1
2
3
4
/ 4
  • Details
  • Annotations
Entry Properties
Modified
10/26/2017 5:04:56 PM
Created
10/26/2017 5:04:56 PM
Path
\Development Services\Parcels\Highland Oaks Dr\1600 Highland Oaks Dr\B00-054-422
Template
DSD - Permits
Fields
Permit Number
B00-054-422
Permit Type
Pool/spa
Address
1600 Highland Oaks Dr
Application Date
08/04/2016
Parcel Number
5771-003-016
Owner
Bowden Development
Applicant
California Pools
Contractor
California Pools
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 09a - Amendment to the Seabiscuit Pacifica Specific Plan DATE: July 3, 2018 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Jason Kruckeberg, Assistant City Manager/Development Services Director Lisa Flores, Planning & Community Development Administrator SUBJECT: AMENDMENT TO THE SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN (“SP- SP”) TO ALLOW A REVISED MIXED-USE PROJECT WITH 96 RESIDENTIAL UNITS UNDER PHASE 2, MERGE THE PROPERTIES AT 100 AND 180 W. HUNTINGTON DRIVE INTO THE SPECIFIC PLAN AREA, AND CHANGE THE GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION, GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP, AND ZONING DESIGNATION OF THESE PROPERTIES TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE SPECIFIC PLAN Resolution No. 7223 approving General Plan Amendment No. GPA 18-02 to amend the General Plan Land Use Designation for the properties at 100 and 180 W. Huntington Drive from “Commercial with Downtown Overlay” to “Downtown Mixed Use,” revise the General Plan Land Use Map to reflect the changes, and adopt an Add endum to the 2014 and 2016 Mitigated Negative Declarations and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for all the properties that will be located under the approved Specific Plan area at 130 W. Huntington Drive Recommendation: Adopt Ordinance No. 2355 approving an Amendment to the Seabiscuit Pacifica Specific Plan (“SP-SP”), rezoning the properties at 100 and 180 W. Huntington Drive from “General Commercial with Downtown Overlay” to “Seabiscuit Pacifica Specific Plan” with a Height Overlay of H8 at 180 W. Huntington Drive and make revisions to the Zoning Map to reflect the zone changes for all the properties that will be located under the approved Specific Plan area at 130 W. Huntington Drive Recommendation: Introduce Amendment to Seabiscuit Pacifica Specific Plan 130 W. Huntington Drive July 3, 2018 Page 2 of 14 SUMMARY The applicant, Mr. Robb MacMillan, representing property owner Chateau Group USA, has submitted a change to the second phase (mixed-use project) of the approved Seabiscuit Pacifica Specific Plan (Specific Plan No. 13-02). The applicant is also requesting to merge the two abutting properties at 100 and 180 W. Huntington Drive into the Specific Plan area, and change the General Plan Land Use Designation from “Commercial with Downtown Overlay” to “Downtown Mixed Use,” revise the General Plan Land Use Map to reflect the changes, rezone the properties from “General Commercial with Downtown Overlay” to “Seabiscuit Pacifica Specific Plan” and include a Height Overlay of H8 on 180 W. Huntington Drive to allow a portion of the mixed -use building on that property. The proposed project requires the approval of the following applications:  Specific Plan Amendment No. SPA 18-01 to amend Phase 2 of the Seabiscuit Pacifica Specific Plan to allow a larger mixed -use project that consists of eight floors of residential units (96 residential condominiums) over 38,196 square feet of commercial uses.  Lot Line Adjustment No. LLA 18-03 to merge the two properties at 100 and 180 W. Huntington Drive into the Seabiscuit Pacifica Specific Plan area.  General Plan Amendment No. 18-02 to change the General Plan land use designation on the two properties at 100 and 180 W. Huntington Drive from “Commercial with Downtown Overlay” to “Downtown Mixed Use” to allow residential uses and make the land use designation consistent with the Specific Plan. The approval would also result in revisions to the General Plan Land Use Map to reflect these changes.  Zone Change No. ZC 18-02 to rezone the two properties at 100 and 180 W. Huntington Drive from “General Commercial with Downtown Overlay” to “Seabiscuit Pacifica Specific Plan”, and add a Height Overlay of H8 that allows up to eight (8) stories and up to 95 feet in height over the property at 180 W. Huntington Drive to accommodate a larger mixed-use project. The approval would result in revisions to the Zoning Map to reflect these changes.  Protected Healthy Tree Removal No. TRH 18 -10 the removal of seven (7) protected trees at 180 W. Huntington Drive to accommodate the new mixed -use project.  An Addendum to the 2014 and 2016 Mitigated Negative Declarations and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the revised project. Amendment to Seabiscuit Pacifica Specific Plan 130 W. Huntington Drive July 3, 2018 Page 3 of 14 It is recommended that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 7223 (refer to Attachment No. 1), adopt the Addendum to the 2014 and 2016 Mitigated Negative Declarations, and Introduce Ordinance No. 2355 (refer to Attachment No. 2). BACKGROUND The Santa Anita Inn, formerly the Flamingo Hotel and the Ramada Inn, was a two-story hotel comprised of six buildings with 110 rooms (34,775 square feet) that was originally constructed in 1955 and remodeled in 1985. On March 18, 2014, the City Council approved the Seabiscuit Pacifica Specific Plan project for two hotels (Marriott Residence Inn and Fairfield Inn & Suites) that totaled 142,320 square feet of hotel space in two connected buildings, with a total of 210 rooms, and a hotel condominium tower with 50 units. These project components were to be developed in phases, with Phase 1 consisting of the two Marriott hotels and a remnant of the existing Santa Anita Inn (63 rooms plus a new lobby) remaining on site. Phase 2 of the project was for the demolition of the remnant of the Santa Anita Inn , and the development of the hotel condominium tower. Following a later determination that the hotel condominium would not be pursued, the applicant approached the City Council again, in a Study Session format, on April 5, 2016. The Council agreed with the applicant that the operational restrictions expected for the hotel condominium were not needed, and it would be possible to apply for a change to the project to allow the Phase 2 portion to be developed as a mixed -use project, or as a residential project. Following review from Development Services staff and the Planning Commission, o n December 6, 2016, the City Council approved an Amendment to the Specific Plan that made the following modifications to the project. • An Amendment to the existing Seabiscuit Pacifica Specific Plan to allow the Phase 2 portion of the project to be developed as a mixed -use project, and to enable the 50 hotel condominium units to be developed as residential units. • A General Plan Amendment to revise the General Plan Land Use Designation from Commercial, with a Downtown Overlay and 1.03 FAR, to Downtown Mixed Use, with a 1.0 FAR for this site. • A Zone Change and Amendment to the Zoning Map to revise the zoning to reflect the reduced FAR of 1.0. • A Mitigated Negative Declaration in compliance with CEQA. After the above-described entitlement was issued, the former owner, Andy Chang of Continental Assets Management, sold the property to Chateau Group USA. The new Amendment to Seabiscuit Pacifica Specific Plan 130 W. Huntington Drive July 3, 2018 Page 4 of 14 owners made changes to the approved hotel brand from the Marriott Residence Inn and Fairfield Inn & Suites to a Delta hotel, and gave the art deco style a more modern look, as shown below. The owner also purchased the “100-1 Club” property at 100 W. Huntington Drive, just to the east of the subject property. The primary purpose of the purchase was to beautify this corner and use the property as a focal point of the site. As part of this purchase, Chateau entered into a Purchase and Sale Agreement with the City to place a public art component on the site, along with landscaping and hardscape. The public art will be reviewed and approved through an open design process based around the theme “Hometown Heroes”. In addition, the owner is currently in escrow with the other property adjacent to the site at 180 W. Huntington Drive, which is owned by the Salvation Army. The owners plan to close escrow in late-August of this year. In 2017, the City Council approved modifications to change the previously approved two Marriott hotels into a single, full service Delta by Marriott hotels, 220 rooms (previously approved for 210 rooms), the building elevations and height, and the site plan. The Delta hotel was approved to have a restaurant and lounge area, as well as a bona fide meeting room and conference area that is integrated into the lobby and promenade. The design also included a second level pool area above t he entrance porte-cochere and additional attractive outdoor seating and lounging area overlooking the entry. To accommodate these additional amenities and upgrades, an additional 10 rooms were approved for a total of 220 rooms. Earlier this year, the owner requested minor modifications to the site plan, to modify the driveway locations onto both westbound and eastbound Huntington Drive, change to the approved hotel brand from Delta hotel to Le Meridian, increase the overall room count from 220 rooms to 227 rooms, change to the floor plan and layout of the hotel, and elimination of the traffic signal “leg” and elimination of the driveway directly in front of Amendment to Seabiscuit Pacifica Specific Plan 130 W. Huntington Drive July 3, 2018 Page 5 of 14 the proposed hotel. With regard to the modification of driveways and access/egress into the site, the new site plan will move a driveway from westbound Huntington Drive further west on the site, centralizing it and providing far superior traffic flow through the site. This flow will be assisted by the addition of a new driveway entrance/egress on the eastbound leg of Huntington Drive to allow for better circulat ion on and off of the site. These changes were approved given the plans for Phase 2 of the site, as the new driveway location and access arrangement will facilitate a coordinated system between the buildings. Similarly, the elimination of the traffic signal leg and elimination of the original driveway location was recommended by the City Engineer for safety of the site. With the new arrangement of driveways, this signal leg is no longer needed. As for the modifications to facilitate the Le Meridian brand, it was a welcome change as this is a higher end, elegant hotel brand that will elevate the entire site, and be an excellent addition to the City, as shown in the image below. With the change to the new brand, there were modifications to the location of the meeting rooms, revis ions to the floor plans for improved dining options, and a new roof deck bar and pool area. These changes were minor and they were approved by staff on March 5, 2018. The Santa Anita Inn was demolished in February 2018. The full-service Marriott Le Meridian hotel is currently under construction and will be completed by 2020. The hotel will contain 227 rooms (7 additional rooms than what was previously approved). The hotel will have a six floor wing and a five floor wing with a maximum height of approximately 80 feet. The parking requirement for this project is subject to the development standards of the Specific Plan, which includes a ratio of 1 space for each hotel room. As such, a total of 227 parking spaces will be provided to meet this requirement and to support the additional 17 rooms that were added to the previously approved project. Amendment to Seabiscuit Pacifica Specific Plan 130 W. Huntington Drive July 3, 2018 Page 6 of 14 DISCUSSION The proposed amendment is to the second phase of the Seabiscuit Pacifica Specific Plan (“SP-SP”) – refer to Attachment No. 2. The Applicant is requesting to add two additional parcels to the approved Specific Plan area , including at the northeast corner of the project site at 100 W. Huntington Drive (the former 100-1 Club site), and an 11,887 square foot parcel adjacent to the west of the si te at 180 W. Huntington Drive (the Salvation Army site). The revised project would change the mixed-use project from an 115,269 square foot mixed-use project comprised of 50 residential units over 6,732 square feet of ground floor commercial uses, to 180,441 square feet, with 96 residential units over 38,196 square feet of commercial uses on the bottom two floors, and a podium parking structure. The new building will also extend over the Salvation Army property at 180 W. Huntington Drive, as shown in the image below. An historical evaluation of the Salvation Army property at 180 W. Huntington Drive was conducted. The evaluation determined that the 1936 altered residenc e does not appear to be eligible for listing in the California Register of Historic Resources under any criteria. It has sustained alterations (window replacements and additions) that have compromised its integrity and it does not embody the distinctive ch aracteristics of any particular architectural style. In addition, there is no indication that it is associated with people who are significant in history. Therefore, the demolition of the residence would not result in any impact regarding historic resources. Amendment to Seabiscuit Pacifica Specific Plan 130 W. Huntington Drive July 3, 2018 Page 7 of 14 The two abutting properties are subject to General Plan Amendment and Zone Change to change the land use designation from “Commercial with a Downtown Overlay” to “Downtown Mixed Use” to make all land use designations consistent with the Specific Plan, and to rezone the two properties from “General Commercial with a Downtown Overlay” to “Seabiscuit Pacifica Specific Plan,” and add a Height Overlay of H8, allows the structure up to 95 feet in height over the property at 180 W. Huntington Drive to accommodate the larger mixed-use project. With the incorporation of the 6,273 square foot lot at 100 W. Huntington Drive and the 11,887 square foot parcel owned by the Salvation Army, the new lot area will be 6.15 acres (currently 5.87 acres). The allowed Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of the site is 1.0. Given that the residential units do not count toward FAR, the FAR for both phases of the project is calculated at 0.72, well below the allowable 1.0. The addition of these two properties cleans up the entire area under a single development plan, which is a desirable land use pattern. Parking and Phased Parking Lot In terms of parking, Phase 1 will be fully parked with 227 surface parking spaces for the 227 guest rooms. The hotel is planned to be valet service only, given its higher-end function, which will greatly assist in parking for the site . Phase 2 will provide a new two and half story podium parking structure that that will fully park the mixed-use project by providing 595 parking stalls: 513 parking stalls within the parking garage and 82 surface parking stalls. The above ground podium parking structure will be hidden by the commercial stores/restaurants. Once Phase 2 is completed, the parking structure will provide parking for the hotel guests, owners of the residential units, and for all the commercial businesses within the mixed-use development. The Applicant is also requesting a change to the parking requirements for the mixed- use project to have the project parked at 1.5 parking spaces for every unit and one guest parking space for every three units (previously approved at two (2) parking spaces for every unit, and one guest space for every two units), as required per the Development Code for a mixed-use project. The Applicant has not finalized the parking arrangement, but some of the residential units will have one parking space, while the rest of the units will have two parking spaces, and a total of 176 parking spaces will be dedicated to the residential units and guest parking. As for the commercial spaces, they will be parked at one (1) space for every 200 square feet of gross floor area and a total of 191 parking spaces will be dedicated within the parking structure. Any change in use that requires more parking than what will be approved under this Amendment to Specific Plan would require the owners to revisit the parking situation and find an alternative solution for any shortfalls, and/or a new parking study. Amendment to Seabiscuit Pacifica Specific Plan 130 W. Huntington Drive July 3, 2018 Page 8 of 14 Uses Parking Requirement Provided Parking Le Meridian Hotel – 227 rooms (Phase 1) 1:1 – Previously Approved at 1 parking space for each room 227 spaces 96 Residential Units within the Mixed-Use Project (Phase 2) 1.5 parking space for every unit and 1 guest space for every 3 units 176 spaces Commercial Area (38,196 sf) within the Mixed-Use Project - Phase 2 1:200 sf of gross floor area 191 spaces Total Parking Spaces: 594 spaces 595 spaces Changes to the Building Architecture The approved architectural design for the mixed-use project was originally French Normandy architecture, with eight (8) floors and at 95 feet in height as allowed under the H8 Height Overlay, as shown below. Some of the attributes that lend to this style included pilasters, an accentuated chimney clad with stone veneer, as well as pronounced trim and strategically placed cornices. The façade of the building was adorned with many different forms such as cylindrical corner pieces, and curvilinear balconies with decorative wrought-iron railings. As part of the original approval, it was agreed upon that the aesthetics and architectural features would be modified in a collaborative effort between the City and design team. The Applicant is proposing to revise the architectural design and character to visually compliment the hotel design while providing a more modern and contemporary style to create striking luxury residences. The podium parking structure will be hidden behind Amendment to Seabiscuit Pacifica Specific Plan 130 W. Huntington Drive July 3, 2018 Page 9 of 14 the retail façade, and the residential towers will sit among gardens, pools, and lifestyle seating areas, with spectacular views of the mountains and the City. The approval for the mixed-use project was for eight (8) stories and up to 85 feet in height; however, under the Specific Plan it was approved at eight (8) stories and 95 feet in height. The revised project will be 8.5 stories tall, six (6) residential floors above the two and half level podium parking structure. The project will not exceed the maximum height of 95 feet that was previously approved under Specific Plan, and under the Height Overlay H8 that was amended in 2016 under the Development Code Update, which now allows the building up to 95 feet in height. However, the number of stories will be a half story taller than what was previously approved to help accommodate the podium parking structure. The building will still look like it only has eight (8) stories since the two and half level parking structure will be hidden by the two story retail façade and the ground floor units have tall storefronts. Therefore, the project still meets the intent in that it looks like an eight (8) story building and does not exceed the maximum permitted height limit of 95 feet. It is important to note that final design of the building elements, landscaping elements and choices, and internal and external finishes will be subject to evaluation and refinement through the plan check process. The elevations and landscape plan are conceptual in nature (as they are in all Specific Plans) and will continue to be reviewed and evaluated throughout the process. The revised project was reviewed by all relevant departments and some of the conditions of approval and mitigation measures were amended and/or eliminated to reflect to the revised changes to the project. The conditions and mitigation measures can be found as an attachment to Resolution No. 7223 (Attachment No.1). FINDINGS Pursuant to Section 9108.03.060 of the Development Code, the Specific Plan Amendment, General Plan Amendment and Zone Change may be approved only if all the following findings are satisfied. Specific Plan Amendment Findings 1. The proposed specific plan amendment is consistent with the General Plan, including its goals, objectives, policies, and action programs. Facts to Support the Finding: The proposal simply changes the mixed-use project to a larger mixed-use project and adds two additional properties to the approved Specific Plan area. Based on the previous approvals, the mixed -use project is an approved use within the Specific Plan and within the Downtown Mixed Use zone. The revised proposal simply expands the previously approved use and thus will not adversely affect the public health, safety and welfare. Adding the adjacent parcels into the Specific Plan area also makes a more cohesive Amendment to Seabiscuit Pacifica Specific Plan 130 W. Huntington Drive July 3, 2018 Page 10 of 14 development pattern and allows for more efficient use of the much smaller, oddly shaped lots at 100 and 180 W. Huntington Dr. 2. The proposed specific plan amendment is a desirable planning tool to implement the provisions of the General Plan. Facts to Support the Finding: The Specific Plan Amendment is the appropriate process to implement the provisions of the General Plan for this site. The Seabiscuit Pacifica Specific Plan (SP-SP) contains goals, policies, and objectives to which all projects must adhere. The proposed amendment is a desirable planning tool because it will control how much can be built on this site, in terms of size and density, and will ensure that development will not exceed what was fully evaluated in the environmental document. As such, the Specific Plan Amendment is a desirable planning tool to further improve this area and help implement the General Plan’s vision for this commercial corridor. 3. The proposed specific plan amendment will not adversely affect the public health, safety and general welfare or result in an illogical land use pattern. Facts to Support the Finding: The proposed Amendment to the Specific Plan will not adversely affect the public health, safety, and general welfare or result in an illogical land use pattern since the proposal simply expands the mixed-use project to a larger mixed-use project by incorporating two much smaller, adjacent properties. The Addendum to the 2014 and 2016 Mitigated Negative Declarations for the Specific Plan Amendment analyzed all the potential environmental impacts, and it was determined that the proposed changes will not adversely affect the Project site or the adjacent properties in terms the existing public services, utilities, or infrastructure and these sites can be properly serviced. By adding the two abutting properties at 100 and 180 W. Huntington Drive to the Specific Plan area, it will result in a better land use pattern and use of the Project site to accommodate a more efficient development. Ingress, egress, and site circulation will be enhanced under the proposed modifications, which will increase safety overall on the site as well as the adjacent streets. 4. The proposed Specific Plan Amendment will not create internal inconsistencies within the Specific Plan and is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Specific Plan it is amending. Facts to Support the Finding: The proposed Amendment will not create any internal inconsistencies within the Specific Plan since the proposed change is to simply expand the mixed-use project to a larger mixed-use project that consists of 46 more residential units and 31,464 square feet of more commercial uses and a podium parking structure. The Amendment will allow more commercial uses on the ground floor which will help activate this area, bring vitality, and provide additional services and amenities to the area. The intent of the Specific Plan is to bring Amendment to Seabiscuit Pacifica Specific Plan 130 W. Huntington Drive July 3, 2018 Page 11 of 14 complementary uses to this area of Arcadia which already contains regionally- important facilities such as the Santa Anita Racetrack, L.A. Coun ty Arboretum, Santa Anita Golf Course, Methodist Hospital, and Westfield Santa Anita. General Plan Amendment Findings: 1. The amendment is internally consistent with all other provisions of the General Plan. Facts to Support the Finding: The amendment is to change the land use designations of the two properties at 100 and 180 W. Huntington Drive from Commercial to Downtown Mixed Use, and rezone the abutting properties to be consistent with the Specific Plan area. This change will allow the property owner to merge the two properties into one parcel to accommodate a larger mixed-use project that is more appropriate for this site. The revised project continues to implement the General Plan’s policies and goals for an orde rly development that is supported by public infrastructure and services. The proposed development meets all applicable development standards, including not exceed ing the height that is allowed through the Height Overlay of H8 (95 feet in height). 2. The proposed amendment will not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or general welfare of the City. Facts to Support the Finding: The Addendum to the 2014 and 2016 Mitigated Negative Declarations for the Specific Plan and General Plan Amendments analyzed all the potential impacts, and the anticipated impacts from the amended project are less than significant or can be reduced to less than significant levels with the implementation of the existing mitigation measures. Therefore, the Amendment to the Specific Plan would not be detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare. Further, the larger mixed -use project and its revised architectural style will provide a superior development to this site and add to the vitality of the area. Zone Change and Zoning Map Amendment Finding 1. The proposed amendment is consistent with the General Plan and any applicable Specific Plans. Facts to Support the Finding: The proposed revision to the Specific Plan is simply to expand the mixed-use development and add two abutting properties to the approved Specific Plan area. The Specific Plan is still consistent with the General Plan in that the uses are not changing and i t still allows for a new hotel and a mixed-use development. The revised project will help revitalize the Downtown area of Arcadia, as well as contribute positively to the existing downtown setting. Therefore, the Amended Specific Plan is consistent with the General Plan. Amendment to Seabiscuit Pacifica Specific Plan 130 W. Huntington Drive July 3, 2018 Page 12 of 14 Protected Trees A new tree assessment was conducted for the windrow of redwood trees along East Huntington Drive (refer to Attachment No. 3, the Addendum to the Mitigated Negative Declaration). The tree assessment concluded that none of the 92 redwood trees are in good condition; rather, a majority of the trees are in poor condition. As has been discussed in the past, these trees were not originally planted in a manner that was beneficial to their long term health. They were planted as a windrow, or green screen, and this has compromised them significantly. To accommodate a new driveway off of Huntington Drive, 23 of the 92 redwood trees were removed. Due to the poor condition of the rest of the redwood trees, the Applicant is requesting to remove all of them and construct a new 5’-0” wide sidewalk and a 5’-0” wide landscape planter to create better connectivity from the public right-of-way to the site and to/from the Gold Line station and continue to Methodist Hospital. The City also has plans to construct a new sidewalk along East Huntington Drive to continue the sidewalk path from this property. New trees will be planted on the inside of the property line with tree species that can adapt better to this environment and climate, and still create lush landscaping on this side of the property. True pedestrian access along Huntington Drive in this area is important; thus the sidewalk is a critical feature of this project. The approval would also include the removal of seven (7) protected trees at 180 W. Huntington Drive to accommodate the new mixed-use building footprint. None of these trees are Oaks or Sycamores and they are not deemed to be significant trees. Therefore, it is recommended that the trees be allowed to be removed. There is no vegetation on the corner parcel at 100 W. Huntington Drive. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), the Development Services Department required the preparation of an Addendum to the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (“MND”) for the proposed project (refer to Attachment No. 3). State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 clarifies that a subsequent EIR or MND is only required when “substantial changes” occur to a project or the circumstances surrounding a project, or “new information” about a project implicates new “significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of a previously identified significant effects”. When only minor technical changes or additions to a previously approved MND are necessary and none of the conditions described above are met, an Addendum is the appropriate document. The major focus of the Addendum was to evaluate whether the changes in the project led to any changes in the previously identified environmental impacts (refer to Attachment No. 3). In this case, the delta between the two project s is 46 residential units and 38,196 square feet of commercial floor area is what was analyzed. Of particular concern were the areas of aesthetics, traffic, parking, and land use. Following the analysis, the Addendum concludes that the proposed changes do not constitute Amendment to Seabiscuit Pacifica Specific Plan 130 W. Huntington Drive July 3, 2018 Page 13 of 14 substantial project revisions and there are no substantial changes in the phy sical environment that require changes to the MND. The City Council is required to consider the Addendum together with any comments received during the public review process. An Addendum does not need to be circulated for public review, but it was mentione d in the public hearing notice. PUBLIC NOTICE/COMMENTS Public hearing notices for this item were mailed on June 20, 2018, to the property owners of those properties that are located within 300 feet of the subject pro perty. Pursuant to the provisions of CEQA, the public hearing notice was published in the Arcadia Weekly on June 21, 2018. As of the date of this Staff Report, Staff did not receive any public comments on this project from the residents. FISCAL IMPACT The project will have a positive fiscal impact on the City. Fees from the project will fund the development’s fair share of impacts from the project on City utilities and services, including sewer, transportation, electrical, and storm water. The proposed modification to the originally approved development would have a limited impact on fire or police services, and would not have any significant impacts on local schools or parks. Instead, the proposed development will significantly increase the assessed va lue of the subject property, which will result in substantial additional property tax. Additionally, the project will have a substantial increase in receipts from Transient Occupancy Tax (“TOT”) and at a higher price point than previous iterations of the project. Finally, the expanded commercial area proposed will provide additional sales tax revenue to the City. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council adopt the Addendum to the 2014 and 2016 Mitigated Negative Declarations per the California Environmental Quality Act, adopt Resolution No. 7223, and Introduce Ordinance No. 2355 approving an Amendment to the Seabiscuit Pacifica Specific Plan (“SP-SP”) to allow a revised mixed-use project with 96 residential units under Phase 2 , merge the properties at 100 and 180 W. Huntington Drive into the Specific Plan area, and change the General Plan designation, General Plan land use map, and zoning designation of these properties to be consistent with the Specific Plan at 130 W. Huntington Drive. Amendment to Seabiscuit Pacifica Specific Plan 130 W. Huntington Drive July 3, 2018 Page 14 of 14 Attachment No. 1: Resolution No. 7223 with Conditions of Approval Attachment No. 2: Ordinance No. 2355 with Amended Seabiscuit Pacifica Specific Plan Attachment No. 3: Addendum to 2016 and 2014 Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (“MMRP”), and related amended studies/reports. Attachment No. 1 Resolution No. 7223 with Conditions of Approval 7 EXHIBIT “A” CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Changes were made to the conditions of approval. The deleted conditions are shown with strikethrough (example) and any new or amended conditions are shown in italics and bold (example). 1. When the applicant/property owner proceeds with the construction of Phase 1, all existing units and structures comprising the Santa Anita Inn shall be demolished. 2. Each set of tandem parking spaces shall be assigned to a single unit unless a 24- hour valet service or equivalent measure is implemented. Any changes or alteration to the parking space assignment shall be subject to review and approval by the Development Services Director or designee. 1.Both phases of the project shall comply with the Amended Seabiscuit Pacifica Specific Plan, dated May 3, 2018. Any modifications to the parking layout, site design, size of the parking structure, and the number of stalls for either or both phases shall be subject to review and approval of the Development Services Director or designee. 3.No architectural features, chimneys, vents, equipment, and other accessory rooftop structures may be placed on top of the mansard roofs of the hotel condominium tower. The maximum height of all elements is 95 feet. 2.In a situation when there is no mention of a specific land use regulation/requirement in the Seabiscuit Pacifica Specific Plan, the applicant/owner shall refer to the City’s Development Code or Building/Fire Code, when necessary. 3. In accordance with the City’s Transportation Impact Fee Program, the applicant/property owner shall pay its development impact fees, which will mitigate the project’s contribution to any cumulative impacts to the westbound I-210 intersection at Santa Anita Avenue. 4. The design and construction of any and all traffic signals, signing, and striping modifications or additions to accommodate the new entrance near the intersection of Huntington Drive and Colorado Place shall be at the applicant’s/property owner’s expense. 5. Damaged sections of the existing curb and gutter on Huntington Drive shall be removed and replaced per City of Arcadia Standards. 6. The applicant/property owner shall provide signage to clearly mark the monument roundabout as “One Way,” and also provide signage to clearly mark the exits from the condominium hotel site onto westbound and eastbound Huntington Drive(s) as “Left Turn Only.” 8 4. The applicant/owner shall design and construct any signage and striping modifications or additions to accommodate the new entrances on Huntington Drive. Acceleration/deceleration lanes shall be striped for both driveways on west Huntington Drive. 5. All existing curb and gutter and sidewalk on westbound and eastbound Huntington Drive shall be removed and replaced per the City of Arcadia Standards. 6. Construct new driveway approaches per City of Arcadia Standards, including visibility requirements. 7. Construct a new 6’-0” wide sidewalk along eastbound Huntington Drive per City Standard. 8. The applicant/owner shall dedicate to the City additional right-of-way for the following locations: x Around the driveways and other fixed objects to accommodate ADA sidewalk access. x At the southwest corner of Huntington Drive and Santa Clara Street to provide full ADA access around existing signal poles and equipment. 7. New sidewalk along eastbound Huntington Drive per City Standard shall be constructed at the applicant’s/property owner’s expense. The property owner and site superintendent shall coordinate with City Engineer and Public Works Services Director for the protection and/or replacement of existing trees within the City’s rights-of-way. 9. The applicant/property owner shall prepare a Standard Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan (SUSMP) for the proposed development, as prescribed by Los Angeles Department of Public Works SUSMP Manual. 10. Prior to issuance of a building permit for each phase of the project, a detailed landscaping and irrigation plan shall be prepared by the applicant/property owner for the project site. The proposed project shall comply with the requirements of the City’s Water Efficient Landscaping Ordinance. 11. The applicant/owner shall plant new street trees within the City’s parkway. Prior to approving the landscape plans for Phase 1 (hotel), the applicant/owner shall submit final landscape/sidewalk plans to Planning Services that shows the right-of-way improvements, the proposed location of the tree wells and the tree species and size. The street tree wells shall be 4’- 0” x 4’-0”. 12. A Tract Map shall be required to subdivide the multi-family residential condominium airspace within the mixed-use project. 9 13. All City requirements regarding disabled access and facilities; occupancy limits; building safety; fire prevention, detection and suppression; health code compliance; emergency access, egress, and equipment; water supply and facilities; sewer facilities; trash reduction and recycling requirements; environmental regulation compliance, including National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) measures; fire requirements, including any requirements for a high-rise structure, and parking and site design shall be complied with to the satisfaction of the Building Official, City Engineer, Planning & Community Development Administrator, Fire Marshal, and Public Works Services Director. Compliance with these requirements shall be determined by having fully detailed construction plans submitted for plan check review and approval by the foregoing City officials and employees. 14. The uses approved by these applications shall be operated and maintained in a manner that is consistent with the proposal and plans submitted and approved; and shall be subject to periodic inspections, after which the provisions of this approval may be adjusted after due notice to address any adverse impacts to the adjacent streets, rights-of-way, and/or the neighboring businesses, residents, or properties. 15. Noncompliance with the plans, provisions and conditions of approval shall be grounds for immediate suspension or revocation of any approvals, which could result in the closing of the hotels and hotel condominium. 16. 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 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. 16. Approval of SP 13-02, GP 16-04, and ZC 16-02 shall not be of effect unless on or before 30 calendar days after City Council adopts the Resolution and Ordinance, the property owner/applicant has executed and filed with the Community Development Administrator an Acceptance Form available from the Development Services Department to indicate awareness and acceptance of these conditions of approval. 17.Approval of SPA 18-01, GP 18-02, ZC 18-02, LLA 18-03, and TRH 18-10 shall not be of effect unless on or before 30 calendar days after City Council adopts the Resolution and Ordinance, the property owner/applicant has 10 executed and filed with the Planning & Community Development Administrator an Acceptance Form available from the Development Services Department to indicate awareness and acceptance of these conditions of approval. Mitigation Measures as Conditions of Approval The following conditions are found in the Amended Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP). They are recorded here to facilitate review and implementation. More information on the timing and responsible parties for these mitigation measures is detailed in the MMRP. Changes were made to the original Mitigation Measures. The added text is shown with a double underline (example) and deleted text is shown with a strikethrough (example). 1. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall demonstrate that all project windows are glazed or otherwise treated to minimize glare on surrounding roads and properties, to the satisfaction of the Development Services Director or designee. 2. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the general contractor for the project shall prepare and file a Dust Control Plan with the City that complies with SCQAMD Rule 403 and requires the following during excavation and construction as appropriate: • Apply nontoxic chemical soil stabilizers according to manufacturers’ specifications to all inactive construction areas (previously graded areas inactive for 10 days or more). • Water active sites at least twice daily (locations where grading is to occur will be thoroughly watered prior to earthmoving). • Cover all trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials, or maintain at least 2 feet of freeboard (vertical space between the top of the load and top of the trailer) in accordance with the requirements of California Vehicle Code (CVC) Section 23114. • Pave construction access roads at least 100 feet onto the site from the main road. • Control traffic speeds within the property to 15 mph or less. 4. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project developer shall require by contract specifications that contractors shall utilize California Air Resources Board (CARB) Tier II Certified equipment or better during the rough/mass grading phase for rubber-tired dozers and scrapers. Contract specifications shall be included in the proposed project construction documents, which shall be subject to review and approval by the City. 11 5. Prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit for each phase, the project developer shall require by contract specifications that contractors shall place construction equipment staging areas at least 200 feet away from sensitive receptors. Contract specifications shall be included in the project construction documents, which shall be subject to review and approval by the City. 6. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for each phase, the project developer shall require by contract specifications that contractors shall utilize power poles or clean- fuel generators for electrical construction equipment. Contract specifications shall be included in the proposed project construction documents, which shall be subject to review and approval by the City. 7.Prior to issuance of a grading permit for each phase, the developer shall provide an updated arborist report on the health of the existing trees on the areas to be developed, including the redwood trees along the southern property line. This tree assessment shall be prepared by a qualified landscape architect and identify any existing large bushes or trees that can be relocated or preserved as part of the new development project. The project landscaping plans shall attempt to preserve existing mature trees onsite to the extent feasible, based on the tree assessment. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Planning Division. 8.During project construction in either phase, the existing redwood trees along the east side of the property shall be protected per arborist direction, with appropriate signage so construction equipment will not accidentally come in contact with and damage or destroy any trees. The trees shall be sprayed with water at the end of each day when substantial amounts of dust are generated (e.g., during grading or demolition) to minimize damage from dust deposition. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Planning Division. 9. Construction in either phase should not occur during the local nesting season (estimated February 1 to July 15). If any construction occurs during the nesting season, a nesting bird survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist prior to the issuance of a grading permit or removal of any large trees on the existing hotel property. If the biologist determines that nesting birds are present, an area of 100 feet shall be marked off around the nest and no construction activity can occur in that area during nesting activities. Grading and/or construction may resume in this area when a qualified biologist has determined the nest is no longer occupied and all juveniles have fledged. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Planning Services. 10.Prior to demolition of any existing hotel buildings on the site, the completed DPR 523A and 523B forms and a cover memorandum shall be submitted to the City for filing to officially document the historical assessment for the Santa Anita Inn. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Planning Division. 11. Prior to issuance of an occupancy permit for Phase 1, the applicant shall install a monument plaque indicating the location of the former Santa Anita Inn and its 12 importance in the history of the City of Arcadia. The size, construction, and location of this plaque shall be up to the discretion of the City Manager, in consultation with the Planning Services. 12. If cultural artifacts are discovered during project grading, work shall be halted in that area until a qualified historian or archaeologist can be retained by the developer to assess the significance of the find. The project cultural monitor shall observe the remaining earthmoving activities at the project site consistent with Public Resources Code Section 21083.2(b), (c), and (d). The monitor shall be equipped to record and salvage cultural resources that may be unearthed during grading activities. The monitor shall be empowered to temporarily halt or divert grading equipment to allow recording and removal of the unearthed resources. 13. If any resources of a prehistoric or Native American origin are discovered, the appropriate Native American tribal representative will be contacted and invited to observe the monitoring program for the duration of the grading phase at tribal expense. Any Native American resources shall be evaluated in accordance with the CEQA Guidelines and either reburied at the project site or curated at an accredited facility approved by the City of Arcadia. Once grading activities have ceased or the cultural monitor determines that monitoring is no longer necessary, such activities shall be discontinued. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Planning Services. 14. If paleontological resources (fossils) are discovered during project grading, work will be halted in that area until a qualified paleontologist can be retained to assess the significance of the find. The project paleontologist shall monitor remaining earthmoving activities at the project site and shall be equipped to record and salvage fossil resources that may be unearthed during grading activities. The paleontologist shall be empowered to temporarily halt or divert grading equipment to allow recording and removal of the unearthed resources. Any fossils found shall be evaluated in accordance with the CEQA Guidelines and offered for curation at an accredited facility approved by the City of Arcadia. Once grading activities have ceased or the paleontologist determines that monitoring is no longer necessary, monitoring activities shall be discontinued. This measure may be combined with CUL-3 at the discretion of the City Planning Services. 15. 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. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the developer shall include a note to this effect on the grading plans for the project. 16. To ensure reductions below the expected “Business As Usual” (BAU) scenario, the project will implement a variety of measures that will reduce its greenhouse gas 13 (GHG) emissions. To the extent feasible, and to the satisfaction of the City of Arcadia (City), the following measures will be incorporated into the design and construction of the SP-SP project prior to the issuance of building permits: Construction and Building Materials • Recycle/reuse at least 50 percent of the demolished and/or grubbed construction materials (including, but not limited to, soil, vegetation, concrete, lumber, metal, and cardboard). • Use “Green Building Materials,” such as those materials that are resource- efficient and are recycled and manufactured in an environmentally friendly way, for at least 10 percent of the project. Energy Efficiency Measures • Design all project buildings to exceed the 2013 California Building Code’s (CBC) Title 24 energy standard by 10 percent, including, but not limited to, any combination of the following: • Design buildings to accommodate future solar installations as appropriate. • Limit air leakage through the structure or within the heating and cooling distribution system to minimize energy consumption. • Incorporate ENERGY STAR or better rated windows, space heating and cooling equipment, light fixtures, appliances, or other applicable electrical equipment. • Install efficient lighting and lighting control systems. Use daylight as an integral part of the lighting systems in buildings. • Install light-colored roofs and pavement materials where possible. • Install energy-efficient heating and cooling systems, appliances and equipment, and control systems. • Install solar lights or light-emitting diodes (LEDs) for outdoor lighting or outdoor lighting that meets the 2013 California Building and Energy Code Water Conservation and Efficiency Measures Devise a comprehensive water conservation strategy appropriate for the project and its location consistent with the City’s Water Efficiency Landscape Ordinance (WELO). The strategy may include the following, plus other innovative measures that may be appropriate: • Create water-efficient landscapes within the development. 14 • Install water-efficient irrigation systems and devices, such as soil moisture- based irrigation controls. • Design buildings to be water-efficient. Install water-efficient fixtures and appliances, including low-flow faucets, dual-flush toilets, and waterless urinals. • Restrict watering methods (e.g., prohibit systems that apply water to nonvegetated surfaces) and control runoff. Solid Waste Measures To facilitate and encourage recycling to reduce landfill-associated emissions, among others, the project will provide trash enclosures that include additional enclosed area(s) for collection of recyclable materials. The recycling collection area(s) will be located within, near, or adjacent to each trash and rubbish disposal area. The recycling collection area will be a minimum of 50 percent of the area provided for the trash/rubbish enclosure(s) or as approved by the waste management department of the City of Arcadia. Provide employee education on waste reduction and available recycling services. Transportation Measures To facilitate and encourage non-motorized transportation, bicycle racks shall be provided in convenient locations to facilitate bicycle access to the project area. The bicycle racks shall be shown on project landscaping and improvement plans submitted for Planning Services approval and shall be installed in accordance with those plans. Provide pedestrian walkways and connectivity throughout the project. Fund or participate in some type of shuttle service for hotel guests to access the City’s downtown Gold Line Station. 17. Prior to demolition of any existing hotel buildings or associated structures, a qualified contractor shall be retained to survey structures proposed for demolition to determine if asbestos-containing materials (ACMs) and/or lead-based paint (LBP) are present. If ACMs and/or LBP are present, prior to commencement of general demolition, these materials shall be removed and transported to an appropriate landfill by a licensed contractor. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Building Services including written documentation of the disposal of any ACMs or LBP in conformance with all applicable regulations. 18. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the developer shall file a Notice of Intent (NOI) with the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board to be covered under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Construction Permit for discharge of storm water associated with construction activities. The project developer shall submit to the City the Waste Discharge 15 Identification Number issued by the State Water Quality Control Board (SWQCB) as proof that the project’s NOI is to be covered by the General Construction Permit which has been filed with the SWQCB. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 19. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the developer shall submit to the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and receive approval for a project- specific Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). The SWPPP shall include a surface water control plan and erosion control plan citing specific measures to control on-site and off-site erosion during the entire grading and construction period. In addition, the SWPPP shall emphasize structural and nonstructural best management practices (BMPs) to control sediment and non- visible discharges from the site. BMPs to be implemented may include (but shall not be limited to) the following: x Potential sediment discharges from the site may be controlled by the following: sandbags, silt fences, straw wattles, fiber rolls, a temporary debris basin (if deemed necessary), and other discharge control devices. The construction and condition of the BMPs are to be periodically inspected by the RWQCB during construction, and repairs will be made as required. • Area drains within the construction area must be provided with inlet protection. Minimum standards are sand bag barriers, or two layers of sandbags with filter fabric over the grate, properly designed standpipes, or other measures as appropriate. • Materials that have the potential to contribute non-visible pollutants to storm water must not be placed in drainage ways and must be placed in temporary storage containment areas. • All loose soil, silt, clay, sand, debris, and other earthen material shall be controlled to eliminate discharge from the site. Temporary soil stabilization measures to be considered include: covering disturbed areas with mulch, temporary seeding, soil stabilizing binders, fiber rolls or blankets, temporary vegetation, and permanent seeding. Stockpiles shall be surrounded by silt fences and covered with plastic tarps. • Implement good housekeeping practices such as creating a waste collection area, putting lids on waste and material containers, and cleaning up spills immediately. • The SWPPP shall include inspection forms for routine monitoring of the site during the construction phase. • Additional required BMPs and erosion control measures shall be documented in the SWPPP. 16 • The SWPPP would be kept on site for the duration of project construction and shall be available to the local Regional Water Quality Control Board for inspection at any time. The developer and/or construction contractor shall be responsible for performing and documenting the application of BMPs identified in the project-specific SWPPP. Regular inspections shall be performed on sediment control measures called for in the SWPPP. Monthly reports shall be maintained and remain available for City inspection. An inspection log shall be maintained for the project and shall be available at the site for review by the City and the Regional W ater Quality Control Board as appropriate. 20. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, a site-specific Standard Urban Stormwater Management Plan (SUSMP) shall be submitted to the City Planning Division for review and approval. The SUSMP shall specifically identify the long-term site design, source control, and treatment control BMPs that shall be used on site to control pollutant runoff and to reduce impacts to water quality to the maximum extent practicable. At a minimum, the SUSMP shall identify and the site developer shall implement the following site design, source control, and treatment control BMPs as appropriate: Site Design BMPs x Minimize urban runoff by maximizing permeable areas and minimizing impermeable areas (recommended minimum 25 percent of site to be permeable). • Incorporate landscaped buffer areas between sidewalks and streets. • Maximize canopy interception and water conservation by planting native or drought-tolerant trees and large shrubs wherever possible • Where soil conditions are suitable, use perforated pipe or gravel filtration pits for low flow infiltration. • Construct onsite ponding areas or retention facilities to increase opportunities for infiltration consistent with vector control objectives. • Construct streets, sidewalks and parking lot aisles to the minimum widths necessary, provided that public safety and a walkable environment for pedestrians are not compromised. • Direct runoff from impervious areas to treatment control BMPs such as landscaping/bioretention areas. Source Control BMPs 17 Source control BMPs are implemented to eliminate the presence of pollutants through prevention. Such measures can be both non-structural and structural: Non-Structural Source Control BMPs • Education for property owners, tenants, occupants, and employees. • Activity restrictions. • Irrigation system and landscape maintenance to minimize water runoff. • Common area litter control. • Regular mechanical sweeping of private streets and parking lots. • Regular drainage facility inspection and maintenance. Structural Source Control BMPs • MS4 stenciling and signage at stormdown drains. • Properly design trash storage areas and any outdoor material storage areas. Treatment Control BMPs Treatment control BMPs supplement the pollution prevention and source control measures by treating the water to remove pollutants before it is released from the project site. The treatment control BMP strategy for the project is to select Low Impact Development (LID) BMPs that promote infiltration and evapotranspiration, including the construction of infiltration basins, bioretention facilities, and extended detention basins. Where infiltration BMPs are not appropriate, bioretention and/or biotreatment BMPs (including extended detention basins, bioswales, and constructed wetlands) that provide opportunity for evapotranspiration and incidental infiltration may be utilized. Harvest and use BMPs (e.g., storage pods) may be used as a treatment control BMP to store runoff for later non-potable uses. 21. Prior to issuance of grading and building permits for each phase of the project, the developer shall prepare a Construction Noise Control Plan and shall submit the plan to the City for review and approval. The plan shall include but will not be limited to the following: • During all project site excavation and grading, contractors shall equip all construction equipment, fixed or mobile, with properly operating and maintained mufflers consistent with manufacturers’ standards. •The project contractor shall place all stationary construction equipment so that emitted noise is directed away from the closest sensitive receptor to the project site (i.e., the (i.e., the residents located along Santa Cruz Road to the north 18 Salvation Army facility at the southwest corner of the project site at a distance of approximately 350 feet). •The construction contractor shall locate equipment staging in areas that will create the greatest distance between construction-related noise sources and the closest noise-sensitive receptor to the project site (i.e., the residents located along Santa Cruz Road to the north Salvation Army facility at the southwest corner of the project site at a distance of approximately 350 feet) during all project construction. • During all project site construction, the construction contractor shall limit all construction-related activities that would result in high noise levels to between the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. on weekdays and Saturdays. No construction shall be permitted on Sundays or any of the holidays listed in AMC Section 4261. x Prior to the start of Phase 2 grading, the developer shall install a wooden noise barrier along the common boundary of the project and the Salvation Army rehab facility at the southwest corner of the project site. This barrier shall be removed upon completion of Phase 2 construction. 22. Prior to the issuance of building permits for each phase, the developer shall demonstrate that all buildings shall have air-conditioning to minimize noise impacts on hotel rooms along West and East Huntington Drives. 23.Prior to the issuance of occupancy permits for the Phase 2 condominium building, the developer shall install a filled-cell concrete block wall along the common boundary with the Salvation Army rehab facility at the southwest corner of the project site. In lieu of the temporary construction wall outlined in condition no. 34, the developer may install this permanent wall “early” (i.e., prior to issuance of occupancy permits for Phase 1) which would eliminate the need for that portion of Measure N-1. 24. Prior to issuance of an occupancy permit for either the hotel in Phase 1, the developer shall be responsible for restriping westbound Huntington Drive to include an acceleration/deceleration left turn lane into the proposed drivewaysinstalling an additional signal phase to accommodate northbound movements exiting the shared hotel driveway and southbound movements entering the hotel driveway. The developer will also change the number one lane to a shared through and left turn lane to access the driveway for the hotels and modify the signal to account for the added phases and lanes. These changes shall be made to the satisfaction of and in coordination with the City traffic engineer. 25. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for either of the hotels or the mixed use project; the developer shall install bike racks and provide showers and locker rooms for employees who wish to ride bicycles to work. Bike racks shall also be 19 installed for project guests in appropriate locations. An appropriate number of bike racks as determined by the City of Arcadia shall be located near each building to serve the anticipated number of employees and guests. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 26.Prior to issuance of building permits for either Phase 1 or Phase 2, the project plans shall be circulated to Foothill Transit (FT) and the Metropolitan Transit Authority (MTA) to determine if there is a need for a bus stop on the south side of Colorado Place in front of the project site (e.g., for either FT Route 187 or MTA routes 78, 79, or 378). If either agency determines a need for such a stop, the developer shall install a bus stop to agency specifications prior to issuance of occupancy permits for the affected phase of development. This measure shall be implemented for each phase to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 27.Prior to issuance of occupancy permits for either hotel in Phase 1, the developer shall demonstrate that the main hotel entrance for Phase 1 has a circular drive with signage to allow only one way circulation (counter-clockwise) to provide adequate vehicle queuing lanes for exiting at the traffic signal. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 28. Prior to issuance of a building permit for either hotel, the developer shall retain a qualified licensed civil engineer to conduct a sewer study to evaluate before and after conditions of the project on the City’s existing sewer system (both lateral and main lines). This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Public Works Services Department and the County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County as appropriate. 29. Prior to issuance of an occupancy permit for either the Le Meridian hotel, the developer shall make a fair share contribution to the City to help fund upgrading of the existing sewer in West Huntington Drive included in the City’s 2014-15 Capital Improvement Project Plan budget, based on the results of the sewer study outlined in Mitigation Measure UTL-1. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and/or the City Public Works Services Department as appropriate. 30. Prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit for either the Le Meridian hotel, the developer shall also make a fair share contribution to the County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County for any trunk line improvements required to serve the project based on the results of the sewer study. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Public Works Services Department in consultation with the County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County as appropriate. 31. In accordance with the City’s Transportation Fee Program, the applicant shall pay its development impact fees which will mitigate any cumulative impacts in the future at the westbound I-210 intersection at Santa Anita Avenue. 20 32. Prior to issuance of an occupancy permit for either the Le Meridian hotel, the developer shall make a fair share contribution to fund project-related portions of any improvements needed to provide adequate electrical service to the project. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Public Works Services Department in consultation with Southern California Edison. 33. These conditions shall be deemed to be part of the Specific Plan and are fully incorporated therein by this reference. Notwithstanding any provisions or interpretations to the contrary, this Specific Plan shall remain subject to such amendment or termination as may be adopted by the City pursuant to its zoning authority. 21 Exhibit “B” General Plan Land Use Designation Downtown Mixed Use ! ! 180 100 LA County eGIS Proposed General Plan Land Use Existing General Plan Land Use ! ! 180 100 LA County eGIS Downtown Mixed Use (30-50 du/acre & 1.0 FAR) City of Arcadia Commercial Downtown Overlay (1.0 FAR) Ü 0250500 Feet June 6, 2018 Attachment No. 2 Ordinance No. 2355 1 SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN ARCADIA, CA Rev. 2 - 05/03/2018 Rev. 1 - 04/17/2018 04/07/2018 1 SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN ARCADIA, CA Rev. 2 - 05/03/2018 Rev. 1 - 04/17/2018 04/07/2018 SHEET INDEXPROJECT SUMMARY THE PROPOSED WORK ARE PHASES I AND II OF THE FORMER SANTA ANITA INN SITE LOCATED IN ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA. THE NORTHEAST HALF OF THE PROPERTY WILL BE THE CONSTRUCTION OF A FOUR-STAR LE MERIDIEN HOTEL BY MARRIOTT. PHASE II WILL BE A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT CONSISTING OF GROUND FLOOR RETAIL, OFFICE, LUXURY RESIDENTIAL AND PODIUM PARKING. PHASE 1 AND PHASE 2 TOTAL SITE AREA AND FLOOR AREA RATIO: SITE AREA: 6.15 ACRES FAR: MAX FAR 1.0 PHASE 1 LE MERIDIEN HOTEL BY MARRIOTT BUILDING AREA 155,143 SF PUBLIC AREAS 20,620 227 GUESTROOMS 80,000 BACK OF HOUSE 54,523 PARKING PROVIDED: 227 PARKING PHASE 2 MIXED USE RESIDENTIAL BUILDING AREA 180,441 SF RETAIL/COMMERCIAL 19,123 SF OFFICE 12,408 SF SPA 6,665 SF RESIDENTIAL (96 UNITS) 139,368 RESIDENTIAL LOBBY AND AMENITIES 2,877 SF PHASE 1 AND PHASE 2 REQUIRED PARKING RETAIL/COMMERCIAL/SPA (5/1000SF) 129 OFFICE (4/1000SF) 50 HOTEL (1/GUESTROOM) 227 96 RESIDENTIAL UNITS (1.5/UNIT +1/3UNITS) 176 TOTAL REQUIRED PARKING 582 PARKING PROVIDED ON GRADE HOTEL PARKING: 82 LEVEL B1 RETAIL PARKING 119 LEVEL P1 HOTEL AND OFFICE PARKING 212 LEVEL P2 RESIDENTIAL PARKING 182 TOTAL PROVIDED PARKING 595 LIST OF PROFESSIONALS CLIENT: CHATEAU GROUP USA 119 LA PORTE STREET ARCADIA, CA 91006 ARCHITECT: ARCHITECTS ORANGE 144 N ORANGE STREET,ORANGE, CA 92866 SURVEYOR: TRITECH ASSOCIATED, INC SUBDIVISION SURVEY ENGINEERING DESIGN 135 NORTH SAN GABRIEL BOULEVARD, SAN GABRIEL, CA 91775 CIVIL: TRITECH ASSOCIATED, INC SUBDIVISION SURVEY ENGINEERING DESIGN 135 NORTH SAN GABRIEL BOULEVARD, SAN GABRIEL, CA 91775 LANDSCAPE: ARCHITECTS ORANGE 144 N ORANGE STREET,ORANGE, CA 92866 ENVIRONMENTAL: LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. 1500 IOWA AVENUE, SUITE 200, RIVERSIDE, CA 92507 CODE AND PLANNING INFORMATION PARCEL ADDRESS: 130 WEST HUNTINGTON DRIVE, ARCADIA 91007 PARCEL AIN NO.:5775-024-014 EXISTING USE:R-1 HOTEL & C2 & C PROPOSED USE: R-1 HOTEL, B OFFICE, R-3 MU RES & M RETAIL/COMMERCIAL APPLICABLE BUILDING CODES BUILDING: 2016 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE (CBC) ELECTRICAL: 2016 CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE (CEC) MECHANICAL: 2016 CALIFORNIA MECHANICAL CODE (CMC) PLUMBING: 2016 CALIFORNIA PLUMBING CODE (CPC) ACCESSIBILITY: MORE STRINGENT OF CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE OR APPLICABLE FEDERAL LAW ENERGY: 2016 CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE (CFC) AND LOCAL ORDINANCE 2 SPECIFIC PLAN 10 SITE PHOTOS 11 VICINITY MAP & SITE MAP 12 SITE SURVEY 13 EXISTING SITE PLAN 14 PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN 15 OVERALL SITE PLAN PHASE 1 - HOTEL 16 SITE PLAN & PROJ. SUMMARY 17 FIRE TRUCK ACCESS ROUTE 18 GROUND FLOOR PLAN 19 MEZZANINE FLOOR PLAN 20 FLOOR PLANS 23 ROOF PLAN 24 ELEVATIONS 26 COLOR & MATERIAL BOARD 27 SECTIONS 28 RENDERING PHASE 2 - MIXED USE RESIDENTIAL 29 SITE PLAN & PROJ. SUMMARY 30 FLOOR PLANS 33 ELEVATIONS 35 COLOR & MATERIAL BOARD 36 SECTIONS 37 RENDERING LANDSCAPE 38 TREE SURVEY 39 PHASE 1 LANDSCAPE PLAN 43 PHASE 2 LANDSCAPE PLAN 47 OPTION B STREETSCAPE 48 VEHICULAR VISIBILITY EXHIBIT 2 SeabiscuitPacificaSpecificPlan 130W.HuntingtonDr.,Arcadia,CA91007 SECTION1.0INTRODUCTION  1.1 PurposeandAuthority  ASpecificPlanisalegislativetoolthatimplementstheGeneralPlanbycombiningzoning requirementsanddevelopmentregulationsthataretailoredtoaspecificpropertyASpecificPlanis commonlyusedforalargesite,asitewheremanyindividualpropertieshavebeenassembled,ora sitethatrequiresspecialattentionintermsoflanduseordevelopmentcharacteristics.TheSeabiscuit Pacificasiterequiresspecialattentionduetoitslimitedsizebutuniquelocationandabilityto economicallysupportSantaAnitaPark,thecurrentdowntownrevitalizationcommunitydistrict,and theCityofArcadia(seeSection2forsiteandprojectdetails).Morespecifically,itisthephasingofthe projectintotwophasesthathasraisedquestions,whichtheSpecificPlanlookstoaddress.Phase1 willconsistofanewMarriottfullserviceHotel.Phase2willconsistofdevelopingtherestofthesite intoan8ͲstoryresidentialmixedͲuseproject. ThepurposeoftheSeabiscuitPacificaSpecificPlanistodefinetherangeofpermitteduses, developmentregulationsanddesignguidelinesforthedevelopmentoftheprojectsite. ImplementationoftheSpecificPlanwillaccomplishthefollowingobjectives:  • ProvidehighqualitydevelopmentconsistentwiththeCity'sGeneralPlanandinconformancewith municipalstandards,codes,andpolicies; • ProvideusesthatwillcomplimentandsupporttheSantaAnitaParkracetrack,otherimportant regionalfacilitiesintheCity,andtheadjacentDowntownarea; •Designthedevelopmenttominimizethepotentialforenvironmentalimpacts; •AugmenttheCity'seconomicbasebyincreasingtaxͲgeneratingcommercialuseswithintheCity; and • CreateemploymentͲgeneratingopportunitiesforthecitizensoftheCityandsurrounding communities.  1.2 DocumentApproval  TheSeabiscuitPacificaSpecificPlanhasbeenpreparedpursuanttotheprovisionsoftheCalifornia GovernmentCode,Title7,Division1,Chapter3,Article8,andSections65450through65457.The CaliforniaGovernmentCodeauthorizesjurisdictionstoadoptSpecificPlansbyresolutionaspolicy documentsorbyordinanceasregulatorydocuments.ThisSpecificPlanisbeingadoptedby Ordinance.ThelawallowspreparationofSpecificPlansasmayberequiredfortheimplementation oftheGeneralPlanandfurtherallowsfortheirreviewandadoption.  1.3 RelationshipoftheSpecificPlantotheGeneralPlan,Zoning,andOtherOrdinances  SpecificPlansmustbeconsistentwiththegoalsandpoliciesoftheadoptedGeneralPlansoflocal jurisdictions(CaliforniaCodeSection65454).TheSeabiscuitPacificaSpecificPlanimplementsthe goalsandpoliciesoftheCityofArcadiaGeneralPlanwithintheSpecificPlanarea.Thegoalsand objectivesfoundintheLandUseElementsupporttheCity'sdesiretocontinuetocreateafuturein whichtheeconomyandenvironmentoftheCityispreservedandenhancedbynewdevelopment Section2.3providesaspecificanalysisoftheSpecificPlanrelativetotheCityGeneralPlanlanduse andzoningdesignations.AppendixB,theGeneralPlanConsistencyAnalysis,demonstrateshowthe SeabiscuitPacificaSpecificPlanimplementsapplicablegoalsandobjectivesoftheCityofArcadia's GeneralPlan.VariouslandusegoalsthatsupportaviableeconomicfuturedirectionfortheCity.  ThisSpecificPlanactsasabridgebetweentheGeneralPlanandindividualdevelopmentproposals.It combinesdevelopmentstandardsandguidelinesintoasingledocumentthatistailoredtomeetthe developmentneedsofthisspecificsite.TheCityofArcadia'sGeneralPlanindicatesthataSpecific Planisrequiredforlargeparcelsthatmayhavedevelopmentcharacteristicsthatarenotaddressed intheCity'sGeneralPlanorZoning.WhiletheSpecificPlansiteisnotverylarge(6.15acres),itdoes representauniquepropertyinrelationtotheSantaAnitaParkracetrack,andsoCitystaffhas supportedpreparationofaSpecificPlanforthehotelprojectapplicationbySeabiscuitPacifica,LLC onthissite.  TheSeabiscuitPacificaSpecificPlanisdevelopedwithintheoverallframeworkoftheCity'sZoning Ordinance,butprovidesseparatedevelopmentstandardsandguidelinesthatarecustomizedtothe SpecificPlansite.TheCity'szoningstandardsareutilizedforcertainaspectsofdevelopment,suchas parkingandlandscaping,whiletheSpecificPlanprovidesotherstandardsthataretailoredtothe uniquelocationandopportunitiesoftheSeabiscuitPacificaSpecificPlansite.Futurediscretionary approvalsforthissitewillbesubjecttothereviewprocedures,findingsandprovisionsofthe SeabiscuitPacificaSpecificPlanandtheCityofArcadiaZoningOrdinance.Relatedand/orsubsequent approvals,suchasSpecificPlanamendmentsorarchitecturaldesignreviewasdeemednecessaryby theDevelopmentServicesDirectorordesignee,mustbeconsistentwithboththeguidelinesofthe SeabiscuitPacificaSpecificPlanandtheCity'sZoningOrdinance.Wheredevelopmentregulationsin thisSpecificPlandifferfromthoseestablishedintheCity'sCode,theprovisionsoftheSeabiscuit PacificaSpecificPlanshallprevail.WherethisSpecificPlanissilentonadevelopmentregulation,the CityofArcadia'Codeshallprevail.  Section2.3andAppendixBprovideamoredetailedanalysisoftheSpecificPlan'sconsistencywith theGeneralPlanpoliciesandobjectives.AlthoughtheproposedSeabiscuitPacificaprojectis consistentwiththeCity'sGeneralPlanandzoning(seeSection2.3),aSpecificPlanwaspreparedto addressthefollowingprojectcharacteristics:(a)developmentphasing;(b)thedevelopment agreement;and(c)theoverallappearanceofallbuildingswithintheproject     SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN ARCADIA, CA Rev. 2 - 05/03/2018 Rev. 1 - 04/17/2018 04/07/2018 SPECIFIC PLAN 3 1.4RelationshiptotheCaliforniaEnvironmentalQualityAct AdoptionoramendmentofaSpecificPlanconstitutesaprojectundertheCaliforniaEnvironmental QualityAct(CEQA).AMitigatedNegativeDeclaration(MND)hasbeenpreparedinaccordancewith theCEQAGuidelines(CCR,Title14,Division6,Chapter3Section15000Ͳ15387),andStateCEQA GuidelinesSections15070through15075inparticular,toanalyzetheenvironmentalimpactsofthe SeabiscuitPacificaSpecificPlan.TheMNDestablishestheexisting,onsiteenvironmentalconditions andevaluatesthepotentialimpactsofthisSpecificPlan.TheMNDreferencesprojectdesignfeatures andincludesvariousmitigationmeasuresthatwillbeimplementedthrougheithertheMitigation MonitoringandReportingProgramorConditionsofApproval(refertoAppendixA).  