HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 3 - 501 N. Santa Anita AveDATE: October 13, 2015
TO: Honorable Chairman and Planning Commission
FROM: Jim Kasama, Community Development Administrator
By: Lisa Flores, Planning Services Manager
Jordan Chamberlin, Assistant Planner
SUBJECT: RESOLUTION NO. 1947 – APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO.
TTM 14-03 (73106), ZONE VARIANCE NO. ZV 15-02, MODIFICATION
APPLICATION NO. MP 14-17, OAK TREE ENCROACHMENT PERMIT
NO. TRE 14-30, AND MULTIPLE-FAMILY ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN
REVIEW NO. MFADR 14-09 WITH A CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION
UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA)
FOR A 20-UNIT RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM DEVELOPMENT AT 501
N. SANTA ANITA AVENUE
Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 1947
SUMMARY
The applicant, Mr. Kenneth Pang, is requesting approval of a Tentative Tract Map, Zone
Variance, Zoning Modifications, an Oak Tree Encroachment, Multiple-Family
Architectural Design Review, and adjustments to easements and vacation of a portion
of the adjacent Colorado Boulevard right-of-way for a proposed 20-unit residential
condominium development at 501 N. Santa Anita Avenue. The proposed development
is consistent with the City’s General Plan and Subdivision Code. However, several
Zoning Code adjustments are required for the proposed design: A Zone Variance to
allow 20 dwelling units in lieu of the minimum 23 units required; an Oak Tree
Encroachment Permit to allow building walls, perimeter garden walls, walkways, and
landscaping within the protected area of one oak tree located adjacent to N. Santa Anita
Avenue; Zoning Modifications for encroachments into the setbacks along Colorado
Boulevard, the required front yard setback along N. Santa Anita Avenue, the required
interior side yard setback along the north property line; to exceed the allowable building
length of 165’-0” for one building; and to exceed the maximum allowable fence height of
6’-0” along the interior and street sides.
As explained later in the staff report, the proposed development qualifies for a
Categorical Exemption as an in-fill development project under the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Based on the findings discussed in this report, it is
recommended that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 1947 (Attachment
No. 1) to approve Tentative Tract Map No. TTM 14-03 (73106), Zone Variance No. ZV
TTM 14-03, ZV 15-02, MP 14-17, TRE 14-30, and MFADR 14-09
501 N. Santa Anita Avenue
October 13, 2015 – Page 2 of 20
15-02, Modification No. MP 14-17, Oak Tree Encroachment Permit No. TRE 14-30, and
Architectural Design Review No. MFADR 14-09, with a CEQA exemption, subject to the
conditions listed in this staff report.
BACKGROUND
The subject property is approximately 45,824 square feet (1.05-acres) in area and is
zoned R-3, High Density Multiple-Family Residential. The lot is currently developed with
a church that was constructed in 1953. It is currently vacant. The church buildings cover
an area of approximately 12,047 square feet. The rest of the site is paved surface
parking and landscaping. There is one oak tree adjacent to the Santa Anita Avenue
property line – refer to Attachment No. 2 for an Aerial photo with Zoning Information and
Photos of the Subject Property and Vicinity. A Certificate of Demolition was approved on
July 21, 2014, based on an evaluation by an Architectural Historian, which found the
existing church to be in good condition, but with alterations that negate its being a good
architectural example. Therefore, it is not considered a historic resource, and is not
eligible for listing on the California Register.
The western portion of the site (the back half of the property) has a Public Utility
Easement (PUE) on it that the City retained when a portion of Windsor Drive and
Cornell Drive were vacated in 1953 for street realignment purposes. The vacated land
was deeded to the adjacent property owner (the church site) and consolidated. The
PUE is for all variety of public utilities; sanitary sewer, water, storm drains, electrical
facilities, gas lines, etc. There is also a 15’-0” storm drain easement along a portion of
the north property line.
PROPOSAL
The applicant is proposing to demolish the existing structures and construct 20 multi-
family residential condominium units in six, two-story townhome style buildings that are
of Contemporary architectural style. Each two story unit will have at least three
bedrooms and two and a half bathrooms, and will range from approximately 1,439 to
2,520 square feet of living area. The new buildings will have a maximum height of 28’-
4”, where a maximum of 30’-0” is allowed. All units will have a private outdoor area
ranging from 195 square feet to 852 square feet, which exceed the minimum
requirement of 100 square feet.
Figure 1. Map of existing easements.
15’-0” Storm Drain Easement
Existing Pubic Utility Easement (PUE)
TTM 14-03, ZV 15-02, MP 14-17, TRE 14-30, and MFADR 14-09
501 N. Santa Anita Avenue
October 13, 2015 – Page 3 of 20
Four units will face N. Santa Anita Avenue, seven units will face Colorado Boulevard,
four units will face Windsor Road or Cornell Drive, and the other five units will face the
north interior side property line. Access to the site is provided from Santa Anita Avenue
through Newman Avenue, and then south to Windsor Road and Cornell Drive. There
will be 50 on-site parking spaces, which meets the parking requirement. Of the 50
parking spaces provided, 38 will be semi-subterranean (30 garage spaces and eight
guest parking spaces) and 12 will be surface parking (10 garage spaces and two guest
parking spaces.
The applicant is requesting approval of a Zone Variance to allow 20 dwelling units in
lieu of the minimum 23 dwelling units required, approval of an Oak Tree Encroachment
Permit to allow one of the units (Unit No. 14), perimeter garden walls, walkways, and
landscaping within the protected area of one oak tree located adjacent to N. Santa Anita
Avenue, and the following Zoning Modifications:
Front yard setback along Santa Anita Avenue (first and second story):
• 15’-0” in lieu of the 25’-0” required.
Street side yard setback along Colorado Boulevard:
• A 7’-7’ to 21’-9” encroachment into the 75’-0” special setback along this portion of
Colorado Boulevard;
• A 10’-1” to 21’-9” building setback instead of the 25’-0” street side yard
requirement;
• To allow three air conditioning units to be located in the required street side yard
setback for units 2, 3, and 11; and
• To allow one of the buildings to be 219’-0” in length in lieu of the 165’-0”
maximum.
Street side yard and front yard setbacks, and fence height along Colorado Boulevard for
incidental structures:
• A 7’-7” street side yard setback and 9’-0” front yard setback for an open stairwell
and ADA chair lift adjacent to Colorado Boulevard in lieu of the 25’-0” required;
• To allow 80 linear feet of fencing adjacent to the property line to exceed 6’-0” in
height with a maximum height of 8’-0” measured from the lowest adjacent grade.
Interior side yard setback along Windsor Road and Cornell Drive:
• To allow 85 linear feet of fencing adjacent to the northerly interior side property
line to exceed 6’-0” in height with a maximum height of 11’-6” measured from the
lowest adjacent grade.
TTM 14-03, ZV 15-02, MP 14-17, TRE 14-30, and MFADR 14-09
501 N. Santa Anita Avenue
October 13, 2015 – Page 4 of 20
Easements and Right-of-Way Adjustments
As a part of this proposal, the applicant has made arrangements to obtain a portion of
the City’s right-of-way along Colorado Boulevard to facilitate disabled accessibility onto
the subject site from the sidewalk. The requested right-of-way area is unusable for
public street purposes, but can be used for utilities. Therefore, the City will retain a
public utility easement over the entire vacated portion. The applicant/property owner
shall also enter in an agreement with the City and post security to construct a new
sidewalk, retaining wall, and all other associated elements along Colorado Boulevard.
As part of these improvements, the applicant has also agreed to beautify the concrete
slope (shown in red below) with drought tolerant vines, 10 new tree wells with 36-inch
box Deodar Cedar trees, and a new sidewalk (shown in grey below). This will be a
significant improvement to the overall streetscape. These improvements are to be
completed, regardless of whether, or not the developer proceeds with the project. A
condition of approval to this effect is included (refer to condition No. 5).
As for the public utility easement on the back-half of the property it will be quitclaimed to
the property owner with new easements granted to the utility companies for their
specific utility purposes.
Finally, a portion of the existing storm drain easement adjacent to the north property
line, between Santa Anita Avenue and Windsor Road, would be reduced in width by five
feet and a new easement adjacent to Windsor Road would be granted to the City that
connects directly to the existing storm drain on the back half of the property. With these
adjustments the lot area for the proposed project increases from 45,824 square feet to
51,462 square feet (1.18-acres).
ANALYSIS
Due to the irregular shape of the lot and the number of easements that must be
maintained, the applicant is requesting the following: A Zone Variance to reduce the
minimum density; Zoning Modifications for setbacks, the length of one of the building,
the locations of air conditioning units; and to allow encroachments into the protected
area of an oak tree. One of the property owner’s/applicant’s responsibilities is to obtain
a portion of the City’s right-of-way along Colorado Boulevard to facilitate disabled
Figure 2. The site plan showing the location of the new sidewalk, beautified slope, and easements.
TTM 14-03, ZV 15-02, MP 14-17, TRE 14-30, and MFADR 14-09
501 N. Santa Anita Avenue
October 13, 2015 – Page 5 of 20
accessibility onto the subject site from the sidewalk. The requested right-of-way area is
unusable for public street purposes, but can be used for utilities. The General Plan
emphasizes consistency with the City’s Master Plan of Roadways. The roadways will
remain compatible with the surrounding land uses after the adjustments to the
easements and the adjacent Colorado Boulevard right-of-way vacation. The proposed
vacation is consistent with the following goals and policies set forth in the City’s 2010
General Plan.
Circulation and Infrastructure Element
Policy CI-1.2: Implement street design standards on arterial corridors consistent with
the Master Plan of Roadways to address bicycle facilities, sidewalks,
and on-street parking that are context sensitive to adjacent land uses
and districts, and to all roadway users, where appropriate.
Policy CI-2.2: Design and operate arterials and intersections for the safe operation of
all modes, including transit, bicyclists, and pedestrians.
Policy CI-4.6: Provide sidewalks on all arterial roadways.
Zone Variance
The R-3 Zoning Code requires a minimum density of one unit for every 2,200 square
feet of land area (AMC Sec. 9255.2.7) which calculates to a minimum of 23 units for the
51,462 square-foot development site. The minimum density is in place to comply with
the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA), which requires that jurisdictions
provide sufficiently zoned land area to accommodate a variety of housing opportunities
for all economic segments of the community. It also ensures that the quantity of
multiple-family housing stock is maintained.
Seventeen (17) units are proposed on, the east portion of the site which fronts N. Santa
Anita Avenue, and three units are proposed on the rear or west portion of the site. The
applicant contends that 17 units is the maximum that will fit in the front portion of the
site, and that only three units can fit in this west portion due to the utility easements.
There are three new utility easements that must be maintained across the rear portion
of the site, and due to the street vacation, approximately 1,483 square feet of the rear
portion of the site is a concrete slope for the Colorado Boulevard abutment. These
areas cannot be built on. The easements and concrete slope areas reduce the buildable
area of this portion of the site by more than 3,100 square feet. This rear portion of the
site is further constricted by its triangular or irregular shape where it abuts the light rail
right-of-way.
The required easements in conjunction with the other constrictions of the site, limit the
layout options. These constrictions and the minimum areas required for parking and
access, makes it infeasible to provide the required minimum number of units. A Zone
Variance is necessary because the minimum density requirement does not take into
account easements, site irregularities, or other non-zoning related limitations.
TTM 14-03, ZV 15-02, MP 14-17, TRE 14-30, and MFADR 14-09
501 N. Santa Anita Avenue
October 13, 2015 – Page 6 of 20
Modifications
Front yard setback along Santa Anita Avenue (first and second story):
• 15’-0” in lieu of the 25’-0” required.
The applicant is requesting approval of a 15’-0” front yard setback along N. Santa Anita
Avenue in lieu of the 25’-0” required. R-3 zoning regulations require a minimum front
yard setback of 25’-0”. Most of the properties on Santa Anita Avenue between
Huntington Drive and the Foothill Freeway are zoned Commercial and do not have front
yard setback requirements. The exceptions are this residential area and a small
residentially-zoned area across Santa Anita Avenue. The overall vision for this stretch of
Santa Anita Avenue is a more urban appearance, with uses close to the street to invite
activity and foster the pedestrian experience. The requested 15’-0” front yard setback is
appropriate as it will place the units closer to the street, but provide a buffer for the
existing R-3 properties located north of the subject site.
Street side yard setback along Colorado Boulevard
• A 7’-7”’ to 21’-9” encroachment into the 75’-0” special setback along this portion
of Colorado Boulevard;
• A 10’-1” to 21’-9” building setback instead of the 25’-0” street side yard
requirement;
• To allow three air conditioning units to be located in the required street side yard
setback at units 2, 3, and 11; and
• To allow one of the buildings to be 219’-0” in length in lieu of the 165’-0”
maximum.
The intent of the special setback requirement is to allow for future street widening and to
promote a consistent streetscape. Encroachments into the special setback are typically
handled administratively, but this request is being included with the other applications
subject to the Commission’s review. The City Engineer has reviewed the proposal and
has no objections to the requested setback Modifications as there are no plans to widen
this portion of Colorado Boulevard.
The R-3 zoning regulations require that the street side yard setback of a corner lot shall
not be less than the required front yard setback, which is 25’-0”. This provides for a
consistent setback around the street side of a residential development. With the front
yard setback being reduced, it follows that the street side setback should also be
reduced. Also, the subject property is rather narrow, and irregularly shaped, which limits
the layout and design of the units. The reduced street side yard setback will match the
requested front yard setback and facilitates a greater number of dwelling units on the
site, which brings the project closer to the required minimum density of the R-3 Zoning
Regulations.
TTM 14-03, ZV 15-02, MP 14-17, TRE 14-30, and MFADR 14-09
501 N. Santa Anita Avenue
October 13, 2015 – Page 7 of 20
Due to the multiple street frontages and the narrowness of the back portion of the site,
the air conditioning units, for Units 2 and 3, are located within the required street side
yard setback of 25’-0”. However with the grade difference between Colorado Boulevard
and the subject site, and the landscaping that is proposed, the air conditioning units will
not be visible from the public right-of-way. These locations are preferable because they
will be less impactful to the neighboring residential properties to the north along Cornell
Drive and Windsor Road. The air conditioning unit for Unit 11 is also located in the
required street side yard setback, but would be located at the basement level that is 4’-
6” below grade and not visible from the street.
One of the proposed buildings (Building F) will exceed 165’-0” in length, which is the
maximum allowable building length per the City’s zoning regulations. The intent of this
requirement is to limit the massing of the buildings. The proposed design addresses the
massing by providing extensive wall articulations, incorporating architectural projections,
recesses, and balconies to add depth to design. The roof design incorporates shed
roofs and flat roofs that break up the roofline, which deemphasizes the building length.
Building F is located adjacent to Colorado Boulevard across from the commercially
zoned properties to the south. The commercial zones do not have a maximum building
length, so the proposed 219’-0” building length will not adversely impact the properties
across Colorado Boulevard.
Street side yard and front yard setbacks, and fence height along Colorado Boulevard for
incidental structures:
• A 7’-7” street side yard setback and 9’-0” front yard setback for an open stairwell
and ADA chair lift adjacent to Colorado Boulevard in lieu of the 25’-0” required;
• To allow 80 linear feet of fencing adjacent to the property line to exceed 6’-0” in
height with a maximum height of 8’-0” measured from the lowest adjacent grade.
Setback modifications that are needed to accommodate persons with disability are
typically handled administratively, but this request is included with the other applications
subject to the Commission’s review. The proposed locations of the stairwell and ADA
chair lift provide the most convenient path of travel between the two ADA accessible
units (Units 10 and 11), the handicap guest parking space, and the public rights-of-way.
Landscaping around the stairwell and chair lift landings will minimize the impacts to the
streetscape.
The Building Code requires that a minimum 42-inch high safety railing be provided
when the difference between grade levels is greater than 30-inches. The applicant is
proposing a 4’-6” high retaining wall with 3’-6” high open wrought-iron fencing on top to
comply with this requirement. The result is an overall wall and fence height of 8’-0”
when measured from the lowest adjacent grade. The proposed fencing will not
negatively impact the streetscape and is required to comply with the Building Code for
safety purposes.
TTM 14-03, ZV 15-02, MP 14-17, TRE 14-30, and MFADR 14-09
501 N. Santa Anita Avenue
October 13, 2015 – Page 8 of 20
Interior side yard setback
• To allow 85 linear feet of retaining and garden wall adjacent to the north, interior
side property line to exceed 6’-0” in height with a maximum height of 10’-6”
measured from the lowest adjacent grade.
The proposal includes a semi-subterranean parking area that is 4’-6” below grade. The
applicant is proposing a new 4’-6” high retaining wall with a 6’-0” high garden wall on top
adjacent to the north side property line to accommodate a pedestrian ramp that will
provide additional access to and from the parking area. This results in a maximum wall
height of 10’-6” when measured from the lowest adjacent grade. The 6’-0” high garden
wall will provide privacy for the neighboring multiple-family developments to the north of
the site. Changes in grade levels are very common between multiple-family
developments, and height Modifications are usually granted to provide for privacy
between developments. Additionally, the pedestrian ramp will be beneficial to the on-
site circulation and will have minimal impacts to the streetscape.
Oak Tree Encroachment
There is one healthy Coast Live Oak tree located on site adjacent to N. Santa Anita
Avenue at the northeast corner of the subject property. Building walls for Unit 14,
perimeter garden walls, walkways, and landscaping will encroach into the protected
area of the oak tree. Certified Arborists Mr. Scott McAllaster and Ms. Christy Cuba,
prepared an Oak Tree Report dated March, 19 2014, and an Addendum dated August
20, 2015 – refer to attachment 3 for the Oak Tree Report and Addendum. The Arborists
found that with protective measures, the development will not have an adverse impact
on the health of the oak tree.
The Arborists’ report shows that there was another Coast Live Oak tree on site during
their initial site visit. That oak tree was located along the west property line, adjacent to
the light rail right-of-way. The tree was in poor condition due to its proximity to a block
wall that was recently constructed and the Arborist recommended that the tree be
removed. Shortly after the Arborist’s site visit, the tree was cut to a 6’-0” stump. The
applicant is proposing to remove the remaining stump and plant two (2), 36” box Coast
Live Oak trees near Unit 1 along Cornell Drive. This replacement proposal is consistent
with the City’s Tree Preservation Ordinance.
Architectural Style
The Planning Commission is to approve, conditionally approve, or deny the architectural
design of the proposed project. The architectural style of the development is described
as Contemporary – see Attachment No. 4 for the proposed Architectural Plans. The
design is well conceived. The units facing N. Santa Anita Avenue and Colorado
Boulevard will enhance the streetscape of this prominent corner. The exterior of the
buildings include a combination of smooth white and tan stucco, cement siding, and
cultured stone. Metal framed windows, shed roofs with grey multi-dimensional roof tiles,
and thoughtfully placed architectural projections and balconies emphasize the
Contemporary style. The majority of the parking is semi-subterranean and between or
TTM 14-03, ZV 15-02, MP 14-17, TRE 14-30, and MFADR 14-09
501 N. Santa Anita Avenue
October 13, 2015 – Page 9 of 20
behind the buildings so that the architecture is the focus of the development as viewed
from N. Santa Anita Avenue and Colorado Boulevard.
Each unit will have ample private open space in the form or patios and balconies. A
common open space area is provided between Units 3 and 4. The massing, scale,
quality of the design of the proposed development, and the landscaping is consistent or
superior to that of other developments in the area. The Contemporary style will
complement the other new developments proposed and under construction on N. Santa
Anita Avenue. The proposal is consistent with the City’s Multiple-Family Residential
Design Guidelines.
Tentative Tract Map
The proposal for the 20-unit residential project to be condominium units requires that
they be subdivided through the Tentative Tract Map process – see Attachment No. 5 for
the Tentative Tract Map. The proposed subdivision complies with the subdivision
regulations of the Arcadia Municipal Code and the State Subdivision Map Act, and will
not violate any requirements of a California Regional Water Quality Control Board.
The proposed development, with approvals of the Zone Variance, Oak Tree
Encroachment, and the Zoning Modifications, will be consistent with the City’s General
Plan, Multiple-Family Residential Design Guidelines, the Subdivision Code, the State
Subdivision Map Act, and the City’s Zoning Code. The proposed plans have been
reviewed by the various City Departments and all City requirements shall be complied
with to the satisfaction of the Building Official, City Engineer, Community Development
Figure 3. Image of proposed N. Santa Anita Avenue elevation
Figure 4. Image of proposed Colorado Boulevard elevation
TTM 14-03, ZV 15-02, MP 14-17, TRE 14-30, and MFADR 14-09
501 N. Santa Anita Avenue
October 13, 2015 – Page 10 of 20
Administrator, Fire Marshal, and Public Works Services Director, or their respective
designees.
FINDINGS
The following two findings are required for approval of a Tentative Tract Map:
A.1. That the proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for its design
and improvement, is consistent with the City’s General Plan the City’s
Subdivision Regulations, and the State Subdivision Map Act.
The proposed project will replace the church with a new, 20-unit, residential
development that is consistent in character with the High Density Multiple-Family
Residential designation as described in the City’s General Plan and is to be
subdivided into condominiums in a manner that is consistent with the City’s
Subdivision Regulations, and the State Subdivision Map Act.
A.2. That the discharge of waste from the proposed subdivision into the
community sewer system will comply with existing requirements prescribed
by a California Regional Water Quality Control Board.
The Arcadia Public Works Services Department confirmed that the proposed
development will be adequately served by the existing sewer infrastructure and
the requirements of the California Regional Water Quality Control Board will be
satisfied.
The proposed subdivision should not be approved if the Planning Commission finds that
any of the findings for denial listed at the end of this staff report are applicable.
Zone Variance
The applicant is requesting to develop 20 residential condominium units on the subject
property, in lieu of 23 units required per the minimum density requirements of Arcadia
Municipal Code Section 9255.2.7. This is requested because the irregular shape of the
lot and the numerous easements that must be maintained on the western portion of the
site significantly reduces the buildable area of the lot.
Section 9291.1.2 of the Arcadia Municipal Code requires that for a Zone Variance to be
granted, it shall be found that the following prerequisite conditions can be satisfied:
1. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable
to the property involved, or to the intended use of the property, that do not apply
generally to the property or class of use in the same zone or vicinity.
The irregular shape of the property is the basis to approve a variance since the
unique shape and the required easements limit where the residential units may be
located. This unique situation is an exceptional circumstance that necessitates a
reduction in the number of units so as to allow the development to comply with
other essential R-3 Zoning Code requirements, particularly the driveway widths, the
TTM 14-03, ZV 15-02, MP 14-17, TRE 14-30, and MFADR 14-09
501 N. Santa Anita Avenue
October 13, 2015 – Page 11 of 20
number of parking spaces, and the minimum ingress and egress area for each
parking space.
2. That the granting of such variance will not be materially detrimental to the public
health or welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such zone or
vicinity in which the property is located.
A multiple family development on this site would not have these effects. Providing
20 units in lieu of 23 units on the subject property would not be materially
detrimental to the other properties in this R-3 zoned area. Indeed, the reduction in
units would be less impactful to the properties in the vicinity of the subject property
compared to the 23 units required.
3. That such variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial
property right of the applicant possessed by other property in the same zone and
vicinity.
This variance is necessary to allow the site to be developed in a manner similar to
the other R-3 zoned properties of this area, which do not have irregular lot shapes
or easements that reduce the developable area of a property.
4. That the granting of such variance will not adversely affect the comprehensive
general plan.
The proposed development, despite the reduction in the number of units will have a
density of 16 dwelling units per acre, which is consistent with the General Plan
Land Use Designation of High Density Residential that has a density range of 12-30
dwelling units per acre.
Modifications
Section 9292.1.4 of the Arcadia Municipal Code states that the purpose of the
Modification procedures is for the following:
1. Secure an appropriate improvement of a lot;
2. Prevent an unreasonable hardship; or
3. Promote uniformity of development.
The requested Modifications will allow the site to be developed in a manner similar to
other R-3 zoned properties and will prevent an unreasonable hardship due to the
irregular shape of the lot and the various easements that must be maintained, and
therefore cannot be built on. The Modifications will also secure appropriate
improvements that will be compatible with the neighboring commercial and residential
properties.
TTM 14-03, ZV 15-02, MP 14-17, TRE 14-30, and MFADR 14-09
501 N. Santa Anita Avenue
October 13, 2015 – Page 12 of 20
Oak Tree Encroachment
The Certified Arborists found that the proposed encroachments, with protective
measures, will not harm the one Oak Tree. Additionally, the proposed replacement for
the Oak Tree that was removed is consistent with the City’s Tree Preservation
Ordinance.
Architectural Design Review
The proposed Contemporary style architecture, its massing, scale, and quality of
design, and the proposed landscaping match or exceed the design characteristics of
other developments in the area and is consistent with the City’s Multiple-Family
Residential Design Guidelines.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the
Development Services Department prepared an Initial Study for the proposed project
(refer to Attachment No. 6) to analyze its potential environmental impacts. In particular,
the potential impacts associated with the adjacent light rail right-of-way. The Initial Study
determined that there are no significant impacts and that the project is an infill
development project, and qualifies as a Class 32 Categorical Exemption per the
provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section
15305 of the CEQA Guidelines.
PUBLIC COMMENTS/NOTICE
Public hearing notices for this item were
mailed to the property owners and
tenants of those properties that are
located within 300 feet of the subject
property. Pursuant to the provisions of
the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA), the public hearing notice was
published in the Arcadia Weekly on
October 1, 2015.
The property owner met with some of the
neighboring property owners and
residents on September 27, 2015, to go
over the project and hear of any concerns
they might have regarding the proposed
development. Staff also received
comments that the proposed project
would negatively impact the amount of street parking along Windsor Road and Cornell
Drive and that an inadequate number of guest parking spaces were being provided.
Neighbors also voiced concerns regarding vehicular circulation since the neighborhood
has only one point of ingress and egress from N. Santa Anita Avenue, and there would
Figure 5. Notification Area Map
TTM 14-03, ZV 15-02, MP 14-17, TRE 14-30, and MFADR 14-09
501 N. Santa Anita Avenue
October 13, 2015 – Page 13 of 20
be traffic backing up on Newman Avenue due to the difficulties in turning onto Santa
Anita Avenue. There was also concern expressed about egress from the neighborhood
during an emergency.
To address these traffic concerns, the applicant had a traffic study prepared to
determine if any impacts would occur during the construction of this project to the two
nearest intersections: 1) Newman Avenue and Santa Anita Avenue (unsignalized) and
2) Colorado Boulevard and Santa Anita Avenue (signalized) and examine the parking
conditions in the surrounding area. Based on the traffic study (Attachment No. 7) the
Traffic Engineer determined that the project would not have any impacts to the
surrounding area, the parking conditions in the general vicinity were observed and
deemed adequate, and the project will meet the minimum parking requirements for its
residents and guests on-site; therefore, there is no issue with on-street parking.
However, the traffic study recommended that the property owner add a wayfinding sign
on site to direct guests to their designated parking spaces.
Staff, also received a letter of support from the neighboring property owner to the north
at 513 N. Santa Anita Avenue – refer to Attachment No. 8.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Planning Commission find that the proposed right-of-way
vacation of portions of Santa Anita Avenue is consistent with the City’s General Plan
goals and policies and forward a recommendation to the City Council and adopt
Resolution No. 1947 to approve Tentative Tract Map No. TTM 14-03 (73106), Zone
Variance No. ZV 15-02, Modification No. MP 14-17, Oak Tree Encroachment Permit No.
TRE 14-30, and Architectural Design Review No. MFADR 14-09, based on the
aforementioned findings, including that the project is Categorically Exempt from the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and subject to the following conditions:
1. The project shall be developed and maintained by the applicant/property owner
in a manner that is consistent with the plans submitted and conditionally
approved for TTM 14-03 (73106), ZV 15-02, MP 14-17, TRE 14-30, and MFADR
14-09, subject to the approval of the Community Development Administrator or
designee.
2. The project shall be developed and maintained by the applicant/property owner
in compliance with all of the recommended tree protection measures listed in the
Oak Tree Report prepared for this project.
3. The applicant/property owner shall be required to pay a $100 Map fee and $25
Final Map Approval fee prior to the approval of the Tract Map.
4. Prior to approval of the Tract Map or issuance of a building permit, the
applicant/property owner shall either construct or post security for all public
improvements to be shown on the Tentative Map:
TTM 14-03, ZV 15-02, MP 14-17, TRE 14-30, and MFADR 14-09
501 N. Santa Anita Avenue
October 13, 2015 – Page 14 of 20
a. The applicant/property owner shall install new street trees to be shown on
the Grading Plan located in the parkways along Santa Anita Avenue and
Colorado Boulevard per the City of Arcadia Street Tree Master Plan.
b. The applicant/property owner shall construct a new ADA curb ramp at the
corner of Santa Anita Avenue and Colorado Boulevard.
c. The applicant/property owner shall remove and replace the sidewalk along
Santa Anita Avenue from property line to property line.
d. The applicant/property owner shall remove and replace the curb and gutter
from property line to property line along Colorado Boulevard, Cornell Drive,
Windsor Road, and Santa Anita Avenue.
e. The applicant/property owner shall construct new driveway approaches per
the City of Arcadia standard.
f. The applicant/property owner shall construct a new inlet structure and
underground piped storm water system to capture and convey the runoff
from the alley to the north of the site to outlet at an approved drainage
device, subject to the approval of the City Engineer.
5. Prior to the issuance of a building permit or the recordation of the final map,
whichever comes first, the applicant/property owner shall make application to the
City and pay all fees determined by the City to be necessary to vacate a portion
of Colorado Boulevard in conformance with the site plan and the tentative map.
The City shall retain a public utility easement over the entire vacated portion of
the street. Prior to the City proceeding with the street vacation, the developer
shall enter into an agreement in a form and substance approved by the Assistant
City Manager/Development Services Director and the City Attorney or their
designees, and post security in an amount determined by the Assistant City
Manager/Development Services Director or designee, for the construction of a
sidewalk, retaining wall, and all associated elements along Colorado Boulevard
at the proposed property line. The improvements must be completed in the time
required by the Agreement, regardless of the developer’s project proceeding.
6. The applicant/property owner shall submit a Grading Plan prepared by a
registered civil engineer subject to the approval of the City Engineer prior to
issuance of a building permit.
7. The applicant/property owner shall grant the City of Arcadia 5’-0” easements
along Santa Anita Avenue and Cornell Drive for Street and Highway Purposes.
8. The applicant/property owner shall grant the City of Arcadia a corner cutback
dedication at the corner of Santa Anita Avenue and Colorado Boulevard. The
dedication shall be sufficient in size to accommodate a standard ADA curb ramp.
