MID PM AM MID PM AM MID PM
1. Rockhold 10.2 8.6 8.2 B A A 0.346 0.253 0.271 10.3 8.6 8.2 B A A 0.350 0.257 0.275 0.004 0.004 0.004 No No No
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 102
Table 13: Opening Year (2022) With Ambient Growth With Cumulative
Projects Plus Project Traffic Level Conditions
Intersection
Existing Conditions
Existing Plus Project Conditions
Delay (Secs)1,2
Level of
Service
V/C Ratio 4
Delay
(Secs)1,2
Level of
Service
V/C Ratio 4
Change in V/C
Ratio
Significant Impact?
AM MID PM AM MID PM AM MID PM AM MID PM AM MID PM AM MID PM AM MID PM AM MID PM
Avenue
(NS) /
Dorothy
Street
(EW)
2. Willard
Avenue
(NS) /
Garvey
Avenue
(EW)
711.1 83.8 86.0 F F F 0.553 0.510 0.516 711.1 85.3 86 F F F 0.554 0.511 0.517 0.001 0.001 0.001 No No No
3. Willard
Avenue
(NS) /
Project
Access
(EW)
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 10.7 9.7 9.3 B A A 0.202 0.162 0.164 --- --- --- No No No
b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines § 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
Less Than Significant Impact. On September 27, 2013, Governor Jerry Brown
signed SB 743 into law and started a process intended to fundamentally change
how transportation impact analysis is conducted as part of the CEQA review of
projects. SB 743 eliminates Level of Service (LOS) as the basis for determining
transportation impacts under CEQA and requires the use of Vehicle Miles
Traveled (VMT) instead. The state is shifting the focus of CEQA traffic analysis
from measuring a project's impact on automobile delay (LOS) to measuring the
amount and distance of automobile travel that is attributable to a project (VMT).
The State's goal in changing the metric used to determine a significant
transportation impact is to encourage land use and transportation decisions that
reduce greenhouse gas emissions, encourage infill development, and improve
public health through active transportation.
The City of Rosemead adopted VMT traffic thresholds of impact via a City Council
Resolution on June 9, 2020. Consistent with the State’s guidance, Rosemead’s
adopted thresholds filter out areas of the City that are already considered "low
VMT" traffic analysis zones (TAZs) and consistent with the surrounding existing
General Plan land uses and can be considered local-serving. Projects that located
within a low VMT zone and meet the land use criteria are forecast to have a VMT
that is 15% below the regional average, and are considered to have a less than
significant impact.
Attachment C of Rosemead’s adopted VMT thresholds illustrates the portions of
the City within designated Low VMT Areas. As shown in Figure 15 below, the
Project site is within a designated Low VMT Area which is 15% below the regional
average. Further, as noted above, the Project is considered local-serving and
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 103
consistent with the residential land uses in the area. Consequently, the Project
would have a less than significant VMT impact.
Figure 15. City of Rosemead Low VMT Areas
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp
curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Although the Project would
not result in a significant impact on traffic levels on City streets, because the
Project site is located directly in front of the Willard Elementary School, the
Traffic Impact Study recommended the following measures to minimize conflicts
with school traffic. These measures are incorporated into Mitigation Measure TR-
1, below, and shall be implemented during Project construction:
• Minimize construction traffic during peak traffic periods of weekday 7:00
AM to 9:00 AM, weekday mid-day school pick-up periods, and weekday
PM peak period of 4:00 PM to 6:00 PM.
• Contact the Garvey School District at (626) 307-3400 regarding the
potential impact upon existing school bus routes.
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 104
• The Project Construction Manager or designee should notify the Garvey
School District of the expected start and end dates for various portions of
the project that may affect traffic within nearby school areas.
• Provide unrestricted access to schools for school buses.
• Avoid delays to transported students resulted by truck and construction
traffic.
• Avoid adverse impacts on school buses’ on-time performance and
passenger safety resulting from changed traffic patterns, lane adjustment,
traffic light patterns, and altered bus stops during and after construction.