1.5RequiredEntitlements ThediscretionaryactionstobeconsideredbytheCityaspartoftheproposedSeabiscuitPacifica SpecificPlanincludeapprovalofthefollowing: • DevelopmentAgreement • SeabiscuitPacificaSpecificPlanNo.SP13Ͳ02(OrdinanceNo.2344and2345,andResolutionNo. 7158); • GeneralPlanAmendmentNo.GPAandAmendmenttheGeneralPlanLandUseMap(CityCouncil ResolutionNo.7013); • ZoneChangeNo.ZC13Ͳ02(SPͲSP)andAmendmenttotheZoningMap(OrdinanceNo.2344and 2345,andResolutionNo.7158) x MitigatedNegativeDeclarationincompliancewithCEQA(CityCouncilResolutionNo.7013); x ConceptualReviewoftheoverallprojectsiteplanandvisualrenderings; x DesignReviewoftheSitePlanandBuildingElevationsforPhase1;and x DesignReviewoftheSitePlanandBuildingElevationsforPhase2. OthernonͲdiscretionaryactionsanticipatedtobetakenbytheCityattheStafflevelaspartofthe proposedprojectinclude: • ApprovalofaStormWaterPollutionPreventionPlan(SWPPP)tomitigatesiterunoffduring construction(i.e.,overtheshortͲterm)andaStandardUrbanStormwaterManagementPlan (SUSMP)tomitigateforpostͲconstructionrunoffflows(i.e.,overthelongͲtermduringproject occupancyandoperation). •Reviewoflandscaping/irrigationplans. • CertificateofDemolition • Buildingpermit.Thecomprehensivebuildingpermitincludesbuildingpermit,plumbing, mechanical,andelectricalpermits. • Gradingpermit • Sewerconnectionpermit DevelopmentoftheproposedSeabiscuitPacificaprojectmayrequirethefollowingpermitsand/or approvalsfromotherresponsibleagencies: •ANationalPollutantDischargeEliminationSystempermitfromtheRegionalWaterQuality ControlBoardͲLosAngelesRegiontoensurethatconstructionsitedrainagevelocitiesareequal toorlessthanthepreͲconstructionconditionsanddownstreamwaterqualityisnotharmed.  2.0LANDUSEPLAN  2.1Location TheprojectsitecurrentlyconsistsofoneparcelplustheadditionalcitycornerparcelplustheSalvation ArmyParcelthatisintendedtobeaddedtotheprojectforatotalofthreeparcelsandatotalsiteareaof approximately6.15acreslocatedjusteastoftheSantaAnitaParkracetrack,justsouthofHuntington Drive,andjusteastofWestHuntingtonDriveintheCityofArcadia.ThesiteisdepictedontheUnited StatesGeologicalSurvey(USGS)Mt.Wilson,California7.5ͲminutetopographicquadrangleinTownship1 North,Range11West(nosectionsindicated),withalatitudeof34'8'21.7"Northandalongitudeof118' 2'77"WestTheparcelisboundedbyColoradoPlace/HuntingtonDrivetothenorth,theArcadiaCityHall complextothesouth,EastHuntingtonDrivetotheeast,andWestHuntingtonDrivetothewestThe projectlocationisillustratedinFiguresAͲ0.2andAͲ0.3.ThelegaldescriptionisincludedinAppendixC. TheprojectsiteconsistsofAssessor'sParcelNumber’s577Ͳ502Ͳ4014,5774Ͳ024Ͳ019and5775Ͳ024Ͳ015. TheprecisedescriptionoftheparcelsisincludedasAppendixC.  2.2EnvironmentalSetting Theproposedprojectsitegentlyslopestothesouthatagradientof2.4percentwithelevationsranging from473feetabovemeansealevel(amsl)atthenorthcornerslopingdownto466feetamslatthesouth corner.OnsiteelevationsareshowninFigureAͲ0.4.ThesiteisfullydevelopedwiththeSantaAnitaInn hotelthathasoccupiedthispropertysince1955.Thesitehasseveralimprovedaccessroadsaroundits perimeter,includingColoradoPlace/HuntingtonDrivetothenorth,EastHuntingtonDrivetotheeast,and WestHuntingtonDrivetothewest. Theprojectsiteisinanurbanizedareaandissurroundedbydevelopeduses.Directlywestoftheproject sitearetheSantaAnitaParkracetrack,theArboretumofLosAngelesCountyisfurtherwest,anda regionalmall,WestfieldMallSantaAnita,istothewestoftheracetrack.Northoftheprojectsiteare officesalongColoradoPlaceandHuntingtonDrive,andabankalongHuntingtonDriveNorthofthese commercialandofficeusesareexistingresidentialneighborhoods.A6,273SFparcelatthenortheast corneroftheprojectsiteisintendedtobeincorporatedintotheprojectsiteforlandscape.Anindividual houseusedbytheSalvationArmyasarehabilitationfacilityislocatedadjacenttothewestofthesite, containing11,887sf,andisalsointendedtobeincorporatedintothesite.Totheeastoftheprojectsite istheArcadiaCountyPark.SouthoftheproposedsitearetheCivicCenterAthleticFieldRecreationalArea andtheCityHallcomplex.,FarthersouthwestaretheMethodistHospital,QuestDiagnosticsMedicalLab, andMedicalLibrary. SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN ARCADIA, CA Rev. 2 - 05/03/2018 Rev. 1 - 04/17/2018 04/07/2018 SPECIFIC PLAN 4 Therearenosurfacedrainagecoursesontheprojectsite,buttheEastBranchArcadiaWashislocated approximately227feetwestofthesiteandtheArcadiaWashislocatedapproximately2,000feetwest ofthesite.ThepreviousFigureAͲ0.2showsthelocationoftheprojectsiteandsurroundinglanduses.  2.3GeneralPlanLandUseandZoningConstraints AccordingtotheArcadiaGeneralPlan,theprojectsiteisdesignatedforcommercialuses.TheCity's GeneralPlanLandUseDesignationMapshowsthelandusesoftheprojectsiteandthesurrounding properties,asshownonTable2A.  TheCity'sGeneralPlansaysthefollowingabouttheDowntownMixedUselandusedesignation... TheDowntownMixedUsezoneisintendedtoprovideopportunitiesforcomplimentaryserviceandretail commercialbusinesses,professionaloffices,andresidentialuseslocatedwithintheCity’sdowntown.A widerangeofcommercialandresidentialusesareappropriate,orientedtowardspedestriansto encourageshareduseofparking,publicopenspace,andinteractionofuseswithinthezone.Mixeduse requirestheinclusionofagroundͲfloor,streetfrontagecommercialcomponentsforallprojects.Exclusive residentialstructuresarenotallowed.ThiszoneimplementstheGeneralPlanDowntownMixedͲUse designation.MaximumFARallowedinDowntownMixedUseis1.0 ThedescriptionofalloweduseslistshotelsandmotelsthatrequiretheapprovalofaConditionalUse PermitsubjecttorequirementsofSection9107.09.09useoftheDevelopmentCodeSection9220.29of theCity'sMunicipalCode(zoning)defines"Hotelisabuildinginwhichtherearesixormoreguestrooms wherelodgingwithorwithoutmealsisprovidedforcompensationasthemoreorlesstemporaryabiding placeofindividualsandwherenoprovisionismadeforcookinginanyindividualroomorsuite."Allofthe hotelroomsmeetthisdefinition.TheywillalsobesubjecttoTOTtaxlikeatypicalhotel.Therefore,the hotelintheSeabiscuitPacificaprojectareconsistentwiththeallowableusesundertheGeneralPlan undertheDowntownMixedͲUselandusedesignation,therefore,theSeabiscuitPacificaSpecificPlandoes notrequireaGeneralPlanAmendment. TheCity'szoningmapindicatesthesiteiszonedDowntownMixedUsewhichallowshotelsandresidential mixedͲusewithaConditionalUsePermit(CUP).ApprovaloftheSpecificPlanbytheCityCouncilwould allowthehotelandresidentialmixedusebyrightandeliminatetheneedforaCUPconsistentwithstate lawforchartercities. ThetotalbuildingareaoftheSeabiscuitPacificaSpecificPlanindicatestheprojectFARis10(seeTable 2.B).However,approvaloftheSpecificPlanamendmentbytheCityCouncilwillconstituteacceptanceby theCitythattheproposedSeabiscuitPacificaSpecificPlanisgenerallyconsistentwiththeGeneralPlan, andthatanymodificationtothebuildingdevelopmentcharacteristicsshowninthisSpecificPlanwill requireCityCouncilapprovalofaSpecificPlanAmendment. Finally,theCity'szoningmapindicatesthesitehasaHeightOverlay(HͲ8)whichallowsbuildingsupto95 feetinheightor8stories,asshownbelowfromtheCity'sMunicipalCodeSection9102.03.030:   9276.2.2.ͲHEIGHTLIMIT. AnybuildingorstructureinZoneHmay,bycomplyingwiththeprovisionsofthisTitle,exceedthe heightlimitationapplicabletothebasiczoneinwhichitislocated;provided,however,thatnobuilding orstructureshallinanyeventexceedtheheightlimitsetforthinthefollowingtable: ZoneH4ͲFour(4)storiesorfortyͲfive(45)feet; ZoneH5ͲFive(5)storiesorfiftyͲfive(55)feet; ZoneH6ͲSix(6)storiesorsixtyͲfive(65)feet; ZoneH7ͲSeven(7)storiesorseventyͲfive(75)feet; ZoneH8ͲEight(8)storiesorninetyͲfive(95)feet.  ThetallestbuildingintheproposedSeabiscuitPacificaprojectisthecondominiumbuildingat approximately95feetwith8storiesofoccupiedspace.Withthearchitecturalroofprojection,thehotel condobuildingwillstand95feettothetopoftheprimaryroofdeck.TheSeabiscuitPacificaSpecificPlan willbewithinrequirementsoftheHͲ8HeightOverlay.  2.4SpecificPlanContents TheSeabiscuitPacificaSpecificPlanincludesthesiteplan,floorplans,andelevationsfortheproject buildings,aswellastheaccompanyingrenderingsandsiteinformation,andtheConditionsofApproval. TheSpecificPlanalsoincludestheplannedbuildingheights,setbacksfromWestHuntingtonDrive,East HuntingtonDrive,ColoradoPlace,andexistingusestothesouth.ThesiteplanandassociatedInitialStudy provideinformationonenvironmentalconditionsofthesiteandpotentialenvironmentaleffectsofthe project,includingtraffic,airquality,noise,drainage,utilities,andmunicipalservices.Onceapproved,the SeabiscuitPacificaSpecificPlanwillbeshownontheCity'sofficialzoningmapasSPͲSP. ThefollowinggraphicalmaterialsareherebyincorporatedintotheSpecificPlanandpresentedattheend ofthissection: 2SPECIFICPLAN 10SITEPHOTOS 11VICINITYMAP&SITEMAP 12SITESURVEY 13EXISTINGSITEPLAN 14PRELIMINARYGRADINGPLAN 15OVERALLSITEPLAN PHASE1ͲHOTEL 16SITEPLAN&PROJ.SUMMARY SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN ARCADIA, CA Rev. 2 - 05/03/2018 Rev. 1 - 04/17/2018 04/07/2018 SPECIFIC PLAN 5 17FIRETRUCKACCESSROUTE 18GROUNDFLOORPLAN 19MEZZANINEFLOORPLAN 20FLOORPLANS 23ROOFPLAN 24ELEVATIONS 26COLOR&MATERIALBOARD 27SECTIONS 28RENDERING PHASE2ͲMIXEDUSERESIDENTIAL 29SITEPLAN&PROJ.SUMMARY 30FLOORPLANS 33ELEVATIONS 35COLOR&MATERIALBOARD 36SECTIONS 37RENDERING LANDSCAPE 38TREESURVEY 39PHASE1LANDSCAPEPLAN 43PHASE2LANDSCAPEPLAN 47OPTIONBSTREETSCAPE 48VEHICULARVISIBILITYEXHIBIT AppendixA:ConditionsofApprovalandMitigationMeasures AppendixB:GeneralPlanConsistencyAnalysis AppendixC:TitleReportandAssessor'sParcelMap    Inaddition,thefollowingdocumentsandstudiesassociatedwiththeSpecificPlanareonfileatthe PlanningDivisionoftheDevelopmentServicesDepartment,240W.HuntingtonDrive,Arcadia,CA: •"CityofArcadiaGeneralPlan."CityofArcadia.November2010 •"PhaseIEnvironmentalSiteAssessment."ContinentalAssetsManagementMarch2003 • "PreliminaryGeotechnicalAssessment."Geotechnologies,Inc.July2013 •"CityofArcadiaZoningMap.”HogleͲIrelandInc.2010 •"SantaAnitaInnRedevelopmentProject."KimleyͲHornandAssociates,Inc.OriginalJuly2013, updatedNovember2013andupdatedMarch2018. • “SantaAnitaInnRedevelopmentProject,AddendumtoTrafficImpactAnalysis."KimleyͲHornand Associates,Inc.2013 "NoiseImpactAnalysis."LSAAssociates,Inc.August2013 •"AirQualityAnalysis."LSAAssociates,Inc.August2013 •ThePrimaryRecordsforms(fullsetsͲ523Aand5238,andLocationMap,etc). • "InitialStudyandMitigatedNegativeDeclaration,ForTwoMedicalOfficeBuildings,AGeneral OfficeBuilding,andaFourͲLevelParkingStructureat161ColoradoPlaceand125IN,Huntington Drive."PacificDesignGroup.December2012 • "Hydraulic&HydrologyCalculation."TritechAssociates,Inc.July2013 2.5SpecificPlanLandUseComponents TheSeabiscuitPacificaSpecificPlanisproposedintheCityofArcadiaatthesouthwestcornerofColorado PlaceandWestHuntingtonDrive.TheSpecificPlansiteoccupiesapproximately6.15acresandislocated at130Ͳ180HuntingtonDrive.TheSeabiscuitPacificaprojectproposestoconstructafullserviceMarriott Hotel,andaresidentialmixedͲusetowerandsupportingparkingfortheentireprojectTheSeabiscuit PacificaSpecificPlanproposesatotalofSFsquarefeetofbuilding,including155,143squarefeetofhotel spacewith227rooms(17moreadditionalroomsthanwhatwaspreviouslyapproved)inonebuildingand SF)squarefeetofresidentialmixedͲusewith96totalunits.FigureAͲ1.0showstheproposedSeabiscuit PacificaSpecificPlanlanduseplanandTable2.8summarizestheproposedusesoftheSpecificPlan. Theprojectisintendedtosupportpatrons,employees,andmanagersoftheSantaAnitaParkracetrack onaregularbasis,inadditiontogeneralgueststotheCityofArcadia.Thefullservicehotelwillallowfor accommodationsforracetrackandcityguests.ThislodgingͲrelateduseisconsistentwiththegoalsofthe GeneralPlanforgeneralcommercialuseslocatedaroundtheSantaAnitaParkracetrack.Thehoteland theresidentialmixedͲuseareexpectedtogenerateaneedfor185newemployeesatbuildout.        SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN ARCADIA, CA Rev. 2 - 05/03/2018 Rev. 1 - 04/17/2018 04/07/2018 SPECIFIC PLAN 6 Table2.B:SeabiscuitPacificaSpecificPlanLandUses HotelͲRelatedLandUseRoom/SpacesFloorArea (squarefeet) Footprint BuildingArea (squarefeet) PercentofSite PhaseI(hotel) LEMeridianHotel227155,14336,25013.5 Subtotal227155,14336,25013.5 PhaseII ResidentialMixedͲUse(sitson parkingpodium)96139,36823,2288.7 ResidentialLobbyandAmenitiesͲ2,8772,877.13 Commercial38,19625,7889.6 Subtotal96180,44119.6 Parking     HotelSurfaceParkingPhaseIat completionofPhase2structured parking(227surfacestalls provideduntilPhasetwo constructionstarts) 82 ͲͲ ͲͲ Ͳ StructuredCoveredParking PhaseII 513  ͲͲ    ͲͲ ͲͲ ͲͲ Subtotal595 ͲͲ ͲͲ ͲͲ DevelopmentTotal     MarriottLeMeridianHotel227155,14336,25013.5 ResidentialMixedUse368180,441TBDTBD19.6 Total(w/oparkingstructure)595335,58452,37733.1 TotalParkingSpaces595  ͲͲ ͲͲ FAR(Total1.0:1Maxallowed) ͲͲ.72:1(Doesnot include condominiumSF) ͲͲ ͲͲ Source:ArchitectsOrange(August2017) 1Buildingfootprint 2AtPhase2completion,85existingsurfaceparkingspacesaredeletedfromPhase1surfaceparking 3 FloorAreaRatio=BuildingArea(insquarefeet):SiteArea(267,759squarefeetor6.15acres)perALTAsurveyandCountyAssessor’sParcel data  Theincorporationofparcel#5774Ͳ024Ͳ019,anapproximate6,273squarefeetparcel,iscurrentlyowned bytheCitybutwillbeincorporatedforenhancedlandscapingfortheproject.Uponapprovalofthe transferorsomeformofanagreement,thatallowsthemaintenanceandimprovementsofthecorner site,andparcel5775Ͳ024Ͳ015,anapproximate11,887sfparceliscurrentlyownedbytheSalvationArmy butwillbeincorporated,tobecomepartofthespecificplan.    2.5ProjectPhasing TheSeabiscuitPacificaSpecificPlanisaselfͲsupportingcommercialprojectwithindividual owners/developersresponsibleforonͲsiteandoffͲsiteimprovementsnecessarytosupportdevelopment oftheprojectThepreviousTable2.8providesasummaryofthevariousprojectusesbyphase. Developmentoftheplanareawilloccurintwophases,generallyasfollows: PhaseI PhaseIwillbecompletedby2019andwillincludeafullserviceMarriottLeMeridianhotelandsurface parking.PhaseIIwillconsistofamixedusedevelopmentwithgarageparking,andsurfaceparking.Phase Iincludesconstructingatotalof155,143squarefeetofhotelspace.Thehotelwillcontainatotalof227 roomsasoutlinedinTable2.C.TheMarriottLeMeridianHotelisMarriott’supscale,artistic,fullservice brandhotelofferinganupscaleguestexperienceinamidͲcenturymodernenvironmentwithafullservice foodandbeveragecomponentandamodernandrefreshingdesign.Thehotelwillhaveasixfloorwing andafivefloorwingwithamaximumheightofapproximately80feet.PhaseIsurfaceparkingwillhave 227spacesforthehoteltosupporttheadditional17roomsthatwereaddedtothepreviouslyapproved project. PhaseII PhaseIIincludesconstructionoftheresidentialmixedͲusetower,whichwillcompriseof96totalunits, coveredstructuredparkingandstreetfrontagecommercial.Theresidentialtowerwillhaveeightfloors andinclude96condominiumunits,andastructuredparkingpodium.TheresidentialmixedͲusetowerwill haveamaximumheightof95'Ͳ0"totheprimaryroofdeck.Theparking,whichwillbeconstructedduring PhaseIIfortheresidences,willcontain222,642squarefeetand513garageparkingspacesasshownin Table2D.Theparkingrequirementsareoneandonehalfparkingspacesforeveryunitandanadditional oneguestparkingspaceforeverythreeunits.Eachunitwillhavetwocoveredparkingspacesinthe parkingstructure,wherealltheguestspaceswillbelocated..Anychangesoralterationtotheparking spaceassignmentshallbesubjecttoreviewandapprovalbytheDevelopmentServicesDirectoror designee(refertoconditionofapprovalno.3ofAppendixA). PhaseIIparkingwillhave513parkingspacesinallatthecompletionofthephasetwoparkingstructure. and145ofthespaceswillbededicatedtohotelguestparking.AfterPhaseIIcompletion,agrandtotal of595parkingspaceswillbeavailable,whichwillyieldahotelparkingratioof1.00.         SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN ARCADIA, CA Rev. 2 - 05/03/2018 Rev. 1 - 04/17/2018 04/07/2018 SPECIFIC PLAN 7 Table2.C:SeabiscuitPacificaRooms/UnitsSummary ProjectRooms/UnitsSummary PhaseIBuilding#ofRooms/Units FullServiceMarriottHotel227 TotalPhaseIRooms227 PhaseII ResidentialMixedUse96 TotalPhaseIIRooms96   Table2.D:SeabiscuitPacificaParkingSummary ProjectParkingSummary PhaseIType#ofSpaces NewSurfaceParking(atcompletionofPhase2)82 TotalPhaseISpaces82 PhaseII NewGarageParking513 TotalPhaseIISpaces513  TotalPhaseIand PhaseII 595   2.6Access/Improvements/Screening PrimaryaccessforthehotelwillfromWestHuntingtonDrive.PrimaryaccesstotheresidentialmixedͲuse willbeoffofWestHuntingtonDrive.AdrivewayoffofEastHuntingtonDrivewillserveasa secondary/emergencyaccesspointforboththehotelandcondominium Mainentranceintotheparkinglotwillfeatureatreelinedentryapproachprovidingplentyofstacking spaceforguests. Theprojectwillprepareasewercapacitystudyandprovidea"fairshare"contributiontohelpfundan expansionprojectalreadyincludedintheCity'sCapitalImprovementProgram(CIP)thatwillprovide adequatesewercapacityforthisproject. Anadditionalten(10)feetisallowedforarchitecturalfeatures,chimneys,vents,equipment,andother accessoryrooftopstructuresonthehotelandcondominiumbuilding.Suchappurtenancesnotfully incorporatedasarchitecturalfeaturesshallbeadequatelyscreenedbyawall.AnyroofͲmounted mechanicalequipmentshallbeappropriatelyscreenedfromview.Themethodofscreeningshallbe architecturallyintegratedwiththeadjacentstructureintermsofmaterials,color,shape,andsize.Where individualequipmentisprovided,acontinuousscreenisdesirable.  2.7LandscapingRequirements AconceptuallandscapingplanisincludedwiththeSpecificPlanapplicationanditwillbephasedaswell. TheproposalisconsistentwithCityrequirementsandtheoveralllandscapingplanfortheSantaAnita ParkracetrackandWestHuntingtonDrive.  2.8DesignNarrative 1. BuildingArchitecture  A. Hotel ArtDecoisthestyleoftheSantaAnitaParkgrandstandandmayalsobefoundthroughoutLos Angeles.EarlyArtDecowasinfluencedbyboldgeometricforms–thecylinder,thesphere,the cone,andthecube.Theuseofreinforcedconcreteenabledarchitectsandengineerstodesign buildingswithcleanlines,rectangularforms,andlittledecorationonthefaçade.Forprojectson atightbudget,thesimpleboxcouldbeembellishedwithappliedmotifsthatmadeaconceptually rudimentarystructureappearfashionableanduptodate.Visualinterestcouldbefurther enhancedbystretchinglinearformshorizontallyandverticallythroughoutthebuilding Takingcuesfromthatera,weapproachedourdesignwithamodernandfreshinterpretationof thecharacteristicsoftheArtDecostyle.Thebuildingportraysacleanandmodern,yetsubtle homagetothismovement.Thedesignissophisticated,timeless,tasteful,yetstriking. Thedecolightvocabularyincludesroundedstreamlinedcorners,cantileveredhorizontalbanding, meaningfulverticalelements,andsubtlepatterningwhosemotifsaredrawnfromthespecial equestriannatureofthesiteanditsproximitytotheworldfamoustrack.Strikingarchitectural elements,thoughtfullylocatedateachendofthebuildingandadjacenttothestreettoprovidea memorableandartisticdecoͲesqueicons,signalingtheluxuryandspecialhandcraftednature thatawaitsthehotelguest. Exteriorarchitecturallightingwillhighlighttherichmaterials,colorsandformsofthehotel creatingalandmarkproject,beautifulduringthedayandsubtlyspectacularatnight. ThehotelisaMarriottproductandmustadheretotheirdesignguidelines,whichhasitsown requirementsandrestrictions.Designersareabletotailortheirdesignstomanydifferent specificationsandstyles,butstillmustholdtruetoMarriott'srequireddesignelements.In comparisontotheirprototypes,thishotelismuchdifferentanduniquetoArcadia.Theinterior willfeaturethenewestgenerationofMarriotthoteldesigns,whichwereonlyapprovedforuse inthelastyear.Franchisealsorequiresallhotelstobeupdatedeveryfiveyearssoguestswill havethelatestdesignandexperience.Marriott'sdesignshavealwaysexperiencedalotofsuccess astheyareconstantlybeinghonedandhavealwaysscoredwellincustomersatisfaction.The hotelwillalsohavefantasticoutdoorgardens,secondlevelpatioareasandaspectacularroof toppooldeckandloungeprovidingflexiblespaceforhotelguests.Thegroundlevelgardenswill provideaverdantandlushstreetpresencetothecommunityandastunningbackdropforthe variouslobby,restaurant,gatheringandloungespacesorganizedaroundthegarden.Theroof topdeckwillprovideoutstandingviewsofthecity,themountainsandtheracetrack! SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN ARCADIA, CA Rev. 2 - 05/03/2018 Rev. 1 - 04/17/2018 04/07/2018 SPECIFIC PLAN 8 B. ResidentialMixedͲUse ThearchitecturaldesignandcharacteroftheresidentialmixedͲuseisvisuallycomplimentarywith thePhaseIhoteldesignwhileprovidingaslightlymoremodernandurbantexture.Thestructured parkingishiddenbehindaluxuriousretailfaçade,frontingWestHuntingtonDriveandliningthe grandarrivalboulevardprovidinganactivatedretailfaçadeacrossfromthehotellobby.Witha lushlandscapedpodiumatitsbase,theresidentialtowerswillsitamonggardens,poolsand lifestyleseatingareas,withspectacularviewsofthemountainsandthecity.Thebuilding architectureplaysofftheartdecoandmidͲcenturymodernelementsofthehotelandplayfully variesthefacades,colorsandmaterialstocreatestrikingluxuryresidences.Asubtlegroundlevel connectionbetweenPhaseIandPhaseIIisplannedfortheoverallproject. 2. Fences&Walls  A. Hotel Proposedwallswouldincludedecorativefencingfeaturethatwouldenclosethehotelgardenand patios,andseparateitfromthegroundleveltocreateprivacy.Itwillhavefinishestocompliment thebuildings.Therewillbelandscapingadjacenttomeetingrooms,whichwouldalsobe consistentinappearancewiththeadjacentarchitecture.Thebalanceoftheprojectwillhave extensivelandscaping. B.ResidentialMixedͲUse ProposedwallsfortheresidentialmixedͲuseincludea5Ͳ6'perimeterwallaroundthepoolarea toensureguestprivacyandchildsafety.Itwillhavestuccofinishtomatchtheadjacentbuilding. Thebalanceoftheprojectwillhaveextensivelandscapingtoaccentuatethesurrounding architectureandmeshthetwophasesintoonefluentdesign.Nowallsorfencingwilldividethe phasesasrequired. C. PropertyLine Thewesternpropertylinewillincludeanew6'Ͳ0"highwallthatwillhavestuccofinishtomatch thehotelcondominiumbuilding. 3. Parking Surfaceparkingandstructuredparkingwillbeilluminatedinamannertoprovideenoughsafe visibilityandnotbeadisturbancetooffͲsitetraffic.AspartofSpecificPlanconditionalapproval, parkinglotlightingstudywillbeperformedpriortoissuanceofbuildingpermit.Guestsafetyisa priorityandonͲsitesecuritycameraswillalsobeusedtoensurethisisachieved. 4. PhasedParkingLot Phaseonewillbefullyparkedwith227surfaceparkingstallsforthe227guestrooms.Phasetwo willprovidestructuredparkingthatwillfullyparkthephasetwobuildingsbyproviding595 parkingstalls,whichincludesreplacementparkingforallhotelparkingremovedtoconstruct phase2. PhaseI–Hotel 227newspaces TotalspacesAfterPhase1completion=227 *Requirementis1.0parkingͲtoͲroomratio Rooms=227 Parking=227  Phase2ͲResidentialMixedͲUse(96Units) 513garageparking *Requirementis2parkingspacesperunitplus1guestparkingforevery2units,soatleast 232spacesmustbeprovided.  TotalspacesafterPhase2completion=595spaces **Only232spaceswillbededicatedtoresidentsandguests,whileremainingbalanceofTBD spaceswillbededicatedtothehotelparkingandcommercialparking.   5. Landscaping Therewillbemanynewtrees,shrubs,andgroundcoversthatwillbeplantedtoenhancethe aestheticsoftheentiresite.Unfortunately,manymaturetreeswillneedtoberemovedfromour siteasamajorityfallswithinthebuildings'footprints.ThewindrowofredwoodsalongEast Huntingtonwillbepreserved(pendingconfirmationoftheprojectarborist),totheextent possible,withsometreesbeingremovedfortrafficvisibility.Priortoissuanceofagradingpermit foreachphase,thedevelopershallprovideanassessmentofexistingtreesontheareastobe developed.Thistreeassessmentshallbepreparedbyaqualifiedlandscapearchitectandidentify anyexistinglargebushesortreesthatcanberelocatedorpreservedaspartofthenew developmentproject.Theprojectlandscapingplansshallattempttopreserveexistingmature treesonsitetotheextentfeasible,basedonthetreeassessment.Thismeasureshallbe implementedtothesatisfactionoftheCityPlanningDivision. 6. Signs Typicaldirectionalandroomdesignationsignagewillbeprovidedpercoderequirements.Exterior Marriottandretailsignagewillalsobeinstalledontheexteriorofthebuildings.Therewillalso betwosmallmonumentsignsforthehotellocatedalongWestHuntington.Thesize,height,and styleshallbesubjecttoreviewbystaffthroughaSignDesignReviewApplication.Anynew signageorreplacementinthefutureshallbesubjecttoaformalsigndesignreview.No amendmenttotheSpecificPlanisrequired. 7. OutdoorEquipment Outdoorequipment,devices,andtrashwillbeshownonthelandscapingplan.  SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN ARCADIA, CA Rev. 2 - 05/03/2018 Rev. 1 - 04/17/2018 04/07/2018 SPECIFIC PLAN 9 2.9ApprovalandImplementation TheSeabiscuitPacificaSpecificPlanisexpectedtobebuiltoutasoutlinedintheSpecificPlandocument andasshownontheattachedplans(AͲ1.0throughAͲ5.5andothersoutlinedabove),includingbuilding heightsandFARallowances.ApprovaloftheSeabiscuitPacificaSpecificPlanbytheCityCouncilwill constituteacceptancebytheCitythattheproposedSpecificPlanisgenerallyconsistentwiththeGeneral Plan,andthatanymodificationtothebuildingdevelopmentcharacteristicsshowninthisSpecificPlan (withtheexceptionofminormodificationstothelandscapingplan)willrequireCityCouncilapprovalofa SpecificPlanAmendment  2.10InterpretationoftheSpecificPlan InterpretationoftheprovisionsoftheSpecificPlanistheresponsibilityoftheDevelopmentServices Directorordesignee.Thisauthorityextendstodetermining"substantialconformance"withthe standards,regulations,andguidelinesoftheSpecificPlanandallassociateddocuments,andincludes: 1. Determinationsregardingissues,conditions,orsituationsthatarisethatnotaddressedbythe SpecificPlan. 2. Approvalofsignsincompliancewiththestandardsofthezoningdesignation. 3. Additions,deletionsandchangestotheSpecificPlanexhibitsortextthatsubstantiallycomply withtheSpecificPlan. 4. Adjustmentstothesiteplan,buildingelevations,landscaping,parking,andallotherconceptual plans. 5. BuildingͲmountedmechanicalequipmentorcellularinstallations. TheDirectorordesigneemaymakeadecisionontheaboveissues,withorwithoutconditions,orcan referadecisiontothePlanningCommissionand/orCityCouncilatanoticedpublichearing.Noticeshall beprovidedbypublicationinanewspaperofgeneralcirculation.Ifnecessary,additionalCEQAreview and/oranalysiswillbeconductedtodeterminetheimpactsoftherequest.Determinationsofsubstantial conformanceshallbemadebasedonfindingsthattherequest: 1. SubstantiallyconformstoallapplicableprovisionoftheSpecificPlan. 2. Willnotadverselyaffectpublichealthandsafety. 3. Willnotadverselyaffectadjacentproperties.   SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN ARCADIA, CA Rev. 2 - 05/03/2018 Rev. 1 - 04/17/2018 04/07/2018 SPECIFIC PLAN 10 SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN ARCADIA, CA Rev. 2 - 05/03/2018 Rev. 1 - 04/17/2018 04/07/2018 SITE PHOTOS 1 1 5 5 2 2 6 6 3 3 7 7 9 9 4 4 8 8 10 10 11 SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN ARCADIA, CA Rev. 2 - 05/03/2018 Rev. 1 - 04/17/2018 04/07/2018 VICINITY MAP SITE MAPCOLORADO PL . HUNTI N G T O N D R . H U N T I NG T O N D R . HUNTINGTON DR. 12 SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN ARCADIA, CA Rev. 2 - 05/03/2018 Rev. 1 - 04/17/2018 04/07/2018 SITE SURVEY SCALE:0 6’ 12’ 32’ 13 SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN ARCADIA, CA Rev. 2 - 05/03/2018 Rev. 1 - 04/17/2018 04/07/2018 EXISTING SITE PLAN SCALE:0 6’ 12’ 32’ 14 SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN ARCADIA, CA Rev. 2 - 05/03/2018 Rev. 1 - 04/17/2018 04/07/2018 PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN 15 SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN ARCADIA, CA Rev. 2 - 05/03/2018 Rev. 1 - 04/17/2018 04/07/2018 OVERALL SITE PLAN SCALE:0 60’ 120’ 16 SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN ARCADIA, CA Rev. 2 - 05/03/2018 Rev. 1 - 04/17/2018 04/07/2018 PHASE 1 - HOTEL 16 M E HUNTINGTON DR O DINGO OR DO E HU N T I N G T O N D R I E N R E RO D T ESEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN ARCADIA, CA Rev. 2 - 05/03/2018 Rev. 1 - 04/17/2018 04/07/2018 PHASE 1 SITE PLAN & PROJECT SUMMARY PHASE1 LEMERIDIENHOTELBYMARRIOTT BUILDINGAREA PUBLICAREAS20,620 227GUESTROOMS 80,000 BACKOFHOUSE54,523 TOTALBUILDINGAREA 155,143SF ROOMTYPES: KING133(59%) DBLQUEEN78(34%) JRSUITE4(2%) SUITE12(5%) 227 PARKINGPROVIDED:227SPACES  SCALE:0 60’ 120’ PHASE 2, FUTURE MIXED USE 17 M E HUNTINGTON DR 17 LOADING 10 10 4 23 17 44 44 8 COLORADO PLACE HU N T I N G T O N D R I V E SAN RAFAELROAD771711 444 444 3333333 10 77177171 222 NONPARKING58 71717 33333333 33 175858 33 TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT BACKFLOWBBAACCCCKKOWWBBBBBAAAAAACCCCCCCCCKKKKKFFLLLLOOOOOOWWWWWWWWWWBBBAAAABBBACCCCAAAAAAACCCCCCACCCCKKKKKKCCCCFFFKFFLLFFFFOOOLLLLLOWWOOOOOOOWWWWWWWOWWWWWWWWWOLFKCACAABBBBBBBBBBAABAAAAAABBBBBBACAACACCBBBBBBBBBABBBBAAAAAAABBBBBAAAAACCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCKFKKKFFFFKFFKKKKKKCKCCCCCCCCKFLOKKKFLKKKFFFLLKFLOOLFKKKKKKKKKCCCCCCCLLLLLLLOLOOLOOBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB PREVENTION DEVICEDEEVVCCEEEEEEVEEVVVVVVVVCCCCCCCCEECCEEEEEEEEEEEEEDDDVVVVVVEEEEEIVVVVVVCCCCCIVVVEEEEECCCCCEEEEEEEEEPPRRRREEVVEENNTTTTTTOOOONNNNNDDPPPPPPPPPPRRRRRRRREEEEEEEVVEEVVVVEEVVEEEEEEEEENNNNNNNTTTTTTTTTTOTTOOOOOOOOONNNNNNNNNNNNDDDDDDPPPRRRPPPPPPRRRRRRRRRPPPEEEEERRRRRRVVVVVEEEEEEEEEVEEVVVVVNNNNEEEEEEVEETTNNNNNNEETTTTTTTTTTNNOOOOITTTTTTTTONOOOOOOOOINNNNNONNOOOODDDDNNNNNNNNDDDDDDDVVVVVVVVVVVVVEVEVVEERERRRPEEEEEEEEEERRNENNENNNNNENONNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNVVVVVVVVVVEEEEEEEEEEEVICVIDEDDDDDDD TRANSFORMER TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT 33 SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN ARCADIA, CA Rev. 2 - 05/03/2018 Rev. 1 - 04/17/2018 04/07/2018 FIRE TRUCK ACCESS ROUTE SCALE:0 60’ 120’ 18 SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN ARCADIA, CA Rev. 2 - 05/03/2018 Rev. 1 - 04/17/2018 04/07/2018 GROUND FLOOR PLAN SCALE:0 6’ 12’ 32’ 19 SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN ARCADIA, CA Rev. 2 - 05/03/2018 Rev. 1 - 04/17/2018 04/07/2018 MEZZANINE FLOOR PLAN SCALE:0 6’ 12’ 32’ 20 SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN ARCADIA, CA Rev. 2 - 05/03/2018 Rev. 1 - 04/17/2018 04/07/2018 LEVEL 2 FLOOR PLAN SCALE:0 6’ 12’ 32’ 21 SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN ARCADIA, CA Rev. 2 - 05/03/2018 Rev. 1 - 04/17/2018 04/07/2018 LEVELS 3, 4 & 5 FLOOR PLAN SCALE:0 6’ 12’ 32’ 22 SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN ARCADIA, CA Rev. 2 - 05/03/2018 Rev. 1 - 04/17/2018 04/07/2018 LEVEL 6 & ROOF DECK FLOOR PLAN SCALE:0 6’ 12’ 32’ 23 ROOF HVAC CONDENSING UNIT4' x 16' x 5'6" HIGH 2500 # HVAC CONDENSING UNITNDENSING 4' x 16' x 5'6" HIGH4' x 16' x 2500 # HVAC CONDENSING UNIT 4' x 16' x 5'6" HIGH 2500 # HVAC CONDENSING UNIT 4' x 16' x 5'6" HIGH 2500 # 28" x 28" OUTSIDESIDEAIR DUCT HVAC OUTSIDE AIR 8' x 28'88' x xx 8' 15,000 #15 000 ##00 HVAC CONDENSING UNIT 4' x 16' x 5'6" HIGH4' x 16' x 2500 # SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN ARCADIA, CA Rev. 2 - 05/03/2018 Rev. 1 - 04/17/2018 04/07/2018 ROOF PLAN SCALE:0 6’ 12’ 32’ 24 LEVEL 2 TO PARAPET TO PARAPET TO PARAPET LEVEL 6 TO PARAPET LEVEL 5 LEVEL 5 LEVEL 4 LEVEL 4 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 2 +79’-0” +79’-0” +78’-3” +64’-7” +69’-0” +53’-0” +53’-0” +42’-0” +42’-0” +31’-0” +31’-0” +20’-0” +20’-0” TO ELEVATOR +85’-0” SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN ARCADIA, CA Rev. 2 - 05/03/2018 Rev. 1 - 04/17/2018 04/07/2018 ELEVATIONS SOUTH WEST ELEVATION NORTH EAST ELEVATION LEGEND 1A Painted Finish Dunn Edwards “Fossil” 1B Painted Finish Dunn Edwards “Play on Gray” 1C Painted Finish Dunn Edwards “ Pointed Rock” 2 Stone Accent Rough Finish Grey Limestone 3A Low E Green Tinted Glass 3B Clear Glass Storefront 4. Aluminum Siding with Woodgrain Finish 5 Laser-cut Metal Panel 6 Glass Fiber Reinforced Concrete SCALE:0 6’ 12’ 32’ 1B1A 6 61C 1A3A 3B 245 25 TO PARAPET TO PARAPET TO ELEVATOR TO ELEVATOR LEVEL 6 LEVEL 6 LEVEL 5 LEVEL 5 LEVEL 4 LEVEL 4 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 2 +79’-0” +79’-0” +85’-0” +85’-0” +64’-7” +64’-7” +53’-0” +53’-0” +42’-0” +42’-0” +31’-0” +20’-0” +31’-0” +20’-0” TO PARAPET +78’- 3” SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN ARCADIA, CA Rev. 2 - 05/03/2018 Rev. 1 - 04/17/2018 04/07/2018 ELEVATIONS SOUTH EAST ELEVATION NORTH WEST ELEVATION SCALE:0 6’ 12’ 32’ LEGEND 1A Painted Finish Dunn Edwards “Fossil” 1B Painted Finish Dunn Edwards “Play on Gray” 1C Painted Finish Dunn Edwards “ Pointed Rock” 2 Stone Accent Rough Finish Grey Limestone 3A Low E Green Tinted Glass 3B Clear Glass Storefront 4. Aluminum Siding with Woodgrain Finish 5 Laser-cut Metal Panel 6 Glass Fiber Reinforced Concrete 1A 1B61C 1C43A3B25 26 SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN ARCADIA, CA Rev. 2 - 05/03/2018 Rev. 1 - 04/17/2018 04/07/2018 1A 2 5 1B 3A 6 1C 3B 4 COLOR AND MATERIAL BOARD LEGEND 1A Sand Plaster Finish Dunn Edwards “Fossil” 1B Smooth Plaster Finish Dunn Edwards “Play on Gray” 1C Sand Plaster Finish Dunn Edwards “ Pointed Rock” 2 Stone Accent Rough & Smooth Finish - Grey Limestone 3A Low E Green Tinted Glass 3B Clear Glass Storefront 4. Aluminum Siding with Woodgrain Finish 5 Laser-cut Metal Panel 6 Glass Fiber Reinforced Concrete 27 SECTION A SECTION B SECTION C SECTION D SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN ARCADIA, CA Rev. 2 - 05/03/2018 Rev. 1 - 04/17/2018 04/07/2018 SECTIONS SCALE:0 6’ 12’ 32’ 28 SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN ARCADIA, CA Rev. 2 - 05/03/2018 Rev. 1 - 04/17/2018 04/07/2018 RENDERING 29 SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN ARCADIA, CA Rev. 2 - 05/03/2018 Rev. 1 - 04/17/2018 04/07/2018 PHASE 2 - MIXED USE RESIDENTIAL 29 SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN ARCADIA, CA Rev. 2 - 05/03/2018 Rev. 1 - 04/17/2018 04/07/2018 PHASE 2 SITE PLAN & PROJECT SUMMARY PHASE2 MIXEDUSERESIDENTIAL BUILDINGAREA RETAIL/COMMERCIAL 19,123SF OFFICE12,408SF SPA6,665SF RESIDENTIAL(96UNITS) 139,368 RESIDENTIALLOBBY 2,877SF TOTALBUILDINGAREA 180,441SF PHASE1ANDPHASE2REQUIREDPARKING RETAIL/COMMERCIAL/SPA(5/1000SF)129 OFFICE(4/1000SF)50 HOTEL(1/GUESTROOM)227 96RESIDENTIALUNITS(1.5/UNIT+1/3UNITS)176 TOTALREQUIREDPARKING 582 PARKINGPROVIDED ONGRADEHOTELPARKING: 82 LEVELB1RETAILPARKING 119 LEVELP1HOTELANDOFFICEPARKING212 LEVELP2RESIDENTIALPARKING 182 TOTALPROVIDEDPARKING 595 SCALE:0 60’ 120’ 30 SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN ARCADIA, CA Rev. 2 - 05/03/2018 Rev. 1 - 04/17/2018 04/07/2018 FLOOR PLANSLEVEL B1 -7’-0” LEVEL L1 +0’-0” SCALE:0 60’ 120’ 31 SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN ARCADIA, CA Rev. 2 - 05/03/2018 Rev. 1 - 04/17/2018 04/07/2018 SCALE:0 60’ 120’ FLOOR PLANSLEVEL P1 +8’-0” LEVEL P2/L2 +18’-0” 32 SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN ARCADIA, CA Rev. 2 - 05/03/2018 Rev. 1 - 04/17/2018 04/07/2018 SCALE:0 60’ 120’ FLOOR PLANSLEVELS L3-L8 33 ROOF DECK ROOF DECK LEVEL 8 LEVEL 8 LEVEL 7 LEVEL 7 LEVEL 6 LEVEL 6 LEVEL 5 LEVEL 5 LEVEL 4 LEVEL 4 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 3 +92’-0” +92’-0” +80’-6” +80’-6” +70’-0” +70’-0” +59’-6” +59’-6” +49’-0” +49’-0” +38’-6” +38’-6” +28’-0” +28’-0” +95’-6” +95’-6” EXISTING CIVIC CENTER ATHLETIC FIELD WALL +19’-0” SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN ARCADIA, CA Rev. 2 - 05/03/2018 Rev. 1 - 04/17/2018 04/07/2018 SOUTH WEST ELEVATION NORTH EAST ELEVATION LEGEND 1A Sand Plaster Finish Dunn Edwards “Fossil” 1B Smooth Plaster Finish Dunn Edwards “Play on Gray” 1C Sand Plaster Finish Dunn Edwards “Pointed Rock” 1D Sand Plaster Finish Dunn Edwards “Storm Cloud” 2 Stone Accent Smooth Finish Grey Limestone 3A Low E Clear Glass 3B Clear Glass Storefront 4. Aluminum Siding with Woodgrain Finish 5$OXPLQXP9HUWLFDO%DIÁHV  with Woodgrain Finish 6. Colored Polycarbonate Acrylic Panels ELEVATIONS SCALE:0 6’ 12’ 32’ 1B 1B1D1A METAL CANOPY METAL CANOPY 1C 3A 3A3B 3B45622 34 ROOF DECK ROOF DECK LEVEL 8 LEVEL 8 LEVEL 7 LEVEL 7 LEVEL 6 LEVEL 6 LEVEL 5 LEVEL 5 LEVEL 4 LEVEL 4 LEVEL 3 +92’-0” +92’-0” +80’-6” +80’-6” +70’-0” +70’-0” +59’-6” +59’-6” +49’-0” +49’-0” +38’-6” +38’-6” +19’-0” +28’-0” +95’-6” +95’-6” EXISTING CIVIC CENTER ATHLETIC FIELD WALL SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN ARCADIA, CA Rev. 2 - 05/03/2018 Rev. 1 - 04/17/2018 04/07/2018 ELEVATIONS SOUTH EAST ELEVATION NORTH WEST ELEVATION SCALE:0 6’ 12’ 32’ LEGEND 1A Sand Plaster Finish Dunn Edwards “Fossil” 1B Smooth Plaster Finish Dunn Edwards “Play on Gray” 1C Sand Plaster Finish Dunn Edwards “Pointed Rock” 1D Sand Plaster Finish Dunn Edwards “Storm Cloud” 2 Stone Accent Smooth Finish Grey Limestone 3A Low E Clear Glass 3B Clear Glass Storefront 4. Aluminum Siding with Woodgrain Finish 5$OXPLQXP9HUWLFDO%DIÁHV  with Woodgrain Finish 6. Colored Polycarbonate Acrylic Panels 1A1D1B 43A3B 2546 35 SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN ARCADIA, CA Rev. 2 - 05/03/2018 Rev. 1 - 04/17/2018 04/07/2018 1A 2 1B 3A 1C 1D 3B 4 56 COLOR AND MATERIAL BOARD LEGEND 1A Sand Plaster Finish Dunn Edwards “Fossil” 1B Smooth Plaster Finish Dunn Edwards “Play on Gray” 1C Sand Plaster Finish Dunn Edwards “ Pointed Rock” 1D Sand Plaster Finish Dunn Edwards “ Storm Cloud” 2 Stone Accent Rough & Smooth Finish - Grey Limestone 3A Low E Clear Glass 3B Clear Glass Storefront 4. Aluminum Siding with Woodgrain Finish 5$OXPLQXP9HUWLFDO%DIÁHVZLWK  Woodgrain Finish 6. Colored Polycarbonate Acrylic Panels 36 -10'-0" B1 0'-0" L1/P1 +14'-0" L2/P2 +25'-0" L3/T.O.R +35'-6" L4 +46'-0" L5 +56'-6" L6 +67'-0" L7 +77'-6" L8 +91'-6" T.O.R GARAGE T.O. DECK 3'-0"0"000POOL 14'-0"10'-6"10'-6"10'-6"10'-6"10'-6"14'-0"+95'-0" T.O.P RESIDENTIAL TOWER EL.470 L1/P111'-0"-6'-0" GARAGE GARAGE RETAIL SPORTS FIELD 0'-0"PORTE COCHERE L2/P2 +14'-0" L3/T.O.ROOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOR +25'-0"EL.495 EL.464 SPA COMMERCIAL/RETAIL RESIDENTIAL EXIT RETAIL ACCESS RESIDENTIAL LOBBY GARAGE ENTRANCE COMMERCIAL/RETAILGARAGE OFFICESGARAGE COMMERCIAL/RETAIL RESIDENTIAL EXIT 0'-0" L1/P1 +14'-0" L2/P2 +25'-0" L3/T.O.R 14'-0"11'-0"RESIDENTIAL TOWER +35'-6" L4 +56'-6" L6 +77'-6" L8 +46'-0" L5 +67'-0" L7 +91'-6" T.O.R 10'-6"10'-6"14'-0"+95'-0" T.O.P 10'-6"10'-6"10'-6"GARAGE -10'-0" B1 -6'-0" SPORTS FIELD GARAGE GARAGE PORTE COCHEREEL.470 EL.464 SECTION A SECTION B SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN ARCADIA, CA Rev. 2 - 05/03/2018 Rev. 1 - 04/17/2018 04/07/2018 SECTIONS SCALE:0 6’ 12’ 32’ 37 SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN ARCADIA, CA Rev. 2 - 05/03/2018 Rev. 1 - 04/17/2018 04/07/2018 RENDERING 38 SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN ARCADIA, CA Rev. 2 - 05/03/2018 Rev. 1 - 04/17/2018 04/07/2018 LANDSCAPE 38 SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN ARCADIA, CA Rev. 2 - 05/03/2018 Rev. 1 - 04/17/2018 04/07/2018 LANDSCAPE TREE SURVEY 39 SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN ARCADIA, CA Rev. 2 - 05/03/2018 Rev. 1 - 04/17/2018 04/07/2018 SCALE 1” = 60’0 60’ 120’30’ PHASE 1 - LEVEL 1 LANDSCAPE SITE PLAN FUTURE PHASE 2 DEVELOPMENT LANDSCAPE CALCULATIONS - PHASE ONE TOTAL SITE SQUARE FOOTAGE = 190,565 SQ. FT. LANDSCAPE SQUARE FOOTAGE = 27,130 SQ. FT. PARKING SQUARE FOOTAGE = 39,480 X 5% = 1,974 SQ. FT. OF LANDSCAPE REQUIRED (MINIMUM) = 14,638 SQ. FT. OF LANDSCAPE PROVIDED MAXIMUM APPLIED WATER ALLOWANCE (MAWA) MAWA = (ETO) X (0.7) X (LANDSCAPE AREA) X (0.62) = (50.2) X (0.7) X (27,130 SQ. FT.) X (0.62) = 591,075 GAL / YEAR ESTIMATED TOTAL WATER USAGE ETWU = (ETO) X (0.62) X ([PLANT FACTOR] X [LA] / 0.9) = (50.2) X (0.62) X ([.4] X [27,130] / 0.9) = 375,286 GAL / YEAR * LANDSCAPE SQUARE FOOTAGE INCLUDES PLANTING AREAS ON HOTEL ROOF DECK LANDSCAPE KEYNOTES PROPERTY LINE PEDESTRIAN CONCRETE SIDEWALK PER CITY STANDARDS ENHANCED PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY CONCRETE PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY SPECIALTY PAVING AT ENTRY DRIVE ENTRY SIGNAGE PORTE COCHERE COVERED SEATING AREA COVERED DINING PATIO OPEN SEATING AREA ENHANCED CROSSWALK FREESTANDING SCREENING WALL WITH SIGNAGE WATER FEATURE ELEVATED DECK WATER FEATURE WITH DECORATIVE BACKDROP MULTI-PURPOSE SYNTHETIC LAWN GARDEN PROPOSED PLANTING - TYP. BIKE RACKS MOUNDED LANDSCAPE ART INSTALLATION BIKE LOCKERS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 7 3 5 6 12 19 17 3 9 8 14 16 13 10 2118 6 2 2 4 7 9 9 5 13 15 20 8 3 11 11 1 20 11 4 11 4 40 SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN ARCADIA, CA Rev. 2 - 05/03/2018 Rev. 1 - 04/17/2018 04/07/2018 SCALE 1” = 60’0 60’ 120’30’ PHASE 1 - LEVEL 1 LANDSCAPE PLANTING PLAN FUTURE PHASE 2 DEVELOPMENT PRELIMINARY SHRUB LEGEND SYMBOL BOTANICAL NAME (COMMON NAME) BOTANICAL NAME (COMMON NAME) BUXUS MICROPHYLLA (JAPANESE BOXWOOD) MYOPORUM PARVIFOLIUM ‘PINK’ (TRAILING MYOPORUM) CALLISTEMON CITRINUS ‘LITTLE JOHN’ (DWARF BOTTLE BRUSH) PELARGONIUM PELTATUM ‘LAVANDER’ (LAVANDER IVY GERANIUM) DIANELLA TASMANICA ‘VARIEGATA’ (FLAX LILY) PHOENIX ROEBELENII (PYGMY DATE PALM) - MULTI-TRUNK DICHONDRA REPENS (MERCURY BAY WEED) PITTOSPORUM TOBIRA ‘SHIMA’ (CREME DE MINT DWARF MOCK ORANGE) HELICTOTRICHON SEMPERVIRENS (BLUE OAT GRASS) PODOCARPUS MACROPHYLLUS (YEW PINE) HEMEROCALLIS X. ‘BETTY WOODS’ (BETTY WOODS DAYLILY) ROSMARINUS OFFICINALIS ‘PROSTRATUS’ (DWARF ROSEMARY) LONICERA JAPONICA ‘HALLIANA’ (JAPANESE HONEYSUCKLE) TRACHELOSPERMUM ASIATICUM ‘VARIEGATA’ (VARIEGATED DWARF JASMINE) LIGUSTRUM JAPONICUM ‘TEXANUM’ (TEXAS PRIVET) PRELIMINARY TREE LEGEND SYMBOL TYPE BOTANICAL NAME (COMMON NAME) SIZE PALM TREE ARCHONTOPHOENIX CUNNINGHAMIANA (KING PALM)25’-30’ BTH PHOENIX DACTYLIFERA ‘MEDJOOL’ (MEDJOOL DATE PALM)20’ - 25’ ACCENT PALM TREE ALOE BAINSEII (TREE ALOE)36” BOX DRACENA DRACO (DRAGON TREE)36” BOX LARGE ACCENT TREE CERCIDIUM FLORIDUM (BLUE PALO VERDE)36” BOX ERYTHRINA CAFFRA (NAKED CORAL TREE)36” BOX GINKGO BILOBA (MAIDENHAIR TREE)36” BOX MAGNOLIA GRANDIFLORA (SOUTHERN MAGNOLIA)36” BOX OLEA EUROPAEA (OLIVE TREE)36” BOX QUERCUS VIRGINIANA (SOUTHERN LIVE OAK)36” BOX FLOWERING ACCENT TREE ARBUTUS MARINUS (STRAWBERRY TREE)36” BOX CERCIS CANADENSIS ‘FOREST PANSY’ (FOREST PANSY REDBUD)36” BOX LAGERSTROEMIA INDICA (CRAPE MYRTLE)36” BOX RHAPHIOLEPIS ‘MAJESTIC BEAUTY’ (MAJESTIC BEAUTY)36” BOX STREET TREE MAGNOLIA GRANDIFLORA (SOUTHERN MAGNOLIA)24” BOX PLATANUS ACERIFOLIA (LONDON PLANE TREE)36” BOX PYRUS CALLERYANA ‘BRADFORD’ (BRADFORD FLOWERING PEAR)36” BOX TRISTANIA CONFERTA (BRISBANE BOX)36” BOX PARKING LOT TREE GEIJERA PARVIFLORA (AUSTRAILIAN WILLOW)24” BOX PARKING LOT TREE MAGNOLIA GRANDIFLORA ‘LITTLE GEM’ (LITTLE GEM DWARF SOUTHERN MAGNOLIA)24” BOX TRISTANIA CONFERTA (BRISBANE BOX)36” BOX EVERGREEN CANOPY TREE CASSIA LEPTOPHYLLA (GOLD MEDALLION TREE)36” BOX CINNAMOMUM CAMPHORA (CAMPHOR TREE)36” BOX QUERCUS VIRGINIANA (SOUTHERN LIVE OAK)36” BOX ULMUS CHINENSIS (CHINESE ELM)36” BOX NOTES: 1. ALL LANDSCAPE AREAS SHOWN SHALL BE PRIVATELY MAINTAINED. 2. ALL LANDSCAPE AREAS TO BE AUTOMATICALLY IRRIGATED WITH A LOW-FLOW DRIP SYSTEM. 3. ALL LANDSCAPE AREAS TO RECEIVE A MINIMUM 3” LAYER OF SHREDDED BARK MULCH. 4. LANDSCAPE PLANS SHALL COMPLY WITH THE CITY OF ARCADIA MUNICIPAL CODE AND WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE STANDARDS. ANNUAL COLOR 41 SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN ARCADIA, CA Rev. 2 - 05/03/2018 Rev. 1 - 04/17/2018 04/07/2018 PHASE 1 - LEVEL 6 LANDSCAPE SITE PLAN SCALE 1” = 20’0 20’ 40’10’ LANDSCAPE KEYNOTES ENHANCED PAVING ENHANCED PAVING AT POOL DECK SWIMMING POOL ACCESSIBLE RAMP CABANA AND CHAISE LOUNGE COVERED BAR AND BAR SEATING OUTDOOR SEATING VERANDA WITH LOUNGE SEATING AND FIRE TABLE RAISED PLANTERS - TYP. RAISED PLANTER WITH BUILT-IN SEATING POOL GATE AND ENCLOSURE MAINTENANCE ACCESS / WINDOW WASHING LOUNGE CHAIRS AT POOL DECK STAIR ACCESS TO POOL AREA DECORATIVE POTTERY / PLANTING (TYP.) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 4 53 1 13 12 10 8 2 9 1 7 11 14 6 15 42 SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN ARCADIA, CA Rev. 2 - 05/03/2018 Rev. 1 - 04/17/2018 04/07/2018 PHASE 1 - LEVEL 6 LANDSCAPE PLANTING PLAN SCALE 1” = 20’0 20’ 40’10’ PRELIMINARY SHRUB LEGEND - ROOF DECK SYMBOL BOTANICAL NAME (COMMON NAME) BOTANICAL NAME (COMMON NAME) AGAVE X, ATTEBYATA ‘BLUE FLAME’ (BLUE FLAME AGAVE) MYOPORUM PARVIFOLIUM ‘PINK’ (TRAILING MYOPORUM) BOUGAINVILLEA SPECIES ‘OO-LA-LA’ (OO LA LA BOUGAINVILLEA) PELARGONIUM PELTATUM ‘LAVANDER’ (LAVANDER IVY GERANIUM) BUXUS MICROPHYLLA (JAPANESE BOXWOOD) PHOENIX ROEBELENII (PYGMY DATE PALM) - MULTI-TRUNK CALLISTEMON CITRINUS ‘LITTLE JOHN’ (DWARF BOTTLE BRUSH) PHORMIUM TENAX (NEW ZEALAND FLAX) DIANELLA TASMANICA ‘VARIEGATA’ (FLAX LILY) PITTOSPORUM TOBIRA ‘SHIMA’ (CREME DE MINT DWARF MOCK ORANGE) DICHONDRA REPENS (MERCURY BAY WEED) RHAPHIOLEPIS INDICA (INDIAN HAWTHORNE) HELICTOTRICHON SEMPERVIRENS (BLUE OAT GRASS) ROSMARINUS OFFICINALIS ‘PROSTRATUS’ (DWARF ROSEMARY) HEMEROCALLIS X. ‘BETTY WOODS’ (BETTY WOODS DAYLILY) TRACHELOSPERMUM JASMINOIDES (STAR JASMINE) LIGUSTRUM JAPONICUM ‘TEXANUM’ (TEXAS PRIVET) WESTRINGIA FRUTICOSA (COAST ROSEMARY) LIRIOPE MUSCARI ‘SILVERY SUNPROOF’ (DWARF VARIEGATED LIRIOPE) PRELIMINARY TREE LEGEND - ROOF DECK SYMBOL TYPE BOTANICAL NAME (COMMON NAME) SIZE PALM TREE ARCHONTOPHOENIX CUNNINGHAMIANA (KING PALM) - MULTI-TRUNK 25’-30’ BTH PHOENIX DACTYLIFERA ‘MEDJOOL’ (MEDJOOL DATE PALM)20’ - 25’ BTH ACCENT PALM TREE ALOE BAINSEII (TREE ALOE)24” BOX DRACENA DRACO (DRAGON TREE)24” BOX HOWEA FORSTERIANA (KENTIA PALM)36” BOX SPECIMEN TREE ERYTHRINA CAFRA (NAKED CORAL TREE)48” BOX OLEA EUROPAEA (OLIVE TREE)36” BOX CINAMMOMUM CAMPHORA (CAMPHOR TREE)36” BOX SMALL EVERGREEN CANOPY TREE ARBUTUS UNEDO (STRAWBERRY TREE)24” BOX MAGNOLIA GRANDIFLORA ‘LITTLE GEM’ (LITTLE GEM DWARF SOUTHERN MAGNOLIA)36” BOX PRUNUS CARNOLINIANA ‘BRIGHT N TIGHT’ (BRIGHT N TIGHT CAROLINA LAUREL)36” BOX NOTES: 1. ALL LANDSCAPE AREAS SHOWN SHALL BE PRIVATELY MAINTAINED. 2. ALL LANDSCAPE AREAS TO BE AUTOMATICALLY IRRIGATED WITH A LOW-FLOW DRIP SYSTEM. 3. ALL LANDSCAPE AREAS ON PODIUM TO RECEIVE LIGHT WEIGHT SOIL. 4. LANDSCAPE PLANS SHALL COMPLY WITH THE CITY OF ARCADIA MUNICIPAL CODE AND WATER EFFICIENT LAND- SCAPE STANDARDS. 42 SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN ARCADIA, CA 06/13/2018 2017-171 PHASE 2 - LEVEL 1 LANDSCAPE SITE PLAN SCALE 1” = 60’0 60’ 120’30’ PHASE ONE GROUND FLOOR LEVEL LANDSCAPE CALCULATIONS - PHASE TWO TOTAL SITE SQUARE FOOTAGE = 127,100 SQ. FT. LANDSCAPE SQUARE FOOTAGE = 33,061 SQ. FT. PARKING SQUARE FOOTAGE = NO OPEN SPACE PARKING PROVIDED. ALL PARKING IN PARKING STRUCTURE. MAXIMUM APPLIED WATER ALLOWANCE (MAWA) MAWA = (ETO) X (0.7) X (LANDSCAPE AREA) X (0.62) = (50.2) X (0.7) X (33,061 SQ. FT.) X (0.62) = 720,293 GAL / YEAR ESTIMATED TOTAL WATER USAGE ETWU = (ETO) X (0.62) X ([PLANT FACTOR] X [LA] / 0.9) = (50.2) X (0.62) X ([.4] X [33,061] / 0.9) = 457,329 GAL / YEAR * LANDSCAPE SQUARE FOOTAGE INCLUDES PLANTING AREAS ON RESIDENTIAL ROOF DECK LANDSCAPE KEYNOTES PROPERTY LINE PEDESTRIAN CONCRETE SIDEWALK PER CITY STANDARDS PORTE COCHERE WITH ENHANCED PAVING COVERED OUTDOOR DINING OPEN OUTDOOR SEATING WITH FESTOON LIGHTING ENTRY GARDEN AND WATER FEATURE AT SPA PROPOSED PLANTING AREA - TYP. ART INSTALLATION PEDESTRIAN CONCRETE PAVING DECORATIVE POTTERY W/ PLANTING (TYP.) EXISTING FENCE & VINES TO REMAIN PROPOSED HEDGE FOR SCREENING 3’-0” WIDE PLANTING AREA TO HAVE VINE PLANTING 10’-0” HIGH 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 8 4 4 9 3 6 7 7 2 1 5 4 11 12 13 7’-6” 3’-0” 43 SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN ARCADIA, CA 06/13/2018 2017-171 PHASE 2 - LEVEL 1 LANDSCAPE PLANTING PLAN SCALE 1” = 60’0 60’ 120’30’ PHASE ONE GROUND FLOOR LEVEL PRELIMINARY SHRUB LEGEND SYMBOL BOTANICAL NAME (COMMON NAME) BUXUS MICROPHYLLA (JAPANESE BOXWOOD) CALLISTEMON CITRINUS ‘LITTLE JOHN’ (DWARF BOTTLE BRUSH) DIANELLA TASMANICA ‘VARIEGATA’ (FLAX LILY) DICHONDRA REPENS (MERCURY BAY WEED) DISTICTIS BUCCINATORIA (BLOOD RED TRUMPET VINE) HELICTOTRICHON SEMPERVIRENS (BLUE OAT GRASS) HEMEROCALLIS X. ‘BETTY WOODS’ (BETTY WOODS DAYLILY) LONICERA JAPONICA ‘HALLIANA’ (JAPANESE HONEYSUCKLE) LIGUSTRUM JAPONICUM ‘TEXANUM’ (TEXAS PRIVET) MYOPORUM PARVIFOLIUM ‘PINK’ (TRAILING MYOPORUM) PELARGONIUM PELTATUM ‘LAVANDER’ (LAVANDER IVY GERANIUM) PHOENIX ROEBELENII (PYGMY DATE PALM) - MULTI-TRUNK PITTOSPORUM TOBIRA ‘SHIMA’ (CREME DE MINT DWARF MOCK ORANGE) PODOCARPUS MACROPHYLLUS (YEW PINE) ROSMARINUS OFFICINALIS ‘PROSTRATUS’ (DWARF ROSEMARY) TRACHELOSPERMUM ASIATICUM ‘VARIEGATA’ (VARIEGATED DWARF JASMINE) PRELIMINARY TREE LEGEND SYMBOL TYPE BOTANICAL NAME (COMMON NAME) SIZE PALM TREE ARCHONTOPHOENIX CUNNINGHAMIANA (KING PALM)25’-30’ BTH PHOENIX DACTYLIFERA ‘MEDJOOL’ (MEDJOOL DATE PALM)20’ - 25’ LARGE ACCENT TREE CERCIDIUM FLORIDUM (BLUE PALO VERDE)36” BOX GINKGO BILOBA (MAIDENHAIR TREE)36” BOX ERYTHRINA CAFFRA (NAKED CORAL TREE)36” BOX MAGNOLIA GRANDIFLORA (SOUTHERN MAGNOLIA)36” BOX OLEA EUROPAEA (OLIVE TREE)36” BOX QUERCUS VIRGINIANA (SOUTHERN LIVE OAK)36” BOX FLOWERING ACCENT TREE ARBUTUS MARINUS (STRAWBERRY TREE)36” BOX CERCIS CANADENSIS ‘FOREST PANSY’ (FOREST PANSY REDBUD)36” BOX LAGERSTROEMIA INDICA (CRAPE MYRTLE)36” BOX RHAPHIOLEPIS ‘MAJESTIC BEAUTY’ (MAJESTIC BEAUTY)36” BOX STREET TREE MAGNOLIA GRANDIFLORA (SOUTHERN MAGNOLIA)24” BOX PLATANUS ACERIFOLIA (LONDON PLANE TREE)36” BOX PYRUS CALLERYANA ‘BRADFORD’ (BRADFORD FLOWERING PEAR)36” BOX TRISTANIA CONFERTA (BRISBANE BOX)36” BOX SCREEN TREE ELAEOCARPUS DECIPIENS (JAPANESE BLUEBERRY TREE)24” BOX GINGKO BILOBA (MAIDENHAIR TREE)36” BOX PINUS ELDARICA (MONDELL PINE)36” BOX PODOCARPUS GRACILIOR FERN PINE 24” BOX PRUNUS CAROLINIANA ‘BRIGHT N TIGHT’ BRIGHT N TIGHT CAROLINA LAUREL 24” BOX TRISTANIA CONFERTA (BRISBANE BOX)36” BOX PARKING LOT TREE MAGNOLIA GRANDIFLORA ‘LITTLE GEM’ (LITTLE GEM DWARF SOUTHERN MAGNOLIA)24” BOX TRISTANIA CONFERTA (BRISBANE BOX)36” BOX EVERGREEN CANOPY TREE CASSIA LEPTOPHYLLA (GOLD MEDALLION TREE)36” BOX CINNAMOMUM CAMPHORA (CAMPHOR TREE)36” BOX QUERCUS VIRGINIANA (SOUTHERN LIVE OAK)36” BOX ULMUS CHINENSIS (CHINESE ELM)36” BOX NOTES: 1. ALL LANDSCAPE AREAS SHOWN SHALL BE PRIVATELY MAINTAINED. 2. ALL LANDSCAPE AREAS TO BE AUTOMATICALLY IRRIGATED WITH A LOW-FLOW DRIP SYSTEM. 3. ALL LANDSCAPE AREAS TO RECEIVE A MINIMUM 3” LAYER OF SHREDDED BARK MULCH. 4. LANDSCAPE PLANS SHALL COMPLY WITH THE CITY OF ARCADIA MUNICIPAL CODE AND WATER EFFICIENT LAND- SCAPE STANDARDS. 44 SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN ARCADIA, CA Rev. 2 - 05/03/2018 Rev. 1 - 04/17/2018 04/07/2018 PHASE 2 - LEVEL 1 LANDSCAPE PLANTING PLAN SCALE 1” = 60’0 60’ 120’30’ PHASE ONE GROUND FLOOR LEVEL PRELIMINARY SHRUB LEGEND SYMBOL BOTANICAL NAME (COMMON NAME) BOTANICAL NAME (COMMON NAME) BUXUS MICROPHYLLA (JAPANESE BOXWOOD) MYOPORUM PARVIFOLIUM ‘PINK’ (TRAILING MYOPORUM) CALLISTEMON CITRINUS ‘LITTLE JOHN’ (DWARF BOTTLE BRUSH) PELARGONIUM PELTATUM ‘LAVANDER’ (LAVANDER IVY GERANIUM) DIANELLA TASMANICA ‘VARIEGATA’ (FLAX LILY) PHOENIX ROEBELENII (PYGMY DATE PALM) - MULTI-TRUNK DICHONDRA REPENS (MERCURY BAY WEED) PITTOSPORUM TOBIRA ‘SHIMA’ (CREME DE MINT DWARF MOCK ORANGE) HELICTOTRICHON SEMPERVIRENS (BLUE OAT GRASS) PODOCARPUS MACROPHYLLUS (YEW PINE) HEMEROCALLIS X. ‘BETTY WOODS’ (BETTY WOODS DAYLILY) ROSMARINUS OFFICINALIS ‘PROSTRATUS’ (DWARF ROSEMARY) LONICERA JAPONICA ‘HALLIANA’ (JAPANESE HONEYSUCKLE) TRACHELOSPERMUM ASIATICUM ‘VARIEGATA’ (VARIEGATED DWARF JASMINE) LIGUSTRUM JAPONICUM ‘TEXANUM’ (TEXAS PRIVET) PRELIMINARY TREE LEGEND SYMBOL TYPE BOTANICAL NAME (COMMON NAME) SIZE PALM TREE ARCHONTOPHOENIX CUNNINGHAMIANA (KING PALM)25’-30’ BTH PHOENIX DACTYLIFERA ‘MEDJOOL’ (MEDJOOL DATE PALM)20’ - 25’ LARGE ACCENT TREE CERCIDIUM FLORIDUM (BLUE PALO VERDE)36” BOX GINKGO BILOBA (MAIDENHAIR TREE)36” BOX ERYTHRINA CAFFRA (NAKED CORAL TREE)36” BOX MAGNOLIA GRANDIFLORA (SOUTHERN MAGNOLIA)36” BOX OLEA EUROPAEA (OLIVE TREE)36” BOX QUERCUS VIRGINIANA (SOUTHERN LIVE OAK)36” BOX FLOWERING ACCENT TREE ARBUTUS MARINUS (STRAWBERRY TREE)36” BOX CERCIS CANADENSIS ‘FOREST PANSY’ (FOREST PANSY REDBUD)36” BOX LAGERSTROEMIA INDICA (CRAPE MYRTLE)36” BOX RHAPHIOLEPIS ‘MAJESTIC BEAUTY’ (MAJESTIC BEAUTY)36” BOX STREET TREE MAGNOLIA GRANDIFLORA (SOUTHERN MAGNOLIA)24” BOX PLATANUS ACERIFOLIA (LONDON PLANE TREE)36” BOX PYRUS CALLERYANA ‘BRADFORD’ (BRADFORD FLOWERING PEAR)36” BOX TRISTANIA CONFERTA (BRISBANE BOX)36” BOX SCREEN TREE GINGKO BILOBA (MAIDENHAIR TREE)36” BOX PINUS ELDARICA (MONDELL PINE)36” BOX TRISTANIA CONFERTA (BRISBANE BOX)36” BOX PARKING LOT TREE MAGNOLIA GRANDIFLORA ‘LITTLE GEM’ (LITTLE GEM DWARF SOUTHERN MAGNOLIA)24” BOX TRISTANIA CONFERTA (BRISBANE BOX)36” BOX EVERGREEN CANOPY TREE CASSIA LEPTOPHYLLA (GOLD MEDALLION TREE)36” BOX CINNAMOMUM CAMPHORA (CAMPHOR TREE)36” BOX QUERCUS VIRGINIANA (SOUTHERN LIVE OAK)36” BOX ULMUS CHINENSIS (CHINESE ELM)36” BOX NOTES: 1. ALL LANDSCAPE AREAS SHOWN SHALL BE PRIVATELY MAINTAINED. 2. ALL LANDSCAPE AREAS TO BE AUTOMATICALLY IRRIGATED WITH A LOW-FLOW DRIP SYSTEM. 3. ALL LANDSCAPE AREAS TO RECEIVE A MINIMUM 3” LAYER OF SHREDDED BARK MULCH. 4. LANDSCAPE PLANS SHALL COMPLY WITH THE CITY OF ARCADIA MUNICIPAL CODE AND WATER EFFICIENT LAND- SCAPE STANDARDS. 45 SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN ARCADIA, CA Rev. 2 - 05/03/2018 Rev. 1 - 04/17/2018 04/07/2018 PHASE 2 - LEVEL 3 LANDSCAPE SITE PLAN SCALE 1” = 60’0 60’ 120’30’ PHASE ONE LOWER LEVEL LANDSCAPE KEYNOTES LAP SWIMMING POOL CIRCULAR CHILDREN’S SPLASH POOL SPA WITH DECORATIVE BACKDROP WATER FEATURE COVERED OUTDOOR LOUNGE AREA COVERED BARBECUE AREA MULTI-PURPOSE SYNTHETIC LAWN AREA OPEN LOUNGE AREA WITH FIRE TABLE COVERED GAME AREA BOCCE BALL COURT RESIDENTIAL PATIO - TYP. ART INSTALLATION - TYP. CHILDREN’S PLAYGROUND RAISED PLANTER WITH SPECIMEN TREE AND BUILT-IN SEATING DOG RELIEF AREA MAIN RESIDENTIAL ENTRANCE TO ROOF DECK SHADE STRUCTURE AT POOL DECK CONCRETE PAVING AT WALKWAY FESTOON LIGHTING BAR TOP SEATING PROPOSED PLANTING AREA - TYP. EDIBLE GARDEN CANVAS SHADE OVER PLAY AREA FLOWERING GARDEN 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 5 4 18 6 8 21 16 12 4 7 14 9 8 8 6 19 19 20 11 14 7 1 7 5 5 6 12 24 2 5 23 13 17 3 10 1111 22 15 12 46 SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN ARCADIA, CA Rev. 2 - 05/03/2018 Rev. 1 - 04/17/2018 04/07/2018 PHASE 2 - LEVEL 3 LANDSCAPE PLANTING PLAN SCALE 1” = 60’0 60’ 120’30’ PHASE ONE LOWER LEVEL PRELIMINARY TREE LEGEND - ROOF DECK SYMBOL TYPE BOTANICAL NAME (COMMON NAME) SIZE PALM TREE ARCHONTOPHOENIX CUNNINGHAMIANA (KING PALM) - MULTI-TRUNK 25’-30’ BTH PHOENIX DACTYLIFERA ‘MEDJOOL’ (MEDJOOL DATE PALM)20’ - 25’ BTH ACCENT PALM TREE ALOE BAINSEII (TREE ALOE)24” BOX DRACENA DRACO (DRAGON TREE)24” BOX HOWEA FORSTERIANA (KENTIA PALM)36” BOX SPECIMEN TREE CINNAMOMUM CAMPHORA (CAMPHOR TREE)48” BOX ERYTHRINA CAFRA (NAKED CORAL TREE)36” BOX OLEA EUROPAEA (OLIVE TREE)36” BOX FLOWERING ACCENT TREE ARBUTUS MARINUS (STRAWBERRY TREE)36” BOX CERCIS CANADENSIS ‘FOREST PANSY’ (FOREST PANSY REDBUD)36” BOX LAGERSTROEMIA INDICA (CRAPE MYRTLE)36” BOX SMALL EVERGREEN CANOPY TREE CITRUS SPECIES (CITRUS TREE)24” BOX MAGNOLIA GRANDIFLORA ‘LITTLE GEM’ (LITTLE GEM DWARF SOUTHERN MAGNOLIA)36” BOX PRUNUS CAROLINIANA ‘BRIGHT N TIGHT’ (BRIGHT N TIGHT CAROLINA LAUREL)36” BOX LARGE / MEDIUM EVERGREEN CANOPY TREE CINNAMOMUM CAMPHORA (CAMPHOR TREE)36” BOX LAURIS NOBLIS (SWEET BAY)24” BOX TRISTANIA CONFERTA (BRISBANE BOX)36” BOX NOTES: 1. ALL LANDSCAPE AREAS SHOWN SHALL BE PRIVATELY MAINTAINED. 2. ALL LANDSCAPE AREAS TO BE AUTOMATICALLY IRRIGATED WITH A LOW-FLOW DRIP SYSTEM. 3. ALL LANDSCAPE AREAS ON PODIUM TO RECEIVE LIGHT WEIGHT SOIL. 4. LANDSCAPE PLANS SHALL COMPLY WITH THE CITY OF ARCADIA MUNICIPAL CODE AND WATER EFFICIENT LAND- SCAPE STANDARDS. PRELIMINARY SHRUB LEGEND - ROOF DECK SYMBOL BOTANICAL NAME (COMMON NAME) BOTANICAL NAME (COMMON NAME) AGAVE X, ATTEBYATA ‘BLUE FLAME’ (BLUE FLAME AGAVE) MYOPORUM PARVIFOLIUM ‘PINK’ (TRAILING MYOPORUM) BOUGAINVILLEA SPECIES ‘OO-LA-LA’ (OO LA LA BOUGAINVILLEA) PELARGONIUM PELTATUM ‘LAVANDER’ (LAVANDER IVY GERANIUM) BUXUS MICROPHYLLA (JAPANESE BOXWOOD) PHOENIX ROEBELENII (PYGMY DATE PALM) - MULTI-TRUNK CALLISTEMON CITRINUS ‘LITTLE JOHN’ (DWARF BOTTLE BRUSH) PHORMIUM TENAX (NEW ZEALAND FLAX) DIANELLA TASMANICA ‘VARIEGATA’ (FLAX LILY) PITTOSPORUM TOBIRA ‘SHIMA’ (CREME DE MINT DWARF MOCK ORANGE) DICHONDRA REPENS (MERCURY BAY WEED) RHAPHIOLEPIS INDICA (INDIAN HAWTHORNE) HELICTOTRICHON SEMPERVIRENS (BLUE OAT GRASS) ROSMARINUS OFFICINALIS ‘PROSTRATUS’ (DWARF ROSEMARY) HEMEROCALLIS X. ‘BETTY WOODS’ (BETTY WOODS DAYLILY) TRACHELOSPERMUM JASMINOIDES (STAR JASMINE) LIGUSTRUM JAPONICUM ‘TEXANUM’ (TEXAS PRIVET) WESTRINGIA FRUTICOSA (COAST ROSEMARY) LIRIOPE MUSCARI ‘SILVERY SUNPROOF’ (DWARF VARIEGATED LIRIOPE) FLOWERING GARDEN 47 SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN ARCADIA, CA Rev. 2 - 05/03/2018 Rev. 1 - 04/17/2018 04/07/2018 SCALE 1” = 60’0 60’ 120’30’ OPTION B STREETSCAPE AT E HUNTINGTON DR LANDSCAPE KEYNOTES PROPERTY LINE PEDESTRIAN CONCRETE SIDEWALK PER CITY STANDARDS 1 2 PRELIMINARY TREE LEGEND SYMBOL TYPE BOTANICAL NAME (COMMON NAME) SIZE FLOWERING ACCENT TREE ARBUTUS MARINUS (STRAWBERRY TREE)36” BOX CERCIS CANADENSIS ‘FOREST PANSY’ (FOREST PANSY REDBUD)36” BOX LAGERSTROEMIA INDICA (CRAPE MYRTLE)36” BOX STREET TREE MAGNOLIA GRANDIFLORA (SOUTHERN MAGNOLIA)36” BOX PINUS ELDARICA (MONDELL PINE)36” BOX TRISTANIA CONFERTA (BRISBANE BOX)24” BOX PARKING LOT TREE GEIJERA PARVIFLORA (AUSTRAILIAN WILLOW)24” BOX GINKGO BILOBA (GINKGO TREE)24” BOX EVERGREEN CANOPY TREE OLEA EUROPAEA (OLIVE TREE)36” BOX TRISTANIA CONFERTA (BRISBANE BOX)36” BOX QUERCUS VIRGINIANA (SOUTHERN LIVE OAK)36” BOX NOTES: 1. ALL LANDSCAPE AREAS SHOWN SHALL BE PRIVATELY MAINTAINED. 2. ALL LANDSCAPE AREAS TO BE AUTOMATICALLY IRRIGATED WITH A LOW-FLOW DRIP SYSTEM. 3. ALL LANDSCAPE AREAS TO RECEIVE A MINIMUM 3” LAYER OF SHREDDED BARK MULCH. 4. LANDSCAPE PLANS SHALL COMPLY WITH THE CITY OF ARCADIA MUNICIPAL CODE AND WATER EFFICIENT LAND- SCAPE STANDARDS. PRELIMINARY SHRUB LEGEND SYMBOL BOTANICAL NAME (COMMON NAME) BOTANICAL NAME (COMMON NAME) BUXUS MICROPHYLLA (JAPANESE BOXWOOD) MYOPORUM PARVIFOLIUM ‘PINK’ (TRAILING MYOPORUM) CALLISTEMON CITRINUS ‘LITTLE JOHN’ (DWARF BOTTLE BRUSH) PELARGONIUM PELTATUM ‘LAVANDER’ (LAVANDER IVY GERANIUM) DIANELLA TASMANICA ‘VARIEGATA’ (FLAX LILY) PHOENIX ROEBELENII (PYGMY DATE PALM) - MULTI-TRUNK DICHONDRA REPENS (MERCURY BAY WEED) PITTOSPORUM TOBIRA ‘SHIMA’ (CREME DE MINT DWARF MOCK ORANGE) HELICTOTRICHON SEMPERVIRENS (BLUE OAT GRASS) PODOCARPUS MACROPHYLLUS (YEW PINE) HEMEROCALLIS X. ‘BETTY WOODS’ (BETTY WOODS DAYLILY) ROSMARINUS OFFICINALIS ‘PROSTRATUS’ (DWARF ROSEMARY) LONICERA JAPONICA ‘HALLIANA’ (JAPANESE HONEYSUCKLE) TRACHELOSPERMUM ASIATICUM ‘VARIEGATA’ (VARIEGATED DWARF JASMINE) LIGUSTRUM JAPONICUM ‘TEXANUM’ (TEXAS PRIVET) 21 48 10 8 33 T )+3/835835 RAMP DN 1:12 19'-7"15'-0"60'-0" PREFERRED 30'-0" CITY STD. 30'-0" 3/835RAMP DN2%30'-0" 30'-0" CITY S T D . 60'-0" PREF E R R E D15'-0"SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN ARCADIA, CA Rev. 2 - 05/03/2018 Rev. 1 - 04/17/2018 04/07/2018 VEHICULAR VISIBILITY EXHIBIT SCALE 1” = 40’0 40’ 80’20’ VEHICULAR VIEW TRIANGLE @ W HUNTINGTON DR VEHICULAR VIEW TRIANGLE @ E HUNTINGTON DR ! ! 180 100 LA County eGIS Proposed Zoning Existing Zoning ! ! 180 100 LA County eGIS Seabiscuit Pacifica Specific Plan (SP-SP Height Overlay (H-8) City of Arcadia General Commercial Downtown Overlay Ü 0250500 Feet June 6, 2018 Attachment No. 3 Addendum to the 2016 and 2014 Mitigated Negative Declarations, Mitigated Monitoring and Reporting Program, and Appendices SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT CITY OF ARCADIA ADDENDUM TO THE 2016 and 2014 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATIONS Specific Plan Amendment No. SPA 18-01 General Plan Amendment No. GPA 18-02 Zone Change No. ZC 18-02 Lot Line Adjustment No. 18-03 Healthy Protected Tree Removal No. TRH 18-10 June 21, 2018 State Clearinghouse #2013121018 and #2016091073 Lead Agency: City of Arcadia 240 West Huntington Drive Arcadia, California 91006 Prepared by: LSA Associates, Inc. 1500 Iowa Avenue, Suite 200 Riverside, California 92507 SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 i ARCADIASEABISCUIT PACIFICA AMENDMENT PROJECT CONTENTS INITIALSTUDY SECTION 1INTRODUCTION .................................................................................. 3 1.1SUMMARY .................................................................................................... 3 1.2BACKGROUND .............................................................................................. 3 1.3BASIS FOR AN ADDENDUM ........................................................................... 4 SECTION 2MODIFIED PROJECT DESCRIPTION ...................................................... 6 2.1LOCATION AND EXISTING USES ................................................................... 6 2.2PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS ...................................................................... 11 2.3REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS, PERMITS, AND APPROVALS ......................... 15 SECTION 3ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ................................................... 16 3.1ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED .................................. 16 3.2DETERMINATION ....................................................................................... 16 SECTION 4ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST AND DISCUSSION ................................. 17 I.AESTHETICS .............................................................................................. 17 II.AGRICULTURE RESOURCES ......................................................................... 21 III.AIR QUALITY ............................................................................................. 24 IV.BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ........................................................................... 30 V.CULTURAL RESOURCES .............................................................................. 36 VI.GEOLOGY AND SOILS ................................................................................. 40 VII.GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ................................................................... 43 VIII.HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ..................................................... 45 IX.HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY ............................................................ 50 X.LAND USE AND PLANNING .......................................................................... 57 XI.MINERAL RESOURCES ................................................................................ 60 XII.NOISE ........................................................................................................ 60 XIII.POPULATION AND HOUSING ....................................................................... 68 XIV.PUBLIC SERVICES ...................................................................................... 70 XV.RECREATION.............................................................................................. 71 XVI.TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC ....................................................................... 72 XVII.UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS .............................................................. 77 XVIII.MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE .................................................. 82 SECTION 5LIST OF PREPARERS .......................................................................... 86 5.1LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. ............................................................................... 86 5.2CITY OF ARCADIA ...................................................................................... 86 SECTION 6REFERENCES ..................................................................................... 86 SECTION 7SUMMARY OF MITIGATION MEASURES ............................................... 89 SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 ii APPENDICES (on CD) A Air Quality/Greenhouse Gas B Biological Studies C Historical Assessment D Traffic Impact Assessment LIST OF TABLES Table A: Seabiscuit Pacifica Specific Plan Land Uses ................................................... 13 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Regional Location ........................................................................................ 7 Figure 2: Aerial Photograph ........................................................................................ 8 Figure 3: Site Photographs .............................................................................. 9 and 10 Figure 4: Proposed Site Plan ..................................................................................... 13 SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 3 SECTION 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 SUMMARY Project Title: Arcadia Seabiscuit Pacifica Specific Plan Amendment No. SPA 18-01, General Plan Amendment No. GPA 18-02, Zone Change No. ZC 18-02, and Lot Line Adjustment No. 18-03 Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Arcadia 240 West Huntington Drive Arcadia, California 91006 Contact Person and Phone Number: Lisa Flores, Planning & Community Development Administrator (626) 574-5445 Project Location: 240 West Huntington Drive Project Sponsor’s Name and Address: Chateau Group USA 119 La Porte Street Arcadia, California 91006 General Plan Designation: Downtown Mixed Use (FAR 1.0) Zoning Designation: Seabiscuit Pacifica Specific Plan (SP-SP) 1.2 BACKGROUND A Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND), State Clearinghouse (SCH) No. 2013121018, for the original Seabiscuit Pacifica Specific Plan (SP-SP) was approved by the City of Arcadia City Council on March 18, 2014. The original 2014 approval included the development of two hotels with a total of 210 rooms and a hotel condominium tower with 50 hotel condominium units on a 5.73-acre site. These project components were to be developed in phases, with Phase 1 consisting of the two hotels and a remnant of the existing Santa Anita Inn (63 rooms plus a new lobby) to remain on site. Phase 2 of the project was to demolish the remainder of the Santa Anita Inn and the development of the hotel condominium tower. A second MND, SCH No. 2016091073, was approved for the Seabiscuit Pacifica Specific Plan Amendment (SPA) No. 1 on December 6, 2016 by the City Council. The 2016 approval revised Phase 1 by including complete demolition of the Santa Anita Inn during the first phase of construction, leaving no remainder portion of the existing hotel, enabling complete construction of 210 hotel rooms as part of two hotels. Phase 2 was revised to change the hotel condominiums to mixed-use, enabling the 50 condominium units to be developed as residential units. The condominium tower in Phase 2 would also SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 4 have 6,762 square feet of office/retail uses to fulfill the General Plan requirement of ground floor commercial in mixed use projects. An Addendum to the 2016 MND was approved for the Seabiscuit Pacifica SPA No. 2 on September 5, 2017 by the City Council. The 2017 approval changed the design and operator of the hotel portion of the project, resulting in a single hotel. The basic elements of the Specific Plan remained the same including demolition of the Santa Anita Inn and construction of a single operator hotel with 210 rooms as part of Phase 1, and development of a 50 residential condominium tower with 6,762 square feet of office/retail uses on the ground floor as part of Phase 2. 1.3 BASIS FOR AN ADDENDUM The Seabiscuit Pacifica SPA No. 3, or proposed project, is the subject of this Addendum. The proposed changes set forth in the SPA are summarized in Section 2. Prior to approval of subsequent actions that constitute a “project” under CEQA, such as amendments to the Seabiscuit Pacifica SPA, the City of Arcadia (City) is required to determine whether the environmental effects of such actions are within the scope of prior environmental analysis, or whether additional environmental analysis is required. That decision is influenced by whether the subsequent actions result in new significant impacts or increase the severity of previously identified significant impacts. Under CEQA, the lead agency or a responsible agency shall prepare an addendum to a previously certified EIR or adopted Negative Declaration if only minor technical changes or additions to the prior environmental document are necessary or none of the conditions calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR or Negative Declaration have occurred (CEQA Guidelines §§ 15162, 15164). Once an EIR has been certified or Negative Declaration approved, a subsequent EIR is only required when the lead agency or responsible agency determines that one of the following conditions has been met: (1) Substantial changes are proposed in the project, or substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken, which require major revisions of the previous EIR or Negative Declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects [CEQA Guidelines §15162(a)(1)&(2)]; (2) New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete or Negative Declaration approved, shows any of the following: a) The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR or Negative Declaration [CEQA Guidelines §15162(a)(3)(A)]; b) Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR or Negative Declaration [CEQA Guidelines §15162(a)(3)(B)]; c) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 5 effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative [CEQA Guidelines §15162(a)(3)(C)]; or d) Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR or Negative Declaration would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative [CEQA Guidelines §15162(a)(3)(D)]. The City has evaluated the potential environmental impacts of proposed Seabiscuit Pacifica SPA No. 3 as set forth below in Section 2. The City, acting as the Lead Agency, has determined that none of the CEQA conditions listed above apply and that an Addendum to the prior environmental documentation (2014 MND, 2016 MND, 2017 Addendum) is appropriate for the proposed Amendment to the SP-SP and an Addendum is appropriate for compliance with CEQA as described in the CEQA Guidelines. An Addendum does not need to be circulated for public review, but rather can be attached to the prior environmental documentation [CEQA Guidelines §15164(c)]. Prior to initiating the Modified Project, the City will consider this Addendum together with the previously adopted MND (2016 and Addendum No. 1 (2017) and will make a decision regarding the Modified Project [CEQA Guidelines §15164(d)]. The proposed SPA or proposed project constitutes the Modified Project analyzed in this Addendum. Collectively, the SPA, proposed project, and Modified Project can be used interchangeably. However, the Modified Project shall be used from this point forward in reference to the proposed project. The SPA is referred to as necessary, for example when referencing the Specific Plan or the SPA. SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 6 SECTION 2 MODIFIED PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2.1 LOCATION AND EXISTING USES The SP-SP originally covered a 5.73-acre site (130 West Huntington Drive) in the City. The main Assessor Identification Number (AIN) of the site is 5775-024-014 and is found on the Mt. Wilson 7.5 minute USGS Quadrangle. It is located in Township 1 North, Range 11 West at approximately latitude 34Ń 08’ 21” North and longitude 118Ń 02’ 13” West). The project site was occupied by the 110-room (34,775 square feet) Santa Anita Inn hotel that was recently demolished (February 2018) as part of the existing/current approvals for the site. The Modified Project includes approximately 0.42 acres of additional area to the east and west of the original site boundary. These areas include a 0.144 acre parcel currently owned by the City at the Huntington Drive/Santa Clara Street intersection (AIN 5774-024-019) and a 0.273 acre parcel occupied by a residential structure recently vacated by the Salvation Army to southwest of the previously approved project limits (address 180 West Huntington Drive; AIN 5775-024-015). With this additional acreage, the Modified Project covers a total of approximately 6.15 acres. The proposed project site is bounded by East Huntington Drive to the north and west, West Huntington Drive to the east, and the Arcadia City Hall complex to the south. Figure 1 shows the regional and project location of the site and Figure 2 shows and aerial view of the site and surrounding land uses. Figure 3 provides photographs of the project site and surrounding land uses. Service Layer Credits: Copyright:© 2013 National Geographic Society, i-cubedCOLORADO PLACE HUNTINGTON DRIVE HUNTINGTON DRIVEHUNTINGTON DRIVE¦§¨¦210 ¦§¨¦210 Project Location Project Vicinity SOURCE: USGS 7.5' Quads: El Monte, 1981, & Mt. Wilson, 1988, CA; ESRI Streetmap, 2013. I:\CTA1401.01\Reports\Addendum\fig1_Reg_Loc.mxd (6/18/2018) FIGURE 1 Seabiscuit Pacifica Specific Plan Amendment Regional and Project Location 0 1000 2000 FEET S!!N Los Angeles County £¤101 ÃÃ2 ÃÃ42 ÃÃ71 ÃÃ72ÃÃ19 ÃÃ142 ÃÃ134 ÃÃ39 ÃÃ57 ÃÃ60 Project Location §¨¦110 §¨¦105 §¨¦710 §¨¦210 §¨¦10 §¨¦605 §¨¦5 Project Vicinity Service Layer Credits: HUNTINGTON DRIVE HUNTINGTON DRIVEHUNTINGTON DRIVECOLORADOP L A C E SANTA ANITA AVENUESOURCE: Google Earth, 2017; ESRI Streetmap, 2013. I:\CTA1401.01\Reports\Addendum\fig2_Aerial.mxd (6/18/2018) FIGURE 2 Seabiscuit Pacifica Specific Plan Amendment Aerial Photograph S!!N LEGEND Project Boundary 0200400 FEET &/'hZϯ WŚŽƚŽŐƌĂƉŚϭ͗sŝĞǁĨĂĐŝŶŐƐŽƵƚŚ͕ĨƌŽŵƚŚĞŶŽƌƚŚƐŝĚĞŽĨƚŚĞƐŝƚĞ͕ŽĨƚŚĞ^ĂŶƚĂ ŶŝƚĂ/ŶŶĞŶƚƌLJǁĂLJ͘;ĐŝƌĐĂϮϬϭϯͿ WŚŽƚŽŐƌĂƉŚϯ͗sŝĞǁĨĂĐŝŶŐƐŽƵƚŚǁĞƐƚ͕ĨƌŽŵ,ƵŶƚŝŶŐƚŽŶƌŝǀĞ͕ŽĨƚŚĞŽůŽƌĂĚŽ WůĂĐĞĂŶĚ,ƵŶƚŝŶŐƚŽŶƌŝǀĞŝŶƚĞƌƐĞĐƚŝŽŶǁŝƚŚƚŚĞ^ĂŶƚĂŶŝƚĂ WĂƌŬƌĂĐĞƚƌĂĐŬŝŶƚŚĞďĂĐŬŐƌŽƵŶĚ͘;ĐŝƌĐĂϮϬϭϯͿ WŚŽƚŽŐƌĂƉŚϮ͗sŝĞǁĨĂĐŝŶŐƐŽƵƚŚ͕ĨƌŽŵƚŚĞĐĞŶƚĞƌŽĨƚŚĞƐŝƚĞ͕ŽĨƚŚĞŝŶƚĞƌŝŽƌ ůĂŶĚƐĐĂƉŝŶŐĂŶĚŐĂnjĞďŽ͘;ĐŝƌĐĂϮϬϭϯͿ WŚŽƚŽŐƌĂƉŚϰ͗sŝĞǁĨĂĐŝŶŐƐŽƵƚŚǁĞƐƚŽĨƚŚĞ^ĂŶƚĂŶŝƚĂWĂƌŬƌĂĐĞƚƌĂĐŬ͕ĨƌŽŵ ŶŽƌƚŚǁĞƐƚŽĨƚŚĞƐŝƚĞŽŶtĞƐƚ,ƵŶƚŝŶŐƚŽŶƌŝǀĞ͘;ĐŝƌĐĂϮϬϭϯͿ /͗ͰdϭϰϬϭ͘ϬϭͰZĞƉŽƌƚƐͰĚĚĞŶĚƵŵͰĨŝŐϯͺ^ŝƚĞWŚŽƚŽƐ͘ĐĚƌ;ϬϲͬϭϴͬϭϴͿ ^ŝƚĞWŚŽƚŽŐƌĂƉŚƐ ^ĞĂďŝƐĐƵŝƚWĂĐŝĨŝĐĂ ^ƉĞĐŝĨŝĐWůĂŶŵĞŶĚŵĞŶƚ &/'hZϯ WŚŽƚŽŐƌĂƉŚϱ͗sŝĞǁĨĂĐŝŶŐƐŽƵƚŚĞĂƐƚ͕ĨƌŽŵƚŚĞŶŽƌƚŚĞĂƐƚĐŽƌŶĞƌŽĨƚŚĞƐŝƚĞ͕ŽĨ ĂƌĞĚǁŽŽĚǁŝŶĚƌŽǁ͘;ĐŝƌĐĂϮϬϭϯͿ WŚŽƚŽŐƌĂƉŚϳ͗sŝĞǁĨĂĐŝŶŐƐŽƵƚŚǁĞƐƚ͕ĨƌŽŵƚŚĞƐŽƵƚŚĞƌŶƐŝĚĞŽĨ ƚŚĞƐŝƚĞ͕ŽĨƚŚĞ^ĂůǀĂƚŝŽŶƌŵLJĨĂĐŝůŝƚLJ͕ƐŝƚĞ ůĂŶĚƐĐĂƉŝŶŐĂŶĚƚŚĞĂƚŚůĞƚŝĐĨŝĞůĚĨĞŶĐĞ͘;ĐŝƌĐĂ ϮϬϭϯͿ WŚŽƚŽŐƌĂƉŚϲ͗sŝĞǁĨĂĐŝŶŐŶŽƌƚŚ͕ĨƌŽŵƐŽƵƚŚŽĨƚŚĞƐŝƚĞ͕ŽĨĐŝƚLJĂƚŚůĞƚŝĐĨŝĞůĚƐ ĂĚũĂĐĞŶƚƚŽƚŚĞƉƌŽũĞĐƚƐŝƚĞ͘;ĐŝƌĐĂϮϬϭϯͿ WŚŽƚŽŐƌĂƉŚϴ͗sŝĞǁĨĂĐŝŶŐƐŽƵƚŚǁĞƐƚ͕ĨƌŽŵƚŚĞƐŽƵƚŚĞƌŶƉŽƌƚŝŽŶŽĨƚŚĞƐŝƚĞ͕ŽĨ ƚŚĞ^ĂůǀĂƚŝŽŶƌŵLJĨĂĐŝůŝƚLJ͘;ĐŝƌĐĂϮϬϭϯͿ /͗ͰdϭϰϬϭ͘ϬϭͰZĞƉŽƌƚƐͰĚĚĞŶĚƵŵͰĨŝŐϯͺ^ŝƚĞWŚŽƚŽƐ͘ĐĚƌ;ϬϲͬϭϴͬϭϴͿ ^ŝƚĞWŚŽƚŽŐƌĂƉŚƐ ^ĞĂďŝƐĐƵŝƚWĂĐŝĨŝĐĂ ^ƉĞĐŝĨŝĐWůĂŶŵĞŶĚŵĞŶƚ SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 11 2.2 PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS The Modified Project includes an Amendment to the SP-SP. Implementation of the Specific Plan would result in the construction of a full service Marriott Hotel, and a residential mixedǦuse tower and supporting parking for the entire project site. The SP-SP proposes a total of 335,584 square feet of total building area, including 155,143 square feet of hotel space with 227 rooms (17 more additional rooms than what was previously approved) in one building and 180,441 square feet of residential mixedǦuse comprised of 96 total residential units and 38,196 square feet of commercial space. Figure 4 shows the proposed project site plan. Table A summarizes the proposed uses of the Specific Plan. The Modified Project includes the incorporation of City owned parcel AIN 5774Ǧ024Ǧ019 covering approximately 6,273 square feet (0.144 acre) located at the corner of Huntington Drive and Santa Clara Street (100 W. Huntington Drive). The Modified Project also includes the addition of parcel AIN 5775Ǧ024Ǧ015 (180 West Huntington Drive) covering approximately 11,887 square feet (0.273 acre) to the southwest of the previously approved project limits currently owned by the Salvation Army. The two properties are subject to a GPA and ZC to be consistent with the main parcel. The GPA will change the land use designation from Commercial to Downtown Mixed Use and the zone change will change the zoning from General Commercial to Seabiscuit Pacifica Specific Plan (SP-SP).The two parcels will be incorporated into and become part of the Specific Plan. The SP-SP is a selfǦsupporting commercial project with individual owners/developers responsible for onǦsite and offǦsite improvements necessary to support development of the project. Development of the plan area will occur in two phases. Previously referenced Table A provides a summary of the various project uses by phase generally as follows: Phase I Phase I will be completed by 2019-2020 and will include a full service Marriott Le Meridian hotel and surface parking. Phase II will consist of a mixed use development with garage parking, and surface parking. Phase I includes a 155,143 square foot Marriott Le Meridian hotel with 227 rooms. The Marriott Le Meridian Hotel is an upscale, artistic, full service brand hotel with a full service restaurant and a rooftop bar/restaurant. The hotel will have a six floor wing and a five floor wing with a maximum height of approximately 80 feet. Phase I surface parking will have 227 spaces for the hotel to support the additional 17 rooms that were added to the previously approved project. SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 12 Table A: Seabiscuit Pacifica Specific Plan Land Uses Specific Plan Land Uses Rooms/ Spaces Floor Area (square feet) Building Area1 (square feet) Percent of Site Phase I (Le Meridian hotel) Subtotals 227 155,143 36,250 13.5 Phase II (Residential/Commercial) Residential/Mixed Use2 96 139,368 23,228 8.7 Residential Lobby and Amenities 2,877 2,877 0.13 Commercial 38,196 25,788 9.6 Subtotal 96 180,441 19.6 Parking Hotel Surface Parking Phase I at completion of Phase 2 structured parking (227 surface stalls provided until Phase two construction starts) 82 ——— Structured Covered Parking Phase II 513 ——— Subtotal 595 ——— Development Total Marriott Le Meridian Hotel 227 155,143 36,250 13.5 Residential Mixed Use 368 180,441 19.6 Total (w/o parking structure) 595 335,584 52,377 33.1 Total Parking Spaces 595 ——— FAR3 (without condos) — 0.72:1 —— Source: Table 2.B, Seabiscuit Pacifica Specific Plan, (May 2018) 1 Building footprint 2 includes 38,196 square feet of commercial on first floor, condos on 2nd floor and up. 3 Floor Area Ratio = Building Area (in square feet). Site Area (approx. 