TTM 14-03, ZV 15-02, MP 14-17, TRE 14-30, and MFADR 14-09
501 N. Santa Anita Avenue
October 13, 2015 – Page 15 of 20
9. Prior to issuance of grading permit, the applicant/property owner shall complete
the following:
a. Grant Southern California Edison Co. and any other appropriate entities
easement(s) for their respective on-site facilities by separate documents.
b. Grant the City of Arcadia, easement(s) for Public Utilities for any sewer,
water, and/or storm drain facilities, subject to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer.
c. Provide proof that all affected utility companies have accepted and are
satisfied with the new easements and that they approve of the City of
Arcadia’s quitclaim of the existing Public Utility Easement.
d. Request the City of Arcadia to quitclaim the existing Public Utility Easement
either on the Final Map or by a separate document. The quitclaim must be
approved prior to issuance of a grading permit.
10. The applicant/property owner shall submit a Standard Urban Stormwater
Mitigation Plan (SUSMP) subject to the approval of the City Engineer prior to the
issuance of a building permit.
11. Prior to the approval of the Final Map the applicant/property owner shall submit
to the City Engineer for approval a separate demolition and erosion control plan
prepared by a registered civil engineer, and all existing structures shall be
demolished prior to approval of the Final Map.
12. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant/property owner shall
design and relocate the existing sewer main on Cornell Drive and the subject
property as necessary to accommodate the proposed development. The design
of the affected portions of the sewer main shall include, but not be limited to the
relocation of manholes 507MH047 and 507MH049, and the addition of two new
manholes and sewer mainline piping.
13. Access to a new manhole on the subject property shall be provided for routine
maintenance of the sewer main. The access shall be unrestricted in its height,
minimum 12-feet in width, and capable of supporting H20 vehicle loading.
14. Access to manhole 507MH051 shall be provided from Colorado Boulevard.
Access shall be a minimum 4’ wide. A gate must be capable of being opened by
City personnel with use of a City key, or by providing a lockbox.
15. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Developer/Owner shall remove and
replace the existing 36” x 22” CMP storm drain from Windsor Road to Santa
Anita Avenue with a new storm drain capable of conveying a comparable flow
volume and flow rate as the existing drain. Design of the replacement drain shall
be subject to the approval of the City Engineer.
TTM 14-03, ZV 15-02, MP 14-17, TRE 14-30, and MFADR 14-09
501 N. Santa Anita Avenue
October 13, 2015 – Page 16 of 20
16. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Developer/Owner shall design and
construct a new storm drain capable of conveying flow from the alley south of
Newman Avenue, between Windsor Road and Santa Anita Avenue to Cornell
Drive and then to existing storm drains at either Colorado Boulevard or Santa
Anita Avenue.
17. If it is determined by the Fire Marshal that a common fire suppression system
(NFPA-13) is required to provide fire protection for the development, the fire
service shall be served by a separate fire service with Double Check Detector
Assembly (DCDA).
18. The applicant/property owner shall comply with the General Construction NPDES
Permit. Submit a Notice of Intent (NOI) and pay applicable fees to the State
Water Resources Control Board.
19. The applicant/property owner shall prepare a Storm Water Pollution Prevention
Plan (SWPPP) as part of the General Construction Permit requirements.
20. A Waste Discharge Identification (WDID) number shall be issued by the State
prior to the approval of any grading plans.
21. The proposed development will require a Standard Urban Stormwater Mitigation
Plan (SUSMP) if there will be the creation, addition, or replacement of 5,000
square feet or more of impermeable surface area. The applicant/property owner
shall comply with the SUSMP as prescribed by the Los Angeles County
Department of Public Works SUSMP Manual and the construction plans shall
show the selected measures on the grading plan to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer or designee.
22. The applicant/property owner shall integrate low impact development (LID)
strategies into the site design. These strategies include using infiltration trenches,
bio-retention planter boxes, roof drains connected to a landscaped area, pervious
concrete/paver, etc.
23. Condominium or townhouse complexes of more than 5 individual units shall be
served by a common domestic water meter and service capable of supplying
sufficient water to meet all domestic and fire suppression needs of the total
number of units
24. If the water service is to be used to supply both domestic water and fire
sprinklers for each unit, the developer shall separate the fire service from the
domestic water service at each unit with an approved back flow prevention
device.
25. A separate water service and meter will be required for common area landscape
irrigation.
TTM 14-03, ZV 15-02, MP 14-17, TRE 14-30, and MFADR 14-09
501 N. Santa Anita Avenue
October 13, 2015 – Page 17 of 20
26. A Water Meter Clearance Application, filed with the Public Works Services
Department, shall be required prior to permit issuance
27. New water service installation shall be by the applicant/property owner.
Installation shall be according to the specifications of the Public Works Services
Department, Engineering Division. Abandonment of existing water services, if
necessary, shall be by the Developer, according to Public Works Services
Department, Engineering Division specifications.
28. If any drainage fixture elevation is lower than the elevation of the next upstream
manhole cover (514.92), an approved backwater valve is required.
29. Existing trees in parkways shall remain and be protected.
30. The project shall comply with the 2013 California Building Code, including
Chapter 11-A (residential accessibility) and with the Arcadia Multi-Family
Standards.
31. The applicant/property owner shall install an automatic sprinkler system per the
City of Arcadia Fire Department Single & Multiple-Family Dwelling Sprinkler
Standard prior to obtaining final occupancy.
32. A fire hydrant shall be provided adjacent to the driveway entrance from Windsor
Road.
33. Fire extinguishers of 2A:10BC type shall be provided on the first floor level prior
to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy. The maximum travel distance to
an extinguisher shall be 75 feet.
34. The trash enclosure in the semi-subterranean parking area shall be revised to
accommodate the required trash containers to the satisfaction of the Public
Works Services Director or designee.
35. The applicant/property owner shall comply with all City requirements regarding
building safety, fire prevention, detection, suppression, emergency access, public
right-of-way improvements, parking, water supply and water facilities, sewer
facilities, trash reduction and recycling requirements, and National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) measures to the satisfaction of the
Building Official, Fire Marshal, Public Works Services Director and Development
Services Director. Compliance with these requirements is to be determined by
having fully detailed construction plans submitted for plan check review and
approval by the foregoing City officials and employees.
36. The applicant/property owner shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City
of Arcadia and its officials, officers, employees, and agents from and against any
claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Arcadia, its officials, officers,
employees or agents to attack, set aside, void, or annul any approval or
conditional approval of the City of Arcadia concerning this project and/or land use
TTM 14-03, ZV 15-02, MP 14-17, TRE 14-30, and MFADR 14-09
501 N. Santa Anita Avenue
October 13, 2015 – Page 18 of 20
decision, including but not limited to any approval or conditional approval of the
City Council, Planning Commission, or City Staff, which action is brought within
the time period provided for in Government Code Section 66499.37 or other
provision of law applicable to this project or decision. The City shall promptly
notify the applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding concerning the project
and/or land use decision and the City shall cooperate fully in the defense of the
matter. The City reserves the right, at its own option, to choose its own attorney
to represent the City, its officials, officers, employees, and agents in the defense
of the matter.
37. Approval of TTM 14-03 (73106), ZV 15-02, MP 14-17, TRE 14-30, and MFADR
14-09 shall not take effect unless on or before 30 calendar days after the
Planning Commission adoption of the Resolution, the applicant and property
owner have executed and filed with the Community Development Administrator
or designee an Acceptance Form available from the Development Services
Department to indicate awareness and acceptance of these conditions of
approval.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
Approval
If the Planning Commission intends to approve this project, the Commission should
approve a motion to adopt Resolution No. 1947 to approve Tentative Tract Map No.
TTM 14-03 (73106), Zone Variance No. ZV 15-02, Modification No. MP 14-17, Oak Tree
Encroachment Permit No. TRE 14-30, and Architectural Design Review No. MFADR 14-
09, based on the aforementioned findings, including that the project is Categorically
Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and subject to the
aforementioned conditions, or as may be modified by the Commission.
Denial
If the Planning Commission intends to deny this project, the Commission should state
the specific findings that the proposal does not satisfy based on the evidence presented
with specific reasons for denial, and approve a motion to deny Tentative Tract Map No.
TTM 14-03 (73106), Zone Variance Application No. ZV 15-02, Modification Application
No. MP 14-17, Oak Tree Encroachment Application No. TRE 14-30, and/or Architectural
Design Review No. MFADR 14-09 and direct staff to prepare a resolution for adoption at
the next meeting that incorporates the Commission’s decision and specific findings. The
Planning Commission may wish to consider the following findings, which must be
expanded upon with specific reasons for denial:
D.1. That the proposed map is not consistent with the applicable general and specific
plans as specified in Section 66451 of the Subdivision Map Act.
D.2. That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is not consistent with
applicable general and specific plans and/or the City’s Multiple-Family Residential
Design Guidelines.
TTM 14-03, ZV 15-02, MP 14-17, TRE 14-30, and MFADR 14-09
501 N. Santa Anita Avenue
October 13, 2015 – Page 19 of 20
D.3. That the site is not physically suitable for the type of development.
D.4. That the site is not physically suitable for the density of development.
D.5. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements is likely to cause
substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or
wildlife or their habitat.
D.6. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements is likely to cause
serious public health problems.
D.7. That the requested subdivision injuriously affects the neighborhood wherein said
lot is located.
D.8. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will conflict with
easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property
within the proposed subdivision. In this connection, the legislative body may
approve a map if it finds that alternate easements for access or for use, will be
provided and that these will be substantially equivalent to ones previously
acquired by the public. This finding shall apply only to easements of record or to
easements established by judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction and no
authority is hereby granted to a legislative body to determine that the public at
large has acquired easements for access through or use of property within the
proposed subdivision.
D.9. That the proposed waste discharge would result in or add to violation of
requirements of a California Regional Water Quality Control Board.
D.10. That the requested Modification would not secure an appropriate improvement of
a lot; would not prevent an unreasonable hardship; and would not promote
uniformity of development.
If any Planning Commissioner or other interested party has any questions or comments
regarding this matter prior to the October 13, 2015, public hearing, please contact
Assistant Planner, Jordan Chamberlin by calling (626) 821-4334, or by email to
JChamberlin@ArcadiaCA.gov.
Approved:
Attachment No. 1: Resolution No. 1947
Attachment No. 2: Aerial Photo and Zoning Information and Photos of the Subject
Property and Vicinity
TTM 14-03, ZV 15-02, MP 14-17, TRE 14-30, and MFADR 14-09
501 N. Santa Anita Avenue
October 13, 2015 – Page 20 of 20
Attachment No. 3: Oak Tree Report and Addendum
Attachment No. 4: Architectural Plans
Attachment No. 5: Tentative Tract Map 73106
Attachment No. 6: Initial Study dated September 23, 2015
Attachment No. 7: Traffic Study dated October 8, 2015
Attachment No. 8: Letter of Support from Neighboring Property Owner
Attachment No. 1
Attachment No. 1
Resolution No. 1947
1
RESOLUTION NO. 1947
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ARCADIA APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. TTM 14-03
(73106), ZONE VARIANCE NO. ZV 15-02, MODIFICATION
APPLICATION NO. MP 14-17, OAK TREE ENCROACHMENT
APPLICATION NO. TRE 14-30, MULTIPLE-FAMILY ARCHITECTURAL
DESIGN REVIEW NO. MFADR 14-09, AND GENERAL PLAN
CONSISTENCY NO. GP 15-01 WITH A CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION
UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA)
FOR A 20-UNIT RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM DEVELOPMENT AT 501
N. SANTA ANITA AVENUE
WHEREAS, on April 11, 2014 and April 21, 2014, applications were filed by Mr.
Kenneth Pang, for the design review of a 20 unit residential condominium development
and for the encroachment into the canopy of one Oak Tree by the proposed
condominium development, at 501 N. Santa Anita Avenue, Development Services Case
No. MFADR 14-09 and TRE 14-30; and
WHEREAS, on August 21, 2014 and August 27, 2014, applications were filed by
Mr. Kenneth Pang, for Modifications to allow encroachments into the special setback
along Colorado Boulevard, encroachments into the front yard setback along N. Santa
Anita Avenue, the interior side yard setback along the northerly property line, and the
street side yard setback along Colorado Boulevard; a modification to exceed the
allowable building length of 165’-0” for one building; and a modification to exceed the
maximum allowable fence height of 6’-0” along the interior and street sides, and a
Tentative Tract Map for a 20 unit condominium subdivision at 501 N. Santa Anita
Avenue, Development Services Case No. MP 14-17 and TTM 14-03; and
WHEREAS, on April 23, 2015, an application was filed by Mr. Scott Yang, for a
Zone Variance to allow 20 units in lieu of the 23 required at 501 N. Santa Anita Avenue,
2
Development Services Case No. ZV 15-02. The design review application, oak tree
encroachment application, subdivision application, modification application, zone
variance application, and review of the General Plan consistency for partial vacation of
the street right-of-way along Colorado Boulevard to gain additional land for the private
residential development and provide disabled accessibility onto the subject site from the
sidewalk are hereafter individually and collectively referred to as the “Project”; and
WHEREAS, on September 23, 2015 an Initial Study for the project was prepared
for this project, and it was determined that the Project is exempt under CEQA per
Section 15332 of the CEQA Guidelines of the CEQA Guidelines because the Project is
considered infill development; and
WHEREAS, on October 1, 2015 a duly noticed public hearing was held before
the Planning Commission on said applications, at which time all interested persons
were given full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence; and
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ARCADIA HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. That the factual data submitted by the Community Development
Division in the staff report dated October 13, 2015 and Initial Study dated September 23,
2015 are true and correct.
SECTION 2. This Commission finds, based upon the entire record:
1. That the proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and
improvement, is consistent with the City’s General Plan, the City’s Subdivision
Regulations, and the State Subdivision Map Act.
3
FACT: The proposed project will replace the church with a new, 20-unit,
residential development that is consistent in character with the High Density Multiple-
Family Residential designation as described in the City’s General Plan and is to be
subdivided into condominiums in a manner that is consistent with the City’s Subdivision
Regulations, and the State Subdivision Map Act..
2. That the discharge of waste from the proposed subdivision into the
community sewer system will comply with existing requirements prescribed by a
California Regional Water Quality Control Board.
FACT: The Arcadia Public Works Services Department confirmed that the
proposed development will be adequately served by the existing sewer infrastructure
and the requirements of the California Regional Water Quality Control Board will be
satisfied..
3. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions
applicable to the property involved, or to the intended use of the property, that do not
apply generally to the property or class of use in the same zone or vicinity.
FACT: The irregular shape of the property is the basis to approve a variance
since the unique shape and the required easements limit where the residential units may
be located. This unique situation is an exceptional circumstance that necessitates a
reduction in the number of units so as to allow the development to comply with other
essential R-3 Zoning Code requirements, particularly the driveway widths, the number of
parking spaces, and the minimum ingress and egress area for each parking space.
4
4. That the granting of such variance will not be materially detrimental to the
public health or welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such zone or
vicinity in which the property is located.
FACT: A multiple family development on this site would not have these effects.
Providing 20 units in lieu of 23 units on the subject property would not be materially
detrimental to the other properties in this R-3 zoned area. Indeed, the reduction in units
would be less impactful to the properties in the vicinity of the subject property compared
to the 23 units required.
5. That such variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a
substantial property right of the applicant possessed by other property in the same zone
and vicinity.
FACT: This variance is necessary to allow the site to be developed in a manner
similar to the other R-3 zoned properties of this area, which do not have irregular lot
shapes or easements that reduce the developable area of a property..
6. That the granting of such variance will not adversely affect the
comprehensive general plan.
FACT: The proposed development, despite the reduction in the number of units
will have a density of 16 dwelling units per acre, which is consistent with the General
Plan Land Use Designation of High Density Residential that has a density range of 12-30
dwelling units per acre..
7. That the proposed Zoning Modification will secure an appropriate
improvement of a lot; prevent an unreasonable hardship; and/or promote uniformity of
development.
5
FACT: The requested Modifications will allow the site to be developed in a
manner similar to other R-3 zoned properties and will prevent an unreasonable hardship
due to the irregular shape of the lot and the various easements that must be maintained,
and therefore cannot be built on. The Modifications will also secure appropriate
improvements that will be compatible with the neighboring commercial and residential
properties.
8. That this Project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) per Section 15332 of the CEQA Guidelines.
9. That the partial vacation of the City’s street right-of-way along Colorado
Boulevard to gain additional land for the private residential development and provide
disabled accessibility onto the subject site from the sidewalk is consistent with the
General Plan, and that the Planning Commission forward a recommendation of approval
of the City Council. This transaction would occur concurrently with the street vacation
and improvements to Colorado Boulevard. The Planning Commission action,
determination of the General Plan consistency, is not a project for the purposes of
CEQA. The proposed partial vacation of the right-of-way by the City Council is expected
to be categorically exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15301(c) because the action
consists of a legal transfer of ownership which will result in negligible or no expansion of
use beyond the project analyzed in the General Plan Environmental Impact Report,
adopted in 2010.
10. That the Development Services Director or designee is authorized to
approve and execute, if necessary, a subdivision agreement for this project.
6
SECTION 3. For the foregoing reasons the Planning Commission determines
that the Project is Categorically Exempt per Section 15332 of the CEQA Guidelines, and
approves Tentative Tract Map No. TTM 14-03 (73106), Zone Variance Application No.
ZV 15-02, Modification Application No. MP 14-17, Oak Tree Encroachment Application
No. TRE 14-30, and Architectural Design Review No. MFADR 14-09, for a 20-unit
residential condominium development at 501 N. Santa Anita Avenue, subject to the
conditions of approval attached hereto.
SECTION 4. The Secretary shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
Passed, approved and adopted this _____ day of _____________, 2015.
Chairman, Planning Commission
ATTEST:
______________________
Secretary
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
______________________
Stephen P. Deitsch
City Attorney
7
RESOLUTION NO. 1947
Conditions of Approval
1. The project shall be developed and maintained by the applicant/property owner in
a manner that is consistent with the plans submitted and conditionally approved
for TTM 14-03 (73106), ZV 15-02, MP 14-17, TRE 14-30, and MFADR 14-09,
subject to the approval of the Community Development Administrator or designee.
2. The project shall be developed and maintained by the applicant/property owner in
compliance with all of the recommended tree protection measures listed in the
Oak Tree Report prepared for this project.
3. The applicant/property owner shall be required to pay a $100 Map fee and $25
Final Map Approval fee prior to the approval of the Tract Map.
4. Prior to approval of the Tract Map or issuance of a building permit, the
applicant/property owner shall either construct or post security for all public
improvements to be shown on the Tentative Map:
a. The applicant/property owner shall install new street trees to be shown on
the Grading Plan located in the parkways along Santa Anita Avenue and
Colorado Boulevard per the City of Arcadia Street Tree Master Plan.
b. The applicant/property owner shall construct a new ADA curb ramp at the
corner of Santa Anita Avenue and Colorado Boulevard.
c. The applicant/property owner shall remove and replace the sidewalk along
Santa Anita Avenue from property line to property line.
d. The applicant/property owner shall remove and replace the curb and gutter
from property line to property line along Colorado Boulevard, Cornell Drive,
Windsor Road, and Santa Anita Avenue.
e. The applicant/property owner shall construct new driveway approaches per
the City of Arcadia standard.
f. The applicant/property owner shall construct a new inlet structure and
underground piped storm water system to capture and convey the runoff
from the alley to the north of the site to outlet at an approved drainage
device, subject to the approval of the City Engineer.
5. Prior to the issuance of a building permit or the recordation of the final map,
whichever comes first, the applicant/property owner shall make application to the
City and pay all fees determined by the City to be necessary to vacate a portion
of Colorado Boulevard in conformance with the site plan and the tentative map.
The City shall retain a public utility easement over the entire vacated portion of
the street. Prior to the City proceeding with the street vacation, the developer
shall enter into an agreement in a form and substance approved by the Assistant
City Manager/Development Services Director and the City Attorney or their
designees, and post security in an amount determined by the Assistant City
Manager/Development Services Director or designee, for the construction of a
8
sidewalk, retaining wall, and all associated elements along Colorado Boulevard at
the proposed property line. The improvements must be completed in the time
required by the Agreement, regardless of the developer’s project proceeding.
6. The applicant/property owner shall submit a Grading Plan prepared by a
registered civil engineer subject to the approval of the City Engineer prior to
issuance of a building permit.
7. The applicant/property owner shall grant the City of Arcadia 5’-0” easements
along Santa Anita Avenue and Cornell Drive for Street and Highway Purposes.
8. The applicant/property owner shall grant the City of Arcadia a corner cutback
dedication at the corner of Santa Anita Avenue and Colorado Boulevard. The
dedication shall be sufficient in size to accommodate a standard ADA curb ramp.
9. Prior to issuance of grading permit, the applicant/property owner shall complete
the following:
a. Grant Southern California Edison Co. and any other appropriate entities
easement(s) for their respective on-site facilities by separate documents.
b. Grant the City of Arcadia, easement(s) for Public Utilities for any sewer,
water, and/or storm drain facilities, subject to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer.
c. Provide proof that all affected utility companies have accepted and are
satisfied with the new easements and that they approve of the City of
Arcadia’s quitclaim of the existing Public Utility Easement.
d. Request the City of Arcadia to quitclaim the existing Public Utility
Easement either on the Final Map or by a separate document. The
quitclaim must be approved prior to issuance of a grading permit.
10. The applicant/property owner shall submit a Standard Urban Stormwater
Mitigation Plan (SUSMP) subject to the approval of the City Engineer prior to the
issuance of a building permit.
11. Prior to the approval of the Final Map the applicant/property owner shall submit to
the City Engineer for approval a separate demolition and erosion control plan
prepared by a registered civil engineer, and all existing structures shall be
demolished prior to approval of the Final Map.
12. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant/property owner shall
design and relocate the existing sewer main on Cornell Drive and the subject
property as necessary to accommodate the proposed development. The design of
the affected portions of the sewer main shall include, but not be limited to the
relocation of manholes 507MH047 and 507MH049, and the addition of two new
manholes and sewer mainline piping.
13. Access to a new manhole on the subject property shall be provided for routine
maintenance of the sewer main. The access shall be unrestricted in its height,
minimum 12-feet in width, and capable of supporting H20 vehicle loading.
9
14. Access to manhole 507MH051 shall be provided from Colorado Boulevard.
Access shall be a minimum 4’ wide. A gate must be capable of being opened by
City personnel with use of a City key, or by providing a lockbox.
15. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Developer/Owner shall remove and
replace the existing 36” x 22” CMP storm drain from Windsor Road to Santa Anita
Avenue with a new storm drain capable of conveying a comparable flow volume
and flow rate as the existing drain. Design of the replacement drain shall be
subject to the approval of the City Engineer.
16. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Developer/Owner shall design and
construct a new storm drain capable of conveying flow from the alley south of
Newman Avenue, between Windsor Road and Santa Anita Avenue to Cornell
Drive and then to existing storm drains at either Colorado Boulevard or Santa
Anita Avenue.
17. If it is determined by the Fire Marshal that a common fire suppression system
(NFPA-13) is required to provide fire protection for the development, the fire
service shall be served by a separate fire service with Double Check Detector
Assembly (DCDA).
18. The applicant/property owner shall comply with the General Construction NPDES
Permit. Submit a Notice of Intent (NOI) and pay applicable fees to the State
Water Resources Control Board.
19. The applicant/property owner shall prepare a Storm Water Pollution Prevention
Plan (SWPPP) as part of the General Construction Permit requirements.
20. A Waste Discharge Identification (WDID) number shall be issued by the State
prior to the approval of any grading plans.
21. The proposed development will require a Standard Urban Stormwater Mitigation
Plan (SUSMP) if there will be the creation, addition, or replacement of 5,000
square feet or more of impermeable surface area. The applicant/property owner
shall comply with the SUSMP as prescribed by the Los Angeles County
Department of Public Works SUSMP Manual and the construction plans shall
show the selected measures on the grading plan to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer or designee.
22. The applicant/property owner shall integrate low impact development (LID)
strategies into the site design. These strategies include using infiltration trenches,
bio-retention planter boxes, roof drains connected to a landscaped area, pervious
concrete/paver, etc.
23. Condominium or townhouse complexes of more than 5 individual units shall be
served by a common domestic water meter and service capable of supplying
sufficient water to meet all domestic and fire suppression needs of the total
number of units
24. If the water service is to be used to supply both domestic water and fire sprinklers
for each unit, the developer shall separate the fire service from the domestic
water service at each unit with an approved back flow prevention device.
10
25. A separate water service and meter will be required for common area landscape
irrigation.
26. A Water Meter Clearance Application, filed with the Public Works Services
Department, shall be required prior to permit issuance
27. New water service installation shall be by the applicant/property owner.
Installation shall be according to the specifications of the Public Works Services
Department, Engineering Division. Abandonment of existing water services, if
necessary, shall be by the Developer, according to Public Works Services
Department, Engineering Division specifications.
28. If any drainage fixture elevation is lower than the elevation of the next upstream
manhole cover (514.92), an approved backwater valve is required.
29. Existing trees in parkways shall remain and be protected.
30. The project shall comply with the 2013 California Building Code, including
Chapter 11-A (residential accessibility) and with the Arcadia Multi-Family
Standards.
31. The applicant/property owner shall install an automatic sprinkler system per the
City of Arcadia Fire Department Single & Multiple-Family Dwelling Sprinkler
Standard prior to obtaining final occupancy.
32. A fire hydrant shall be provided adjacent to the driveway entrance from Windsor
Road.
33. Fire extinguishers of 2A:10BC type shall be provided on the first floor level prior to
the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy. The maximum travel distance to an
extinguisher shall be 75 feet.
34. The trash enclosure in the semi-subterranean parking area shall be revised to
accommodate the required trash containers to the satisfaction of the Public Works
Services Director or designee.
35. The applicant/property owner shall comply with all City requirements regarding
building safety, fire prevention, detection, suppression, emergency access, public
right-of-way improvements, parking, water supply and water facilities, sewer
facilities, trash reduction and recycling requirements, and National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) measures to the satisfaction of the
Building Official, Fire Marshal, Public Works Services Director and Development
Services Director. Compliance with these requirements is to be determined by
having fully detailed construction plans submitted for plan check review and
approval by the foregoing City officials and employees.
36. The applicant/property owner shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City
of Arcadia and its officials, officers, employees, and agents from and against any
claim, action, or proceeding against the City of Arcadia, its officials, officers,
employees or agents to attack, set aside, void, or annul any approval or
conditional approval of the City of Arcadia concerning this project and/or land use
decision, including but not limited to any approval or conditional approval of the
City Council, Planning Commission, or City Staff, which action is brought within
11
the time period provided for in Government Code Section 66499.37 or other
provision of law applicable to this project or decision. The City shall promptly
notify the applicant of any claim, action, or proceeding concerning the project
and/or land use decision and the City shall cooperate fully in the defense of the
matter. The City reserves the right, at its own option, to choose its own attorney to
represent the City, its officials, officers, employees, and agents in the defense of
the matter.
37. Approval of TTM 14-03 (73106), ZV 15-02, MP 14-17, TRE 14-30, and MFADR
14-09 shall not take effect unless on or before 30 calendar days after the Planning
Commission adoption of the Resolution, the applicant and property owner have
executed and filed with the Community Development Administrator or designee
an Acceptance Form available from the Development Services Department to
indicate awareness and acceptance of these conditions of approval.
Attachment No. 2
Attachment No. 2
Aerial Photo and Zoning Information and
Photos of the Subject Property and Vicinity
Photo of subject property, 501 N. Santa Anita Avenue, from onsite, adjacent to N. Santa Anita Avenue.
Photo of subject property, 501 N. Santa Anita Avenue, from N. Santa Anita Avenue.
View of the back half of the subject property to be quitclaimed. Photo taken from onsite.
View of the back half of the subject property, to be quitclaimed. Photo taken from the corner of Windsor Road
and Cornell Drive.
Photo of subject property, 501 N. Santa Anita Avenue, from Colorado Boulevard.
Photo of concrete slope along Colorado Boulevard adjacent to the subject property.
Photo of adjacent property to the northwest, 520 Cornell Drive.
Photo of adjacent property to the north, 515 Windsor Road.
Photo of adjacent property to the north, 514 Windsor Road.
Photo of adjacent property to the north, 513 N. Santa Anita Avenue Road.
Photo of adjacent property to the northeast, 510 N. Santa Anita Avenue.
Photo of adjacent property to the east, a Chevron Gas Station, at 500 N. Santa Anita Avenue.
Photo of adjacent property to the southeast, an In-N-Out Burger, at 420 N. Santa Anita Boulevard.
Photo of adjacent commercial property to the south which includes Fasching's Car Wash, at 425 N. Santa Anita
Avenue.
Photo of adjacent rail right-of-way to the east.
Photo of adjacent park, Newcastle Park to the east beyond the rail right-of-way , at 143 W. Colorado Boulevard.
Attachment No. 3
Attachment No. 3
Oak Tree Report and Addendum
1
Jordan Chamberlin
From:Christy Cuba <christy@cycarlberg.com>
Sent:Thursday, August 20, 2015 9:09 AM
To:F8GI Yahoo; Jordan Chamberlin
Subject:RE: Addendum to Arborist Report, latest COA from Engineer/PW
Dear Ms. Chamberlin,
This email is a follow-up to our phone call of this morning. I have reviewed the updated site plans with regard
to the encroachments on two oak trees and one ash tree in the northeast sections of the property at 501 Santa
Anita Avenue. The encroachments do not appear to have changed significantly from the original plans
addressed in our protected tree report of March 19, 2014. In my opinion, no new recommendations are
necessary.
Please feel welcome to contact me with any questions. Thank you.
Christy Cuba
Carlberg Associates
626.428.5072
www.cycarlberg.com
Sent from my Android
----- Forwarded Message -----
From: Jordan Chamberlin <jchamberlin@ci.arcadia.ca.us>
To: 'Scott Yang' <f8giscott@yahoo.com>
Cc: Kenneth Pang <kpang@cda-arc.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2015 7:45 AM
Subject: RE: Addendum to Arborist Report, latest COA from Engineer/PW
Scott,
I have the latest from Engineering and I am waiting on PW to finalize theirs. Regarding the letter
from the Arborist, it doesn’t appear that much has changed adjacent to the tree that is to be
encroached upon but it would be helpful if she addressed that as well. It could be as simple as a
line or two on that, that way both the Oak Tree Removal and Oak Tree Encroachment are up to
date. The additional trees she recommends and their location seem good. The landscape
architect can update accordingly. Thanks.