• Construction trucks and other vehicles are required to stop when
encountering school buses using red-flashing-lights must-stop-indicators
per the California Vehicle Code (CVC).
• Contractors must install and maintain appropriate traffic controls (signs
and signals) to ensure vehicular and pedestrian safety.
• Contractors must maintain ongoing communication with Garvey School
District school administrators, providing sufficient notice to forewarn
children and parents when existing vehicle routes to school may be
impacted.
• Continue to maintain access to the passenger loading areas for parents
dropping off their children.
• Contractors must maintain ongoing communication with Garvey School
District school administrators, providing sufficient notice to forewarn
children and parents when existing pedestrian routes to school may be
impacted.
• Contractors must maintain safe and convenient pedestrian routes to all
nearby schools. The District will provide School Pedestrian Route Maps
upon request.
• No staging or parking of construction-related vehicles, including worker-
transport vehicles, should occur on or adjacent to a school property.
• Construction fencing must be installed to secure construction equipment
and to minimize trespassing, vandalism, short-cut attractions, and
attractive nuisances.
• Additionally, the school’s hours are from 7:55 AM to 2:35 PM. The Project
contractor shall avoid hampering school traffic from 7:30 AM to 8:00 AM
and from 2:30 PM to 3:00 PM.
The Traffic Impact Study also recommended measures to improve site access.
These measures are listed below and incorporated into Mitigation Measure TR-2
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 105
below. In addition to these measures, the Project applicant proposes to facilitate
existing school crossings along Willard Avenue by working with the City and
School District to explore the feasibility of installing a crosswalk and/or crossing
guard along Willard Avenue in front of the school.
• Sight distance at all Project access points should be reviewed with respect
to City of Rosemead sight distance standards at the time of preparation of
final grading, landscape, and street improvement plans.
• Provide appropriate signage and pavement markings at the Project site
driveways, including stop bars and stop signs and restrict project access
through clear signage and other means as follows: One (1) proposed
unsignalized full-access driveway on Willard Avenue.
• Participate in any approved transportation or development impact fees
established by the City of Rosemead.
With the inclusion of Mitigation Measures TR-1 and TR-2, Project impacts relative
to transportation design hazards would be less than significant.
d) Result in inadequate emergency access?
Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Primary entry to the Project
site would be from Willard via a 26-foot private drive aisle that would connect at
a T-juncture to 26-foot fire lane and hammer head, and then a 20 and 24-foot
drive aisle. All of the Project’s 8 buildings would take vehicular access from the
drive aisles. The fire lane and hammer head are built to Fire Code standards and
would supply adequate emergency access for the Project. However as discussed
in Section 6.9.f of this Initial Study, Project construction activities could
temporarily impact street traffic adjacent to the site due to roadway
improvements and potential extension of construction activities into the right-of-
way. This could reduce the number of lanes or temporarily close certain street
segments. Any such impacts would be limited to the construction period and
would affect only adjacent streets or intersections. With implementation of
construction traffic plan, temporary street closures would not affect emergency
access in the vicinity of future developments, and potential impacts would be less
than significant. Mitigation Measure HAZ-3 is added to require a construction
traffic plan. Consequently, with implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-3, the
Project would not impair implementation or interfere with the City’s emergency
response or evacuation plans.
6.17.3 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
The analysis determined that the proposed Project, including proposed cumulative
projects, would not result in any significant adverse transportation or traffic impacts
subject to conditions. Consequently, no significant adverse cumulative
transportation or traffic impacts would result from the project.
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 106
6.17.4 MITIGATION MEASURES
The following mitigation measures are required to ensure internal circulation, project
entry and roadway circulation system continue to operate in an efficient, effective,
and safe manner.
Mitigation Measure TR-1: Construction Traffic.
Timing: During All Grading and Construction Activities.
Department Responsible: Building Division.