257,619 square feet or 5.9 acres with the 100:1 Club property included). Data extrapolated from ALTA survey and County Assessor’s Parcel data NOTE: Per General Plan, FAR is for non-residential uses and does not include any square footage for residential (condo) units. The maximum residential density is 50 du/acre. SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 14 Phase II Phase II includes construction of the residential mixedǦuse tower, which will comprise of 96 total units, covered structured parking and street frontage commercial. The residential tower will have eight floors and include 96 condominium units, and a structured parking podium. The residential mixedǦuse tower will have a maximum height of 95'Ǧ0" to the primary roof deck, and up to 95’-6” to the highest appurtenance. The parking, which will be constructed during Phase II for the residences, will contain 222,642 square feet and 513 garage parking spaces. The parking requirements are one and one half parking spaces for every unit and an additional one guest parking space for every three units. Each unit will have two covered parking spaces in the parking structure, where all the guest spaces will be located. Any changes or alteration to the parking space assignment shall be subject to review and approval by the Development Services Director or designee. After Phase II completion, a grand total of 595 parking spaces will be available, which will yield a hotel parking ratio of 1.00. The project landscape plan is shown in Figure 5, and project elevations are shown in Figure 6. Grading for the project will require approximately 7,000 cubic yards of fill but will be largely balanced onsite, although there may be some need for offsite soil transport. The primary access points for the hotel and mixed-use development will be from driveways located at the approximate midpoint of the East and West Huntington Drive project frontages. Secondary access to the parking structure serving the condominiums and commercial uses will be from both East and West Huntington Drive near the west project property limits. The Specific Plan document as Amended indicates it will accomplish the following objectives: • Provide high quality development consistent with the City’s General Plan and in conformance with municipal standards, codes, and policies; • Provide uses that will compliment and support the Santa Anita Park race track and other important regional facilities in the City, and the current downtown revitalization community district; • Design the development to minimize the potential for environmental impacts; • Augment the City’s economic base by increasing tax-generating commercial uses within the City; and • Create employment-generating opportunities for the citizens of the City and surrounding communities. SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 15 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: i Seabiscuit Pacifica Specific Plan Amendment No. SPA 18-01; i General Plan Amendment No. GPA 18-02; i Zone Change No. ZC 18-02; i Lot Line Adjustment No. 18-03, i Healthy Protected Tree Removal No. TRH 18-10; and i Addendum to the previously approved 2016 and 2014 Mitigated Negative Declarations in compliance with CEQA; Other non-discretionary actions anticipated to be taken by the City at the Staff level as part of the proposed project include: i 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). i Building permit. The comprehensive building permit includes building permit, plumbing, mechanical, and electrical permits. i Grading permit. i Sewer connection permit. Development of the proposed Seabiscuit Pacifica project may require the following permits and/or approvals from other responsible agencies: i A National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System 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. IMPORTANT NOTE: In the following analysis, each environmental topic will be evaluated by first describing the impacts of the original project (“Approved Project Analysis”) and then an analysis of the proposed changes to the project (“Modified Project Analysis”). SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 17 SECTION 4 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST AND DISCUSSION I. AESTHETICS Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact I.a) Approved Project Analysis. 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 Santa Anita Park race track is just west of the project site, but it is not considered a visual resource per se although the grandstands of the park are visible from surrounding land uses. However, the race track is a designated historic district which is discussed in Subsection V., Cultural Resources. The project site consisted of the former Santa Anita Inn, a collection of two-story buildings with extensive mature landscaping. At the time of the analysis, the hotel and landscaping did not significantly block views of the San Gabriel Mountains for drivers heading northbound on East and West Huntington Drives. The hotel buildings also did not block views of the mountains from City Hall or surrounding public facilities, but views were partially blocked by the tall redwood trees in the center of the existing hotel property, and to some degree by tall trees along the northern boundary of the City Hall athletic fields north of City Hall. There are approximately 45 redwood trees on site with about half of which are part of a windrow on the eastern boundary of the site. The Approved Project would construct one six-story and two eight-story buildings on the site that would temporarily block views of the mountains for northbound travelers on either East or West Huntington Drive. At 35 miles per hour, the time of view obstruction would be approximately five seconds. The Approved Project may also block views of the mountains from public facilities and residential areas south of the project site. When viewed from a vantage point of a two-story house south of the golf course and west of Arcadia High School, approximately 3 degrees or 2.2 percent of the existing viewshed (approximately 135 degrees) to the north. Therefore, only a small portion of the permanent view of the mountains from these areas would be blocked by the Approved Project. A similar percentage of the viewshed from City Hall would also be blocked by the project buildings. The remainder of the residential and public views south of the project would remain unimpeded. Views of the mountains from the Civic Center Athletic Fields (north of City Hall) would be almost entirely blocked by the Approved Project. However, these SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 18 views are already somewhat obscured by tall trees along the north side of the athletic field property. Furthermore, individuals using the athletic fields would be present for limited periods of time; therefore, the project would only result in temporary or short-term visual impacts for this area. There is also a 12-foot tall chain link fence with fabric screening and landscaped vines covering most of the fence along the southern boundary of the site (i.e., north boundary of the athletic fields) that would remain after the completion of the Approved Project. The Arcadia County Park is located directly east of the project site and its primary viewshed is the San Gabriel Mountains to the north. The Approved Project is not expected to block or eliminate these views for persons using the park or the Santa Anita Golf Course which is located directly south of the Arcadia County Park. In addition, mature trees located in the park and along the eastern boundary of the project site would help soften views of the new dual hotel and condominiums. The height the three proposed buildings would make them visible throughout much of the City of Arcadia, however, the buildings are not expected to significantly block views of the San Gabriel Mountains for the general public. The Approved Project would not substantially block any views from residential land uses. Based on this analysis, the Approved Project is not expected to result in substantial adverse effects on scenic vistas, so impacts to public views would be less than significant. Modified Project Analysis. The maximum number of floors and height of the hotel will not change with the Modified Project. Similarly, the maximum number of floors of the residential mixed-use tower (referred to as the “condominium tower” under the Approved Project) will not change with the Modified Project. However, with the Modified Project the maximum height of the residential mixed-use tower will be 95 feet to the primary roof deck; an increase of 7 feet when compared to the Approved Project. The nominal increase in height of the residential mixed-use tower is not anticipated to be perceptible when compared to the Approved Project. Consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project will not significantly block views of the San Gabriel Mountains for the general public or substantially block any views from residential land uses. Therefore, consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project will result in less than significant impacts to scenic vistas. No mitigation measures were identified in the approved 2014 or 2016 IS/MND and no new mitigation measures are required for the Modified Project with regard to scenic vistas. b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact I.b) Approved Project Analysis. The project site or surrounding area do not contain any designated scenic highways. The nearest designated State scenic highway is the Angeles Crest Highway approximately 15 miles northwest from the project site. Therefore, the Approved SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 19 Project would not significantly damage scenic resources, including trees, rock outcroppings, or historic buildings within a state scenic highway. Modified Project Analysis. The Modified Project will add two additional parcels to the approved SP-SP, a 6,273 square foot (0.144 acre) parcel at the northeast corner of the project site at 100 W. Huntington Drive, and an 11,887 square foot (0.273 acre) parcel located adjacent to the west of the site at 180 W. Huntington Drive. The total acreage of the SP-SP area will increase with the Modified Project by approximately 0.42 acres. However, consistent with the Approved Project, the nearest designated State scenic highway, Angeles Crest Highway, remains approximately 15 miles northwest from the project site. Therefore, consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project will not significantly damage scenic resources, including trees, rock outcroppings, or historic buildings within a state scenic highway. No mitigation measures were identified in the approved 2014 or 2016 IS/MND and no new mitigation measures are required for the Modified Project with regard to State scenic highways. c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact I.c) Approved Project Analysis. At the time the 2016 IS/MND was prepared for the Approved Project, the project site consisted of the former Santa Anita Inn, a collection of two- story buildings with extensive mature landscaping. The Approved Project involved demolishing the existing 2-story hotel buildings and constructing two separate hotels consisting of three hotel-related buildings with heights of 60, 80, and 86 feet. During construction, persons travelling on area roads, using nearby land uses would have views of the project site in various stages of site preparation and construction. The Approved Project would adhere to the City’s standard screened construction fencing requirement which would be visible to persons travelling on area roads and using nearby land uses. However, because the screened construction fencing would be removed upon the completion of construction and construction of the Approved Project would be short-term in nature, this potential visual impact is considered temporary and less than significant. The Approved Project will be taller and not to scale with existing office and hospital buildings within the immediate area. However, in accordance with the City’s zoning map, the project site has a Height Overlay (H-8) which allows buildings up to 95 feet in height. Therefore, the Approved Project would be consistent with the Height Overlay. The H-8 Height Overlay was approved by the City for this property to provide a “landmark” project just east of the race track that would provide a visual focal point or entry statement into the City along Colorado Boulevard. Therefore, the Approved Project is not expected to detract from the planned visual quality of the immediate neighborhood, or from any of the surrounding residential neighborhoods. Therefore, the Approved Project would not significantly degrade the existing SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 20 visual character or adversely affect the visual quality of the site and its surroundings over the long term. Modified Project Analysis. Consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project will adhere to the City’s standard screened construction fencing requirement which will be visible to persons travelling on area roads and using nearby land uses. However, because the screened construction fencing will be removed upon the completion of construction and construction of the Modified Project will be short-term in nature, this potential visual impact is considered temporary and less than significant. The maximum number of floors and height of the hotel will not change with the Modified Project. Similarly, the maximum number of floors of the residential mixed-use tower (referred to as the “condominium tower” under the Approved Project) will not change with the Modified Project. However, with the Modified Project the maximum height of the residential mixed-use tower will be 95 feet to the primary roof deck; an increase of 7 feet when compared to the Approved Project. Consistent with the Approved Project, the maximum height of the Modified Project will be consistent with the requirements of the H-8 Height Overlay and the nominal increase in height of the residential mixed-use tower is not anticipated to be perceptible when compared to the Approved Project. Furthermore, the Modified Project will not change the proposed use of the site (i.e., hotel and condominiums). Similar to the Approved Project, the Modified Project is not expected to detract from the planned visual quality of the immediate neighborhood, or from any of the surrounding residential neighborhoods. Therefore, consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project will not significantly degrade the existing visual character or adversely affect the visual quality of the site and its surroundings over the long term. No mitigation measures were identified in the approved 2014 or 2016 IS/MND and no new mitigation measures are required for the Modified Project with regard to existing visual character and quality of the site. d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect daytime or nighttime views in the area? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact I.d) Approved Project Analysis. At the time the 2016 IS/MND was prepared for the Approved Project the existing hotel buildings did not cause a substantial amount of glare due to the extensive landscaping present onsite. At certain times of day, glare can occur from the sun shining off of the windows of nearby office buildings and the hospital, especially in the morning and late afternoon hours. The Approved Project consisted of dual hotel and condominium buildings that would substantially increase the amount of night lighting such as parking lights and streets lights over the lighting levels of the existing hotel buildings. However, the project site is directly east of Santa Anita Park (i.e., horseracing track), which produces a substantially greater amount of SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 21 night light during its nighttime events compared to the existing hotel or the Approved Project due to its large parking lot lighting and stadium lighting. The other substantial source of night lighting in the area is the field lighting of the Civic Center Athletic Fields immediately south of the project site. The Approved Project would also be required to be consistent with State Building Code (i.e., Title 24) and City Municipal Code lighting requirements. For more information on exterior lighting and its controls related to energy efficiency, see Subsection VII. Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Due to their height, the Approved Project buildings would be able to be seen at night from much of the City. However, because the Approved Project would comply with the City’s Municipal Code lighting requirements, the Approved Project is not expected to cause significant adverse impacts on nighttime views. The Approved Project would introduce tall buildings into the area with hundreds of glass windows which would introduce an increased source of glare. However, with implementation of Mitigation Measure AES-1, as prescribed in the approved 2014 and 2016 IS/MND, all project windows would be glazed or otherwise treated to minimize glare on surrounding roads and properties. Therefore, with implementation of Mitigation Measure AES-1, the Approved Project would result in a less than significant impact to views in the area associated with glare. Modified Project Analysis. Consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project will increase the amount of night lighting and glare when compared to the existing hotel buildings. However, when considered with the surrounding land uses (i.e., Santa Anita Park and the Civic Center Athletic Fields), the Modified Project would not produce a substantial source of light that would result in significant adverse impacts to nighttime views. Furthermore, consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project will be consistent with the State Building Code and will comply with the City’s Municipal Code lighting requirements. Although the Modified Project will increase the total number of hotel, condominiums, and square footage of commercial mixed use when compared to the Approved Project, with implementation of Mitigation Measure AES-1, as prescribed in the approved 2014 and 2016 IS/MND and provided in Section 7 of this Addendum, the Modified Project will not result in significant impacts to views in the area associated with glare. Therefore, consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project will not create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect daytime or nighttime views in the area. No additional mitigation measures are required. II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state's inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Would the project: SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 22 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? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact II.a) Approved Project Analysis. At the time the 2016 IS/MND was prepared for the Approved Project the site was almost completely covered over by impervious man-made surfaces (e.g., buildings and parking lots). 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. Therefore, the Approved Project would not convert any Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance to non-agricultural use and there is no impact. Modified Project Analysis. The Modified Project will add two additional parcels to the approved SP-SP, a 6,273 square foot parcel (0.144 acre) at the northeast corner of the project site at 100 W. Huntington Drive, and an 11,887 square foot (0.273 acre) parcel located adjacent to the west of the site at 180 W. Huntington Drive. The total acreage of the SP-SP area will increase with the Modified Project by approximately 0.42 acres. Consistent with the remainder of the SP-SP area, these two parcels are also designated as “Urban Land” per the FMMP maps, and are not underlain by any Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance. Therefore, consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project will not convert any Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance to non-agricultural use and there is no impact. No mitigation measures were identified in the approved 2014 or 2016 IS/MND and no new mitigation measures are required for the Modified Project with regard to farmland. b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact II.b) Approved Project Analysis. There is no agricultural use zoning or Williamson Act contracts in the City of Arcadia. Therefore, the Approved Project would not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract and there are no impacts in this regard. Modified Project Analysis. Although the Modified Project will add two additional parcels to the approved SP-SP area, because there are no agricultural use zoning or Williamson Act contracts in the City of Arcadia, the Modified Project will not conflict with existing zoning for SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 23 agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract. Therefore, consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project will not result in impacts associated with agricultural use or Williamson Act contracts. No mitigation measures were identified in the approved 2014 or 2016 IS/MND and no new mitigation measures are required for the Modified Project with regard to agricultural use or Williamson Act contracts. 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))? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact II.c) Approved Project Analysis. At the time the 2016 IS/MND was prepared for the Approved Project the site was almost completely covered over by man-made impervious surfaces (e.g., buildings and parking lots). The City of Arcadia has no timberland or timberland production land, and has no property zoned for forest land. Therefore, the Approved Project would not conflict with any forest land, timberland or timberland production, and there are no impacts in this regard. Modified Project Analysis. Although the Modified Project will add two additional parcels to the approved SP-SP area, because there are no timberland or timberland production land, and no property zoned for forest land in the City of Arcadia, the Modified Project will not conflict with the existing zoning or cause the rezoning of forestland, timberland, or timber production land. Therefore, consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project will not result in impacts associated with timberland or forest land. No mitigation measures were identified in the approved 2014 or 2016 IS/MND and no new mitigation measures are required for the Modified Project with regard to timberland or forest land. d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact II.d) Approved Project Analysis. As described under response II.c above, there is no forest land in the City of Arcadia. Therefore, the Approved Project would not result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use and there are no impacts in this regard. SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 24 Modified Project Analysis. Although the Modified Project will add two additional parcels to the approved SP-SP area, because there is no forest land in the City of Arcadia, the Modified Project will not result in the loss of forest land or the conversion of forest land to non-forest use. Therefore, consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project will not result in impacts to forest land. No mitigation measures were identified in the approved 2014 or 2016 IS/MND and no new mitigation measures are required for the Modified Project with regard to forest land. 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? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact II.e) Approved Project Analysis. As described under response II.c above, there is no farmland or forest land in the City of Arcadia. Therefore, the Approved Project would not involve changes in the existing environment that would result in the conversion of farmland or forest land to non-agricultural or non-forest land use and there are no impacts in this regard. Modified Project Analysis. Although the Modified Project will add two additional parcels to the approved SP-SP area, because there is no farmland or forest land in the City of Arcadia, the Modified Project will not involve changes in the existing environment that would result in the conversion of farmland or forest land to non-agricultural or non-forest land. Therefore, consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project will not result in impacts to farmland or forest land. No mitigation measures were identified in the approved 2014 or 2016 IS/MND and no new mitigation measures are required for the Modified Project with regard to farmland or forest land. 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: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 25 III.a) Approved Project Analysis. LSA Associates, Inc. (LSA) prepared a detailed assessment of air quality impacts for the Approved Project (LSA 2013) based on the Approved Project’s development characteristics and the Approved Project’s Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA, Kimley-Horn and Associates 2013). The Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) for the South Coast Air Basin (Basin) sets forth a comprehensive program that will lead the Basin into compliance with all federal and state air quality standards. Air quality in the Basin is regulated by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). The AQMP control measures and related emission reduction estimates are based upon emissions projections for a future development scenario derived from land use, population, and employment characteristics defined in consultation with local governments. Accordingly, conformance with the AQMP for development projects is determined by demonstrating compliance with local land use plans and/or population projections. The Approved Project involved the construction and occupancy of 257,589 square feet of dual hotels and a mixed use development on 5.9 acres of land. The Approved Project would also involve the demolition of the Santa Anita Inn, with 34,775 square feet of buildings. As described in Subsection X, Land Use and Planning, the Approved Project included a General Plan Amendment and zone change to provide consistency with the SP-SP and to allow residential uses in what was previously identified as a commercial zone. Therefore, the Approved Project uses were determined to be consistent with the General Plan land use designations for the site. Because the Approved Project was consistent with the General Plan, it was also consistent with the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) Regional Comprehensive Plan (RCP) Guidelines and the SCAQMD Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP). Therefore, the Approved Project would be consistent with the applicable air quality plan, and there were no significant impacts in this regard. Modified Project Analysis. Consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project consists of constructing a hotel, condominiums, and mixed-use commercial space on the site of the recently demolished Santa Anita Inn. With approval of proposed GPA 18-02 and ZC 18-02, and, the Modified Project would be consistent with the General Plan and zoning land use designations for the balance of the SP-SP area and thus the Modified Project would be consistent with the SCAG RCP Guidelines and the SCAQMD AQMP. Therefore, consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project is consistent with the applicable air quality plan and there are no significant impacts in this regard. No mitigation measures were identified in the approved 2014 or 2016 IS/MND and no new mitigation measures are required for the Modified Project with regard to conflicting with an applicable air quality plan. b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 26 III.b) Approved Project Analysis. Both short-term impacts caused by construction activities and long-term impacts caused by occupancy and operation of the Approved Project were analyzed and are described below. Short-Term Impacts Grading and other construction activities would result in combustion emissions from heavy-duty construction vehicles, haul trucks, and vehicles transporting construction crews. Exhaust emissions during these construction activities will vary daily as construction activity levels change. The grading and demolition phases of construction represent the most intense construction period during which daily emissions would be at their greatest level, based on the potential amount of equipment and duration of use. The other construction phases would not result in any greater construction emissions due to less equipment being used and shorter construction duration. Construction-related impacts also include demolition of some of the Santa Anita Inn buildings in Phase 1 and the remaining buildings in Phase 2, as well as excavation for the subterranean parking in Phase 2. At the time the 2016 IS/MND was prepared for the Approved Project, the Basin was designated as a nonattainment area for ozone, PM10, and PM2.5. Construction of the Approved Project would be required to comply with regional fugitive dust reduction practices (SCAQMD Rule 403) that assist in reducing short-term air pollutant emissions. The purpose of SCAQMD Rule 403 is to reduce the amount of particulate matter in the atmosphere resulting from man-made fugitive dust sources. Among the requirements under this rule, fugitive dust must be controlled so that the presence of such dust does not remain visible in the atmosphere beyond the property line of the emission source. This is achieved by requiring actions to prevent, reduce, or mitigate dust emissions. Adherence to Rule 403 is a standard requirement for any construction activity occurring within the Basin. Adherence to Rule 403 can reduce fugitive dust emissions by 50 percent or more. As concluded in the Approved Project’s Air Quality Impacts Analysis (2013), construction emissions would not exceed regional thresholds, so impacts would be less than significant. However, Mitigation Measures AIR-1 through AIR-4, as prescribed in the approved 2014 and 2016 IS/MND, would be implemented to help assure that air quality impacts during construction, especially on the nearby Salvation Army facility, remain at less than significant levels. Long-Term Impacts Long-term air pollutant emission impacts result from stationary sources and mobile sources involving any project-related changes. The Approved Project would result in a net increase in the amount of hotel lodging or seasonal residences of 222,814 square feet (257,589 new square feet minus the 34,775 square feet associated with the Santa Anita Inn). Thus the Approved Project would result in net increases in both stationary and mobile source emissions. The stationary source emissions would come from the use of consumer products, landscape equipment, general energy, and solid waste, while trip generation factors were taken from the ITE Trip Generation Manual, Eight Edition and the Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by for the Approved Project (Kimley-Horn and Associates 2013). The long-term operational emissions associated with the Approved Project were calculated using the CalEEMod 2011.1.1 model. The air quality study shows that the increase of all criteria pollutants as a result of the Approved Project would be less than the applicable SCAQMD daily emission thresholds. Therefore, project-related long-term air quality impacts associated with the Approved Project would be less than significant. SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 27 Modified Project Analysis. LSA conducted an Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Analysis for the Modified Project (LSA 2018) (refer to Appendix B) based on the Modified Project’s development characteristics and the Modified Project’s Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) (Kimely-Horn and Associates 2018). The Modified Project’s proposed land uses are the same as those of the Approved Project; however, the Modified Project will increase the total number of hotel room, condominiums, and square feet of commercial mixed use development when compared to the Approved Project. Although the Modified Project will increase the total number of hotel and condominium units and increase the square feet of commercial mixed use development when compared to the Approved Project, construction impacts associated with the Modified Project will be the same as the Approved Project. Consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project will implement Mitigation Measures AIR-1 through AIR-4, as prescribed in the approved 2014 and 2016 IS/MND and provided in Section 7 of this Addendum. Therefore, consistent with the Approved Project, construction emissions associated with the Modified Project will not exceed regional thresholds and short-term air quality impacts will remain less than significant. Peak daily operational emissions were calculated for the Modified Project. A trip generation rate of 2,774 daily trips, based on the TIA, was used for the Modified Project, and 901 daily trips for the Approved Project (default rate from the Institute of Transportation Engineers [ITE] Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition), in combination with the CalEEMod default values for trip lengths and types, fleet mixes, water and energy use, and waste generation to produce the daily emission rates. In addition, a localized emissions analysis was conducted as recommended by the SCAQMD to determine the potential for project emissions to result in pollutant concentrations in excess of the Ambient Air Quality Standards. The analysis concluded that none of the pollutant emission rates will exceed the localized impact emissions thresholds for the existing sensitive receptors approximately 350 feet from the project site (residents located along Santa Cruz Road to the north of the project site). Therefore, consistent with the Approved Project, project-related long-term air quality impacts associated with the Modified Project will be less than significant. No additional mitigation measures are required. 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)? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact III.c) Approved Project Analysis. The majority of the project-related operational emissions associated with the Approved Project would be due to vehicle trips to and from the new project buildings. The Air Quality Analysis (LSA 2013) prepared for the Approved Project indicates that all emissions of criteria pollutants from the Approved Project would be under the applicable SCAQMD thresholds, therefore, no significant impacts would occur. Modified Project Analysis. As concluded in the Air Quality Analysis (LSA 2018) prepared for the Modified Project, construction-related emissions will be the same for the Modified Project as SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 28 projected for the Approved Project. Long-term operational air pollutant emissions form the Modified Project will be incrementally higher compared to the Approved Project analysis but still less than significant. Consistent with the Approved Project, all emissions of criteria pollutants from the Modified Project will be under the applicable SCAQMD thresholds, therefore, no significant impacts will occur. No mitigation measures were identified in the approved 2014 or 2016 IS/MND and no new mitigation measures are required for the Modified Project with regard to resulting in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment. d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact III.d) Approved Project Analysis. Localized Significance Thresholds (LSTs) represent the maximum emissions from a project that would not result in an exceedance of the national or state ambient air quality standards. LSTs are based on the ambient concentrations of that pollutant within the project source receptor area (SRA) and the distance to the nearest sensitive receptor. For the Approved Project, the appropriate SRA is the East San Gabriel Valley according to the Air Quality Analysis (LSA 2013). Short-Term LST Impacts Construction of the Approved Project was expected to occur in two phases, so no more than 5 acres of the site would be actively worked on during any given day. Other than the one Salvation Army facility at the southwest corner of the site, the closest sensitive receptors to the site are residences located 1,000 feet north of the project site across Colorado Place. Based on the Air Quality Analysis (LSA 2013), the Approved Project’s emissions would not exceed LST thresholds and thus would not require mitigation. Short-term emissions from the Approved Project would cease once construction of the project is completed, and implementation of Mitigation Measures AIR-1 through AIR-4 as prescribed in the approved 2014 and 2016 IS/MND, would help assure that short-term emissions on nearby sensitive receptors would remain at less than significant levels. Long-Term LST Analysis The Air Quality Analysis (LSA 2013) provides the calculated emissions for the proposed operational activities compared with the appropriate LSTs, which only includes on-site sources; however, the CalEEMod 2011.1.1 model outputs do not separate on-site and off-site emissions for mobile sources. For a worst-case scenario assessment, the emissions include all on-site project-related stationary sources and 5 percent of the project-related new mobile sources, which is an estimate of the amount of project-related new vehicle traffic that will occur on site. Considering the total trip length included in the CalEEMod 2011.1.1 model, the 5 percent assumption is conservative. As shown in the Air Quality Analysis (LSA 2013), the operational SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 29 emission rates of the Approved Project would not exceed the LST thresholds for the closest sensitive receptors. Therefore, the Approved Project’s operational activity would not result in a localized significant air quality impact. Modified Project Analysis. The former Santa Anita Inn was demolished in February 2018 as part of Phase 1 of the previously Approved Project; therefore, construction of the Modified Project will not require demolition of the former hotel. The Modified Project will add two additional parcels to the approved SP-SP area, one of which is located at the southwest corner of the site and contains the existing Salvation Army facility which will be demolished as part of the Modified Project. Therefore the closest sensitive receptor for the Modified Project is comprised of the residents located along Santa Cruz Road to the north of the project site at a distance of approximately 350 feet. Consistent with the Approved Project, construction of the Modified Project will occur in two phases and no more than 5 acres of the site will be actively worked on during any given day. Based on the Air Quality Analysis (LSA 2018) and consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project’s emissions will not exceed LST thresholds in the short- or long-term. Short-term emissions from the Modified Project will cease once construction of the project is completed, and implementation of Mitigation Measures AIR-1 through AIR-4 as prescribed in the approved 2014 and 2016 IS/MND and provided in Section 7 of this Addendum, will help assure that short-term emissions on nearby sensitive receptors would remain at less than significant levels. Therefore, consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project will not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations and will not result in a localized significant air quality impact. No additional mitigation measures are required. e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact III.e) Approved Project Analysis. Construction of the Approved Project would generate limited odors over the short-term, mainly fumes from gasoline- and diesel-powered construction equipment. These odors would be temporary and not likely to be noticeable beyond the project limits. The painting of buildings or the installation of asphalt surfaces may also create odors. SCAQMD Rule 1113 outlines standards for paint applications, while Rule 1108 identifies standards regarding the application of asphalt. Adherence to the standards identified in these SCAQMD Rules would reduce temporary odor impacts to a less than significant level. Land uses generally associated with long-term objectionable odors include agricultural uses, wastewater treatment plants, food processing plants, chemical plants, composting operations, refineries, landfills, dairies, and fiberglass molding facilities. The Approved Project does not include uses that would generate long-term objectionable odors. Because the Approved Project would not involve any substantial short-term or long-term sources of odors, impacts are considered less than significant. SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 30 Modified Project Analysis. Consistent with the Approved Project, construction of the Modified Project will generate limited odors over the short-term, mainly fumes from gasoline- and diesel-powered construction equipment. These odors will be temporary and not likely to be noticeable beyond the project limits. The painting of buildings or the installation of asphalt surfaces may also create odors. SCAQMD Rule 1113 outlines standards for paint applications, while Rule 1108 identifies standards regarding the application of asphalt. Consistent with the Approved Project, adherence to the standards identified in these SCAQMD Rules will reduce temporary odor impacts to a less than significant level. Consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project does not include uses that will generate long-term objectionable odors. Therefore, because the Modified Project will not involve any substantial short-term or long-term sources of odors, impacts are considered less than significant. No mitigation measures were identified in the approved 2014 or 2016 IS/MND and no new mitigation measures are required for the Modified Project with regard to objectionable odors. IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact IV.a) Approved Project Analysis. The project site is located on an urban infill site that contains no native vegetation and supports limited wildlife species, mainly those that are tolerant of regular human activity including ground squirrels, rodents, and song birds such as meadowlarks, finches, chickadees, and mockingbirds. There is no suitable habitat to support special-status species either on or adjacent to the project site. At the time the 2016 IS/MND was prepared for the Approved Project the existing hotel landscaping on the project site included rose gardens, man-made waterfalls, ornamental bushes and trees, and a windrow of mainly redwood trees adjacent to Huntington East Drive and the Arcadia County Park on the east side of the project site. The Approved Project would preserve the windrow of redwood trees along the east side of the project site. There are approximately 100 other trees on the remainder of project site, mainly ornamental varieties, including sycamore, palm, and weeping willow. These trees are mature and may provide roosting opportunities for raptors and other birds but likely not nesting opportunities due to the constant level of human disturbance. Migratory and raptorial birds are covered by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, and may be impacted by project construction if birds or nests are present during grading and/or tree removal. In addition, redwood trees are not SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 31 listed or otherwise protected species, but they do constitute a relatively unique biological resource in this area and as such should be preserved if possible. In addition, the City’s development guidelines for commercial uses encourage the preservation of mature trees. During Phase 1 of construction of the Approved Project, the southern portion of the existing Santa Anita Inn mature landscaping would remain in place until the start of Phase 2 of construction. The Approved Project has the potential to result in significant impacts to existing trees and nesting birds. However, with implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1 through BIO-3, as prescribed in the approved 2014 and 2016 IS/MND, a tree assessment would be prepared for the project and existing mature trees would be preserved or relocated to the extent feasible, the existing redwood trees along the east side of the property would be protected in place, and a nesting bird survey would be conducted if construction must occur during the local nesting season (February 1 to July 15). Therefore, with implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1 through BIO-3, the Approved Project would result in less than significant impacts associated with any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status. Modified Project Analysis. Although the Modified Project will add two additional parcels to the approved SP-SP area, similar to the remainder of the SP-SP area, these two parcels do not contain suitable habitat to support special-status species. The City owned parcel AIN 5774Ǧ024Ǧ 019 (0.144 acre) located at the corner of Huntington Drive and Santa Clara Street (100 W. Huntington Drive) is undeveloped, contains no vegetation, and is covered by wood chips. The Salvation Army parcel AIN 5775Ǧ024Ǧ015 (180 West Huntington Drive) contains 14 trees that are four inches in diameter or larger. All the trees are non-native exotic species trees with the potential to provide refuge for nesting. Consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project will re-develop the project site and has the potential to result in impacts to existing trees and nesting birds. An Arborist Tree Assessment and Nesting Bird Survey and Tree Preservation Study were conducted for the Modified Project (LSA 2018; Arborgate Consulting 2018) (refer to Appendix C- 1 and C-2). The purpose of the tree assessments was to assess the health of the existing redwood trees along the east side of the project site and the non-native exotic trees on the Salvation Army site. The tree assessment concluded that 71 of the 92 redwood trees surveyed along the east side of the project limits and 8 of the 14 non-native exotic trees on the Salvation Army site would be subject to the City’s tree protection ordinance. However, none of the redwood trees are in good condition, rather, a majority are in poor condition. Consistent with the prior SP-SP environmental approvals, 23 of the redwood trees and one palm tree were removed to accommodate the relocation of the W. Huntington Drive driveway associated with the Modified Project. Due to the poor condition of the majority of the tress, the tree assessment recommends that the redwood tress be removed and replaced with a species better suited to the environmental conditions found on the site and in accordance with the City’s tree protection ordinance. Similarly, 7 of the 8 protected trees on the Salvation Army site are not worthy of saving or relocated and one tree can be saved but not relocated. The 5 southern magnolias are too large, too old, very shallow rooted, and would not survive relocation or would take more than a decade to recover and be attractive. The single orchid tree is already declining and does not have adequate health to be relocated. The single floss silk tree is too large and shallow rooted to relocate safely. The single deodar cedar in the W. Huntington parkway could be saved but because it is leaning, has several limbs turned back, cutting its roots to transplant it would SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 32 increase the risk of it falling. Based on this assessment of the 8 trees on the Salvation Army site, the arborist report determined none of the trees are worth relocating or can be relocated. The Approved Project is required to implement Mitigation Measures BIO-1 through BIO-3, as prescribed in the approved 2014 and 2016 IS/MND and provided in Section 7 of this Addendum. However, the two arborist reports prepared for this Addendum provide full assessment of all the remaining trees on the Modified Project site, and therefore Mitigation Measure BIO-1 has been fulfilled and is no longer be applicable. The arborist report for the redwood trees along the east side of the project site recommends none of the trees are worth relocating or can be relocated due to the compromised health of the trees. Mitigation Measure BIO-2 has been fulfilled and is no longer applicable to the Modified Project. Because Mitigation Measure BIO-1 and Mitigation Measure BIO-2 have been fulfilled and are no longer applicable, they are shown with strikethrough in Section 7 of this Addendum. Consistent with the Approved Project, with implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-3, the Modified Project will result in less than significant impacts associated with any species identified as candidate, sensitive, or special- status. No additional mitigation measures are required. 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 Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact IV.b) Approved Project Analysis. The project site does not contain any designated riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities. The site is fully developed with man-made improvements and landscaping, and does not contain any natural drainages or riparian vegetation. Therefore, the Approved Project would not result in a substantial adverse effect on riparian habitat or sensitive natural communities, and there are no impacts in this regard. Modified Project Analysis. Although the Modified Project will add two additional parcels to the approved SP-SP area, similar to the remainder of the SP-SP area, these two parcels do not contain any designated riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities. Therefore, consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project will not result in a substantial adverse effect on riparian habitat or sensitive natural communities, and there are no impacts in this regard. No mitigation measures were identified in the approved 2014 or 2016 IS/MND and no new mitigation measures are required for the Modified Project with regard to riparian habitat or sensitive nature communities. 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, New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity New Mitigation is No New Impact/ No Reduced SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 33 filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? of Impact Required Impact Impact IV.c) Approved Project Analysis. The project site and immediate surrounding area are fully developed with man-made improvements and do not contain any natural drainages, federally protected wetlands, or any biological resources that would be under the jurisdiction of federal or state resource agencies. Therefore, the Approved Project would not result in a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and there are no impacts in this regard. Modified Project Analysis. Although the Modified Project will add two additional parcels to the approved SP-SP area, similar to the remainder of the SP-SP area, these two parcels do not contain any natural drainages, federally protected wetlands, or any biological resources that would be under the jurisdiction of federal or state resource agencies. Therefore, consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project will not result in a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and there are no impacts in this regard. No mitigation measures were identified in the approved 2014 or 2016 IS/MND and no new mitigation measures are required for the Modified Project with regard to wetlands. 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? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact IV.d) Approved Project Analysis. There are no known native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species within the City of Arcadia. Furthermore, the project site does not contain native vegetation and supports limited wildlife species, mainly those that are tolerant of regular human activity including ground squirrels, rodents, and song birds such as meadowlarks, finches, chickadees, and mockingbirds. The project site does not contain any drainage features that would support fish or other wildlife, nor does it contain any resources that would assist any species that are migrating or native wildlife raising their young. The project site is fully developed with man-made improvements and surrounded by developed uses and busy city streets; therefore, the project site does not serve as a migratory wildlife corridor. The landscaped ornament trees located on the project site may provide roosting opportunities for raptors and other birds but likely not nesting opportunities due to the constant level of human disturbance. However, as discussed above under response IV.a), with implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1 through BIO-3, as prescribed in the approved 2014 and 2016 IS/MND, the Approved Project would result in less than significant impacts associated with existing trees and nesting birds. Therefore, the Approved Project would not substantially SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 34 interfere with the movement of native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established migratory wildlife corridors. Modified Project Analysis. Although the Modified Project will add two additional parcels to the approved SP-SP area, similar to the remainder of the SP-SP area, these two parcels do not contain any native vegetation or habitat to support any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species. Consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project will re-develop the project site and has the potential to result in impacts to existing trees and nesting birds. As discussed above under response IV.a, the two arborist reports have fulfilled the requirements of Mitigation Measure BIO-1 and Mitigation Measure BIO-2 and they are no longer be applicable to the Modified Project. Consistent with the Approved Project, with implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-3, the Modified Project will result in less than significant impacts associated with nesting birds. Therefore, consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project will not substantially interfere with the movement of native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established migratory wildlife corridors. No additional mitigation measures are required. e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact IV.e) Approved Project Analysis. The City of Arcadia has a Tree Preservation ordinance. At the time the 2014 IS/MND was approved, the City’s Tree Preservation ordinance only included oak trees. However, as noted in the 2016 IS/MND, in August 2016 the City Council adopted an ordinance to add sycamore trees to the City’s Tree Preservation ordinance and provide a list of unprotected trees. In accordance with the City’s Tree Preservation ordinance, mature trees (not included on the list of unprotected trees) that are located within a required front, side, street- side, or rear yard setback area and are larger than 12 inches in diameter or 10 inches in diameter if there are multiple trunks are to be protected. There are no oak trees on the project site; however, there are sycamore trees. The Approved Project would comply with the requirements of the City’s Tree Preservation ordinance and would preserve the windrow of mature redwood trees along the east side of the project site. In accordance with Mitigation Measure BIO-2 as prescribed in the approved 2014 and 2016 IS/MND, the existing redwood trees along the east side of the property would be protected by being taped or roped off with appropriate signage during construction and would be sprayed with water at the end of each day when substantial amounts of dust are generated (e.g., during grading or demolition). Therefore, the Approved Project would not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources. Modified Project Analysis. As described above under response IV.a, an Arborist Tree Assessment and Nesting Bird Survey and Tree Preservation Study were conducted for the Modified Project (LSA 2018; Arborgate Consulting 2018). The purpose of the tree assessments was to assess the health of the existing redwood trees along the east side of the project site SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 35 and the non-native exotic trees on the Salvation Army site. The tree assessment concluded that 71 of the 92 redwood trees surveyed along the east side of the project limits and 7 of the 13 non-native exotic trees on the Salvation Army site would be subject to the City’s tree protection ordinance. However, none of these trees are in good condition, rather, a majority are in poor condition. Consistent with the prior SP-SP environmental approvals, 23 of the redwood trees and one palm tree were removed to accommodate the relocation of the W. Huntington Drive driveway associated with the Modified Project. Due to the poor condition of the majority of the trees, the tree assessment recommends that the redwood tress be removed and replaced with a species better suited to the environmental conditions found on the site and in accordance with the City’s tree protection ordinance. Similarly, 6 of the 7 protected trees on the Salvation Army site are not worthy of saving or relocated and one tree can be saved but not relocated. The five (5) southern magnolias are too large, too old, very shallow rooted, and would not survive relocation or would take more than a decade to recover and be attractive. The single orchid tree is already declining and does not have adequate health to be relocated. The single floss silk tree is too large and shallow rooted to relocate safely. The single deodar cedar is a street tree within the City’s parkway along W. Huntington. The City’s tree could be saved but because it is leaning, has several limbs turned back, cutting its roots to transplant it would increase the risk of it falling. Based on this assessment of the 7 trees on the Salvation Army site, the arborist report determined none of the trees are worth relocating or can be relocated. The two arborist reports prepared for this Addendum provide full assessment of all the remaining trees on the Modified Project site, and therefore Mitigation Measure BIO-1 has been fulfilled and is no longer be applicable. The arborist report for the redwood trees along the east side of the project site recommends none of the trees are worth relocating or can be relocated due to the compromised health of the trees. Mitigation Measure BIO-2 has been fulfilled and is no longer applicable to the Modified Project. Because Mitigation Measure BIO-1 and Mitigation Measure BIO-2 have been fulfilled and are no longer applicable, they are shown with strikethrough in Section 7 of this Addendum. Based on the finding contained in the two arborist reports prepared for this Addendum, the Modified Project has complied with the requirements of the City’s Tree Preservation ordinance and will not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources. No additional mitigation measures are required. f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact IV.f) Approved Project Analysis. 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. Therefore, the Approved Project would not conflict with the provisions of any adopted Habitat Conservation Plans, Natural Community Plans, or other approved conservation plans. SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 36 Modified Project Analysis. Although the Modified Project will add two additional parcels to the approved SP-SP area, similar to the remainder of the SP-SP area, these two parcels are not covered by any adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. Therefore, consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would not conflict with the provisions of any adopted Habitat Conservation Plans, Natural Community Plans, or other approved conservation plans. No mitigation measures were identified in the approved 2014 or 2016 IS/MND and no new mitigation measures are required for the Modified Project with regard to conservation plans. V. CULTURAL RESOURCES Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact V.a) Approved Project Analysis. The project site formerly consisted of the Santa Anita Inn, an existing 2-story hotel with 110 guest rooms. The hotel was built in 1955, and the State Office of Historic Preservation recommends all structures over 50 years of age be surveyed for historical significance prior to demolition. In August 2013, a Historical Assessment was prepared for the Approved Project and the results were included in the approved 2014 and 2016 IS/MNDs. The Santa Anita Inn helped support Santa Anita Park by providing lodging for race track visitors as well as other City guests over the years. The City of Arcadia incorporated in 1903, and Santa Anita Park was built in its present location in 1934. The racetrack played and continues to play an important role in the City of Arcadia’s economy, which is based on entertainment, sporting, hospitality, and gambling opportunities. Other local historical resources in the immediate area include the Methodist Hospital of Southern California built in 1957 a quarter mile south of the project site, and the Los Angeles County Arboretum and Botanic Garden a mile west of the site that opened to the public in 1948. Built in 1955, the Santa Anita Inn was built almost 50 years after the creation of the Santa Anita Park. The Inn was originally built to house Santa Anita Park workers, jockeys, and visiting guests to the race track. In 1985, the hotel went through a major renovation and all interior spaces were reconstructed or upgraded so that little if any of the original interior treatments or furnishings remain. The building exteriors were also renovated at that time, but the overall appearance and color scheme of the hotel were maintained. In addition, the hotel grounds contain extensive mature landscaping which provides a very pleasant ambiance to the facility. SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 37 The 2014 and 2016 IS/MNDs concluded that the existing Santa Anita Inn property does not meet the requirements of listing for either the State or National Register of Historic Places. In addition, the City of Arcadia does not maintain a list of locally designated historical resources. Therefore, the Approved Project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5. The Santa Anita Inn does represent a connection to the City’s past, and its character and contributions to the City’s history were documented in the California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) 523A and 523B forms completed as part of the Historical Assessment. In order to obtain a Certificate of Demolition from the City for the project, and in accordance with Mitigation Measure CUL-1 as prescribed in the approved 2014 and 2016 IS/MND and provided in Section 7 of this Addendum, prior to demolition of any existing hotel buildings on the project site the completed DPR 523A forms and cover memorandum must be submitted to the City for filing to officially document the Historical Assessment for the Santa Anita Inn has been completed. Additionally, in accordance with Mitigation Measure CUL-2, as prescribed in the approved 2014 and 2016 IS/MND and provided in Section 7 of this Addendum, prior to issuance of an occupancy permit for Phase 1 of construction, the Approved Project must install a monument plaque indicating the location of the former Santa Anita Inn and its importance in the history of the City. With implementation of Mitigation Measures CUL-1 and CUL-2, the Approved Project will ensure proper documentation of the Santa Anita Inn and its contribution to the City’s history. Because construction of the Approved Project would require excavation, in the unlikely event that undocumented cultural artifacts are discovered during project grading, Mitigation Measure CUL-3 as prescribed in the approved 2014 and 2016 IS/MND and provided in Section 7 of this Addendum, would be implemented to reduce potentially significant impacts to cultural resources. With implementation of Mitigation Measures CUL-1 through CUL-3, the Approved Project would not result in any potentially significant impacts to existing or undiscovered cultural resources. Modified Project Analysis. An historical evaluation of the Salvation Army property at 180 West Huntington Drive (AIN 5775Ǧ024Ǧ015) was conducted for this Addendum. As a result of the archival research and intensiveǦlevel field survey, the evaluation determined that the 1936 altered residence does not appear to be eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources under any criteria. It has sustained alterations (window replacements and additions) that have compromised its integrity and it does not embody the distinctive characteristics of a particular architectural style. In addition, there is no indication that it is associated with any people who are significant in history. Further, this property is not included in the 2016 citywide survey either individually or as a contributor to a potential historic district. For these reasons, the residence at 180 West Huntington Drive does not qualify as a “historical resource” as defined by CEQA. Implementation of the proposed SP-SP including demolition of the 1936 residence would result in no impact with regard to historical resources. b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5? New Significant Impact/ Increased New Mitigation No New Impact/ SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 38 Severity of Impact is Required No Impact Reduced Impact IV.b) Approved Project Analysis. The project site is located on an urban infill site that is fully developed and has been completely disturbed by previous development and human activity. Development of the Approved Project is not expected to cause any significant impacts to archaeological resources on the site. However, it is still possible, though unlikely, that archaeological resources may be found during excavation of the project site. Therefore, in the unlikely event that undocumented archaeological resources are discovered during project grading, Mitigation Measure CUL-3 as prescribed in the approved 2014 and 2016 IS/MND, would be implemented to reduce potentially significant impacts to archaeological resources. Modified Project Analysis. The Modified Project will add two additional parcels to the approved SP-SP area not previously evaluated in the 2014 or 2016 IS/MNDs. Consistent with the Approved Project, development of the Modified Project is not expected to cause any significant impacts to archaeological resources on the site. However, similar to the Approved Project it is still possible, though unlikely, that archaeological resources may be found during excavation of the project site. Therefore, in the unlikely event that undocumented archaeological resources are discovered during project grading, Mitigation Measure CUL-3 as prescribed in the approved 2014 and 2016 IS/MND and provided in Section 7 of this Addendum, would be implemented to reduce potentially significant impacts to archaeological resources. Therefore, consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project will not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource. No additional mitigation measures are required. c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact IV.c) Approved Project Analysis. The project site is located on an urban infill site that is fully developed with man-made structures and improvements. As concluded in the 2014 and 2016 IS/MNDs, the Approved Project area is underlain by hundreds of feet of alluvial (stream- deposited) materials, and therefore it is unlikely that fossil-bearing geologic strata would be disturbed during project grading. However, it is possible, though not likely, that megafaunal (ancient large mammal) or related paleontological resources may be found during excavation of the project site, since such resources have been occasionally found during excavations elsewhere in the LA Basin. Therefore, in the unlikely event that unanticipated paleontological resources are discovered during project grading, Mitigation Measure CUL-4 as prescribed in the SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 39 approved 2014 and 2016 IS/MND and provided in Section 7 of this Addendum, would be implemented to reduce potentially significant impacts to paleontological resources. Modified Project Analysis. Although the Modified Project will add two additional parcels to the approved SP-SP area, these parcels are directly adjacent to the SP-SP area and have the same geologic conditions as the remainder of the SP-SP area. Therefore, consistent with the Approved Project, it is unlikely that paleontological resources would be disturbed by grading associated with the Modified Project. However, consistent with the Approved Project, in the unlikely event that unanticipated paleontological resources are discovered during grading associated with the Modified Project, Mitigation Measure CUL-4 as prescribed in the approved 2014 and 2016 IS/MND and provided in Section 7 of this Addendum, would be implemented to reduce potentially significant impacts to paleontological resources. Therefore, consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project will not directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature. No additional mitigation measures are required. d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact IV.d) Approved Project Analysis. The Approved Project site does not contain any known human remains. However, there is always a small possibility that ground-disturbing activities during construction may uncover previously unknown buried human remains. Therefore, in the unlikely event that unknown human remains are discovered during ground-disturbing activities associated with the Approved Project, Mitigation Measure CUL-5 as prescribed in the approved 2014 and 2016 IS/MND and provided in Section 7 of this Addendum, would be implemented to reduce potentially significant impacts to human remains. Modified Project Analysis. Consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project site does not contain any known human remains. However, as with the Approved Project, there is always a small possibility that ground-disturbing activities during construction may uncover previously unknown buried human remains. Therefore, in the unlikely event that unknown human remains are discovered during ground-disturbing activities associated with the Modified Project, Mitigation Measure CUL-5 as prescribed in the approved 2014 and 2016 IS/MND and provided in Section 7 of this Addendum, would be implemented to reduce potentially significant impacts to human remains. Therefore, consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project will not result in any potentially significant impacts to human remains. No additional mitigation measures are required. SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 40 VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS Would the project: 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. New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? iv) Landslides? VI.a.i-iv) Approved Project Analysis. The Raymond Hill Fault Zone and the Sierra Madre Fault Zone are the only faults located in the City of Arcadia. 