__________________________________
Jordan Chamberlin
Assistant Planner|City of Arcadia
626-821-4334| JChamberlin@ArcadiaCA.gov
From: Scott Yang [mailto:f8giscott@yahoo.com]
Sent: Monday, August 17, 2015 11:29 PM
To: Jordan Chamberlin
Cc: Kenneth Pang
Subject: Fw: Addendum to Arborist Report, latest COA from Engineer/PW
Attachment No. 4
Attachment No. 4
Architectural Plans
0510203050
E
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
NEW
PL
NEW
PL
NEW
NEW
NEW
NEW
NEW
NEW
NEW
EXISTING
EXISTING
COLORADO BLVD
SANTA ANITA AVE
TRASH 1 H
123 456
7
9
10
8
SEWAGE EASEMENT
5'-0" CITY ENGINEERING
EASEMENT
ADJACENT BLDG.
ADJACENTBLDG.
ADJACENT BLDG.
CORNELL DRIVE
WINDSOR RD TRASH 2
10'-0" SCE POWER POLE
EASEMENT
SEWAGE EASEMENT
LOT A
LOT B
LOT A
LOT B
LOT A
LOT B
AS-101.1
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCEARCADIA SANTA ANITA LLC
PARTICIPANTS
501 N. SANTA ANITA AVE
RESIDENTIAL NEVIS_SANTA ANITA ARCADIA, CA 91006
VICINITY MAPSCALE: N.T.S
SHEET INDEX
PROJECT DATA
DIAGRAM 1: LOT A & BSCALE: N.T.SDIAGRAM 2: LOT GAINS AND LOSSESSCALE: N.T.SDIAGRAM 3: USEABLE VS. UNUSEABLE LANDSCALE: N.T.S
SITE NOTES
0510203050
E
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
NEW
PL
NEW
PL
NEW
NEW
NEW
NEW
NEW
NEW
NEW
EXISTING
EXISTING
G
GG
G
G
G
G
UNIT - 1TYPE - F
BLDG B. UNIT- 3 TYPE - E1
COLORADO BLVD
SANTA ANITA AVE
TRASH 1 H
UNIT - 7TYPE -A3
UNIT - 8TYPE -A3
UNIT - 9TYPE -A2
UNIT - 11TYPE -D2(COVEREDUNIT)UNIT - 14TYPE -D3
UNIT - 18TYPE - A1
UNIT - 17TYPE -A3B
UNIT - 16TYPE -A2
UNIT - 15TYPE - A1
UNIT - 20TYPE - BUNIT 5TYPE - A1
UNIT - 10TYPE - A4
(COVEREDUNIT)
UNIT - 12TYPE - D1UNIT - 13TYPE - D1
UNIT - 19TYPE -A2
1 23456
7
9
10
UNIT - 4TYPE - C
UNIT - 6TYPE -A2
8
ADJACENT BLDG.
ADJACENTBLDG.
ADJACENT BLDG.
BLDG. C
BLDG. D
BLDG. E
BLDG. F
BLDG. AUNIT - 2TYPE - E
CORNELL DRIVE
DSOR RD TRASH 2
1
0510203050
E
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
NEW
PL
NEW
PL
NEW
NEW
NEW
NEW
NEW
NEW
NEW
EXISTING
EXISTING
G
GG
G
G
G
G
UNIT - 1TYPE - F
BLDG B.UNIT - 3TYPE -E1
COLORADO BLVD
SANTA ANITA AVE
TRASH
UNIT - 7TYPE - A3
UNIT - 8TYPE - A3
UNIT - 9TYPE - A2
UNIT - 14TYPE - D3
UNIT - 18TYPE - A1
UNIT - 17TYPE -A3B
UNIT - 16TYPE - A2
UNIT - 15TYPE - A1
UNIT - 20TYPE - BUNIT 5TYPE - A1
UNIT - 10TYPE - A4
(COVEREDUNIT)
UNIT - 12TYPE - D1UNIT - 13TYPE - D1
UNIT - 19TYPE - A2
1 23
7
9
10
UNIT - 4TYPE - C
UNIT - 6TYPE - A2
8
ADJACENT BLDG.
ADJACENTBLDG.
ADJACENT BLDG.
BLDG. C
BLDG. D
BLDG. E
BLDG. F
BLDG. AUNIT - 2TYPE - E
CORNELL DRIVE
SOR RD
H
UNIT - 11TYPE - D2
(COVEREDUNIT)
456
TRASH 2
1
SITE KEY NOTESSITE KEY NOTES
AS-101.2
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCEARCADIA SANTA ANITA LLC
SITE NOTES
0510203050
E
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
NEW
PL
NEW
PL
NEW
NEW
NEW
NEW
NEW
NEW
NEW
EXISTING
EXISTING
G
GG
G
G
G
G
UNIT - 1TYPE - F
BLDG B.UNIT - 3TYPE - E1
COLORADO BLVD
SANTA ANITA AVE
TRASH
UNIT - 7TYPE - A3
UNIT - 8TYPE - A3
UNIT - 9TYPE - A2
UNIT - 14TYPE - D3
UNIT - 18TYPE - A1
UNIT - 17TYPE - A3B
UNIT - 16TYPE - A2
UNIT - 15TYPE - A1
UNIT - 20TYPE - B
UNIT 5TYPE - A1
UNIT - 10TYPE - A4
(COVEREDUNIT)
UNIT - 13TYPE - D1
UNIT - 19TYPE - A2
123
7
9
10
UNIT - 4TYPE - C
UNIT - 6TYPE - A2
8
ADJACENT BLDG.
ADJACENTBLDG.
ADJACENT BLDG.
BLDG. C
BLDG. D
BLDG. F
BLDG. AUNIT - 2TYPE - E
CORNELL DRIVE
DSOR RD
H
UNIT - 11TYPE - D2
(COVEREDUNIT)
456
UNIT - 12TYPE - D1
BALCONYBALCONY
TRASH 2
1
SITE KEY NOTESSITE KEY NOTES
0510203050
E
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
NEW
PL
NEW
PL
NEW
NEW
NEW
NEW
NEW
NEW
NEW
EXISTING
EXISTING
G
GG
G
G
G
G
UNIT - 1TYPE - F
BLDG B. UNIT- 3 TYPE - E1
COLORADO BLVD
SANTA ANITA AVE
TRASH H
UNIT - 7TYPE -A3
UNIT - 8TYPE -A3
UNIT - 9TYPE -A2
UNIT - 11TYPE -
D2 (ADA)UNIT - 14TYPE -D3
UNIT - 18TYPE - A1
UNIT - 17TYPE -A3B
UNIT - 16TYPE -A2
UNIT - 15TYPE - A1
UNIT - 20TYPE - B UNIT 5TYPE - A1
UNIT - 10TYPE - A4
(COVEREDUNIT)
UNIT - 12TYPE - D1UNIT - 13TYPE - D1
UNIT - 19TYPE -A2
1234 56
7
9
10
UNIT - 4TYPE - C
UNIT - 6TYPE -A2
8
ADJACENT BLDG.
ADJACENTBLDG.
ADJACENT BLDG.
BLDG. C
BLDG. D
BLDG. E
BLDG. F
BLDG. AUNIT - 2TYPE - E
CORNELL DRIVE
SOR RD TRASH 2
1
AS-101.3
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCEARCADIA SANTA ANITA LLC
SITE NOTES
0510203050
E
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
NEW
PL
NEW
PL
NEW
NEW
NEW
NEW
NEW
NEW
NEW
EXISTING
EXISTING
G
GG
G
G
G
COLORADO BLVD
CORNELL DRIVE
OR RD
SANTA ANITA AVE
COLORADO BLVD
CORNELL DRIVE
R RD
SANTA ANITA AVE
0510203050
E
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
NEW
PL
NEW
PL
NEW
NEW
NEW
NEW
NEW
NEW
NEW
EXISTING
EXISTING
G
GG
G
G
G
0510203050
E
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
NEW
PL
NEW
PL
NEW
NEW
NEW
NEW
NEW
NEW
NEW
EXISTING
EXISTING
G
GG
G
G
G
AS-101.4
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCEARCADIA SANTA ANITA LLC
SITE NOTES
AS-102
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCEARCADIA SANTA ANITA LLC
Not To ScaleVICINITY MAP
PL
NEW
SITE DETAILSAS-103
8
TRASH ENCLOSURE 1 ENLARGED PLANSCALE: 1/4" = 1'
3
SITE ENTRY SIGNSCALE: N. T. S.
2
HANDICAP PARKING SIGNSCALE: N. T. S.
14
GUARD POSTSCALE: N. T. S.
19
11
TRASH ENCLOSURE 1 ELEVATIONSCALE:1/4"=1'-0"
9
CANE BOLT DETAILSCALE: N.T.S
10
SLIDE BOLT LATCHSCALE: N.T.S
1413
HINGE DETAILSCALE: N.T.S
12
METAL GATE @ TRASH WALLSCALE: N.T.S
20
TRASH ENCLOSURE WALL SECTIONSCALE: N. T. S.
HANDICAP PARKING SYMBOLSCALE: N. T. S.
A
B
CAST IN PLACE CONC. CURBSCALE: N. T. S.
TRASH ENCLOSURE 1 ELEVATIONSCALE:1/4"=1'-0"
18
SECTION AT PAVEMENTSCALE: N.T.S
17
DRAIN PIPE THRU CURBSCALE: N.T.S
6
DETECTABLE DOMES @ CROSSWALKSCALE: N.T.S
16
METAL CORRUGATED ROOFING FOR TRASH SCALE: 1 1/2" =1'-0"
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCEARCADIA SANTA ANITA LLC
5
HANDRAIL START AND RETURNSCALE: N.T.S
15
ENLARGED SITE STAIR & ADA VAN ACCESSIBLE PARKING SPACESCALE: 1/4" = 1'
7
PRECAST WHEEL STOPSCALE: N.T.S
SITE DETAILSAS-104
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCEARCADIA SANTA ANITA LLC
1
TRASH ENCLOSURE 2 ENLARGED PLANSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"
2
TRASH ENCLOSURE 2 ELEVATIONSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"
3
TRASH ENCLOSURE 2 ELEVATIONSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"
4
TRASH ENCLOSURE 2 ELEVATIONSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"
5
MAILBOX ELEVATIONSSCALE: 3/4" = 1'-0"
6
MAILBOX PEDESTAL AND PLANSCALE: 3/4" = 1'-0"
7
ENLARGED PLAN OF RAMPSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"
8
SECTION OF RAMPSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"
9
SECTION OF RAMPSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
R
O
Exp.OI
N
P
D
N
G
E
HA
RE
AT
ST
H
S
TS
K
I
R
E
E
AN
IO
S
E
F
S
N
45846
O
ERE
GN
12/31/16F
O
R
N
I
A
L
I
F
CA
CIVIL
A
NGI
N J
E
LI
G
-
L
20-UNIT CONDOMINIUM501 N. SANTA ANITA AVE. ARCADIA, CA 91006
SANTA ANITA ARCADIA, LLC9674 TELSTAR AVE., #C,EL MONTE, CA 91731PH: 626-255-7439
APN: 5775-027-027G
SANTA ANITA ARCADIA, LLC
R
O
Exp.OI
N
P
D
N
G
E
HA
RE
AT
ST
H
S
TS
K
I
R
E
E
AN
IO
S
E
F
S
N
45846
O
ERE
GN
12/31/16F
O
R
N
I
A
L
I
F
CA
CIVIL
A
NG I
N J
E
LI
G
-
L
20-UNIT CONDOMINIUM501 N. SANTA ANITA AVE. ARCADIA, CA 91006
SANTA ANITA ARCADIA, LLC9674 TELSTAR AVE., #C,EL MONTE, CA 91731PH: 626-255-7439
APN: 5775-027-027
MASTER BEDROOMTYPE A
BEDROOM 2
BEDROOM 1
LIVING ROOMKITCHENDINING ROOM
TYPE AGARAGE
LAUNDRY
TYPE A
TYPE A
A-101.1
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCEARCADIA SANTA ANITA LLC
UNIT BREAKDOWN
MASTER BEDROOMTYPE A2
BEDROOM 2
BEDROOM 1
LIVING ROOMKITCHENDINING ROOM
TYPE A2GARAGE
LAUNDRY
TYPE A2
TYPE A2
A-101.2
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCEARCADIA SANTA ANITA LLC
UNIT BREAKDOWN
TYPE A3MASTER BEDROOMBEDROOM 2
BEDROOM 1MASTER BEDROOMBEDROOM 2
BEDROOM 1
TYPE A3LIVING ROOMKITCHENDINING ROOM
TYPE A3GARAGE
LAUNDRY
TYPE A3
A-101.3
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCEARCADIA SANTA ANITA LLC
UNIT BREAKDOWN
TYPE A3BMASTER BEDROOMBEDROOM 2
BEDROOM 1MASTER BEDROOMBEDROOM 2
BEDROOM 1
LIVING ROOMKITCHENDINING ROOM
TYPE A3BTYPE A3BGARAGE
LAUNDRY
TYPE A3B
A-101.4
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCEARCADIA SANTA ANITA LLC
UNIT BREAKDOWN
MASTER BEDROOMTYPE A4
BEDROOM 2
BEDROOM 1
LIVING ROOMKITCHENDINING ROOM
PANTRY
TYPE A4ADA
CHAIRLIFT
WATER CLOSETCLR. SPACELAVATORY
CLR. SPACE
GARAGE
TYPE A4
TYPE A4
A-101.5
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCEARCADIA SANTA ANITA LLC
UNIT BREAKDOWN
TYPE B
LIVING ROOM
KITCHEN
GARAGE
BEDROOM 2BEDROOM 1
TYPE B
MASTER BEDROOMSTUDY
LINEN
LAUNDRY
TYPE B
A-102
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCEARCADIA SANTA ANITA LLC
UNIT BREAKDOWN
GARAGE
LIVING ROOM
KITCHEN
BEDROOM 1
DINING ROOM
TYPE C
BEDROOM 3BEDROOM 2
MASTER BEDROOM
STUDY
TYPE C
TYPE C
A-103
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCEARCADIA SANTA ANITA LLC
UNIT BREAKDOWN
GARAGE
TYPE D
LIVING ROOM
KITCHENDINING ROOM
TYPE DADA
CHAIRLIFT
MASTER BEDROOM
BEDROOM 2
BEDROOM 1
LAUNDRY
TYPE D
TYPE D
A-104.1
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCEARCADIA SANTA ANITA LLC
UNIT BREAKDOWN
GARAGELAUNDRY
TYPE D2BONUS ROOM
LIVING ROOM
KITCHENDINING ROOM
BEDROOM 1
TYPE D2
WATER CLOSETCLR. SPACELAVATORY
CLR. SPACEBATHTUB
CLR. SPACE
ADA
CHAIRLIFT
MASTER BEDROOMBEDROOM 2
TYPE D2
TYPE D2
A-104.2
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCEARCADIA SANTA ANITA LLC
UNIT BREAKDOWN
GARAGE
TYPE D3
LIVING ROOM
KITCHENDINING ROOM
TYPE D3ADA
CHAIRLIFT
MASTER BEDROOM
BEDROOM 2
BEDROOM 1
LAUNDRY
TYPE D3976
TYPE D3
A-104.3
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCEARCADIA SANTA ANITA LLC
UNIT BREAKDOWN
BEDROOM 1
LIVING ROOMKITCHEN
TYPE E1MASTER BEDROOM
BEDROOM 3
BEDROOM 2
LOFT
TYPE E1
TYPE E1
A-105
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCEARCADIA SANTA ANITA LLC
UNIT BREAKDOWN
LIVING ROOMKITCHEN
TYPE E2
BEDROOM 1
MASTER BEDROOM
BEDROOM 2
TYPE E2
TYPE E2
A-106
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCEARCADIA SANTA ANITA LLC
UNIT BREAKDOWN
TYPE F
GARAGE
KITCHENLIVING ROOM
TYPE FLOFT
MASTER BEDROOM
BEDROOM 1BEDROOM 2
TYPE F
A-107
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCEARCADIA SANTA ANITA LLC
UNIT BREAKDOWN
A-200.1
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCEARCADIA SANTA ANITA LLC
A-200.2
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCEARCADIA SANTA ANITA LLC
HIGHEST STREET CURB ELEVATION+510'-10.32"2ND FLOOR+525-0"FIRST STORY LINE+510'-0"ATTIC
+535-0"
AVERAGE HEIGHT OF ROOF+539'-1.75"T.O. ROOF+541'-3.5"SIDWALK+508'-6"1ST FLOOR MEZZANINE+514'-0"GARAGE+505'-6"
HIGHEST STREET CURB ELEVATION+510'-10.32"2ND FLOOR+520'-0"FIRST STORY LINE+510'-0"
AVERAGE HEIGHT OF ROOF+536'-2"
T.O. ROOF+538'-4"SIDWALK+508'-6"GARAGE+505'-6"ATTIC
+531'-0"
HIGHEST STREET CURB ELEVATION+510'-10.32"2ND FLOOR+525-0"FIRST STORY LINE+510'-0"ATTIC
+535-0"
AVERAGE HEIGHT OF ROOF+539'-1.75"T.O. ROOF+541'-3.5"SIDWALK+508'-6"
1ST FLOOR MEZZANINE+514'-0"GARAGE+505'-6"
HIGHEST STREET CURB ELEVATION+510'-10.32"2ND FLOOR+520'-0"FIRST STORY LINE+510'-0"
AVERAGE HEIGHT OF ROOF+536'-2"
T.O. ROOF+538'-4"SIDWALK+508'-6"GARAGE+505'-6"ATTIC
+531'-0"
HIGHEST STREET CURB ELEVATION+510'-10.32"
2ND FLOOR+525-0"FIRST STORY LINE+510'-0"ATTIC
+535-0"
AVERAGE HEIGHT OF ROOF+539'-1.75"T.O. ROOF+541'-3.5"SIDWALK+508'-6"
1ST FLOOR MEZZANINE+514'-0"GARAGE+505'-6"
1ST FLOOR+510'-0"2nd FLOOR+520'-0"T.O. PLATE+530'-0"T.O. ROOF+536'-1.75"
1ST FLOOR+510'-0"2nd FLOOR+521'-0"T.O. PLATE+531'-0"T.O. ROOF+537'-2.5"
HIGHEST STREET CURB ELEVATION+510'-10.32"2ND FLOOR+525-0"FIRST STORY LINE+510'-0"ATTIC
+535-0"
AVERAGE HEIGHT OF ROOF+539'-1.75"T.O. ROOF+541'-3.5"SIDWALK+508'-6"
1ST FLOOR MEZZANINE+514'-0"GARAGE+505'-6"
HIGHEST STREET CURB ELEVATION+510'-10.32"2ND FLOOR+525-0"FIRST STORY LINE+510'-0"ATTIC
+535-0"
AVERAGE HEIGHT OF ROOF+539'-1.75"T.O. ROOF+541'-3.5"SIDWALK+508'-6"
1ST FLOOR MEZZANINE+514'-0"GARAGE+505'-6"
1ST FLOOR+510'-0"2nd FLOOR+520'-0"T.O. PLATE+530'-0"T.O. ROOF+538'-7"
HIGHEST STREET CURB ELEVATION+510'-10.32"2ND FLOOR+525-0"FIRST STORY LINE+510'-0"ATTIC
+535-0"
SIDWALK+508'-6"
1ST FLOOR MEZZANINE+514'-0"GARAGE+505'-6"
AVERAGE HEIGHT OF ROOF+539'-1.75"T.O. ROOF+541'-3.5"
A-201
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCEARCADIA SANTA ANITA LLC
HIGHEST STREET CURB ELEVATION+510'-10.32"2ND FLOOR+520'-0"FIRST STORY LINE+510'-0"ATTIC
+531'-0"
T.O. ROOF+538'-4"
AVERAGE HEIGHT OF ROOF+536'-2.25"
HIGHEST STREET CURB ELEVATION+510'-10.32"2ND FLOOR+520'-0"FIRST STORY LINE+510'-0"ATTIC
+531'-0"
AVERAGE HEIGHT OF ROOF+536'-2.25"T.O. ROOF+538'-4"
HIGHEST STREET CURB ELEVATION+510'-10.32"2ND FLOOR+520'-0"FIRST STORY LINE+510'-0"ATTIC
+531'-0"
AVERAGE HEIGHT OF ROOF+536'-2.25"T.O. ROOF+538'-4"
HIGHEST STREET CURB ELEVATION+510'-10.32"2ND FLOOR+520'-0"FIRST STORY LINE+510'-0"ATTIC
+531'-0"
AVERAGE HEIGHT OF ROOF+536'-2.25"T.O. ROOF+538'-4"
A-202
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCEARCADIA SANTA ANITA LLC
HIGHEST STREET CURB ELEVATION+510'-10.32"2ND FLOOR+520'-0"FIRST STORY LINE+510'-0"ATTIC
+531'-0"
T.O. ROOF+538'-4"
AVERAGE HEIGHT OF ROOF+536'-2.25"
HIGHEST STREET CURB ELEVATION+510'-10.32"2ND FLOOR+520'-0"FIRST STORY LINE+510'-0"
AVERAGE HEIGHT OF ROOF+536'-2.25"T.O. ROOF+538'-4"ATTIC
+531'-0"HIGHEST STREET CURB ELEVATION+510'-10.32"2ND FLOOR+520'-0"FIRST STORY LINE+510'-0"ATTIC
+531'-0"
AVERAGE HEIGHT OF ROOF+536'-2.25"T.O. ROOF+538'-4"
HIGHEST STREET CURB ELEVATION+510'-10.32"2ND FLOOR+520'-0"FIRST STORY LINE+510'-0"ATTIC
+531'-0"
AVERAGE HEIGHT OF ROOF+536'-2.25"T.O. ROOF+538'-4"
A-203
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCEARCADIA SANTA ANITA LLC
HIGHEST STREET CURB ELEVATION+510'-10.32"2ND FLOOR+525-0"FIRST STORY LINE+510'-0"ATTIC
+535-0"
AVERAGE HEIGHT OF ROOF+539'-1.75"T.O. ROOF+541'-3.5"1ST FLOOR MEZZANINE+514'-0"GARAGE+505'-6"
HIGHEST STREET CURB ELEVATION+510'-10.32"2ND FLOOR+525-0"FIRST STORY LINE+510'-0"ATTIC
+535-0"
AVERAGE HEIGHT OF ROOF+539'-1.75"T.O. ROOF+541'-3.5"1ST FLOOR MEZZANINE+514'-0"
HIGHEST STREET CURB ELEVATION+510'-10.32"2ND FLOOR+525-0"FIRST STORY LINE+510'-0"ATTIC
+535-0"
AVERAGE HEIGHT OF ROOF+539'-1.75"T.O. ROOF+541'-3.5"1ST FLOOR MEZZANINE+514'-0"GARAGE+505'-6"
A-204
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCEARCADIA SANTA ANITA LLC
HIGHEST STREET CURB ELEVATION+510'-10.32"2ND FLOOR+525-0"FIRST STORY LINE+510'-0"ATTIC
+535-0"
AVERAGE HEIGHT OF ROOF+539'-1.75"T.O. ROOF+541'-3.5"1ST FLOOR MEZZANINE+514'-0"GARAGE+505'-6"
HIGHEST STREET CURB ELEVATION+510'-10.32"2ND FLOOR+525-0"FIRST STORY LINE+510'-0"ATTIC
+535-0"
AVERAGE HEIGHT OF ROOF+539'-1.75"T.O. ROOF+541'-3.5"1ST FLOOR MEZZANINE+514'-0"GARAGE+505'-6"
HIGHEST STREET CURB ELEVATION+510'-10.32"2ND FLOOR+525-0"FIRST STORY LINE+510'-0"ATTIC
+535-0"
AVERAGE HEIGHT OF ROOF+539'-1.75"T.O. ROOF+541'-3.5"1ST FLOOR MEZZANINE+514'-0"GARAGE+505'-6"
A-205
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCEARCADIA SANTA ANITA LLC
GARAGE+505'-6"
HIGHEST STREET CURB ELEVATION+510'-10.32"2ND FLOOR+525-0"FIRST STORY LINE+510'-0"ATTIC
+535-0"
AVERAGE HEIGHT OF ROOF+539'-1.75"T.O. ROOF+541'-3.5"1ST FLOOR MEZZANINE+514'-0"GARAGE+505'-6"
GARAGE+505'-6"
HIGHEST STREET CURB ELEVATION+510'-10.32"2ND FLOOR+525-0"FIRST STORY LINE+510'-0"ATTIC
+535-0"
AVERAGE HEIGHT OF ROOF+539'-1.75"T.O. ROOF+541'-3.5"1ST FLOOR MEZZANINE+514'-0"GARAGE+505'-6"
GARAGE+505'-6"
HIGHEST STREET CURB ELEVATION+510'-10.32"2ND FLOOR+525-0"FIRST STORY LINE+510'-0"ATTIC
+535-0"
AVERAGE HEIGHT OF ROOF+539'-1.75"T.O. ROOF+541'-3.5"1ST FLOOR MEZZANINE+514'-0"GARAGE+505'-6"
GARAGE+505'-6"
HIGHEST STREET CURB ELEVATION+510'-10.32"2ND FLOOR+525-0"FIRST STORY LINE+510'-0"ATTIC
+535-0"
AVERAGE HEIGHT OF ROOF+539'-1.75"T.O. ROOF+541'-3.5"1ST FLOOR MEZZANINE+514'-0"GARAGE+505'-6"
A-206
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCEARCADIA SANTA ANITA LLC
GARAGE+505'-6"
HIGHEST STREET CURB ELEVATION+510'-10.32"2ND FLOOR+525-0"FIRST STORY LINE+510'-0"ATTIC
+535-0"
AVERAGE HEIGHT OF ROOF+539'-1.75"T.O. ROOF+541'-3.5"1ST FLOOR MEZZANINE+514'-0"GARAGE+505'-6"
GARAGE+505'-6"
HIGHEST STREET CURB ELEVATION+510'-10.32"2ND FLOOR+525-0"FIRST STORY LINE+510'-0"ATTIC
+535-0"
AVERAGE HEIGHT OF ROOF+539'-1.75"T.O. ROOF+541'-3.5"1ST FLOOR MEZZANINE+514'-0"GARAGE+505'-6"
GARAGE+505'-6"
HIGHEST STREET CURB ELEVATION+510'-10.32"2ND FLOOR+525-0"FIRST STORY LINE+510'-0"ATTIC
+535-0"
AVERAGE HEIGHT OF ROOF+539'-1.75"T.O. ROOF+541'-3.5"1ST FLOOR MEZZANINE+514'-0"GARAGE+505'-6"
A-207
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCEARCADIA SANTA ANITA LLC
GARAGE
GARAGE
DRIVE AISLE
BEDROOM
LIVING ROOM
KITCHEN
ATTIC
BEDROOM
LIVING ROOM
KITCHEN
ATTIC
FRONT LAWN
FRONT LAWN
WALKWAYP.L.
P.L.
HIGHEST STREET CURB ELEVATION+510'-10.32"2ND FLOOR+525-0"FIRST STORY LINE+510'-0"ATTIC
+535-0"
AVERAGE HEIGHT OF ROOF+539'-1.75"T.O. ROOF+541'-3.5"SIDWALK+508'-6"
1ST FLOOR MEZZANINE+514'-0"GARAGE+505'-6"
6' BLOCK WALL
SIDEWALK
W. COLORADO BLVD.
BEDROOM
LIVING ROOM
KITCHENGARAGE
ATTIC
BEDROOM
LIVING ROOM
KITCHENGARAGE
FRONT LAWNWALKWAY
DRIVE AISLE
FRONT LAWN
P.L.
P.L.
HIGHEST STREET CURB ELEVATION+510'-10.32"2ND FLOOR+525-0"FIRST STORY LINE+510'-0"ATTIC
+535-0"
SIDWALK+504'-0"
1ST FLOOR MEZZANINE+514'-0"GARAGE+505'-6"
AVERAGE HEIGHT OF ROOF+539'-1.75"T.O. ROOF+541'-3.5"
6' BLOCK WALL
SIDEWALK
W. COLORADO BLVD
P.L.
P.L.
DRIVEWAY
MASTER BEDROOM
ATTIC
LIVING ROOM
GARAGE
HIGHEST STREET CURB ELEVATION+510'-10.32"2ND FLOOR+520'-0"FIRST STORY LINE+510'-0"ATTIC
+531'-0"
AVERAGE HEIGHT OF ROOF+536'-2.25"T.O. ROOF+538'-4"SIDWALK+498'-5"
A-301
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCEARCADIA SANTA ANITA LLC
3-1/2"5' MAX∅1-5/8 SS304-4
1-1/2 SQSS304-4
42"
3-1/2"
SS304-4 SLEEVE(MALE CONNECTOR)5/16 X 2 1/2"
LAG SCREW (4X)
FINISHEDFLOOR
312
312
12
12
∅1132TYP
14
R1 8TYP
42"
EXTERIOR SIDEINTERIOR SIDE
1/8"
WOOD BEAM, REF.
3'-6"
4'-0" MAX. (TYP.)LAG SCREWSw/4 3/8"Ø x 3" LONGBENT 8"x4"x1/4" ST. PL.1 1/4"x1 1/4" TUBE2"x6" TUBE@ 4'-0" MAX. 1 1/4"x1 1/4" TUBEGLASS PER ARCH.
4'-0" MAX. (TYP.)LAG SCREWSw/4 3/8"Ø x 3" LONGBENT 8"x4"x1/4" ST. PL.1 1/4"x1 1/4" TUBE@ 4'-0" MAX. 1 1/4"x1 1/4" TUBEGLASS PER ARCH.
4'-0"
WOOD BEAM, REF.2"x6" TUBE
ARCHITECTURAL DETAILSA-601
6
EXTERIOR WOODEN LOUVERSSCALE: 1/4" = 1'
2
METAL RAILING FLOOR CONNECTIONSCALE: N. T. S.
7
WROUGHT IRON RAILING ELEVATIONSCALE: N. T. S.
13
TYP. ALUMINUM SINGLE HUNG WINDOW DETAILSCALE: N. T. S.
WROUGHT IRON RAILING ELEVATIONSCALE: N. T. S.
8
TYP. FIXED ALUMINUM WINDOW DETAILSCALE: N.T.S
9
TYP. ALUMINUM STOREFRONT DETAILSCALE: N.T.S
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCEARCADIA SANTA ANITA LLC
GLASS RAILING SCALE: N. T. S.
4
GLASS RAILING SCALE: N. T. S.