During all grading and construction activities, the Project Applicant shall
insure that its contractor implement the following measures.
• Minimize construction traffic during peak traffic periods of weekday
7:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m., weekday mid-day school pick-up periods, and
weekday PM peak period of 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.
• Contact the Garvey School District at (626) 307-3400 regarding the
potential impact upon existing school bus routes.
• The Construction Manager or designee should notify the Garvey School
District of the expected start and end dates for various portions of the
project that may affect traffic within nearby school areas.
• Provide unrestricted access to schools for school buses.
• Avoid delays to transported students resulted by truck and construction
traffic.
• Avoid adverse impacts on school buses’ on-time performance and
passenger safety resulting from changed traffic patterns, lane
adjustment, traffic light patterns, and altered bus stops during and
after construction.
• Construction trucks and other vehicles are required to stop when
encountering school buses using red-flashing-lights must-stop-
indicators per the California Vehicle Code (CVC).
• Contractors must install and maintain appropriate traffic controls (signs
and signals) to ensure vehicular and pedestrian safety.
• Contractors must maintain ongoing communication with Garvey School
District school administrators, providing sufficient notice to forewarn
children and parents when existing vehicle routes to school may be
impacted.
• Continue to maintain access to the passenger loading areas for parents
dropping off their children.
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 107
• Contractors must maintain safe and convenient pedestrian routes to all
nearby schools. The District will provide School Pedestrian Route Maps
upon request.
• No staging or parking of construction-related vehicles, including
worker-transport vehicles, should occur on the east of Willard Avenue
adjacent to a school property.
• Barriers and/or fencing must be installed to secure construction
equipment and to minimize trespassing, vandalism, short-cut
attractions, and attractive nuisances.
• The school’s hours are from 7:55 AM to 2:35 PM. Project construction
shall avoid interference with school traffic from 7:30 a.m. to 8:00 a.m.
and from 2:30 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. on school day so that faculty and
parents can enter and leave the site as needed.
Mitigation Measure TR-2: Site Access.
Timing: Prior to Residential Building Permit Issuance / Prior to
Certificate of Occupancy Issuance.
Department Responsible: Planning & Economic / Public Works.
Prior to issuance of the first residential building permit, the Project
applicant shall submit plans for the following measures to the City for
review and approval. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the
Project applicant shall insure that the following measures are implemented
as required by the City:
• Review sight distance at all Project access points with respect to City
of Rosemead sight distance standards at the time of preparation of
final grading, landscape, and street improvement plans, and
implement appropriate red curbing or other measures as required by
the City.
• Provide appropriate signage and pavement markings at the Project site
driveways, including stop bars and stop signs, and restrict project
access through clear signage and other means as follows:
o One (1) proposed unsignalized full-access driveway on Willard
Avenue.
• Participate in any approved transportation or development impact fees
established by the City of Rosemead.
Mitigation Measure HAZ-3: Traffic Control Plan.
Timing: Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits.
Department Responsible: Public Works.
Prior to any grading or construction activities, the Applicant shall be
provide for review and approval of the City Engineer a construction traffic
control plan to ensure emergency access routes are not obstructed.
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 108
6.18 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES.
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
No Impact
a) Would the Project cause a substantial
adverse change in the significance of
a tribal cultural resource, defined in
Public Resources Code Section 21074
as either a site, feature, place,
cultural landscape that is
geographically defined in terms of the
size and scope of the landscape,
sacred place, or object with cultural
value to a California Native American
tribe, and that is:
i) Listed or eligible for listing in the
California Register of Historical
Resources, or in a local register of
historical resources as defined in
Public Resources Code Section
5020.1(k), or
X
ii) A resource determined by the lead
agency, in its discretion and
supported by substantial evidence,
to be significant pursuant to criteria
set forth in subdivision (c) of Public
Resources Code Section 5024.1. In
applying the criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resources
Code Section 5024.1, the lead
agency shall consider the
significance of the resource to a
California Native American tribe.