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 distance. Almost the entire region is subject to this hazard, but building design standards do significantly reduce the potential for harm. The project site is not located within the boundaries of an Earthquake Fault Zone for fault rupture hazard as defined by the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act of 1972, there are no known active or potentially active faults that traverse the project site, and the site is not located in an area with steep or unstable slopes. In addition, local groundwater is found at depths well in excess of 50 feet, so the potential for liquefaction is considered low. As part of its development review process, the City will require the project to be built to withstand expected seismic ground shaking, as well as local soil conditions as outlined in the Geotechnical Assessment prepared for the Approved Project. Therefore, the project site is not expected to be subject to any significant impacts regarding fault zones, strong seismic ground shaking, ground failure, liquefaction, or landslides, and no mitigation was required for the Approved Project. Modified Project Analysis. Although the Modified Project will add two additional parcels to the approved SP-SP area, these parcels are directly adjacent to the SP-SP area and have the same conditions regarding faults, seismic ground shaking, liquefaction and landslides as the remainder of the SP-SP area. Consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project will be required to be built to withstand expected seismic ground shaking as well as local soil conditions as outlined in the Geotechnical Study prepared for the project. Therefore, consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project site is not expected to expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 41 involving fault rupture, strong seismic ground shaking, ground failure, liquefaction, or landslides, and no mitigation is required. b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact VI.b) Approved Project Analysis. The project site gently slopes to the south at a gradient of 2.4 percent with elevations ranging from 473 feet above mean sea level (amsl) at the north corner sloping down to 466 feet amsl at the south corner. At the time the 2016 IS/MND was prepared for the Approved Project the site was covered over by buildings and primarily impervious surfaces and did not exhibit signs of erosion. However, the majority of the soils present on the site have at least a slight erosion hazard potential and excavation and grading associated with the Approved Project would temporarily expose some onsite soils to erosion from wind or water. As specified in Subsection IX, Hydrology and Water Quality, because development of the Approved Project would involve more than one acre of ground disturbance, the project is required to obtain a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. A Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) would also be required to address erosion and discharge impacts associated with grading of the site for development of the Approved Project. Additionally, the Approved Project would be required to prepare a Standard Urban Stormwater Management Plan (SUSMP), adhere to the City’s grading requirements, and implement standard erosion control measures as required in the Approved Project’s conditions of approval. With implementation of Mitigation Measures HYD-1 through HYD-3 as prescribed in the approved 2014 and 2016 IS/MND, the Approved Project would not result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil and impacts associated with soil erosion hazards would be less than significant. Modified Project Analysis. Although the Modified Project will add two additional parcels to the approved SP-SP area, these parcels are directly adjacent to the SP-SP area and have the same soil conditions and soil erosion potential as the remainder of the SP-SP area. Consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project will be required to obtain a NPDES permit, prepare a SWPPP and SUSMP, adhere to the City’s grading requirements, and implement standard erosion control measures as required in the Modified Project’s conditions of approval. Therefore, consistent with the Approved Project, with implementation of Mitigation Measures HYD-1 through HYD-3 as prescribed in the approved 2014 and 2016 IS/MND and provided in Section 7 of this Addendum, the Modified Project would not result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil and impacts associated with soil erosion hazards would be less than significant. No additional mitigation measures are required. SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 42 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? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact VI.c) Approved Project Analysis. 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. The project site is flat and would not be subject to either onsite or offsite landslide hazards. Therefore, the Approved Project would not result in impacts associated with unstable geologic units or soil. Modified Project Analysis. Although the Modified Project will add two additional parcels to the approved SP-SP area, these parcels are directly adjacent to the SP-SP area and have the same geologic and soil conditions as the remainder of the SP-SP area. Consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project will not be subject to either onsite or offsite landslide hazards and will not result in impacts associated with unstable geologic units or soil. No mitigation measures were identified in the approved 2014 or 2016 IS/MND and no new mitigation measures are required for the Modified Project with regard to unstable geologic units or soil. 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? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact VI.d) Approved Project Analysis. Expansive soils generally have a substantial amount of clay particles, which can give up water (shrink) or absorb water (swell). The change in the volume exerts stress on buildings and other loads placed on these soils. The extent or range of the shrink/swell is influenced by the amount and kind of clay present in the soil. The occurrence of these soils is often associated with geologic units having marginal stability. Expansive soils can be widely dispersed and they can occur in hillside areas as well as low-lying alluvial basins. The project site and surrounding area are underlain by deep well-drained alluvial soils that have low to moderate expansion potential. With implementation of the building recommendations as specified in the Geotechnical Assessment prepared for the Approved Project, the project would have no substantial risks to life or property related to expansive soils. Therefore, impacts associated with expansive soils would be less than significant. SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 43 Modified Project Analysis. Although the Modified Project will add two additional parcels to the approved SP-SP area, these parcels are directly adjacent to the SP-SP area and have the same conditions related to expansive soils as the remainder of the SP-SP area. Consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project will be required to implement the building recommendations specified in the Geotechnical Assessment prepared for the Approved Project. With implementation of the building recommendations, the Modified Project will result in less than significant impacts associated with expansive soils. No additional mitigation is required. 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? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact VI.e) Approved Project Analysis. The project would connect to the existing sewer system; therefore, no septic or alternative wastewater disposal systems would be needed. Implementation of the Approved Project would not result in impacts associated with the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems. Modified Project Analysis. Consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project will connect to the existing sewer system; therefore no septic or alternative wastewater disposal systems would be needed. Consistent with the Approved Project, implementation of the Modified Project will not result in impacts associated with the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems. No mitigation measures were identified in the approved 2014 or 2016 IS/MND and no new mitigation measures are required for the Modified Project with regard to disposal of waste water. VII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS Would the project: a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact VII.a) Approved Project Analysis. LSA Associates, Inc. (LSA) prepared An Air Quality Analysis (LSA 2013) that included an analysis of greenhouse gas emission impacts for the SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 44 Approved Project based on the Approved Project’s development characteristics and the Approved Project’s Traffic Impact Analysis (Kimley-Horn and Associates 2013). During the construction of the Approved Project, expected equipment and vehicles would generate greenhouse gases in small amounts. At the time the 2016 IS/MND was prepared for the Approved Project there were no identified thresholds for greenhouse gas emissions. The analysis examined the short-term construction and long-term operational impacts of the Approved Project as it related to greenhouse gases. A detailed assessment of project-related GHG emissions was included in the Air Quality Analysis (LSA 2013). Project-related emissions of GHGs were modeled by including direct emissions from project vehicular traffic. Indirect emissions from electric power plants generating electricity, energy used to provide water, and the processing of solid waste were accounted for taking into account the nature of the project. The Approved Project would utilize quantifiable amounts of electricity, natural gas, water and generate solid waste that would contribute CO2, CH4, and N2O emissions. The emissions of GHG resulting were estimated using parameters from both the State of California and the federal government. Calculation of Greenhouse Gas Emissions The Approved Project’s GHG emissions during construction and mobile sources during project operation were estimated by using the CalEEMod 2011.1.1 computer model developed and maintained by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). The Approved Project’s GHG emissions from on-site equipment were estimated using the emission factors found on the SCAQMD website. The CalEEMod 2011.1.1 program estimated that the Approved Project would generate 644 pounds per day or a total of 885 metric tons of CO2e GHGs during construction. By comparison, the Approved Project’s long-term total unmitigated carbon dioxide equivalents for carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide would be 3,700 metric tons of CO2e per year or 0.0037 MMTCO2e/year. The carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide emissions that would be associated with the Approved Project is less than 0.0000075 percent of California’s total emissions for carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide (469.95 Tg CO2e). According to the Air Quality Analysis (LSA 2013), GHG emissions of 3,700 tpy of CO2e from the Approved Project would be lower than the SCAQMD interim tiered GHG emissions threshold for commercial projects of 1,400 tpy of CO2e, and would be below the 25,000 MT of CO2e/yr of residual emissions. With implementation of Mitigation Measure GHG-1 as prescribed in the approved 2014 and 2016 IS/MND, the Approved Project would be consistent with the accepted State GHG strategies. Furthermore, with implementation of Mitigation Measure GHG-1 and application of regulatory requirements, the Approved Project would have GHG emissions below those expected for a business-as-usual (BAU) project and would not conflict with or impede implementation of reduction goals identified in AB 32, the Governor’s Executive Order S-3-05, and other strategies to help reduce GHGs to the level proposed by the Governor. Therefore, the Approved Project’s contribution to cumulative GHG emissions would be less than significant. Modified Project Analysis. LSA conducted an Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Analysis for the Modified Project (LSA 2018) (refer to Appendix B) based on the Modified Project’s development characteristics and the Modified Project’s Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) (Kimely-Horn and Associates 2018). CalEEMod was used to calculate the annual operational SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 45 GHG emissions. Trip rates from the TIA and ITE Manual were used in combination with the CalEEMod default values for trip lengths and types, fleet mixes, water and energy use, and waste generation to produce the annual GHG emission rates for the Modified Project. Because the Modified Project will increase the total number of hotel room, condominiums, and square feet of commercial mixed use development when compared to the Approved Project, the long- term operational GHG emissions for the Modified Project will be incrementally higher than those projected for the Approved Project. However, with implementation of implementation of Mitigation Measure GHG-1 as prescribed in the approved 2014 and 2016 IS/MND and provided in Section 7 of this Addendum, and application of regulatory requirements, the Modified Project will have GHG emissions below those expected for a BAU project and will not conflict with or impede implementation of reduction goals identified in AB 32, the Governor’s Executive Order S-3-05, and other strategies to help reduce GHGs to the level proposed by the Governor. Therefore, consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project’s contribution to cumulative GHG emissions would be less than significant. No additional mitigation measures are required. b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact VII.b) Approved Project Analysis. The City of Arcadia has adopted policies under the City’s General Plan to reduce GHG emissions in compliance with SB 375 and AB 32, to reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020, and 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. The Approved Project would be required to comply with the local GHG emission control measures. With implementation of Mitigation Measure GHG-1 as prescribed in the approved 2014 and 2016 IS/MND and provided in Section 7 of this Addendum, the Approved Project would not conflict with any policies or regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions. Modified Project Analysis. Although the Modified Project would increase the total number of hotel room, condominiums, and square feet of commercial mixed use development when compared to the Approved Project, with implementation of Mitigation Measure GHG-1, the Modified Project would have equivalent impacts relative to GHGs (i.e., less than significant with mitigation) compared to the Approved Project. No additional mitigation measures are required. VIII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Would the project: SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 46 a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact VIII.a) Approved Project Analysis. At the time the 2016 IS/MND was prepared for the Approved Project, the project site consisted of the Santa Anita Inn. A Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment was prepared for the project site and indicates that the site does not contain any hazardous materials or facilities. In addition, there are only a few sites in the surrounding area that store or handle hazardous materials, and none of them would have any effect or impact on the project site or the proposed SP-SP project. The Approved Project proposed to develop two new hotels and condominiums that would not use or generate substantial or significant amounts of hazardous materials. There would be an incremental impact in this regard from these expanded lodging-related uses when compared to the existing conditions; however, the Approved Project would be required to comply with existing federal, state, and local laws/regulations regarding hazardous materials. Therefore, the Approved Project would result in less than significant impacts associated with hazardous materials. Modified Project Analysis. The Modified Project consists of development of one hotel and a mixed use development consisting of retail, office, luxury residential, and podium parking. Although the Modified Project would increase the total number of hotel room, condominiums, and square feet of commercial mixed use development when compared to the Approved Project, these increases would not result in a substantial increase in the use or generation of hazardous materials on the project site. Consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would be required to comply with existing federal, state, and local laws/regulations regarding hazardous materials. Therefore, consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project will result in less than significant impacts associated with hazardous materials. No mitigation measures were identified in the approved 2014 or 2016 IS/MND and no new mitigation measures are required for the Modified Project with regard to the use or generation of hazardous materials. VIII.b) Approved Project Analysis. The project site is located in Los Angeles County, which is not among the counties that are found to have serpentine and ultramafic rock in their soils. Therefore, the potential risk for naturally occurring asbestos is small. However, due to the age of the existing Santa Anita Inn, the prior analysis determined it is very likely that asbestos- 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? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 47 containing materials (ACMs) and/or lead-based paint (LBP) are present on the project site in the buildings associated with the Inn. Prior to demolition of the Inn and associated buildings, these materials will need to be removed by licensed personnel as outlined in Mitigation Measure HAZ- 1 as prescribed in the approved 2014 and 2016 IS/MND. With implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-1, the Approved Project would not create a significant hazard to the public or environment associated with the release of hazardous materials. Modified Project Analysis. The Santa Anita Inn was demolished in February 2018 in compliance with the prior SP-SP environmental approvals. The Modified Project will also require demolition of the existing house that is currently being used by the Salvation Army as a rehabilitation facility located on the approximately 11,887 square foot (0.144 acre) parcel that is being added to the west side of the approved SP-SP area (refer to Figure 2, Aerial Photograph) at 100 W. Huntington Drive. Because of the age of the existing house currently used by the Salvation Army (1936)’ it is very likely that asbestos-containing materials (ACMs) and/or lead- based paint (LBP) are present on the project site in this building. Therefore, prior to demolition of the building, these materials will need to be removed by licensed personnel as outlined in Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 as prescribed in the approved 2014 and 2016 IS/MND and provided in Section 7 of this Addendum. Consistent with the Approved Project, with implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-1, as modified to apply to demolition of any buildings on the project site, the Modified Project will not create a significant hazard to the public or environment associated with the release of hazardous materials. No additional mitigation measures are required. c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact VIII.c) Approved Project Analysis. There is one school located within a quarter mile of the project site - Barnhart School (Kindergarten through 8th grade). However, Subsection VIII.a above indicates the project would not emit or produce any hazardous materials that would represent a health hazard to the public or to students or staff at Barnhart School. Therefore, the Approved Project would not result in significant impact to this school associated with hazardous emissions or materials. Modified Project Analysis. Consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would not emit or produce any hazardous materials that would represent a health hazard to the public or to students or staff at Barnhart School. Therefore, consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project will not result in significant impact to this school associated with hazardous emissions or materials. No mitigation measures were identified in the approved 2014 or 2016 IS/MND and no new mitigation measures are required for the Modified Project with regard to the use or generation of hazardous materials. SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 48 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? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact VIII.d) Approved Project Analysis. 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 (2012). Therefore, the Approved Project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environmental associated with hazardous materials sites. Modified Project Analysis. Although the Modified Project will add two additional parcels to the approved SP-SP area, consistent with the remainder of the SP-SP area, these parcels are not included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. Therefore, consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project will not create a significant hazard to the public or the environmental associated with hazardous materials sites. No mitigation measures were identified in the approved 2014 or 2016 IS/MND and no new mitigation measures are required for the Modified Project with regard to hazardous materials sites. 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? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact VIII.e) Approved Project Analysis. The project site is not located within an airport land use plan or within two miles of a public airport or public use airport. There would not be any airport-related safety hazards for people working at the project site or guests of the hotels or condominiums. Therefore, the Approved Project would not result in impacts related to airport activity. Modified Project Analysis. Consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project site is not located within an airport land use plan or within two miles of a public airport or public use airport. There will not be any airport-related safety hazards for people working at the project site or guests/patrons of the hotel or commercial mixed uses Therefore, consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project will not result in impacts related to airport activity. No SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 49 mitigation measures were identified in the approved 2014 or 2016 IS/MND and no new mitigation measures are required for the Modified Project with regard to airport activity. 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? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact VIII.f) Approved Project Analysis. There are no private airstrips within 2 miles of the project site. Therefore, the Approved Project would not result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area. Modified Project Analysis. There are no private airstrips within 2 miles of the Modified Project site. Therefore, consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project will not result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area. No mitigation measures were identified in the approved 2014 or 2016 IS/MND and no new mitigation measures are required for the Modified Project with regard to airport activity. g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact VIII.g) Approved Project Analysis. At the time the 2016 IS/MND was prepared for the Approved Project, the Santa Anita Inn occupied the project site. Police, fire, and paramedic services are currently provided by the City to the entire downtown area, including the project site. The site is accessible via the merger of Colorado Place and West Huntington Drive to the north and East Huntington Drive to the east. Development of the Approved Project would not reduce the existing level of emergency access or the ability to evacuate onsite uses if an emergency or disaster occurs. Therefore, the Approved Project would not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. Modified Project Analysis. The Modified Project consists of development of one hotel and a mixed use development consisting of retail, office, luxury residential, and podium parking. Although the Modified Project would increase the total number of hotel room, condominiums, and square feet of commercial mixed use development when compared to the Approved Project, the Modified Project will not reduce the existing level of emergency access or the ability to evacuate onsite uses if an emergency or disaster occurs. Therefore, consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project will not impair implementation of or physically interfere SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 50 with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. No mitigation measures were identified in the approved 2014 or 2016 IS/MND and no new mitigation measures are required for the Modified Project with regard to emergency response and evacuation. 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? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact VIII.h) Approved Project Analysis. 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 project site does not fall within any fire hazard zones and is not within close proximity to any wildlands. Therefore, the Approved Project would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires. Modified Project Analysis. Although the Modified Project will add two additional parcels to the approved SP-SP area, these parcels are directly adjacent to the SP-SP area and have the same fire hazard risk as the remainder of the SP-SP area. Consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project site does not fall within any fire hazard zones and is not within close proximity to any wildlands. Therefore, consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project will not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires. No mitigation measures were identified in the approved 2014 or 2016 IS/MND and no new mitigation measures are required for the Modified Project with regard to wildland fire risk. IX. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact IX.a) Approved Project Analysis. In 1972, the Clean Water Act (CWA) was amended to require National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits for the discharge of SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 51 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. As required for all development projects within the City, the Approved Project would be subject to NPDES requirements as well as the City of Arcadia’s Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (WELO) in accordance with Mitigation Measure HYD-1 as prescribed in the approved 2014 and 2016 IS/MND. Short-Term Impacts. It is possible that runoff during grading and construction activities associated with the Approved Project could result in sediment and other urban pollutants into local drainage facilities. To protect water quality over the short-term (i.e., during construction), the Approved Project would be required to prepare a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) in accordance with Mitigation Measure HYD-2 as prescribed in the approved 2014 and 2016 IS/MND. The SWPPP would include a description of Best Management Practices (BMPs) for erosion and sediment controls, BMPs for construction waste handling and disposal, and proposed post-construction controls, including a description of local post-construction erosion and sediment control requirements. With implementation of BMPs specified in the project’s SWPPP, potential impacts associated with violation of water quality standards or waste discharge requirements during construction of the Approved Project would be less than significant. Long-Term Impacts. Once construction of the Approved Project is completed, it is possible that operation or ongoing activities of project uses may contribute to long-term water quality impacts. To prevent such impacts, the Approved Project must implement a Standard Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan (SUSMP) in accordance with Mitigation Measure HYD-3 as prescribed in the approved 2014 and 2016 IS/MND. In accordance with the SUSMP, onsite runoff would be either infiltrated into the ground in landscaped areas or be directed to several catch basins and down drains which would then direct runoff into the City’s storm drain system. New development would be required to meet or exceed pre-project conditions for stormwater discharge, and the 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. With implementation of Mitigation Measure HYD-3, potential long-term impacts of the Approved Project on local and regional water quality would be reduced to less than significant levels. Modified Project Analysis. The Modified Project consists of development of one hotel and a mixed use development consisting of retail, office, luxury residential, and podium parking. Although the Modified Project would increase the total number of hotel room, condominiums, and square feet of commercial mixed use development when compared to the Approved Project, potential impacts associated with site runoff and water quality are expected to be equivalent to those of the Approved Project. Therefore, consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project will be required to submit a Notice of Intent with the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board to be covered under the NPDES permit, and prepare a SWPPP and a SUSMP in accordance with Mitigation Measures HYD-1 through HYD-3 as prescribed in the approved 2014 and 2016 IS/MND and provided in Section 7 of this Addendum. Consistent with SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 52 the Approved Project, with implementation of these mitigation measures potential short- and long-term impacts of the Modified Project on local and regional water quality would less than significant. No additional mitigation measures are required. 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)? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact IX.b) Approved Project Analysis. The Approved Project is subject to NPDES requirements and will be designed and constructed to ensure compliance with the water quality standards and waste discharge requirements. It should be noted that there is a 16-inch water main on the west side of the site and a 12-inch water main on the east side of the site, both with 65 pounds per square inch of static pressure (65 psi). It may be necessary that the booster pumps be designed to provide sufficient pressure for the heights of the proposed buildings. Compliance with these regulations and implementation of Mitigation Measures HYD-1 through HYD-3 as prescribed in the approved 2014 and 2016 IS/MND, along with all City water supply requirements, would reduce potential impacts related to groundwater to less than significant levels. Modified Project Analysis. Consistent with Approved Project, the Modified Project is subject to NPDES requirements and will be designed and constructed to ensure compliance with the water quality standards and waste discharge requirements. The Modified Project will also connect to the existing water mains located to the west and east sides of the site. Consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project will implement Mitigation Measures HYD-1 through HYD-3 as prescribed in the approved 2014 and 2016 IS/MND and provided in Section 7 of this Addendum, along with all City water supply requirements, and will result in less than significant impacts associated with groundwater. No additional mitigation measures are required. 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? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact IX.c) Approved Project Analysis. The project site slopes gently to the south at a gradient of 2.4 percent with elevations ranging from 473 feet above mean sea level (amsl) at the north corner sloping down to 466 feet amsl at the south corner. The project site does not contain any SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 53 natural drainage courses. And at the time the 2016 IS/MND was prepared for the Approved Project, the project site was fully developed and landscaped. There is also no historical evidence of localized ponding or flooding on the project site. The Approved Project includes landscaping that would reduce the potential for erosion. Although the amount of erosion or siltation onsite might incrementally increase during construction, with implementation of Mitigation Measures HYD-1 through HYD-3 as prescribed in the approved 2014 and 2016 IS/MND, the Approved Project would not result in long-term significant impacts associated with erosion and siltation. Modified Project Analysis. Although the Modified Project will add two additional parcels to the approved SP-SP area, similar to the remainder of the SP-SP area, these parcels do not contain any natural drainage courses and there is no historical evidence of localized ponding or flooding. Consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project will include landscaping that would reduce the potential for erosion on site. Consistent with the Approved Project, with implementation of Mitigation Measures HYD-1 through HYD-3 as prescribed in the approved 2014 and 2016 IS/MND and provided in Section 7 of this Addendum, the Modified Project will not result in long-term significant impacts associated with erosion and siltation. No additional mitigation measures are required. 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? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact IX.d) Approved Project Analysis. And at the time the 2016 IS/MND was prepared for the Approved Project, the project site was fully developed with structures and impervious surfaces. Therefore, construction of the Approved Project would not substantially increase the amount of runoff from the site when compared to existing conditions. Surface runoff flows from the northeast corner of the property through the southwest corner of the property before draining into the City’s storm drain system in East Huntington Drive. There are no onsite drainage channels or features, and on-site drainage flows and direction would remain essentially the same. The Approved Project would not have a significant impact on drainage patterns and would not substantially increase the rate of amount of surface water runoff. Modified Project Analysis. The Modified Project will add two additional parcels to the approved SP-SP area, one which is currently undeveloped and would be utilized for landscaping and the second which is fully developed with a house and landscaping and will be incorporated into the development footprint. Consistent with the Approved Project, construction of the Modified Project would not substantially increase the amount of runoff from the site when compared to existing conditions. Furthermore, consistent with the Approved Project, there are no onsite drainage channels or features, and on-site drainage flows and direction would remain essentially the same. Therefore, consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project will not have a significant impact on drainage patterns and will not substantially increase the rate of amount of surface water runoff. No mitigation measures were identified in the approved 2014 SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 54 or 2016 IS/MND and no new mitigation measures are required for the Modified Project with regard to surface water runoff. 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? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact IX.e) Approved Project Analysis. The project site is relatively flat and runoff generally drains towards the south of the project site. At the time the 2016 IS/MND was prepared for the Approved Project, the project site was developed with a hotel, landscaping, and parking areas. There are no surface drainage courses on the project site, but the East Branch Arcadia Wash is located approximately 227 feet west of the site and the Arcadia Wash is located approximately 2,000 feet west of the site. The Approved Project would replace the Santa Anita Inn with new hotel and related lodging facilities, landscaping, and parking areas. The Approved Project would be required to comply with the City’s flood control requirements as well as implement Mitigation Measures HYD-1 through HYD-3 as prescribed in the approved 2014 and 2016 IS/MND. With implementation of these measures and compliance with the City’s flood control requirements, the Approved Project would not create or contribute runoff which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. Modified Project Analysis. The Modified Project will add two additional parcels to the approved SP-SP area, one which is currently undeveloped and would be utilized for landscaping and the second which is fully developed with a house and landscaping and will be incorporated into the development footprint. Consistent with the remainder of the approved SP-SP area, these two additional parcels are relatively flat and runoff generally drains toward the south of the project site. There are no surface drainage courses on the Modified Project site. Consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project will be required to comply with the City’s flood control requirements as well as implement Mitigation Measures HYD-1 through HYD-3 as prescribed in the approved 2014 and 2016 IS/MND and provided in Section 7 of this Addendum. With implementation of these measures and compliance with the City’s flood control requirements, consistent with the Approved Project the Modified Project will not create or contribute runoff which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. No additional mitigation measures are required. f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity New Mitigation is No New Impact/ No Reduced SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 55 of Impact Required Impact Impact IX.f) Approved Project Analysis. Please refer to the discussion provided under response IX.a, above. The Approved Project would be required to adhere to City water quality regulations as well as implement Mitigation Measures HYD-1 through HYD-3 as prescribed in the approved 2014 and 2016 IS/MND. With implementation of these measures and compliance with the City’s water quality regulation, the Approved Project would not substantially degrade water quality. Modified Project Analysis. Please refer to the discussion provided under response IX.a, above. Consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project will be required to adhere to City water quality regulations as well as implement Mitigation Measures HYD-1 through HYD-3 as prescribed in the approved 2014 and 2016 IS/MND and provided in Section 7 of this Addendum. Consistent with the Approved Project, with implementation of these measures and compliance with the City’s water quality regulation, the Modified Project will not substantially degrade water quality. No additional mitigation measures are required. 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? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact IX.g) Approved Project Analysis. 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 (map 06037c1400F), the project site is not located within a 100-year flood hazard area. Therefore, the Approved Project would not result in impacts associated with placing housing within a 100-year flood hazard area. Modified Project Analysis. Although the Modified Project will add two additional parcels to the approved SP-SP area, these parcels are directly adjacent to the SP-SP area and consistent with the remainder of the SP-SP area, are not located within a 100-year flood hazard area. Therefore, consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project will not result in impacts associated with placing housing within a 100-year flood hazard area. No mitigation measures were identified in the approved 2014 or 2016 IS/MND and no new mitigation measures are required for the Modified Project with regard to 100-year flood hazard areas. h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures that would impede or redirect New Significant SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 56 flood flows? Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact IX.h) Approved Project Analysis. Please refer to the discussion provided under response IX.g, above. Based on the FIRM maps (map 06037c1400F), the project site is not located within a 100-year flood hazard area. Because the project site is not located within a floodplain, the Approved Project would not impede or redirect flood flows (FEMA 2011). Therefore, the Approved Project would not place structures within a 100-year flood hazard area that would impede or redirect flood flows. Modified Project Analysis. Although the Modified Project will add two additional parcels to the approved SP-SP area, these parcels are directly adjacent to the SP-SP area and consistent with the remainder of the SP-SP area, are not located within a 100-year flood hazard area. Consistent with the Approved Project, because the project site is not located within a floodplain, the Modified Project will not impede or redirect flood flows (FEMA 2011). Therefore, consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project will not place structures within a 100-year flood hazard area that would impede or redirect flood flows. No mitigation measures were identified in the approved 2014 or 2016 IS/MND and no new mitigation measures are required for the Modified Project with regard to 100-year flood hazard areas. i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact IX.i) Approved Project Analysis. Construction and operation of the Approved 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 Santa Anita Dam inundation zone per the Safety Element of the Arcadia General Plan. The Santa Anita Dam is regulated and monitored for structural safety by the California Department of Water Resources, Division of Safety of Dams (2010 General Plan). Regulation and planned improvements to the Santa Anita Dam ensure compliance with seismic safety standards and reduces the chance of catastrophic failure. Additionally, the City has evacuation planning for the portion of the City within dam inundation zones. The risk to the Approved Project associated with dam or levee failure would be the same when compared to the current land use (e.g., the Santa Anita Inn). Therefore, impacts in this regard would be less than significant. Modified Project Analysis. The Modified Project will add two additional parcels to the approved SP-SP area that are directly adjacent to the SP-SP area and therefore are also located within the Santa Anita Dam inundation zone per the Safety Element of the Arcadia General Plan. SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 57 Consistent with the Approved Project, the risk to the Modified Project associated with dam or levee failure will be the same when compared to the current land use (e.g., the Santa Anita Inn). Therefore, impacts in this regard will be less than significant. No mitigation measures were identified in the approved 2014 or 2016 IS/MND and no new mitigation measures are required for the Modified Project with regard to dam or levee failure. j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact IX.j) Approved Project Analysis. 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 Approved Project would not result any significant impacts related to inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow. Modified Project Analysis. The Modified Project will add two additional parcels to the approved SP-SP area that are directly adjacent to the SP-SP area. Consistent with the approved SP-SP area, the two additional parcels do not contain any enclosed bodies of water (e.g., reservoir tank or pond) that could cause or result in a seiche during a seismic event. Therefore, because the project site is also not located near the Pacific Ocean or within a tsunami or mudflow hazard area, the Modified Project will not result any significant impacts related to inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow. No mitigation measures were identified in the approved 2014 or 2016 IS/MND and no new mitigation measures are required for the Modified Project with regard to inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow. X. LAND USE AND PLANNING Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact X.a) Approved Project Analysis. The project site is in an urbanized area and is surrounded by developed uses. Directly west of the project site are the Santa Anita Park race track, the SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 58 Arboretum of Los Angeles County is further to the west, and a regional mall called the Westfield Mall Santa Anita is to the southwest just south of the racetrack. North of the project site are offices and retail commercial areas along Colorado Place. North of these commercial and office uses are existing residential neighborhoods. At the time the 2016 IS/MND was prepared for the Approved Project, a small bar called the “100 to 1” is located at the northeast corner of the project site. To the east of the project site is the Arcadia County Park. South of the proposed site are the Civic Center Athletic Field Recreational Area and the City Hall complex. An individual house used by the Salvation Army as a rehabilitation facility is immediately south of the southwest corner of the site, and farther southwest are the Methodist Hospital, Quest Diagnostics Medical Lab, and Medical Library. Demolition of the existing hotel and construction of new lodging and other commercial uses on the project site would not physically divide an established community, as the Approved Project’s proposed site plan indicates that access in and around the site would be maintained similar or better than that which exists now. The only existing residential land use is north of the site (north of the office and commercial uses along Colorado Place) and the remainder of the surrounding land uses are commercial in nature or public facilities. Therefore, the Approved Project would not divide an existing community and impacts would be less than significant. Modified Project Analysis. Although the Modified Project will add two additional parcels to the approved SP-SP area, these parcels are directly adjacent to the SP-SP area and have the same neighborhood conditions as the remainder of the SP-SP area. Furthermore, one of the two parcels being added to the approved SP-SP area currently consists of the individual house used by the Salvation Army as a rehabilitation facility. Consistent with the Approved Project, demolition of the existing hotel and individual house used by the Salvation Army and construction of new lodging and other commercial uses on the project site will not physically divide an established community. Access in and around the site will be maintained similar or improved to better conditions than currently exist. Therefore, consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project will not divide an existing community and impacts would be less than significant. No mitigation measures were identified in the approved 2014 or 2016 IS/MND and no new mitigation measures are required for the Modified Project with regard to dividing an established community. b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact X.b) Approved Project Analysis. The City of Arcadia is a charter city as opposed to a general law city. The City’s General Plan designated the project site as commercial with a downtown overlay (for higher FAR), while the zoning was general commercial (C-2) with the downtown overlay and a height overlay (H-8) which allowed buildings up to 95. The Approved Project included a General Plan Amendment and zoning change to provide consistency with the SP-SP and to allow residential uses in what was previously identified as a commercial zone. Therefore, SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 59 the land use designation for the project site is now Downtown Mixed Use to allow both commercial (hotel and office) and residential (condominium) uses, and the zoning is now mixed use. The City’s zoning map indicates the site has a Height Overlay (H-8) which allows buildings up to 95 feet in height, pursuant to Section 9276.2.2 of the City’s Municipal Code. The tallest building in the Approved Project is 95. Therefore, the Approved Project uses are consistent with the current General Plan and zoning land use designations for the site. Appendix B of the SP-SP provides a detailed tabular comparison of the General Plan policies and goals that are applicable to the Approved Project and indicates the Approved Project is consistent with all applicable General Plan policies and goals. The Approved Project would be consistent with the City’s General Plan and zoning designations and applicable development guidelines and the City’s zoning designations. Therefore, the Approved Project would have no significant land use impacts related to existing applicable land use plans, policies, and regulations. Modified Project Analysis. Although the Modified Project would increase the total number of hotel room, condominiums, and square feet of commercial mixed use development when compared to the Approved Project, the proposed uses remain the same as with the Approved Project. The maximum height of the Modified Project’s proposed residential mixed-use tower will be 95 feet to the primary roof deck. Therefore, consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project will be consistent with the City’s General Plan and zoning designations and applicable development guidelines and the City’s zoning designations. Thus, the Modified Project will not result in significant land use impacts related to existing applicable land use plans. No mitigation measures were identified in the approved 2014 or 2016 IS/MND and no new mitigation measures are required for the Modified Project with regard to land use plans or policies. c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact X.c) Approved Project Analysis. 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, the Approved Project would not conflict with a habitat conservation plan or natural community plan and there would be no impacts in this regard. Modified Project Analysis. Consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified 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, consistent with the Approved Project the Modified Project will not conflict with a SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 60 habitat conservation plan or natural community plan and there will be no impacts in this regard. No mitigation measures were identified in the approved 2014 or 2016 IS/MND and no new mitigation measures are required for the Modified Project with regard to habitat or natural community conservation plans. XI. MINERAL RESOURCES Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact XI.a) Approved Project Analysis. The Approved Project site is located within the City of Arcadia, and does not contain, nor is it designated as, a source of mineral resources (e.g., construction aggregate), per the City of Arcadia General Plan Update Draft Program EIR (September 2010). Therefore, the Approved Project would not result in impacts to known mineral resources. Modified Project Analysis. The Modified Project will add two additional parcels to the approved SP-SP area that are directly adjacent to the SP-SP area. The additional parcels have the same site conditions regarding mineral resources as the Approved Project. Therefore, consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project will not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the retention and the residents of the state. No mitigation measures were identified in the approved 2014 or 2016 IS/MND and no new mitigation measures are required for the Modified Project with regard to known mineral resources. 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? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact XI.b) See response XI.a. XII. NOISE Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards New Significant SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 61 established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact XII.a) Approved Project Analysis. The Approved Project is in an urbanized area and surrounded by developed uses. Directly west of the project site is the Santa Anita Park horse racing track, while the Arboretum of Los Angeles County is further to the west. A regional mall called the Westfield Mall Santa Anita is located southwest of the site just south of Santa Anita Park. Immediately north of the project site are offices and retail commercial areas along Colorado Place, and further north of these offices are existing residential areas west of the main downtown area. Just east of the project site is the Arcadia County Park, while to the south is the Civic Center Athletic Field Recreational Area and (further south) is the Arcadia City Hall. A rehabilitation facility in a single family house used by the Salvation Army is located at the southwest corner of the project site, while an old bar is located at the northeast corner of the project site. Farther to the southwest are the Methodist Hospital, Quest Diagnostics Medical Lab, and Medical Library. Short-Term Impacts A Noise Impact Assessment was prepared for the Approved Project by LSA Associates, Inc. (LSA 2013). The assessment indicated that short-term noise impacts would be associated with excavation, grading, and erecting of buildings on site during construction of the Approved Project. Construction-related short-term noise levels would be higher than existing ambient noise levels in the project area but would no longer occur once construction of the project is completed. Construction of the Approved Project is expected to require the use of earthmovers, bulldozers, and water and pickup trucks. This equipment would be used on the project site. Based on the Noise Impact Analysis (LSA 2013), and assuming that each piece of construction equipment operates at some distance from the other equipment, the worst-case combined noise level during this phase of construction would be 91 dBA Lmax at a distance of 50 feet from the active construction area. According to the Noise Impact Analysis (LSA 2013), the residences nearest to the project site are more than 1,000 feet to the north of the project boundary. These residences may be subject to short-term, intermittent, maximum noise reaching 65 dBA Lmax, generated by construction activities on the project site. The Approved Project would be required to prepare and implement a Construction Noise Control Plan that would ensure compliance with the construction hours specified in the City’s Noise Control Ordinance as specified in Mitigation Measures N-1, prescribed in the approved 2014 and 2016 IS/MND. Because the existing Salvation Army rehabilitation facility is directly adjacent to the southwest corner of the project site, demolition of the Santa Anita Inn and construction of the new condominiums in Phase 2 may have significant noise impacts on the rehabilitation facility. With implementation of Mitigation Measure N-1 requiring installation of a temporary wooden noise barrier along the common boundary of the project and the Salvation Army rehabilitation until Phase 2 construction is complete, construction noise impacts would be less than significant. SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 62 Long-Term Impacts According to the Noise Impact Analysis (LSA 2013), vehicular traffic trips associated with the Approved Project would not result in significant traffic noise impacts on off-site sensitive uses. However, the proposed hotel units adjacent to Huntington Drive (Eastbound) and Huntington Drive (Westbound) would be potentially exposed to significant traffic noise from these streets. The Noise Impact Analysis identifies the existing traffic noise levels, existing plus cumulative with project traffic noise levels, opening year (2016) without project traffic noise levels, and opening year (2016) plus cumulative with project scenarios traffic noise levels. These noise levels represent the worst-case scenario, which assumes that no shielding is provided between the traffic and the location where the noise contours are drawn. The largest increase in noise in the area would be 1.0 dBA and would occur due to increased traffic along Huntington Drive (westbound) from Holly Drive to Santa Clara Street because of the Approved Project. This noise increase is not perceptible to the human ear and would have a less than significant impact on long term noise impacts to off-site land uses. According to the Noise Impact Analysis (LSA 2013), hotel balconies and patios along Huntington Drive westbound and eastbound would be exposed to traffic noise reaching 63 dBA CNEL, which is lower than the City’s 65 dBA CNEL noise standard for noise-sensitive outdoor active uses. Therefore, no noise barrier is required. Interior noise levels with windows closed would also be below the City’s 45 dBA CNEL noise standard. However, with windows open, interior noise levels would be higher than 45 dBA CNEL. The Approved Project would be required to implement Mitigation Measure N-2, as prescribed in the approved 2014 and 2016 IS/MND, to reduce interior noise levels to less than significant for hotel rooms along West and East Huntington Drives. Residential uses north of the project site would be physically blocked from noise emanating from onsite loading/unloading activities for Approved Project uses. Therefore, no significant noise impacts would occur for these off-site residences from on-site noise generating activities. Noise levels from parking lot noises are anticipated to be lower than that of the truck delivery and loading/unloading activities. Parking lot noise is not anticipated to be a significant noise issue with respect to hotel customers within the project site. HVAC equipment is typically located on the building rooftop and is assumed that, as a worst-case scenario, HVAC equipment would operate 24 hours a day. The closest neighboring residence to the HVAC equipment is estimated to experience noise levels below the City’s nighttime maximum noise level of 60 dBA Lmax. Therefore, noise generated from HVAC equipment would not have a significant noise impact. Mitigation is not required for less than significant impacts from truck delivery loading, parking lot noises, and HVAC equipment. As with short-term noise impacts from construction, there may be long-term noise impacts at the existing Salvation Army rehabilitation facility due to its proximity to the southwest corner of the project site. Occupancy of the new condominiums in Phase 2 is not expected to cause significant long-term noise impacts on the rehabilitation facility. However, with implementation of Mitigation Measure N-3, as prescribed in the approved 2014 and 2016 IS/MND, requiring installation of a filled cell block wall as a permanent noise barrier for this facility along its common boundary with the Approved Project, potential long-term noise impacts on the Salvation Army facility would be less than significant. SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 63 Modified Project Analysis. Consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project will result in short-term noise impacts associated with excavation, grading, and erecting of buildings on site during construction of the Modified Project. Construction-related short-term noise levels are anticipated to be the same for the Modified Project when compared to the Approved Project and will no longer occur once construction of the project is complete. Consistent with the Approved Project, the worst-case combined noise level during the earthmoving phase of construction would be 91 dBA Lmax at a distance of 50 feet from the active construction area. The closest sensitive receptor for the Modified Project is comprised of the residents located along Santa Cruz Road to the north of the project site at a distance of approximately 350 feet (inaccurately referenced as 1,000 feet from the project site in the 2014 and 2016 IS/MNDs and Noise Impact Analysis [LSA 2013]). These residences may be subject to short-term, intermittent, maximum noise reaching 65 dBA Lmax, generated by construction activities on the project site. Consistent with the Approved Project, with implementation of Mitigation Measure N-1 as prescribed in the approved 2014 and 2016 IS/MND and provided in Section 7 of this Addendum, construction noise impacts would be less than significant. The Modified Project will add two additional parcels to the approved SP-SP area, one of which is located at the southwest corner of the site and contains the existing Salvation Army facility which will be demolished as part of the Modified Project. Because the existing Salvation Army facility will be demolished during construction of the Modified Project, potentially significant short-term noise impacts related to this facility identified for the Approved Project would no longer occur with the Modified Project. Therefore, Mitigation Measure N-1 has been revised as follows to no longer require installation of a temporary wooden noise barrier along the common boundary of the project and the Salvation Army facility. Modifications to the adopted Mitigation Measure are shown below in strikethrough for deleted text, and double underlined for new inserted text. Mitigation Measure N-1: Prior to issuance of grading and building permits for each phase of the project, the developer shall prepare a Construction Noise Control Plan and will submit the plan the City for review and approval. The plan shall include but will not be limited to the following: x During all project site excavation and grading, contractors shall equip all construction equipment, fixed or mobile, with properly operating and maintained mufflers consistent with manufacturers’ standards. x The project contractor shall place all stationary construction equipment so that emitted noise is directed away from the closest sensitive receptor to the project site (i.e., the Salvation Army facility at the southwest corner of the site residents located along Santa Cruz Road to the north of the project site at a distance of approximately 350 feet). x The construction contractor shall locate equipment staging in areas that will create the greatest distance between construction- related noise sources and the closest noise-sensitive receptor to the project site (i.e., the Salvation Army facility at the southwest corner of the site residents located along Santa Cruz Road to the SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 64 north of the project site at a distance of approximately 350 feet) during all project construction. x During all project site construction, the construction contractor shall limit all construction-related activities that would result in high noise levels to between the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. on weekdays and Saturday. No construction shall be permitted on Sundays or any of the holidays listed in AMC Section 4261. x Prior to the start of Phase 2 grading, the developer shall install a wooden noise barrier along the common boundary of the project and the Salvation Army rehab facility at the southwest corner of the project site. This barrier shall be removed upon completion of Phase 2 construction. Although the Modified Project would increase the total number of hotel room, condominiums, and square feet of commercial mixed use development when compared to the Approved Project, anticipated long-term noise impacts associated with the Modified Project are expected to be equivalent to those of the Approved Project. Consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would be required to implement Mitigation Measure N-2, as prescribed in the approved 2014 and 2016 IS/MND and provided in Section 7 of this Addendum, to reduce interior noise levels to less than significant for hotel rooms along West and East Huntington Drives. Consistent with the Approved Project, residential uses north of the project site would be physically blocked from noise emanating from onsite loading/unloading activities for Modified Project uses. Therefore, no significant noise impacts will occur for these off-site residences from on-site noise generating activities. Consistent with the Approved Project, noise levels from parking lot noises associated with the Modified Project are anticipated to be lower than that of the truck delivery and loading/unloading activities. Similarly, consistent with the Approved Project, noise generated from the Modified Project’s HVAC equipment will not have a significant noise impact. No mitigation measures were identified in the approved 2014 or 2016 IS/MND and no new mitigation measures are required for the Modified Project with regard to noise impacts from truck delivery loading, parking lot noises, and HVAC equipment. As discussed above, the Modified Project will add two additional parcels to the approved SP-SP area, one of which is located at the southwest corner of the site and contains the existing Salvation Army facility which will be demolished as part of the Modified Project. Because the existing Salvation Army facility will be demolished during construction of the Modified Project, potentially significant long-term noise impacts related to this facility identified for the Approved Project would no longer occur with the Modified Project. Therefore, Mitigation Measure N-3 requiring installation of a permanent noise barrier for this facility is not applicable to the Modified Project. No long-term noise impacts will occur to the Salvation Army facility and no additional mitigation measures are required. b) Exposure of persons to or generation of New SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 65 excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact XII.b) Approved Project Analysis. Vibration refers to groundborne noise and perceptible motion. Groundborne vibration is almost exclusively a concern inside buildings and is rarely perceived as a problem outdoors, where the motion may be discernible, but without the effects associated with the shaking of a building, there is less adverse reaction. Bulldozers and other heavy-tracked construction equipment generate approximately 92 VdB of groundborne vibration when measured at 50 feet. This level of groundborne vibration exceeds the threshold of human perception, which is around 65 VdB. Every doubling of distance from 50 feet results in the reduction of the vibration level by 6 VdB; therefore, receptors at 100 and 200 feet from the construction activity may be exposed to groundborne vibration up to 86 and 80 VdB, respectively. Existing and proposed streets surrounding the project area are paved, smooth, and unlikely to cause significant ground-borne vibration. In addition, the rubber tires and suspension systems of buses and other on-road vehicles make it unusual for on-road vehicles to cause ground- borne noise or vibration problems. It is therefore assumed that no such vehicular vibration impacts would occur and that no vibration impact analysis of on-road vehicles is necessary. During Phase 1 of construction of the Approved Project, demolition and excavation would take place mainly in the northern portion of the site, so the Salvation Army facility would not be significantly impacted by vibration from grading. During Phase 2 of construction, and especially during excavation of the subterranean parking, vibration from grading may be felt by residents of the Salvation Army facility. However, no blasting or pile-driving activities are expected as part of grading for the Approved Project, so vibration effects will be temporary and relatively limited relative to the Salvation Army facility. No other sensitive receptors would be affected by grading and construction of the Approved Project due to the distance from the project site to these uses (i.e., residences to the north). Ground-borne vibration from construction activities would be mostly low to moderate, except during on-site grading and earthmoving activities. Vibrations associated with on-site construction would be reduced to a level less than what is perceptible to the average human. Additionally, groundborne vibration during construction activity would be temporary and cease upon completion of construction, and is therefore considered to be a less than significant impact of the Approved Project. Modified Project Analysis. Consistent with the Approved Project, the existing and proposed streets surrounding the project area are paved, smooth, and unlikely to cause significant ground-borne vibration. Therefore, consistent with the Approved Project, it is assumed that no vehicular vibration impacts would occur and that no vibration impact analysis of on-road vehicles is necessary for the Modified Project. SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 66 The Modified Project will add two additional parcels to the approved SP-SP area, one of which is located at the southwest corner of the site and contains the existing Salvation Army facility which will be demolished as part of the Modified Project. Therefore, potential vibration impacts associated with Phase 2 of construction identified for the Approved Project, would no longer occur with the Modified Project. Consistent with the Approved Project, no other sensitive receptors would be affected by vibration associated with grading and construction of the Modified Project due to the distance from the project site to these uses (i.e., residences to the north). Groundborne vibration during construction of the Modified Project will be temporary and cease upon completion of construction. Therefore, consistent with the Approved Project, impacts associated with groundborne vibration will be less than significant. No mitigation measures were identified in the approved 2014 or 2016 IS/MND and no new mitigation measures are required for the Modified Project with regard to groundborne vibration. c) Substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact XII.c) Approved Project Analysis. At the time the 2016 IS/MND was prepared for the Approved Project, noise levels on the project site were relatively low and are related to activities of the former Santa Anita Inn. The Approved Project would introduce more intense development to the site, which would increase ambient noise levels compared to those of the Santa Anita Inn. The Approved Project’s Noise Impact Analysis (LSA 2013) indicated that these increases would be noticeable but would not represent a significant adverse noise impact. With implementation of Mitigation Measures N-1 through N-3, as prescribed in the approved 2014 and 2016 IS/MND, the Approved Project would not result in significant adverse noise impacts or noise levels in excess of identified standards. For a more detailed analysis, refer to response XII.a, above. Modified Project Analysis. Although the Modified Project would increase the total number of hotel room, condominiums, and square feet of commercial mixed use development when compared to the Approved Project, ambient noise levels for the Modified Project are expected to be equivalent to those of the Approved Project and would not represent a significant adverse noise impact. As discussed above, the Modified Project will add two additional parcels to the approved SP-SP area, one of which is located at the southwest corner of the site and contains the existing Salvation Army facility which will be demolished as part of the Modified Project. Because the existing Salvation Army facility will be demolished during construction of the Modified Project, potentially significant long-term noise impacts related to this facility identified for the Approved Project would no longer occur with the Modified Project. Therefore, Mitigation Measure N-1 has been revised to no longer require installation of a temporary wooden noise barrier along the common boundary of the project and the Salvation Army facility (modifications to the adopted Mitigation Measure are provided in Subsection XII.a, above and Section 7 of this Addendum). SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 67 Similarly, Mitigation Measure N-3 requiring installation of a permanent noise barrier for this facility is not applicable to the Modified Project. Therefore, with implementation of revised Mitigation Measure N-1 and Mitigation Measure N-2, the Modified Project will not result in significant adverse noise impacts or noise levels in excess of identified standards. No additional mitigation measures are required. For a more detailed analysis, refer to response XII.a, above. d) Substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact XII.d) Approved Project Analysis. Although activity on the site will increase as a result of the new land uses and construction of the Approved Project, the Approved Project would not result in a significant temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity when compared to levels existing without the project as discussed under response XII.a, above. Modified Project Analysis. Although the Modified Project will increase the total number of hotel room, condominiums, and square feet of commercial mixed use development when compared to the Approved Project, ambient noise levels for the Modified Project are expected to be equivalent to those of the Approved Project. Consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project will not result in a significant temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity when compared to levels existing without the project as discussed under response XII.a, above. 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? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact XII.e) Approved Project Analysis. The project site is not located within an airport land use plan study area, or within two miles of a public airport or public use airport. The Approved Project would therefore have no impacts related to exposure of residents or workers to excessive airport noise levels. Modified Project Analysis. Consistent with the Approved Project, the project site is not located within an airport land use plan study area, or within two miles of a public airport or public use airport. Therefore, the Modified Project will have no impacts related to exposure of residents or workers to excessive airport noise levels. No mitigation measures were identified in SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 68 the approved 2014 or 2016 IS/MND and no new mitigation measures are required for the Modified Project with regard to airport 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? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact XII.f) Approved Project Analysis. The project site is not located within the influence area of a private airstrip. The Approved Project would therefore have no impact related to exposure of residents or workers to excessive airstrip noise levels. Modified Project Analysis. Consistent with the Approved Project, the project site is not located within the influence area of a private airstrip. Therefore, the Modified Project will have no impact related to exposure of residents or workers to excessive airstrip noise levels. No mitigation measures were identified in the approved 2014 or 2016 IS/MND and no new mitigation measures are required for the Modified Project with regard to private airstrip noise levels. XIII. POPULATION AND HOUSING Would the project: 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)? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact XIII.a) Approved Project Analysis. The Approved Project would result in incremental population growth for the City. At the time the 2016 IS/MND was prepared for the Approved Project, the project site consisted of the former Santa Anita Inn, a collection of two-story buildings with extensive mature landscaping. The former Inn had 26 employees (14 full-time employees and 12 part-time employees). The Approved Project would add 85 full-time or part- time commercial service employees to the local workforce. The new hotel would accommodate approximately 357 people at buildout based on at 85 percent average occupancy and assuming 2 people per unit.1 The condominiums would increase the full time resident population by 85 people.2 As a worst case estimate, if all 50 units had 2 full-time residents, the long-term 1 210 rooms × 0.85 × 2 people per room = 357 persons 2 50 rooms × 0.85 × 2 people per room = 85 persons SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 69 population of the Approved Project would be 100 residents which would incrementally increase the City’s population. The population increase resulting from the Approved Project would be primarily transient or seasonal based on the Santa Anita Park race schedule. The Approved Project would not result in the need for any new utilities, except for the planned sewer improvements. Therefore, due to the nature and size of the Approved Project, the project is not expected to result in any significant indirect growth inducement to the City’s population or housing. No significant impacts are expected in this regard. Modified Project Analysis. The Modified Project will construct 17 additional hotel rooms, 46 additional condominiums, and 31,693 additional square feet of commercial mixed-use space when compared to the Approved Project. The Modified Project’s hotel is not anticipated to require more employees than required for the Approved Project’s hotel. However, the worse- case estimate for full time residents of the Modified Project’s condominium units would increase by a maximum of 107 people when compared to the Approved Project. It is anticipated that office workers in the Modified Project’s commercial space would currently be living in the City or adjacent areas and thus not required additional housing. However, should office workers relocate to the area for the Modified Project, adequate housing is expected to be available in the City or adjacent areas or in the project’s new condominium units. Therefore, consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would not induce substantial population growth and impacts would be less than significant. No mitigation measures were identified in the approved 2014 or 2016 IS/MND and no new mitigation measures are required for the Modified Project with regard to population growth. b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact XIII.b) Approved Project Analysis. The project site does not contain any housing units, so construction of the Approved Project would not result in displacement of existing housing or construction of replacement housing elsewhere in the City or nearby County areas. The Approved Project would result in the construction of 210 hotel units and 50 condominium units. No significant housing impacts are expected with implementation of the Approved Project. Modified Project Analysis. The Modified Project will result in the construction of an addition 17 hotel rooms and 46 condominium units when compared to the Approved Project. In addition, the Modified Project will result in the acquisition of two additional parcels, one which contains an individual house currently used by the Salvation Army as a rehabilitation facility. The Salvation Army plans relocate the services currently offered at this facility to another facility in Pasadena; therefore, residents of this facility will not be displaced. The Modified Project will provide more housing than the Approved Project and will not displace substantial numbers of existing housing or necessitate the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. Therefore, SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 70 consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project will not result in significant impacts associated with existing housing. No mitigation measures were identified in the approved 2014 or 2016 IS/MND and no new mitigation measures are required for the Modified Project with regard to population growth. c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact XIII.c) Approved Project Analysis. At the time the 2016 IS/MND was prepared for the Approved Project, the project site consisted of the former Santa Anita Inn, a collection of two- story buildings with extensive mature landscaping. The Inn had an average occupancy of 187 guests, while the new hotel and condominium units would have an average occupancy of 442 guests. Demolition of the Santa Anita Inn would not result in the displacement of existing housing (as opposed to lodging) or require construction of replacement housing elsewhere in the City or nearby County areas. Therefore, the Approved Project would not result in impacts in this regard. Modified Project Analysis. The Modified Project site is the same as the Approved Project site, except for the acquisition of two additional parcels, one which contains an individual house currently used by the Salvation Army as a rehabilitation facility. The Salvation Army plans to relocate the services currently offered at this facility to another facility in Pasadena; therefore, residents of this facility will not be displaced. The Modified Project will provide more housing than the Approved Project and will not displace substantial numbers of people or necessitate the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. Therefore, consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project will not result in impacts resulting in the need for replacement housing elsewhere. No mitigation measures were identified in the approved 2014 or 2016 IS/MND and no new mitigation measures are required for the Modified Project with regard to replacement housing. XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES 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: i Fire Protection? i Police Protection? i Schools? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 71 i Parks? i Other Public Facilities? XIV.a) Approved Project Analysis. At the time the 2016 IS/MND was prepared for the Approved Project, the project site consisted of the former Santa Anita Inn, a collection of two- story buildings with 110 rooms. The Approved Project would construct a hotel with 210 rooms, 50 condominiums, and 6,792 square feet of retail space which would generate more local traffic and introduce more employees, residents, and guests to the project area. This change of use, when compared to the existing site use, would incrementally increase the need for fire, police, parks, and other public facilities. The Approved Project would be required to pay all applicable Development Impact Fees to the City and local school district to alleviate potential impacts related to public services. Therefore, the Approved Project would not result in a significant impact to public services. Modified Project Analysis. Although the Modified Project will increase the total number of hotel room, condominiums, and square feet of commercial mixed use development when compared to the Approved Project, these increases will result in an incremental increases in the need for public services. Consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Proejct will be required to pay all applicable Development Impact Fees to the City and local school district to alleviate potential impacts related to public services. Therefore, consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project will not result in significant impacts to public services. No mitigation measures were identified in the approved 2014 or 2016 IS/MND and no new mitigation measures are required for the Modified Project with regard to public services. XV. RECREATION a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact XV.a) Approved Project Analysis. The Approved Project consisted of the construction of a hotel, condominiums, and commercial mixed-use spaces that would potentially incrementally increase the use of the County park to the east. If all 50 condominium units had full time residents, there could be as many as 100 additional residents in the area or in the City (assuming 2 residents per condominium unit). It is anticipated that project workers would likely live in or near to Arcadia, and would take advantage of existing City and County park facilities and services. Some new workers may live outside of Arcadia and may result in an incremental increase in the demand on City park facilities and services. However, the Approved Project would be required to pay all applicable Development Impact Fees to the City to alleviate potential impacts related to park facilities. Therefore, the Approved Project would not result in a significant impact to existing recreational facilities. Modified Project Analysis. The Modified Project will increase the number of hotel units by 17, condominium units by 46, and commercial mixed-use space by 31,693 square feet when SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 72 compared to the Approved Project. If the additional 46 condos had full time residents, there may be as many as 92 additional residents in the area or in the City (assuming 2 residents per condo) when compared to the Approved Project. This minor increase is not expected to substantially change the demand on City park facilities. Consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project will be required to pay all applicable Development Impact Fees to the City to alleviate potential impacts related to park facilities. Therefore, consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project will not result in significant impacts to existing recreational facilities. No mitigation measures were identified in the approved 2014 or 2016 IS/MND and no new mitigation measures are required for the Modified Project with regard to recreation facilities. 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? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact XV.b) Approved Project Analysis. The Approved Project proposed a hotel, condominiums, and mixed-use commercial development. The construction of 50 condominiums would not generate a substantial amount of new City residents; therefore, the Approved Project would not generate a need to expand existing City recreational facilities. The Approved Project would also have a number of indoor and outdoor event or public spaces which would help reduce potential impacts on local park facilities. Therefore, the Approved Project would not result in significant impacts associated with recreational facilities. Modified Project Analysis. Although the Modified Project will increase the total number of hotel room, condominiums, and square feet of commercial mixed use development when compared to the Approved Project, these increases will result in an incremental increases in the demand for recreational facilities. Consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project will include a number of indoor and outdoor event or public spaces which will help reduce potential impacts associated with recreational facilities. Therefore, consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project will not result in significant impacts associated with recreational facilities. No mitigation measures were identified in the approved 2014 or 2016 IS/MND and no new mitigation measures are required for the Modified Project with regard to recreation facilities. For a more detailed analysis, refer to response XV.a, above. XVI. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC Would the project: 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 New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 73 components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit? XVI.a) Approved Project Analysis. The Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) prepared for the Approved Project (Kimley Horn & Associates 2013) evaluated twelve (12) local roadways and four (4) local intersections based on the City’s traffic study requirements and the County’s Congestion Management Plan (CMP) criteria. The TIA (Kimley Horn & Associates 2013) used the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) methodology for both signalized and unsignalized intersections. The HCM method examines the ratio of volume to capacity (V/C) and emphasizes seconds of delay on each leg of an intersection. The City of Arcadia utilizes 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. According to the 2013 TIA the intersection at Huntington Drive and Colorado Place would be negatively impacted as a result of the Approved Project. Phase 1 of the Approved Project would result in significant impacts on the intersection of Huntington Drive and Colorado Place due to increase of greater than 2 percent demand. However, Phase 2 of the Approved Project would not result in significant impacts on surrounding intersections. With implementation of Mitigation Measures TRA-1 through TRA-4, as prescribed in the approved 2014 and 2016 IS/MND, short- term (during construction) and long-term (after project occupancy) project-related traffic impacts would be reduced to less than significant levels. The Approved Project included 340 parking spaces and the City requires 312 parking spaces. While parking has been 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 would not have to park on adjacent properties due to a deficiency of onsite parking. Modified Project Analysis. A Traffic Impact Analysis was prepared for the Modified Project (Kimley Horn & Associates 2018) (refer to Appendix E). Consistent with the 2013 TIA, the 2018 TIA evaluated twelve (12) local roadways and four (4) local intersections based on the City’s traffic study requirements and the County’s Congestion Management Plan (CMP) criteria. According to the 2018 TIA, neither Phase 1 nor Phase 2 of the Modified Project would result in significant impacts on any of the study intersections or study roadways. Under the revised site layout associated with Modified Project, the main hotel driveway on W. Huntington Drive has been relocated further to the west in comparison to the Approved Project driveway location. This shift to the west renders the signal phase changes to accommodate inbound project traffic associated with Mitigation Measure TRA-1 no longer valid, although the project proponent will be required to restripe westbound Huntington Drive to include an acceleration / deceleration left turn lane into the proposed driveways. Similarly, the westerly shift of the main hotel driveway on W. Huntington Drive renders the circular driveway associated with Mitigation Measure TRA-4 no longer valid. For these reasons, Section 7 shows modifications to Mitigation Measure TRA-1 and Mitigation Measure TRA-4 is shown in strikethrough. Although the Modified Project would not result in significant impacts to any of the study intersections or study roadways, Mitigation SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 74 Measures TRA-2 through TRA-3, as prescribed in the approved 2014 and 2016 IS/MND and provided in Section 7 of this Addendum, are still applicable to the Modified Project. Additionally, in accordance with the City’s standard construction practices construction traffic (deliveries, etc.) will be scheduled during off-peak hours to minimize impacts on adjacent roadways, and in the immediate project work area flagmen and lane channelization devices will regulate access and parking during work hours. Therefore, consistent with the Approved Project, with implementation of Mitigation Measures TRA-1 through TRA-3 short-term (during construction) and long-term (after project occupancy) traffic impacts associated with the Modified Project will be less than significant. No additional mitigation measures are required. Phase 1 of the Modified Project will include a total of 227 parking spaces. Phase 2 of the Modified Project will include an additional 503 parking spaces for a total of 585 parking spaces site-wide. The Modified Project will provide adequate parking spaces to accommodate employees, residents, customers, and visitors. 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? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact XVI.b) Approved Project Analysis. The Approved Project’s TIA (Kimley Horn & Associates 2013) was performed in accordance with the Los Angeles County Congestion Management Program (CMP) guidelines. Therefore, the Approved Project would not conflict an applicable congestion management program with implementation of Mitigation Measures TRA-1 through TRA-4 as prescribed in the approved 2014 and 2016 IS/MND. Modified Project Analysis. Consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project’s TIA (Kimley Horn & Associates 2018) was performed in accordance with the Los Angeles County CMP guidelines. According to the 2018 TIA, neither Phase 1 nor Phase 2 of the Modified Project would result in significant impacts on any of the study intersections or study roadways. However, Mitigation Measures TRA-1 through TRA-4 are still applicable to the Modified Project. Therefore, consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project will not conflict with an application congestion management program. No additional mitigation measures are required. 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? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 75 XVI.c) Approved Project Analysis. The Approved Project does not include uses or components that would affect air traffic, so no substantial safety risks would result from implementation of the Approved Project and no significant impacts would occur. Modified Project Analysis. Consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project does not include uses or components that would affect air traffic, so no substantial safety risks will result from implementation of the Modified Project and no significant impacts would occur. No mitigation measures were identified in the approved 2014 or 2016 IS/MND and no new mitigation measures are required for the Modified Project with regard to air traffic patterns or 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)? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact XVI.d Approved Project Analysis. The Approved Project will increase traffic onsite and on adjacent streets and intersections. The project leg of the skewed intersection adjacent to the project site entrance is presently uncontrolled and signed for “right turn only”. Although there have been no accidents at this location, a substantial increase in traffic from the project site would substantially increase the risk of traffic accidents at this location due to this leg of the intersection being uncontrolled. The 2013 TIA recommends the Approved Project be responsible for improvements to the existing traffic signal to add controls to the project leg of the intersection. Implementation of Mitigation Measure TRA-1, as prescribed in the approved 2014 and 2016 IS/MND, would provide traffic control as development intensity of the site increase and would prevent the increase of hazards due to design features of the Approved Project. With implementation of Mitigation Measure TRA-1, the Approved Project would result in less than significant impacts with regard to increases hazards due to a design feature. Modified Project Analysis. Consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project has the potential to increase the risk of traffic accidents along the uncontrolled project leg of the skewed intersection adjacent to the project site due to an increase in traffic associated with the project. Therefore, consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project will implement Mitigation Measure TRA-1, as prescribed in the approved 2014 and 2016 IS/MND and provided in Section 7 of this Addendum, to reduce the potential for an increase of hazards associated with the Modified Project design features. Consistent with the Approved Project, with implementation of Mitigation Measure TRA-1, the Modified Project will result in less than significant impacts with regard to increases hazards due to a design feature. No additional mitigation measures are required. SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 76 e) Result in inadequate emergency access? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact XVI.e) Approved Project Analysis. The Arcadia Police Department is less than a minute away and the Arcadia Station 106 Fire Department is only three minutes away from the project site. Traffic associated with construction of the Approved Project may have a temporary effect on existing traffic circulation patterns. However, the Approved Project is in an urban setting and direct access to the site would be available primarily from West Huntington Drive and secondary emergency access would be provided by a driveway on East Huntington Drive. The Approved Project would also comply with all of the City’s requirements for emergency access. Therefore, due to the proximity of emergency services, the urban setting, and availability of access to the site, impacts to emergency access would be less than significant. Modified Project Analysis. Consistent with the Approved Project, traffic associated with construction of the Modified Project may have a temporary effect on existing traffic circulation patterns. However, as with the Approved Project, the Modified Project is in an urban setting and direct access to the site will be available primarily from West Huntington Drive and secondary emergency access will be provided by a driveway on East Huntington Drive. The Modified Project will also comply with all of the City’s requirements for emergency access. Therefore, consistent with the Approved Project, due to the proximity of emergency services, the urban setting, and availability of access to the site, impacts to emergency access associated with the Modified Project will be less than significant. No mitigation measures were identified in the approved 2014 or 2016 IS/MND and no new mitigation measures are required for the Modified Project with regard to adequate emergency access. 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? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact XVI.g) Approved Project Analysis. The Approved Project would be required to install bike racks and provide showers and locker rooms for employees of the hotel and condominiums in addition to providing bike racks for project guests as specified in Mitigation Measure TRA-2 prescribed in the approved 2014 and 2016 IS/MND. Additionally, the Approved Project plans would be circulated to Foothill Transit and the Metropolitan Transit Authority to determine if there is a need for a bus stop on the south side of Colorado Place in front of the project site as specified in Mitigation Measure TRA-2 prescribed in the approved 2014 and 2016 IS/MND. If it is determined a bus stop is needed, one would be installed as part of the Approved Project. SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 77 With implementation of Mitigation Measures TRA-2 and TRA-3, the Approved Project would be consistent with City policies supporting public transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities and impacts will be less than significant. Modified Project Analysis. Consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project will implement Mitigation Measures TRA-2 requiring installation of bike racks, showers, and lockers. Implementation of Mitigation Measure TRA-3 (for the Phase 1 hotel construction) requiring coordination with MTA regarding installation of a bus stop along the project frontages was implemented and MTA determined a bus stop would not be located on the Huntington Drive project frontages. With implementation Mitigation Measures TRA-2, the Modified Project will be consistent with City policies supporting public transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities and impacts will be less than significant. No additional mitigation measures are required. XVII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? New Significan t Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact XVII.a) Approved Project Analysis. At the time the 2016 IS/MND was prepared for the Approved Project, the project site consisted of the Santa Anita Inn that discharged its wastewater into the sanitary sewerage collection and treatment systems provided by the City of Arcadia and the County of Los Angeles, respectively. Wastewater generation would increase incrementally under the Approved Project with addition of full time residences, office workers, and a hotel with a larger guest capacity. 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 storm water and construction project discharges. Construction of a project resulting in the disturbance of more than one acre requires an NPDES permit as required by Mitigation Measure HYD-1 prescribed in the approved 2014 and 2016 IS/MND. Construction project proponents are also required to prepare a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) as required by Mitigation Measure HYD-2 prescribed in the approved 2014 and 2016 IS/MND. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, 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 Approved Project would comply with the waste discharge prohibitions and water quality objectives established by the RWQCB and the City by implementing Mitigation Measures HYD-1 through HYD-3 as prescribed in the approved 2014 and 2016 IS/MND. By implementing Mitigation SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 78 Measures HYD-1 through HYD-3, the Approved Project would not exceed wastewater treatment requirements and no significant impacts would occur. Modified Project Analysis. The Modified Project would incrementally increase wastewater generation from the site by adding additional full time residents, office workers, and hotel guests. Consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project will be required to implement Mitigation Measures HYD-1 through HYD-3 as prescribed in the 2014/2016 IS/MND provided in Section 7 of this addendum. With implementation of Mitigation Measures HYD-1 through HYD-3 the Modified Project would not exceed wastewater treatment requirements and no significant impacts would occur. No additional mitigation measures are required. 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? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact XVII.b) Approved Project Analysis. 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 Approved Project would need to connect to the sewer line in West Huntington Drive which was considered to be deficient according to the City’s Public Work’s Department at the time the 2016 IS/MND was prepared for the Approved Project. The Huntington Drive Sewer Capacity Improvement Project, a Capital Improvement Project (CIP), would upgrade the sewer pipe from 10” to 12” and was scheduled for Fiscal Year (FY) 2014-2015 with actual construction planned for FY 2015-2016. The Approved Project would need to participate in (i.e., help fund) the CIP project. If the project participates in the CIP improvement, the Approved Project would not cause a need to construct any new water or wastewater treatment facilities, or expand existing facilities because the facilities would be adequately sized to service the site. Implementation of Mitigation Measures UTL-1 and UTL-2 as prescribed the approved 2014/2016 IS/MND would reduce effects to wastewater treatment facilities to less than significant. Modified Project Analysis. The Modified Project would use the same water and wastewater services as the Approved Project. Although the Modified Project will increase the total number of hotel room, condominiums, and square feet of commercial mixed use development when compared to the Approved Project, these increases will result in an incremental increase in the demand for water and generation of wastewater. In 2017, Phase 2 of the Huntington Drive Sewer Capacity Project was approved and implemented to increase the sewer capacity in the vicinity of the Modified Project. The completion of the sewer project satisfies Mitigation Measures UTL-1 and UTL-2 prescribed for the Approved Project in the approved 2014 and 2016 IS/MND; therefore, Mitigation Measures UTL-1 and UTL-2 are no longer applicable to the Modified Project. Consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project will not cause a need to construct any new water or wastewater treatment facilities, or expand existing facilities. No additional mitigation measures are required. SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 79 c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact XVII.c) Approved Project Analysis. The Approved Project would pay the City’s established Development Impact Fees (DIF) to help offset costs for new storm water drainage facilities in the vicinity of the project. Therefore, the Approved Project would result in a less than significant impact on storm water drainage facilities. Modified Project Analysis. Consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project will pay the City DIF fees based on impacts to City services, including affected utilities. Therefore, consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project will result in less than significant impacts to storm water drainage facilities. No mitigation measures were identified in the approved 2014 or 2016 IS/MND and no new mitigation measures are required for the Modified Project with regard to storm water drainage facilities. d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact XVII.d) Approved Project Analysis. Water service would be 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 at the time the 2016 IS/MND was prepared for the Approved Project, MWD would be able to meet the region’s water needs through 2030. In addition, the Approved Project does not meet the threshold to prepare a project-specific Water Supply Assessment (WSA) under SB 610. The Approved Project would pay City DIF fees for water services as appropriate. Therefore, the Approved Project would result in less than significant impacts to existing entitlements. Modified Project Analysis. Consistent with the Approved Project, water service will be provided to the Modified Project by the City’s Public Works Services Department. Although the Modified Project will increase the total number of hotel room, condominiums, and square feet of commercial mixed use development when compared to the Approved Project, these increases will result in an incremental increase in water consumption when compared to the Approved SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 80 Project. Consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project will also pay City DIF fees for water services as appropriate. Therefore, consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would result in less than significant impacts to existing entitlements. No mitigation measures were identified in the approved 2014 or 2016 IS/MND and no new mitigation measures are required for the Modified Project with regard to water entitlements. 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? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact XVII.e) Approved Project Analysis. The Approved Project would incrementally increase the area population with the addition of full time residents, office workers, and a hotel with a larger guest capacity than the former Santa Anita Inn. As discussed in Responses XIII.a and XVII.a above, prior to the issuance of grading permits, the project applicant would be required to satisfy City requirements related to the payment of fees and/or the provision of adequate wastewater treatment facilities. The Approved Project would comply with the waste discharge prohibitions and water quality objectives established by the RWQCB and the City with implementation of Mitigation Measures HYD-1 through HYD-3. With implementation of Mitigation Measures HYD-1 through HYD-3, impacts related to wastewater treatment would be less than significant. Modified Project Analysis. The Modified Project will result in an incremental increase in full time residents, office workers and employee guests as compared to the Approved Project. However, consistent with the Approved Project, prior to the issuance of grading permits for the Modified Project, the project applicant will be required to satisfy City requirements related to the payment of fees and/or the provision of adequate wastewater facilities. The Modified Project will comply with the waste discharge prohibitions and water quality objectives established by the RWQCB and the City by implementing Mitigation Measures HYD-1 through HYD-3 as prescribed in the approved 2014/2016 IS/MND and provided in Section 7 of this addendum. Therefore, consistent with the Approved Project, with implementation of Mitigation Measures HYD-1 through HYD-3 impacts related to wastewater treatment will be less than significant. No additional mitigation measures are required. f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 81 XVII.f) Approved Project Analysis. At the time the 2016 IS/MND was prepared for the Approved Project, the City of Arcadia did not contract with a particular landfill; however, the Santa Anita Inn contracted with Waste Management to dispose of trash generated on the site. The Approved Project would likely contract with the same company or with a similar company in the area. The Approved Project would generate wastes both during construction and occupancy of the hotels, condominiums, and commercial mixed-use spaces. According to the California Recycle website at the time the 2016 IS/MND was prepared for the Approved Project, hotel uses generated approximately 10 pounds of trash per person per day, so the Approved Project as a worst case scenario would generate up to 5,270 pounds of trash each day or 2.6 tons per day which adds to 962 tons per year (5273 persons times 10 pounds per person per day). It is expected that landfills serving the Approved Project would have sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs. Therefore, the Approved Project would not result in significant impacts associated with solid waste disposal needs. Modified Project Analysis. Although the Modified Project will increase the total number of hotel room, condominiums, and square feet of commercial mixed use development when compared to the Approved Project, these increases will result in an incremental increase in the volume of solid waste generated by operation of the Modified Project when compared to the Approved Project. Consistent with the Approved Project, it is expected that landfills serving the Modified Project will have sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs. Therefore, the Modified Project will not result in significant impacts associated with solid waste disposal needs. No mitigation measures were identified in the approved 2014 or 2016 IS/MND and no new mitigation measures are required for the Modified Project with regard to solid waste disposal. g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact XVII.g) Approved Project Analysis. The Approved 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. Therefore, impacts in this regard would be less than significant. Modified Project Analysis. Consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project will be required to comply with the same federal, state and local solid waste regulations. Therefore, consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project would result in less than significant impacts to solid waste. No mitigation measures were identified in the approved 2014 or 2016 IS/MND and no new mitigation measures are required for the Modified Project with regard to 3 260 total rooms × 85 percent occupancy × 2 persons per room average= 442 guests plus 85 employees = 527 persons. This is a worst case estimate. SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 82 solid waste. 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? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact XVIII.a) Approved Project Analysis. At the time the 2016 IS/MND was prepared for the Approved Project, the project site supported the former Santa Anita Inn and was fully developed. There is no suitable habitat to support special-status species either on or adjacent to the project site. The Approved Project has the potential to result in significant impacts to existing trees and nesting birds. However, with implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1 through BIO-3, as prescribed in the approved 2014 and 2016 IS/MND, a tree assessment would be prepared for the project and existing mature trees would be preserved or relocated to the extent feasible, the existing redwood trees along the east side of the property would be protected in place, and a nesting bird survey would be conducted if construction must occur during the local nesting season (February 1 to July 15). Therefore, with implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1 through BIO-3, the Approved Project would result in less than significant impacts associated with any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special- status. The 2014 and 2016 IS/MNDs concluded that the existing Santa Anita Inn property does not meet the requirements of listing for either the State or National Register of Historic Places. In addition, the City of Arcadia does not maintain a list of locally designated historical resources. Therefore, the Approved Project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5. However, the Santa Anita Inn does represent a connection to the City’s past; therefore, with implementation of Mitigation Measures CUL-1 and CUL-2 as prescribed in the approved 2014 and 2016 IS/MND, the Approved Project would ensure proper documentation of the Santa Anita Inn and its contribution to the City’s history. Modified Project Analysis. Although the Modified Project will add two additional parcels to the approved SP-SP area, similar to the remainder of the SP-SP area, these two parcels are currently developed and do not contain suitable habitat to support special-status species. Consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project will re-develop the project site and has the potential to result in impacts to existing trees and nesting birds. An Arborist Tree Assessment and Nesting Bird Survey and Tree Preservation Study were conducted for the Modified Project (LSA 2018; Applegate Consulting 2018). The tree assessments concluded that 71 of the 92 redwood trees surveyed along the east side of the SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 83 project limits and 7 of the 13 non-native exotic trees on the Salvation Army site would be subject to the City’s tree protection ordinance. However, none of the redwood trees are in good condition, rather, a majority are in poor condition. Consistent with the prior SP-SP environmental approvals, 23 of the redwood trees and one palm tree were removed to accommodate the relocation of the W. Huntington Drive driveway associated with the Modified Project. Due to the poor condition of the majority of the tress, the tree assessment recommends that the redwood tress be removed and replaced with a species better suited to the environmental conditions found on the site and in accordance with the City’s tree protection ordinance. Similarly, 6 of the 7 protected trees on the Salvation Army site are not worthy of saving or relocated and one tree can be saved but not relocated. The 5 southern magnolias are too large, too old, very shallow rooted, and would not survive relocation or would take more than a decade to recover and be attractive. The single orchid tree is already declining and does not have adequate health to be relocated. The single floss silk tree is too large and shallow rooted to relocate safely. The single deodar cedar in the W. Huntington parkway could be saved but because it is leaning, has several limbs turned back, cutting its roots to transplant it would increase the risk of it falling. Based on this assessment of the 7 trees on the Salvation Army site, the arborist report determined none of the trees are worth relocating or can be relocated. The Approved Project is required to implement Mitigation Measures BIO-1 through BIO-3, as prescribed in the approved 2014 and 2016 IS/MND and provided in Section 7 of this Addendum. However, the two arborist reports prepared for this Addendum provide full assessment of all the remaining trees on the Modified Project site, and therefore Mitigation Measure BIO-1 has been fulfilled and is no longer be applicable. The arborist report for the redwood trees along the east side of the project site recommends none of the trees are worth relocating or can be relocated due to the compromised health of the trees. Mitigation Measure BIO-2 has been fulfilled and is no longer applicable to the Modified Project. Because Mitigation Measure BIO-1 and Mitigation Measure BIO-2 have been fulfilled and are no longer applicable, they are shown with strikethrough in Section 7 of this Addendum. Consistent with the Approved Project, with implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-3, the Modified Project will result in less than significant impacts associated with any species identified as candidate, sensitive, or special- status. No additional mitigation measures are required. An historical evaluation of the Salvation Army property at 180 West Huntington Drive (AIN 5775Ǧ024Ǧ015) was conducted for this Addendum. As a result of the archival research and intensiveǦlevel field survey, the evaluation determined that the 1936 altered residence does not appear to be eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources under any criteria. It has sustained alterations (window replacements and additions) that have compromised its integrity and it does not embody the distinctive characteristics of a particular architectural style. In addition, there is no indication that it is associated with any people who are significant in history. Further, this property is not included in the 2016 citywide survey either individually or as a contributor to a potential historic district. For these reasons, the residence at 180 West Huntington Drive does not qualify as a “historical resource” as defined by CEQA. Implementation of the proposed SP-SP including demolition of the 1936 residence would result in no impact with regard to historical resources. SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 84 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.) New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact XVIII.b) Approved Project Analysis. As presented in the discussion of environmental checklist questions I through XVII, the Approved Project would result in no impact, a less than significant impact, or a less than significant impact with implementation of mitigation measures as prescribed in the approved 2014 and 2016 IS/MND with respect to all environmental issues. Due to the limited scope of direct physical impacts to the environment associated with development of the Approved Project, the Approved Project is not expected to result in significant contributions to cumulative impacts within the City or surrounding areas. Modified Project Analysis. Although the Modified Project will increase the total number of hotel room, condominiums, and square feet of commercial mixed use development when compared to the Approved Project, and will add two additional parcels to the approved SP-SP area, consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project will result in no impact, a less than significant impact, or a less than significant impact with implementation of mitigation measures as prescribed in the approved 2014 and 2016 IS/MND with respect to all environmental issues (environmental checklist questions I through XVII). Therefore, consistent with the Approved Project, the Modified Project is not expected to result in significant contributions to cumulative impacts within the City or surrounding area. No mitigation measures were identified in the approved 2014 or 2016 IS/MND and no new mitigation measures are required for the Modified Project with regard to cumulative impacts. c) Does the project have environmental effects that will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? New Significant Impact/ Increased Severity of Impact New Mitigation is Required No New Impact/ No Impact Reduced Impact XVIII.c) Approved Project Analysis. In general, impacts to human beings from the Approved Project may occur due to air pollutant emissions, hazards and hazardous materials, and noise. At the time the 2016 IS/MND was prepared for the Approved Project, the South Coast Air Basin was designated as a non-attainment area for ozone, PM10, and PM2.5. Development of the Approved Project would contribute to air pollutant emissions on a short- term basis. The Approved Project would be required to comply with regional rules that assist in reducing short-term air pollutant emissions. The purpose of SCAQMD Rule 403 is to reduce the amount of particulate matter in the atmosphere resulting from man-made fugitive dust sources as required in Mitigation Measure AIR-1 prescribed in the approved 2014 or 2016 IS/MND. Implementation of Mitigation Measures AIR-1 through AIR-4 as prescribed in the approved SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 85 2014 or 2016 IS/MND would reduce potential short- and long-term air pollutant impacts associated with construction and operation of the Approved Project to less than significant levels. The Approved Project also has the potential to result in impacts related to potential hazardous materials and to water quality. However, the Approved Project would be required to comply with existing federal, state, and local laws/regulations regarding hazardous materials. Prior to demolition of the Santa Anita Inn and associated buildings, asbestos-containing materials and/or lead-based paint would need to be removed by licensed personnel as outlined in Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 as prescribed in the approved 2014 and 2016 IS/MND. With implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-1, the Approved Project would not create a significant hazard to the public or environment associated with the release of hazardous materials. To prevent potential impacts to water quality, the Approved Project would be 1) subject to NPDES requirements as well as the City of Arcadia’s Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance in accordance with Mitigation Measure HYD-1; 2) required to prepare a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) in accordance with Mitigation Measure HYD-2; and 3) must implement a Standard Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan (SUSMP) in accordance with Mitigation Measure HYD-3 as prescribed in the approved 2014 and 2016 IS/MND. With implementation of Mitigation Measures HYD-1 through HYD-3 potential short- and long-term impacts of the Approved Project on local and regional water quality would less than significant. To prevent potential noise impacts to nearby residences, the Approved Project would be 1) required to prepare and implement a Construction Noise Control Plan that would ensure compliance with the construction hours specified in the City’s Noise Control Ordinance as specified in Mitigation Measures N-1; 2) demonstrate that all buildings have air-conditioning to minimize noise impacts on hotel rooms along West and East Huntington Drives as specified in Mitigation Measures N-2; and 3) install a filled-cell concrete block wall along the common boundary with the Salvation Army rehabilitation facility at the southwest corner of the project site as specified in Mitigation Measures N-3 prescribed in the approved 2014 and 2016 IS/MND. With implementation of Mitigation Measures N-1 through N-3 potential noise impacts associated with the Approved Project would be less than significant. Therefore, with implementation of the Mitigation Measures referenced above, the Approved Project would not result in environmental effects that would cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. Modified Project Analysis. Consistent with the Approved Project, impacts to human beings from the Modified Project may occur due to air pollutant emissions, hazards and hazardous materials, and noise. Please refer to the discussions provided under Modified Project Anlaysis in responses III.b, IV,a, VII.b, IX.a, and XII.a, above. Consistent with the Approved Project, with implementation of mitigation measures prescribed in the approved 2014 and 2016 IS/MND, the Modified Project will not result in environmental effects that would cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. No additional mitigation measures are required. SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 86 SECTION 5 LIST OF PREPARERS 5.1 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. x Lynn Calvert-Hayes, AICP (Principal in Charge) x Ray Hussey, AICP (Project Manager) x Laurel Frakes (Associate/Environmental Planner) x Amber Long x Ron Brugger x Casey Tibbet x Meredith Canterbury (Graphics) 5.2 CITY OF ARCADIA x Jason Kruckeberg (Development Services Director) x Lisa Flores (Planning Services Manager) 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 2013a “Managing Hazardous Waste,” California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) and Department of Toxic Substances Control, website accessed August 1, 2013. http://www.dtsc.ca.gov/hazardouswaste CalEPA 2013b “Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA) Program Directory,” California Department Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA), website accessed August 10, 2013. http://www.calepa.ca.gov/CUPA/Directory/default.aspx CALREC Calrecycle website accessed August 12, 2013. 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 2013 California Department of Transportation Scenic Highway Program, California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), website accessed August 2, 2013. SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 87 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. CDC 2013 “Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program,” California Department of Conservation (CDC), Division of Land Resource Protection. Website accessed July 30, 2013. CGS 2013 “Fault Mapping in California”. California Geological Survey (CGS). 2005. Website accessed August 3, 2013. CIWMB 2013 “Estimated Waste Generation Rates,” California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB) website accessed on August 2, 2013. www.ciwmb.ca.gov/wastechar/wastegenrates/default.htm CWC 2013 “Sections 10750–10756,” California Water Code (CWC), California Department of Water Resources website accessed August 2, 2013. DOF 2013 “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, July 2013. DOT 2013 “Code of Federal Regulations, Title 49—Transportation, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration,” U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), website site accessed August 3, 2013. http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text- idx?sid=585c275ee19254ba07625d8c92fe925f&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title 49/49cfrv2_02.tpl DTSC 2013 “Hazardous Waste and Substance Site (Cortese) List,” California Department of Toxic Substance Control (DTSC), website accessed August 3, 2013. http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 88 FEMA 2013 “Flood Limit Data and Mapping,” U.S. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), Flood Insurance Rate Map Program, website accessed August 1, 2013. Geo Inc 2013 “Preliminary Geotechnical Assessment.” Geotechnologies, July 2013. Geotracker 2013 “Geotracker” database of hazardous material sites maintained by the Regional Water Quality Control Board, website accessed July 25, 2013. HII 2010 “City of Arcadia Zoning Map.” Hogle-Ireland Inc. 2010. KHA 2013 “Traffic Impact Assessment, Santa Anita Inn Redevelopment Project.” Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2013. LSA 2013a “Air Quality Analysis.” (includes greenhouse gas emissions). LSA Associates, Inc. August 2013. LSA 2013b “Noise Impact Analysis.” LSA Associates, Inc. August 2013. NRCS 2013 “Soil Data Mart,” Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture, website accessed August 2, 2013. 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. 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. RJLA 2003 “Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, Continental Assets Management.” RJL Associates, March 19, 2003. 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_GrowthFor ecast.pdf SCAQMD 2010 “Air Quality Management Plan,” South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), 2010. SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 89 SCAQMD 2013 SCAQMD website accessed August 2, 2013. www.aqmd.gov/ceqa/handbook/LST TTA 2013 “Hydraulic & Hydrology Calculation.” Tritech Associates, Inc. July 2013. 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 USEPA 2004b “EPA430-K-03-004, Direct HFC and PFC Emissions from Use of Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment.” U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), Climate Leaders, October 2004. http://www.epa.gov/climateleaders/documents/resources/refrige_acequipus eguidance.pdf. USFWS 2011 “HCP/NCCP Planning Areas, Southern California,” U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), October 2011. SECTION 7 SUMMARY OF MITIGATION MEASURES I. AESTHETICS AES-1 Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall demonstrate that all project windows are glazed or otherwise treated to minimize glare on surrounding roads and properties, to the satisfaction of the Development Services Director or designee. II. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES None III. AIR QUALITY AIR-1 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the general contractor for the project shall prepare and file a Dust Control Plan with the City that complies with SCAQMD Rule 403 and requires the following during excavation and construction as appropriate: x Apply nontoxic chemical soil stabilizers according to manufacturers’ specifications to all inactive construction areas (previously graded areas inactive for 10 days or more). SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 90 x Water active sites at least twice daily (locations where grading is to occur will be thoroughly watered prior to earthmoving.) x Cover all trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials, or maintain at least 2 feet of freeboard (vertical space between the top of the load and top of the trailer) in accordance with the requirements of California Vehicle Code (CVC) Section 23114. x Pave construction access roads at least 100 feet onto the site from the main road. x Control traffic speeds within the property to 15 mph or less. AIR-2 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project developer shall require by contract specifications that contractors shall utilize California Air Resources Board (CARB) Tier II Certified equipment or better during the rough/mass grading phase for rubber-tired dozers and scrapers. Contract specifications shall be included in the proposed project construction documents, which shall be reviewed by the City. AIR-3 Prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit for each phase, the project developer shall require by contract specifications that contractors shall place construction equipment staging areas at least 200 feet away from sensitive receptors. Contract specifications shall be included in the project construction documents, which shall be reviewed by the City. AIR-4 Prior to the issuance of a building permit for each phase, the project developer shall require by contract specifications that contractors shall utilize power poles or clean-fuel generators for electrical construction equipment. Contract specifications shall be included in the proposed project construction documents, which shall be reviewed by the City. IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES BIO-1 Prior to issuance of a grading permit for each phase, the developer shall provide an assessment of existing trees on the areas to be developed. This tree assessment shall be prepared by a qualified landscape architect and identify any existing large bushes or trees that can be relocated or preserved as part of the new development project. The project landscaping plans shall attempt to preserve existing mature trees onsite to the extent feasible, based on the tree assessment. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Planning Division. BIO-2 During project construction in either phase, the existing redwood trees along the east side of the property shall be protected by being taped or roped off with appropriate signage so construction equipment will not accidentally come in contact with and damage or destroy any trees. The trees shall be sprayed with water at the end of each day when substantial amounts of dust are generated (e.g., during grading or demolition) to minimize damage from dust deposition. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Planning Division. SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 91 BIO-3 Construction in either phase should not occur during the local nesting season (estimated February 1 to July 15). If any construction occurs during the nesting season, a nesting bird survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist prior to the issuance of a grading permit or removal of any large trees on the existing hotel property. If the biologist determines that nesting birds are present, an area of 100 feet shall be marked off around the nest and no construction activity can occur in that area during nesting activities. Grading and/or construction may resume in this area when a qualified biologist has determined the nest is no longer occupied and all juveniles have fledged. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Planning Division. V. CULTURAL RESOURCES CUL-1 Prior to demolition of any existing hotel buildings on the site, the completed DPR 523A and 523B forms and a cover memorandum shall be submitted to the City for filing to officially document the historical assessment for the Santa Anita Inn. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Planning Division. CUL-2 Prior to issuance of an occupancy permit for Phase 1, the applicant shall install a monument plaque indicating the location of the former Santa Anita Inn and its importance in the history of the City of Arcadia. The size, construction, and location of this plaque shall be up to the discretion of the City Manager, in consultation with the Planning Division. CUL-3 If cultural artifacts are discovered during project grading, work shall be halted in that area until a qualified historian or archaeologist can be retained by the developer to assess the significance of the find. The project cultural monitor shall observe the remaining earthmoving activities at the project site consistent with Public Resources Code Section 21083.2(b), (c), and (d). The monitor shall be equipped to record and salvage cultural resources that may be unearthed during grading activities. The monitor shall be empowered to temporarily halt or divert grading equipment to allow recording and removal of the unearthed resources. If any resources of a prehistoric or Native American origin are discovered, the appropriate Native American tribal representative will be contacted and invited to observe the monitoring program for the duration of the grading phase at tribal expense. Any Native American resources shall be evaluated in accordance with the CEQA Guidelines and either reburied at the project site or curated at an accredited facility approved by the City of Arcadia. Once grading activities have ceased or the cultural monitor determines that monitoring is no longer necessary, such activities shall be discontinued. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Planning Division. CUL-4 If paleontological resources (fossils) are discovered during project grading, work will be halted in that area until a qualified paleontologist can be retained to assess the significance of the find. The project paleontologist shall monitor SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 92 remaining earthmoving activities at the project site and shall be equipped to record and salvage fossil resources that may be unearthed during grading activities. The paleontologist shall be empowered to temporarily halt or divert grading equipment to allow recording and removal of the unearthed resources. Any fossils found shall be evaluated in accordance with the CEQA Guidelines and offered for curation at an accredited facility approved by the City of Arcadia. Once grading activities have ceased or the paleontologist determines that monitoring is no longer necessary, monitoring activities shall be discontinued. This measure may be combined with CUL-3 at the discretion of the City Planning Division. CUL-5 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. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the developer shall include a note to this effect on the grading plans for the project. VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS None VII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS GHG-1 To ensure reductions below the expected “Business As Usual” (BAU) scenario, the project will implement a variety of measures that will reduce its greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. To the extent feasible, and to the satisfaction of the City of Arcadia (City), the following measures will be incorporated into the design and construction of the SP-SP project prior to the issuance of building permits: Construction and Building Materials Recycle/reuse at least 50 percent of the demolished and/or grubbed construction materials (including, but not limited to, soil, vegetation, concrete, lumber, metal, and cardboard). Use “Green Building Materials,” such as those materials that are resource- efficient and are recycled and manufactured in an environmentally friendly way, for at least 10 percent of the project. Energy Efficiency Measures Design all project buildings to exceed the 2013 California Building Code’s (CBC) Title 24 energy standard by 10 percent, including, but not limited to, any combination of the following: Design buildings to accommodate future solar installations. Limit air leakage through the structure or within the heating and cooling distribution system to minimize energy consumption. SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 93 Incorporate ENERGY STAR or better rated windows, space heating and cooling equipment, light fixtures, appliances, or other applicable electrical equipment. Install efficient lighting and lighting control systems. Use daylight as an integral part of the lighting systems in buildings. Install light-colored roofs and pavement materials where possible. Install energy-efficient heating and cooling systems, appliances and equipment, and control systems. Install solar lights or light-emitting diodes (LEDs) for outdoor lighting or outdoor lighting that meets the 2013 California Building and Energy Code. Water Conservation and Efficiency Measures Devise a comprehensive water conservation strategy appropriate for the project and its location consistent with the City’s Water Efficiency Landscape Ordinance (WELO). The strategy may include the following, plus other innovative measures that may be appropriate: Create water-efficient landscapes within the development. Install water-efficient irrigation systems and devices, such as soil moisture-based irrigation controls. Design buildings to be water-efficient. Install water-efficient fixtures and appliances, including low-flow faucets, dual-flush toilets, and waterless urinals. Restrict watering methods (e.g., prohibit systems that apply water to unvegetated surfaces) and control runoff. Solid Waste Measures To facilitate and encourage recycling to reduce landfill-associated emissions, among others, the project will provide trash enclosures that include additional enclosed area(s) for collection of recyclable materials. The recycling collection area(s) will be located within, near, or adjacent to each trash and rubbish disposal area. The recycling collection area will be a minimum of 50 percent of the area provided for the trash/rubbish enclosure(s) or as approved by the waste management department of the City of Arcadia. Provide employee education on waste reduction and available recycling services. Transportation Measures To facilitate and encourage non-motorized transportation, bicycle racks shall be provided in convenient locations to facilitate bicycle access to the project area. The bicycle racks shall be shown on project landscaping and improvement plans submitted for Planning Department approval and shall be installed in accordance with those plans. Provide pedestrian walkways and connectivity throughout the project. Fund or participate in some type of shuttle service for hotel guests to access the City’s downtown Gold Line Station. SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 94 VIII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS HAZ-1 Prior to demolition of any existing hotel buildings or associated structures, a qualified contractor shall be retained to survey structures proposed for demolition to determine if asbestos-containing materials (ACMs) and/or lead- based paint (LBP) are present. If ACMs and/or LBP are present, prior to commencement of general demolition, these materials shall be removed and transported to an appropriate landfill by a licensed contractor. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Building Division including written documentation of the disposal of any ACMs or LBP in conformance with all applicable regulations. IX. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY HYD-1 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the developer shall file a Notice of Intent (NOI) with the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board to be covered under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Construction Permit for discharge of storm water associated with construction activities. The project developer shall submit to the City the Waste Discharge Identification Number issued by the State Water Quality Control Board (SWQCB) as proof that the project’s NOI is to be covered by the General Construction Permit has been filed with the SWQCB. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. HYD-2 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the developer shall submit to the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and receive approval for a project-specific Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). The SWPPP shall include a surface water control plan and erosion control plan citing specific measures to control on-site and off-site erosion during the entire grading and construction period. In addition, the SWPPP shall emphasize structural and nonstructural best management practices (BMPs) to control sediment and non- visible discharges from the site. BMPs to be implemented may include (but shall not be limited to) the following: x Potential sediment discharges from the site may be controlled by the following: sandbags, silt fences, straw wattles, fiber rolls, a temporary debris basin (if deemed necessary), and other discharge control devices. The construction and condition of the BMPs are to be periodically inspected by the RWQCB during construction, and repairs would be made as required. x Area drains within the construction area must be provided with inlet protection. Minimum standards are sand bag barriers, or two layers of sandbags with filter fabric over the grate, properly designed standpipes, or other measures as appropriate. x Materials that have the potential to contribute non-visible pollutants to storm water must not be placed in drainage ways and must be placed in temporary storage containment areas. SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 95 x All loose soil, silt, clay, sand, debris, and other earthen material shall be controlled to eliminate discharge from the site. Temporary soil stabilization measures to be considered include: covering disturbed areas with mulch, temporary seeding, soil stabilizing binders, fiber rolls or blankets, temporary vegetation, and permanent seeding. Stockpiles shall be surrounded by silt fences and covered with plastic tarps. x Implement good housekeeping practices such as creating a waste collection area, putting lids on waste and material containers, and cleaning up spills immediately. x The SWPPP shall include inspection forms for routine monitoring of the site during the construction phase. x Additional required BMPs and erosion control measures shall be documented in the SWPPP. x The SWPPP would be kept on site for the duration of project construction and shall be available to the local Regional Water Quality Control Board for inspection at any time. The developer and/or construction contractor shall be responsible for performing and documenting the application of BMPs identified in the project-specific SWPPP. Regular inspections shall be performed on sediment control measures called for in the SWPPP. Monthly reports shall be maintained and available for City inspection. An inspection log shall be maintained for the project and shall be available at the site for review by the City and the Regional Water Quality Control Board as appropriate. HYD-3 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, a site-specific Standard Urban Stormwater Management Plan (SUSMP) shall be submitted to the City Planning Division for review and approval. The SUSMP shall specifically identify the long-term site design, source control, and treatment control BMPs that shall be used on site to control pollutant runoff and to reduce impacts to water quality to the maximum extent practicable. At a minimum, the SUSMP shall identify and the site developer shall implement the following site design, source control, and treatment control BMPs as appropriate: Site Design BMPs x Minimize urban runoff by maximizing maximizing permeable areas and minimizing impermeable areas (recommended minimum 25 percent of site to be permeable). x Incorporate landscaped buffer areas between sidewalks and streets. x Maximize canopy interception and water conservation by planting native or drought-tolerant trees and large shrubs wherever possible x Where soil conditions are suitable, use perforated pipe or gravel filtration pits for low flow infiltration. x Construct onsite ponding areas or retention facilities to increase opportunities for infiltration consistent with vector control objectives. SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 96 x Construct streets, sidewalks and parking lot aisles to the minimum widths necessary, provided that public safety and a walkable environment for pedestrians are not compromised. x Direct runoff from impervious areas to treatment control BMPs such as landscaping/bioretention areas. Source Control BMPs Source control BMPs are implemented to eliminate the presence of pollutants through prevention. Such measures can be both non-structural and structural: Non-Structural Source Control BMPs x Education for property owners, tenants, occupants, and employees. x Activity restrictions. x Irrigation system and landscape maintenance to minimize water runoff. x Common area litter control. x Regular mechanical sweeping of private streets and parking lots. x Regular drainage facility inspection and maintenance. Structural Source Control BMPs x MS4 stenciling and signage at storm down drains. x Properly design trash storage areas and any outdoor material storage areas. Treatment Control BMPs Treatment control BMPs supplement the pollution prevention and source control measures by treating the water to remove pollutants before it is released from the project site. The treatment control BMP strategy for the project is to select Low Impact Development (LID) BMPs that promote infiltration and evapotranspiration, including the construction of infiltration basins, bioretention facilities, and extended detention basins. Where infiltration BMPs are not appropriate, bioretention and/or biotreatment BMPs (including extended detention basins, bioswales, and constructed wetlands) that provide opportunity for evapotranspiration and incidental infiltration may be utilized. Harvest and use BMPs (i.e., storage pods) may be used as a treatment control BMP to store runoff for later non-potable uses. X. LAND USE AND PLANNING None XI. MINERAL RESOURCES None XII. NOISE N-1 Prior to issuance of grading and building permits for each phase of the project, the developer shall prepare a Construction Noise Control Plan and will submit the SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 97 plan the City for review and approval. The plan shall include but will not be limited to the following: x During all project site excavation and grading, contractors shall equip all construction equipment, fixed or mobile, with properly operating and maintained mufflers consistent with manufacturers’ standards. x The project contractor shall place all stationary construction equipment so that emitted noise is directed away from the closest sensitive receptor to the project site (i.e., the residents located along Santa Cruz Road to the north Salvation Army facility at the southwest corner of the project site at a distance of approximately 350 feet). x The construction contractor shall locate equipment staging in areas that will create the greatest distance between construction-related noise sources and the closest noise-sensitive receptor to the project site (i.e., the residents located along Santa Cruz Road to the north Salvation Army facility at the southwest corner of the project site at a distance of approximately 350 feet) during all project construction. x During all project site construction, the construction contractor shall limit all construction-related activities that would result in high noise levels to between the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. on weekdays and Saturday. No construction shall be permitted on Sundays or any of the holidays listed in AMC Section 4261. x Prior to the start of Phase 2 grading, the developer shall install a wooden noise barrier along the common boundary of the project and the Salvation Army rehab facility at the southwest corner of the project site. This barrier shall be removed upon completion of Phase 2 construction. N-2 Prior to the issuance of building permit for each phase, the developer shall demonstrate that all buildings shall have air-conditioning to minimize noise impacts on hotel rooms along West and East Huntington Drives. N-3 Prior to the issuance of occupancy permits for the Phase 2 condominium building, the developer shall install a filled-cell concrete block wall along the common boundary with the Salvation Army rehab facility at the southwest corner of the project site. In lieu of the temporary construction wall outlined in Measure N-1, the developer may install this permanent wall “early” (i.e., prior to issuance of occupancy permits for Phase 1) which would eliminate the need for that portion of Measure N-1. XIII. POPULATION AND HOUSING None XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 98 None XV. RECREATION None XVI. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC TRA-1 Prior to issuance of an occupancy permit for either the hotel in Phase 1, the developer shall be responsible for restriping westbound Huntington Drive to include an acceleration/deceleration left turn lane into the proposed drivewaysinstalling an additional signal phase to accommodate northbound movements exiting the shared hotel driveway and southbound movements entering the hotel driveway. The developer will also change the number one lane to a shared through and left turn lane to access the driveway for the hotels and modify the signal to account for the added phases and lanes. These changes shall be made to the satisfaction of and in coordination with the City traffic engineer. TRA-2 Prior to issuance of occupancy permits for either of the hotels or the condominiums, the developer shall install bike racks and provide showers and locker rooms for employees who wish to ride bicycles to work. Bike racks shall also be installed for project guests in appropriate locations. An appropriate number of bike racks shall be located near each building to serve the anticipated number of employees and guests. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. TRA-3 Prior to issuance of building permits for either Phase 1 or Phase 2, the project plans shall be circulated to Foothill Transit (FT) and the Metropolitan Transit Authority (MTA) to determine if there is a need for a bus stop on the south side of Colorado Place in front of the project site (i.e., for either FT Route 187 or MTA routes 78, 79, or 378). If either agency determines a need for such a stop, the developer shall install a bus stop to agency specifications prior to issuance of occupancy permits for the affected phase of development. This measure shall be implemented for each phase to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. TRA-4 Prior to issuance of occupancy permits for either hotel in Phase 1, the developer shall demonstrate that the main hotel entrance for Phase 1 has a circular drive with signage to allow only one way circulation (counter-clockwise) to provide adequate vehicle queuing lanes for exiting at the traffic signal. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. XVII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS UTL-1 Prior to issuance of a building permit for either hotel, the developer shall retain a qualified licensed civil engineer to conduct a sewer study to evaluate before and after conditions of the project on the City’s existing sewer system (both lateral SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 99 and main lines). This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Public Works Services Department. UTL-2 Prior to issuance of an occupancy permit for either hotel, the developer’s fair share payment to the City will be determined to help fund upgrading of the existing sewer in West Huntington Drive included in the City’s 2014-15 Capital Improvement Project Plan budget, based on the results of the sewer study outlined in Mitigation Measure UTL-1. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and/or the City Public Works Services Department as appropriate. SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 Appendix A: Air Quality/Greenhouse Gas Study (on CD) SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 Appendix B: Biological Studies (on CD) SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 Appendix C: Historical Assessment (on CD) SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO.3 ADDENDUM LSA CTA1401.01 Appendix D: Traffic Impact Assessment (on CD) SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN – CITY OF ARCADIA MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM June 21, 2018 1. INTRODUCTION This Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program has been prepared for use in implementing mitigation for the Seabiscuit Pacifica Specific Plan. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires adoption of a reporting or monitoring program for those measures placed on a project to mitigate or avoid adverse effects on the environment (Public Resource Code Section 21081.6). The law states that the reporting or monitoring program shall be designed to ensure compliance during project implementation. The monitoring program contains the following elements: 1) The mitigation measures are recorded with the action and procedure necessary to ensure compliance. In some instances, one action may be used to verify implementation of several mitigation measures. 2) A procedure for compliance and verification has been outlined for each action necessary. This procedure designates who will take action, what action will be taken and when, and to whom and when compliance will be reported. 3) The program has been designed to be flexible. As monitoring progresses, changes to compliance procedures may be necessary based upon recommendations by those responsible for the program. As changes are made, new monitoring compliance procedures and records will be developed and incorporated into the program. This Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program includes mitigation identified in the original Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (2014) and most recent Addendum (June 2018) for the Seabiscuit Pacific Specific Plan. Changes made to the original Mitigation Measures are shown as added text in double underline (example) and deleted text in strikethrough (example). 2. MITIGATION MONITORING AND RESPONSIBILITIES As the Lead Agency, the City of Arcadia is responsible for ensuring full compliance with the mitigation measures adopted for the proposed project. The City will monitor and report on all mitigation activities. Mitigation measures will be implemented at different stages of development throughout the project area. In this regard, the responsibilities for implementation have been assigned to the Applicant, Contractor, or a combination thereof. If during the course of project implementation, any of the mitigation measures identified herein cannot be successfully implemented, the City shall be immediately informed, and the City will then inform any affected responsible agencies. The City, in conjunction with any affected responsible agencies, will then determine if modification to the project is required and/or whether alternative mitigation is appropriate. SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN – CITY OF ARCADIA MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM June 21, 2018 2 Mitigation Measure No. / Implementing Action Responsible for Monitoring Monitoring Frequency Timing of Verification Method of Verification Verified Date/ Initials Sanctions for Non- Compliance I. AESTHETICS AES-1 Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall demonstrate that all project windows are glazed or otherwise treated to minimize glare on surrounding roads and properties, to the satisfaction of the Development Services Director or designee. City Development Services Director or designee Once for each phase Prior to issuance of building permit for each phase Development Services Director confirmation of glazed or otherwise treated windows. Withhold Building Permit III. AIR QUALITY AIR-1 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the general contractor for the project shall prepare and file a Dust Control Plan with the City that complies with SCQAMD Rule 403 and requires the following during excavation and construction as appropriate: • Apply nontoxic chemical soil stabilizers according to manufacturers’ specifications to all inactive construction areas (previously graded areas inactive for 10 days or more). • Water active sites at least twice daily (locations where grading is to occur will be thoroughly watered prior to earthmoving.) • Cover all trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials, or maintain at least 2 feet of freeboard (vertical space between the top of the load and top of the trailer) in accordance with the requirements of California Vehicle Code (CVC) Section 23114. • Pave construction access roads at least 100 feet onto the site from the main road. • Control traffic speeds within the property to 15 mph or less. City Planning and Building Divisions Once for each phase Prior to issuance of grading permit for each phase City confirms Dust Control Plan complies with SCQAMD Rule 403 Withhold Grading Permit AIR-2 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project developer shall require by contract specifications that contractors shall utilize California Air Resources Board (CARB) Tier II Certified equipment or better during the City Planning and Building Divisions Once for each phase Prior to issuance of grading permit for each phase City verifies that construction documents include required language. Withhold Grading Permit SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN – CITY OF ARCADIA MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM June 21, 2018 3 Mitigation Measure No. / Implementing Action Responsible for Monitoring Monitoring Frequency Timing of Verification Method of Verification Verified Date/ Initials Sanctions for Non- Compliance rough/mass grading phase for rubber-tired dozers and scrapers. Contract specifications shall be included in the proposed project construction documents, which shall be reviewed by the City. AIR-3 Prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit for each phase, the project developer shall require by contract specifications that contractors shall place construction equipment staging areas at least 200 feet away from sensitive receptors. Contract specifications shall be included in the project construction documents, which shall be reviewed by the City. City Planning Division Once for each phase Prior to issuance of grading or building permit City verifies that construction documents include required language Withhold Grading or Building Permit AIR-4 Prior to the issuance of a building permit for each phase, the project developer shall require by contract specifications that contractors shall utilize power poles or clean-fuel generators for electrical construction equipment. Contract specifications shall be included in the proposed project construction documents, which shall be reviewed by the City. City Planning Division Once for each phase Prior to issuance of building permit for each phase City verifies that construction documents include required language. Withhold Building Permit IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES BIO-1 Prior to issuance of a grading permit for each phase, the developer shall provide an assessment of existing trees on the areas to be developed. This tree assessment shall be prepared by a qualified landscape architect and identify any existing large bushes or trees that can be relocated or preserved as part of the new development project. The project landscaping plans shall attempt to preserve existing mature trees onsite to the extent feasible, based on the tree assessment. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Planning Division. City Planning Division Once during each phase Prior to issuance of a grading permit for each phase City Planning Division verifies receipt of tree assessment from developer, and a relocation/preservation tree plan. Withhold Grading Permit SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN – CITY OF ARCADIA MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM June 21, 2018 4 Mitigation Measure No. / Implementing Action Responsible for Monitoring Monitoring Frequency Timing of Verification Method of Verification Verified Date/ Initials Sanctions for Non- Compliance BIO-2 During project construction in either phase, the existing redwood trees along the east side of the property shall be protected by being taped or roped off with appropriate signage so construction equipment will not accidentally come in contact with and damage or destroy any trees. The trees shall be sprayed with water at the end of each day when substantial amounts of dust are generated (e.g., during grading or demolition) to minimize damage from dust deposition. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Planning Division. City Planning and Building Divisions Regularly during construction During project construction in either phase City inspectors note compliance Issue “Stop Work” Order until compliance verified BIO-3 Construction in either phase should not occur during the local nesting season (estimated February 1 to July 15). If any construction occurs during the nesting season, a nesting bird survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist prior to the issuance of a grading permit or removal of any large trees on the existing hotel property. If the biologist determines that nesting birds are present, an area of 100 feet shall be marked off around the nest and no construction activity can occur in that area during nesting activities. Grading and/or construction may resume in this area when a qualified biologist has determined the nest is no longer occupied and all juveniles have fledged. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Planning Division. City Planning Division Once during each phase Prior to issuance of grading permit or removal of large trees during each phase City verifies that construction documents include required language Withhold Grading Permit V. CULTRUAL RESOURCES CUL-1 Prior to demolition of any existing hotel buildings on the site, the completed DPR 523A and 523 B forms and a cover memorandum shall be submitted to the City for filing to officially document the historical assessment for the Santa Anita Inn. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Planning Division. City Planning Division Once for each phase Prior to demolition of any existing hotel buildings on the site City verifies DPR 523A and 523B forms and cover memorandum filed to officially document the historical assessment for the Santa Anita Inn Withhold occupancy permit for either phase SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN – CITY OF ARCADIA MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM June 21, 2018 5 Mitigation Measure No. / Implementing Action Responsible for Monitoring Monitoring Frequency Timing of Verification Method of Verification Verified Date/ Initials Sanctions for Non- Compliance CUL-2 Prior to issuance of an occupancy permit for Phase 1, the applicant shall install a monument plaque indicating the location of the former Santa Anita Inn and its importance in the history of the City of Arcadia. The size, construction, and location of this plaque shall be up to the discretion of the City Manager, in consultation with the Planning Division. City Planning Division Once Prior to issuance of an occupancy permit for Phase 1 City verifies installation of monument plaque Withhold occupancy permit for Phase 1 CUL-3 If cultural artifacts are discovered during project grading, work shall be halted in that area until a qualified historian or archaeologist can be retained by the developer to assess the significance of the find. The project cultural monitor shall observe the remaining earthmoving activities at the project site consistent with Public Resources Code Section 21083.2(b), (c), and (d). The monitor shall be equipped to record and salvage cultural resources that may be unearthed during grading activities. The monitor shall be empowered to temporarily halt or divert grading equipment to allow recording and removal of the unearthed resources. If any resources of a prehistoric or Native American origin are discovered, the appropriate Native American tribal representative will be contacted and invited to observe the monitoring program for the duration of the grading phase at tribal expense. Any Native American resources shall be evaluated in accordance with the CEQA Guidelines and either reburied at the project site or curated at an accredited facility approved by the City of Arcadia. Once grading activities have ceased or the cultural monitor determines that monitoring is no longer necessary, such activities shall be discontinued. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Planning Division. City Planning Division Anytime during grading Discovery of cultural artifacts City verifies grading plans require City to be notified if any cultural materials are found during grading. City shall verify developer has retained a cultural monitor if needed Issue a “Stop Work” Order for non-compliance SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN – CITY OF ARCADIA MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM June 21, 2018 6 Mitigation Measure No. / Implementing Action Responsible for Monitoring Monitoring Frequency Timing of Verification Method of Verification Verified Date/ Initials Sanctions for Non- Compliance CUL-4 If paleontological resources (fossils) are discovered during project grading, work will be halted in that area until a qualified paleontologist can be retained to assess the significance of the find. The project paleontologist shall monitor remaining earthmoving activities at the project site and shall be equipped to record and salvage fossil resources that may be unearthed during grading activities. The paleontologist shall be empowered to temporarily halt or divert grading equipment to allow recording and removal of the unearthed resources. Any fossils found shall be evaluated in accordance with the CEQA Guidelines and offered for curation at an accredited facility approved by the City of Arcadia. Once grading activities have ceased or the paleontologist determines that monitoring is no longer necessary, monitoring activities shall be discontinued. This measure may be combined with CUL-3 at the discretion of the City Planning Division. City of Arcadia Planning Division Anytime during grading Discovery of paleontological resources City verifies grading plans require City to be notified if any fossils are found during grading. City shall verify developer has retained a paleo monitor if needed Issue a “Stop Work” Order for non-compliance CUL-5 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. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the developer shall include a note to this effect on the grading plans for the project. City Planning Division Anytime during grading Discover or recognition of any human remains City verifies grading plans state County Coroner and City if human remains are accidentally discovered during grading Issue a “Stop Work” Order during grading if notification does not occur SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN – CITY OF ARCADIA MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM June 21, 2018 7 Mitigation Measure No. / Implementing Action Responsible for Monitoring Monitoring Frequency Timing of Verification Method of Verification Verified Date/ Initials Sanctions for Non- Compliance VII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS GHG-1 To ensure reductions below the expected “Business As Usual” (BAU) scenario, the project will implement a variety of measures that will reduce its greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. To the extent feasible, and to the satisfaction of the City of Arcadia (City), the following measures will be incorporated into the design and construction of the SP-SP project prior to the issuance of building permits: Construction and Building Materials Recycle/reuse at least 50 percent of the demolished and/or grubbed construction materials (including, but not limited to, soil, vegetation, concrete, lumber, metal, and cardboard). Use “Green Building Materials,” such as those materials that are resource-efficient and are recycled and manufactured in an environmentally friendly way, for at least 10 percent of the project. Energy Efficiency Measures Design all project buildings to exceed the 2013 California Building Code’s (CBC) Title 24 energy standard by 10 percent, including, but not limited to, any combination of the following: Design buildings to accommodate future solar installations. Limit air leakage through the structure or within the heating and cooling distribution system to minimize energy consumption. Incorporate ENERGY STAR or better rated windows, space heating and cooling equipment, light fixtures, appliances, or other applicable electrical equipment. Install efficient lighting and lighting control City Planning and Building Divisions Once for each phase Prior to issuance of building permits for each phase City verifies project plans show required compliance Withhold Building Permits SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN – CITY OF ARCADIA MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM June 21, 2018 8 Mitigation Measure No. / Implementing Action Responsible for Monitoring Monitoring Frequency Timing of Verification Method of Verification Verified Date/ Initials Sanctions for Non- Compliance systems. Use daylight as an integral part of the lighting systems in buildings. Install light-colored roofs and pavement materials where possible. Install energy-efficient heating and cooling systems, appliances and equipment, and control systems. Install solar lights or light-emitting diodes (LEDs) for outdoor lighting or outdoor lighting that meets the 2013 California Building and Energy Code . Water Conservation and Efficiency Measures Devise a comprehensive water conservation strategy appropriate for the project and its location consistent with the City’s Water Efficiency Landscape Ordinance (WELO). The strategy may include the following, plus other innovative measures that may be appropriate: Create water-efficient landscapes within the development. Install water-efficient irrigation systems and devices, such as soil moisture-based irrigation controls. Design buildings to be water-efficient. Install water-efficient fixtures and appliances, including low-flow faucets, dual-flush toilets, and waterless urinals. Restrict watering methods (e.g., prohibit systems that apply water to nonvegetated surfaces) and control runoff. Solid Waste Measures To facilitate and encourage recycling to reduce landfill-associated emissions, among others, the project will provide trash enclosures that include SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN – CITY OF ARCADIA MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM June 21, 2018 9 Mitigation Measure No. / Implementing Action Responsible for Monitoring Monitoring Frequency Timing of Verification Method of Verification Verified Date/ Initials Sanctions for Non- Compliance additional enclosed area(s) for collection of recyclable materials. The recycling collection area(s) will be located within, near, or adjacent to each trash and rubbish disposal area. The recycling collection area will be a minimum of 50 percent of the area provided for the trash/rubbish enclosure(s) or as approved by the waste management department of the City of Arcadia. Provide employee education on waste reduction and available recycling services. Transportation Measures To facilitate and encourage non-motorized transportation, bicycle racks shall be provided in convenient locations to facilitate bicycle access to the project area. The bicycle racks shall be shown on project landscaping and improvement plans submitted for Planning Department approval and shall be installed in accordance with those plans. Provide pedestrian walkways and connectivity throughout the project. Fund or participate in some type of shuttle service for hotel guests to access the City’s downtown Gold Line Station. VIII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS HAZ-1 Prior to demolition of any existing hotel buildings or associated structures, a qualified contractor shall be retained to survey structures proposed for demolition to determine if asbestos- containing materials (ACMs) and/or lead-based paint (LBP) are present. If ACMs and/or LBP are present, prior to commencement of general demolition, these materials shall be removed and transported to an appropriate landfill by a licensed contractor. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City City Building Division Once during each phase Prior to demolition of existing hotel buildings or associated structures City review of written documentation of the disposal of any ACMs or LBP in conformance with all applicable regulations Withhold Building Permit or Occupancy Permit as applicable SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN – CITY OF ARCADIA MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM June 21, 2018 10 Mitigation Measure No. / Implementing Action Responsible for Monitoring Monitoring Frequency Timing of Verification Method of Verification Verified Date/ Initials Sanctions for Non- Compliance Building Division including written documentation of the disposal of any ACMs or LBP in conformance with all applicable regulations. IX. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY HYD-1 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the developer shall file a Notice of Intent (NOI) with the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board to be covered under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Construction Permit for discharge of storm water associated with construction activities. The project developer shall submit to the City the Waste Discharge Identification Number issued by the State Water Quality Control Board (SWQCB) as proof that the project’s NOI is to be covered by the General Construction Permit has been filed with the SWQCB. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. City Engineer or designee Once during each phase Prior to issuance of grading permit City verifies developer has filed a NOI with the LA RWQCB per state requirements Withhold Grading Permit HYD-2 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the developer shall submit to the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and receive approval for a project-specific Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). The SWPPP shall include a surface water control plan and erosion control plan citing specific measures to control on-site and off-site erosion during the entire grading and construction period. In addition, the SWPPP shall emphasize structural and nonstructural best management practices (BMPs) to control sediment and non-visible discharges from the site. BMPs to be implemented may include (but shall not be limited to) the following: • Potential sediment discharges from the site may be controlled by the following: sandbags, silt fences, straw wattles, fiber rolls, a temporary City Engineer or designee Once during each phase Prior to issuance of grading permit City verifies developer has a SWPPP approved by the LA RWQCB per state requirements Withhold Grading Permit SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN – CITY OF ARCADIA MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM June 21, 2018 11 Mitigation Measure No. / Implementing Action Responsible for Monitoring Monitoring Frequency Timing of Verification Method of Verification Verified Date/ Initials Sanctions for Non- Compliance debris basin (if deemed necessary), and other discharge control devices. The construction and condition of the BMPs are to be periodically inspected by the RWQCB during construction, and repairs would be made as required. • Area drains within the construction area must be provided with inlet protection. Minimum standards are sand bag barriers, or two layers of sandbags with filter fabric over the grate, properly designed standpipes, or other measures as appropriate. • Materials that have the potential to contribute non-visible pollutants to storm water must not be placed in drainage ways and must be placed in temporary storage containment areas. • All loose soil, silt, clay, sand, debris, and other earthen material shall be controlled to eliminate discharge from the site. Temporary soil stabilization measures to be considered include: covering disturbed areas with mulch, temporary seeding, soil stabilizing binders, fiber rolls or blankets, temporary vegetation, and permanent seeding. Stockpiles shall be surrounded by silt fences and covered with plastic tarps. • Implement good housekeeping practices such as creating a waste collection area, putting lids on waste and material containers, and cleaning up spills immediately. • The SWPPP shall include inspection forms for routine monitoring of the site during the construction phase. • Additional required BMPs and erosion control measures shall be documented in the SWPPP. • The SWPPP would be kept on site for the duration of project construction and shall be available to the local Regional Water Quality SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN – CITY OF ARCADIA MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM June 21, 2018 12 Mitigation Measure No. / Implementing Action Responsible for Monitoring Monitoring Frequency Timing of Verification Method of Verification Verified Date/ Initials Sanctions for Non- Compliance Control Board for inspection at any time. The developer and/or construction contractor shall be responsible for performing and documenting the application of BMPs identified in the project-specific SWPPP. Regular inspections shall be performed on sediment control measures called for in the SWPPP. Monthly reports shall be maintained and available for City inspection. An inspection log shall be maintained for the project and shall be available at the site for review by the City and the Regional Water Quality Control Board as appropriate. HYD-3 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, a site-specific Standard Urban Stormwater Management Plan (SUSMP) shall be submitted to the City Planning Division for review and approval. The SUSMP shall specifically identify the long-term site design, source control, and treatment control BMPs that shall be used on site to control pollutant runoff and to reduce impacts to water quality to the maximum extent practicable. At a minimum, the SUSMP shall identify and the site developer shall implement the following site design, source control, and treatment control BMPs as appropriate: Site Design BMPs • Minimize urban runoff by maximizing permeable areas and minimizing impermeable areas (recommended minimum 25 percent of site to be permeable). • Incorporate landscaped buffer areas between sidewalks and streets. • Maximize canopy interception and water conservation by planting native or drought- tolerant trees and large shrubs wherever possible City Planning, Engineering, and Public Works Department Once during each phase Prior to issuance of grading permit City verifies developer has received approval of a SUSMP from the LA RWQCB per state requirements Withhold the Grading Permit SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN – CITY OF ARCADIA MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM June 21, 2018 13 Mitigation Measure No. / Implementing Action Responsible for Monitoring Monitoring Frequency Timing of Verification Method of Verification Verified Date/ Initials Sanctions for Non- Compliance • Where soil conditions are suitable, use perforated pipe or gravel filtration pits for low flow infiltration. • Construct onsite ponding areas or retention facilities to increase opportunities for infiltration consistent with vector control objectives. • Construct streets, sidewalks and parking lot aisles to the minimum widths necessary, provided that public safety and a walkable environment for pedestrians are not compromised. • Direct runoff from impervious areas to treatment control BMPs such as landscaping/bioretention areas. Source Control BMPs Source control BMPs are implemented to eliminate the presence of pollutants through prevention. Such measures can be both non- structural and structural: Non-Structural Source Control BMPs • Education for property owners, tenants, occupants, and employees. • Activity restrictions. • Irrigation system and landscape maintenance to minimize water runoff. • Common area litter control. • Regular mechanical sweeping of private streets and parking lots. • Regular drainage facility inspection and maintenance. Structural Source Control BMPs • MS4 stenciling and signage at storm down drains. • Properly design trash storage areas and any SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN – CITY OF ARCADIA MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM June 21, 2018 14 Mitigation Measure No. / Implementing Action Responsible for Monitoring Monitoring Frequency Timing of Verification Method of Verification Verified Date/ Initials Sanctions for Non- Compliance outdoor material storage areas. Treatment Control BMPs Treatment control BMPs supplement the pollution prevention and source control measures by treating the water to remove pollutants before it is released from the project site. The treatment control BMP strategy for the project is to select Low Impact Development (LID) BMPs that promote infiltration and evapotranspiration, including the construction of infiltration basins, bioretention facilities, and extended detention basins. Where infiltration BMPs are not appropriate, bioretention and/or biotreatment BMPs (including extended detention basins, bioswales, and constructed wetlands) that provide opportunity for evapotranspiration and incidental infiltration may be utilized. Harvest and use BMPs (i.e., storage pods) may be used as a treatment control BMP to store runoff for later non-potable uses. XII. LAND USE AND PLANNING N-1 Prior to issuance of grading and building permits for each phase of the project, the developer shall prepare a Construction Noise Control Plan and will submit the plan the City for review and approval. The plan shall include but will not be limited to the following: • During all project site excavation and grading, contractors shall equip all construction equipment, fixed or mobile, with properly operating and maintained mufflers consistent with manufacturers’ standards. • The project contractor shall place all stationary construction equipment so that emitted noise is directed away from the closest sensitive receptor to the project site (i.e., the residents located City Planning Division Twice during each phase Prior to issuance of grading and building permits for each phase City approves CNCP during plan review for grading and building Withhold Grading Permit or Building Permit SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN – CITY OF ARCADIA MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM June 21, 2018 15 Mitigation Measure No. / Implementing Action Responsible for Monitoring Monitoring Frequency Timing of Verification Method of Verification Verified Date/ Initials Sanctions for Non- Compliance along Santa Cruz Road to the north Salvation Army facility at the southwest corner of the project site at a distance of approximately 350 feet). • The construction contractor shall locate equipment staging in areas that will create the greatest distance between construction-related noise sources and the closest noise-sensitive receptor to the project site (i.e., the residents located along Santa Cruz Road to the north Salvation Army facility at the southwest corner of the project site at a distance of approximately 350 feet) during all project construction. • During all project site construction, the construction contractor shall limit all construction- related activities that would result in high noise levels to between the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. on weekdays and Saturday. No construction shall be permitted on Sundays or any of the holidays listed in AMC Section 4261. • Prior to the start of Phase 2 grading, the developer shall install a wooden noise barrier along the common boundary of the project and the Salvation Army rehab facility at the southwest corner of the project site. This barrier shall be removed upon completion of Phase 2 construction. N-2 Prior to the issuance of building permit for each phase, the developer shall demonstrate that all buildings shall have air-conditioning to minimize noise impacts on hotel rooms along West and East Huntington Drives. City Planning and Building Divisions. Once during each phase Prior to issuance of building permit City verifies project plans show air conditioning for indicated spaces Withhold Building Permit N-3 Prior to the issuance of occupancy permits for the Phase 2 condominium building, the developer shall install a filled-cell concrete block wall along the common boundary with the Salvation Army rehab facility at the southwest City Planning and Building Divisions. Once during Phase 2 Prior to issuance of an occupancy permit City inspector shall verify wall has been installed as indicated. Withhold Occupancy Permit SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN – CITY OF ARCADIA MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM June 21, 2018 16 Mitigation Measure No. / Implementing Action Responsible for Monitoring Monitoring Frequency Timing of Verification Method of Verification Verified Date/ Initials Sanctions for Non- Compliance corner of the project site. In lieu of the temporary construction wall outlined in Measure N-1, the developer may install this permanent wall “early” (i.e., prior to issuance of occupancy permits for Phase 1) which would eliminate the need for that portion of Measure N-1. XVI. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC TRA-1 Prior to issuance of an occupancy permit for either the hotel in Phase 1, the developer shall be responsible for restriping westbound Huntington Drive to include an acceleration/deceleration left turn lane into the proposed drivewaysinstalling an additional signal phase to accommodate northbound movements exiting the shared hotel driveway and southbound movements entering the hotel driveway. The developer will also change the number one lane to a shared through and left turn lane to access the driveway for the hotels and modify the signal to account for the added phases and lanes. These changes shall be made to the satisfaction of and in coordination with the City traffic engineer. City Engineer or designee Twice in Phase 1 Prior to issuance of an occupancy permit for either hotel building in Phase 1 City inspector shall verify indicated signal and circulation improvements have been installed Withhold Occupancy Permit for either hotel building in Phase 1 TRA-2 Prior to issuance of occupancy permits for either of the hotels or the hotel condominiums, the developer shall install bike racks and provide showers and locker rooms for employees who wish to ride bicycles to work. Bike racks shall also be installed for project guests in appropriate locations. An appropriate number of bike racks City of Arcadia shall be located near each building to serve the anticipated number of employees and guests. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. City Planning and Building Divisions Three times prior to occupancy of each new building Prior to issuance of occupancy permit City inspector verifies indicated equipment has been installed for each building Withhold Occupancy Permit TRA-3 Prior to issuance of building permits for either Phase 1 or Phase 2, the project plans shall City Engineer or designee Once for each phase Prior to issuance of City shall verify FT and MTA have reviewed Withhold Building Permits SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN – CITY OF ARCADIA MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM June 21, 2018 17 Mitigation Measure No. / Implementing Action Responsible for Monitoring Monitoring Frequency Timing of Verification Method of Verification Verified Date/ Initials Sanctions for Non- Compliance be circulated to Foothill Transit (FT) and the Metropolitan Transit Authority (MTA) to determine if there is a need for a bus stop on the south side of Colorado Place in front of the project site (i.e., for either FT Route 187 or MTA routes 78, 79, or 378). If either agency determines a need for such a stop, the developer shall install a bus stop to agency specifications prior to issuance of occupancy permits for the affected phase of development. This measure shall be implemented for each phase to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. building permits for Phase 1 and Phase 2 and approved building plans for each phase If necessary, City inspector shall verify installation of required bus stop improvements TRA-4 Prior to issuance of occupancy permits for either hotel in Phase 1, the developer shall demonstrate that the main hotel entrance for Phase 1 has a circular drive with signage to allow only one way circulation (counter-clockwise) to provide adequate vehicle queuing lanes for exiting at the traffic signal. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. City Engineer and City Inspector(s) Once in Phase 1 Prior to issuance of any occupancy permit for Phase 1 City Inspector or other staff shall verify correct design and signage for circular driveway entrance/exit for two hotels in Phase 1 Withhold Occupancy Permit UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS UTL-1 Prior to issuance of a building permit for either hotel, the developer shall retain a qualified licensed civil engineer to conduct a sewer study to evaluate before and after conditions of the project on the City’s existing sewer system (both lateral and main lines). This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Public Works Services Department and the County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County as appropriate. City Public Works Service Department Twice during Phase 1 Prior to issuance of a building permit for either hotel City shall approve indicated sewer study Withhold Building Permit UTL-2 Prior to issuance of an occupancy permit for either hotel, the developer shall make a fair share contribution to the City to help fund upgrading of the existing sewer in West Huntington Drive included in the City’s 2014-15 City Planning, Building, and, Public Works Services Department Twice during Phase 1 Prior to issuance of an occupancy permit for either hotel City shall verify developer has made the indicated fair share contribution Withhold Occupancy Permit SEABISCUIT PACIFICA SPECIFIC PLAN – CITY OF ARCADIA MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM June 21, 2018 18 Mitigation Measure No. / Implementing Action Responsible for Monitoring Monitoring Frequency Timing of Verification Method of Verification Verified Date/ Initials Sanctions for Non- Compliance Capital Improvement Project Plan budget, based on the results of the sewer study outlined in Mitigation Measure UTL-1. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and/or the City Public Works Services Department as appropriate. UTL-3 Prior to issuance of an occupancy permit for either hotel, the developer shall also make a fair share contribution to the County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County for any trunk line improvements required to serve the project based on the results of the sewer study outlined in UTL- 1. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Public Works Services Department in consultation with the County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County as appropriate. City Public Works Services Department Twice during Phase 1 Prior to issuance of an occupancy permit for either hotel City shall verify developer has made the indicated fair share contribution Withhold Occupancy Permit UTL-4 Prior to issuance of an occupancy permit for either hotel, the developer shall make a fair share contribution to fund project-related portions of any improvements needed to provide adequate electrical service to the project. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Public Works Services Department in consultation with Southern California Edison. City Public Works Services Department Twice during Phase 1 Prior to issuance of an occupancy permit for either hotel City shall verify developer has made the indicated fair share contribution Withhold Occupancy Permit     BERKELEY CARLSBAD FRESNO IRVINE LOSANGELES PALMSPRINGS POINTRICHMOND RIVERSIDE ROSEVILLE SANLUISOBISPO 20ExecutivePark,Suite200,Irvine,California92614 949.553.0666 www.lsa.net  MEMORANDUM DATE:May11,2018 TO:RayHussey,ProjectManager,LSAAssociates,Inc. FROM:RonBrugger,SeniorAirQualitySpecialist,LSAAssociates,Inc. SUBJECT:SeabiscuitSpecificPlanAmendmentNo.3AirQualityandGreenhouseGas EmissionsAnalysis LSAhasconductedthisairqualityandgreenhousegas(GHG)emissionsanalysisoftheproposed SeabiscuitSpecificPlanAmendment(SPA)No.3ProjectintheCityofArcadia.Theanalysiswas basedontheTrafficImpactAnalysis(TIA)conductedbyKimleyHorndatedApril2018.Theproposed SeabiscuitSpecificPlanAmendmentcomprises227hotelrooms,96condominiumunits,and38,485 squarefeetofmixedͲusecommercialspace.Thesitewaspreviouslyusedasa110Ͳroomhotel, whichwasrecentlydemolishedandwouldbereplacedaspartofthisproject.Astheconstruction impactshavebeenanalyzedpreviouslyaspartofthepriorMitigatedNegativeDeclarationsandan Addendum,thisanalysisdoesnotincludeanassessmentofconstructionemissionsbecause constructionoftheprojectenvisionedbySPANo.3wouldproducethesameconstructionimpacts astheapprovedproject. ThemostrecentversionofCalEEMod(Version2016.3.2)wasusedtocalculatethepeakdaily operationalemissions.Atripgenerationrateof2,774dailytrips,basedontheTIA,wasusedforthe proposedproject,and901dailytripsfortheprevious110Ͳroomhotel(defaultratefromthe InstituteofTransportationEngineers[ITE]TripGenerationManual,10thEdition),incombination withtheCalEEModdefaultvaluesfortriplengthsandtypes,fleetmixes,waterandenergyuse,and wastegenerationtoproducethedailyemissionratesshowninTableA. InadditiontotheregionalemissionsshowninTableA,alocalizedemissionsanalysiswasconducted asrecommendedbytheSouthCoastAirQualityManagementDistrict(SCAQMD)todeterminethe potentialforprojectemissionstoresultinpollutantconcentrationsinexcessoftheAmbientAir QualityStandards.ThisanalysiscombinestheonͲsiteportionoftheoverallemissionslistedinTable AwithanairdispersionanalysisprovidedbytheSCAQMDandthelocationofthenearestsensitive receptor,whichcomprisesresidentslocatedalongSantaCruzRoadtothenorthoftheprojectsiteat adistanceofapproximately350feet.TableBshowstheonͲsiteemissionsduringoperation.Noneof thepollutantemissionrateswouldexceedthelocalizedimpactemissionsthresholdsfortheexisting sensitivereceptorsapproximately350feetfromtheprojectsite.  6/21/18(R:\CTA1401.01_ArcadiaMarriottHotel\techstudies\AQGHG\AQͲGHGResultsMemo05Ͳ11Ͳ18.docx)2 TableA:RegionalOperationalEmissions Source PollutantEmissions,lbs/day VOCNOxCOSOxPM10PM2.5 ExistingLandUse Area4<1<10<1<1 Energy<11<1<1<1<1 Mobile2823<151 TotalExistingEmissions6924<151 RevisedProject Area1129<1<1<1 Energy<122<1<1<1 Mobile73077<1195 TotalRevisedProjectEmissions183488<1195 NetEmissionsChange122464<1144 SCAQMDThresholds555555015015055 EmissionsExceedThreshold?NoNoNoNoNoNo Source:CompiledbyLSA(May2018). Note:Columntotalsmaynotaddupduetoroundingupofmodelresults. CO=carbonmonoxide lbs/day=poundsperday NOx=nitrogenoxides PM2.5=particulatematterlessthan2.5micronsinsize PM10 =particulatematterlessthan10micronsinsize SCAQMD=SouthCoastAirQualityManagementDistrict SOx=sulfuroxides VOC=volatileorganiccompounds  TableB:LongͲTermOperationalLocalizedImpactsAnalysis EmissionsSourcesNOxCOPM10PM2.5 OnͲSiteEmissions3131<1 LocalizedImpactsEmissionsThresholds3275,640217 EmissionsExceedThreshold?NoNoNoNo Source:CompiledbyLSA(May2018). Note:SourceReceptorArea–EastSanGabrielValley,5acres,receptorsat350feet. CO=carbonmonoxide LST=LocalSignificanceThresholds NOx=nitrogenoxides PM2.5 =particulatematterlessthan2.5micronsinsize PM10=particulatematterlessthan10micronsinsize Additionally,CalEEModwasusedtocalculatetheannualoperationalGHGemissions.Consistent withtheairqualityanalysisdescribedabove,tripratesfromtheTIAandITEManualwereusedin combinationwiththeCalEEModdefaultvaluesfortriplengthsandtypes,fleetmixes,waterand energyuse,andwastegenerationtoproducetheannualGHGemissionratesshowninTableC.  6/21/18(R:\CTA1401.01_ArcadiaMarriottHotel\techstudies\AQGHG\AQͲGHGResultsMemo05Ͳ11Ͳ18.docx)3 TableC:LongͲTermOperationalGreenhouseGasEmissions Category GreenhouseGasEmissions,MT/year BioͲCO2NBioͲCO2TotalCO2CH4N2OCO2e ExistingLandUse AreaSources0<1<1<10<1 EnergySources0590590<1<1593 MobileSources0985985<10987 WasteSources12012<1030 WaterSources<11314<1<117 TotalExistingEmissions121,5881,601001,626 RevisedProject AreaSources02525<1<125 EnergySources01,7241,724<1<11,731 MobileSources03,7013,701<103,706 WasteSources4204230105 WaterSources58489<1<1105 TotalRevisedProjectEmissions475,5345,581305,672 NetEmissionsChange353,9463,980304,046 Source:CompiledbyLSA(May2018). BioͲCO2=biologicallygeneratedCO2 CH4=methane CO2=carbondioxide CO2e=carbondioxideequivalent MT/year=metrictonsperyear N2O=nitrousoxide NBioͲCO2=nonͲbiologicallygeneratedCO2  Attachment:CalEEModOutput CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 1 of 1 Date: 5/9/2018 11:26 AM Seabiscuit Specific Plan Amendment-Existing - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual Seabiscuit Specific Plan Amendment-Existing Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual 1.0 Project Characteristics 1.1 Land Usage Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population Hotel 110.00 Room 3.67 159,720.00 0 1.2 Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Urban Wind Speed (m/s)2.2 Precipitation Freq (Days)33 Climate Zone 9 Operational Year 2018 Utility Company Southern California Edison CO2 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 702.44 CH4 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.029 N2O Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.006 1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data Project Characteristics - Land Use - Existing condition. Construction Phase - Existing condition, no construction analyzed. Vehicle Trips - Woodstoves - Wood-burning stoves and hearths are prohibited in SCAQMD jurisdiction areas. Default Value New Value tblConstructionPhase NumDays 5.00 0.00 Table Name Column Name 2.0 Emissions Summary NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 2.1 Overall Construction Unmitigated Construction ROG NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Year tons/yr MT/yr Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 2018 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Maximum 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction ROG NOx CO Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Year tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 2018 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Maximum 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Maximum Mitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter) Highest Quarter Start Date End Date Maximum Unmitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter) SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 2.2 Overall Operational Unmitigated Operational ROG NOx CO Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Area 0.6513 1.0000e- 005 1.4200e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 2.7300e- 003 2.7300e- 003 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 2.9200e- 003 Energy 0.0207 0.1878 0.1577 1.1300e- 003 0.0143 0.0143 0.0143 0.0143 0.0000 590.1358 590.1358 0.0198 7.0400e- 003 592.7304 Mobile 0.3257 1.4889 3.9956 0.0107 0.7827 0.0132 0.7959 0.2099 0.0124 0.2223 0.0000 985.0757 985.0757 0.0635 0.0000 986.6634 Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 12.2262 0.0000 12.2262 0.7225 0.0000 30.2898 Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.8853 12.6740 13.5592 0.0915 2.2600e- 003 16.5175 Total 0.9977 1.6766 4.1547 0.0118 0.8974 9.3000e- 003 1,626.203 9 0.7827 0.0275 0.8102 0.2099 0.0267 0.2366 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 13.1114 1,587.888 2 1,600.9996 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Operational ROG NOx CO Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Area 0.6513 1.0000e- 005 1.4200e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 2.7300e- 003 2.7300e- 003 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 2.9200e- 003 Energy 0.0207 0.1878 0.1577 1.1300e- 003 0.0143 0.0143 0.0143 0.0143 0.0000 590.1358 590.1358 0.0198 7.0400e- 003 592.7304 Mobile 0.3257 1.4889 3.9956 0.0107 0.7827 0.0132 0.7959 0.2099 0.0124 0.2223 0.0000 985.0757 985.0757 0.0635 0.0000 986.6634 Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 12.2262 0.0000 12.2262 0.7225 0.0000 30.2898 Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.8853 12.6740 13.5592 0.0915 2.2600e- 003 16.5175 Total 0.9977 1.6766 4.1547 0.0118 0.7827 0.0275 0.8102 0.2099 0.0267 0.2366 13.1114 1,587.888 2 1,600.9996 0.8974 9.3000e- 003 1,626.203 9 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.0 Construction Detail Construction Phase Phase Number Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days Week Num Days Phase Description 1 Site Preparation Site Preparation 8/1/2018 7/31/2018 5 0 Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0 Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 0 Acres of Paving: 0 Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non-Residential Indoor: 0; Non-Residential Outdoor: 0; Striped Parking Area: 0 OffRoad Equipment Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8.00 247 0.40 Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 4 8.00 97 0.37 Trips and VMT Phase Name Offroad 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 HDT_Mix HHDT 3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction Site Preparation 7 18.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix 3.2 Site Preparation - 2018 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Fugitive Dust 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2ePM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Category tons/yr MT/yr Fugitive Dust 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile ROG NOx NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2eExhaust PM10 PM10 Total Category tons/yr MT/yr Mitigated 0.3257 1.4889 3.9956 0.0107 0.7827 0.0132 0.7959 0.2099 0.0124 0.2223 0.0000 985.0757 985.0757 0.0635 0.0000 986.6634 Unmitigated 0.3257 1.4889 3.9956 0.0107 0.7827 0.0132 0.7959 0.2099 0.0124 0.2223 0.0000 985.0757 985.0757 0.0635 0.0000 986.6634 4.2 Trip Summary Information Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT Hotel 898.70 900.90 654.50 2,061,959 2,061,959 Total 898.70 900.90 654.50 2,061,959 2,061,959 4.3 Trip Type Information Miles Trip % Trip Purpose % Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C- W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by Hotel 16.60 8.40 6.90 19.40 61.60 19.00 58 38 4 4.4 Fleet Mix HHD OBUS UBUS MCYLand Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 0.125604 0.017697 0.005953 0.018360 LHD2 MHD 0.002583 0.004804 0.000667 0.000944 SBUS MH NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 0.027618 0.002341Hotel 0.547972 0.046127 0.199330 Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 5.0 Energy Detail Historical Energy Use: N 5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy ROG NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2eExhaust PM10 PM10 Total Category tons/yr MT/yr Electricity Mitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 385.7478 385.7478 0.0159 3.2900e- 003 387.1279 Electricity Unmitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 385.7478 385.7478 0.0159 3.2900e- 003 387.1279 NaturalGas Mitigated 0.0207 0.1878 0.1577 1.1300e- 003 0.0143 0.0143 0.0143 0.0143 0.0000 204.3880 204.3880 3.9200e- 003 3.7500e- 003 205.6025 NaturalGas Unmitigated 0.0207 0.1878 0.1577 1.1300e- 003 204.3880 204.3880 3.9200e- 003 3.7500e- 003 205.60250.0143 0.0143 0.0143 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 0.00000.0143 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas Unmitigated NaturalGa s Use NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr Exhaust PM10 Hotel 3.83009e+ 006 0.0207 0.1878 0.1577 3.9200e- 003 3.7500e- 003 1.1300e- 003 0.0143 0.0143 0.0143 0.0143 0.0143 0.0000 204.3880 204.3880 0.0000 204.3880 205.6025 Total 0.0207 0.1878 0.1577 1.1300e- 003 204.3880 3.9200e- 003 3.7500e- 003 205.6025 Mitigated 0.0143 0.0143 0.0143 NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr Hotel 3.83009e+ 006 0.0207 0.1878 204.3880 3.9200e- 003 0.1577 1.1300e- 003 0.0143 0.0143 1.1300e- 003 0.0143 0.0143 0.0000 204.3880 0.0143 0.0000 3.7500e- 003 205.6025 Total 0.0207 0.1878 0.1577 204.3880 204.3880 3.9200e- 003 3.7500e- 003 205.60250.0143 0.0143 0.0143 5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity Unmitigated Electricity Use Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kWh/yr t o n MT/yr Hotel 1.21068e+ 006 385.7478 0.0159 3.2900e- 003 387.1279 Total 385.7478 0.0159 3.2900e- 003 387.1279 3.2900e- 003 Mitigated Electricity Use Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e 387.1279 Land Use kWh/yr t o n MT/yr Hotel 1.21068e+ 006 385.7478 0.0159 387.1279 Total 385.7478 0.0159 3.2900e- 003 6.0 Area Detail 6.1 Mitigation Measures Area CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2ROG NOx NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Mitigated 0.6513 1.0000e- 005 1.4200e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 2.7300e- 003 2.7300e- 003 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 2.9200e- 003 Unmitigated 0.6513 1.0000e- 005 1.4200e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 2.9200e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0000 2.7300e- 003 2.7300e- 003 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 6.2 Area by SubCategory Unmitigated ROG NOx CO Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Architectural Coating 0.0740 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer Products 0.5772 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Landscaping 1.4000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 1.4200e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 2.7300e- 003 2.7300e- 003 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 2.9200e- 003 Total 0.6513 1.0000e- 005 1.4200e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 2.9200e- 003 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0000 2.7300e- 003 2.7300e- 003 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated ROG NOx CO Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2ePM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr Architectural Coating 0.0740 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer Products 0.5772 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Landscaping 1.4000e- 004 1.0000e- 005 1.4200e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 2.7300e- 003 2.7300e- 003 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 2.9200e- 003 Total 0.6513 1.0000e- 005 1.4200e- 003 0.0000 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 2.7300e- 003 2.7300e- 003 1.0000e- 005 0.0000 2.9200e- 003 7.0 Water Detail 7.1 Mitigation Measures Water Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category t o n MT/yr Mitigated 13.5592 0.0915 2.2600e- 003 16.5175 Unmitigated 13.5592 0.0915 2.2600e- 003 16.5175 7.2 Water by Land Use Unmitigated Indoor/Out door Use Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use Mgal t o n MT/yr Hotel 2.79034 / 0.310038 13.5592 0.0915 2.2600e- 003 16.5175 Total 13.5592 0.0915 2.2600e- 003 16.5175 Mitigated Indoor/Out door Use Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use Mgal t o n MT/yr Hotel 2.79034 / 0.310038 13.5592 0.0915 2.2600e- 003 16.5175 Total 13.5592 0.0915 2.2600e- 003 16.5175 8.0 Waste Detail 8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste Category/Year Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e t o n MT/yr Mitigated 12.2262 0.7225 0.0000 30.2898 Unmitigated 12.2262 0.7225 0.0000 30.2898 8.2 Waste by Land Use Unmitigated Waste Disposed Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use tons t o n MT/yr Hotel 60.23 12.2262 0.7225 0.0000 30.2898 Total 12.2262 0.7225 0.0000 30.2898 Mitigated Waste Disposed Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use tons t o n MT/yr Hotel 60.23 12.2262 0.7225 0.0000 30.2898 Total 12.2262 0.7225 0.0000 30.2898 9.0 Operational Offroad Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type Horse Power Load Factor Boiler Rating Fuel Type 10.0 Stationary Equipment Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Hours/Year User Defined Equipment Equipment Type Number 11.0 Vegetation Fuel Type Boilers Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day Heat Input/Year CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 1 of 1 Date: 5/9/2018 11:27 AM Seabiscuit Specific Plan Amendment-Existing - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer Seabiscuit Specific Plan Amendment-Existing Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer 1.0 Project Characteristics 1.1 Land Usage Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population Hotel 110.00 Room 3.67 159,720.00 0 1.2 Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Urban Wind Speed (m/s)2.2 Precipitation Freq (Days)33 Climate Zone 9 Operational Year 2018 Utility Company Southern California Edison CO2 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 702.44 CH4 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.029 N2O Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.006 1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data Project Characteristics - Land Use - Existing condition. Construction Phase - Existing condition, no construction analyzed. Vehicle Trips - Woodstoves - Wood-burning stoves and hearths are prohibited in SCAQMD jurisdiction areas. Default Value New Value tblConstructionPhase NumDays 5.00 0.00 Table Name Column Name 2.0 Emissions Summary NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission) Unmitigated Construction ROG NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Year lb/day lb/day Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 2018 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.5787 0.0000 0.0000 2.3724 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Maximum 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 2.5787 0.0000 0.0000 2.3724 0.0000 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction ROG NOx CO Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Year lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 2018 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.5787 0.0000 0.0000 2.3724 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Maximum 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.5787 0.0000 0.0000 2.3724 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.2 Overall Operational SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Unmitigated Operational ROG NOx CO Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Area 3.5692 1.1000e- 004 0.0114 0.0000 4.0000e- 005 4.0000e- 005 4.0000e- 005 4.0000e- 005 0.0241 0.0241 7.0000e- 005 0.0257 Energy 0.1132 1.0288 0.8642 6.1700e- 003 0.0782 0.0782 0.0782 0.0782 1,234.515 9 1,234.5159 0.0237 0.0226 1,241.852 0 Mobile 1.9657 8.1620 23.4314 0.0636 4.5720 0.0753 4.6472 1.2239 0.0708 1.2947 6,450.916 8 6,450.9168 0.4029 6,460.990 3 Total 5.6480 9.1908 24.3069 0.0698 0.4267 0.0226 7,702.868 1 4.5720 0.1535 4.7255 1.2239 0.1491 1.3729 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 7,685.456 8 7,685.4568 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Operational ROG NOx CO Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Area 3.5692 1.1000e- 004 0.0114 0.0000 4.0000e- 005 4.0000e- 005 4.0000e- 005 4.0000e- 005 0.0241 0.0241 7.0000e- 005 0.0257 Energy 0.1132 1.0288 0.8642 6.1700e- 003 0.0782 0.0782 0.0782 0.0782 1,234.515 9 1,234.5159 0.0237 0.0226 1,241.852 0 Mobile 1.9657 8.1620 23.4314 0.0636 4.5720 0.0753 4.6472 1.2239 0.0708 1.2947 6,450.916 8 6,450.9168 0.4029 6,460.990 3 Total 5.6480 9.1908 24.3069 0.0698 4.5720 0.1535 4.7255 1.2239 0.1491 1.3729 7,685.456 8 7,685.4568 0.4267 0.0226 7,702.868 1 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.0 Construction Detail Construction Phase Phase Number Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days Week Num Days Phase Description 1 Site Preparation Site Preparation 8/1/2018 7/31/2018 5 0 Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0 Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 0 Acres of Paving: 0 Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non-Residential Indoor: 0; Non-Residential Outdoor: 0; Striped Parking Area: 0 OffRoad Equipment Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8.00 247 0.40 Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 4 8.00 97 0.37 Trips and VMT Phase Name Offroad 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 HDT_Mix HHDT 3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction Site Preparation 7 18.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 3.2 Site Preparation - 2018 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Fugitive Dust 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Fugitive Dust 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile ROG NOx NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Mitigated 1.9657 8.1620 23.4314 0.0636 4.5720 0.0753 4.6472 1.2239 0.0708 1.2947 6,450.916 8 6,450.9168 0.4029 6,460.990 3 Unmitigated 1.9657 8.1620 23.4314 0.0636 4.5720 0.0753 4.6472 1.2239 0.0708 1.2947 6,450.916 8 6,450.9168 0.4029 6,460.990 3 4.2 Trip Summary Information Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT Hotel 898.70 900.90 654.50 2,061,959 2,061,959 Total 898.70 900.90 654.50 2,061,959 2,061,959 4.3 Trip Type Information Miles Trip % Trip Purpose % Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C- W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by Hotel 16.60 8.40 6.90 19.40 61.60 19.00 58 38 4 4.4 Fleet Mix HHD OBUS UBUS MCYLand Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 0.125604 0.017697 0.005953 0.018360 LHD2 MHD 0.002583 0.004804 0.000667 0.000944 SBUS MH NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 0.027618 0.002341Hotel 0.547972 0.046127 0.199330 Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 5.0 Energy Detail Historical Energy Use: N 5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy ROG NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total NaturalGas Mitigated 0.1132 1.0288 0.8642 6.1700e- 003 0.0782 0.0782 0.0782 0.0782 1,234.515 9 1,234.5159 0.0237 0.0226 1,241.852 0 NaturalGas Unmitigated 0.1132 1.0288 0.8642 6.1700e- 003 1,234.5159 0.0237 0.0226 1,241.852 0 0.0782 0.0782 0.0782 0.0782 1,234.515 9 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Unmitigated NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Hotel 10493.4 0.1132 1.0288 0.8642 6.1700e- 003 0.0782 0.0782 0.0782 0.0782 1,234.5159 1,234.515 9 0.0237 0.0226 1,241.852 0 Total 0.1132 1.0288 0.8642 6.1700e- 003 1,234.515 9 0.0237 0.0226 1,241.852 0 0.0782 0.0782 0.0782 0.0782 CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 1,234.5159 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Hotel 10.4934 0.1132 1.0288 0.8642 6.1700e- 003 0.0782 0.0782 0.0782 0.0782 1,234.5159 1,234.515 9 0.0237 0.0226 1,241.852 0 Total 0.1132 1.0288 0.8642 6.1700e- 003 0.0237 0.0226 1,241.852 0 0.0782 0.0782 0.0782 0.0782 1,234.5159 1,234.515 9 6.0 Area Detail 6.1 Mitigation Measures Area CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2ROG NOx NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Mitigated 3.5692 1.1000e- 004 0.0114 0.0000 4.0000e- 005 4.0000e- 005 4.0000e- 005 4.0000e- 005 0.0241 0.0241 7.0000e- 005 0.0257 Unmitigated 3.5692 1.1000e- 004 0.0114 0.0000 7.0000e- 005 0.02574.0000e- 005 4.0000e- 005 4.0000e- 005 4.0000e- 005 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0241 0.0241 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 6.2 Area by SubCategory Unmitigated ROG NOx CO Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Architectural Coating 0.4057 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer Products 3.1625 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Landscaping 1.0900e- 003 1.1000e- 004 0.0114 0.0000 4.0000e- 005 4.0000e- 005 4.0000e- 005 4.0000e- 005 0.0241 0.0241 7.0000e- 005 0.0257 Total 3.5692 1.1000e- 004 0.0114 0.0000 7.0000e- 005 0.02574.0000e- 005 4.0000e- 005 4.0000e- 005 4.0000e- 005 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0241 0.0241 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated ROG NOx CO Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Architectural Coating 0.4057 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer Products 3.1625 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Landscaping 1.0900e- 003 1.1000e- 004 0.0114 0.0000 4.0000e- 005 4.0000e- 005 4.0000e- 005 4.0000e- 005 0.0241 0.0241 7.0000e- 005 0.0257 Total 3.5692 1.1000e- 004 0.0114 0.0000 4.0000e- 005 4.0000e- 005 4.0000e- 005 4.0000e- 005 0.0241 0.0241 7.0000e- 005 0.0257 7.0 Water Detail 7.1 Mitigation Measures Water 8.0 Waste Detail 8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste 9.0 Operational Offroad Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type 10.0 Stationary Equipment Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating Fuel Type Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Hours/Year Horse Power User Defined Equipment Equipment Type Number 11.0 Vegetation Load Factor Fuel Type Boilers Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 1 of 1 Date: 5/9/2018 11:28 AM Seabiscuit Specific Plan Amendment-Existing - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter Seabiscuit Specific Plan Amendment-Existing Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter 1.0 Project Characteristics 1.1 Land Usage Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population Hotel 110.00 Room 3.67 159,720.00 0 1.2 Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Urban Wind Speed (m/s)2.2 Precipitation Freq (Days)33 Climate Zone 9 Operational Year 2018 Utility Company Southern California Edison CO2 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 702.44 CH4 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.029 N2O Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.006 1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data Project Characteristics - Land Use - Existing condition. Construction Phase - Existing condition, no construction analyzed. Vehicle Trips - Woodstoves - Wood-burning stoves and hearths are prohibited in SCAQMD jurisdiction areas. Default Value New Value tblConstructionPhase NumDays 5.00 0.00 Table Name Column Name 2.0 Emissions Summary NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission) Unmitigated Construction ROG NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Year lb/day lb/day Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total 2018 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.5787 0.0000 0.0000 2.3724 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Maximum 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 2.5787 0.0000 0.0000 2.3724 0.0000 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction ROG NOx CO Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Year lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 2018 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.5787 0.0000 0.0000 2.3724 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Maximum 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.5787 0.0000 0.0000 2.3724 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.2 Overall Operational SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Unmitigated Operational ROG NOx CO Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Area 3.5692 1.1000e- 004 0.0114 0.0000 4.0000e- 005 4.0000e- 005 4.0000e- 005 4.0000e- 005 0.0241 0.0241 7.0000e- 005 0.0257 Energy 0.1132 1.0288 0.8642 6.1700e- 003 0.0782 0.0782 0.0782 0.0782 1,234.515 9 1,234.5159 0.0237 0.0226 1,241.852 0 Mobile 1.9221 8.3704 22.6572 0.0604 4.5720 0.0760 4.6479 1.2239 0.0715 1.2953 6,129.769 3 6,129.7693 0.4029 6,139.842 9 Total 5.6044 9.3993 23.5328 0.0666 0.4267 0.0226 7,381.720 7 4.5720 0.1542 4.7261 1.2239 0.1497 1.3736 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 7,364.309 3 7,364.3093 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Operational ROG NOx CO Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Area 3.5692 1.1000e- 004 0.0114 0.0000 4.0000e- 005 4.0000e- 005 4.0000e- 005 4.0000e- 005 0.0241 0.0241 7.0000e- 005 0.0257 Energy 0.1132 1.0288 0.8642 6.1700e- 003 0.0782 0.0782 0.0782 0.0782 1,234.515 9 1,234.5159 0.0237 0.0226 1,241.852 0 Mobile 1.9221 8.3704 22.6572 0.0604 4.5720 0.0760 4.6479 1.2239 0.0715 1.2953 6,129.769 3 6,129.7693 0.4029 6,139.842 9 Total 5.6044 9.3993 23.5328 0.0666 4.5720 0.1542 4.7261 1.2239 0.1497 1.3736 7,364.309 3 7,364.3093 0.4267 0.0226 7,381.720 7 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.0 Construction Detail Construction Phase Phase Number Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days Week Num Days Phase Description 1 Site Preparation Site Preparation 8/1/2018 7/31/2018 5 0 Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0 Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 0 Acres of Paving: 0 Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non-Residential Indoor: 0; Non-Residential Outdoor: 0; Striped Parking Area: 0 OffRoad Equipment Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8.00 247 0.40 Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 4 8.00 97 0.37 Trips and VMT Phase Name Offroad 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 HDT_Mix HHDT 3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction Site Preparation 7 18.