5
Attachment No. 5
Attachment No. 5
Tentative Tract Map 73106
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
R
O
Exp.OI
N
P
D
N
G
E
HA
RE
AT
ST
H
S
TS
K
I
R
E
E
AN
IO
S
E
F
S
N
45846
O
ERE
GN
12/31/16F
O
R
N
I
A
L
I
F
CA
CIVIL
A
N GI
NJ
E
LI
G
-
L
20-UNIT CONDOMINIUM501 N. SANTA ANITA AVE. ARCADIA, CA 91006
SANTA ANITA ARCADIA, LLC9674 TELSTAR AVE., #C,EL MONTE, CA 91731PH: 626-255-7439
APN: 5775-027-027G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
R
O
Exp.OI
N
P
D
N
G
E
HA
RE
AT
ST
H
S
TS
K
I
R
E
E
AN
IO
S
E
F
S
N
45846
O
ERE
GN
12/31/16F
O
R
N
I
A
L
I
F
CA
CIVIL
A
N GI
NJ
E
LI
G
-
L
20-UNIT CONDOMINIUM501 N. SANTA ANITA AVE. ARCADIA, CA 91006
SANTA ANITA ARCADIA, LLC9674 TELSTAR AVE., #C,EL MONTE, CA 91731PH: 626-255-7439
APN: 5775-027-027G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
R
O
Exp.OI
N
P
D
N
G
E
HA
RE
AT
ST
H
S
TS
K
I
R
E
E
AN
IO
S
E
F
S
N
45846
O
ERE
GN
12/31/16F
O
R
N
I
A
L
I
F
CA
CIVIL
A
N GI
NJ
E
LI
G
-
L
20-UNIT CONDOMINIUM501 N. SANTA ANITA AVE. ARCADIA, CA 91006
SANTA ANITA ARCADIA, LLC9674 TELSTAR AVE., #C,EL MONTE, CA 91731PH: 626-255-7439
APN: 5775-027-027
Attachment No. 6
Attachment No. 6
Initial Study dated September 23, 2015
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCE PROJECT
CITY OF ARCADIA
501 N. SANTA ANITA AVENUE, ARCADIA, CA
INITIAL STUDY
Tentative Tract Map No. 14-03 (73106)
Zone Variance No. ZV 15-02
Modification No. MP 14-17
Oak Tree Encroachment Permit No. TRE 14-30
Architectural Design Review MFADR 14-09
September 23, 2015
Lead Agency:
City of Arcadia
240 West Huntington Drive
Arcadia, CA 91006
Prepared by:
LSA Associates, Inc.
1500 Iowa Avenue, Suite 200
Riverside, CA 92507
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCE PROJECT
INITIAL STUDY
LSA SAA1401
ii
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCE PROJECT
CONTENTS
INITIAL STUDY
SECTION 1 BACKGROUND ................................................................................... 1
1.1 SUMMARY .................................................................................................. 1
1.2 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................... 1
SECTION 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION...................................................................... 2
2.1 PROJECT BACKGROUND .............................................................................. 2
2.2 EXISTING UTILITY INFRASTRUCTURE .......................................................... 2
2.3 EASEMENTS AND DEDICATIONS .................................................................. 7
2.4 PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS ....................................................................... 7
2.5 REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS, PERMITS, AND APPROVALS ........................ 12
SECTION 3 ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION .................................................. 14
3.1 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED ................................. 14
3.2 DETERMINATION...................................................................................... 14
SECTION 4 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST AND DISCUSSION ................................ 15
I. AESTHETICS ............................................................................................ 15
II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES ....................................................................... 16
III. AIR QUALITY ............................................................................................ 17
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES .......................................................................... 18
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES ............................................................................. 19
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS ............................................................................... 21
VII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS .................................................................. 22
VIII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS .................................................... 23
IX. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY ........................................................... 25
X. LAND USE AND PLANNING ........................................................................ 27
XI. MINERAL RESOURCES ............................................................................... 29
XII. NOISE ..................................................................................................... 29
XIII. POPULATION AND HOUSING ..................................................................... 31
XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES ..................................................................................... 32
XV. RECREATION ............................................................................................ 32
XVI. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC ...................................................................... 33
XVII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS ............................................................ 35
XVIII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE ................................................. 38
SECTION 5 LIST OF PREPARERS ........................................................................ 40
5.1 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. ............................................................................. 40
5.2 CITY OF ARCADIA .................................................................................... 40
SECTION 6 REFERENCES ................................................................................... 41
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCE PROJECT
INITIAL STUDY
LSA SAA1401
iii
APPENDICES
A Air Quality/Greenhouse Gas Information
B Tree Report
C Historical Information
D Train Noise Assessment
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Regional Location ...................................................................................... 3
Figure 2: Project Site ............................................................................................... 4
Figure 3: Site Photographs ....................................................................................... 5
Figure 4a: Existing Easements and Dedications .......................................................... 8
Figure 4b: Proposed Easements and Dedications ........................................................ 9
Figure 5: Project Site Plan ...................................................................................... 10
Figure 6: Example Elevations .................................................................................. 11
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCE PROJECT
INITIAL STUDY
LSA SAA1401
1
SECTION 1 BACKGROUND
1.1 SUMMARY
Project Title:
Santa Anita Residence Project
Lead Agency Name and Address:
City of Arcadia
240 West Huntington Drive
Arcadia, CA 91006
Contact Person and Phone Number:
Jordan Chamberlin, Assistant Planner, or
Lisa Flores, Planning Services Manager
(626) 574-5445
Project Location:
501 North Santa Anita Avenue
Project Sponsor’s Name and Address:
Arcadia Santa Anita LLC,
9674 Telstar Avenue #C
El Monte, CA 91731
General Plan Designation:
High Density Residential (HDR)
(12-30 dwelling units per acre)
Zoning Designation:
High Density Multiple Family Residential (R-3)
1.2 INTRODUCTION
The City of Arcadia incorporated in 1904 and has contributed to the rich history of
Southern California for over 100 years, and the City is home to the famous Santa Anita
Park horse racing track. A church was constructed on the project site in 1953. The
property changed ownership over the years and was most recently operated as the
Mandarin Baptist Church of Pasadena, but is presently vacant. The site contains one
church building and associated parking areas to the east and west. Access is via Windsor
Road off of Santa Anita Ave. There is currently no direct access to Colorado Boulevard or
Santa Anita Avenue.
The applicant is proposing to develop 20 multi-family residences on the 1.05-acre site
which is consistent with the existing High Density Residential (HDR) land use
designation and the R-3 Multi-Family Residential zoning but does not meet the minimum
density requirement. Adjacent uses include multi-family residential buildings to the
north, retail commercial uses and a car wash (Fasching’s Car wash) along Santa Anita
Avenue and Colorado Boulevard to the south, multi-family and a gas station (Chervron),
commercial office and a drive through restaurant (In-N-Out) to the east, the Foothill
Gold Line rail line to the west runs along the rear property line of the subject site, and
Newcastle Park is just west of the railroad tracks.
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCE PROJECT
INITIAL STUDY
LSA SAA1401
2
SECTION 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
2.1 PROJECT BACKGROUND
Location and Existing Site Conditions. As shown in Figures 1 through 3, the Project
site is located at 501 North Santa Anita, and is identified by Assessor Parcel Number
APN 5775-027-027 and Lot 15 of Tract No. 17329. Currently, the site is developed with
a church building, which was constructed in 1953 but is no longer in use. The former
church covers an area of 12,047 square feet. The rest of the site is primarily paved
surface parking, with landscaping and one oak tree.
The site is bound by multi-family residential housing and Cornell Drive to the north,
North Santa Anita Avenue to the east, West Colorado Boulevard to the south, and
Windsor Road and the Atchison Topeka and Santa Fe (AT&SF) railroad line (Foothill Gold
Line) to the west. Vehicular access for the proposed project is at the intersection of
Cornell Drive and Windsor Road, and further west on Cornell Drive. Surrounding uses
include multi-family residential housing to the north, commercial uses, gas station and
multi-family residential to the east, commercial uses and a car wash to the south, and a
public park (Newcastle Park) to the west.
2.2 EXISTING UTILITY INFRASTRUCTURE
Offsite water from the neighboring property to the north passes through the site
through a 15’ surface drainage easement along a portion of the north property line
before being collected by a catch basin on the site. The catch basin captures the offsite
and onsite water and transfers the water into a 22” × 36” storm drain located in an
easement that runs through the property to Santa Anita along Colorado Blvd, with an
overflow for water to run down to Colorado Blvd to be captured by a separate storm
drain. The storm drains tie into the LA County storm drain system on Santa Anita
Avenue. Storm drainage in the City is provided by curbs and gutters along streets, which
direct water into the catch basins, pipes, and washes that run in a southerly direction in
or near the City. Our four miles of City-maintained storm water management facilities
are present in Arcadia, which connect to regional flood-control and runoff conveyance
facilities. Storm water flows in a southerly direction through the Eaton Wash, Arcadia
Wash, Santa Anita Wash, Sierra Madre Wash, and Sawpit Wash toward the Rio Hondo,
which runs southwest into Whittier Narrows and continues southwest to join the Los
Angeles River in Downey.
Water is provided to the Project site through a 12-inch pipeline located in Windsor Road
and Cornell Drive. The City of Arcadia provides potable water to City residents and
obtains water primarily from local groundwater supplies and treated imported water
from the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD). The City does not
typically use service from MWD because the City’s collective groundwater supplies are
generally sufficient to meet the City’s water demands.
Sewage from the Project site is conveyed through an eight-inch pipeline located in
Cornell Dr., passing through the property in an easement along the south property line
to the sewer main on Santa Anita Ave. Local sewer lines are maintained by the City and
convey wastewater into trunk lines that are maintained by the Sanitation Districts of Los
Angeles County.
FIGURE 1
Arcadia Multi-Family ResidentialInitial Study
Regional and Project Location
01,0002,000
Feet
S!!N
I:\SAA1401\Reports\IS\fig1_RegLoc.mxd (12/10/2014)
SOURCE: Bing Aerial, 2010
Aä
?l!"^$
%&o(
!"`$
?q
A»
%&l(
A»
!"a$
!"`$
%&l(
!"^$
KË
%&g(
%&g(
AË
A¥
!"a$
!"a$
!"`$KË
Pacific Ocean
Los Angeles County
Orange County
SanBernardinoCounty
RiversideCounty
Regional Location
Project Area
01020
Miles
S!!N
Project Location
SANTA ANITA AVENUE
COLORADO BOULEVARD
Metro Railroad
NEWMAN AVENUE
WINDSOR ROADCORNELL DRIVE
§¨¦210
Newcastle Park
Residential
Residential
Residential
Angeles National Forest Headquarters Retail
Commercial
CommercialResidential
Commercial
Commercial
FIGURE 2
Arcadia Multi-Family ResidentialInitial Study
Project Site
0100200
Feet
S!!N
I:\SAA1401\Reports\IS\fig2_Project.mxd (12/10/2014)
SOURCE: Google Earth, 2014.
Project Boundary
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCE PROJECT
INITIAL STUDY
LSA SAA1401
5
Figure 3: Site Photographs
A. Looking northwest toward site at intersection of Colorado Blvd./Santa Anita Ave.
B. Looking northwest across Colorado Blvd. toward project site
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCE PROJECT
INITIAL STUDY
LSA SAA1401
6
Figure 3: Site Photographs
C. Looking east along Cornell Dr. toward church building (site at right – parking)
D. Looking east across western parking lot of former church site
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCE PROJECT
INITIAL STUDY
LSA SAA1401
7
2.3 EASEMENTS AND DEDICATIONS
As shown on Figure 4, Existing and Proposed Easements and Dedications, the Project
involves the following easement adjustments and dedications.
A portion of existing Easement A on Lot 27 of Tract No. 17329 for storm drain
purposes shall be quitclaimed by the City of Arcadia.
Existing Easement B on a portion of Lot 15 of Tract No. 17329 shall be
quitclaimed by the City and grant rights to the City of Arcadia for public utility
purposes, sanitary sewer, water, storm drains, electrical poles and wires, cross
arms, overhead guy wires, conduits, gas main and lines, and any other utility and
incidental purposes.
Easement C is located on a portion of Lot 15 of Tract No. 17329 and would grant
rights for public utility purposes.
Easement D on Lot 27 and a portion of Lot 15 of would grant rights to the City of
Arcadia for street and highway purposes.
Easement E on Lot 27 of Tract No. 17329 would grant rights to the City of
Arcadia for storm drain purposes.
Easement F on a portion of Lot 15 of Tract No. 17329 would grants rights to the
City of Arcadia for sewer and storm drain purposes.
Easement G within a portion of Lot 27 and Lot 15 of Tract no. 17329 shall be
vacated to the property owner and the City of Arcadia would retain a public utility
easement.
Dedication H on Lot 27 of Tract No. 17329 would grant rights to the City of
Arcadia for street and highway purposes.
Easement I on a portion of Lot 15 of Tract No. 17329 would grant rights for public
utility purposes and gas.
Easement J on a portion of Lot 15 of Tract No. 17329 would grant rights to the
City of Arcadia for sewer purposes.
2.2 PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS
The proposed “Santa Anita Residence” Project involves the construction of 20 multi-
family residential units in six, two-story townhome style building on 1.18 gross acres in
the City of Arcadia, which is in the County of Los Angeles. The total building area is
approximately 40,438 square feet. The buildings would be Contemporary in style and
are approximately 29 feet in height. The exterior of the building would include smooth
white and tan stucco, cement siding, and cultured stone. Metal framed windows, shed
roofs with grey multidimensional roof tile, and thoughtfully placed architectural
projections and balconies further emphasize the Contemporary style. Each unit will
include at least three bedrooms and two and a half bathrooms and will range from
approximately 1,439 to 2,520 square feet of living area. Additionally, all units will have a
private outdoor area ranging in size from 195 square feet to 852 square feet. Four units
will face N. Santa Anita Avenue, seven units will face Colorado Boulevard, another four
units will face Windsor Road or Cornell Drive, and the remaining units will face the
SOURCE: EGL Associates, Inc, 11/10/14.
I:\ArcadiaMulti-Fam\Reports\IS\fig4a_ExistEasementsDedi.ai (09/23/2015)
Existing Easements and Dedications
Arcadia Multi-Family Residential
Initial Study
FIGURE 4A
SOURCE: EGL Associates, Inc, 11/10/14.
I:\ArcadiaMulti-Fam\Reports\IS\fig4b_PropEasementsDedi.ai (09/23/2015)
Proposed Easements and Dedications
Arcadia Multi-Family Residential
Initial Study
FIGURE 4B
05102030
50
E
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
NEW
PL
NEW
PL
NEW
NEW
NEW
NEW
NEW
NEW
NEW
EXISTING
EXISTING
COLORADO BLVD
SANTA ANITA AVE
TRASH 1 H
123 456
7
9
10
8
SEWAGE EASEMENT
5'-0" CITY ENGINEERING
EASEMENT
ADJACENT BLDG.
ADJACENTBLDG.
ADJACENT BLDG.
CORNELL DRIVE
WINDSOR RD TRASH 2
10'-0" SCE POWER POLE
EASEMENT
SEWAGE EASEMENT
LOT A
LOT B
LOT A
LOT B
LOT A
LOT B
AS-101.1
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCEARCADIA SANTA ANITA LLC
PARTICIPANTS
501 N. SANTA ANITA AVE
RESIDENTIAL NEVIS_SANTA ANITA ARCADIA, CA 91006
VICINITY MAPSCALE: N.T.S
SHEET INDEX
PROJECT DATA
DIAGRAM 1: LOT A & BSCALE: N.T.SDIAGRAM 2: LOT GAINS AND LOSSESSCALE: N.T.SDIAGRAM 3: USEABLE VS. UNUSEABLE LANDSCALE: N.T.S
SITE NOTES
FIGURE5ArcadiaMulti-FamilyResidentialInitialStudy
ProjectSitePlan
A-200.1
SANTA ANITA
RESIDENCE
ARCADIA
SANTA ANITA LLC
SOURCE: Creative Design Associates, 2014
I:\ArcadiaMulti-Fam\Reports\IS\fig5_Elevations.ai (11/21/2014)
Example Elevations
Arcadia Multi-Family Residential
Initial Study
FIGURE 5
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCE PROJECT
INITIAL STUDY
LSA SAA1401
12
interior side property line. Access to the site is provided from Santa Anita Avenue, east
to Newman Avenue, and then south to Windsor Road and Cornell Drive. 50 parking
spaces are planned, including 12 surface parking spaces and 38 semi-subterranean
parking spaces. 40 will be garage spaces for residents and 10 will be surface lot parking
for guests. Figures 5 and 6 illustrate the design of the proposed project.
As part of the proposed project, City staff will incorporate the following into standard or
site specific conditions of approval that will assure potential environmental impacts of
the project are as outlined in this evaluation:
dust and other standard air pollutant control measures;
water quality protection and erosion control measures;
incorporate tree protection actions identified in Carlberg Associates report;
design actions to address local geotechnical and soil constraints; and
greenhouse gas emission reduction strategies for residential uses.
2.3 REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS, PERMITS, AND APPROVALS
The project applicant has applied for or will need the following discretionary approvals
from the City relative to this project:
Tentative Tract Map No. 14-03 (73106) – To subdivide the air space for 20
condominium units (AMC Sec. 9255.2.7);
Zone Variance No. ZV 15-02 - To allow a 20-unit multiple-family development in
lieu of the minimum 23-unit density requirement;
Modification No. MP 14-17 – To allow the following Zoning Modifications:
o An encroachment into the 75’ special setback on Colorado Blvd;
o A 15’-0”, 1st and 2nd story, front yard setback along Santa Anita Ave in
lieu of the 25’-0” required (AMC Sec. 9255.2.3);
o A 5’-0” encroachment into the interior side yard setback for a 5’-0” wide
pedestrian access ramp adjacent to the northerly property line in lieu of
the 10’-0” required (AMC Sec. 9255.2.6(B)).
o A 7’-7” to 21’-9”, 1st and 2nd story, street side yard setback along
Colorado Blvd in lieu of the 25’-0” required (AMC Sec. 9255.2.4);
o An 7’-7” street side yard setback and 9’-0” front yard setback for an open
stairwell adjacent to Colorado Blvd in lieu of 25’-0” required (AMC Sec.
9255.2.6(B));
o To allow three required parking spaces to be located within the 25’-0”
street side yard setback for units 1, 2, and 11 (AMC Sec. 9255.2.9);
o To allow three air conditioning units to be located in the required street
side yard setback for units 2, 3, and 11 (AMC Sec. 9255.2.18);
o To allow a building, Building F, to be 219’-0” in length in lieu of the 165’-
0” maximum (AMC Sec. 9255.2.13); and
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCE PROJECT
INITIAL STUDY
LSA SAA1401
13
o To allow 85 linear feet of fencing adjacent to the northerly interior side
property line and 80 linear feet of fencing adjacent to the southerly street
side yard property line to exceed 6’-0” in height with a maximum height
of 11’-6” measured from the lowest adjacent grade (AMC Sec.
9255.2.21.2).
Oak Tree Encroachment Permit No. TRE 14-30 – To allow construction within the
protected area of one, Coast Live Oak tree; and
Architectural Design Review No. ADR 14-09 – To approve the proposed 20-unit
multiple-family development.
Other non-discretionary actions anticipated to be taken by the City at the Staff level as
part of the proposed project include:
Approval of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to mitigate site runoff
during construction (i.e., over the short-term) and a Standard Urban Stormwater
Management Plan (SUSMP) to mitigate for post-construction runoff flows (i.e., over
the long-term during project occupancy and operation).
Building permit. The comprehensive building permit includes building permit,
plumbing, mechanical, and electrical permits.
Grading permit.
Sewer connection permit.
Encroachment permit for work within the City’s right-of-way.
Development of the proposed project may require the following permits and/or
approvals from other responsible agencies:
A National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the Regional
Water Quality Control Board - Los Angeles Region to ensure that construction site
drainage velocities are equal to or less than the pre-construction conditions and
downstream water quality is not harmed.
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCE PROJECT
INITIAL STUDY
LSA SAA1401
14
SECTION 3 ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
3.1 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project,
involving no impacts that are a “Potentially Significant Impact” or Less than Significant
with Mitigation Incorporated” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
Aesthetics Greenhouse Gas Emissions Population and Housing
Agriculture Resources Hazards/Hazardous Materials Public Services
Air Quality Hydrology/Water Quality Recreation
Biological Resources Land Use and Planning Transportation/Circulation
Cultural Resources Mineral Resources Utilities and Service Systems
Geology and Soils Noise Mandatory Findings of Significance
3.2 DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the Project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a
CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION (Class 32 – Infill Development) will be prepared.
I find that the Project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the 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 Project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the 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.
Signature Date
City of Arcadia
Printed Name Agency
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCE PROJECT
INITIAL STUDY
LSA SAA1401
15
SECTION 4 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST AND DISCUSSION
I. AESTHETICS
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic
vista?
b) Substantially damage scenic resources,
including, but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings within a
state scenic highway?
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual
character or quality of the site and its
surroundings?
d) Create a new source of substantial light or
glare, which would adversely affect daytime
or nighttime views in the area?
I.a - d) Less Than Significant. The most prominent scenic resources that can be viewed
from the project area are the San Gabriel Mountains to the north. There are no other unique
vistas, natural or undisturbed areas, or officially recognized scenic areas in the surrounding
area. The project site contains an existing church and parking lot, and the surrounding area
contains newer retail commercial structures to the east and south, and older multi-family
residential structures to the north along Newman Avenue and Windsor Road.
The proposed project would introduce six (6) multi-story multi-family residential buildings onto
the site consistent with the City’s Zoning Code requirements for height but requests reduced
front and street side yard setbacks due to the unusual shape and location of the property. The
previous Figures 5 and 6 provide the proposed project site plan and planned elevations of the
new buildings. Adjacent residential uses are north of the site, with commercial uses to the east
and south (across Colorado Boulevard.) and a recreation facility (Newcastle Park) adjacent to
the west across the railroad tracks. Placement of the new multi-family buildings will therefore
not block any views to the north from existing residences in the area, so there will be no
significant impacts regarding scenic vistas, scenic resources, or the visual quality of the area.
The new buildings will also fit into the overall visual character of the area (newer commercial
and older residential) as shown in Figure 3 (Site Photographs) and Figure 6.
The project will also add nightlighting and a minimal amount of glare from new windows and
driveway lighting fixtures. These improvements will be consistent with the City’s residential
development standards (e.g., lighting) so there will be no significant impacts.
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCE PROJECT
INITIAL STUDY
LSA SAA1401
16
II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
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?
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural
use, or a Williamson Act contract?
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause
rezoning of , forest land (as defined in Public
Resources Code section 12220(g)),
timberland (as defined by Public Resources
Code section 4526, or timberland zoned
Timberland Production (as defined by
Government Code section 51104 (g))?
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion
of forest land to non-forest use?
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?
II.a - e) No Impact. The site is in a completely urban setting and contains at most a half
dozen landscaped trees. It is and has been completely covered over by impervious man-made
surfaces for many years. According to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP)
maps, the project site is designated as “Urban Land” and is not underlain by any Prime
Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance, so there will be no
significant impacts relative to farmland or forestland. The site and surrounding areas are zoned
for urban uses so there are also no significant impacts regarding land use designations.
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCE PROJECT
INITIAL STUDY
LSA SAA1401
17
III. AIR QUALITY
Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management
or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would
the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of
the applicable air quality plan?
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute
substantially to an existing or projected air
quality violation?
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net
increase of any criteria pollutant for which
the project region is non-attainment under
an applicable federal or state ambient air
quality standard (including releasing
emissions which exceed quantitative
thresholds for ozone precursors)?
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations?
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a
substantial number of people?
III.a - e) Less than Significant Impact. LSA Associates, Inc. (LSA) compared the
development characteristics of the project (20 units on 1 acre) against the South Coast Air
Quality Management District’s (SCAQMD) daily construction and operational emission standards
and found the project to be substantially below any of the daily thresholds. For example, the
maximum daily construction emissions would be 30 pounds of NOx and 22 pounds of CO,
compared to the SCAQMD thresholds of 100 and 550 pounds per day, respectively. Similarly,
the maximum daily operational emissions would be 1.9 pounds of NOx and 7.8 pounds of CO,
compared to the SCAQMD thresholds of 55 and 550 pounds, respectively (see Appendix A).
Therefore, the project will not violate any air quality standard or expose sensitive receptors to
substantial pollutant concentrations. Due to the size and nature of the project, there is no
potential for the project to result in a significant impact regarding either short- or long-term air
pollutant emissions. The project is consistent with zoning and land use designations for the site
and surrounding area, as outlined in the City’s zoning map and General Plan Land Use Element.
Therefore, the project is consistent with the Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) for the South
Coast Air Basin (Basin) managed by the SCAQMD which sets forth comprehensive programs
that will eventually lead the Basin into compliance with all federal and state air quality
standards. The City will assure that project construction complies with all standard City
Conditions Of Approvals (COAs) relative to air quality (e.g., dust control, watering during
grading, emission control equipment on work vehicles, etc.).
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCE PROJECT
INITIAL STUDY
LSA SAA1401
18
In addition, it is a residential project in a residential area, so there will be no significant impacts
regarding odors. Therefore, the project will not result in any significant air quality impacts.
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either
directly or through habitat modifications, on
any species identified as a candidate,
sensitive, or special status species in local or
regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by
the California Department of Fish and
Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any
riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regional
plans, policies, regulations, or by the
California Department of Fish and Wildlife or
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally
protected wetlands as defined by Section 404
of the Clean Water Act (including, but not
limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.)
through direct removal, filling, hydrological
interruption, or other means?
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of
any native resident or migratory fish or
wildlife species or with established native
resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or
impede the use of native wildlife nursery
sites?
e) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted
Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural
Community Conservation Plan, or other
approved local, regional, or state habitat
conservation plan?
f) Have a substantial adverse effect, either
directly or through habitat modifications, on
any species identified as a candidate,
sensitive, or special status species in local or
regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by
the California Department of Fish and Game
or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCE PROJECT
INITIAL STUDY
LSA SAA1401
19
IV.a - f) No Impact. The proposed project site is located on a small urban infill site (approx. 1
acre) that contains no native vegetation or drainage features, and supports only limited wildlife
species, mainly those that are tolerant of regular human activity including ground squirrels,
rodents, and song birds such as chickadees and mockingbirds. The existing landscaping on the
site includes a number of small planters with landscaped bushes and approximately a dozen
trees. There is one (1) oak tree that is considered protected under the City’s Oak and Sycamore
tree preservation ordinance. The oak tree has been evaluated by a Certified Arborist, Carlberg
Associates – refer to the report entitled “Protected Tree Evaluation” prepared by Carlberg
Associates dated March 19, 2014 and an Addendum dated August 20, 2015 (see Appendix B).
One Coast Live Oak tree that is in poor health due to being topped and then cut to no more
than a 6’-0” high stump by an unknown party in March 2014 will also be removed. Two (2) 36”
box Coast Live Oak trees are to be planted adjacent to Cornell Drive as replacement trees which
is consistent with the City’s tree preservation ordinance. City staff will include the requirements
of the Carlberg Associates report in the Conditions of Approval (COAs) for the project (see
Appendix B).
At the time of site survey by LSA staff, there was no evidence of birds nesting in the trees or
other onsite vegetation. It should be noted that migratory and raptorial birds are covered by the
Migratory Bird Treaty Act, but no impacts to covered species are expected from project
construction. The project site is not covered by any adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural
Community Conservation Plan, or other local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. Due
to the size and location of the project site, development of the proposed project will not have
any significant impacts on biological resources.
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource as
defined in §15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource
pursuant to §15064.5?
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique
geologic feature?
d) Disturb any human remains, including those
interred outside of formal cemeteries?
V.a) Less than Significant Impact. CEQA Section 15064.5, Determining the Significance of
Impacts to Archaeological and Historical Resources, states that:
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCE PROJECT
INITIAL STUDY
LSA SAA1401
20
“Generally, a resource shall be considered by the lead agency to be ‘historically significant’ if the
resource meets 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.”
For buildings and other structures at least 50 years old, the completeness and integrity of the
structural architecture may cause the site to pass Criterion A, B, and/or C thresholds. The
threshold should be associated with the site context or theme. If sets of unusual artifacts,
buried but unusual buildings, or human remains are detected during tests of cultural resources
in the project site, or if a historical review of the resource finds that it was once associated with
a person and/or event of historical significance at the State/National level, such resources will
likely be considered potentially significant for California Register/National Register listing.
The former church on the site was originally built around 1953 (61 years ago). It changed
ownership and was remodeled several times over the years, and was most recently operated as
the Mandarin Baptist Church of Pasadena. The State Office of Historic Preservation recommends
all structures over 50 years of age be surveyed for historical significance prior to demolition. In
June 2014 LSA Associates, Inc. conducted an historical assessment of the church, which is a
reconnaissance-level architectural survey required as part of the demolition compliance process.
The DPR 523A form completed as part of that survey indicated the church facility did not
appear to be “architecturally significant” in reference to historical character (see Appendix C). It
also does not appear to meet any of the four criteria previously outlined from Public Resources
Code §5024.1. Based on available evidence, the former church does not appear to meet the
CEQA criteria for an identified historic resource, so there is no significant impact on any
identified historical resources.
V.b–d) No Impact. The site has been graded and developed for many years, so it is underlain
by shallow consolidated fill material, and there is no evidence the site or surrounding area is
underlain by important geologic or paleontological resources, nor is there evidence the site
contains any human remains. Based on available information, development of the proposed
project will have no impacts on archaeological, geologic, or paleontological resources.
In the event of an accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains, California State
Health and Safety Code § 7050.5 dictates that no further disturbance shall occur until the
County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to CEQA
regulations and PRC § 5097.98. If human remains are found, the LA County Coroner’s office
shall be contacted to determine if the remains are recent or of Native American significance.
Supporting documentation for this conclusion is included in Appendix C.
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCE PROJECT
INITIAL STUDY
LSA SAA1401
21
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Expose people or structures to 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.
ii) Strong seismic groundshaking?
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction?
iv) Landslides?
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of
topsoil?
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-site or off-site landslide, lateral spreading,
subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in
Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code
(1994), creating substantial risks to life or
property?
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 waste
water?