X
6.18.1 ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
a) Would the Project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a
tribal cultural resource defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074 as either
a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms
of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value
to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
(1) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources,
or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code
Section 5020.1(k).
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 109
Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. As discussed in Section
6.5.b of this Initial Study, a records search by the SCCIC was conducted and the
results found that no archaeological studies have been conducted in the Project
area and as a result, no archaeological resources have been identified.(Reference
Appendix D.) SCCIC notes that buried resources could potentially be unearthed
during Project grading activities, and therefore, customary caution and a halt-
work condition should be in place for all ground-disturbing activities. In the event
that any evidence of cultural resources is discovered, all work within the vicinity
of the find should stop until a qualified archaeological consultant can assess the
find and make recommendations. Mitigation Measure CUL-1, is added to the
Project to incorporate SCCIC’s recommendations and protect potential historic
resources.
A Sacred Lands File (SLF) check of the Project area was conducted by NAHC.
(Reference Appendix B.) The NAHC check searched records from the Information
Center of the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) and
available archaeological inventories. The results of the SLF check was positive and
the NAHC recommended contacting the Gabrieleno/Tongva San Gabriel Band of
Mission Indians and the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation for more
information.
As discussed in Section 2.11 of this Initial Study, on February 12, 2020, Lily
Valenzuela, Planning and Economic Development Manager for the City, sent
letters inviting tribal resource consultation to five tribes, including the
Gabrieleno/Tongva San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians and the Gabrieleno Band
of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation. On February 14, 2020, a representative from
the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation contacted Ms. Valenzuela
requesting consultation. A consultation was scheduled for April 29, 2020 at 11:00
a.m.; however at 9:45 a.m. on April 29th before the scheduled meeting, a tribal
representative contacted Ms. Valenzuela and cancelled the consultation, stating
that after further discussion with the tribal government, the tribe no longer has
any concerns with the Project location. No other tribe requested consultation.
To continue to account for the possibility that tribal resources could be identified
on the Project site, Mitigation Measure TCR-1, below, is added to the Project
establishing procedures should tribal resources be uncovered during Project
grading activities. With inclusion of this measure and CUL-1, potential impacts
relative to historical archaeological resources would be reduced to less than
significant levels.
(2) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by
substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the
criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1,
the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California
Native American tribe.
Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. California Public
Resources Code § 21080.3.1 and Assembly Bill (AB) 52 established a process to
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 110
assess tribal cultural resources through consultation with the Native American
tribal representatives. As discussed above, pursuant to these requirements, letters
from the City of Rosemead were sent to five tribes requesting consultation. The
Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians/Kizh Nation requested and then cancelled
consultation finding no concerns with the Project location. However, to continue
to account for the possibility that tribal resources could be identified on the Project
site, Mitigation Measure TCR-1, below, is added to the Project establishing
procedures should tribal resources be uncovered during Project grading activities.
In addition, Mitigation Measure CUL-2 (Section 6.5.3) addresses the potential for
discovery of human remains if determined to be prehistoric, requiring notification
of the NAHC and determination and notification most likely descendant (MLD).
Consequently, with inclusion of Mitigation Measures CUL-2 and TCR-1, potential
impacts to tribal resources would be reduced to less than significant levels.
6.18.2 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
Mitigation Measure TRC-1 is added to the Project to protect potential tribal resources
that could be found on site during excavation activities. Further Mitigation Measures
CUL-1 and CUL-2 presented in Section 6.5.3 of this Initial Study would reduce
potential impacts to potential tribal remains. By reducing on site impacts to less than
significant levels, cumulative impacts relative to tribal resources would also be
reduced to less than significant levels.
6.18.3 MITIGATION MEASURES
The following measure will be required to mitigate potential Project impacts related
to tribal resources to less than significant levels:
Mitigation Measure TRC-1: Native American Monitoring.
Timing: Prior to Issuance of Grading Permits.