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 3.2 Site Preparation - 2018 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Fugitive Dust 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Fugitive Dust 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile ROG NOx NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Mitigated 1.9221 8.3704 22.6572 0.0604 4.5720 0.0760 4.6479 1.2239 0.0715 1.2953 6,129.769 3 6,129.7693 0.4029 6,139.842 9 Unmitigated 1.9221 8.3704 22.6572 0.0604 4.5720 0.0760 4.6479 1.2239 0.0715 1.2953 6,129.769 3 6,129.7693 0.4029 6,139.842 9 4.2 Trip Summary Information Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT Hotel 898.70 900.90 654.50 2,061,959 2,061,959 Total 898.70 900.90 654.50 2,061,959 2,061,959 4.3 Trip Type Information Miles Trip % Trip Purpose % Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C- W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by Hotel 16.60 8.40 6.90 19.40 61.60 19.00 58 38 4 4.4 Fleet Mix HHD OBUS UBUS MCYLand Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 0.125604 0.017697 0.005953 0.018360 LHD2 MHD 0.002583 0.004804 0.000667 0.000944 SBUS MH NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 0.027618 0.002341Hotel 0.547972 0.046127 0.199330 Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 5.0 Energy Detail Historical Energy Use: N 5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy ROG NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total NaturalGas Mitigated 0.1132 1.0288 0.8642 6.1700e- 003 0.0782 0.0782 0.0782 0.0782 1,234.515 9 1,234.5159 0.0237 0.0226 1,241.852 0 NaturalGas Unmitigated 0.1132 1.0288 0.8642 6.1700e- 003 1,234.5159 0.0237 0.0226 1,241.852 0 0.0782 0.0782 0.0782 0.0782 1,234.515 9 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Unmitigated NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Hotel 10493.4 0.1132 1.0288 0.8642 6.1700e- 003 0.0782 0.0782 0.0782 0.0782 1,234.5159 1,234.515 9 0.0237 0.0226 1,241.852 0 Total 0.1132 1.0288 0.8642 6.1700e- 003 1,234.515 9 0.0237 0.0226 1,241.852 0 0.0782 0.0782 0.0782 0.0782 CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 1,234.5159 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Hotel 10.4934 0.1132 1.0288 0.8642 6.1700e- 003 0.0782 0.0782 0.0782 0.0782 1,234.5159 1,234.515 9 0.0237 0.0226 1,241.852 0 Total 0.1132 1.0288 0.8642 6.1700e- 003 0.0237 0.0226 1,241.852 0 0.0782 0.0782 0.0782 0.0782 1,234.5159 1,234.515 9 6.0 Area Detail 6.1 Mitigation Measures Area CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2ROG NOx NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Mitigated 3.5692 1.1000e- 004 0.0114 0.0000 4.0000e- 005 4.0000e- 005 4.0000e- 005 4.0000e- 005 0.0241 0.0241 7.0000e- 005 0.0257 Unmitigated 3.5692 1.1000e- 004 0.0114 0.0000 7.0000e- 005 0.02574.0000e- 005 4.0000e- 005 4.0000e- 005 4.0000e- 005 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0241 0.0241 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 6.2 Area by SubCategory Unmitigated ROG NOx CO Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Architectural Coating 0.4057 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer Products 3.1625 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Landscaping 1.0900e- 003 1.1000e- 004 0.0114 0.0000 4.0000e- 005 4.0000e- 005 4.0000e- 005 4.0000e- 005 0.0241 0.0241 7.0000e- 005 0.0257 Total 3.5692 1.1000e- 004 0.0114 0.0000 7.0000e- 005 0.02574.0000e- 005 4.0000e- 005 4.0000e- 005 4.0000e- 005 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0241 0.0241 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated ROG NOx CO Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Architectural Coating 0.4057 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer Products 3.1625 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Landscaping 1.0900e- 003 1.1000e- 004 0.0114 0.0000 4.0000e- 005 4.0000e- 005 4.0000e- 005 4.0000e- 005 0.0241 0.0241 7.0000e- 005 0.0257 Total 3.5692 1.1000e- 004 0.0114 0.0000 4.0000e- 005 4.0000e- 005 4.0000e- 005 4.0000e- 005 0.0241 0.0241 7.0000e- 005 0.0257 7.0 Water Detail 7.1 Mitigation Measures Water 8.0 Waste Detail 8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste 9.0 Operational Offroad Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type 10.0 Stationary Equipment Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating Fuel Type Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Hours/Year Horse Power User Defined Equipment Equipment Type Number 11.0 Vegetation Load Factor Fuel Type Boilers Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 1 of 1 Date: 5/9/2018 11:20 AM Seabiscuit Specific Plan Amendment - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual Seabiscuit Specific Plan Amendment Los Angeles-South Coast County, Annual 1.0 Project Characteristics 1.1 Land Usage Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population Enclosed Parking Structure 75.72 1000sqft 1.74 75,720.00 0 Hotel 227.00 Room 7.57 329,604.00 0 Condo/Townhouse High Rise 96.00 Dwelling Unit 1.50 96,000.00 275 Strip Mall 38.48 1000sqft 0.88 38,480.00 0 1.2 Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Urban Wind Speed (m/s)2.2 Precipitation Freq (Days)33 Climate Zone 9 Operational Year 2020 Utility Company Southern California Edison CO2 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 702.44 CH4 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.029 N2O Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.006 1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data Project Characteristics - Land Use - Construction Phase - No construction analyzed. Vehicle Trips - Trip rates from project TIA (Santa Anita Inn Redevelopment Project, Kimley Horn, April 2018) Woodstoves - Wood-burning stoves and hearths are prohibited in SCAQMD jurisdiction areas. Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value tblConstructionPhase NumDays 10.00 0.00 tblFireplaces FireplaceWoodMass 1,019.20 0.00 tblFireplaces NumberGas 81.60 96.00 tblFireplaces NumberNoFireplace 9.60 0.00 tblFireplaces NumberWood 4.80 0.00 tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 4.31 4.60 tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 8.19 8.38 tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 42.04 32.88 tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 3.43 3.66 tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 5.95 6.09 tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 20.43 15.98 tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 4.18 4.46 tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 8.17 8.36 tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 44.32 34.66 tblWoodstoves NumberCatalytic 4.80 0.00 tblWoodstoves NumberNoncatalytic 4.80 0.00 tblWoodstoves WoodstoveDayYear 25.00 0.00 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total tblWoodstoves WoodstoveWoodMass 999.60 0.00 2.0 Emissions Summary 2.1 Overall Construction NBio- CO2 Total CO2 Unmitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CH4 N2O CO2e Year tons/yr MT/yr Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 2018 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Maximum 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction ROG NOx CO Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Year tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 2018 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Maximum 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Maximum Mitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter) Highest SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 Quarter Start Date End Date Maximum Unmitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter) PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 2.2 Overall Operational Unmitigated Operational ROG NOx CO Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Area 1.9166 0.0314 1.0062 1.8000e- 004 7.0900e- 003 7.0900e- 003 7.0900e- 003 7.0900e- 003 0.0000 24.6788 24.6788 2.0400e- 003 4.2000e- 004 24.8558 Energy 0.0499 0.4498 0.3533 2.7200e- 003 0.0345 0.0345 0.0345 0.0345 0.0000 1,723.899 3 1,723.8993 0.0603 0.0196 1,731.234 3 Mobile 1.0729 5.1995 12.9881 0.0401 3.0781 0.0419 3.1200 0.8252 0.0393 0.8644 0.0000 3,701.037 6 3,701.0376 0.2154 0.0000 3,706.423 1 Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 42.3926 0.0000 42.3926 2.5053 0.0000 105.0260 Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 4.7155 84.0721 88.7876 0.4878 0.0122 104.6043 Total 3.0393 5.6808 14.3476 0.0430 3.2708 0.0321 5,672.143 5 3.0781 0.0834 3.1615 0.8252 0.0808 0.9060 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 47.1081 5,533.687 8 5,580.7959 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Operational ROG NOx CO Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Area 1.9166 0.0314 1.0062 1.8000e- 004 7.0900e- 003 7.0900e- 003 7.0900e- 003 7.0900e- 003 0.0000 24.6788 24.6788 2.0400e- 003 4.2000e- 004 24.8558 Energy 0.0499 0.4498 0.3533 2.7200e- 003 0.0345 0.0345 0.0345 0.0345 0.0000 1,723.899 3 1,723.8993 0.0603 0.0196 1,731.234 3 Mobile 1.0729 5.1995 12.9881 0.0401 3.0781 0.0419 3.1200 0.8252 0.0393 0.8644 0.0000 3,701.037 6 3,701.0376 0.2154 0.0000 3,706.423 1 Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 42.3926 0.0000 42.3926 2.5053 0.0000 105.0260 Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 4.7155 84.0721 88.7876 0.4878 0.0122 104.6043 Total 3.0393 5.6808 14.3476 0.0430 3.0781 0.0834 3.1615 0.8252 0.0808 0.9060 47.1081 5,533.687 8 5,580.7959 3.2708 0.0321 5,672.143 5 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.0 Construction Detail Construction Phase Phase Number Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days Week Num Days Phase Description 1 Site Preparation Site Preparation 8/1/2018 7/31/2018 5 0 Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0 Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 0 Acres of Paving: 1.74 Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non-Residential Indoor: 0; Non-Residential Outdoor: 0; Striped Parking Area: 0 OffRoad Equipment Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8.00 247 0.40 Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 4 8.00 97 0.37 Trips and VMT Phase Name Offroad 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 HDT_Mix HHDT 3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction Site Preparation 7 18.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 3.2 Site Preparation - 2018 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Fugitive Dust 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Fugitive Dust 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2ePM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Category tons/yr MT/yr Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile ROG NOx NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Mitigated 1.0729 5.1995 12.9881 0.0401 3.0781 0.0419 3.1200 0.8252 0.0393 0.8644 0.0000 3,701.037 6 3,701.0376 0.2154 0.0000 3,706.423 1 Unmitigated 1.0729 5.1995 12.9881 0.0401 3.0781 0.0419 3.1200 0.8252 0.0393 0.8644 0.0000 3,701.037 6 3,701.0376 0.2154 0.0000 3,706.423 1 4.2 Trip Summary Information Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT Condo/Townhouse High Rise 428.16 441.60 351.36 1,432,158 1,432,158 Enclosed Parking Structure 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hotel 1,897.72 1,902.26 1382.43 4,354,179 4,354,179 Strip Mall 1,333.72 1,265.22 614.91 2,323,535 2,323,535 Total 3,659.60 3,609.08 2,348.70 8,109,872 8,109,872 4.3 Trip Type Information Miles Trip % Trip Purpose % Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C- W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by Condo/Townhouse High Rise 14.70 5.90 8.70 40.20 19.20 40.60 86 11 3 Enclosed Parking Structure 16.60 8.40 6.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 Hotel 16.60 8.40 6.90 19.40 61.60 19.00 58 38 4 Strip Mall 16.60 8.40 6.90 16.60 64.40 19.00 45 40 15 4.4 Fleet Mix Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH Condo/Townhouse High Rise 0.547726 0.045437 0.201480 0.122768 0.016614 0.006090 0.019326 0.029174 0.002438 0.002359 0.005005 0.000677 0.000907 Enclosed Parking Structure 0.547726 0.045437 0.201480 0.122768 0.016614 0.006090 0.019326 0.029174 0.002438 0.002359 0.005005 0.000677 0.000907 Hotel 0.547726 0.045437 0.201480 0.122768 0.016614 0.006090 0.019326 0.029174 0.002438 0.002359 0.005005 0.000677 0.000907 Strip Mall 0.547726 0.045437 0.201480 0.122768 0.016614 0.006090 0.019326 0.029174 0.002438 0.002359 0.005005 0.000677 0.000907 5.0 Energy Detail Historical Energy Use: N 5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Electricity Mitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1,230.121 6 1,230.1216 0.0508 0.0105 1,234.522 4 Electricity Unmitigated 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 1,230.121 6 1,230.1216 0.0508 0.0105 1,234.522 4 NaturalGas Mitigated 0.0499 0.4498 0.3533 2.7200e- 003 0.0345 0.0345 0.0345 0.0345 0.0000 493.7776 493.7776 9.4600e- 003 9.0500e- 003 496.7119 NaturalGas Unmitigated 0.0499 0.4498 0.3533 2.7200e- 003 493.7776 493.7776 9.4600e- 003 9.0500e- 003 496.71190.0345 0.0345 0.0345 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 0.00000.0345 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas Unmitigated NaturalGa s Use NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr Exhaust PM10 Condo/Townhouse High Rise 1.28603e+ 006 6.9300e- 003 0.0593 0.0252 3.8000e- 004 4.7900e- 003 4.7900e- 003 4.7900e- 003 4.7900e- 003 0.0000 68.6276 68.6276 1.3200e- 003 1.2600e- 003 69.0354 Enclosed Parking Structure 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Hotel 7.9039e+0 06 0.0426 0.3875 0.3255 2.3200e- 003 0.0295 0.0295 0.0295 0.0295 0.0000 421.7824 421.7824 8.0800e- 003 7.7300e- 003 424.2889 Strip Mall 63107.2 3.4000e- 004 3.0900e- 003 2.6000e- 003 2.0000e- 005 2.4000e- 004 2.4000e- 004 2.4000e- 004 2.4000e- 004 0.0000 3.3676 3.3676 6.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 3.3877 Total 0.0499 0.4498 0.3533 2.7200e- 003 0.0345 0.0345 0.0345 0.0345 0.0000 493.7776 493.7776 9.4600e- 003 9.0500e- 003 496.7119 Mitigated NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr tons/yr MT/yr Condo/Townhouse High Rise 1.28603e+ 006 6.9300e- 003 0.0593 0.0252 3.8000e- 004 4.7900e- 003 4.7900e- 003 4.7900e- 003 4.7900e- 003 0.0000 68.6276 68.6276 1.3200e- 003 1.2600e- 003 69.0354 Enclosed Parking Structure 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Hotel 7.9039e+0 06 0.0426 0.3875 0.3255 2.3200e- 003 0.0295 0.0295 0.0295 0.0295 0.0000 421.7824 421.7824 8.0800e- 003 7.7300e- 003 424.2889 Strip Mall 63107.2 3.4000e- 004 3.0900e- 003 2.6000e- 003 2.0000e- 005 2.4000e- 004 2.4000e- 004 2.4000e- 004 2.4000e- 004 0.0000 3.3676 3.3676 6.0000e- 005 6.0000e- 005 3.3877 Total 0.0499 0.4498 0.3533 9.4600e- 003 9.0500e- 003 2.7200e- 003 0.0345 0.0345 0.0345 0.0345 0.0000 493.7776 493.7776 496.7119 N2O CO2e 5.4400e- 003 1.1300e- 003 5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity Unmitigated Electricity Use Total CO2 CH4 1.1700e- 003 137.2839 Land Use kWh/yr t o n MT/yr Condo/Townhouse High Rise 413552 131.7664 796.0432 0.0329 6.8000e- 003 132.2378 Enclosed Parking Structure 429332 136.7945 5.6500e- 003 798.8911 Strip Mall 519480 165.5175 6.8300e- 003 1.4100e- 003 166.1096 Hotel 2.4984e+0 06 N2O CO2e Total 1,230.1216 0.0508 0.0105 5.4400e- 003 1.1300e- 003 1,234.522 4 Mitigated Electricity Use Total CO2 CH4 1.1700e- 003 137.2839 Land Use kWh/yr t o n MT/yr Condo/Townhouse High Rise 413552 131.7664 796.0432 0.0329 6.8000e- 003 132.2378 Enclosed Parking Structure 429332 136.7945 5.6500e- 003 798.8911 Strip Mall 519480 165.5175 6.8300e- 003 1.4100e- 003 166.1096 Hotel 2.4984e+0 06 Total 1,230.1216 0.0508 0.0105 1,234.522 4 6.0 Area Detail NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 6.1 Mitigation Measures Area ROG NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category tons/yr MT/yr Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Mitigated 1.9166 0.0314 1.0062 1.8000e- 004 7.0900e- 003 7.0900e- 003 7.0900e- 003 7.0900e- 003 0.0000 24.6788 24.6788 2.0400e- 003 4.2000e- 004 24.8558 Unmitigated 1.9166 0.0314 1.0062 1.8000e- 004 2.0400e- 003 4.2000e- 004 24.85587.0900e- 003 7.0900e- 003 7.0900e- 003 7.0900e- 003 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0000 24.6788 24.6788 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 6.2 Area by SubCategory Unmitigated ROG NOx CO Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Architectural Coating 0.2017 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer Products 1.6819 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Hearth 2.3300e- 003 0.0199 8.4700e- 003 1.3000e- 004 1.6100e- 003 1.6100e- 003 1.6100e- 003 1.6100e- 003 0.0000 23.0532 23.0532 4.4000e- 004 4.2000e- 004 23.1902 Landscaping 0.0307 0.0115 0.9977 5.0000e- 005 5.4800e- 003 5.4800e- 003 5.4800e- 003 5.4800e- 003 0.0000 1.6256 1.6256 1.6000e- 003 0.0000 1.6656 Total 1.9165 0.0314 1.0062 1.8000e- 004 2.0400e- 003 4.2000e- 004 24.85587.0900e- 003 7.0900e- 003 7.0900e- 003 7.0900e- 003 0.0000 24.6788 24.6788 Mitigated SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2ROG NOx CO Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory tons/yr MT/yr PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Architectural Coating 0.2017 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer Products 1.6819 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Hearth 2.3300e- 003 0.0199 8.4700e- 003 1.3000e- 004 1.6100e- 003 1.6100e- 003 1.6100e- 003 1.6100e- 003 0.0000 23.0532 23.0532 4.4000e- 004 4.2000e- 004 23.1902 Landscaping 0.0307 0.0115 0.9977 5.0000e- 005 5.4800e- 003 5.4800e- 003 5.4800e- 003 5.4800e- 003 0.0000 1.6256 1.6256 1.6000e- 003 0.0000 1.6656 Total 1.9165 0.0314 1.0062 1.8000e- 004 7.0900e- 003 7.0900e- 003 7.0900e- 003 7.0900e- 003 0.0000 24.6788 24.6788 2.0400e- 003 4.2000e- 004 24.8558 7.0 Water Detail 7.1 Mitigation Measures Water Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category t o n MT/yr Mitigated 88.7876 0.4878 0.0122 104.6043 Unmitigated 88.7876 0.4878 0.0122 104.6043 7.2 Water by Land Use Unmitigated CO2e 0.2055 5.1500e- 003 Indoor/Out door Use Total CO2 CH4 N2O 0.0000 0.0000 Land Use Mgal t o n MT/yr Condo/Townhouse High Rise 6.25479 / 3.94323 41.8926 27.9814 0.1887 4.6500e- 003 48.5648 Enclosed Parking Structure 0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 34.0860 Strip Mall 2.85031 / 1.74696 18.9136 0.0936 2.3500e- 003 21.9535 Hotel 5.75826 / 0.639806 N2O CO2e Total 88.7876 0.4878 0.0122 0.2055 5.1500e- 003 104.6043 Mitigated Indoor/Out door Use Total CO2 CH4 0.0000 0.0000 Land Use Mgal t o n MT/yr Condo/Townhouse High Rise 6.25479 / 3.94323 41.8926 27.9814 0.1887 4.6500e- 003 48.5648 Enclosed Parking Structure 0 / 0 0.0000 0.0000 34.0860 Strip Mall 2.85031 / 1.74696 18.9136 0.0936 2.3500e- 003 21.9535 Hotel 5.75826 / 0.639806 Total 88.7876 0.4878 0.0122 104.6043 8.0 Waste Detail 8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste Category/Year Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e t o n MT/yr Mitigated 42.3926 2.5053 0.0000 105.0260 CO2e Unmitigated 42.3926 2.5053 0.0000 105.0260 0.5298 0.0000 8.2 Waste by Land Use Unmitigated Waste Disposed Total CO2 CH4 N2O 0.0000 0.0000 Land Use tons t o n MT/yr Condo/Townhouse High Rise 44.16 8.9641 25.2277 1.4909 0.0000 22.2081 Enclosed Parking Structure 0 0.0000 0.0000 62.5006 Strip Mall 40.4 8.2008 0.4847 0.0000 20.3172 Hotel 124.28 Total 42.3926 2.5053 0.0000 105.0260 Mitigated Waste Disposed Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use tons t o n MT/yr Condo/Townhouse High Rise 44.16 8.9641 0.5298 0.0000 22.2081 Enclosed Parking Structure 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Hotel 124.28 25.2277 1.4909 0.0000 2.5053 0.0000 62.5006 Strip Mall 40.4 8.2008 0.4847 0.0000 20.3172 105.0260 9.0 Operational Offroad Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Total 42.3926 10.0 Stationary Equipment Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Hours/Year Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating Fuel Type Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type Horse Power User Defined Equipment Equipment Type Number 11.0 Vegetation Load Factor Fuel Type Boilers Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 1 of 1 Date: 5/9/2018 11:22 AM Seabiscuit Specific Plan Amendment - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer Seabiscuit Specific Plan Amendment Los Angeles-South Coast County, Summer 1.0 Project Characteristics 1.1 Land Usage Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population Enclosed Parking Structure 75.72 1000sqft 1.74 75,720.00 0 Hotel 227.00 Room 7.57 329,604.00 0 Condo/Townhouse High Rise 96.00 Dwelling Unit 1.50 96,000.00 275 Strip Mall 38.48 1000sqft 0.88 38,480.00 0 1.2 Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Urban Wind Speed (m/s)2.2 Precipitation Freq (Days)33 Climate Zone 9 Operational Year 2020 Utility Company Southern California Edison CO2 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 702.44 CH4 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.029 N2O Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.006 1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data Project Characteristics - Land Use - Construction Phase - No construction analyzed. Vehicle Trips - Trip rates from project TIA (Santa Anita Inn Redevelopment Project, Kimley Horn, April 2018) Woodstoves - Wood-burning stoves and hearths are prohibited in SCAQMD jurisdiction areas. Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value tblConstructionPhase NumDays 10.00 0.00 tblFireplaces FireplaceWoodMass 1,019.20 0.00 tblFireplaces NumberGas 81.60 96.00 tblFireplaces NumberNoFireplace 9.60 0.00 tblFireplaces NumberWood 4.80 0.00 tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 4.31 4.60 tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 8.19 8.38 tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 42.04 32.88 tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 3.43 3.66 tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 5.95 6.09 tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 20.43 15.98 tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 4.18 4.46 tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 8.17 8.36 tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 44.32 34.66 tblWoodstoves NumberCatalytic 4.80 0.00 tblWoodstoves NumberNoncatalytic 4.80 0.00 tblWoodstoves WoodstoveDayYear 25.00 0.00 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total tblWoodstoves WoodstoveWoodMass 999.60 0.00 2.0 Emissions Summary 2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission) NBio- CO2 Total CO2 Unmitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CH4 N2O CO2e Year lb/day lb/day Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 2018 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.5787 0.0000 0.0000 2.3724 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Maximum 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 2.5787 0.0000 0.0000 2.3724 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction ROG NOx CO Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Year lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 2018 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.5787 0.0000 0.0000 2.3724 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Maximum 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.5787 0.0000 0.0000 2.3724 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.00 0.00 0.00 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 2.2 Overall Operational Unmitigated Operational ROG NOx CO Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Area 10.7525 1.6847 8.6592 0.0106 0.1726 0.1726 0.1726 0.1726 0.0000 2,047.276 9 2,047.2769 0.0531 0.0373 2,059.710 3 Energy 0.2734 2.4647 1.9357 0.0149 0.1889 0.1889 0.1889 0.1889 2,982.447 5 2,982.4475 0.0572 0.0547 3,000.170 7 Mobile 6.6106 29.1221 77.4808 0.2421 18.2573 0.2432 18.5004 4.8864 0.2280 5.1144 24,606.37 04 24,606.370 4 1.3868 24,641.04 03 Total 17.6365 33.2715 88.0757 0.2676 1.4970 0.0920 29,700.92 13 18.2573 0.6046 18.8619 4.8864 0.5894 5.4758 0.0000 29,636.09 48 29,636.094 8 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Operational ROG NOx CO Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Area 10.7525 1.6847 8.6592 0.0106 0.1726 0.1726 0.1726 0.1726 0.0000 2,047.276 9 2,047.2769 0.0531 0.0373 2,059.710 3 Energy 0.2734 2.4647 1.9357 0.0149 0.1889 0.1889 0.1889 0.1889 2,982.447 5 2,982.4475 0.0572 0.0547 3,000.170 7 Mobile 6.6106 29.1221 77.4808 0.2421 18.2573 0.2432 18.5004 4.8864 0.2280 5.1144 24,606.37 04 24,606.370 4 1.3868 24,641.04 03 Total 17.6365 33.2715 88.0757 0.2676 18.2573 0.6046 18.8619 4.8864 0.5894 5.4758 0.0000 29,636.09 48 29,636.094 8 1.4970 0.0920 29,700.92 13 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.0 Construction Detail Construction Phase Phase Number Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days Week Num Days Phase Description 1 Site Preparation Site Preparation 8/1/2018 7/31/2018 5 0 Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0 Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 0 Acres of Paving: 1.74 Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non-Residential Indoor: 0; Non-Residential Outdoor: 0; Striped Parking Area: 0 OffRoad Equipment Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8.00 247 0.40 Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 4 8.00 97 0.37 Trips and VMT Phase Name Offroad 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 HDT_Mix HHDT 3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction Site Preparation 7 18.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 3.2 Site Preparation - 2018 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Fugitive Dust 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Fugitive Dust 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile ROG NOx NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Mitigated 6.6106 29.1221 77.4808 0.2421 18.2573 0.2432 18.5004 4.8864 0.2280 5.1144 24,606.37 04 24,606.370 4 1.3868 24,641.04 03 Unmitigated 6.6106 29.1221 77.4808 0.2421 18.2573 0.2432 18.5004 4.8864 0.2280 5.1144 24,606.37 04 24,606.370 4 1.3868 24,641.04 03 4.2 Trip Summary Information Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT Condo/Townhouse High Rise 428.16 441.60 351.36 1,432,158 1,432,158 Enclosed Parking Structure 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hotel 1,897.72 1,902.26 1382.43 4,354,179 4,354,179 Strip Mall 1,333.72 1,265.22 614.91 2,323,535 2,323,535 Total 3,659.60 3,609.08 2,348.70 8,109,872 8,109,872 4.3 Trip Type Information Miles Trip % Trip Purpose % Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C- W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by Condo/Townhouse High Rise 14.70 5.90 8.70 40.20 19.20 40.60 86 11 3 Enclosed Parking Structure 16.60 8.40 6.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 Hotel 16.60 8.40 6.90 19.40 61.60 19.00 58 38 4 Strip Mall 16.60 8.40 6.90 16.60 64.40 19.00 45 40 15 4.4 Fleet Mix Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH Condo/Townhouse High Rise 0.547726 0.045437 0.201480 0.122768 0.016614 0.006090 0.019326 0.029174 0.002438 0.002359 0.005005 0.000677 0.000907 Enclosed Parking Structure 0.547726 0.045437 0.201480 0.122768 0.016614 0.006090 0.019326 0.029174 0.002438 0.002359 0.005005 0.000677 0.000907 Hotel 0.547726 0.045437 0.201480 0.122768 0.016614 0.006090 0.019326 0.029174 0.002438 0.002359 0.005005 0.000677 0.000907 Strip Mall 0.547726 0.045437 0.201480 0.122768 0.016614 0.006090 0.019326 0.029174 0.002438 0.002359 0.005005 0.000677 0.000907 5.0 Energy Detail Historical Energy Use: N 5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NaturalGas Mitigated 0.2734 2.4647 1.9357 0.0149 0.1889 0.1889 0.1889 0.1889 2,982.447 5 2,982.4475 0.0572 0.0547 3,000.170 7 NaturalGas Unmitigated 0.2734 2.4647 1.9357 0.0149 2,982.4475 0.0572 0.0547 3,000.170 7 0.1889 0.1889 0.1889 0.1889 CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 2,982.447 5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas Unmitigated NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Condo/Townhouse High Rise 3523.38 0.0380 0.3247 0.1382 2.0700e- 003 0.0263 0.0263 0.0263 0.0263 414.5149 414.5149 7.9400e- 003 7.6000e- 003 416.9781 Enclosed Parking Structure 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Hotel 21654.5 0.2335 2.1230 1.7833 0.0127 0.1614 0.1614 0.1614 0.1614 2,547.5919 2,547.591 9 0.0488 0.0467 2,562.7310 Strip Mall 172.896 1.8600e- 003 0.0170 0.0142 1.0000e- 004 1.2900e- 003 1.2900e- 003 1.2900e- 003 1.2900e- 003 20.3408 20.3408 3.9000e- 004 3.7000e- 004 20.4616 Total 0.2734 2.4646 1.9357 0.0149 2,982.447 5 0.0572 0.0547 3,000.17070.1889 0.1889 0.1889 0.1889 CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 2,982.4475 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Condo/Townhouse High Rise 3.52338 0.0380 0.3247 0.1382 2.0700e- 003 0.0263 0.0263 0.0263 0.0263 414.5149 414.5149 7.9400e- 003 7.6000e- 003 416.9781 Enclosed Parking Structure 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Hotel 21.6545 0.2335 2.1230 1.7833 0.0127 0.1614 0.1614 0.1614 0.1614 2,547.5919 2,547.591 9 0.0488 0.0467 2,562.7310 Strip Mall 0.172896 1.8600e- 003 0.0170 0.0142 1.0000e- 004 1.2900e- 003 1.2900e- 003 1.2900e- 003 1.2900e- 003 20.3408 20.3408 3.9000e- 004 3.7000e- 004 20.4616 Total 0.2734 2.4646 1.9357 0.0149 0.0572 0.0547 3,000.17070.1889 0.1889 0.1889 0.1889 CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 2,982.4475 2,982.447 5 Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 6.0 Area Detail 6.1 Mitigation Measures Area ROG NOx NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2eExhaust PM10 PM10 Total Category lb/day lb/day Mitigated 10.7525 1.6847 8.6592 0.0106 0.1726 0.1726 0.1726 0.1726 0.0000 2,047.276 9 2,047.2769 0.0531 0.0373 2,059.710 3 Unmitigated 10.7525 1.6847 8.6592 0.0106 0.0531 0.0373 2,059.710 3 0.1726 0.1726 0.1726 0.1726 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0000 2,047.276 9 2,047.2769 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 6.2 Area by SubCategory Unmitigated ROG NOx CO Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Architectural Coating 1.1052 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer Products 9.2157 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Hearth 0.1864 1.5925 0.6777 0.0102 0.1288 0.1288 0.1288 0.1288 0.0000 2,032.941 2 2,032.9412 0.0390 0.0373 2,045.021 9 Landscaping 0.2453 0.0922 7.9815 4.2000e- 004 0.0438 0.0438 0.0438 0.0438 14.3357 14.3357 0.0141 14.6884 Total 10.7525 1.6847 8.6592 0.0106 0.0531 0.0373 2,059.710 3 0.1726 0.1726 0.1726 0.1726 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0000 2,047.276 9 2,047.2769 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated ROG NOx CO Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Architectural Coating 1.1052 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer Products 9.2157 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Hearth 0.1864 1.5925 0.6777 0.0102 0.1288 0.1288 0.1288 0.1288 0.0000 2,032.941 2 2,032.9412 0.0390 0.0373 2,045.021 9 Landscaping 0.2453 0.0922 7.9815 4.2000e- 004 0.0438 0.0438 0.0438 0.0438 14.3357 14.3357 0.0141 14.6884 Total 10.7525 1.6847 8.6592 0.0106 0.1726 0.1726 0.1726 0.1726 0.0000 2,047.276 9 2,047.2769 0.0531 0.0373 2,059.710 3 7.0 Water Detail 7.1 Mitigation Measures Water 8.0 Waste Detail 8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste 9.0 Operational Offroad Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type 10.0 Stationary Equipment Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating Fuel Type Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Hours/Year Horse Power User Defined Equipment Equipment Type Number 11.0 Vegetation Load Factor Fuel Type Boilers Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2016.3.2 Page 1 of 1 Date: 5/9/2018 11:22 AM Seabiscuit Specific Plan Amendment - Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter Seabiscuit Specific Plan Amendment Los Angeles-South Coast County, Winter 1.0 Project Characteristics 1.1 Land Usage Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population Enclosed Parking Structure 75.72 1000sqft 1.74 75,720.00 0 Hotel 227.00 Room 7.57 329,604.00 0 Condo/Townhouse High Rise 96.00 Dwelling Unit 1.50 96,000.00 275 Strip Mall 38.48 1000sqft 0.88 38,480.00 0 1.2 Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Urban Wind Speed (m/s)2.2 Precipitation Freq (Days)33 Climate Zone 9 Operational Year 2020 Utility Company Southern California Edison CO2 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 702.44 CH4 Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.029 N2O Intensity (lb/MWhr) 0.006 1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data Project Characteristics - Land Use - Construction Phase - No construction analyzed. Vehicle Trips - Trip rates from project TIA (Santa Anita Inn Redevelopment Project, Kimley Horn, April 2018) Woodstoves - Wood-burning stoves and hearths are prohibited in SCAQMD jurisdiction areas. Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value tblConstructionPhase NumDays 10.00 0.00 tblFireplaces FireplaceWoodMass 1,019.20 0.00 tblFireplaces NumberGas 81.60 96.00 tblFireplaces NumberNoFireplace 9.60 0.00 tblFireplaces NumberWood 4.80 0.00 tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 4.31 4.60 tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 8.19 8.38 tblVehicleTrips ST_TR 42.04 32.88 tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 3.43 3.66 tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 5.95 6.09 tblVehicleTrips SU_TR 20.43 15.98 tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 4.18 4.46 tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 8.17 8.36 tblVehicleTrips WD_TR 44.32 34.66 tblWoodstoves NumberCatalytic 4.80 0.00 tblWoodstoves NumberNoncatalytic 4.80 0.00 tblWoodstoves WoodstoveDayYear 25.00 0.00 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total tblWoodstoves WoodstoveWoodMass 999.60 0.00 2.0 Emissions Summary 2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission) NBio- CO2 Total CO2 Unmitigated Construction ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 CH4 N2O CO2e Year lb/day lb/day Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 2018 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.5787 0.0000 0.0000 2.3724 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Maximum 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 2.5787 0.0000 0.0000 2.3724 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction ROG NOx CO Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Year lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 2018 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.5787 0.0000 0.0000 2.3724 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Maximum 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2.5787 0.0000 0.0000 2.3724 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.00 0.00 0.00 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 2.2 Overall Operational Unmitigated Operational ROG NOx CO Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Area 10.7525 1.6847 8.6592 0.0106 0.1726 0.1726 0.1726 0.1726 0.0000 2,047.276 9 2,047.2769 0.0531 0.0373 2,059.710 3 Energy 0.2734 2.4647 1.9357 0.0149 0.1889 0.1889 0.1889 0.1889 2,982.447 5 2,982.4475 0.0572 0.0547 3,000.170 7 Mobile 6.4309 29.7273 74.8383 0.2300 18.2573 0.2448 18.5021 4.8864 0.2296 5.1160 23,385.68 73 23,385.687 3 1.3906 23,420.45 18 Total 17.4568 33.8766 85.4332 0.2555 1.5008 0.0920 28,480.33 28 18.2573 0.6063 18.8635 4.8864 0.5910 5.4774 0.0000 28,415.41 17 28,415.411 7 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Operational ROG NOx CO Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Area 10.7525 1.6847 8.6592 0.0106 0.1726 0.1726 0.1726 0.1726 0.0000 2,047.276 9 2,047.2769 0.0531 0.0373 2,059.710 3 Energy 0.2734 2.4647 1.9357 0.0149 0.1889 0.1889 0.1889 0.1889 2,982.447 5 2,982.4475 0.0572 0.0547 3,000.170 7 Mobile 6.4309 29.7273 74.8383 0.2300 18.2573 0.2448 18.5021 4.8864 0.2296 5.1160 23,385.68 73 23,385.687 3 1.3906 23,420.45 18 Total 17.4568 33.8766 85.4332 0.2555 18.2573 0.6063 18.8635 4.8864 0.5910 5.4774 0.0000 28,415.41 17 28,415.411 7 1.5008 0.0920 28,480.33 28 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Percent Reduction 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.0 Construction Detail Construction Phase Phase Number Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days Week Num Days Phase Description 1 Site Preparation Site Preparation 8/1/2018 7/31/2018 5 0 Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 0 Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 0 Acres of Paving: 1.74 Residential Indoor: 0; Residential Outdoor: 0; Non-Residential Indoor: 0; Non-Residential Outdoor: 0; Striped Parking Area: 0 OffRoad Equipment Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8.00 247 0.40 Site Preparation Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 4 8.00 97 0.37 Trips and VMT Phase Name Offroad 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 HDT_Mix HHDT 3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction Site Preparation 7 18.00 0.00 0.00 14.70 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 6.90 20.00 LD_Mix PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 3.2 Site Preparation - 2018 Unmitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Fugitive Dust 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction On-Site ROG NOx CO Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Fugitive Dust 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated Construction Off-Site ROG NOx CO Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Total 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 4.0 Operational Detail - Mobile 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile ROG NOx NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Mitigated 6.4309 29.7273 74.8383 0.2300 18.2573 0.2448 18.5021 4.8864 0.2296 5.1160 23,385.68 73 23,385.687 3 1.3906 23,420.45 18 Unmitigated 6.4309 29.7273 74.8383 0.2300 18.2573 0.2448 18.5021 4.8864 0.2296 5.1160 23,385.68 73 23,385.687 3 1.3906 23,420.45 18 4.2 Trip Summary Information Average Daily Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated Land Use Weekday Saturday Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT Condo/Townhouse High Rise 428.16 441.60 351.36 1,432,158 1,432,158 Enclosed Parking Structure 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hotel 1,897.72 1,902.26 1382.43 4,354,179 4,354,179 Strip Mall 1,333.72 1,265.22 614.91 2,323,535 2,323,535 Total 3,659.60 3,609.08 2,348.70 8,109,872 8,109,872 4.3 Trip Type Information Miles Trip % Trip Purpose % Land Use H-W or C-W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW H-W or C- W H-S or C-C H-O or C-NW Primary Diverted Pass-by Condo/Townhouse High Rise 14.70 5.90 8.70 40.20 19.20 40.60 86 11 3 Enclosed Parking Structure 16.60 8.40 6.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0 Hotel 16.60 8.40 6.90 19.40 61.60 19.00 58 38 4 Strip Mall 16.60 8.40 6.90 16.60 64.40 19.00 45 40 15 4.4 Fleet Mix Land Use LDA LDT1 LDT2 MDV LHD1 LHD2 MHD HHD OBUS UBUS MCY SBUS MH Condo/Townhouse High Rise 0.547726 0.045437 0.201480 0.122768 0.016614 0.006090 0.019326 0.029174 0.002438 0.002359 0.005005 0.000677 0.000907 Enclosed Parking Structure 0.547726 0.045437 0.201480 0.122768 0.016614 0.006090 0.019326 0.029174 0.002438 0.002359 0.005005 0.000677 0.000907 Hotel 0.547726 0.045437 0.201480 0.122768 0.016614 0.006090 0.019326 0.029174 0.002438 0.002359 0.005005 0.000677 0.000907 Strip Mall 0.547726 0.045437 0.201480 0.122768 0.016614 0.006090 0.019326 0.029174 0.002438 0.002359 0.005005 0.000677 0.000907 5.0 Energy Detail Historical Energy Use: N 5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Category lb/day lb/day NaturalGas Mitigated 0.2734 2.4647 1.9357 0.0149 0.1889 0.1889 0.1889 0.1889 2,982.447 5 2,982.4475 0.0572 0.0547 3,000.170 7 NaturalGas Unmitigated 0.2734 2.4647 1.9357 0.0149 2,982.4475 0.0572 0.0547 3,000.170 7 0.1889 0.1889 0.1889 0.1889 CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 2,982.447 5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas Unmitigated NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Condo/Townhouse High Rise 3523.38 0.0380 0.3247 0.1382 2.0700e- 003 0.0263 0.0263 0.0263 0.0263 414.5149 414.5149 7.9400e- 003 7.6000e- 003 416.9781 Enclosed Parking Structure 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Hotel 21654.5 0.2335 2.1230 1.7833 0.0127 0.1614 0.1614 0.1614 0.1614 2,547.5919 2,547.591 9 0.0488 0.0467 2,562.7310 Strip Mall 172.896 1.8600e- 003 0.0170 0.0142 1.0000e- 004 1.2900e- 003 1.2900e- 003 1.2900e- 003 1.2900e- 003 20.3408 20.3408 3.9000e- 004 3.7000e- 004 20.4616 Total 0.2734 2.4646 1.9357 0.0149 2,982.447 5 0.0572 0.0547 3,000.17070.1889 0.1889 0.1889 0.1889 CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 2,982.4475 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated NaturalGa s Use ROG NOx Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU/yr lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Condo/Townhouse High Rise 3.52338 0.0380 0.3247 0.1382 2.0700e- 003 0.0263 0.0263 0.0263 0.0263 414.5149 414.5149 7.9400e- 003 7.6000e- 003 416.9781 Enclosed Parking Structure 0 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Hotel 21.6545 0.2335 2.1230 1.7833 0.0127 0.1614 0.1614 0.1614 0.1614 2,547.5919 2,547.591 9 0.0488 0.0467 2,562.7310 Strip Mall 0.172896 1.8600e- 003 0.0170 0.0142 1.0000e- 004 1.2900e- 003 1.2900e- 003 1.2900e- 003 1.2900e- 003 20.3408 20.3408 3.9000e- 004 3.7000e- 004 20.4616 Total 0.2734 2.4646 1.9357 0.0149 0.0572 0.0547 3,000.17070.1889 0.1889 0.1889 0.1889 CO SO2 Fugitive PM10 2,982.4475 2,982.447 5 Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 6.0 Area Detail 6.1 Mitigation Measures Area ROG NOx NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2eExhaust PM10 PM10 Total Category lb/day lb/day Mitigated 10.7525 1.6847 8.6592 0.0106 0.1726 0.1726 0.1726 0.1726 0.0000 2,047.276 9 2,047.2769 0.0531 0.0373 2,059.710 3 Unmitigated 10.7525 1.6847 8.6592 0.0106 0.0531 0.0373 2,059.710 3 0.1726 0.1726 0.1726 0.1726 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0000 2,047.276 9 2,047.2769 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 6.2 Area by SubCategory Unmitigated ROG NOx CO Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Architectural Coating 1.1052 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer Products 9.2157 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Hearth 0.1864 1.5925 0.6777 0.0102 0.1288 0.1288 0.1288 0.1288 0.0000 2,032.941 2 2,032.9412 0.0390 0.0373 2,045.021 9 Landscaping 0.2453 0.0922 7.9815 4.2000e- 004 0.0438 0.0438 0.0438 0.0438 14.3357 14.3357 0.0141 14.6884 Total 10.7525 1.6847 8.6592 0.0106 0.0531 0.0373 2,059.710 3 0.1726 0.1726 0.1726 0.1726 SO2 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 0.0000 2,047.276 9 2,047.2769 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Mitigated ROG NOx CO Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e SubCategory lb/day lb/day PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 Architectural Coating 1.1052 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Consumer Products 9.2157 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Hearth 0.1864 1.5925 0.6777 0.0102 0.1288 0.1288 0.1288 0.1288 0.0000 2,032.941 2 2,032.9412 0.0390 0.0373 2,045.021 9 Landscaping 0.2453 0.0922 7.9815 4.2000e- 004 0.0438 0.0438 0.0438 0.0438 14.3357 14.3357 0.0141 14.6884 Total 10.7525 1.6847 8.6592 0.0106 0.1726 0.1726 0.1726 0.1726 0.0000 2,047.276 9 2,047.2769 0.0531 0.0373 2,059.710 3 7.0 Water Detail 7.1 Mitigation Measures Water 8.0 Waste Detail 8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste 9.0 Operational Offroad Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Days/Year Horse Power Load Factor Fuel Type 10.0 Stationary Equipment Heat Input/Year Boiler Rating Fuel Type Fire Pumps and Emergency Generators Equipment Type Number Hours/Day Hours/Year Horse Power User Defined Equipment Equipment Type Number 11.0 Vegetation Load Factor Fuel Type Boilers Equipment Type Number Heat Input/Day BERKELEY CARLSBAD FRESNO IRVINE LOS ANGELES PALM SPRINGS POINT RICHMOND RIVERSIDE ROSEVILLE SAN LUIS OBISPO 20 Executive Park, Suite 200, Irvine, California 92614 949.553.0666 www.lsa.net MEMORANDUM DATE: April 19, 2018 TO: Lisa Flores, City of Arcadia Planning & Community Development Administrator FROM: Leo Simone, LSA Associate Biologist/Certified Arborist SUBJECT: Arborist Tree Assessment and Nesting Bird Survey at the Arcadia Seabiscuit Pacifica Specific Plan Amendment Site in Arcadia, California (CTA1401.01) LSA was retained by the City of Arcadia Planning & Community Development Administrator to conduct an arboricultural assessment and nesting bird survey of the 92 coast redwoods (Sequoia sempervirens) planted as screening at 130 West Huntington Drive in Arcadia, Los Angeles County, California, as shown on the United States Geological Survey Mount Wilson, California 7.5-minute quadrangle (Figure 1; all figures provided in Attachment B). This arboricultural assessment and nesting bird survey documents the findings of the on-site tree inventory and assessment conducted by LSA for the purpose of identifying and evaluating all qualifying trees within the survey limits and identifying the presence (if any) of active bird nests within the 92 coast redwoods surveyed for the project. INTRODUCTION LSA conducted an assessment of the redwood trees on site adjacent to West Huntington Drive that may be governed by the City of Arcadia’s (City) tree preservation regulations (Protected Trees Ordinance No. 2338 (City of Arcadia 2016a) and Mitigation Measures Bio-1 and Bio-3 in the Arcadia Seabiscuit Pacifica Specific Plan Amendment City of Arcadia, California Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) (City of Arcadia 2016b), which may require removal or relocation (if appropriate) as part of the new development. Ordinance No. 2338 requires the following prior to the removal of any tree species subject to the protected tree ordinance with a 12-inch or greater diameter at breast height measured at 4.5 feet above ground level (DBH). “1. An application for a tree permit for the removal of a healthy protected tree shall be made to the Community Development Division. The content, form, instructions, procedures, and requirements of the application package deemed necessary and appropriate for the proper enforcement of this Chapter shall be established by the Community Development Division. The application shall include, but not be limited to the following: 4/19/18 «P:\CTA1401.01\Arborist_Nesting_Bird_Memo Final rev.docx» 2 (a) An explanation as to why the tree's removal is necessary; (b) An explanation as to why tree removal is more desirable than alternative project designs; (c) An explanation of any mitigation measures. (d) A fee in the same amount as required for a modification application.” LSA inventoried and evaluated 92 coast redwood trees within the project survey limits. This species is native to parts of the Coast Ranges from Monterey County, California, to the Oregon border; it is not native to Southern California. Although somewhat adaptable to the Southern California climate, coast redwood trees do not typically perform well in the hot, dry conditions found in the urban environment of the Los Angeles Basin. The 92 surveyed trees surveyed were divided into three sections, as follows: x Section 1: 10 trees proposed for removal for the new driveway; x Section 2: 34 trees south of the new driveway; and x Section 3: 48 trees from north of the new driveway to the corner. Eight of the trees within Section 1 would be subject to the City’s tree protection ordinance. Of those 10 trees, 5 are in fair condition and 5 are in poor condition. Twenty of the trees within Section 2 would be subject to the City’s tree protection ordinance. Of these, 3 are in fair condition, 14 are in poor condition, and 3 are dead. A total of 43 trees within Section 3 would be subject to the City’s tree protection ordinance; 11 of these are in fair condition and 32 are in poor condition. The project location is shown on Figure 1. Figure 2 shows the project survey area boundary and inventoried tree locations displayed on an aerial photograph base map at a scale of 1 inch = 47.5 feet. Representative site photographs are included as Figure 3. All figures are included as Attachment B. The Tree Attributes Table (Attachment C) identifies all trees by number. The trees’ scientific names, common names, DBH, average height, condition, protection status, and remarks are also included in the table. In addition to the table, relevant information regarding the trees within the survey area is provided below. SURVEY AREA The survey area encompasses all of the redwood trees planted on the southeastern side of the project site bordering West Huntington Drive, as shown on Figure 2. The project area falls within Sunset Climate Zone 21 (Williamson 1988). Sunset Climate Zones are important because a plant’s performance is influenced by the total climate (i.e., growing season length, timing and amount of rainfall, winter lows, summer highs, wind, and humidity), factors which the zones take into account. 4/19/18 «P:\CTA1401.01\Arborist_Nesting_Bird_Memo Final rev.docx» 3 METHODS LSA surveyed and mapped all coast redwood trees within the designated survey area. The on-site tree inventory survey was conducted on April 4, 2018, by LSA Associate Biologist Leo Simone (International Society of Arboriculture [ISA] Certified Arborist/Certified Tree Risk Assessor WE-8491A), with assistance from LSA Assistant Biologist Heather Monteleone. The tree inventory data and physical measurements were taken during the field visit. The entire survey area was surveyed on foot, and all coast redwood trees within the survey area boundary were inventoried, assigned numbers, and evaluated for the following attributes: x Global Positioning System (GPS) location; x Diameter at 4.5 feet above the lowest point where the trunk meets the soil; x Approximate height; x Condition (excellent, good, fair, poor, or dead); x Protected status (DBH of 12 inches or greater); and x Remarks (other related health or structure information). A survey was also conducted to assess whether potential nesting bird activity was occurring. The nesting bird survey was conducted from 10:00 a.m. to 11:45 a.m. on April 4, 2018. Weather conditions were partly cloudy, cool, and mild, with a wind speed of approximately 5 miles per hour (mph). Existing database queries and recently prepared environmental documents for the region were also used from April 5 to 9, 2018. The primary sources used are listed below. Additional literature that was reviewed or referenced is provided in Attachment A. x SelectTree Database, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo (SelecTree 2018); x Sunset Western Garden Book (Williamson 1988); x Aerial photographs available through Google Earth Pro (Google Earth 2013) and the County of Los Angeles; x Arcadia Municipal Code of Ordinances: Comprehensive Tree Management Program (City of Arcadia 2016a); INVENTORIED COAST REDWOOD TREES Of the 92 coast redwood trees inventoried and evaluated, 71 have a DBH of 12 inches or greater and are subject to the City’s Ordinance No. 2338.Within Section 1, 4 of the subject trees are in fair condition and 4 are in poor condition; within Section 2, three of the subject trees are in fair condition and 14 are in poor condition; and within Section 3, 11 of the subject trees are in fair condition and 32 are in poor condition. 4/19/18 «P:\CTA1401.01\Arborist_Nesting_Bird_Memo Final rev.docx» 4 A majority of the trees surveyed within the project footprint are in poor condition and significantly weakened due to years of injuries and stress from lack of maintenance and irrigation. Additionally, the trees are planted too close to one another to allow for adequate root development. Due to the large size of these trees, and in many cases their poor condition, transplantation is not a viable option. Codominant stems, girdling, and overcrowding were the main rationale for giving many of these trees a “poor” classification. Several of the coast redwood trees had damage to their trunks from large vines. The damage ranged from minor to severe. Many of the coast redwood trees present within the survey limits showed signs of chlorosis, most likely resulting from a nutrient deficiency (a lack of potassium, manganese, boron, magnesium, nitrogen, and iron). Codominant Stems This term is used to describe two or more main stems (or leaders) that are approximately the same diameter and emerge from the same location on the main trunk, with neither stem becoming dominant over time. Codominant stems grow and develop as they would if they were single leaders and include xylem, phloem, cambium, and bark. As the two stems grow wider, some of this bark becomes trapped inside the branch junction (included bark), further compromising the integrity of the joint, which in turn increases the chances of failure. Codominant leaders are much more consequential on large trees than smaller ones. Tall, heavy limbs that develop on tall trees have the potential to break from the rest of the tree and may cause major property damage or injury. In many cases, removal is the best course of action for trees with codominant stems. This is because few trees with codominant stems survive the (nondeliberate or deliberate) loss of either stem. Because they lack the branch protection zones found in well-formed branch junctions, and the loss of a large stem typically causes a massive wound, such trees are often inundated with pests, pathogens, and fungi. Girdling Another rationale for a “poor” classification is the presence of girdling, which refers to the strangling of a tree branch or trunk by a rope, cable, or vine. This constricts the bark, phloem, and cambium layer and inhibits proper nutrient flow. With any type of bark wound, the flow of nutrients from the foliage and root system to other parts of the tree will be disrupted, causing the tree to become stressed. This in turn can result in dieback in the crown and root system and colonization by wood- decaying organisms. Several of the trees on the project site exhibited girdling damage caused by vines. Topping Three of the coast redwood trees rated as “poor” were previously topped. “Topping” a tree is the indiscriminate cutting of tree branches to stubs and removal of the main stem, mainly to reduce tree height. Topping is perhaps the most harmful tree-trimming practice and remains a common method of reducing tree height. 4/19/18 «P:\CTA1401.01\Arborist_Nesting_Bird_Memo Final rev.docx» 5 Crowding In an urbanized setting, trees planted close together pose safety risks to both individuals and property. Trees require ample space to spread their roots and stems. Crowding prevents sunlight from filtering down to the lower branches, creates a lack of air flow, and reduces the ability of moisture to reach the soil roots. Overcrowded trees are more likely to be nutrient-deficient, exhibiting noticeable symptoms such as chlorosis, branch dieback, and pest infestations. Structural Deficiencies When two or more trees are placed too close together and mature, both their canopies and root systems start growing into one another, which increases the chance of tree failure. Branches and stems grow weak and have a higher potential of collapsing against surrounding trees, causing further damage. Nutrient Deficiencies Due to their relative immobility, trees often face significant challenges in obtaining an adequate supply of mineral nutrients available in the soil to meet the demands of basic cellular processes. Nutrient deficiencies and pH imbalance (5.5 to 6.5 is ideal) can pose serious threats to plant productivity, often as a result of root problems (e.g., crowding, disease, and deep planting). Planting trees farther apart allows for increased root system growth, trunk diameter, and root flare. Overcrowded trees must compete with each other for a finite amount of soil nutrients, which can result in increased fertilization needs. Trees suffering from insufficient nutrient acquisition may develop weak branch attachments susceptible to structural failure. Soil properties like water content, pH, and compaction may exacerbate these problems. Symptoms of nutrient deficiency vary depending on the severity of the deficiency. Therefore, the soil should be analyzed to determine the cause of the nutrient deficiency. A soil laboratory can also provide recommendations on how to treat the problem. Pests and Disease Poor air circulation can lead to an increase of fungal diseases in an overcrowded stand of trees. When trees are spaced properly, air circulation dries out excessive moisture on the leaves and stems, preventing fungal infections. Pests, including aphids and mites, can also more easily move between trees if they are planted in close proximity. Additionally, trees planted close together also harbor large quantities of woody debris and litter-fall that serve as a further breeding ground for pests and pathogens. Moisture Issues In urban settings, moisture retention is a recurring issue for plant productivity. Water absorption in crowded stands is negatively impacted by limited soil volume and interconnected root systems. This necessitates more frequent watering schedules to maintain species-specific moisture levels. Water 4/19/18 «P:\CTA1401.01\Arborist_Nesting_Bird_Memo Final rev.docx» 6 applied from overhead (i.e., from irrigation or rain) soaks the foliage but may not reach the ground beneath. Furthermore, the soil and the shallow root systems are difficult to soak efficiently due to dense leaf litter and woody debris collected between adjacent trunks in close proximity. The wet foliage and drought-stressed roots make the plants more prone to disease. Root Issues Most trees have root systems contained within the top 4 to 5 feet of soil, with the absorbing roots in the top 18 to 24 inches. With available space, tree roots can extend outward beyond three times the height of the tree. Crowded trees with limited soil volume are especially susceptible to stress due to elevated temperatures, insufficient soil moisture, and finite nutrient availability because of decreased root systems. Furthermore, trees can also present a hazard in community settings with their roots. Planted too close to sidewalks, curbs, and roadways, the tree roots can interfere with adjacent physical infrastructure such as irrigation, sewer, or electrical lines. Proximity to High-Use Roadway The coast redwood trees in the project area are in a less-than-ideal state, having compromised structural integrity with an increased risk of failure that could directly affect the adjacent highly traveled road. A tree is considered hazardous when two criteria are met: (1) a defect that will likely result in failure, and (2) existence of a target. Failure refers to the fact that the tree could split, crack, fall, or break off at the point of the defect. The target is an object (structure, people, vehicle, etc.) that could result in damage, injury, or the disruption of activity if the tree were to fail. In the case of the on-site coast redwood trees, the project area is bordered directly by West Huntington Drive, which has a consistent flow of traffic. This poses a potential hazard to vehicular safety, considering that the majority of the surveyed trees displayed codominant stems with included bark. The hazards posed by the presence of codominant stems with included bark are likely to be higher at the project location considering the volume of traffic that passes directly adjacent to the row of 92 coast redwood trees, 43 of which exhibited codominant stems. According to the most recent Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) Report for the City (City of Arcadia 2014) , an average of 13,600 motor vehicles pass directly by the project site on West Huntington Drive each day. Although LSA did not conduct a Tree Risk Assessment, it should be noted that trees with codominant stems with included bark, girdling, and overcrowding are less structurally sound than trees without these defects. Public safety should be taken into consideration when making a determination of whether to remove or retain the coast redwood trees on the project site. 4/19/18 «P:\CTA1401.01\Arborist_Nesting_Bird_Memo Final rev.docx» 7 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS At least 10 of the coast redwood trees are expected to be impacted by the placement of a new access driveway, buildings, and construction activities. Due to the poor condition of the majority of the trees, it is LSA’s recommendation that the coast redwood trees be removed and replaced with a species better suited to the environmental conditions found on site. As discussed, the City has a tree ordinance that may apply to this project, which may limit the type of species that can be planted. Recommended Replacement Trees An arboricultural guideline that cannot be overemphasized is that in order for a tree to succeed, it must be properly matched to the site conditions. No amount of proper tree planting practices or maintenance practices will save a tree that is poorly suited for the site. Therefore, it is important to consider the functions that the trees will be expected to fulfill and to select the correct species for the chosen location. Factors to consider include, but are not limited to, the following: x Existing tree species and age diversity; x Growth-space requirements above and below ground; x Tree species characteristics; x Tree species requirements (e.g., water and light); x The climate and microclimate of the site (e.g., amount of sunlight, soil conditions, and wind conditions); x Irrigation and maintenance practices; and x The City’s goals, policies, and other legislation. Because of the existing defects on many of the on-site coast redwood trees and the trees’ unsuitability for transplanting, LSA recommends replacing the coast redwood trees with a species better suited to the physical and environmental conditions of the project area. The criteria for choosing recommended species included: drought tolerance, full sun tolerance, a suitable screening growth habit, non-invasive root systems, evergreen foliage, and ready availability at commercial nurseries. The recommended species include: broad-leaved paperbark /Cajeput tree (Melaleuca quinquenervia), peppermint tree (Agonis flexuosa), smooth Arizona cypress (Hesperocyparis arizonica var. glabra), Afghan pine (Pinus eldarica), hop bush (Dodonaea viscosa), incense cedar (Calocedrus decurrens), Carolina laurel cherry (Prunus caroliniana), Australian brush cherry (Syzygium australe), lemonwood tree (Pittosporum eugenioides), and American holly (Ilex opaca). LSA has provided a list of recommended replacement species with accompanying photographs in Attachment D. 4/19/18 «P:\CTA1401.01\Arborist_Nesting_Bird_Memo Final rev.docx» 8 Tree Life Expectancy Typical life spans in nature for trees range from 40 to 150 years. Trees growing in urban landscapes are typically not expected to live as long as their counterparts growing in a native environment. For example, in a study about the City of Los Angeles’ Million Tree LA program, a low-mortality scenario projected that 17 percent of planted trees would be dead after 35 years, while a high- mortality scenario projected 56 percent mortality (Roman 2014; LSA 2014). Trees, like all other living organisms, have a natural lifecycle and a finite life span. Trees are nonhierarchical organisms with decentralized vital functions. The average tree life span depends on its species. However, human activity can dramatically shorten a tree’s potential life span, as can moderate environmental conditions that might cause premature death (e.g., drought). However, human activity can rarely extend a tree’s lifetime beyond its normal range. Sustaining healthy trees in the urban landscape is often difficult because of differences in the growing environment compared to a tree’s natural growing conditions. Symptoms of tree decline from urban stressors can take years to appear. Common causes of urban tree mortality include: x Damage to roots or soils from nearby construction activities; x Air pollution; x Damage from disease and insects; x Trees planted in too small a space; x Improper planting techniques; x Tree stakes or grates left on too long; x Poor soil conditions; x Improper watering; x Removal or damage during maintenance of nearby utilities or sidewalks; and x Competition from nearby plant species. These factors may significantly reduce the average life span of urban landscape trees from 100-plus years in their natural environment to less than 30 years in the urban landscape. Although trees in the urban landscape can be damaged by improper pruning or other physical damage, the issues of greatest concern generally occur with the trees’ roots. The top 18 inches of soil are typically home to the largest percentage of roots, and overall tree health is directly related to the health of these roots. TREE INSTALLATION AND MAINTENANCE Proper site preparation before and during planting, coupled with good follow-up care, reduces the amount of time the plant material experiences transplant shock and allows the tree to establish more quickly. Proper handling during planting is essential for new trees. The International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) recommends that the following procedures be used for all trees: x The planting hole should be at least three times the diameter of the root ball but only as deep as the root ball. It is important to make the hole wide because the roots on the newly establishing 4/19/18 «P:\CTA1401.01\Arborist_Nesting_Bird_Memo Final rev.docx» 9 tree must push through surrounding soil in order to become established. The existing soils on site have been compacted and may be unsuitable for healthy root growth. Breaking up the soil in a large area around the tree(s) provides the newly emerging roots room to expand into loose soil to accelerate establishment. x The trunk flare at the base of the tree should be partially visible after the tree has been planted. If the trunk flare is not partially visible, soil should be removed from the top of the root ball. The trunk flare determines how deep the hole needs to be for proper planting. x Before placing the tree in the hole, the tree worker should confirm that the hole has been dug to the proper depth and no more. The majority of the roots on the newly planted tree will develop in the top 12 inches of soil. If the tree is planted too deeply, new roots will have difficulty developing because of a lack of oxygen. It is better to plant the tree slightly high (i.e., 2 to 3 inches above the base of the trunk flare) than to plant it at or below the original growing level. This planting level will allow for some settling. To avoid damage when setting the tree in the hole, the tree should be lifted by the root ball, not by the trunk. x Before backfilling, the tree worker should view the tree from several directions to confirm that it is straight. Once backfilling has begun, it may be difficult to reposition the tree. x The hole should be filled about one-third full while gently but firmly packing the soil around the base of the root ball, being careful not to damage the trunk or roots in the process. The tree worker can then fill the remainder of the hole, firmly packing the soil to eliminate air pockets that may cause the roots to dry. Soil should be added a few inches at a time and settled with water. This process should be continued until the hole is filled and the tree is firmly planted. Application of fertilizer at the time of planting is not recommended. x If the tree is grown and dug properly at the nursery, staking for support will not be necessary in most landscape situations. Studies have shown that trees establish more quickly and develop stronger trunk and root systems if they are not staked at the time of planting. However, protective staking may be required on sites where vandalism or windy conditions are concerns. If staking is necessary for support, two stakes used in conjunction with a wide, flexible tie material will hold the tree upright, provide flexibility, and minimize injury to the trunk. Support staking and ties should be removed after the first year of growth. x Mulch is organic matter applied to the base of the tree. It holds moisture, moderates soil temperature extremes (both hot and cold), and reduces competition from grass and weeds. A 2- to 4-inch layer is ideal; more than 4 inches may cause a problem with oxygen and moisture levels. When placing mulch, it is important to ensure that the tree trunk is not covered, as doing so may cause decay of the living bark at the base of the tree. A mulch-free area 1 to 2 inches wide at the base of the tree is sufficient to avoid moist bark conditions and prevent decay. x The soil should be kept moist but not soaked; overwatering causes needles/leaves to turn yellow and fall off. Trees should be watered when the soil is dry below the surface of the mulch. 4/19/18 «P:\CTA1401.01\Arborist_Nesting_Bird_Memo Final rev.docx» 10 Continue until mid-fall, tapering off for lower temperatures that require less frequent watering. Xeriscape irrigation should be employed, ensuring deep watering that is matched to the tree’s evapotranspiration rates. Other follow-up care may include minor pruning of branches damaged during the planting process. Tree workers should prune sparingly immediately after planting and wait to begin necessary corrective pruning until after a full season of growth in the new location. To ensure that best practice standards are being met, planting should be performed by ISA-certified tree workers under the supervision of a certified arborist. Disclosure Statement Arborists are tree specialists who use their education, knowledge, training, and experience to examine trees, recommend measures to enhance the beauty and health of trees, and attempt to reduce the risk of living near trees. Clients may choose to accept or disregard the recommendations of the arborist or to seek additional advice. Arborists cannot detect every condition that could possibly lead to the structural failure of a tree. Trees are living organisms that fail in ways we do not fully understand. Certain conditions are often hidden within trees or below the ground. Arborists cannot guarantee that a tree will be healthy or safe under all circumstances or for a specific period of time. Likewise, remedial treatments cannot be guaranteed. Trees can be managed, but they cannot be controlled. To live near trees is to accept some degree of risk. The only way to remove all risk from trees is to remove all trees. I have personally inspected the trees and/or property referred to in this report and have stated my findings accurately. The extent of the evaluation and appraisal is stated in this report. I have no current or prospective interest in the vegetation or the property that is the subject of this report, and I have no personal interest or bias with respect to the parties involved. The analysis, opinions, and conclusions stated herein are my own and are based on current scientific procedures and facts. My compensation is not contingent upon the reporting of a predetermined conclusion that favors the cause of the client or any other party, or upon the results of the assessment, the attainment of stipulated results, or the occurrence of any subsequent events. My analysis, opinions, and conclusions were developed and this report has been prepared according to commonly accepted arboricultural practices. I further certify that I am a Certified Arborist and Certified Tree Risk Assessor by the ISA. I CERTIFY THAT THE INFORMATION IN THIS ARBORIST TREE ASSESSMENT REPORT AND ATTACHED EXHIBITS FULLY AND ACCURATELY REPRESENTS MY WORK: SURVEYOR: ISA CERTIFICATION NO.: DATE: WE-8491A April 19, 2018 Leo Simone 4/19/18 «P:\CTA1401.01\Arborist_Nesting_Bird_Memo Final rev.docx» 11 NESTING BIRD SURVEY RESULTS This survey was conducted to assess the potential nesting bird activity on the project site prior to maintenance activities. No active nests were found during the survey. However, the density of the coast redwood foliage, along with the noise of the demolition crews and West Huntington Drive traffic, may have impeded finding individual nests. Observed bird species included American crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos), common raven (Corvus corax), house finch (Haemorhous mexicanus), Anna’s hummingbird (Calypte anna), mourning dove (Zenaida macroura), black phoebe (Sayornis nigricans), and northern mockingbird (Mimus polyglottos). LSA is confident that no large raptor nests are present in the upper canopy of the coast redwood trees. No raptors were observed in the project vicinity during the site survey. The primary season for nesting birds is February to September, so there is potential that active nests could occur within the project area at a later time during the nesting bird season. Conclusion and Recommendations The nesting bird survey conducted represents a good-faith effort to find and document active nest(s) that may be present within the project area. Birds have the potential to construct nests at any time; therefore, if additional tree removal will take place later during the active nesting bird season (February through September), LSA recommends that a survey by a qualified biologist be conducted within 3 days prior to additional tree removal beyond the currently planned removal of the redwood trees within Section 1. If you have any questions or comments about the survey, please contact me at (949) 553-0666. Attachments: A—References B—Figures C—Tree Attribute Table D—Recommended Replacement Trees A RBORIST T REE A SSESSMENT AND N ESTING B IRD S URVEY R ESULTS A PRIL 2018 A RCADIA S EABISCUIT P ACIFICA S PECIFIC P LAN A MENDMENT A RCADIA, C ALIFORNIA P:\CTA1401.01\Arborist_Nesting_Bird_Memo Final rev.docx «04/19/18» A-1 ATTACHMENT A REFERENCES BrightView Tree Care Services. 