VI.a.i-iii) Less than Significant Impact. The City’s General Plan and other regional
information indicates the Raymond Hill Fault Zone and the Sierra Madre Fault Zone are the only
major faults located in the City of Arcadia, and there are no regional or local faults on or in the
immediate vicinity of the project site. The project study area is underlined by extremely thick
alluvial deposits that are subject to differential settlement during any intense shaking associated
with seismic events, which can be expected for any location in Southern California. This can
result in damage to property when an area settles to different degrees over a relatively short
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCE PROJECT
INITIAL STUDY
LSA SAA1401
22
distance. Almost the entire region is subject to this hazard, but building design standards do
significantly reduce the potential for harm. The site is also not located in an area subject to
liquefaction. Therefore, the project site is not expected to be subject to any significant impacts
regarding fault zones, strong seismic ground shaking, ground failure, or liquefaction, or
landslides.
VI.a.iv – e) No Impact. The project site is also a flat site and will not be subject to either
onsite or offsite landslide hazards. Similarly, the site is covered with impermeable surfaces and
only 1 acre in size, so grading for the proposed project will not result in substantial erosion or
loss of topsoil.
Available information indicates the site is not located over a hazardous geologic unit or would
be subject to severe seismic activity or related impacts such as lateral spreading. Subsidence is
the sudden sinking or gradual downward settling of the earth’s surface with little or no
horizontal movement. Subsidence is caused by a variety of activities, which includes, but is not
limited to, withdrawal of groundwater, pumping of oil and gas from underground, the collapse
of underground mines, liquefaction, and hydrocompaction. However, the City of Arcadia is
located on an alluvial plain that is relatively flat and expected to be stable, and groundwater
levels below the site are greater than 50 feet in depth.
According to the Natural Resources Conservation Service (formerly the U.S. Soil Conservation
Service), the proposed project site and surrounding area are underlain by deep well-drained
alluvial soils that have low to moderate expansion potential.
The proposed project would be connected to the existing sewer system, so no septic or
alternative wastewater disposal systems are needed.
For the reasons outlined above, the project will have no significant impacts related to
landslides, erosion, loss of topsoil, lateral spreading, liquefaction, expansive soils, or use of
septic tanks or alternative treatment systems.
VII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Generate gas emissions, either directly or
indirectly, that may have a significant impact
on the environment?
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or
regulation adopted for the purpose of
reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCE PROJECT
INITIAL STUDY
LSA SAA1401
23
VII.a-b) Project-related emissions of GHGs include direct emissions from project vehicular
traffic and indirect emissions from electric power plants generating electricity, energy used to
provide water, and the processing of solid waste. The project would utilize quantifiable amounts
of electricity, natural gas, water and generate solid waste that will contribute CO2, CH4, and N2O
emissions. However, based the size and type of project (20 multi-family residential units on 1
acre), LSA Associates, Inc. (LSA) concludes that greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from the
proposed project are far below the South Coast Air Quality Management District’s (SCAQMD)
thresholds for GHGs (3,000 metric tons per year)(see Appendix A).
The City of Arcadia has adopted policies under the City’s General Plan to reduce greenhouse
gas emissions in compliance with SB 375 and AB 32, to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to
1990 levels by 2020, and 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. The project will be required to
comply with these local GHG emission control measures as standard Conditions of Approval
(COAs).
Compliance with the City’s policies will result in less than significant project and cumulative
impacts related to GHGs and global climate change.
In addition, the project is subject to mandatory provisions of the 2010 California Green Building
Code which was implemented in January 2014 to reduce GHG emissions. The code specifies a
reduction in water use by using water efficient plumbing fixtures and automated irrigation
systems that are weather sensitive. Energy and air pollution reduction is accomplished by using
low VOC paints and carpets, installation of whole house exhaust fans, installation of gas not
wood burning fireplaces, and installation of energy efficient appliances.
VIII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment through the routine
transport, use, or disposal of hazardous
materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment through reasonably
foreseeable upset and accident conditions
involving the release of hazardous materials
into the environment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle
hazardous or acutely hazardous materials,
substances, or waste within one-quarter mile
of an existing or proposed school?
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCE PROJECT
INITIAL STUDY
LSA SAA1401
24
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list
of hazardous materials sites compiled
pursuant to Government Code Section
65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a
significant hazard to the public or the
environment?
e) For a project located within an airport land
use plan or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public airport
or public use airport, would the project result
in a safety hazard for people residing or
working in the project area?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private
airstrip, would the project result in a safety
hazard for people residing or working in the
project area?
g) Impair implementation of or physically
interfere with an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
h) 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?
VIII.a-h) The site currently contains a former church and demolition will comply with existing
federal and state laws regarding hazardous materials if any are present (e.g. asbestos-
containing materials, lead-based paint, etc.). The project proposes to develop six multi-family
residential buildings that are not expected to use or generate substantial or significant amounts
of hazardous materials. Compliance with existing federal, state, and local laws/regulations
regarding hazardous materials will ensure that potential hazard-related impacts of the project
are less than significant.
There is a private school, Arroyo Pacific Academy, located within a quarter mile of the project
site. The main campus building is located at 41 W. Santa Clara Street and a secondary building
for art technology, arts, and fitness is located at 400 Rolyn Place, approximately 1,110 feet and
500 feet south of the subject site, respectively. The proposed project, however, would not emit
or produce any hazardous materials that would represent a health hazard to the public.
There are no properties in the vicinity of the project site, nor is the project site itself, on any
Federal Superfund Sites (NPL), State Response Sites, Voluntary Cleanup Sites, School Cleanup
Sites, Permitted Sites, or Corrective Action sites lists. Neither the project site nor the
surrounding properties within one-quarter mile of the site are identified on the California State
Water Resources Control Board’s Geotracker list of leaking underground fuel tank (LUFT) sites.
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCE PROJECT
INITIAL STUDY
LSA SAA1401
25
The proposed project site is not located within an airport land use plan or within two miles of a
public airport or private airstrip. Therefore, there would be no airport-related safety hazards
related to the project.
Police, fire, and paramedic services are currently provided by the City to the project site. The
site is accessible via Colorado Boulevard and Santa Anita Avenue. Development of the project
will not reduce the existing level of emergency access or the ability to evacuate onsite or area
residents if an emergency or disaster occurs.
According to the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL Fire) mapping
system the City of Arcadia contains areas considered to be Very High Fire Hazards Zones. The
map created by CAL Fire has been adopted by the City to target these areas and implement
stringent wild land fire mitigation strategies. The proposed project site does not fall within any
fire hazard zones, and is not within close proximity to any wildlands and will not have a fire
hazard impact. Review of proposed building plans is a standard part of the City’s development
review process, and the proposed project will be required to comply with any building design
requirements of the City Fire Department (see Section XIV, Public Services) to address urban
(non-wildland) fire hazards.
In conclusion, compliance with existing federal, state, and local laws/regulations and payment
of established development impact fees will help ensure that potential hazard-related impacts of
the project are less than significant.
IX. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements?
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater
recharge such that there would be a net
deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the
local groundwater table level (e.g., the
production rate of pre-existing nearby wells
would drop to a level which would not
support existing land uses or planned uses for
which permits have been granted)?
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage
pattern of the site or area, including through
the alteration of the course of a stream or
river, in a manner that would result in
substantial erosion or siltation on site or off
site?
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCE PROJECT
INITIAL STUDY
LSA SAA1401
26
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage
pattern of the site or area, including through
the alteration of the course of a stream or
river, or substantially increase the rate or
amount of surface runoff in a manner that
would result in flooding on site or off site?
e) Create or contribute runoff water, which
would exceed the capacity of existing or
planned storm water drainage systems or
provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff?
f) Otherwise substantially degrade water
quality?
g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard
area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard
Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or
other flood hazard delineation map?
h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area
structures that would impede or redirect flood
flows?
j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?
IX.a-j) No Impact. In 1972, the Clean Water Act (CWA) was amended to require National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits for the discharge of pollutants into
“Waters of the U.S.” from any point source. In 1987, the CWA was amended to require that the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency establish regulations for permitting under the NPDES
permit program, that at the local level cities must ensure provision of vegetates swales, buffers,
and infiltration areas in new development projects. For Arcadia, the NPDES program is issued
by the Regional Water Quality Control Board, Los Angeles Region. The NPDES program
coordinates the actions of all incorporated cities within this region (except Long Beach) and Los
Angeles County to regulate and control storm water and urban runoff into Los Angeles County
waterways and ocean. The proposed project will be subject to NPDES requirements as well as
the City of Arcadia’s Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (WELO) which is a standard
regulatory requirement that is incorporated into project design through standard Conditions of
Approval (COAs). During the construction period, the City would require the project to use a
series of standard BMPs to reduce erosion and sedimentation. These measures may include the
use of gravel bags, silt fences, hay bales, check dams, hydroseed, and soil binders. The
construction contractor would be required to operate and maintain these controls throughout
the duration of on-site construction activities.
The site is already fully developed with impervious surfaces, and the proposed project would
result in similar long-term conditions. Onsite runoff will be either infiltrated into the ground in
landscaped areas or be directed to several catch basins and down drains which will then direct
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCE PROJECT
INITIAL STUDY
LSA SAA1401
27
runoff into the City’s storm drain system. New development is required to meet or exceed pre-
project conditions for stormwater discharge, and the proposed project would be required to
retain any additional runoff onsite and discharge it to the storm drain system at rates that do
not exceed pre-project conditions. Adherence to NPDES requirements is required of all
development within the City. Due to the small size of the site, no impacts related to
groundwater quality or supply are expected.
Most of the annual rainfall in the region occurs in the winter with potential flooding occurring in
the City from intense storms resulting in rapid runoff. The Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) identify areas subject to flooding during the
100-year storm event. Note that the term “100-year” is a measure of the size of the flood, not
how often it occurs. The “100-year flood” is a flooding event that has a one percent chance of
occurring in any given year. Based on these FIRM maps, the project site is not located within
the 100-year floodplain; therefore, the project would not impede or redirect flood flows.
Construction and operation of the proposed project would not cause or increase the likelihood
of failure of a levee or dam that could result in flooding. The project site is located within the
flood hazard zone for Santa Anita Debris Dam, which is located along the Santa Anita Wash
approximately 1.7 miles northeast of the project site. However, the project site and the entire
community is in Flood Zone D which does not require the City to implement any flood plain
management regulation as a condition per the National Flood Insurance Program from the
Federal Emergency Management Agency. Therefore, impacts in this regard would be less than
significant.
The project site does not have any enclosed bodies of water (e.g., reservoir tank or pond) that
could cause or result in a seiche (standing wave) during a seismic event. The site is also not
located near the Pacific Ocean or within a tsunami or mudflow hazard area. Therefore, the
project would not result in any significant impacts related to these hazards, and no mitigation is
required.
With implementation of the City’s development review process, potential short- and long-term
impacts related to drainage, water quality, flooding, and dam inundation will be less than
significant.
X. LAND USE AND PLANNING
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Physically divide an established community?
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCE PROJECT
INITIAL STUDY
LSA SAA1401
28
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan,
policy, or regulation of an agency with
jurisdiction over the project (including, but
not limited to the general plan, specific plan,
local coastal program, or zoning ordinance)
adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental effect?
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat
conservation plan or natural community
conservation plan?
X.a and c) No Impact. The project site is in an urbanized area and is surrounded by
developed uses. It is also on the northeast corner of the intersection of two major arterials
(Colorado Boulevard and Santa Anita Avenue.) with commercial uses along both roadways
adjacent to the site. The only existing residential land uses are north of the site (along Newman
Avenue and Windsor Road) and the rest of the surrounding land uses are commercial in nature
or public facilities (park to the west). In addition, the proposed site plan indicates that access in
and around the site will be maintained similar to that which exists now. Therefore, demolition of
the existing former church facility and development of new multi-family residential uses on the
project site would not physically divide an established community.
Arcadia’s General Plan and zoning map designate the proposed project and surrounding area
with the following land uses:
Area/
Direction
Existing
Land Uses
Land Use
Designations
Zoning
Designations
Project
Site
Church (vacant) and
parking lot
High Density Residential (HDR)
(12-30 dwelling units per acre)
High Density Multi-Family
Residential (R-3)
North Multi-family residential High Density Residential (HDR)
(12-30 dwelling units per acre)
High Density Multi-Family
Residential (R-3)
South Colorado Boulevard and
retail commercial uses
Commercial (Downtown Overlay) General Commercial (C-2)
(Downtown Overlay)
Commercial Manufacturing
(C-M)
East Santa Anita Avenue and
retail commercial uses
Commercial
High Density Residential (HDR)
(12-30 dwelling units per acre)
General Commercial (C-2)
High Density Multi-Family
Residential (R-3)
West Multi-family residential,
railroad tracks and
Newcastle Park (beyond
tracks)
High Density Residential (HDR)
(12-30 dwelling units per acre),
Rail Right-of-Way, and Open
Space-Outdoor Recreation (park)
High Density Multi-Family
Residential (R-3),
Rail Right-of-Way (R-R),
Public Purpose (S-2)
The High Density Residential land use designation of the General Plan allows development with
a unit density of 12-30 units per acre (Land Use and Community Design Element, page 2-11).
The proposed project has a density of 20 units per acre, so it is consistent with this limit but
does not meet the minimum density. The site also has a specific zoning of R-3 or High Density
Multi-Family Residential, and the proposed project is also consistent with this zoning
designation, but again does not meet the minimum density. The existing residential units in the
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCE PROJECT
INITIAL STUDY
LSA SAA1401
29
area are multi-family in nature and 1-2 stories in height, so the proposed project would be
consistent with the general character of the surrounding area. Therefore, there will be no
significant impacts regarding land use consistency and compatibility.
The project site is not designated for any type of habitat protection under the City’s General
Plan, and is not covered by any adopted Habitat Conservation Plan or Natural Community
Conservation Plan. Therefore, there will be no impacts in this regard.
X.b.) Less than Significant Impact. The City of Arcadia is a charter city. Only 20 units are
proposed which does not meet the minimum density of 23 units. This is due to the irregular
shape of the lot and easements that must be maintained on the western portion of the lot, and
therefore cannot be built on. Approval of a Zone Variance to allow fewer units would constitute
acceptance by the City and would still be consistent with the General Plan. Therefore, the
proposed project would have no significant land use impacts and no mitigation is required.
XI. MINERAL RESOURCES
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
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?
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?
XI.a-b) The project site is within a fully developed portion of the City and does not contain, nor
is it designated as, a source of mineral resources (e.g., construction aggregate). Therefore,
there will be no impacts in this regard, and no mitigation is required.
XII. NOISE
Would the project result in:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise
levels in excess of standards established in
the local general plan or noise ordinance, or
applicable standards of other agencies?
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCE PROJECT
INITIAL STUDY
LSA SAA1401
30
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of
excessive groundborne vibration or
groundborne noise levels?
c) Substantial permanent increase in ambient
noise levels in the project vicinity above levels
existing without the project?
d) Substantial temporary or periodic increase in
ambient noise levels in the project vicinity
above levels existing without the project?
e) For a project located within an airport land
use plan or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public airport
or public use airport, would the project
expose people residing or working in the
project area to excessive noise levels?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private
airstrip, would the project expose people
residing or working in the project area to
excessive noise levels?
XII.a-d) Less than Significant Impact. The City’s noise impact thresholds are outlined in
the General Plan and the City’s Noise Ordinance. The project is consistent with onsite and area
zoning, so noise impacts will be within General Plan standards. Construction of the proposed
project is expected to require the use of earthmovers, bulldozers, and water and pickup trucks,
however, the worst-case combined noise level during construction would not be expected to
exceed 90 dBA Lmax at a distance of 50 feet from the active construction area. In addition, City
staff would require the project to comply with the noise ordinance requirements for construction
activities. Therefore, noise impacts of the project will comply with local regulations and would
be less than significant.
The Foothill Gold Line train line runs along the rear property line. The Environmental Impact
Report (EIR) that was prepared in 2007 for the Gold Line Foothill Extension from Pasadena to
Montclair, evaluated the impacts to the subject site but for the Church use. Since a residential
use was not evaluated in the EIR, a train noise impact assessment for the proposed project was
prepared by LSA Associates, Inc. (LSA December 2014)(Appendix D) to examine the potential
train noise impacts of the proposed residential use.
The City of Arcadia Noise Element of the General Plan establishes exterior noise criteria for
outdoor living areas associated with residential uses. It requires that interior areas of new
residential homes not exceed 45 dBA CNEL and that exterior active use areas not exceed 65
dBA CNEL.
The City’s Noise Ordinance establishes the maximum permissible noise level that may intrude
into a neighbor’s property. For Residential Zone, the exterior noise levels shall not exceed 55
dBA for more than 30 minutes in any hour during daytime hours between 7:00 a.m. and 10:00
p.m. For events occurring within shorter periods of time, the noise levels are adjusted upward
accordingly. For events lasting equal to or less than 30 minutes but more than 15 minutes, the
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCE PROJECT
INITIAL STUDY
LSA SAA1401
31
exterior noise shall not exceed 60 dBA during daytime hours. For events lasting equal to or less
than 15 minutes but more than 5 minutes, the exterior noise shall not exceed 65 dBA during
daytime hours. For events lasting equal to or less than 5 minutes but more than 1 minute, the
exterior noise shall not exceed 70 dBA during daytime hours. At any time during daytime hours,
the exterior noise shall not exceed 75 dBA
The assessment determined that short- and long-term noise levels from the Foothill Gold Line
would not exceed the City’s noise standards, so there will be no significant noise impacts on
future project residents in that regard.
The project is consistent with onsite and surrounding zoning, so the incremental vehicular traffic
trips associated with the proposed project would not result in significant traffic noise impacts on
off-site sensitive uses (i.e., Santa Anita Avenue and Colorado Boulevard are adjacent to the
site). The project will comply with City design and construction requirements for multi-family
development, so short- and long-term noise impacts are expected to be less than significant.
XII.e-f) No Impact. The proposed project site is not located within an airport land use plan
or within two miles of a public airport or private airstrip. Therefore, there would be no airport-
related noise impacts related to the project.
XIII. POPULATION AND HOUSING
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
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)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing
housing, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?
c) Displace substantial numbers of people,
necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
XIII.a) Less than Significant Impact. The proposed project would result in only minor
population growth for the City. The site contains a former church so there are no residents or
employees currently on the site. The proposed project could add 57 additional residents to the
City, which is estimated based on 20 multi-family units times 2.83 persons per unit based on
2010 federal census data. This is less than what was projected for this lot since the proposed
project does not meet the minimum density requirement of 23 units.
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCE PROJECT
INITIAL STUDY
LSA SAA1401
32
XIII.b-c) No Impact. The project would result in demolition of the former church building but
will not result in the loss of any current (i.e., baseline) employment since the church has
already been closed, and the site did not contain any housing or residents so none would be
lost by project development.
XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Would the project result in substantial
adverse physical impacts associated with the
provision of new or physically altered
governmental facilities, need for new or
physically altered governmental facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant
environmental impacts, in order to maintain
acceptable service ratios, response times or
other performance objectives for any of the
public services:
Fire Protection?
Police Protection?
Schools?
Parks?
Other Public Facilities?
XIV.a) Less than Significant Impact. The proposed project would replace a former church
with 20 multi-family residential units that would generate incrementally more local traffic and
population into the project area. This increase in population would incrementally increase the
need for fire, police, parks, and other public facilities. However, these increases would be small
and would not result in any significant public service impacts. The City will require the proposed
project to pay all applicable Development Impact Fees to the City and to the local school district
to alleviate potential impacts related to public services.
XV. RECREATION
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
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?
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCE PROJECT
INITIAL STUDY
LSA SAA1401
33
b) Does the project include recreational facilities
or require the construction or expansion or
recreational facilities, which might have an adverse
physical effect on the environment?
XV.a-b) Less than Significant Impact. The project proposes 20 additional residential units
that would require an incremental amount of additional recreational facilities or programs.
Project residents would also be able to take advantage of existing City and County park facilities
and services. The City will require the proposed project to pay applicable Development Impact
Fees to the City for parks.
XVI. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or
policy establishing measures of effectiveness
for the performance of the circulation system,
taking into account all modes of
transportation including mass transit and
non-motorized travel and relevant
components of the circulation system,
including but not limited to intersections,
streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian
and bicycle paths, and mass transit?
b) Conflict with an applicable congestion
management program, including, but not
limited to level of service standards and travel
demand measures, or other standards
established by the county congestion
management agency for designated roads or
highways?
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns,
including either an increase in traffic levels or
a change in location that result in substantial
safety risks?
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a
design feature (e.g., sharp curves or
dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses
(e.g., farm equipment)?
e) Result in inadequate emergency access?
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCE PROJECT
INITIAL STUDY
LSA SAA1401
34
f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or
programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or
pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease
the performance or safety of such facilities?
XVI.a-b) Less than Significant Impact. The project is very small and consistent with site
zoning, so City staff determined that no formal traffic impact analysis was required. Trip
generation for the proposed project is shown below and is based on rates from the Institute of
Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation (9th Ed., 2013) for Land Use 230 “Residential
Condominium/Townhouse.” The following summarizes the trip generation for the proposed
project during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. As shown below, the project is expected to
generate 116 daily total trips, with 9 trips occurring the a.m. peak hour and 11 trips occurring
during the p.m. peak hour.
Land Use
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Daily Trips In Out Total In Out Total
Condos/Townhomes (20)
Dwelling Units Trips/Unit1 0.07 0.37 0.44 0.35 0.17 0.52 5.81
Trip Generation
(rounded up)
2 8 9 7 4 11 116
Source: ITE 9th Ed, 2014 1 Rates based on Land Use 230 – “Residential Condominium/Townhouse”
The former church on the site is not active at present, but the project would only generate an
incremental amount of additional traffic during the peak hours. This small increase in ambient
traffic is not expected to result in any significant traffic impacts to local roadways or
intersections, or the nearby I-210 freeway ramps or mainline. The City of Arcadia utilizes
County’s Congestion Management Program (CMP) traffic impact study guidelines that define a
“significant traffic impact” as an increase in demand by at least 2 percent where the intersection
would operate at LOS F with the project traffic. The small amount of traffic expected from the
project will not exceed the CMP threshold of 50 peak hour trips to conduct an intersection
analysis. Therefore, the project is not expected to produce any significant traffic volume
impacts.
Regarding parking, the site plan includes 50 parking spaces and the City requires 50 parking
spaces. While parking was recently removed from the State CEQA Guidelines Appendix G
Checklist as an environmental issue, it is nonetheless important to know how much parking is
being provided by the project compared to how much is needed and/or required by the City to
assure that project occupants will not have to park on adjacent properties due to a deficiency of
onsite parking, which would be an indirect environmental impact affecting adjacent properties.
In this case, there should be no such impacts.
XVI.c-f) No Impact. The proposed project does not include uses or components that would
affect air traffic, so no substantial safety risks would result from project implementation. No
significant impacts would occur, and no mitigation is required.
The proposed project will incrementally increase traffic onsite and on adjacent streets and
intersections. The site plan indicates the project will take access from the established roadway
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCE PROJECT
INITIAL STUDY
LSA SAA1401
35
connections (Windsor Road to the north to Newman Avenue, to Santa Anita Avenue), and will
not create any new or unsafe driveways or access points. The project is also compatible with
surrounding land uses.
The Arcadia Police Department and the Arcadia Fire Station 106 are approximately three
minutes or less from the project site in terms of response time (i.e., 0.85 mile and 1.85 miles @
35 mph, respectively). Traffic associated with project construction may have a temporary effect
on existing traffic circulation patterns. However, the proposed project is in a urban setting and
direct access to the site will be available primarily from Santa Anita Avenue and secondary
emergency access will be available via Cornell Drive. Due to the proximity of emergency
services, the urban setting, and availability of access to the site impacts to emergency access
will be less than significant. The proposed project will also comply with all of the City’s
requirements for emergency access, so there will be no significant impacts.
The project site is adjacent to Santa Anita Avenue and Colorado Boulevard which provide
vehicular and non-vehicular access to the project area. City staff will also require the project to
be consistent with City policies supporting public transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities, so
there will be no significant impacts.
XVII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Would the project:
b) Require or result in the construction of new
water or wastewater treatment facilities or
expansion of existing facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
c) Require or result in the construction of new
stormwater drainage facilities or expansion of
existing facilities, the construction of which
could cause significant environmental effects?
d) Have sufficient water supplies available to
serve the project from existing entitlements
and resources, or are new or expanded
entitlements needed?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements
of the applicable Regional Water Quality
Control Board?
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCE PROJECT
INITIAL STUDY
LSA SAA1401
36
e) Result in a determination by the wastewater
treatment provider, which serves or may
serve the project that it has adequate
capacity to serve the project’s projected
demand in addition to the provider’s existing
commitments?
f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient
permitted capacity to accommodate the
project’s solid waste disposal needs?
g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes
and regulations related to solid waste?
XVII.a-g) Less than Significant Impacts. The project site currently has a former church
that when it operational it discharged its wastewater into the sanitary sewerage collection and
treatment systems provided by the City of Arcadia and the County of Los Angeles, respectively.
Under Section 402 of the Federal Clean Water Act (CWA), the Regional Water Quality Control
Board (RWQCB) issues National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits to
regulate waste discharges to “waters of the U.S.,” which includes rivers, lakes, and their
tributary waters. Waste discharges include discharges of stormwater and construction project
discharges. Construction of a project resulting in the disturbance of more than one acre
requires an NPDES permit. Construction project proponents are also required to prepare a
Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP).
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant would be required to satisfy City
requirements related to the payment of fees and/or the provision of adequate wastewater
facilities. The project would also have to comply with the waste discharge prohibitions and
water quality objectives established by the RWCQB and the City as part of the development
review and approval process. Therefore, project impacts related to this issue would be less
than significant.
Water and wastewater services are provided to the project site by the City of Arcadia Public
Works Services Department. The department obtains water from both groundwater and
imported water. The City also provides sewer service collection to the local area. Wastewater
from the area is carried by sewers to the San Jose Creek Water Reclamation Plant which is
operated by the Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County. The project will not cause a need to
construct any new water or wastewater treatment facilities, or expansion of existing facilities
because these facilities are adequately sized to service the site, so there will be no significant
impacts.
A new sewer main will be constructed from Cornell Drive, adjacent to Unit 3, and tie into the
existing sewer main adjacent to Colorado Blvd. A portion of the existing sewer main that runs
southeast through the western portion of the site will be abandoned, and a sewer cleanout, cast
iron sewer main will be constructed. Two existing manholes will be relocated and two new
manholes will be constructed.
A new storm drain pipe and catch basins will be constructed along the northerly property line,
Windsor Road, and Cornell Drive to connect to new curb opening catch basin on Cornell Drive.
This will connect to a new storm drain pipe and sewer manhole that will be constructed in the
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCE PROJECT
INITIAL STUDY
LSA SAA1401
37
driveway between Unit 2 and 3 and will tie into an existing catch basin that will be modified
adjacent to Colorado Boulevard. A new 30” storm drain pipe will be constructed from the
modified catch basin and will run along Colorado Boulevard to N. Santa Anita Avenue.
The new, modified, and relocated utilities are necessary to develop on the lot, however no
expansion of these facilities are required as a result of the proposed project. Therefore the
proposed project will have a less than significant impact on these facilities.
Water service is provided to the project site by the City of Arcadia Public Works Services
Department. The department obtains groundwater from the Main San Gabriel and Raymond
Groundwater Basins. The City also obtains water imported from the Metropolitan Water District
of Southern California (MWD) via the State Water Project and the Colorado River. According to
MWD’s website, it will be able to meet the region’s water needs through 2030. In addition, the
proposed project does not meet the threshold to prepare a project-specific Water Supply
Assessment (WSA) under SB 610. Therefore, impacts related to water supply are considered to
be less than significant.
The proposed project would not increase the area population or otherwise induce substantial
new population growth beyond that identified in the City’s General Plan (i.e., project is
consistent with current zoning), as outlined in the previous Section XIII, Population and
Housing. Therefore, impacts related to wastewater are less than significant.
The City of Arcadia does not contract with a particular landfill. The proposed project would
generate wastes both during construction and occupancy of the new townhomes. According to
the California Recycle website, multi-family residences generate approximately 30 pounds of
trash per unit per day, so the proposed project as a worst case scenario could generate up to
600 pounds of trash each day or 219,000 pounds per year.
The proposed project would be required to comply with applicable elements of AB 1327,
Chapter 18 (California Solid Waste Reuse and Recycling Access Act of 1991), and other
applicable local, state, and federal solid waste disposal standards, thereby ensuring that impacts
associated with this issue would be considered to be less than significant.
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCE PROJECT
INITIAL STUDY
LSA SAA1401
38
XVIII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
a) Does the project have the potential to
degrade the quality of the environment,
substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or
wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self-sustaining
levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
community, reduce the number or restrict the
range of a rare or endangered plant or animal
or eliminate important examples of the major
periods of California history or prehistory?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
XVIII.a) The project site is fully developed and contains no biological resources except for
several landscaped trees. Development of the proposed project would not result in any
significant impacts to listed or sensitive plants or animals, and it will comply with the City’s tree
preservation ordinance. The project site does contain a structure that is over 50 years old;
however, the structure was determined to not be a significant historic resource under CEQA.
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.)
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
XVIII.b) As presented in the discussion of environmental checklist questions I through XVII,
the project will have no impacts or less than significant impacts with respect to all
environmental issues. Due to the limited scope of direct physical impacts to the environment
associated with this small development project (consistent with current zoning), the project will
not have significant cumulative environmental impacts within the City or surrounding areas.
c) Does the project have environmental effects
that will cause substantial adverse effects on
human beings, either directly or indirectly?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
XVIII.c) In general, impacts to human beings from the project may occur due to air pollutant
emissions, hazards and hazardous materials, and noise. The South Coast Air Basin is currently
designated as a non-attainment area for ozone, PM10, and PM2.5. Development of the project
would contribute to air pollutant emissions on a short-term basis. The proposed project would
be required to comply with regional rules that assist in reducing short-term air pollutant
emissions. The analysis in Section III determined that this small project would not produce any
significant short- and long-term air pollutant impacts from the project.
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCE PROJECT
INITIAL STUDY
LSA SAA1401
39
In addition, the analyses in Sections VIII and IX, respectively, evaluated potential impacts
related to hazards/hazardous materials and to water resources and determined there was either
no impact or impacts were less than significant. As detailed in the preceding responses,
development of the proposed project would not result, either directly or indirectly, in adverse
hazards and noise effects, resulting in a corresponding less than significant impact to human
beings.
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCE PROJECT
INITIAL STUDY
LSA SAA1401
40
SECTION 5 LIST OF PREPARERS
5.1 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC.