Department Responsible: Community Development (Planning and
Building & Safety Divisions)
If potential Native American resources are uncovered during grading, the
applicant shall be required to halt work within 50 feet of the find,
inform the Director of Planning & Economic or his/her designee immediately
and retain a qualified professional archaeologist and an experienced and
certified Native American monitor of Gabrieleño heritage to examine the
material to determine whether it is a “unique cultural resource” as defined in
Section 21083.2 (g) of the State CEQA Statues. If this determination is
positive, the scientifically consequential information shall be fully recovered
by the archaeologist and Native American monitor. Work may continue
outside the area of the find. However, no further work shall occur in the
immediate location of the find until all information recovery has been
completed and a report concerning same filed with the County, a designated
repository as appropriate and made available to interested representatives of
Native American tribes that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with the
Project area.
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 111
6.19 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
No
Impact
a) Require or result in the relocation or
construction of new or expanded
water, wastewater treatment or
storm water drainage, electric power,
natural gas, or telecommunications
facilities, the construction or
relocation of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
X
b) Have sufficient water supplies
available to serve the project and
reasonably foreseeable future
development during normal, dry and
multiple dry years?
X
c) Result in a determination by the
wastewater treatment provider, which
serves or may serve the project that
it has adequate capacity to serve the
project’s projected demand in
addition to the provider’s existing
commitments?
X
d) Generate solid waste in excess of
state or local standards, or in excess
of the capacity of local infrastructure,
or otherwise impair the attainment of
solid waste reduction goals?
X
e) Comply with federal, state, and local
management and reduction statutes
and regulations related to solid
waste?
X
6.19.1 ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
a) Would the Project require or result in the relocation or construction of new or
expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power,
natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of
which could cause significant environmental effects?
No Impact. The Project is an infill development that would connect to existing
utility connections currently available to the site. As discussed in Section 6.10 of
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 112
this Initial Study, the quality of the wastewater that would be generated by the
residential Project is not anticipated to include any materials that would cause the
wastewater treatment plant that would serve the project to exceed the wastewater
treatment requirements established by the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality
Control Board. Consequently, the Project would not require or result in the
relocation of new or expanded utilities.
b) Would the Project have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project
and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple
dry years?
Less Than Significant Impact. Water service to Rosemead is served by several
water companies, including: San Gabriel County Water District, San Gabriel
Valley Water, Golden State Water, Amarillo Mutual Water, California American
Water. Water supply distributed from these companies comes from Metropolitan
Water District of Southern California imported water and groundwater wells
located within the Rosemead service boundary.
Changing the land use designation from medium density to high density will result
in a population increase of 0.2%. This increase is nominal and the development
and future residents will be required to pay water impact fees and water use fees
to off-set the Project’s incremental demand for water. The Project would connect
to the existing water line on Willard Avenue, and would be required by the CBC
to install low flow water fixtures that conserve water. Consequently, potential
adverse impacts relative to water supplies would be less than significant.
c) Would the Project result in a determination by the wastewater treatment
provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to
serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing
commitments?
Less Than Significant Impact. Sanitary sewer service for the Project site is
provided by the City of Rosemead. The existing local wastewater collection
system within the Project area is owned and operated by the City as well as by the
Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County (LACSD). Wastewater is collected by
gravity sewers and lift stations and then transported through trunk sewers to
LACSD’s San Jose Creek and Whittier Narrows Water Reclamation Plants (WRP).
The San Jose Creek WRP provides primary, secondary, and tertiary treatment
for an average dry weather flow (DWF) of 100 million gallons of wastewater per
day (mgd).15
As discussed above, Project is an infill development that would connect to
existing utility connections currently available to the site. Changing the land use
designation from medium density to high density will result in a population
increase of 0.2%. This increase is nominal and the development and future
residents will be required to pay sewer impact fees and use fees to off-set the
Project’s incremental demand for wastewater services. The Project would connect
**
15 City of Rosemead Draft Environmental Impact Report Garvey Avenue Corridor Specific Plan, Volume I, May 2017.
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 113
to the existing wastewater line on Willard Avenue, and would be required by the
CBC to install low flow water fixtures that reduce the amount of wastewater.