• Kent Norton, AICP, REPA (Project Manager)
• Lynn Calvert-Hayes, AICP (Principal in Charge)
• Tony Chung, Ph.D. (Noise/Air Quality/GHG Studies)
• Katherine Best (Environmental Planner)
• Casey Tibbet (Historical Assessment)
• Margaret Gooding (Graphics)
5.2 CITY OF ARCADIA
• Lisa Flores (Planning Services Manager)
• Jordan Chamberlin (Assistant Planner)
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCE PROJECT
INITIAL STUDY
LSA SAA1401
41
SECTION 6 REFERENCES
Arcadia 2010 “City of Arcadia General Plan.” City of Arcadia. November 2010.
BB&N 1987 “Noise Control for Buildings and Manufacturing Plants,” Bolt, Beranek &
Newman (BB&N), 1987.
CalEPA 2014 “Managing Hazardous Waste,” California Environmental Protection
Agency (CalEPA) and Department of Toxic Substances Control, website
accessed December 1, 2014. http://www.dtsc.ca.gov/hazardouswaste
CalEPA 2014 “Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA) Program Directory,” California
Department Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA), website
accessed November 30, 2014.
http://www.calepa.ca.gov/CUPA/Directory/default.aspx
CALREC 2014 Calrecycle website accessed December 1, 2014.
www.calrecycle.ca.gov
Caltrans 2001 “Transportation Related Earthborne Vibrations (Caltrans Experiences)”.
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), Division of
Environmental Analysis, Office of Noise, Air Quality, and Hazardous
Waste Management. Technical Advisory, Vibration. TAV-02-01-R9601.
February 20, 2001.
Caltrans 2014 California Department of Transportation Scenic Highway Program,
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), website accessed
December 2, 2014.
http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LandArch/scenic_highways/scenic_hwy.htm
CAPCOA 2008 “CEQA & Climate Change: Evaluating and Addressing Greenhouse Gas
Emissions from Projects Subject to the California Environmental Quality
Act,” California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA),
January 2008.
CARB 2007 “Proposed Early Actions to Mitigate Climate Change in California,”
California Air Resources Board (CARB), April 20, 2007.
CCCPP 2013 “Hydrofluorocarbon, Perfluorocarbon, and Sulfur Hexafluoride
Emissions,” California Climate Change Policy and Program (CCCPP),
California Climate Change Portal, website accessed July 21, 2013.
http://www.climatechange.ca.gov/policies/1990s_in_depth/page11.html
CCR 2013 “California Health and Safety Code,” Section 7050.5, California Code of
Regulations (CCR). July 2013.
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCE PROJECT
INITIAL STUDY
LSA SAA1401
42
CDC 2014 “Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program,” California Department of
Conservation (CDC), Division of Land Resource Protection. Website
accessed November 28, 2014.
CGS 2014 “Fault Mapping in California”. California Geological Survey (CGS). 2005.
Website accessed November 29, 2014.
CIWMB 2014 “Estimated Waste Generation Rates,” California Integrated Waste
Management Board (CIWMB) website accessed on December 2, 2014.
www.ciwmb.ca.gov/wastechar/wastegenrates/default.htm
CWC 2014 “Sections 10750–10756,” California Water Code (CWC), California
Department of Water Resources website accessed December 2, 2014.
DOF 2014 “E-5 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties and the State,
2001-2010, with 2000 Benchmark.” State of California, Department of
Finance (DOF), Sacramento, California, November 2014.
DOT 2014 “Code of Federal Regulations, Title 49—Transportation, Pipeline and
Hazardous Materials Safety Administration,” U.S. Department of
Transportation (DOT), website site accessed December 3, 2014.
http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-
idx?sid=585c275ee19254ba07625d8c92fe925f&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/
Title49/49cfrv2_02.tpl
DTSC 2014 “Hazardous Waste and Substance Site (Cortese) List,” California
Department of Toxic Substance Control (DTSC), website accessed
December 3, 2014. http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public
FEMA 2014 “Flood Limit Data and Mapping,” U.S. Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA), Flood Insurance Rate Map Program, website accessed
December 1, 2014.
Geotracker 2014 “Geotracker” database of hazardous material sites maintained by the
Regional Water Quality Control Board, website accessed December 5,
2014.
HII 2010 “City of Arcadia Zoning Map.” Hogle-Ireland Inc. 2010.
LSA 2014 “Train Noise Impact Analysis.” LSA Associates, Inc. December 2014.
NRCS 2014 “Soil Data Mart,” Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States
Department of Agriculture, website accessed December 2, 2014.
http://soildatamart.nrcs.usda.gov/Report.aspx?Survey=CA675&UseState
=CA and as documented in the “Soil Survey of Los Angeles County,
California” issued by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil
Conservation Service, original research dated 1971.
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCE PROJECT
INITIAL STUDY
LSA SAA1401
43
PDA 2012 “Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration, For Two Medical
Office Buildings, A General Office Building, and a Four-Level Parking
Structure at 161 Colorado Place and 125 W, Huntington Drive.” Pacific
Design Group. December 2012.
SCAG 2008 “Final 2008 Regional Comprehensive Plan,” Southern California
Association of Governments (SCAG), adopted October 2, 2008.
SCAG 2012a “2012-2035 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities
Strategy,” Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG),
adopted April 2012.
SCAG 2012b “Growth Forecast Appendix of the Regional Transportation
Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy” Southern California Association
of Governments, adopted April 2012.
http://rtpscs.scag.ca.gov/Documents/2012/pfinal/SR/2012pfRTP_Growth
Forecast.pdf
SCAQMD 2013 “Air Quality Management Plan,” South Coast Air Quality Management
District (SCAQMD), 2013.
SCAQMD 2014 SCAQMD website accessed December 2, 2014.
www.aqmd.gov/ceqa/handbook/LST
USEPA 1998 “AP-42 Emission Factors, Natural Gas Combustion,” U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (USEPA), July 1998.
www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ap42/ch01/final
USEPA 2004a “EPA420-P-04-016: Update of Methane and Nitrous Oxide Emission
Factors for On-Highway Vehicles,” U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(USEPA), prepared by ICF Consulting. November 2004.
http://www.epa.gov/otaq/models/ngm
USFWS 2011 “HCP/NCCP Planning Areas, Southern California,” U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (USFWS), October 2011.
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCE PROJECT
INITIAL STUDY
LSA SAA1401
Appendix A:
Air Quality/Greenhouse Gas Information
Project Characteristics -
Land Use - Lot acreage, square feet: from project description
Grading - Total acres: project description
Demolition -
Land Use Change -
South Coast Air Basin, Summer
Arcadia Multi-Family
1.1 Land Usage
Land UsesSizeMetricLot AcreageFloor Surface AreaPopulation
Apartments Low Rise20.00Dwelling Unit1.0540,438.0057
1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization
Climate Zone
Urban
9
Wind Speed (m/s)Precipitation Freq (Days)2.231
1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data
1.0 Project Characteristics
Utility CompanyStatewide Average
2014Operational Year
CO2 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
1001.570.029CH4 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
0.006N2O Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
Table NameColumn NameDefault ValueNew Value
tblGradingAcresOfGrading1.501.05
tblGradingAcresOfGrading1.001.05
tblLandUseLandUseSquareFeet20,000.0040,438.00
tblLandUseLotAcreage1.251.05
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2Date: 12/10/2014 10:03 AMPage 1 of 23
2.0 Emissions Summary
2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission)
ROGNOxCOSO2Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2NBio- CO2Total CO2CH4N2OCO2e
Yearlb/daylb/day
201532.049430.615323.56640.02845.91551.88117.38332.98031.76174.33070.00002,876.143
4
2,876.143
4
0.64600.00002,889.709
2
Total32.049430.615323.56640.02845.91551.88117.38332.98031.76174.33070.00002,876.143
4
2,876.143
4
0.64600.00002,889.709
2
Unmitigated Construction
ROGNOxCOSO2Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2NBio- CO2Total CO2CH4N2OCO2e
Yearlb/daylb/day
201532.049430.615323.56640.02845.91551.88117.38332.98031.76174.33070.00002,876.143
4
2,876.143
4
0.64600.00002,889.709
2
Total32.049430.615323.56640.02845.91551.88117.38332.98031.76174.33070.00002,876.143
4
2,876.143
4
0.64600.00002,889.709
2
Mitigated Construction
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2Date: 12/10/2014 10:03 AMPage 2 of 23
ROGNOxCOSO2Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2NBio-CO2Total CO2CH4N20CO2e
Percent
Reduction
0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2Date: 12/10/2014 10:03 AMPage 3 of 23
2.2 Overall Operational
ROGNOxCOSO2Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2NBio- CO2Total CO2CH4N2OCO2e
Categorylb/daylb/day
Area6.18320.153011.74320.01611.53671.53671.53651.5365187.3384362.9711550.30940.56190.0127566.0499
Energy8.4100e-
003
0.07190.03064.6000e-
004
5.8100e-
003
5.8100e-
003
5.8100e-
003
5.8100e-
003
91.741391.74131.7600e-
003
1.6800e-
003
92.2996
Mobile0.64871.88087.75840.01541.03690.03001.06690.27700.02750.30451,422.995
9
1,422.995
9
0.06321,424.322
1
Total6.84032.105619.53220.03191.03691.57252.60950.27701.56981.8468187.33841,877.708
3
2,065.046
7
0.62680.01442,082.671
6
Unmitigated Operational
ROGNOxCOSO2Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2NBio- CO2Total CO2CH4N2OCO2e
Categorylb/daylb/day
Area6.18320.153011.74320.01611.53671.53671.53651.5365187.3384362.9711550.30940.56190.0127566.0499
Energy8.4100e-
003
0.07190.03064.6000e-
004
5.8100e-
003
5.8100e-
003
5.8100e-
003
5.8100e-
003
91.741391.74131.7600e-
003
1.6800e-
003
92.2996
Mobile0.64871.88087.75840.01541.03690.03001.06690.27700.02750.30451,422.995
9
1,422.995
9
0.06321,424.322
1
Total6.84032.105619.53220.03191.03691.57252.60950.27701.56981.8468187.33841,877.708
3
2,065.046
7
0.62680.01442,082.671
6
Mitigated Operational
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2Date: 12/10/2014 10:03 AMPage 4 of 23
3.0 Construction Detail
Construction Phase
Phase
Number
Phase NamePhase TypeStart DateEnd DateNum Days
Week
Num DaysPhase Description
1DemolitionDemolition1/1/20151/28/2015520
2Site PreparationSite Preparation1/29/20151/30/201552
3GradingGrading1/31/20152/5/201554
4Building ConstructionBuilding Construction2/6/201511/12/20155200
5PavingPaving11/13/201511/26/2015510
6Architectural CoatingArchitectural Coating11/27/201512/10/2015510
OffRoad Equipment
ROGNOxCOSO2Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2NBio-CO2Total CO2CH4N20CO2e
Percent
Reduction
0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00
Residential Indoor: 81,887; Residential Outdoor: 27,296; Non-Residential Indoor: 0; Non-Residential Outdoor: 0 (Architectural Coating – sqft)
Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 1.05
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 1.05
Acres of Paving: 0
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2Date: 12/10/2014 10:03 AMPage 5 of 23
Phase NameOffroad Equipment TypeAmountUsage HoursHorse PowerLoad Factor
Architectural CoatingAir Compressors16.00780.48
PavingCement and Mortar Mixers16.0090.56
DemolitionConcrete/Industrial Saws18.00810.73
Building ConstructionGenerator Sets18.00840.74
Building ConstructionCranes16.002260.29
Building ConstructionForklifts16.00890.20
Site PreparationGraders18.001740.41
PavingPavers16.001250.42
PavingRollers17.00800.38
DemolitionRubber Tired Dozers18.002550.40
GradingRubber Tired Dozers16.002550.40
Building ConstructionTractors/Loaders/Backhoes16.00970.37
DemolitionTractors/Loaders/Backhoes38.00970.37
GradingTractors/Loaders/Backhoes17.00970.37
PavingTractors/Loaders/Backhoes18.00970.37
Site PreparationTractors/Loaders/Backhoes18.00970.37
GradingGraders16.001740.41
PavingPaving Equipment18.001300.36
Site PreparationRubber Tired Dozers17.002550.40
Building ConstructionWelders38.00460.45
Trips and VMT
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2Date: 12/10/2014 10:03 AMPage 6 of 23
3.2 Demolition - 2015
ROGNOxCOSO2Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2NBio- CO2Total CO2CH4N2OCO2e
Categorylb/daylb/day
Fugitive Dust0.59290.00000.59290.08980.00000.08980.00000.0000
Off-Road3.066629.677822.05660.02451.86511.86511.74691.74692,509.059
9
2,509.059
9
0.63572,522.410
4
Total3.066629.677822.05660.02450.59291.86512.45800.08981.74691.83672,509.059
9
2,509.059
9
0.63572,522.410
4
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction
Phase NameOffroad Equipment
Count
Worker Trip
Number
Vendor Trip
Number
Hauling Trip
Number
Worker Trip
Length
Vendor Trip
Length
Hauling Trip
Length
Worker Vehicle
Class
Vendor
Vehicle Class
Hauling
Vehicle Class
Demolition513.000.0055.0014.706.9020.00LD_MixHDT_MixHHDT
Site Preparation38.000.000.0014.706.9020.00LD_MixHDT_MixHHDT
Grading38.000.000.0014.706.9020.00LD_MixHDT_MixHHDT
Building Construction714.002.000.0014.706.9020.00LD_MixHDT_MixHHDT
Paving513.000.000.0014.706.9020.00LD_MixHDT_MixHHDT
Architectural Coating13.000.000.0014.706.9020.00LD_MixHDT_MixHHDT
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2Date: 12/10/2014 10:03 AMPage 7 of 23
3.2 Demolition - 2015
ROGNOxCOSO2Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2NBio- CO2Total CO2CH4N2OCO2e
Categorylb/daylb/day
Hauling0.05370.86250.57862.0300e-
003
0.04790.01470.06260.01310.01360.0267206.9194206.91941.6300e-
003
206.9538
Vendor0.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.0000
Worker0.06000.07500.93121.8400e-
003
0.14531.2800e-
003
0.14660.03851.1700e-
003
0.0397160.1641160.16418.6200e-
003
160.3451
Total0.11370.93751.50983.8700e-
003
0.19320.01600.20920.05170.01470.0664367.0836367.08360.0103367.2988
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROGNOxCOSO2Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2NBio- CO2Total CO2CH4N2OCO2e
Categorylb/daylb/day
Fugitive Dust0.59290.00000.59290.08980.00000.08980.00000.0000
Off-Road3.066629.677822.05660.02451.86511.86511.74691.74690.00002,509.059
9
2,509.059
9
0.63572,522.410
4
Total3.066629.677822.05660.02450.59291.86512.45800.08981.74691.83670.00002,509.059
9
2,509.059
9
0.63572,522.410
4
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2Date: 12/10/2014 10:03 AMPage 8 of 23
3.2 Demolition - 2015
ROGNOxCOSO2Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2NBio- CO2Total CO2CH4N2OCO2e
Categorylb/daylb/day
Hauling0.05370.86250.57862.0300e-
003
0.04790.01470.06260.01310.01360.0267206.9194206.91941.6300e-
003
206.9538
Vendor0.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.0000
Worker0.06000.07500.93121.8400e-
003
0.14531.2800e-
003
0.14660.03851.1700e-
003
0.0397160.1641160.16418.6200e-
003
160.3451
Total0.11370.93751.50983.8700e-
003
0.19320.01600.20920.05170.01470.0664367.0836367.08360.0103367.2988
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.3 Site Preparation - 2015
ROGNOxCOSO2Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2NBio- CO2Total CO2CH4N2OCO2e
Categorylb/daylb/day
Fugitive Dust5.82610.00005.82612.95660.00002.95660.00000.0000
Off-Road2.536226.888617.01070.01711.46711.46711.34971.34971,801.744
0
1,801.744
0
0.53791,813.039
8
Total2.536226.888617.01070.01715.82611.46717.29312.95661.34974.30631,801.744
0
1,801.744
0
0.53791,813.039
8
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2Date: 12/10/2014 10:03 AMPage 9 of 23
3.3 Site Preparation - 2015
ROGNOxCOSO2Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2NBio- CO2Total CO2CH4N2OCO2e
Categorylb/daylb/day
Hauling0.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.0000
Vendor0.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.0000
Worker0.03690.04620.57311.1300e-
003
0.08947.9000e-
004
0.09020.02377.2000e-
004
0.024498.562598.56255.3000e-
003
98.6739
Total0.03690.04620.57311.1300e-
003
0.08947.9000e-
004
0.09020.02377.2000e-
004
0.024498.562598.56255.3000e-
003
98.6739
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROGNOxCOSO2Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2NBio- CO2Total CO2CH4N2OCO2e
Categorylb/daylb/day
Fugitive Dust5.82610.00005.82612.95660.00002.95660.00000.0000
Off-Road2.536226.888617.01070.01711.46711.46711.34971.34970.00001,801.744
0
1,801.744
0
0.53791,813.039
8
Total2.536226.888617.01070.01715.82611.46717.29312.95661.34974.30630.00001,801.744
0
1,801.744
0
0.53791,813.039
8
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2Date: 12/10/2014 10:03 AMPage 10 of 23
3.3 Site Preparation - 2015
ROGNOxCOSO2Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2NBio- CO2Total CO2CH4N2OCO2e
Categorylb/daylb/day
Hauling0.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.0000
Vendor0.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.0000
Worker0.03690.04620.57311.1300e-
003
0.08947.9000e-
004
0.09020.02377.2000e-
004
0.024498.562598.56255.3000e-
003
98.6739
Total0.03690.04620.57311.1300e-
003
0.08947.9000e-
004
0.09020.02377.2000e-
004
0.024498.562598.56255.3000e-
003
98.6739
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.4 Grading - 2015
ROGNOxCOSO2Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2NBio- CO2Total CO2CH4N2OCO2e
Categorylb/daylb/day
Fugitive Dust4.79500.00004.79502.51270.00002.51270.00000.0000
Off-Road2.066621.944314.09020.01411.19681.19681.10111.10111,479.800
0
1,479.800
0
0.44181,489.077
4
Total2.066621.944314.09020.01414.79501.19685.99172.51271.10113.61381,479.800
0
1,479.800
0
0.44181,489.077
4
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2Date: 12/10/2014 10:03 AMPage 11 of 23
3.4 Grading - 2015
ROGNOxCOSO2Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2NBio- CO2Total CO2CH4N2OCO2e
Categorylb/daylb/day
Hauling0.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.0000
Vendor0.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.0000
Worker0.03690.04620.57311.1300e-
003
0.08947.9000e-
004
0.09020.02377.2000e-
004
0.024498.562598.56255.3000e-
003
98.6739
Total0.03690.04620.57311.1300e-
003
0.08947.9000e-
004
0.09020.02377.2000e-
004
0.024498.562598.56255.3000e-
003
98.6739
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROGNOxCOSO2Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2NBio- CO2Total CO2CH4N2OCO2e
Categorylb/daylb/day
Fugitive Dust4.79500.00004.79502.51270.00002.51270.00000.0000
Off-Road2.066621.944314.09020.01411.19681.19681.10111.10110.00001,479.800
0
1,479.800
0
0.44181,489.077
4
Total2.066621.944314.09020.01414.79501.19685.99172.51271.10113.61380.00001,479.800
0
1,479.800
0
0.44181,489.077
4
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2Date: 12/10/2014 10:03 AMPage 12 of 23
3.4 Grading - 2015
ROGNOxCOSO2Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2NBio- CO2Total CO2CH4N2OCO2e
Categorylb/daylb/day
Hauling0.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.0000
Vendor0.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.0000
Worker0.03690.04620.57311.1300e-
003
0.08947.9000e-
004
0.09020.02377.2000e-
004
0.024498.562598.56255.3000e-
003
98.6739
Total0.03690.04620.57311.1300e-
003
0.08947.9000e-
004
0.09020.02377.2000e-
004
0.024498.562598.56255.3000e-
003
98.6739
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.5 Building Construction - 2015
ROGNOxCOSO2Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2NBio- CO2Total CO2CH4N2OCO2e
Categorylb/daylb/day
Off-Road3.600021.564215.00410.02201.48511.48511.43441.43442,055.624
7
2,055.624
7
0.47412,065.581
2
Total3.600021.564215.00410.02201.48511.48511.43441.43442,055.624
7
2,055.624
7
0.47412,065.581
2
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2Date: 12/10/2014 10:03 AMPage 13 of 23
3.5 Building Construction - 2015
ROGNOxCOSO2Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2NBio- CO2Total CO2CH4N2OCO2e
Categorylb/daylb/day
Hauling0.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.0000
Vendor0.01890.19650.21684.4000e-
004
0.01253.4000e-
003
0.01593.5600e-
003
3.1200e-
003
6.6800e-
003
44.124544.12453.5000e-
004
44.1318
Worker0.06460.08081.00281.9800e-
003
0.15651.3800e-
003
0.15790.04151.2600e-
003
0.0428172.4844172.48449.2800e-
003
172.6793
Total0.08350.27731.21972.4200e-
003
0.16904.7800e-
003
0.17380.04514.3800e-
003
0.0494216.6090216.60909.6300e-
003
216.8111
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROGNOxCOSO2Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2NBio- CO2Total CO2CH4N2OCO2e
Categorylb/daylb/day
Off-Road3.600021.564215.00410.02201.48511.48511.43441.43440.00002,055.624
7
2,055.624
7
0.47412,065.581
2
Total3.600021.564215.00410.02201.48511.48511.43441.43440.00002,055.624
7
2,055.624
7
0.47412,065.581
2
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2Date: 12/10/2014 10:03 AMPage 14 of 23
3.5 Building Construction - 2015
ROGNOxCOSO2Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2NBio- CO2Total CO2CH4N2OCO2e
Categorylb/daylb/day
Hauling0.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.0000
Vendor0.01890.19650.21684.4000e-
004
0.01253.4000e-
003
0.01593.5600e-
003
3.1200e-
003
6.6800e-
003
44.124544.12453.5000e-
004
44.1318
Worker0.06460.08081.00281.9800e-
003
0.15651.3800e-
003
0.15790.04151.2600e-
003
0.0428172.4844172.48449.2800e-
003
172.6793
Total0.08350.27731.21972.4200e-
003
0.16904.7800e-
003
0.17380.04514.3800e-
003
0.0494216.6090216.60909.6300e-
003
216.8111
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.6 Paving - 2015
ROGNOxCOSO2Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2NBio- CO2Total CO2CH4N2OCO2e
Categorylb/daylb/day
Off-Road1.404114.59599.16950.01330.89190.89190.82150.82151,382.470
3
1,382.470
3
0.40541,390.982
6
Paving0.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.0000
Total1.404114.59599.16950.01330.89190.89190.82150.82151,382.470
3
1,382.470
3
0.40541,390.982
6
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2Date: 12/10/2014 10:03 AMPage 15 of 23
3.6 Paving - 2015
ROGNOxCOSO2Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2NBio- CO2Total CO2CH4N2OCO2e
Categorylb/daylb/day
Hauling0.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.0000
Vendor0.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.0000
Worker0.06000.07500.93121.8400e-
003
0.14531.2800e-
003
0.14660.03851.1700e-
003
0.0397160.1641160.16418.6200e-
003
160.3451
Total0.06000.07500.93121.8400e-
003
0.14531.2800e-
003
0.14660.03851.1700e-
003
0.0397160.1641160.16418.6200e-
003
160.3451
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROGNOxCOSO2Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2NBio- CO2Total CO2CH4N2OCO2e
Categorylb/daylb/day
Off-Road1.404114.59599.16950.01330.89190.89190.82150.82150.00001,382.470
3
1,382.470
3
0.40541,390.982
6
Paving0.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.0000
Total1.404114.59599.16950.01330.89190.89190.82150.82150.00001,382.470
3
1,382.470
3
0.40541,390.982
6
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2Date: 12/10/2014 10:03 AMPage 16 of 23
3.6 Paving - 2015
ROGNOxCOSO2Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2NBio- CO2Total CO2CH4N2OCO2e
Categorylb/daylb/day
Hauling0.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.0000
Vendor0.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.0000
Worker0.06000.07500.93121.8400e-
003
0.14531.2800e-
003
0.14660.03851.1700e-
003
0.0397160.1641160.16418.6200e-
003
160.3451
Total0.06000.07500.93121.8400e-
003
0.14531.2800e-
003
0.14660.03851.1700e-
003
0.0397160.1641160.16418.6200e-
003
160.3451
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
3.7 Architectural Coating - 2015
ROGNOxCOSO2Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2NBio- CO2Total CO2CH4N2OCO2e
Categorylb/daylb/day
Archit. Coating31.62900.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.0000
Off-Road0.40662.57031.90182.9700e-
003
0.22090.22090.22090.2209281.4481281.44810.0367282.2177
Total32.03562.57031.90182.9700e-
003
0.22090.22090.22090.2209281.4481281.44810.0367282.2177
Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2Date: 12/10/2014 10:03 AMPage 17 of 23
3.7 Architectural Coating - 2015
ROGNOxCOSO2Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2NBio- CO2Total CO2CH4N2OCO2e
Categorylb/daylb/day
Hauling0.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.0000
Vendor0.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.0000
Worker0.01380.01730.21494.3000e-
004
0.03353.0000e-
004
0.03388.8900e-
003
2.7000e-
004
9.1600e-
003
36.961036.96101.9900e-
003
37.0027
Total0.01380.01730.21494.3000e-
004
0.03353.0000e-
004
0.03388.8900e-
003
2.7000e-
004
9.1600e-
003
36.961036.96101.9900e-
003
37.0027
Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROGNOxCOSO2Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2NBio- CO2Total CO2CH4N2OCO2e
Categorylb/daylb/day
Archit. Coating31.62900.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.0000
Off-Road0.40662.57031.90182.9700e-
003
0.22090.22090.22090.22090.0000281.4481281.44810.0367282.2177
Total32.03562.57031.90182.9700e-
003
0.22090.22090.22090.22090.0000281.4481281.44810.0367282.2177
Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2Date: 12/10/2014 10:03 AMPage 18 of 23
4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile
ROGNOxCOSO2Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2NBio- CO2Total CO2CH4N2OCO2e
Categorylb/daylb/day
Mitigated0.64871.88087.75840.01541.03690.03001.06690.27700.02750.30451,422.995
9
1,422.995
9
0.06321,424.322
1
Unmitigated0.64871.88087.75840.01541.03690.03001.06690.27700.02750.30451,422.995
9
1,422.995
9
0.06321,424.322
1
4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile
3.7 Architectural Coating - 2015
ROGNOxCOSO2Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2NBio- CO2Total CO2CH4N2OCO2e
Categorylb/daylb/day
Hauling0.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.0000
Vendor0.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.0000
Worker0.01380.01730.21494.3000e-
004
0.03353.0000e-
004
0.03388.8900e-
003
2.7000e-
004
9.1600e-
003
36.961036.96101.9900e-
003
37.0027
Total0.01380.01730.21494.3000e-
004
0.03353.0000e-
004
0.03388.8900e-
003
2.7000e-
004
9.1600e-
003
36.961036.96101.9900e-
003
37.0027
Mitigated Construction Off-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2Date: 12/10/2014 10:03 AMPage 19 of 23
4.2 Trip Summary Information
4.3 Trip Type Information
Average Daily Trip RateUnmitigatedMitigated
Land UseWeekdaySaturdaySundayAnnual VMTAnnual VMT
Apartments Low Rise131.80143.20121.40450,869450,869
Total131.80143.20121.40450,869450,869
MilesTrip %Trip Purpose %
Land UseH-W or C-WH-S or C-CH-O or C-NWH-W or C-WH-S or C-CH-O or C-NWPrimaryDivertedPass-by
Apartments Low Rise14.705.908.7040.2019.2040.6086113
5.0 Energy Detail
ROGNOxCOSO2Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2NBio- CO2Total CO2CH4N2OCO2e
Categorylb/daylb/day
NaturalGas
Mitigated
8.4100e-
003
0.07190.03064.6000e-
004
5.8100e-
003
5.8100e-
003
5.8100e-
003
5.8100e-
003
91.741391.74131.7600e-
003
1.6800e-
003
92.2996
NaturalGas
Unmitigated
8.4100e-
003
0.07190.03064.6000e-
004
5.8100e-
003
5.8100e-
003
5.8100e-
003
5.8100e-
003
91.741391.74131.7600e-
003
1.6800e-
003
92.2996
5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy
4.4 Fleet Mix
LDALDT1LDT2MDVLHD1LHD2MHDHHDOBUSUBUSMCYSBUSMH
0.5166100.0605170.1799790.1405870.0415660.0066160.0150920.0275870.0019230.0025300.0043140.0006020.002075
Historical Energy Use: N
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2Date: 12/10/2014 10:03 AMPage 20 of 23
6.1 Mitigation Measures Area
6.0 Area Detail
5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas
NaturalGa
s Use
ROGNOxCOSO2Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2NBio- CO2Total CO2CH4N2OCO2e
Land UsekBTU/yrlb/daylb/day
Apartments Low
Rise
779.8018.4100e-
003
0.07190.03064.6000e-
004
5.8100e-
003
5.8100e-
003
5.8100e-
003
5.8100e-
003
91.741391.74131.7600e-
003
1.6800e-
003
92.2996
Total8.4100e-
003
0.07190.03064.6000e-
004
5.8100e-
003
5.8100e-
003
5.8100e-
003
5.8100e-
003
91.741391.74131.7600e-
003
1.6800e-
003
92.2996
Unmitigated
NaturalGa
s Use
ROGNOxCOSO2Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2NBio- CO2Total CO2CH4N2OCO2e
Land UsekBTU/yrlb/daylb/day
Apartments Low
Rise
0.7798018.4100e-
003
0.07190.03064.6000e-
004
5.8100e-
003
5.8100e-
003
5.8100e-
003
5.8100e-
003
91.741391.74131.7600e-
003
1.6800e-
003
92.2996
Total8.4100e-
003
0.07190.03064.6000e-
004
5.8100e-
003
5.8100e-
003
5.8100e-
003
5.8100e-
003
91.741391.74131.7600e-
003
1.6800e-
003
92.2996
Mitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2Date: 12/10/2014 10:03 AMPage 21 of 23
ROGNOxCOSO2Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2NBio- CO2Total CO2CH4N2OCO2e
Categorylb/daylb/day
Mitigated6.18320.153011.74320.01611.53671.53671.53651.5365187.3384362.9711550.30940.56190.0127566.0499
Unmitigated6.18320.153011.74320.01611.53671.53671.53651.5365187.3384362.9711550.30940.56190.0127566.0499
6.2 Area by SubCategory
ROGNOxCOSO2Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2NBio- CO2Total CO2CH4N2OCO2e
SubCategorylb/daylb/day
Architectural
Coating
0.08670.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.0000
Consumer
Products
0.80070.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.0000
Hearth5.24070.133010.05280.01601.52781.52781.52751.5275187.3384360.0000547.33840.55870.0127563.0123
Landscaping0.05510.02001.69039.0000e-
005
8.9800e-
003
8.9800e-
003
8.9800e-
003
8.9800e-
003
2.97112.97113.1700e-
003
3.0376
Total6.18320.153011.74320.01611.53681.53681.53651.5365187.3384362.9711550.30940.56190.0127566.0499
Unmitigated
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2Date: 12/10/2014 10:03 AMPage 22 of 23
8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste
7.1 Mitigation Measures Water
7.0 Water Detail
8.0 Waste Detail
10.0 Vegetation
6.2 Area by SubCategory
ROGNOxCOSO2Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2NBio- CO2Total CO2CH4N2OCO2e
SubCategorylb/daylb/day
Consumer
Products
0.80070.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.0000
Hearth5.24070.133010.05280.01601.52781.52781.52751.5275187.3384360.0000547.33840.55870.0127563.0123
Landscaping0.05510.02001.69039.0000e-
005
8.9800e-
003
8.9800e-
003
8.9800e-
003
8.9800e-
003
2.97112.97113.1700e-
003
3.0376
Architectural
Coating
0.08670.00000.00000.00000.00000.00000.0000
Total6.18320.153011.74320.01611.53681.53681.53651.5365187.3384362.9711550.30940.56190.0127566.0499
Mitigated
9.0 Operational Offroad
Equipment TypeNumberHours/DayDays/YearHorse PowerLoad FactorFuel Type
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2013.2.2Date: 12/10/2014 10:03 AMPage 23 of 23
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCE PROJECT
INITIAL STUDY
LSA SAA1401
Appendix B:
Tree Report
1
Jordan Chamberlin
From:Christy Cuba <christy@cycarlberg.com>
Sent:Thursday, August 20, 2015 9:09 AM
To:F8GI Yahoo; Jordan Chamberlin
Subject:RE: Addendum to Arborist Report, latest COA from Engineer/PW
Dear Ms. Chamberlin,
This email is a follow-up to our phone call of this morning. I have reviewed the updated site plans with regard
to the encroachments on two oak trees and one ash tree in the northeast sections of the property at 501 Santa
Anita Avenue. The encroachments do not appear to have changed significantly from the original plans
addressed in our protected tree report of March 19, 2014. In my opinion, no new recommendations are
necessary.