Consequently, potential adverse impacts relative to wastewater treatment
capacity would be less than significant.
d) Would the Project generate solid waste in excess of state or local standards, or
in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the
attainment of solid waste reduction goals?
Less Than Significant Impact. Solid waste services in the City are provided
through a contract with Republic Services. The solid waste is hauled to the Puente
Hills Materials Recovery Facility (MRF) in the City of Whittier and operated by the
Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County. The MRF separates recyclable material
from municipal solid waste and all residual waste is hauled to permitted landfills
and all recovered recyclable materials are recycled. Changing the land use
designation from medium density to high density will result in a population
increase of 0.2%. This increase is nominal and future residents will be required
to pay refuse collection fees to off-set the Project’s incremental demand for solid
waste services. Consequently, the Project impacts relative to solid waste
generation and capacity and solid waste reduction goals would be less than
significant.
e) Would the Project comply with federal, state, and local management and
reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
Less Than Significant Impact. Recycling services are part of the City’s solid waste
program. Typical services include collection of recyclables such as glass, metals
and plastic. The City also provides contact information for e-waste and household
hazardous waste. Future Project residents would be required to participate in
recycling as part of the refuse collection program. Although the Project would
increase City population by 0.2%, this increase is nominal and future residents
would be required to pay refuse collection fees to off-set the Project’s incremental
demand for wastewater services. Consequently, Project impacts relative to
compliance with solid waste regulations would be less than significant.
6.19.2 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
The analysis determined that the proposed Project would not result in any significant
adverse utilities and service systems impacts, as increased demand would be offset
by payment of applicable impact fees and user fees. Consequently, the Project would
not result in significant adverse cumulative impacts to public services.
6.19.3 MITIGATION MEASURES
The analysis indicated that the implementation of the proposed Project would not
result in any significant impacts related to utilities and service systems. As a result,
no mitigation is required.
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 114
6.20 WILDFIRE
WILDFIRE. If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire
hazard severity zones, would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
No
Impact
a) Substantially impair an adopted
emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
X
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and
other factors, exacerbate wildfire
risks, and thereby expose project
occupants to pollutant concentrations
from a wildfire or the uncontrolled
spread of a wildfire?
X
c) Require the installation or
maintenance of associated
infrastructure (such as roads, fuel
breaks, emergency water sources,
power lines or other utilities) that
may exacerbate fire risk or that may
result in temporary or ongoing
impacts to the environment?
X
d) Expose people or structures to
significant risks, including downslope
or downstream flooding or landslides,
as a result of runoff, post-fire slope
instability, or drainage changes?
X
6.20.1 ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
a) Would the Project substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. The City of Rosemead
is nearly entirely built out, and is near completely urbanized. The General Plan
Public Safety does not identify a potential for wildfires in the City but does address
the potential for stationary fires. Service by the County Los Angeles Fire
Department and adequate water supply and flow are discussed by the General
Plan as local tools to address potential fires.
As discussed in Section 6.9.f of this Initial Study, the Project site would take
access from Willard via a 26-foot private drive aisle that would connect at a T-
juncture to 26-foot fire lane and hammer head, and then a 20 and 24-foot drive
aisle All of the Project’s 8 buildings would take vehicular access from the drive
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 115
aisles. The fire lane and hammer head are built to Fire Code standards and would
supply adequate emergency access for the Project.
Construction activities associated with the Project development could temporarily
impact street traffic adjacent to the site. Mitigation measure HAZ-3 is added to
require a construction traffic plan. Consequently, with implementation of
Mitigation Measure HAZ-3, the Project would not substantially impair an adopted
emergency response or evacuation plan.