Please feel welcome to contact me with any questions. Thank you.
Christy Cuba
Carlberg Associates
626.428.5072
www.cycarlberg.com
Sent from my Android
----- Forwarded Message -----
From: Jordan Chamberlin <jchamberlin@ci.arcadia.ca.us>
To: 'Scott Yang' <f8giscott@yahoo.com>
Cc: Kenneth Pang <kpang@cda-arc.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2015 7:45 AM
Subject: RE: Addendum to Arborist Report, latest COA from Engineer/PW
Scott,
I have the latest from Engineering and I am waiting on PW to finalize theirs. Regarding the letter
from the Arborist, it doesn’t appear that much has changed adjacent to the tree that is to be
encroached upon but it would be helpful if she addressed that as well. It could be as simple as a
line or two on that, that way both the Oak Tree Removal and Oak Tree Encroachment are up to
date. The additional trees she recommends and their location seem good. The landscape
architect can update accordingly. Thanks.
__________________________________
Jordan Chamberlin
Assistant Planner|City of Arcadia
626-821-4334| JChamberlin@ArcadiaCA.gov
From: Scott Yang [mailto:f8giscott@yahoo.com]
Sent: Monday, August 17, 2015 11:29 PM
To: Jordan Chamberlin
Cc: Kenneth Pang
Subject: Fw: Addendum to Arborist Report, latest COA from Engineer/PW
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCE PROJECT
INITIAL STUDY
LSA SAA1401
Appendix C:
Historical Information
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCE PROJECT
INITIAL STUDY
LSA SAA1401
Appendix D:
Train Noise Assessment
December 2014
TRAIN NOISE IMPACT ANALYSIS
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCES
501 NORTH SANTA ANITA AVENUE
CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA
December 2014
TRAIN NOISE IMPACT ANALYSIS
SANTA ANITA RESIDENCES
501 NORTH SANTA ANITA AVENUE
CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA
Submitted to:
City of Arcadia
240 West Huntington Drive
Arcadia, California 91006
Prepared by:
LSA Associates, Inc.
20 Executive Park, Suite 200
Irvine, California 92614-4731
(949) 553-0666
Project No. SAA1401
R:\SAA1401_Arcadia CE\Technical Studies\Train Noise Report 12-2014.docx «12/15/14»
1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................. 2
PROJECT LOCATION .......................................................................................................................... 2
EXISTING SETTING ............................................................................................................................ 2
PROJECT DESCRIPTION .................................................................................................................... 2
METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................................................. 2
Characteristics of Sound .................................................................................................................. 5
Measurement of Sound .................................................................................................................... 5
Physiological Effects of Noise ......................................................................................................... 6
Thresholds of Significance .............................................................................................................. 9
Overview of the Existing Noise Environment ................................................................................. 9
Sensitive Land Uses in the Project Vicinity................................................................................... 10
IMPACT ASSESSMENT .................................................................................................................... 10
Long-Term Train Noise Impacts ................................................................................................... 10
Project Design Features ................................................................................................................. 10
CONCLUSIONS .................................................................................................................................. 10
REFERENCES ..................................................................................................................................... 11
FIGURES
Figure 1: Project Location Map .............................................................................................................. 3
Figure 2: Site Plan .................................................................................................................................. 4
TABLES
Table A: Definitions of Acoustical Terms ............................................................................................. 7
Table B: Common Sound Levels and Their Noise Sources ................................................................... 8
R:\SAA1401_Arcadia CE\Technical Studies\Train Noise Report 12-2014.docx «12/15/14» 2
INTRODUCTION
This noise impact analysis has been prepared to evaluate the potential train noise impacts and project
design features needed to develop the proposed 20-unit residential complex. This report is intended to
satisfy the City of Arcadia’s (City) requirement for a project-specific noise impact analysis to meet
the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) that examines the potential
train noise impacts of the proposed uses on the project site.
PROJECT LOCATION
The project site is located at the northwest corner of Santa Anita Avenue and Colorado Boulevard in
the City of Arcadia, as shown on Figure 1.
EXISTING SETTING
The existing uses on the project site include a church. The project site is bounded by existing
residential uses to the north and commercial uses to the east and south.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed project includes the demolition of the existing church structures and the construction of
20 dwelling units. Access to the site will be provided via full-access driveways on Cornell Drive to
the west. A site plan of the project is illustrated on Figure 2.
METHODOLOGY
Evaluation of noise impacts associated with the proposed project includes the following:
Determine the long-term noise levels from the proposed Gold Line train noise using noise data
obtained from Gold Line Phase II, Pasadena to Montclair-Foothill Extension Final Environmental
Impact Report (SCH No. 200361157, February 2007), and compare the levels to the City’s
pertinent noise standards.
Determine the appropriate noise abatement measures, if necessary, such as mechanical ventilation
or building facade enhancements, to assure that long-term, on-site train noise impacts from all
sources will be less than significant.
FIGURE 1
Arcadia Multi-Family ResidentialInitial Study
Regional and Project Location
01,0002,000
Feet
S!!N
I:\SAA1401\Reports\IS\fig1_RegLoc.mxd (12/10/2014)
SOURCE: Bing Aerial, 2010
Aä
?l!"^$
%&o(
!"`$
?q
A»
%&l(
A»
!"a$
!"`$
%&l(
!"^$
KË
%&g(
%&g(
AË
A¥
!"a$
!"a$
!"`$KË
Pacific Ocean
Los Angeles County
Orange County
SanBernardinoCounty
RiversideCounty
Regional Location
Project Area
01020
Miles
S!!N
Project Location
SANTA ANITA AVENUE
COLORADO BOULEVARD
Metro Railroad
NEWMAN AVENUE
WINDSOR ROADCORNELL DRIVE
§¨¦210
Newcastle Park
Residential
Residential
Residential
Angeles National Forest Headquarters Retail
Commercial
CommercialResidential
Commercial
Commercial
FIGURE 2
Arcadia Multi-Family ResidentialInitial Study
Project Site
0100200
Feet
S!!N
I:\SAA1401\Reports\IS\fig2_Project.mxd (12/10/2014)
SOURCE: Google Earth, 2014.
Project Boundary
R:\SAA1401_Arcadia CE\Technical Studies\Train Noise Report 12-2014.docx «12/15/14» 5
Characteristics of Sound
Sound is increasing to such disagreeable levels in the environment that it can threaten quality of life.
Noise is usually defined as unwanted sound. Noise consists of any sound that may produce
physiological or psychological damage and/or interfere with communication, work, rest, recreation,
and sleep.
To the human ear, sound has two significant characteristics: pitch and loudness. Pitch is generally an
annoyance, while loudness can affect the ability to hear. Pitch is the number of complete vibrations,
or cycles per second, of a wave resulting in the tone’s range from high to low. Loudness is the
strength of a sound that describes a noisy or quiet environment and is measured by the amplitude of
the sound wave. Loudness is determined by the intensity of the sound waves combined with the
reception characteristics of the human ear. Sound intensity refers to how hard the sound wave strikes
an object, which in turn produces the sound’s effect. This characteristic of sound can be precisely
measured with instruments. The analysis of a project defines the noise environment of the project area
in terms of sound intensity and its effect on adjacent sensitive land uses.
Measurement of Sound
Sound intensity is measured through the A-weighted scale to correct for the relative frequency
response of the human ear. That is, an A-weighted noise level de-emphasizes low and very high
frequencies of sound similar to the human ear’s de-emphasis of these frequencies. Unlike linear units,
such as inches or pounds, decibels are measured on a logarithmic scale representing points on a
sharply rising curve.
For example, 10 decibels (dB) are 10 times more intense than 1 dB, 20 dB are 100 times more
intense, and 30 dB are 1,000 times more intense. Thirty decibels (30 dB) represents 1,000 times as
much acoustic energy as 1 dB. The decibel scale increases as the square of the change, representing
the sound pressure energy. A sound as soft as human breathing is about 10 times greater than 0 dB.
The decibel system of measuring sound gives a rough connection between the physical intensity of
sound and its perceived loudness to the human ear. A 10 dB increase in sound level is perceived by
the human ear as only a doubling of the loudness of the sound. Ambient sounds generally range from
30 dB (very quiet) to 100 dB (very loud).
Sound levels are generated from a source, and their decibel level decreases as the distance from that
source increases. Sound dissipates exponentially with distance from the noise source. For a single-
point source, sound levels decrease approximately 6 dB for each doubling of distance from the
source. This drop-off rate is appropriate for noise generated by stationary equipment. If noise is
produced by a line source, such as highway traffic or railroad operations, the sound decreases 3 dB
for each doubling of distance in a hard site environment. Line source, noise in a relatively flat
environment with absorptive vegetation, decreases 4.5 dB for each doubling of distance.
There are many ways to rate noise for various time periods, but an appropriate rating of ambient noise
affecting humans also accounts for the annoying effects of sound. Equivalent continuous sound level
(Leq) is the total sound energy of time varying noise over a sample period. However, the predominant
rating scales for human communities in the State of California are the Leq and Community Noise
Equivalent Level (CNEL) or the day-night average level (Ldn) based on A-weighted decibels (dBA).
R:\SAA1401_Arcadia CE\Technical Studies\Train Noise Report 12-2014.docx «12/15/14» 6
CNEL is the time varying noise over a 24-hour period, with a 5 dBA weighting factor applied to the
hourly Leq for noises occurring from 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. (defined as relaxation hours) and
10 dBA weighting factor applied to noise occurring from 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. (defined as sleeping
hours). Ldn is similar to the CNEL scale but without the adjustment for events occurring during the
evening hours. CNEL and Ldn are within 1 dBA of each other and are normally exchangeable. The
City uses the CNEL noise scale for long-term noise impact assessment.
Other noise rating scales of importance when assessing the annoyance factor include the maximum
noise level (Lmax), which is the highest exponential time averaged sound level that occurs during a
stated time period. The noise environments discussed in this analysis for short-term noise impacts are
specified in terms of maximum levels denoted by Lmax. Lmax reflects peak operating conditions and
addresses the annoying aspects of intermittent noise. It is often used together with another noise scale,
or noise standards in terms of percentile noise levels, in noise ordinances for enforcement purposes.
For example, the L10 noise level represents the noise level exceeded 10 percent of the time during a
stated period. The L50 noise level represents the median noise level. Half the time the noise level
exceeds this level, and half the time it is less than this level. The L90 noise level represents the noise
level exceeded 90 percent of the time and is considered the background noise level during a
monitoring period. For a relatively constant noise source, the Leq and L50 are approximately the same.
Noise impacts can be described in three categories. The first is audible impacts that refer to increases
in noise levels noticeable to humans. Audible increases in noise levels generally refer to a change of
3.0 dB or greater because this level has been found to be barely perceptible in exterior environments.
The second category, potentially audible, refers to a change in the noise level between 1.0 dB and
3.0 dB. This range of noise levels has been found to be noticeable only in laboratory environments.
The last category is changes in noise levels of less than 1.0 dB, which are inaudible to the human ear.
Only audible changes in existing ambient or background noise levels are considered potentially
significant.
Physiological Effects of Noise
Physical damage to human hearing begins at prolonged exposure to noise levels higher than 85 dBA.
Exposure to high noise levels affects the entire system, with prolonged noise exposure in excess of
75 dBA increasing body tensions, thereby affecting blood pressure and functions of the heart and the
nervous system. In comparison, extended periods of noise exposure above 90 dBA would result in
permanent cell damage. When the noise level reaches 120 dBA, a tickling sensation occurs in the
human ear even with short-term exposure. This level of noise is called the threshold of feeling. As the
sound reaches 140 dBA, the tickling sensation is replaced by the feeling of pain in the ear. This is
called the threshold of pain. A sound level of 160–165 dBA will result in dizziness or loss of
equilibrium. The ambient or background noise problem is widespread and generally more
concentrated in urban areas than in outlying less developed areas.
Table A lists definitions of acoustical terms, and Table B shows common sound levels and their
sources.
R:\SAA1401_Arcadia CE\Technical Studies\Train Noise Report 12-2014.docx «12/15/14» 7
Table A: Definitions of Acoustical Terms
Term Definitions
Decibel, dB A unit of level that denotes the ratio between two quantities that are proportional to power; the
number of decibels is 10 times the logarithm (to the base 10) of this ratio.
Frequency, Hz Of a function periodic in time, the number of times that the quantity repeats itself in one second (i.e.,
number of cycles per second).
A-Weighted Sound
Level, dBA
The sound level obtained by use of A-weighting. The A-weighting filter deemphasizes the very low
and very high frequency components of the sound in a manner similar to the frequency response of
the human ear and correlates well with subjective reactions to noise. [All sound levels in this report
are A-weighted, unless reported otherwise.]
L01, L10, L50, L90 The fast A-weighted noise levels that are equaled or exceeded by a fluctuating sound level 1 percent,
10 percent, 50 percent, and 90 percent of a stated time period.
Equivalent
Continuous Noise
Level, Leq
The level of a steady sound that, in a stated time period and at a stated location, has the same A-
weighted sound energy as the time varying sound.
Community Noise
Equivalent Level,
CNEL
The 24-hour A-weighted average sound level from midnight to midnight, obtained after the addition
of 5 dBA to sound levels occurring in the evening from 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. and after the
addition of 10 dBA to sound levels occurring in the night between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m.
Day/Night Noise
Level, Ldn
The 24-hour A-weighted average sound level from midnight to midnight, obtained after the addition
of 10 dBA to sound levels occurring in the night between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m.
Lmax, Lmin The maximum and minimum A-weighted sound levels measured on a sound level meter, during a
designated time interval, using fast time averaging.
Ambient Noise
Level
The all-encompassing noise associated with a given environment at a specified time, usually a
composite of sound from many sources at many directions, near and far; no particular sound is
dominant.
Intrusive The noise that intrudes over and above the existing ambient noise at a given location. The relative
intrusiveness of a sound depends upon its amplitude, duration, frequency, and time of occurrence
and tonal or informational content, as well as the prevailing ambient noise level.
Source: Handbook of Acoustical Measurements and Noise Control (1991).
R:\SAA1401_Arcadia CE\Technical Studies\Train Noise Report 12-2014.docx «12/15/14» 8
Table B: Common Sound Levels and Their Noise Sources
Noise Source
A-Weighted Sound Level in
Decibels
Noise
Environments
Subjective
Evaluations
Near Jet Engine 140 Deafening 128 times as loud
Civil Defense Siren 130 Threshold of Pain 64 times as loud
Hard Rock Band 120 Threshold of
Feeling
32 times as loud
Accelerating Motorcycle at a Few Feet
Away
110 Very Loud 16 times as loud
Pile Driver; Noisy Urban Street/Heavy
City Traffic
100 Very Loud 8 times as loud
Ambulance Siren; Food Blender 95 Very Loud
Garbage Disposal 90 Very Loud 4 times as loud
Freight Cars; Living Room Music 85 Loud
Pneumatic Drill; Vacuum Cleaner 80 Loud 2 times as loud
Busy Restaurant 75 Moderately Loud
Near Freeway Auto Traffic 70 Moderately Loud
Average Office 60 Quiet One-half as loud
Suburban Street 55 Quiet
Light Traffic; Soft Radio Music in
Apartment
50 Quiet One-quarter as loud
Large Transformer 45 Quiet
Average Residence without Stereo
Playing
40 Faint One-eighth as loud
Soft Whisper 30 Faint
Rustling Leaves 20 Very Faint
Human Breathing 10 Very Faint Threshold of
Hearing
0 Very Faint
Source: Compiled by LSA Associates, Inc. (1998).
R:\SAA1401_Arcadia CE\Technical Studies\Train Noise Report 12-2014.docx «12/15/14» 9
Thresholds of Significance
Based on Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA),
Appendix G, Public Resource Code §15000–15387, a project will normally have a significant effect
on the environment related to noise if it will substantially increase the ambient noise levels for
adjoining areas or conflict with adopted environmental plans and the goals of the community in which
it is located. The applicable noise standards governing the project site are the criteria in the City’s
Noise Element of the General Plan and its Noise Ordinance.
City of Arcadia Noise Element of the General Plan. The noise standards specified in Table N-2 of
the City’s General Plan Noise Element are used as a guideline to evaluate the acceptability of the
noise levels generated by the Gold Line trains and vehicular traffic in the project area. These
standards are for assessment of long-term mobile sources noise impacts. The City has exterior noise
criteria for outdoor living areas associated with residential uses. The City requires that interior areas
of new residential homes not exceed 45 dBA CNEL and that exterior active use areas not exceed
65 dBA CNEL. Other short-term noise impacts, such as construction activities or on-site stationary
sources, are regulated by the noise ordinance.
Noise Ordinance. The City’s Noise Ordinance establishes the maximum permissible noise level that
may intrude into a neighbor’s property. The City’s Municipal Code, Chapter 6, Noise Regulations,
establishes noise level limits for various land use categories affected by stationary noise sources.
For Residential Zone, the exterior noise levels shall not exceed 55 dBA for more than 30 minutes in
any hour during daytime hours between 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. For events occurring within shorter
periods of time, the noise levels are adjusted upward accordingly. For events lasting equal to or less
than 30 minutes but more than 15 minutes, the exterior noise shall not exceed 60 dBA during daytime
hours. For events lasting equal to or less than 15 minutes but more than 5 minutes, the exterior noise
shall not exceed 65 dBA during daytime hours. For events lasting equal to or less than 5 minutes but
more than 1 minute, the exterior noise shall not exceed 70 dBA during daytime hours. At any time
during daytime hours, the exterior noise shall not exceed 75 dBA. During the nighttime hours
between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. the following day, the above noise standard levels are reduced by
5 dBA.
At the boundary line between two different zones, the noise level of the quieter zone shall be used.
The City’s Municipal Code noise ordinance has not established any upper limits for construction
noise because it is temporary and will cease to occur after completion of the project construction.
Overview of the Existing Train Noise Environment
Train noise on the railroad tracks to the southwest of the project site, including the Gold Line
commuter trains, contribute to the ambient noise in the project area.
R:\SAA1401_Arcadia CE\Technical Studies\Train Noise Report 12-2014.docx «12/15/14» 10
Sensitive Land Uses in the Project Vicinity
The project site is bounded by existing residential uses to the north and commercial uses to the east
and south.
IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Long-Term Train Noise Impacts
Based on noise data obtained from Gold Line Phase II, Pasadena to Montclair–Foothill Extension
Final Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 200361157, February 2007), it was shown that existing
measured noise level was 73 dBA Leq. However, the projected noise level from the operation of the
Gold Line trains was projected to be 49 dBA Leq. Therefore, the projected train noise was much lower
than existing ambient noise, including contribution from vehicular traffic, and would not significantly
affect the project site. Even if it is assumed that this projected hourly noise level would last over 24
hours, the 24-hour weighted average noise from train operations would be 55.7 dBA CNEL. Just by
train noise alone, it would not exceed the City’s exterior noise standard of 65 dBA CNEL for
residential uses.
Based on the United States Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Protective Noise Levels
(EPA 550/9-79-100, November 1978), with a combination of exterior walls, doors, and windows,
standard construction for Southern California (warm climate) commercial or residential buildings
would provide more than 24 dBA in exterior to interior noise reduction with windows closed and
12 dBA or more with windows open (national average is 25 dBA with windows closed and
15 dBA with windows open). With windows or doors open, interior noise levels at these buildings
would be below 45 dBA (i.e., 56 dBA - 12 dBA = 44 dBA). With windows closed, interior noise
levels would also be lower than the 45 dBA (56 dBA - 24 dBA = 32 dBA). This range of maximum
train noise exposure levels is below the City’s 45 dBA CNEL interior noise level for the noise-
sensitive residential uses. Therefore, no specific noise design features are required for train noise
alone.
Project Design Features
Train Noise Impacts. No specific project design features are required.
CONCLUSIONS
Train noise impacts on the proposed project will not exceed CEQA significance thresholds and no
specific Project Design Features are required for train noise impacts.
R:\SAA1401_Arcadia CE\Technical Studies\Train Noise Report 12-2014.docx «12/15/14» 11
REFERENCES
City of Arcadia. Noise Element of the General Plan and Municipal Code Noise Ordinances.
Gold Line Phase II, Pasadena to Montclair – Foothill Extension, Final Environmental Impact Report,
SCH No. 200361157, February 2007.
United States Environmental Protection Agency. 1978. Protective Noise Levels, condensed version of
EPA Levels Document, EPA 550/9-79-100. November.
Attachment No. 7
Attachment No. 7
Traffic Study dated October 8, 2015
2141 West Orangewood Avenue, Suite A
Orange, CA 92868
t: 714.573.0317 f: 714.573.9534
www.koacorporation.com
pg. 1
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
Date: October 8, 2015
To: Scott Yang– Arcadia Santa Anita, LLC
From: Min Zhou, P.E., Vice President – KOA Corporation
Subject: Traffic Operation Analysis for the Residential Nevis Project in the City of Arcadia
KOA Corporation (KOA) is pleased to submit this technical memorandum to summarize the evaluation of the
traffic operational conditions for the Residential Nevis project in the City of Arcadia. Key tasks undertaken for
the traffic operation analysis include: 1) trip generation forecasts of the proposed project, 2) assignment of
project-generated trips to the study area roadway system, and 5) evaluation of the level of service with the
inclusion of project traffic at the study locations. In addition, a parking examination was conducted in the
surrounding area to evaluate any potential issues.
Introduction
The purpose of this updated evaluation is to determine if any impacts would occur due to the construction of this
project to two intersections near the project. The two study intersections are the following:
Newman Avenue & Santa Anita Avenue (Unsignalized)
Colorado Avenue & Santa Anita Avenue (Signalized)
Fieldwork within the project study area was undertaken by KOA to verify the existing conditions of study
roadways such as traffic control characteristics, approach lane configuration at each study intersection, on-street
parking restrictions and locations of transit stops.
Data Collection
KOA conducted AM and PM intersection turning movement counts on September 10, 2015 for the two study
intersections. The surveys were conducted for 2-hour periods during the AM and PM peak hours (7:00 AM to
9:00 AM, and 4:00 PM to 6:00 PM, respectively). The intersection turning movement count data is provided in
Appendix A.
Level of Service Methodology
For analysis of level of service at signalized intersections, the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) methodology
was utilized. The concept of roadway level of service under the ICU methodology is calculated as the volume of
vehicles that pass through the facility divided by the capacity of that facility. A facility is “at capacity” (volume-to-
capacity of 1.00 or greater) when extreme congestion occurs. This volume-to-capacity (v/c) ratio value is based
pg. 2
upon volumes by lane and approach lane configuration. For this analysis, a lane capacity of 1,550 vehicles per hour
per lane for all through lanes and single turn lanes and a total loss time of 10% were used.
For analysis of stop-controlled intersections, the methodology from the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM)
published by the Transportation Research Board (TRB) was utilized. The HCM expresses levels of service in
terms of average delay (seconds per vehicle). For an all-way stop controlled intersection, the average delay for
the entire intersection is computed and used for this analysis. It is important to note that an impact is considered
significant based on an increase in the v/c ratio as defined in the Los Angeles County Traffic Impact Analysis
Report Guidelines. For this reason, the stop-controlled intersection was also evaluated using the ICU
methodology to determine traffic impacts.
Level of service values range from LOS A to LOS F. LOS A indicates excellent operating conditions with little
delay to motorists, whereas LOS F represents congested conditions with excessive vehicle delay. LOS E is
typically defined as the operating “capacity” of a roadway. Table 1 defines the level of service criteria.
Table 1 – Level of Service Definitions
The City of Arcadia uses the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works traffic study guidelines standards
to determine project traffic impacts. For a signalized intersection, a traffic impact is considered significant if the
project-related increase in the v/c ratio equals or exceeds the threshold shown in Table 2 below.
SignalizedStop-Controlled Intersection
IntersectionAverage Stop Delay
Volume/CapacityPer Vehicle (Sec/Veh)
Ratio (ICU)(HCM)
A
Excellent operation. All approaches to the intersection
appear quite open, turning movements are easily made,
and nearly all drivers find freedom of operation.
0.000 - 0.600≤10
B
Very good operation. Many drivers begin to feel
somewhat restricted within platoons of vehicles. This
represents stable flow. An approach to an intersection
may occasionally be fully utilized and traffic queues start
to form.
0.601 - 0.700>10 - 15
C
Good operation. Occasionally backups may develop
behind turning vehicles. Most drivers feel somewhat
restricted.
0.701 - 0.800>15 - 25
D
Fair operation. There are no long-standing traffic
queues. This level is typically associated with design
practice for peak periods.
0.801 - 0.900>25 - 35
E Poor operation. Some long standing vehicular queues
develop on critical approaches.0.901 - 1.000>35 - 50
F
Forced flow. Represents jammed conditions. Backups
from locations downstream or on the cross street may
restrict or prevent movements of vehicles out of the
intersection approach lanes; therefore, volumes carried
are not predictable. Potential for stop and go type
traffic flow.
Greater than 1.000>50
Source:Highway Capacity Manual, Special Report 209, Transportation Research Board, Washington D.C., 2000 and Interim
Materials on Highway Capacity, NCHRP Circular 212, 1982
LOSDefinition
pg. 3
Table 2 – Thresholds of Significant Traffic Impacts
LOS* V/C* Project V/C increase
C < 0.700 – 0.800 Equal to or greater than 0.040
D < 0.800– 0.900 Equal to or greater than 0.020
E and F 0.901 or more Equal to or greater than 0.010
* Pre-project LOS and V/C are the LOS and V/C values at an intersection without the proposed project traffic.
For a stop sign-controlled intersection, the County does not have a significant impact threshold. Thus, the v/c
ratio using the ICU methodology was also calculated, and determination of a significant traffic impact based on the
threshold criteria for a signalized intersection was applied.
Existing Conditions
This section documents the existing traffic conditions in the study area. The discussion presented here is limited
to specific roadways in the project’s vicinity.
Existing Roadway System
A description of the roadways that are approaches to the study intersections are summarized in Table 3.
Table 3 – Description of Study Area Roadways
Existing Transit Service
The project study area is served by two bus transit lines operated by Metro. Table 4 summarizes the transit lines
in the vicinity of the project site.
Table 4 – Summary of Area Transit Lines
Existing Level of Service (LOS) Analysis
A LOS analysis was conducted for the existing AM and PM conditions to determine the changes in delay and LOS
for each study intersection. Table 5 below summarizes the LOS analysis results.
NB / EBSB / WB
Colorado BoulevardLocal Travel Corridor1135Commercial
Santa Anita AvenuePrincipal Travel Corridor3235Residential/Commercial
Newman AvenueLocal Road1125Residential
# Lanes
RoadwayClassification
Posted Speed
Limit (mph)General Land Use
7:00 AM - 12:00 AM12:00 AM - 9:00 PM
487/489Los AngelesEl MonteSanta Anita Avenue30 Min40 Min
487/490El MonteLos AngelesSanta Anita Avenue30 Min40 Min
LineFrom / ToTo / FromViaWeekday
Frequency (Approximate)
pg. 4
Table 5 – Intersection Level of Service Summary
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Unsignalized Intersection Delay (sec/veh) LOS Delay (sec/veh) LOS
Santa Anita Ave & Newman Ave 1.1 A 0.5 A
Signalized Intersection ICU LOS ICU LOS
Colorado Blvd & Santa Anita Blvd 0.692 C 0.628 B
Note: sec/veh = Seconds per Vehicle
As shown in Table 5, the existing conditions analysis using the 2015 intersection turning movement count data
shows that the two study intersections will operate at acceptable LOS. The Synchro analysis worksheets for the
existing conditions are included in Appendix B.
Figure 1 illustrates the study area, existing approach lane configurations and traffic controls at the study
intersections. Figure 2 illustrates the existing traffic volumes.
Figure 1: Study Area
pg. 5
Project Location & Description
The Residential Nevis Project is bounded by Newman Avenue on the north, Santa Anita Avenue on the east,
Colorado Boulevard on the south, and the Windsor Road on the west. The site address is 501 North Santa Anita
Avenue. Figure 3 illustrates the project site location.
Figure 2: Existing Traffic Volumes
pg. 6
The proposed project is the construction of 20 townhomes. The project is anticipated to be open by 2017.
Figure 4 provides the site plan. The project provides vehicular access via one driveway on Windsor Road.