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and
thereby expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or
the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
No Impact. Rosemead is relatively flat and urbanized. The General Plan Public
Safety does not identify a potential for wildfires in the City. The Project would
replace two unoccupied residential structures with new residential development
built to current CBC and Fire Code standards. Consequently, the Project would
not exacerbate wildfire risks.
c) Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as
roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that
may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to
the environment?
No Impact. As discussed above, Rosemead is relatively flat and urbanized. The
General Plan Public Safety does not identify a potential for wildfires in the City.
The Project would replace two unoccupied residential structures with new
residential development built to current CBC and Fire Code standards. The Project
would be located on an infill site surrounded by urban development.
Consequently, the Project would not require installation or maintenance of roads,
fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities that could
exacerbate fire risk.
d) Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or
downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability,
or drainage changes?
No Impact. As discussed above, Rosemead is relatively flat and urbanized. The
General Plan Public Safety does not identify a potential for wildfires in the City.
The Project would replace two unoccupied residential structures with new
residential development built to current CBC and Fire Code standards. The
Project would be located on an infill site surrounded by urban development.
process grading plan review and permit issuance. In addition, Project construction
must comply with the requirements of the approved geotechnical report.
Consequently, the Project is not expected to expose people or structures to
significant risks related to flooding or landslides.
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 116
6.20.2 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
The analysis determined that the proposed Project would not result in any significant
adverse impacts relative to wildfire. Consequently, the Project would not result in
significant adverse cumulative impacts related to wildfire risks.
6.20.3 MITIGATION MEASURES
The analysis indicated that the implementation of the proposed Project would not
result in any significant impacts related to wildfire. As a result, no mitigation is
required.
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 117
6.21 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
No
Impact
a) Does the Project have the potential to
substantially degrade the quality of
the environment, substantially reduce
the habitat of a fish or wildlife
species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self-
sustaining levels, threaten to
eliminate a plant or animal
community, reduce the number or
restrict the range of a rare or an
endangered threatened species, or
eliminate important examples of the
major periods of California history or
prehistory?
X
b) Does the Project have impacts that
are individually limited, but
cumulatively considerable?
(‘Cumulatively considerable’ means
that the incremental effects of a
project are considerable when viewed
in connection with the effects of past
projects, the effects of other current
projects, and the effects of probable
future projects)?
X
c) Does the Project have environmental
effects which will cause substantial
adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
X
a) Does the Project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment,
substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or
animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods
of California history or prehistory?
Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. The Project would not have
substantial impacts on special status species, stream habitat, and wildlife
dispersal and migration. Furthermore, the Project would not affect the local,
regional, or national populations or ranges of any plant or animal species and
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 118
would not threaten any plant communities. There is potential for inadvertent finds
of archaeological and Native American archeological resources during project
grading. Potential impacts to Native American resources would be mitigated by
Mitigation Measures CUL-1, CUL-2 and TRC-1. With implementation of these
mitigation measures, the Project’s Mandatory Finding of Significance relative to
degrading the quality of the environment would be less significant.
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 future
projects)?
Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. The Project would result in
potential significant impacts relative to air quality, cultural resources, hazards
and hazardous materials, emergency access, noise and traffic. Mitigation
measures are added to the Project to reduce these impacts to less than significant
levels. Consequently, with these mitigation measures added, cumulative impacts
relative to these environmental areas would also be less than significant.
Consequently, the Project’s Mandatory Finding of Significance relative to
contribution to cumulative impacts would be less than significant with mitigation
incorporated.
c) Does the Project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse
effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. The Project would result in
potential significant impacts relative to hazards and hazardous materials,
including emergency access and traffic and transportation. Mitigation measures
HAZ-1 through HAZ-3, TR-1 and TR-2 are added to the Project to reduce these
impacts to less than significant levels. Consequently, the Project’s Mandatory
Finding of Significance relative to a substantial adverse effect on human beings
would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 119
SECTION 7.0 – LIST OF PREPARERS
7.1 PREPARATION – ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT
o Joann Lombardo, Comprehensive Planning Services
7.2 PREPARATION - AIR QUALITY / GHG ANALYSIS
o Bryan Estrada, RK Engineering Group, Inc.
o Darshan Shivaiah, Engineering Group, Inc.
7.3 PREPARATION - TRAFFIC ANALYSIS
o Alex Tabrizi, RK Engineering Group, Inc.
7.4 PREPARATION - NOISE ANALYSIS
o Bryan Estrada, RK Engineering Group, Inc.
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 120
SECTION 8.0 – LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
The following lists acronyms and technical abbreviations that appear in this
document by alphabetical order:
• 4,4’-DDD - Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane
• 4,4’-DDE - Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene
• 4,4'-DDT - Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane
• AB - Assembly Bill
• ACMs - Asbestos Containing Material
• ADT - Average Daily Trips
• AQMP - Air Quality Management Plan
• C02e - Carbon Dioxide Equivalents
• CAL Reg - California Register of Historical Resources
• CARB - California Air Resources Board
• CBC - California Building Codes
• CCR - California Code of Regulations
• CEQA - California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
• CFCs - Chlorofluorocarbons
• CFM - Cubic Feet per Minute
• CGC - California Government Code
• CH4 - Methane
• CO - Carbon Monoxide
• CO2 - Carbon Dioxide
• CVC - California Vehicle Code
• dB - Decibels
• dBA - Average (A-weighted) Decibels
• DOT - Department of Transportation
• DPM - Diesel Particulate Matter
• DWF - Dry Weather Flow
• EIR - Environmental Impact Report
• FEMA - Federal Emergency Management Agency
• GHG - Greenhouse Gas Emissions
• H20 - Water
• HFCs - Hydrofluorocarbons
• HPD - California State Historic Properties Directory
• ITE - Institute of Traffic Engineers
• LACSD - Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County
• LBP - Lead Based Paint
• lbs - Pounds
• Ldn - Quiet Time Noise Measurement
• LEQ - Noise Energy Level Measurement
• LID - Preliminary Low Impact Development
• LOS - Level of Service
• LST - Localized Significance Threshold
• MBTA - Migratory Bird Treaty Act
• mgd - Millions of gallons per day
• MLD - Most Likely Descendant
Initial Study Willard & Garvey Residential Project
City of Rosemead
Page 121
• MRF - Material Recovery Facility
• MRZ - Mineral Resources Zone
• MSL - Mean Sea Level
• Mtons - Metric Tons
• NAHC - Native American Heritage Commission
• NOx - Nitrogen Oxide
• NPDES - National Pollution Discharge Elimination System
• PD - Planned Development
• PFCs - Perfluorocarbons
• PM-10 - Respirable 10-Micron Diameter Particulate Matter
• PM-2.5 - Respirable 2.5-Micron Diameter Particulate Matter
• REC - Recognized Environmental Condition
• RMS - Root Mean Square Vibration Velocity
• ROG - Reactive Organic Gases)
• RTP/SCS - Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy
• SB - Senate Bill
• SCAB - South Coast Air Basin
• SCAG - Southern California Association of Governments
• SCAQMD - South Coast Air Quality Management District
• SCCIC - South Central Coastal Information Center
• SCE - Southern California Edison
• SCS - Sustainable Communities Strategy
• SF6 - Sulfur Hexafluoride
• SHL - California Historical Landmarks
• SLF - Sacred Lands File
• Sox - Oxides of Sulfur
• SPHI - California Points of Historical Interest
• STC - Sound Transmission Class
• SWPPP - Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
• TAC - Toxic Air Contaminants
• tpd –
•
•
• Tons per Day
• TTM - Tentative Tract Map
• V/C - Volume to Capacity
• VdB - Vibration Decibels
• VMT - Vehicle Miles Traveled
• WQMP - Water Quality Management Plan
• WRP - Water Reclamation Plants