Figure 3: Project Location
pg. 7
Figure 4: Site Plan
pg. 8
Project Trip Generation & Distribution
The project trip generation was calculated using trip rates based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers
(ITE) Trip Generation (9th Edition). The trip distribution is based on development trends in the area, local and
sub-regional traffic routes, regional traffic flows, and the focused study area. The trip rates and the trip
generation totals are provided in Table 6.
Table 6 – Proposed Project Trip Generation
ITE Land Use Type Intensity Type Daily AM Peak PM Peak
# Total Total In Out Total In Out
230 Residential Condominium/Townhouse 20 D.U. 116 9 2 7 10 7 3
Figure 5 illustrates the project trip distribution percentages that were used for the assignment of traffic volumes.
The final product of this three-step process is a full accounting of project trips by direction and turning movement
at the study intersections. The project trips were assigned based on distribution inputs to the traffic analysis
program, and the assignment to the study intersections is illustrated on Figure 6.
Figure 5: Project Trip Distribution
pg. 9
Existing Plus Project Conditions
This section documents existing traffic conditions at the study intersections with the addition of project-generated
traffic, without area/cumulative project traffic volumes. Traffic volumes for these conditions were derived by
adding project trips to the existing traffic volumes.
The traffic volumes for this scenario are provided on Figure 7. The v/c (or average delay) and corresponding level
of service values at the study intersections were calculated and are summarized in Table 7.
Table 7 – Intersection Performance – Existing Plus Project Conditions
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Unsignalized Intersection Delay (sec/veh) LOS Delay (sec/veh) LOS
Santa Anita Ave & Newman Ave 1.2 A 0.6 A
Signalized Intersection ICU LOS ICU LOS
Colorado Blvd & Santa Anita Blvd 0.693 C 0.628 B
Note: sec/veh = Seconds per Vehicle
Figure 6: Project Trip Assignment
pg. 10
The study intersections are projected to operate at LOS C or better during the weekday AM and PM peak hour
periods. The traffic analysis worksheets for this scenario are provided in Appendix C of this report.
Project Traffic Impacts – Existing Plus Project Conditions
Table 8 provides a summary of study intersection operations and corresponding levels of service values for the
‘Existing’ and ‘Existing Plus Project’ conditions.
The v/c (or average delay) and corresponding levels of service values for the ‘Existing’ and ‘Existing Plus Project
conditions are summarized in Table 8. Traffic impacts created by the project are determined by comparing the
‘Existing’ conditions to the ‘Existing Plus Project’ table columns.
Figure 7: Existing Plus Project Traffic Volumes
pg. 11
Table 8 – Determination of Project Impacts –
Existing Plus Project Conditions
Intersection Peak
Hour
Existing (2015)
Conditions
Existing (2015)
+ Project
Change
in ICU
or Delay
Sig
Impact? ICU or
LOS
ICU or
LOS Delay
(sec/veh)
Delay
(sec/veh)
Santa Anita Ave & Newman Ave*
AM 1.1 A 1.2 A 0.100 No
PM 0.5 A 0.6 A 0.100 No
Colorado Blvd & Santa Anita Blvd
AM 0.692 C 0.693 C 0.001 No
PM 0.628 B 0.628 B 0.000 No
* Non-signalized Intersection
The proposed project would not have a significant traffic impact at any of the study intersections under the
existing plus-Project scenario.
Access & Circulation
KOA conducted a cursory review of the site access and circulation in order to determine if there would be a
potential for adverse impacts to traffic operations both on-site and on the surrounding public roadways. KOA
staff observed vehicle and pedestrian traffic movements around the site and at the site access point during the
weekday PM peak period. The observations are summarized below.
On-site Circulation
The project is providing one driveway along Windsor Road. A motorist can enter the driveway and exit without
any conflicts. There would be no vehicular queuing and delay issues on site. The on-site vehicular circulation
appears to be adequate, based on the site plan.
At Newman Avenue
Traffic operations at this intersection were generally adequate. In most cases, vehicles that entered and exited
the site did so without any turn conflicts with other vehicles. In a few instances, vehicles were observed to exit
the site at the same time that one or more vehicles were entering the site. However, the vehicle queue and delay
was short in duration and did not appear to impact traffic operations on Newman Avenue or at the nearby
signalized intersection at Colorado Boulevard and Santa Anita Avenue.
Parking Analysis
Parking Code Requirements
Based on the City of Arcadia Municipal Code parking requirements, the project would be required to provide 50
spaces. The project will be providing for 2 parking spaces per unit and 1 guest parking space per 2 units for a
total of 50 parking spaces. The proposed parking supply is adequate to accommodate the parking demand on-site
of the proposed project
pg. 12
Parking Demand Observations
KOA staff conducted a cursory review of the parking demand along Windsor Road during the weekday. The parking
demand on Windsor Road adjacent to the site was approximately 25% to 50% of the on-street capacity during the
day. The project site demand did not appear to create any impacts on Windsor Road, based on observations. The
installation of wayfinding signage on the site is recommended in order to inform and direct guest to park in the
designated places so that residential parking along Windsor Road is not impacted. Site management should regularly
post maps to remind tenants that their guest must park in the designated guest parking areas.
Looking north on Windsor Road Looking east on Cornell Drive
Conclusion
KOA conducted existing traffic operational condition analysis for the Residential Nevis project in the City of
Arcadia, based on intersection turning movement count data conducted in September 2015. Based on the
analysis, KOA finds that the project would not have any impacts to the surrounding area. Parking conditions in the
general vicinity of the project were observed and seemed adequate. The project will be providing sufficient
parking spaces for its residents and guest therefore on-street parking would not be an issue. We do recommend
that wayfinding signage be installed within the project so as to direct guest to the designated parking spaces.
KOA is pleased to submit this technical memorandum and appendices to you and the City of Arcadia. If you have
any questions or comments regarding this letter, please contact me at (714) 573-0317. Thank you very much.
Sincerely,
Min Zhou, P.E.
Vice President
J:\Cities\Arcadia\JB53143 Santa Anita Residence\Documents\Arcadia_TechMemo_Sep2015.docx
Appendix A
Intersection AM and PM Turning Movement Count Data
DATE:LOCATION:PROJECT #:SC0713
Thu, Sep 10, 15NORTH & SOUTH:LOCATION #:1
EAST & WEST:CONTROL:STOP E\W
NOTES:AM▲
PMN
MD◄W E ►
OTHERS
OTHER▼
NORTHBOUNDSOUTHBOUNDEASTBOUNDWESTBOUND
NLNTNRSLSTSRELETERWLWTWRTOTALNBSBEBWBTTL
LANES:1301200100100000
7:00 AM022701179070520042101001
7:15 AM130612218120950454902002
7:30 AM6303023180201110264510001
7:45 AM1333282820601070465306006
8:00 AM234966260120610363614005
8:15 AM328537266130320257516007
8:30 AM727303199010420149032005
8:45 AM124934215320500548713004
VOLUMES212,32515331,937625053200214,4567240031
APPROACH %1%98%1%2%98%0%32%0%68%49%0%51%
APP/DEPART2,361/2,3951,976/2,01778/2441/200
BEGIN PEAK HR
VOLUMES121,27011231,126213030110112,509
APPROACH %1%98%1%2%98%0%30%0%70%50%0%50%
PEAK HR FACTOR0.9050.8990.6720.5000.961
APP/DEPART1,293/1,3101,151/1,17043/1822/110
4:00 PM625513238210200150902002
4:15 PM427026221020300351113004
4:30 PM328638255010200256026008
4:45 PM1027123276200310257022004
5:00 PM229933266520100158202002
5:15 PM630811264720220059310001
5:30 PM428712318020130262002002
5:45 PM621363326320410056402002
VOLUMES412,18919292,164191201870114,5096190025
APPROACH %2%97%1%1%98%1%40%0%60%39%0%61%
APP/DEPART2,249/2,2312,212/2,19530/2918/540
BEGIN PEAK HR
VOLUMES221,165791,124146076052,365
APPROACH %2%98%1%1%98%1%46%0%54%55%0%45%
PEAK HR FACTOR0.9480.8960.8130.5500.954
APP/DEPART1,194/1,1821,147/1,14013/1011/330
Santa Anita
NORTH SIDE
Newman WEST SIDEEAST SIDENewman
SOUTH SIDE
Santa Anita
N SIDES SIDEE SIDEW SIDETOTALN SIDES SIDEE SIDEW SIDETOTALNSSSESWSTOTAL
7:00 AM000000000000000
7:15 AM000000000000000
7:30 AM000000000000000
7:45 AM000000000000000
8:00 AM000000000000000
8:15 AM000000000000000
8:30 AM000000000000000
8:45 AM000000000000000
TOTAL000000000000000
4:00 PM000000000000000
4:15 PM000000000000000
4:30 PM000000000000000
4:45 PM000000000000000
5:00 PM000000000000000
5:15 PM000000000000000
5:30 PM000000000000000
5:45 PM000000000000000
TOTAL000000000000000
BICYCLE CROSSINGS
AM
PM
AM
7:30 AM
PM
4:45 PM
PEDESTRIAN + BIKE CROSSINGSPEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS
U-TURNS
Santa AnitaSanta AnitaNewmanNewman
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS
PREPARED BY: AimTD LLC. tel: 714 253 7888 pacific@aimtd.com
Arcadia
Santa Anita
Newman
Add U-Turns to Left Turns
4,188254,10162TOTAL4,626
2,212192,16429PM2,231
1,97661,93733AM2,395
411859
745420211132
000
TOTALPMAM 20 7
27
371225
AMPM
TOTAL
000
711853242953
1083078
2,017AM212,325152,361
2,195PM412,189192,249
4,212TOTAL624,514344,610
2,298162,25032TOTAL2,492
1,147141,1249PM1,182
1,15121,12623AM1,310
221133
44331111 5
16
000
TOTALPMAM AM7:30 AM
8:45 AM
11 6
17
19 6
13
#N/AAMPM
TOTAL
000
PM4:45 PM
5:45 PM
37 7
30181028
561343
1,170AM121,270111,293
1,140PM221,16571,194
2,310Total342,435182,487
Santa Anita
Santa Anita
Santa Anita
NewmanNewman
PEAK HOUR
AimTD LLC
TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS
Santa Anita
NewmanNewman
Arcadia
SC0713
ALL HOURS
DATE:LOCATION:PROJECT #:SC0713
Thu, Sep 10, 15NORTH & SOUTH:LOCATION #:2
EAST & WEST:CONTROL:SIGNAL
NOTES:AM▲
PMN
MD◄W E ►
OTHERS
OTHER▼
NORTHBOUNDSOUTHBOUNDEASTBOUNDWESTBOUND
NLNTNRSLSTSRELETERWLWTWRTOTALNBSBEBWBTTL
LANES:1302211201200000
7:00 AM161716251411723724514951211002
7:15 AM122241025181251217337716968621003
7:30 AM4225312212545313167271074284731004
7:45 AM36257193621049203712321265488826008
8:00 AM29287172720139213110141354385417008
8:15 AM3321692921032162616171385279402002
8:30 AM452018141642619199161385471320002
8:45 AM24190171617131174011301134570522004
VOLUMES2371,799981931,532272120189751978794085,99913200033
APPROACH %11%84%5%10%77%14%31%49%20%13%59%27%
APP/DEPART2,134/2,3471,997/1,817384/4601,484/1,3750
BEGIN PEAK HR
VOLUMES1401,013571138751737011045905061913,383
APPROACH %12%84%5%10%75%15%31%49%20%11%64%24%
PEAK HR FACTOR0.9080.8850.8150.9280.952
APP/DEPART1,210/1,2901,161/1,016225/264787/8130
4:00 PM619230241951625821619193766126008
4:15 PM9222232718711261051516142668123005
4:30 PM11212222522310391121613263474354009
4:45 PM13205222922823361192320253677925007
5:00 PM15234273521218281431717343981944008
5:15 PM16239352722217241331821254782413004
5:30 PM15219324125125281122120283782902002
5:45 PM12178233726230231211716232476600000
VOLUMES971,7012142451,7801502299271431421942806,10216270043
APPROACH %5%85%11%11%82%7%18%71%11%23%31%45%
APP/DEPART2,012/2,2372,175/2,0811,299/1,359616/4250
BEGIN PEAK HR
VOLUMES598971161329138311650779781121593,251
APPROACH %6%84%11%12%81%7%17%72%11%22%32%46%
PEAK HR FACTOR0.9240.8900.9340.9380.980
APP/DEPART1,072/1,1861,128/1,077702/741349/2470
Santa Anita
NORTH SIDE
Colorado WEST SIDEEAST SIDEColorado
SOUTH SIDE
Santa Anita
N SIDES SIDEE SIDEW SIDETOTALN SIDES SIDEE SIDEW SIDETOTALNSSSESWSTOTAL
7:00 AM000000000000000
7:15 AM000000000000000
7:30 AM000000000000000
7:45 AM000000000000000
8:00 AM000000000000000
8:15 AM000000000000000
8:30 AM000000000000000
8:45 AM000000000000000
TOTAL000000000000000
4:00 PM000000000000000
4:15 PM000000000000000
4:30 PM000000000000000
4:45 PM000000000000000
5:00 PM000000000000000
5:15 PM000000000000000
5:30 PM000000000000000
5:45 PM000000000000000
TOTAL000000000000000
BICYCLE CROSSINGS
AM
PM
AM
7:30 AM
PM
4:45 PM
PEDESTRIAN + BIKE CROSSINGSPEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS
U-TURNS
Santa AnitaSanta AnitaColoradoColorado
INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS
PREPARED BY: AimTD LLC. tel: 714 253 7888 pacific@aimtd.com
Arcadia
Santa Anita
Colorado
Add U-Turns to Left Turns
4,1724223,312438TOTAL4,584
2,1751501,780245PM2,237
1,9972721,532193AM2,347
1,484616
2,100
1,800425
1,375 408280688
879194
1,073
TOTALPMAM
197142339
349229120 AMPM
TOTAL
1,116927189
21814375
460
1,3591,819
1,6831,299384
1,817AM2371,799982,134
2,081PM971,7012142,012
3,898TOTAL3343,5003124,146
2,2892561,788245TOTAL2,476
1,12883913132PM1,186
1,161173875113AM1,290
787349
1,136
1,060247813191159350
506112618
TOTALPMAM AM7:30 AM
8:45 AM
9078
168
18611670
#N/AAMPM
TOTAL
617507110 PM4:45 PM
5:45 PM
1247945
264741
1,005
927702225
1,016AM1401,013571,210
1,077PM598971161,072
2,093Total1991,9101732,282
Santa Anita
Santa Anita
Santa Anita
ColoradoColorado
PEAK HOUR
AimTD LLC
TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS
Santa Anita
ColoradoColorado
Arcadia
SC0713
ALL HOURS
Appendix B
SYNCHRO Analysis Reports (Existing)
Intersection Capacity Utilization
3: Santa Anita Ave & Colorado Blvd Timing Plan: Existing AM
Santa Anita Residence 9/24/2015 Synchro 8 Report
Dean MaoPage 1
MovementEBLEBTEBRWBLWBTWBRNBLNBTNBRSBLSBTSBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)701104590506191140101357113875173
Pedestrians
Ped Button
Pedestrian Timing (s)
Free RightNoNoNoNo
Ideal Flow190019001900190019001900190019001900190019001900
Lost Time (s)4.04.04.04.04.04.04.04.04.04.04.04.0
Minimum Green (s)4.04.04.04.04.04.04.04.04.04.04.04.0
Refr Cycle Length (s)120120120120120120120120120120120120
Volume Combined (vph)70155090697014010700113875173
Lane Utilization Factor1.000.951.001.000.951.001.000.911.000.970.951.00
Turning Factor (vph)0.950.960.850.950.960.850.950.990.850.951.000.85
Saturated Flow (vph)180534600180534690180551340350536181615
Ped Intf Time (s)0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0
Pedestrian Frequency (%)0.000.000.000.00
Protected Option AllowedYesYesYesYes
Reference Time (s)4.75.40.06.024.10.09.325.00.03.929.012.9
Adj Reference Time (s)8.79.40.010.028.10.013.329.00.08.033.016.9
Permitted Option
Adj Saturation A (vph)1201730120173412017111171809
Reference Time A (s)69.85.489.824.1139.625.058.029.0
Adj Saturation B (vphNANANANANANANANA
Reference Time B (s)NANANANANANANANA
Reference Time (s)69.889.8139.658.0
Adj Reference Time (s)73.893.8143.662.0
Split Option
Ref Time Combined (s)4.75.46.024.19.325.03.929.0
Ref Time Seperate (s)4.73.86.017.59.323.73.929.0
Reference Time (s)5.45.424.124.125.025.029.029.0
Adj Reference Time (s)9.49.428.128.129.029.033.033.0
SummaryEB WBNB SBCombined
Protected Option (s)36.846.3
Permitted Option (s)93.8143.6
Split Option (s)37.562.0
Minimum (s)36.846.383.1
Right TurnsSBR
Adj Reference Time (s)16.9
Cross Thru Ref Time (s)28.1
Oncoming Left Ref Time (s)13.3
Combined (s)58.3
Intersection Summary
Intersection Capacity Utilization 69.2%ICU Level of Service C
Reference Times and Phasing Options do not represent an optimized timing plan.
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
6: Santa Anita Ave & Newman Ave Timing Plan: Existing AM
Santa Anita Residence 9/24/2015 Synchro 8 Report
Dean MaoPage 1
MovementEBLEBTEBRWBLWBTWBRNBLNBTNBRSBLSBTSBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (veh/h)1303011011121270112311262
Sign ControlStopStopFreeFree
Grade0%0%0%0%
Peak Hour Factor0.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.92
Hourly flow rate (vph)1403312012131380122512242
Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median typeNoneNone
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal (ft)339
pX, platoon unblocked0.840.840.840.840.840.84
vC, conflicting volume177226926122107268946612261392
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
vCu, unblocked vol126223546121660235001226811
tC, single (s)7.56.56.97.56.56.94.14.1
tC, 2 stage (s)
tF (s)3.54.03.33.54.03.32.22.2
p0 queue free %861009375100999896
cM capacity (veh/h)101284364828913564683
Direction, Lane #EB 1WB 1NB 1NB 2NB 3NB 4SB 1SB 2SB 3SB 4
Volume Total472413552552288256126122
Volume Left14121300025000
Volume Right3312000120002
cSH21791564170017001700683170017001700
Volume to Capacity0.220.260.020.320.320.170.040.360.360.00
Queue Length 95th (ft)202420003000
Control Delay (s)26.158.511.50.00.00.010.50.00.00.0
Lane LOSDFBB
Approach Delay (s)26.158.50.10.2
Approach LOSDF
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 1.1
Intersection Capacity Utilization 41.1%ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min)15
Intersection Capacity Utilization
3: Santa Anita Ave & Colorado Blvd Timing Plan: Existing PM
Santa Anita Residence 9/24/2015 Synchro 8 Report
Dean MaoPage 1
MovementEBLEBTEBRWBLWBTWBRNBLNBTNBRSBLSBTSBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)11650779781121595989711613291383
Pedestrians
Ped Button
Pedestrian Timing (s)
Free RightNoNoNoNo
Ideal Flow190019001900190019001900190019001900190019001900
Lost Time (s)4.04.04.04.04.04.04.04.04.04.04.04.0
Minimum Green (s)4.04.04.04.04.04.04.04.04.04.04.04.0
Refr Cycle Length (s)120120120120120120120120120120120120
Volume Combined (vph)1165860782710591013013291383
Lane Utilization Factor1.000.951.001.000.951.001.000.911.000.970.951.00
Turning Factor (vph)0.950.980.850.950.910.850.950.980.850.951.000.85
Saturated Flow (vph)180535440180532990180550870350536181615
Ped Intf Time (s)0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0
Pedestrian Frequency (%)0.000.000.000.00
Protected Option AllowedYesYesYesYes
Reference Time (s)7.719.80.05.29.90.03.923.90.04.530.36.2
Adj Reference Time (s)11.723.80.09.213.90.08.027.90.08.534.310.2
Permitted Option
Adj Saturation A (vph)1201772120165012016961171809
Reference Time A (s)115.719.877.89.958.823.967.830.3
Adj Saturation B (vphNANANANANANANANA
Reference Time B (s)NANANANANANANANA
Reference Time (s)115.777.858.867.8
Adj Reference Time (s)119.781.862.871.8
Split Option
Ref Time Combined (s)7.719.85.29.93.923.94.530.3
Ref Time Seperate (s)7.717.25.24.13.921.24.530.3
Reference Time (s)19.819.89.99.923.923.930.330.3
Adj Reference Time (s)23.823.813.913.927.927.934.334.3
SummaryEB WBNB SBCombined
Protected Option (s)33.042.3
Permitted Option (s)119.771.8
Split Option (s)37.762.2
Minimum (s)33.042.375.3
Right TurnsSBR
Adj Reference Time (s)10.2
Cross Thru Ref Time (s)13.9
Oncoming Left Ref Time (s)8.0
Combined (s)32.0
Intersection Summary
Intersection Capacity Utilization 62.8%ICU Level of Service B
Reference Times and Phasing Options do not represent an optimized timing plan.
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
6: Santa Anita Ave & Newman Ave 10/8/2015
Santa Anita Residence 9/24/2015 Synchro 9 Report
Dean MaoPage 1
MovementEBLEBTEBRWBLWBTWBRNBLNBTNBRSBLSBTSBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (veh/h)60760522116579112414
Sign ControlStopStopFreeFree
Grade0%0%0%0%
Peak Hour Factor0.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.92
Hourly flow rate (vph)708705241266810122215
Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median typeNoneNone
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal (ft)339
pX, platoon unblocked0.880.880.880.880.880.88
vC, conflicting volume171725636111956257442612371274
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
vCu, unblocked vol132322896111596230201237817
tC, single (s)7.56.56.97.56.56.94.14.1
tC, 2 stage (s)
tF (s)3.54.03.33.54.03.32.22.2
p0 queue free %931009889100999699
cM capacity (veh/h)95324375931950559706
Direction, Lane #EB 1WB 1NB 1NB 2NB 3NB 4SB 1SB 2SB 3SB 4
Volume Total1412245075072611061161115
Volume Left772400010000
Volume Right85000800015
cSH164103559170017001700706170017001700
Volume to Capacity0.090.120.040.300.300.150.010.360.360.01
Queue Length 95th (ft)71030001000
Control Delay (s)28.944.711.70.00.00.010.20.00.00.0
Lane LOSDEBB
Approach Delay (s)28.944.70.20.1
Approach LOSDE
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 0.5
Intersection Capacity Utilization 41.1%ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min)15
Appendix C
SYNCHRO Analysis Reports (Existing Plus Project)
Intersection Capacity Utilization
3: Santa Anita Ave & Colorado Blvd Timing Plan: After AM
Santa Anita Residence 9/24/2015 Synchro 8 Report
Dean MaoPage 1
MovementEBLEBTEBRWBLWBTWBRNBLNBTNBRSBLSBTSBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)701104590506191140101457114877174
Pedestrians
Ped Button
Pedestrian Timing (s)
Free RightNoNoNoNo
Ideal Flow190019001900190019001900190019001900190019001900
Lost Time (s)4.04.04.04.04.04.04.04.04.04.04.04.0
Minimum Green (s)4.04.04.04.04.04.04.04.04.04.04.04.0
Refr Cycle Length (s)120120120120120120120120120120120120
Volume Combined (vph)70155090697014010710114877174
Lane Utilization Factor1.000.951.001.000.951.001.000.911.000.970.951.00
Turning Factor (vph)0.950.960.850.950.960.850.950.990.850.951.000.85
Saturated Flow (vph)180534600180534690180551340350536181615
Ped Intf Time (s)0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0
Pedestrian Frequency (%)0.000.000.000.00
Protected Option AllowedYesYesYesYes
Reference Time (s)4.75.40.06.024.10.09.325.00.03.929.112.9
Adj Reference Time (s)8.79.40.010.028.10.013.329.00.08.033.116.9
Permitted Option
Adj Saturation A (vph)1201730120173412017111171809
Reference Time A (s)69.85.489.824.1139.625.058.529.1
Adj Saturation B (vphNANANANANANANANA
Reference Time B (s)NANANANANANANANA
Reference Time (s)69.889.8139.658.5
Adj Reference Time (s)73.893.8143.662.5
Split Option
Ref Time Combined (s)4.75.46.024.19.325.03.929.1
Ref Time Seperate (s)4.73.86.017.59.323.73.929.1
Reference Time (s)5.45.424.124.125.025.029.129.1
Adj Reference Time (s)9.49.428.128.129.029.033.133.1
SummaryEB WBNB SBCombined
Protected Option (s)36.846.4
Permitted Option (s)93.8143.6
Split Option (s)37.562.1
Minimum (s)36.846.483.2
Right TurnsSBR
Adj Reference Time (s)16.9
Cross Thru Ref Time (s)28.1
Oncoming Left Ref Time (s)13.3
Combined (s)58.3
Intersection Summary
Intersection Capacity Utilization 69.3%ICU Level of Service C
Reference Times and Phasing Options do not represent an optimized timing plan.
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
6: Santa Anita Ave & Newman Ave 10/2/2015
Santa Anita Residence 9/24/2015 Synchro 9 Report
Dean MaoPage 1
MovementEBLEBTEBRWBLWBTWBRNBLNBTNBRSBLSBTSBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (veh/h)1603411011131270112311263
Sign ControlStopStopFreeFree
Grade0%0%0%0%
Peak Hour Factor0.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.92
Hourly flow rate (vph)1703712012141380122512243
Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median typeNoneNone
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal (ft)339
pX, platoon unblocked0.840.840.840.840.840.84
vC, conflicting volume177426956122114269246612271392
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
vCu, unblocked vol126423576121667235301227811
tC, single (s)7.56.56.97.56.56.94.14.1
tC, 2 stage (s)
tF (s)3.54.03.33.54.03.32.22.2
p0 queue free %831009274100999796
cM capacity (veh/h)100284364628913564683
Direction, Lane #EB 1WB 1NB 1NB 2NB 3NB 4SB 1SB 2SB 3SB 4
Volume Total542414552552288256126123
Volume Left17121400025000
Volume Right3712000120003
cSH21088564170017001700683170017001700
Volume to Capacity0.260.270.030.320.320.170.040.360.360.00
Queue Length 95th (ft)252520003000
Control Delay (s)28.060.211.60.00.00.010.50.00.00.0
Lane LOSDFBB
Approach Delay (s)28.060.20.10.2
Approach LOSDF
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 1.2
Intersection Capacity Utilization 41.1%ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min)15
Intersection Capacity Utilization
3: Santa Anita Ave & Colorado Blvd Timing Plan: After PM
Santa Anita Residence 9/24/2015 Synchro 8 Report
Dean MaoPage 1
MovementEBLEBTEBRWBLWBTWBRNBLNBTNBRSBLSBTSBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (vph)11750779781121605989811613291483
Pedestrians
Ped Button
Pedestrian Timing (s)
Free RightNoNoNoNo
Ideal Flow190019001900190019001900190019001900190019001900
Lost Time (s)4.04.04.04.04.04.04.04.04.04.04.04.0
Minimum Green (s)4.04.04.04.04.04.04.04.04.04.04.04.0
Refr Cycle Length (s)120120120120120120120120120120120120
Volume Combined (vph)1175860782720591014013291483
Lane Utilization Factor1.000.951.001.000.951.001.000.911.000.970.951.00
Turning Factor (vph)0.950.980.850.950.910.850.950.980.850.951.000.85
Saturated Flow (vph)180535440180532980180550870350536181615
Ped Intf Time (s)0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0
Pedestrian Frequency (%)0.000.000.000.00
Protected Option AllowedYesYesYesYes
Reference Time (s)7.819.80.05.29.90.03.923.90.04.530.36.2
Adj Reference Time (s)11.823.80.09.213.90.08.027.90.08.534.310.2
Permitted Option
Adj Saturation A (vph)1201772120164912016961171809
Reference Time A (s)116.719.877.89.958.823.967.830.3
Adj Saturation B (vphNANANANANANANANA
Reference Time B (s)NANANANANANANANA
Reference Time (s)116.777.858.867.8
Adj Reference Time (s)120.781.862.871.8
Split Option
Ref Time Combined (s)7.819.85.29.93.923.94.530.3
Ref Time Seperate (s)7.817.25.24.13.921.24.530.3
Reference Time (s)19.819.89.99.923.923.930.330.3
Adj Reference Time (s)23.823.813.913.927.927.934.334.3
SummaryEB WBNB SBCombined
Protected Option (s)33.042.3
Permitted Option (s)120.771.8
Split Option (s)37.762.2
Minimum (s)33.042.375.3
Right TurnsSBR
Adj Reference Time (s)10.2
Cross Thru Ref Time (s)13.9
Oncoming Left Ref Time (s)8.0
Combined (s)32.1
Intersection Summary
Intersection Capacity Utilization 62.8%ICU Level of Service B
Reference Times and Phasing Options do not represent an optimized timing plan.
HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
6: Santa Anita Ave & Newman Ave 10/2/2015
Santa Anita Residence 9/24/2015 Synchro 9 Report
Dean MaoPage 1
MovementEBLEBTEBRWBLWBTWBRNBLNBTNBRSBLSBTSBR
Lane Configurations
Volume (veh/h)80860525116579112418
Sign ControlStopStopFreeFree
Grade0%0%0%0%
Peak Hour Factor0.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.920.92
Hourly flow rate (vph)909705271266810122220
Pedestrians
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/s)
Percent Blockage
Right turn flare (veh)
Median typeNoneNone
Median storage veh)
Upstream signal (ft)339
pX, platoon unblocked0.880.880.880.880.880.88
vC, conflicting volume172325706111964258542612411274
vC1, stage 1 conf vol
vC2, stage 2 conf vol
vCu, unblocked vol133122976111606231501241819
tC, single (s)7.56.56.97.56.56.94.14.1
tC, 2 stage (s)
tF (s)3.54.03.33.54.03.32.22.2
p0 queue free %911009889100999599
cM capacity (veh/h)93324375731950557706
Direction, Lane #EB 1WB 1NB 1NB 2NB 3NB 4SB 1SB 2SB 3SB 4
Volume Total1712275075072611061161120
Volume Left972700010000
Volume Right95000800020
cSH154100557170017001700706170017001700
Volume to Capacity0.110.120.050.300.300.150.010.360.360.01
Queue Length 95th (ft)91040001000
Control Delay (s)31.445.711.80.00.00.010.20.00.00.0
Lane LOSDEBB
Approach Delay (s)31.445.70.20.1
Approach LOSDE
Intersection Summary
Average Delay 0.6
Intersection Capacity Utilization 41.1%ICU Level of Service A
Analysis Period (min)15
Attachment No. 8
Attachment No. 8
Letter of Support from Neighboring Property
Owner