2017. Evaluation of Redwood Trees at 130 Huntington Drive, Arcadia, California. May 23. City of Arcadia. 2014. Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) Report. Website: https://www.arcadiaca.gov/government/city-departments/traffic engineering. _____. 2016a. Arcadia Municipal Code of Ordinances: Comprehensive Tree Management Program. _____. 2016b. Arcadia Seabiscuit Pacifica Specific Plan Amendment City of Arcadia, California Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration. September 28. Dunster, Julian A. 2013. Tree Risk Assessment Manual. Champaign: International Society of Arboriculture. Gilman, Edward F., Brian Kempf, Nelda Matheny, and Jim Clark. 2013. Structural Pruning – A Guide For The Green Industry. Visalia: Urban Tree Foundation. Google Earth. 2013. Google Earth Pro. Website: http://www.earth.google.com. Grabosky, Jason C., and Nenad Gucunski. 2011. “A Method for Simulation of Upward Root Growth Pressure in Compacted Sand.” Arboriculture & Urban Forestry, pp. 27–33. LSA Associates, Inc. 2014. Arboricultural Tree Report, Mariners Village Renovation Project, Marina del Rey, California. December 1. Pearson, Brian J., Richard C. Beeson, Jr., Carrie Reinhart-Adams, Michael Olexa, and Amy Shober. 2013. “Determining Variability in Characteristics of Residential Landscape Soils That Influences Infiltration Rates.” Arboriculture & Urban Forestry, pp. 249–255. Roman, Lara A. Spring 2014. “How Many Trees Are Enough? Tree Death and the Urban Canopy.” Scenario 04: Building the Urban Forest. SelecTree Database. 2018. “Tree Record.” 1995–2018. California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo. April 9. Website: http://selectree.calpoly.edu/treea-detail. Smiley, E. Thomas, Nelda Matheny, and Sharron Lilly. 2011. Best Management Practices, Tree Risk Assessment. Champaign: International Society of Arboriculture. Williamson, Joseph F. 1988. Sunset Western Garden Book. Lane Publishing Company. Menlo Park, California. A RBORIST T REE A SSESSMENT AND N ESTING B IRD S URVEY R ESULTS A PRIL 2018 A RCADIA S EABISCUIT P ACIFICA S PECIFIC P LAN A MENDMENT A RCADIA, C ALIFORNIA P:\CTA1401.01\Arborist_Nesting_Bird_Memo Final rev.docx «04/19/18» ATTACHMENT B FIGURES Figure 1: Project Location Figure 2: Tree Survey Locations Figure 3: Representative Site Photographs LEGEND Project Location SOURCE: USGS 7.5' Quad - Mt. Wilsonl(1988), CA I:\CTA1401.01\GIS\MXD\ProjectLocation_USGS.mxd (4/12/2018) FIGURE 1 Arborist Tree Assessment and Nesting Bird Survey Arcadia Seabiscuit Pacifica Specific Plan Amendment Site Arcadia, California Project Location 0 1000 2000 FEET Los Angeles County £¤101 ÃÃ2 ÃÃ42 ÃÃ71 ÃÃ19 ÃÃ72 ÃÃ142 ÃÃ134 ÃÃ39 ÃÃ57 ÃÃ60 Project Location §¨¦10 §¨¦110 §¨¦105 §¨¦710 §¨¦210 §¨¦10 §¨¦605 §¨¦5 Project Vicinity Project Location Service Layer Credits: © 2018 Microsoft Corporation © 2018 DigitalGlobe ©CNES (2018) Distribution Airbus DS © 2018 HERE LEGEND Project Location Tree Condition Dead Fair Poor Protection Status .Protected B Not Protected Section Areas Section 1 Section 2 Section 3 SOURCE: Bing (2015); LSA (2018) I:\CTA1401.01\GIS\MXD\TreeSurvey.mxd (4/12/2018) FIGURE 2 Arborist Tree Assessment and Nesting Bird Survey Arcadia Seabiscuit Pacifica Specific Plan Amendment Site Arcadia, California Tree Survey Locations 0 23.75 47.5 FEET Girdling resulting from rope tied around the tree's trunk. Onsite coast redwood trees planted along West Huntington Drive in Arcadia. Dead coast redwood trees at southwest corner of site. FIGURE 3 Sheet 1 of 2 Representative Site Photographs I:\CTA1401.01\G\Site Photos-Arcadia.cdr (4/6/2018) Arborist Tree Assessment and Nesting Bird Survey Arcadia Seabiscuit Pacifica Specific Plan Amendment Site Arcadia, California Girdling resulting from large vine on the tree's trunk. Coast redwood tree with codominant stems and included bark. FIGURE 3 Sheet 2 of 2 Representative Site Photographs I:\CTA1401.01\G\Site Photos-Arcadia.cdr (4/6/2018) Arborist Tree Assessment and Nesting Bird Survey Arcadia Seabiscuit Pacifica Specific Plan Amendment Site Arcadia, California A RBORIST T REE A SSESSMENT AND N ESTING B IRD S URVEY R ESULTS A PRIL 2018 A RCADIA S EABISCUIT P ACIFICA S PECIFIC P LAN A MENDMENT A RCADIA, C ALIFORNIA P:\CTA1401.01\Arborist_Nesting_Bird_Memo Final rev.docx «04/19/18» ATTACHMENT C TREE ATTRIBUTE TABLE A RBORIST T REE A SSESSMENT AND N ESTING B IRD S URVEY R ESULTS A PRIL 2018 A RCADIA S EABISCUIT P ACIFICA S PECIFIC P LAN A MENDMENT A RCADIA, C ALIFORNIA P:\CTA1401.01\Arborist_Nesting_Bird_Memo Final rev.docx «04/19/18» C-1 Tree Attribute Table Tree ID Common Name Scientific Name DBH (inches) Height (feet) Condition Protected Remarks Section 1 1 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 15 40 Fair Yes 2 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 11 42 Fair No 3 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 15.5 45 Poor Yes Codominant stems 4 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 11.5 42 Poor No Codominant stems 5 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 12.5 45 Fair Yes 6 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 12.5 48 Poor Yes Codominant stems 7 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 15 50 Poor Yes Codominant stems 8 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 13.5 50 Poor Yes Codominant stems 9 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 13 52 Fair Yes 10 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 15 60 Fair Yes Section 2 11 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 17 45 Dead Yes 12 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 14.5 45 Dead Yes 13 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 13.5 45 Dead Yes 14 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 9 40 Poor No Codominant stems 15 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 11.5 48 Poor No Codominant stems 16 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 14 45 Poor Yes Codominant stems 17 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 14 42 Poor Yes Codominant stems 18 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 16 45 Poor Yes Codominant stems 19 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 18 45 Poor Yes Codominant stems 20 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 12.5 33 Poor Yes Vine girdling, slight lean 21 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 11.5 38 Poor No Vine girdling 22 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 15 40 Poor Yes Vine girdling 23 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 10 40 Fair No 24 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 10 30 Poor No Vine girdling 25 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 13 30 Poor Yes Codominant stems 26 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 14 40 Poor Yes Codominant stems 27 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 9.5 40 Poor No Vine girdling 28 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 10 30 Poor No Vine girdling 29 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 11 30 Poor No Vine girdling 30 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 6.5 48 Poor No Vine girdling 31 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 11 30 Poor No Vine girdling 32 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 11.5 30 Poor No Vine girdling 33 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 11.5 32 Poor No Vine girdling 34 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 12 35 Poor Yes Vine girdling 35 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 12 42 Poor Yes Vine girdling 36 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 10.5 42 Fair No 37 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 14 42 Poor Yes Codominant stems, topped 38 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 14 48 Poor Yes Missing bark 20ft up 39 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 11.5 42 Poor No Codominant stems, vine girdling 40 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 13 43 Fair Yes 41 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 13.5 45 Poor Yes Girdling from rope 42 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 13 42 Fair Yes 43 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 13.5 42 Poor Yes Codominant stems 44 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 14.5 45 Fair Yes A RBORIST T REE A SSESSMENT AND N ESTING B IRD S URVEY R ESULTS A PRIL 2018 A RCADIA S EABISCUIT P ACIFICA S PECIFIC P LAN A MENDMENT A RCADIA, C ALIFORNIA P:\CTA1401.01\Arborist_Nesting_Bird_Memo Final rev.docx «04/19/18» C-2 Tree Attribute Table Tree ID Common Name Scientific Name DBH (inches) Height (feet) Condition Protected Remarks Section 3 45 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 13.5 50 Poor Yes Vine girdling 46 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 14 48 Poor Yes Codominant stems 47 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 12.5 46 Poor Yes Codominant stems 48 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 12.5 46 Fair Yes 49 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 15 50 Poor Yes Thick vine girdling 50 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 14.5 53 Poor Yes Codominant stems 51 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 13 52 Poor Yes Codominant stems 52 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 15 52 Poor Yes Codominant stems 53 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 14 55 Poor Yes Vine girdling 54 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 15.5 63 Poor Yes Codominant stems 55 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 17 50 Fair Yes 56 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 16 65 Poor Yes Codominant stems 57 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 15 65 Poor Yes Codominant stems 58 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 17 65 Poor Yes Codominant stems 59 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 16.5 65 Poor Yes Codominant stems 60 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 15.5 68 Poor Yes Codominant stems 61 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 17 65 Poor Yes Codominant stems 62 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 16 63 Fair Yes 63 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 16 65 Poor Yes Codominant stems, vine girdling 64 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 17 65 Poor Yes Codominant stems 65 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 16 65 Poor Yes Codominant stems 66 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 15 60 Poor Yes Codominant stems 67 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 14 15 Poor Yes Topped 68 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 14.5 65 Poor Yes Codominant stems 69 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 14.5 68 Fair Yes 70 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 15.5 65 Fair Yes 71 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 14 60 Poor Yes Codominant stems 72 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 12 50 Poor Yes Codominant stems, vine girdling 73 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 14 58 Poor Yes Mechanical trunk damage, vine girdling 74 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 12.5 48 Poor Yes Rope girdling 75 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 12 62 Fair Yes 76 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 12.5 62 Fair Yes 77 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 14 65 Fair Yes 78 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 13 65 Fair Yes 79 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 16 68 Fair Yes 80 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 15 70 Fair Yes 81 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 9 15 Dead No Topped 82 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 13.5 55 Poor Yes Codominant stems, vine girdling 83 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 15 50 Poor Yes Codominant stems 84 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 13 52 Fair Yes 85 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 17 48 Poor Yes Vine girdling 86 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 7.5 35 Poor Yes Codominant stems 87 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 8, 2 35 Poor No Multi-trunk A RBORIST T REE A SSESSMENT AND N ESTING B IRD S URVEY R ESULTS A PRIL 2018 A RCADIA S EABISCUIT P ACIFICA S PECIFIC P LAN A MENDMENT A RCADIA, C ALIFORNIA P:\CTA1401.01\Arborist_Nesting_Bird_Memo Final rev.docx «04/19/18» C-3 Tree Attribute Table Tree ID Common Name Scientific Name DBH (inches) Height (feet) Condition Protected Remarks 88 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 11 35 Poor No Codominant stems 89 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 11 40 Poor No Codominant stems 90 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 9 40 Poor No Codominant stems 91 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 12 50 Poor Yes Codominant stems 92 Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 15.5 50 Poor Yes Codominant stems DBH = diameter at breast height A RBORIST T REE A SSESSMENT AND N ESTING B IRD S URVEY R ESULTS A PRIL 2018 A RCADIA S EABISCUIT P ACIFICA S PECIFIC P LAN A MENDMENT A RCADIA, C ALIFORNIA P:\CTA1401.01\Arborist_Nesting_Bird_Memo Final rev.docx «04/19/18» ATTACHMENT D RECOMMENDED REPLACEMENT TREES I:\CTA1401.01\G\Recommended Replacement Trees.cdr (4/6/2018) Recommended Replacement Trees Common Name Broad-leaved paperbark /Cajeput Tree Scienfic Name Melaleuca quinquenervia Tree Shape Rounded Max Height () 20-40 Max Width () 15-25 Growth Rate (inch/year) 24 Foliage type Evergreen ellipc to oblong Flower Pink, purple, or yellow; showy Maintenance Drought tolerant, full sun, wet to dry soil Pest and Disease Informaon Suscepble to Phytophthora and Root Rot. Common Landscape Applicaon Screen or Riparian Addional Notes Lier issue is dry fruit. Desirable wildlife plant I:\CTA1401.01\G\Recommended Replacement Trees.cdr (4/6/2018) Recommended Replacement Trees Common Name Peppermint Tree Scienfic Name Agonis flexuosa Tree Shape Rounded, with weeping canopy Max Height () 25-35 Max Width () 15-30 Growth Rate (inch/year) 24-36 Foliage type Evergreen lanceolate Flower White, showy Maintenance Drought tolerant, full sun, wet to dry soil Pest and Disease Informaon Suscepble to Phytophthora and Root Rot. Common Landscape Applicaon Street Tree or Screen Addional Notes Aracts birds Agonis flexuosa ‘Burgundy’ is similar tree with striking purple foliage I:\CTA1401.01\G\Recommended Replacement Trees.cdr (4/6/2018) Recommended Replacement Trees Common Name Smooth Arizona Cypress Scienfic Name Hesperocyparis arizonica var.glabra Tree Shape Columnar Max Height () 40-50 Max Width () 20 Growth Rate (inch/year) 36 Foliage type Evergreen scalelike Flower Inconspicuous yellow Maintenance Drought tolerant, full sun, moist to dry soil Pest and Disease Informaon Resistant to Texas Root Rot. Suscepble to Spider Mites, Gummosis, Phytophthora and Root Rot. Common Landscape Applicaon Screen Addional Notes Excellent wind screen for hot, dry areas. Desirable wildlife plant I:\CTA1401.01\G\Recommended Replacement Trees.cdr (4/6/2018) Recommended Replacement Trees Common Name Afghan/Mondell Pine Scienfic Name Pinus brua (Pinus eldarica) Tree Shape Pyramidal Max Height () 30-55 Max Width () 25-35 Growth Rate (inch/year) 24-36 Foliage type Evergreen needle Flower Inconspicuous Maintenance Drought tolerant, full sun, dry soil Pest and Disease Informaon Resistant to Texas Root Rot and Vercillium Suscepble to Pine p moth Common Landscape Applicaon Street tree, specimen, screen Addional Notes Desirable wildlife plant Thrives in hot dry climates and poor soils I:\CTA1401.01\G\Recommended Replacement Trees.cdr (4/6/2018) Recommended Replacement Trees Common Name Hop Bush Scienfic Name Dodonaea viscosa Tree Shape Oval erect Max Height () 15-20 Max Width () 15-20 Growth Rate (inch/year) 24 to 36 Foliage type Evergreen lanceolate Flower Inconspicuous Maintenance Drought tolerant, full sun, moist to dry and well- drained soil Pest and Disease Informaon Suscepble to Scales, Phytophthora and Root Rot Common Landscape Applicaon Screen or Hedged Addional Notes Lier issue is dry fruit Desirable wildlife plant Dodonaea viscosa ‘Pupurea’ is a readily available variety with striking dark maroon foliage I:\CTA1401.01\G\Recommended Replacement Trees.cdr (4/6/2018) Recommended Replacement Trees Common Name Incense Cedar Scienfic Name Calocedrus decurrens Tree Shape Erect conical Max Height () 70-90 Max Width () 10-15 Growth Rate (inch/year) 12-24 Foliage type Evergreen scalelike Flower Inconspicuous Maintenance Full sun, drought tolerant, moist to dry soil Pest and Disease Informaon Resistant to Oak Root Fungus. Suscepble to Beetle Borers, Juniper Scale and Western Cedar Bark Beetle, Mistletoe, Phytophthora, Root Rot, Red Ring Rot, Schweinitzii Bu Rot, Pied Sap Rot, Oak Root Rot, Incense-cedar Rust and Rust. Common Landscape Applicaon Specimen, wind break, screen Addional Notes Grows slow at first but increases growth rate when established Fire resistance is favorable I:\CTA1401.01\G\Recommended Replacement Trees.cdr (4/6/2018) Recommended Replacement Trees Common Name Carolina Laurel Cherry Scienfic Name Prunus caroliniana Tree Shape Erect conical Max Height () 20-30 Max Width () 15-25 Growth Rate (inch/year) 36 Foliage type Evergreen lanceolate Flower White, showy and fragrant Maintenance Drought tolerant, full sun, moist soil Pest and Disease Informaon Resistant to Oak Root Fungus. Suscepble to Scales, Fire Blight, Root Rot, Rust, Gummosis and Vercillium. Common Landscape Applicaon Screen Addional Notes Lier issue is flower/fruit Withstands heat, dryness, wind, and is quite durable once established Aracts birds and bees I:\CTA1401.01\G\Recommended Replacement Trees.cdr (4/6/2018) Recommended Replacement Trees Common Name Australian Brush Cherry Scienfic Name Syzygium australe (Eugenia paniculata) Tree Shape Rounded erect Max Height () 30-60 Max Width () 10-20 Growth Rate (inch/year) 12 Foliage type Evergreen oblong Flower Green or white, showy Maintenance Full sun, moist soil Pest and Disease Informaon Suscepble to Aphids and Thrip. Common Landscape Applicaon Screen Addional Notes Lier issue is prolific wet fruit in summer/fall Aracts birds and bees Quite hardy once established I:\CTA1401.01\G\Recommended Replacement Trees.cdr (4/6/2018) Recommended Replacement Trees Common Name Lemonwood Tree Scienfic Name Pittosporum eugenioides Tree Shape Rounded erect Max Height () 15-40 Max Width () 6-15 Growth Rate (inch/year) 24 Foliage type Evergreen ellipc to oblong Flower Showy, yellow Maintenance Drought tolerant, full sun to paral shade, moist soil Pest and Disease Informaon Suscepble to Aphids and Scales, Sooty Mold Common Landscape Applicaon Screen or Hedged Addional Notes Root damage potenal rated as Low Desirable Wildlife Plant I:\CTA1401.01\G\Recommended Replacement Trees.cdr (4/6/2018) Recommended Replacement Trees Common Name American Holly Scienfic Name Ilex opaca Tree Shape Erect pyramidal Max Height () 40-50 Max Width () 20-40 Growth Rate (inch/year) 12 Foliage type Glossy evergreen ellipc Flower Inconspicuous, white Maintenance Full sun, moist well-drained soil Pest and Disease Informaon Resistant to Oak Root Fungus and Vercillium. Suscepble to Leaf Miner, Scales and Spider Mites, Anthracnose, Canker and Powdery Mildew. Common Landscape Applicaon Screen Addional Notes Requires ample water in first year aer installaon, then is drought resistant Consulting Arborist's Report June 12, 2018 Tree Preservation Study for the Salvation Army site, 180 West Huntington Drive Prepared for: Mr. Robb MacMillan SAICP 119A La Porte Street Arcadia, CA 91006 Prepared by: Arborgate Consulting, Inc. Greg Applegate, ASCA, ASLA 1131 Lucinda Way Tustin, CA 92780 714/ 731-6240 © Arborgate Consulting, Inc, 2018 Tree Preservation Study Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6/12/18 Table of Contents xx Table of Contents INTRODUCTION..............................................................................................................................................................................................................................1 BACKGROUND .........................................................................................................................................................................................................................1 ASSIGNMENT...........................................................................................................................................................................................................................2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY................................................................................................................................................................................................................3 OVERVIEW OF CONDITIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...........................................................................................................................................................3 FINDINGS...........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................5 GENERAL ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................5 Species distribution ..............................................................................................................................................................................................................6 PESTS AND DISEASE ................................................................................................................................................................................................................6 GENERAL SOILS DISCUSSION ..................................................................................................................................................................................................6 MATRIX OF FINDINGS..............................................................................................................................................................................................................7 ABBREVIATIONS IN THE MATRIX OF FINDINGS .......................................................................................................................................................................8 FAILURE PROFILES BY SPECIES ...............................................................................................................................................................................................9 RECOMMENDATIONS .................................................................................................................................................................................................................10 MATRIX OF RECOMMENDATIONS ..........................................................................................................................................................................................10 REMOVAL JUSTIFICATION .....................................................................................................................................................................................................11 REPLACEMENT ......................................................................................................................................................................................................................11 APPENDIX .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................12 A. RESUME ..................................................................................................................................................................................................... 13 B. PHOTOGRAPHIC DOCUMENTATION ...................................................................................................................................................................................14 C. TREE MAP ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................23 CERTIFICATION............................................................................................................................................................................................................................24 GLOSSARY......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................25 Tree Preservation Study Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6/12/18 Introduction xx 1 Introduction Background SAICP is building a new hotel complex, the Seabiscuit Pacifica Specific Plan, with two towers and a parking garage. As a potential part of the project, SAICP is in the process of buying the existing site of the Salvation Army halfway home and plans to locate the parking garage there. The existing Salvation Army building is about 80 years old. Including palms, street trees, unprotected trees and protected trees, there are fourteen trees over four inch caliper located on this site. There is a large deodar cedar street tree, four Mexican fan palms, and the other nine are trees on site, seven of which are protected, based on being over 12-inch caliper and not being on the non-protected list. The trees on this site may be an asset to the Salvation Army, but they will not be useful to the parking garage that will be built here. There are no trees worth transplanting and few that could be transplanted successfully. There are no endangered or rare species of trees on this property. All the trees covered within this report are non-native exotic species trees. Most of the trees on site are attractive from a distance, however when inspected individually, many have been poorly trained and pruned, are crowded, contain many structural defects, and are in reduced health due to crowding, soil compaction, or the small root space available. The large floss silk tree poses a risk not just from its great size, but also due to the excessive limb length and end weight. Tree Preservation Study Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6/12/18 Introduction xx 2 Assignment This consultant was asked to provide arboricultural evaluation of approximately 14 trees' health, condition and safety, professional opinions and report as appropriate. The report will include all protected trees over 4 or 6 “ DBH for protected trees and all other trees ten inches or larger, per Chapter 7 of the Arcadia Municipal Code. Photographs of each such tree will be included in a formal report suitable for City Review. Tree Preservation Study Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6/12/18 Executive Summary xx 3 Executive Summary Overview of Conditions and Recommendations There is a mixture of fourteen trees including: five Magnolia grandiflora, southern magnolia; four Washingtonia robusta, one Ficus microcarpa, Indian laurel; one Quercus ilex, Holly oak; one Chorisia speciosa, floss silk tree; one Bauhinia purpurea, orchid tree; and the one Cedrus deodara, deodar cedar street tree. Their sizes, health and condition are found in the enclosed Matrix of Findings, which is found later in this report. Most of the trees planted in open lawn area are adequately healthy to remain as they are for several years or more. However, as one should expect, large growing trees planted fifteen feet from each other over fifty years ago are becoming sparse and may begin to decline in health in a few years. The dominant floss silk tree is suppressing the other trees in the front yard, the magnolias, orchid tree and holly oak. Another limiting factor is the lack of root space compounded by the dominant tree’s aggressive and shallow roots. The compaction is also caused by lawn maintenance equipment traversing the trees’ root zones day-by-day, week-by- week and year-by-year. Unlike in a forest, a lawn tree has no leaf litter, burrowing creatures, or native grasses left to molder beneath the tree and aerate and enrich the soil. In fact it is the opposite, lawn maintenance equipment mows and then blowers remove the organic matter. Once the compaction progresses, there is no economical way to reverse this that would not destroy the roots in the process. So the trees are shallow rooted and do not have a healthy or natural root environment. Skillful pruning strengthens and beautifies trees, which increases their value and life spans. Early training is needed to ensure good attachment of the main scaffold limbs. The pruning of these trees never corrected defects, like codominant branching. While the pruning here is slightly higher than average quality, there are still many defects left from inferior traing. A matrix of details including structure and pruning recommendations is found later in this report. Tree Preservation Study Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6/12/18 Executive Summary xx 4 Since none of these trees are protected native species, i.e. Quercus agrifolia or Platanus racemosa, and due to the reduced lifespan, structural quality and health of these trees, the City should consider that remaining life expectancy is difficult to estimate and may be shortened by unforeseen pests, diseases and storms. Such trees should be given a lower status for retention. Tree Preservation Study Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6/12/18 Findings xx 5 Findings General The bulk of the trees on this project are Magnolia grandiflora, southern magnolia; and Washingtonia robusta, Mexican fan palm. There are five other trees between five other species, none of which are protected native species. The holly oak is poorly structured, completely one-sided due to shading by the dominant floss silk tree and other closely adjoining trees. The orchid tree is codominant with a lot of included bark in the main crotch, and it has significant dieback. The deodar cedar has just about filled the parkway with its base, several main limbs have been headed back, several primary roots are circling, and it leans back toward the site. The southern magnolias are very shallow rooted and crowded. They are suppressed under the canopy of the floss silk tree. Tree preservation can be a costly and detailed undertaking, and the useful life span of these trees; their present appearance and condition dictate balancing the cost of replacement or preservation in place with their value and potential lifespan. Transplanting in particular is a large expense and a gamble. The southern magnolias do not tolerate transplanting well at this age. Only young ones can be transplanted with a good success rate, and then only in winter or early spring. The Mexican fan palms transplant easily, but cost more to transplant, hold and replant than just buying new ones. The floss silk tree is too large and shallow rooted to transplant safely. The Indian laurel transplants easily, but this one is jammed against a Mexican fan palm. The holly oak is so one-sided, cutting roots would not be wise, and its value would not justify the expense. The deodar cedar and orchid tree cannot be moved. Tree Preservation Study Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6/12/18 Findings xx 6 Species distribution Botanic name Common name Count Bauhinia purpurea Orchid tree 1 Cedrus deodara (St. tree) Deodar cedar 1 Chorisia speciosa Floss silk tree 1 Ficus microcarpa Indian laurel 1 Magnolia grandiflora Southern magnolia 5 Quercus ilex Holly oak 1 Washingtonia robusta Mexican fan palm 4 Pests and Disease No significant pests were noted and this consultant saw few clear signs of disease or decay. The dieback evident in a the orchid tree may be due to disease, but environmental stress factors are the more likely cause. Root injuries related to lawn maintenance can be expected to lead to disease and decay. The large root that was cut on the floss silk tree may lead to decay. General Soils Discussion One of the main effects of foot and lawn mower traffic is soil compaction. The compaction and lawn watering have caused all the trees in front to be shallow rooted. However, in their present setting and land use, their intertwined root systems and mutual wind protection have kept them stabile over the years. Unfortunately, soil compaction becomes obvious only after a long slow decline, and then it is hard to correct because the trees are rooted in it. The best and most reliable procedure for preventing it in the landscape to come, is to specify compaction-resistant soils in the redesign process, together with other design elements. Tree Preservation Study Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6/12/18 Findings xx 7 Matrix of Findings Each tree on site over 4 inches in trunk diameter was mapped with consecutive numbers. Common names for each species were presented in the previous section. The species, size, evaluation of health, structural condition, and the description of defects of the trees is listed below. Arboricultural terms are defined in the glossary. Caliper is determined according to methods described in the 9th edition of the Guide for Plant Appraisal. A diameter tape was used to measure trees trunk diameter. An “A” to “F” scale is used to rate Health and Structure, “A” = excellent, “B” = good, “C” = average, “D” = poor or declining, and “F” = dead, near dead, weak, or unstable. Tree# Species Common name DBH Ht Wd Health Structure Comments 1 Cedrus deodara Deodar cedar 35 47 57 B C Street tree, Hd leans 2 Quercus ilex Holly oak 9.5 17 20 B C 1s cod 3 Magnolia grandiflora Southern magnolia 14.7 36 20 B C 1s cod sup Sh 4 Magnolia grandiflora Southern magnolia 13.4 35 15 B C LB cod sup Sh 5 Magnolia grandiflora Southern magnolia 15 40 13 B C LB cod sup Sh 6 Magnolia grandiflora Southern magnolia 17.7 40 15 B C LB cod sup Sh 7 Magnolia grandiflora Southern magnolia 12.2 35 20 B C LB cod sup Sh 8 Bauhinia purpurea Orchid tree 13.7 24 20 C- D Db LB cod sup 9 Chorisia speciosa Floss silk tree 35.2 50 66 B D 2long EH Sh DL Rinj 10 Washingtonia robusta Mexican fan palm 67'th 10 B A Vine up trunk 11 Washingtonia robusta Mexican fan palm 56'th 10 B A good 12 Washingtonia robusta Mexican fan palm 63'th 10 B A good 13 Washingtonia robusta Mexican fan palm 63'th 10 B A against ficus 14 Ficus microcarpa Indian laurel 6+6+6 26 24 B C against palm *DBH – Diameter at Brest Height, i.e. 4.5 feet above grade. Tree Preservation Study Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6/12/18 Findings xx 8 Abbreviations in the Matrix of Findings The size, species, evaluation of health and structural condition, location, and the description of defects of the trees are listed below. Arboricultural terms are defined in the glossary. Common abbreviations used in the following matrix include: 1s = one sided B = base e.g. Binj = basal injury Cod = codominant branching Cr = crowded DB = dieback Dk = decay DL = dog-leg epi = epicormic shoots FC = flush cut Inc = included bark R = root e.g. Rinj = root injury Sh = shallow roots Sp = sparse S = scaffold limb SDL = scaffold limb dog-legs Sup = suppressed SW = sidewalk T = trunk Th = trunk height Tinj = trunk injury TO = tear out Xing = crossing, rubbing limbs An “m” in front of an abbreviation indicates minor severity, e.g., mDB = minor dieback. DB = severe dieback. Tree Preservation Study Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6/12/18 Findings xx 9 Failure Profiles by Species Botanic name Common name Failures Common to Species Cedrus deodara Deodar cedar Long limb failure Ficus microcarpa Indian laurel Limb failure with codominant stems or included bark. Magnolia grandiflora Southern magnolia Rarely fails Quercus ilex Holly oak None noted. Bauhinia purpurea Orchid tree None noted Chorisia speciosa Floss silk tree Long limb failure Washingtonia robusta Mexican fan palm Rare trunk failure due to pink rot caused by climbing gaff injuries. Arboricultural terms are defined in the Glossary of this report Tree Preservation Study Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6/12/18 Recommendations xx 10 Recommendations Matrix of Recommendations Tree# Species Common name DBH Save Protected Comments Why necessary 1 Cedrus deodara Deodar cedar 35 Yes Yes St. tree, Hd leans line-of-sight distance 2 Quercus ilex Holly oak 9.5 No No 1s cod line-of-sight distance 3 Magnolia grandiflora Southern magnolia 14.7 No Yes 1s cod sup Construction 4 Magnolia grandiflora Southern magnolia 13.4 No Yes LB cod sup Construction 5 Magnolia grandiflora Southern magnolia 15 No Yes LB cod sup Construction 6 Magnolia grandiflora Southern magnolia 17.7 No Yes LB cod sup Construction 7 Magnolia grandiflora Southern magnolia 12.2 No Yes LB cod sup Construction 8 Bauhinia purpurea Orchid tree 13.7 No Yes Db LB cod sup Construction 9 Chorisia speciosa Floss silk tree 35.2 No Yes 2long EH Sh DL Construction 10 Washingtonia robusta Mexican fan palm No No Vine up trunk Construction 11 Washingtonia robusta Mexican fan palm No No good Construction 12 Washingtonia robusta Mexican fan palm No No good Construction 13 Washingtonia robusta Mexican fan palm No No against ficus Construction 14 Ficus microcarpa Indian laurel 6+6+6 No No against palm Construction Arboricultural terms are defined in the Glossary of this report. Tree Preservation Study Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6/12/18 Recommendations xx 11 Removal Justification The primary reason and justification for removals are to allow construction to go forward. If these trees were in better health and condition and of a different species, transplanting might have been justified. However, southern magnolias of this size and age would not survive transplanting or would take more than a decade to recover and be attractive. These magnolias are also very shallow rooted and would be unstable after transplanting. The holly oak is completely one-sided and transplanting would cut the roots that help stabilize it. The orchid tree is already declining and does not have adequate health to transplant. Mexican fan palms are so inexpensive I have not been able to give them away on other projects. The one City street tree, the deodar cedar is leaning, it had several limbs headed back and the street, curb and sidewalk would need to be removed to transplant it. Like the holly oak, cutting roots of a leaning tree would greatly increase the risk of it toppling. This tree also blocks the line of sight for vehicles leaving the future parking garage. The past pruning or lack of pruning of the trees at the Salvation Army site has reduced their quality. Many trees here have been either poorly trained or unskillfully pruned over the years, and have therefore grown up with less than ideal form and strength. Replacement The new site will be densely built out. Smaller species of trees will generally last longer than larger faster growing species, but give less shade. The shade of the buildings will require more shade tolerant tree selections. The new larger buildings will call for larger trees to be in scale, and those larger trees will also need larger spaces. Some larger species, such as certain eucalypts, have been shown to have less expansive and damaging root systems. Root barriers, properly installed can also reduce damage. Sooner or later any tree will outgrow small planters, with or without root barriers. Tree Preservation Study Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6/12/18 Appendix xx 12 Appendix A. Resume B. Photographic Documentation C. Tree Map Tree Preservation Study Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6/12/18 Appendix xx 13 A. RESUME - GREGORY W. APPLEGATE, ASCA, ASLA PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATIONS: American Society of Consulting Arborists Registered Consulting Arborist #365 International Society of Arboriculture, Certified Arborist Number WE-180A International Society of Arboriculture - Tree Risk Assessment Qualified EXPERIENCE:Mr. Applegate is an independent consulting arborist, CEO of Arborgate Consulting, Inc. He has been in the horticulture industry since 1963, providing professional arboricultural consulting since 1984 within both private and public sectors. His expertise includes appraisal, tree preservation, diagnosis of tree and palm problems, construction impact mitigation, environmental assessment, forensic consulting and testimony, hazard evaluation, pruning programs, species selection and tree health monitoring. Mr. Applegate consults for insurance companies, major developers, theme parks, museums, homeowners' associations, landscape architects, landscape contractors, property managers, attorneys and governmental bodies. Notable projects on which he has consulted are: Disneyland, Disneyland Hotel, DisneySeas-Tokyo, Disney’s Wild Animal Kingdom, the New Tomorrowland, Disney’s California Adventure, Disney Hong Kong project, Knott’s Berry Farm, J. Paul Getty Museums, Tustin Ranch, Newport Coast, Crystal Court, Newport Fashion Island Palms, Bixby Ranch Country Club, Playa Vista, Laguna Canyon Road and Myford Road for The Irvine Company, Beverly Hilton Hotel, MWD-California Lakes, Paseo Westpark Palms, Loyola-Marymount campus, Cal Tech, Cal State Long Beach, Pierce College, The Irvine Concourse, UCI, USC, UCLA, LA City College, LA Trade Tech, Riverside City College, Crafton Hills College, MTA projects, and the State of California review of the Landscape Architecture License exam (plant materials portion) EDUCATION: Bachelor of Science in Landscape Architecture, California State Polytechnic University, Pomona 1973 Arboricultural Consulting Academy (by ASCA), Arbor-Day Farm, Kansas City 1995 Continuing Education in Arboriculture required to maintain Certified Arborist status and for ASCA Registration PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS: American Society of Consulting Arborists (ASCA), Registered Member American Society of Landscape Architects (ASLA), Full Member International Society of Arboriculture (ISA), Certified Member International Palm Society (IPS), Member California Oak Foundation, Member California Tree Failure Report Program, UC Davis, Participant Street Tree Seminar (STS), Member COMMUNITY AFFILIATIONS: Horticulture Advisory Committee, Saddleback College (1988 - 1995) Landscape Architecture License Exam, Reviewer, Cal Poly Pomona (1986-90) American Institute of Landscape Architects (L.A.) Board of Directors (1980-82) ASCA 2011 Nominations Committee, Industry definitions committee, and A3G committee 2009-2010 California Landscape Architect Student Scholarship Fund - Chairman (1985) International Society of Arboriculture - Examiner-tree worker certification (1990) Guest lecturer at Cal Poly, Saddleback College, & Palomar Junior College ASCA web site, west coast tree question responder (2007 -2016) Tree Preservation Study Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6/12/18 Appendix xx 14 B. Photographic Documentation #1 Deodar cedar, note lack of a central leader #2 Holly oak – note one-sided canopy. Tree Preservation Study Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6/12/18 Appendix xx 15 #3, 4 & 5 Southern magnolias #3, 4, 5, 6 & 7 Southern magnolias Tree Preservation Study Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6/12/18 Appendix xx 16 #6 & 7 Southern magnolias #8 Orchid tree – note codominant trunk and canopy of the floss silk tree Tree Preservation Study Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6/12/18 Appendix xx 17 #9 Floss silk tree #9 Floss silk tree – note large dogleg on left Tree Preservation Study Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6/12/18 Appendix xx 18 Note shallow magnolia roots #9 Floss silk tree – note long, end-heavy limbs Tree Preservation Study Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6/12/18 Appendix xx 19 #9 Floss silk tree – note large shallow roots. Tree Preservation Study Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6/12/18 Appendix xx 20 #10 Mexican fan palm #11, 12 & 13 Mexican fan palms – note Indian laurel at left. Tree Preservation Study Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6/12/18 Appendix xx 21 #13 Mexican fan palm & #14 Indian laurel. #9 Floss silk tree over large saucer magnolia shrub. Tree Preservation Study Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6/12/18 Appendix xx 22 #13 Mexican fan palm & #14 Indian laurel are intertwined at the base. Tree Preservation Study Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6/12/18 Appendix xx 23 C. Tree Map Tree Preservation Study Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6/12/18 Certification xx 24 Certification I, Gregory W. Applegate, certify to the best of my knowledge and belief: That the statements of fact contained in this report, are true and correct. That the report analysis, opinions, and conclusions are limited only the reported assumptions and limiting conditions, and are my personal unbiased professional analysis, opinions and conclusions. That I have no present or prospective interest in the trees that are the subject of this report, and I have no personal interest or bias with respect to the parties involved. That my compensation is not contingent upon the reporting or a predetermined conclusion that favors the cause of the client, or the attainment of stipulated result. That my analysis, opinions, and conclusions were developed, and this report has been prepared in conformity with the standards of arboricultural practice. That I have made a personal inspection of the plants that are the subject of this report. No one provided significant professional assistance to the person signing this report. Gregory W. Applegate _____________________________________ Date: 6-12-18 Registered Consulting Arborist #365 Arborgate Consulting, Inc. Tree Preservation Study Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6/12/18 Glossary xx 25 Glossary ANSI-A300 American National Standards Institute performance standards for the care and maintenance of trees, shrubs and other woody plants. ANSI-Z60-1 American National Standards Institute standards sizing and describing trees, shrubs and other nursery stock. Arboricultural Pertaining to the awareness, care, evaluation, identification, growing, maintenance, management, planting, selection, treatment, understanding, valuation and so forth of trees and other woody plants and their growing environments, particularly in shade and ornamental (non-crop/commodity) settings. Arboriculture The selection, cultivation, and care of trees, vines, and shrubs. Arborist A person possessing the technical competence through experience and related training to provide for or supervise the management of trees or other woody plants in a landscape setting. ASCA The American Society of Consulting Arborists, Inc. a professional society, as described in its by- laws. Bark Tissue on the outside of the vascular cambium. Bark is usually divided into inner bark - active phloem and aging and dead crushed phloem - and outer bark. Branch angle The angle of attachment between two branches. Tree Preservation Study Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6/12/18 Glossary xx 26 Caliper Diameter of a nursery-grown or small size tree trunk. Larger trees are usually measured at 4ð feet (see DBH) Trees with calipers 4 inches and below are measured at 6 inches above grade(ANSI Z60- 1-1990) Trees above 4 inches, but still transplantable are measured at 12 inches above grade. Callus Undifferentiated cells, often formed at the edges of recent injuries. This tissue quickly becomes differentiated, forming cells of the type characteristic of that position on the tree (ie: forming wood, bark, roots, etc.) see wound response tissue Cambium A thin layer of actively growing and dividing cells, located between the xylem (sapwood) and bark of a plant; the part responsible for lateral growth of a tree stem or branch. Canopy The part of the crown composed of foliage and twigs, for an individual tree or collective group of trees. Cavity An open and exposed area of wood, where the bark is missing and internal wood has been decayed and dissolved. Central leader The main stem of the tree. Chlorotic Also Chlorosis. A condition of the plant marked by yellowing of normally green foliage, often indicating nutrient deficiency or plant dysfunction. Codominant Leaders equal in size and relative importance, developed from 2 apical buds at the top of a stem. Each codominant stem is an extension of the stem below it. There are no branch collars or trunk collars at the bases of codominant stems. Compaction (Soil Compaction) The compression of soil, causing a reduction of pore space and an increase in the bulk density of the soil. Tree roots cannot grow in compacted soil. Compartmentalize To seal off decay. The ability of the tree to restrict the spread of invasive organisms, such as decay fungi, by means of internal changes in cell structure and chemistry. Crotch The union of two or more branches; the axillary zone between branches. Crown The upper portions of a tree or shrub, including the main limbs, branches, and twigs. Crown class The relative size of individual trees in relation to others in the stand, usually termed dominant, codominant, intermediate, or suppressed Cultivar A cultivated variety. Maybe a field selection or a horticultural variety that has originated and persisted under cultivation. Usually enclosed in single quotes after the genus and species names. Tree Preservation Study Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6/12/18 Glossary xx 27 DBH Diameter of the trunk, measured at breast height or 54 inches above the average grade. See caliper. Decay Progressive deterioration of organic tissues, usually caused by fungal or bacterial organisms, resulting in loss of cell structure, strength, and function. In wood, the loss of structural strength. Deciduous Trees which shed their leaves at the end of the growing season. Decline Progressive reduction of health or vigor of a plant. Decurrent Referring to crowns which are made up of a system of codominant scaffold branches. Lacking a central leader. Dieback Progressive death of buds, twigs and branch tissues, on individual limbs, or throughout the canopy. Dominant crown class Trees with crowns above the upper layer of the canopy and generally receiving light from above and the sides. (syn-emergent) Dripline A projected line on the ground that corresponds to the spread of branches in the canopy; the farthest spread of branches. Drop-crotching Shortening a limb by pruning to an inner branch large enough to assume the terminal role. Evergreen retains its leaves throughout the year. Excurrent Referring to crowns having a strong central leader. Fertilization The process of adding nutrients to a tree or plant; usually done by incorporating the nutrients into the soil, but sometimes by foliar application or injection directly into living tissues. Foliage The live leaves or needles of the tree; the plant part primarily responsible for photosynthesis. Genus A more or less closely related and definable group of plants, including one or more species. Hardscape The sidewalk, curb, gutter, paving or other concrete permanent features. Hazardous condition The combination of a likely failure of a tree or tree part with the presence of a likely target. Heading Pruning techniques where the cut is made to a bud, weak lateral branch or stub. Included bark Bark or cortex tissue that is included or trapped between close-growing branches. Usually found in narrow or tight crotches. Leader A main stem or branch of a tree that is (usually) codominant with other main stems. Limb A large lateral branch growing from the main trunk. Tree Preservation Study Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6/12/18 Glossary xx 28 Lion-tailing Pruning technique where internal foliage and branches are removed, leaving the latter concentrated at branch ends. Narrow crotch Also tight crotch. A crotch with a narrow angle between branches, often having included bark. Pathogen A disease-causing organism, usually a fungus in plants, but may also be viral or bacterial. Prune or pruning Selective removal of woody plant parts of any size, using saws, pruners, clippers, or other pruning tools. Root crown Area at the base of a tree where the roots and stem merge (synonym - root collar) Root system The portion of the tree containing the root organs, including buttress roots, transport roots, and fine absorbing roots; all underground parts of the tree. Root zone The area and volume of soil around the tree in which roots are normally found. May extend to three or more times the branch spread of the tree, or several times the height of the tree. Scaffold limb Primary structural branch of the crown. Shrub A relatively low woody plant with several stems arising near the ground. Street tree A tree growing adjacent to dedicated roadways and within the city’s right of way. Stress "Stress is a potentially injurious, reversible condition, caused by energy drain, disruption, or blockage, or by life processes operating near the limits for which they were genetically programmed." Alex Shigo Subordination Shortening or removing one side of a pair of codominant limbs. Sudden limb drop An otherwise sound and well-attached branch that is dropped in calm air, usually during warm, dry weather. Also referred to as "High temperature limb drop". Thinning Pruning technique where branches are removed at their point of origin or to a large lateral at least on half the diameter of the removed branch. Topping The practice of cutting large limbs back severely, without regard to form or habit of the tree. Cuts are usually made between lateral branch nodes. This practice is extremely injurious to trees, and promotes decay in the canopy. Trees An arborescent woody plant, with a single or few trunks near the base Vigor Active, healthy growth of plants: ability to respond to stress factors.   5/30/18(R:\CTA1401.01_ArcadiaMarriottHotel\techstudies\Cultural\MemoͲ180W.Huntington.docx)   BERKELEY CARLSBAD FRESNO IRVINE LOSANGELES PALMSPRINGS POINTRICHMOND RIVERSIDE ROSEVILLE 1500IowaAvenue,Suite200,Riverside,California 92507 951.781.9310 www.lsa.net  MEMORANDUM DATE:May30,2018 TO:LisaFlores,CityofArcadiaPlanningandCommunityDevelopmentAdministrator FROM:CaseyTibbet,M.A.,Associate/CulturalResourcesManager/ArchitecturalHistorian SUBJECT:180WestHuntingtonDrive,CityofArcadia,California(LSAProjectNumber CTA1401.01) AspartoftheCertificateofDemolitionapplicationprocess,LSAcompletedahistoricalevaluationof thepropertyat180WestHuntingtonDrive(AssessorIdentificationNumber[AIN]5775Ͳ024Ͳ015)in Arcadia,California.TheevaluationwasdocumentedonDepartmentofParksandRecreation(DPR) 523A(PrimaryRecord)and523B(Building,Structure,andObjectRecord)formsandtheproperty wasidentifiedonaDPRLocationMap. Asaresultofthatevaluation,whichincludedarchivalresearchandanintensiveͲlevelfieldsurvey,it wasdeterminedthatthe1936alteredresidencedoesnotappeartobeeligibleforlistinginthe CaliforniaRegisterofHistoricalResourcesunderanycriteria.Ithassustainedalterations(window replacementsandadditions)thathavecompromiseditsintegrityanditdoesnotembodythe distinctivecharacteristicsofaparticulararchitecturalstyle.Inaddition,thereisnoindicationthatit isassociatedwithanypeoplewhoaresignificantinhistory.Further,thispropertyisnotincludedin the2016citywidesurveyeitherindividuallyorasacontributortoapotentialhistoricdistrict. Forthesereasons,theresidenceat180WestHuntingtonDrivedoesnotqualifyasa“historical resource”asdefinedbytheCaliforniaEnvironmentalQualityAct(CEQA)and,forpurposesofthis project,theCitymaymakeafindingof“noimpact”withregardtohistoricalresources. Attachment:DPRforms DPR 523A (1/95)*Required information State of California  The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # PRIMARY RECORD Trinomial NRHP Status Code 6Z Other Listings Review Code Reviewer Date Page 1 of 6 Resource Name or #: 180 West Huntington Drive P1. Other Identifier: *P2. Location: † Not for Publication _ Unrestricted *a. County: Los Angeles and (P2b and P2c or P2d. Attach a Location Map as necessary.) *b. USGS 7.5' Quad: Mt. Wilson, CA Date: 1988 PR 2017 T 1N; R 11W; S.B.B.M. c. Address: 180 West Huntington Drive City: Arcadia Zip: 91007 d. UTM: Zone: 11; mE/ mN (G.P.S.) e. Other Locational Data:(e.g., parcel #, directions to resource, elevation, etc., as appropriate) AIN: 5775-024-015, located on the south side of West Huntington Drive between the Santa Anita Inn and the Civic Center. *P3a. Description:(Describe resource and its major elements. Include design, materials, condition, alterations, size, setting, and boundaries) This two-story vernacular residence is situated on the south side of West Huntington Drive in a mixed-use area and is partially obscured from view by vegetation that includes a row of five large magnolia trees along the driveway, a large pine tree near the street, and a variety of mature ornamental plants. The house rests on a raised foundation, is irregular in plan, and is oriented to the northwest. The multilevel side- and front-gable roof has varying degrees of pitch and is sheathed with composition shingles. It has narrow eaves, exposed rafter tails, and two gabled dormers. The exterior walls are covered with stucco with horizontal boards used as accents. All of the fenestration is modern. The northwest-facing asymmetrical façade features two front-gable dormers and two large bay windows flanking a slightly recessed wood-and-glass door topped by a semi-circular cloth awning. The southwest (driveway side) elevation includes a porte-cochere, a single-hung window, a brick chimney, a door accessed by brick steps, a ribbon of four windows, a small triangular window, foundation vents, and on the second level, a fixed window, a ribbon window with single-hung end vents, and a single-hung window. The southeast (rear) elevation has an attic vent and a pair of fixed windows in the second level and, on the first level, a pair of fixed windows, three evenly-spaced single-hung windows, and a wood-and-glass door below a projecting gable roof supported by wall brackets and accessed by concrete steps. The northeast (side) elevation features exterior wooden stairs and a wooden deck, a recessed dormer with a window and two vents, a door, and a single-hung window. On the first level, there are single-hung windows of varying sizes, including a southwest-facing window. The residence appears to be in fair to poor condition with evidence of dry rot in several areas. Its integrity has been compromised by historic-period and modern alterations including the replacement of all windows, changes to the roof structure, and additions including exterior stairs and a deck. *P3b. Resource Attributes:(List attributes and codes) HP2-Single-family property *P4. Resources Present: _Building †Structure †Object †Site †District †Element of District †Other (Isolates, etc.) P5b. Description of Photo: (View, date, accession #) Façade, view to the southeast (5/29/18) *P6. Date Constructed/Age and Sources: _Historic †Prehistoric †Both 1936 (Building permit) *P7. Owner and Address: Unknown *P8. Recorded by: (Name, affiliation, and address) Casey Tibbet, M.A. LSA Associates, Inc. 1500 Iowa Avenue, Suite 200 Riverside, California 92507 *P9. Date Recorded: May 29, 2018 *P10. Survey Type: (Describe) Intensive-level CEQA compliance *P11. Report Citation:(Cite survey report and other sources, or enter "none.") None. *Attachments:†NONE _Location Map †Sketch Map _Continuation Sheet _Building, Structure, and Object Record †Archaeological Record †District Record †Linear Feature Record †Milling Station Record †Rock Art Record †Artifact Record †Photograph Record † Other (List): P5a. Photo or Drawing (Photo required for buildings, structures, and objects.) See Continuation Sheet DPR 523B (1/95) *Required information State of California  The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI# BUILDING, STRUCTURE, AND OBJECT RECORD Page 2 of 6 *NRHP Status Code 6Z *Resource Name or #(Assigned by recorder) 180 West Huntington Drive B1. Historic Name: B2. Common Name: B3. Original Use: Single-family residence B4. Present Use: Salvation Army facility *B5. Architectural Style: Vernacular *B6. Construction History: (Construction date, alterations, and date of alterations) 1936 – Permit issued to owner Jerry O’Brian for building, plumbing, cesspool, and wiring. Contractor is listed as R.J. Daum. 1946 – Permits issued to owner Fred Sweeney for wiring for range, heater, and addition to dwelling. 1948 – Permit issued to owner Fred Sweeney for addition to dwelling (kitchen, dinette(?), and service porch). 1949 – Permit issued to owner Fred Sweeney to remodel roof. 1950 – Plumbing permit issued to owner Fred Sweeney. 1951 – News advertisement offers a two-story duplex with two two-bedroom apartments and a two-car garage at 180 W. Huntington Drive in Arcadia as a live/work opportunity for doctors and lawyers (Los Angeles Times 1951). 1953 – News advertisement for auction of duplex at 180 W. Huntington Drive in Arcadia (Los Angeles Times 1953a). 1953 – Electrical permit and permit for furnace issued to owner Thomas Bell. 1960(?) – Sewer permit issued to Thomas D. Bell. 1971 – Permit issued to owner Albert Yank to reroof house with composition shingles. 1973 – Electrical permit and permit to install air conditioning issued to owner Albert Yank. 1976 – Electrical permit issued to owner Albert Yanks. 1977 – Plumbing permit. 1988 – Permit issued to owner Chris Spencer to enclose porch. 1989 – Permit issued to owner Chris Spencer for second-story deck with stairs. 1990 – Permit issued to Chris Spencer to install a deck and window. 1990 – Notice of Code Violation states that doors have been moved and the corridor has been changed. 1999 – Electrical permit and permit to reroof with composition shingles issued to the Salvation Army. 2008 – Permit issued to the Salvation Army for all new copper piping. *B7. Moved? _No †Yes †Unknown Date: Original Location: *B8. Related Features: B9a. Architect: Unknown b. Builder: R.J. Daum *B10. Significance: Theme: Residential Development 1936–1945 Area: City of Arcadia Period of Significance: 1936 Property Type: Single-family residence Applicable Criteria: NA (Discuss importance in terms of historical or architectural context as defined by theme, period, and geographic scope. Also address integrity.) This 1936 vernacular residence has sustained alterations and does not appear to be associated with historically important people or events. It is not eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources (California Register) and is not a historical resource for purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). There is no local preservation ordinance. Historic Context: Originally owned by the San Gabriel Mission and then a part of Rancho Santa Anita, the land that includes present- day Arcadia was deeded to Scottish immigrant Hugo Reid in 1839 (City of Arcadia 2012). Reid was the first to make a modern impact on the land, raising cattle and building the first structure (City of Arcadia 2012). After a succession of owners, in 1875, Elias J. “Lucky” Baldwin purchased the land, along with much of the surrounding area and named it Arcadia (Ibid.). Residential development from 1875 to 1909 is one of the first important themes in the City’s history (Architectural Resources Group 2016). See Continuation Sheet B11. Additional Resource Attributes:(List attributes and codes) *B12. References:See Continuation Sheet B13. Remarks: *B14. Evaluator: Casey Tibbet, M.A., LSA Associates, Inc., 1500 Iowa Avenue, Suite 200, Riverside, California 92507 *Date of Evaluation: May 2018 (This space reserved for official comments.) (Sketch Map with north arrow required.) Refer to Location Map '35%7HVW  State of California - The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION CONTINUATION SHEET Primary # HRI # Trinomial Page 3 of 6 *Resource Name or #: (Assigned by recorder) 180 West Huntington Drive *Recorded by LSA Associates, Inc. *Date:May 2018 X Continuation Update P5a. Photo or Drawing (continued from page 1) Rear of residence, view to the northwest (5/29/18) Recessed dormer and vents on northeast side (5/29/18) Exterior stairs and deck (5/29/18) Southwest elevation, view to the northeast (5/29/18) *B10. Significance: (continued from page 2) In 1885, the main line of the Santa Fe Railroad, in which Baldwin was a stockholder, was opened through Baldwin’s property, making it practical to subdivide part of the land into a town site. By 1887, Baldwin was actively attempting to draw residents to the area, but sales were slow and the densest development occurred in the core of the town near the intersection of the railroads (Architectural Resources Group 2016:33). Residential development in this part of town was on small lots, while (see Continuation Sheet) DPR 523L (1/95) *Required Information State of California - The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION CONTINUATION SHEET Primary # HRI # Trinomial Page 4 of 6 *Resource Name or #: (Assigned by recorder) 180 West Huntington Drive *Recorded by LSA Associates, Inc. *Date:May 2018 X Continuation Update *B10. Significance: (continued from page 2) development further south was on multi-acre parcels (Ibid.). As late as 1903, when a census was taken to ascertain the population of the proposed City of Arcadia, the area only had 642 residents and many lived and worked on the Baldwin Ranch or were temporary residents working for the railroads (Ibid.). Regardless, with a booming economy increasingly based on entertainment, sporting, hospitality, and gambling, Arcadia was incorporated in 1903, with Baldwin as its first mayor (City of Arcadia 2012). Moving into the 1910s, Arcadia’s growth remained slow and steady (Architectural Resources Group 2016). However, the city began shifting away from “its sporting days to more respectable pursuits, as it outlawed liquor licensing in 1912 and embarked on a series of civic improvements” (Architectural Resources Group 2016:44). By 1915, electric streetlights had been installed in some areas and streets were graded and oiled (Ibid.). Residential development in the 1910s saw the subdivision of larger parcels into smaller ones (2.5 to 5 acres) that attracted a wider variety of buyers who were interested in a more suburban lifestyle with room for some agricultural pursuits (Architectural Resources Group 2016:49). Most of the 1910s subdivisions followed a grid pattern with graded and sometimes paved roads without curbs or sidewalks (Architectural Resources Group 2016). After World War I, the region thrived and the 1920s were a transformative period in Arcadia’s development (Ibid.). Residential subdivision accelerated with tracts designed in grid patterns like those of the 1910s, but with smaller lots (Architectural Resources Group 2016:36). Single-family residential construction dominated the period (Ibid.). Most of these were modest in size and the earliest were constructed in the Craftsman style, with Period Revival styles becoming dominant in the mid-1920s and into the 1930s (Ibid.). The smaller lot subdivisions were located closer to the original town center, Pacific Electric lines, and the commercial district at Huntington and First, while the larger multi-acre lots were in what was then the southern part of town (Ibid.). The 1936 to 1945 period was characterized nationally by massive unemployment and economic uncertainty, but Arcadia was one of the few places that did not experience a near cessation of construction (Architectural Resources Group 2016:65). The major factors for this were Anita Baldwin selling off the remaining approximately 1,300 acres of the Baldwin Ranch; establishment of military facilities and the related increase in demand for commercial businesses; and construction of a County park, which was a large Works Progress Administration (WPA) project (Ibid.). The Baldwin acreage was parceled out into a number of residential subdivisions that jumpstarted construction between 1936 and 1941 (Ibid.). With the end of WWII and the return of thousands of veterans, Arcadia and the greater Los Angeles area saw an explosion in the development of affordable housing. Much of this development took the architectural vocabulary of the pre-war years and combined it into simplified styles suitable for mass developments and small-scale apartments (City of Los Angeles 2011). Development during the 1945 to 1970 period transformed the city from semi-rural to suburban earning it the nickname a “Community of Homes” (Architectural Resources Group 2016). Citywide Historic Resources Survey. In 2016, a citywide historic resources survey was completed for the City. This survey has not been formally adopted by the City Council and is currently being used informally by City staff and preservationists. The subject residence, 180 West Huntington Drive, was not included in the citywide historic resources survey either individually or as part of a potential historic district. People Associated with this Residence. According to building permits, the original owner was Jerry O’Brian and the contractor was R.J. Daum (City of Arcadia var.). A review of City directories and various other sources did not reveal any information for Jerry O’Brian. In fact, no listing was found for this residence in the 1937, 1939, or 1940 City directories and no Sanborn Fire Insurance Company maps showing this property were found. Raymond J. Daum was born in Kansas in 1888 and by 1910 he was married and working as a carpenter in Los Angeles (Ancestry.com var.). From 1915 to 1917, he was listed as a Los Angeles City Schools building inspector (Ibid.). By 1936, he is listed at R.J. Daum Construction Company based in Inglewood (Ibid.). Daum and Wade A. Perong founded R.J. Daum Construction Company in 1936 and incorporated it in 1949 in Nevada (R.J. Daum n.d.). In 1946, R.J. Daum Construction Company and associated developers bought 475 acres in Pomona to build 2,500 homes and related improvements (Covina Argus 1946). In addition, newspaper searches revealed that in the post-WWII period the company won several contracts to convert military barracks into residential units, build schools, and construct buildings on the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) campus. Mr. Daum died in 1953 and today descendants of Wade Perong run the company (Los Angeles Times 1953b; R.J. Daum n.d.). According to the company website, the company holds engineering and general building contracting licenses in California and Nevada and specializes in commercial projects (R.J. Daum n.d.). Fred B. Sweeney owned the house from 1946 to at least 1950 (City of Arcadia var.; Ancestry.com var.). Fred was born in Vermont in about 1903 and at age 19 he married May who was also born in Vermont (Ancestry.com var.). By 1940, Fred and May, along with their 18-year-old son Phil, were living on Rosemead Boulevard in El Monte and Fred was working as a lumber yard salesman (Ancestry.com var.). No additional relevant information was found for the Sweeneys. Newspaper advertisements in 1951 and 1953 indicate the residence was a duplex (Los Angeles Times 1951, 1953a). In 1953, Thomas D. Bell bought the property and he and his wife Ethel J. Bell are listed at this address until 1965 (City of Arcadia var.; Ancestry.com var.). In 1959 and 1960, Thomas is listed as a salesman, but in 1965 he is listed as retired (Ancestry.com var.). No additional information was found for the Bells. See Continuation Sheet DPR 523L (1/95) *Required Information State of California - The Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION CONTINUATION SHEET Primary # HRI # Trinomial Page 5 of 6 *Resource Name or #: (Assigned by recorder) 180 West Huntington Drive *Recorded by LSA Associates, Inc. *Date:May 2018 X Continuation Update *B10. Significance: (continued from page 3) Significance Evaluation. In compliance with CEQA, this property is being evaluated under California Register criteria. There is no local preservation ordinance or criteria. Criterion 1: Associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of local or regional history or the cultural heritage of California or the United States. The citywide survey identified residential development of the last subdivision of the Baldwin family lands as an important theme in Arcadia’s history. The related period of significance is 1936 to 1945, which includes the date of construction for this residence. However, this residence is south of the Baldwin subdivisions on the north side of West Huntington Drive and appears to have been built as a single home, rather than part of a larger residential development. Therefore, the residence is not significant under this criterion. Criterion 2: Associated with the lives of persons important to local, California or national history. The residence was built in 1936 by Raymond J. Daum who, along with his partner Wade Perong, started the R.J. Daum Construction Company that same year. Although the company is successful and remains in existence today, there is no indication that it is a leader in the industry, an innovator, or historically significant in some other way. In addition, none of the historic-period owners appears to be historically important.  Criterion 3: Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region or method of construction or represents the work of a master or possesses high artistic values. This altered residence does not embody the distinctive characteristics of a particular architectural style, type, or period. It is not the work of a master and it does not possess high artistic values. Criterion 4: Has yielded, or has the potential to yield, information important to the prehistory or history of the local area, California or the nation. This residence was built in 1936 using common materials and construction practices. It does not have the potential to yield information important to the history or prehistory of the local area, California, or the nation. *B12. References: (continued from page 2) Ancestry.com Var. A variety of records were accessed online in May 2018 at: http://home.ancestry.com/. These include City directories, voter registration records, and United States Census Data. Architectural Resources Group 2016 “City of Arcadia Citywide Historic Context Statement.” Accessed online at: https://www.arcadiaca.gov/government/city- departments/development-services/historic-preservation. City of Arcadia Var. Building permits for 180 West Huntington Drive. Accessed online in May 2018 at: http://laserfiche.ci.arcadia.ca.us/WebLink/ Welcome.aspx?cr=1. 2012 History of Arcadia. http://www.ci.arcadia.ca.us/home/index.asp?page=1102. City of Los Angeles 2011 Jefferson Park HPOZ Preservation Plan, City of Los Angeles. Accessed in 2012 online at: http://preservation.lacity.org/files/ Jefferson%20Park%20(Small%20File)%20PP.pdf. Covina Argus 1946 “2500 Homes Will be Built Just West of Pomona.” March 15, page 1. Los Angeles County Office of the Assessor n.d. Property information accessed online in May 2018 at: http://maps.assessor.lacounty.gov/GVH_2_2/Index.html?configBase= http://maps.assessor.lacounty.gov/Geocortex/Essentials/REST/sites/PAIS/viewers/PAIS_hv/virtualdirectory/Resources/Config/Default. Los Angeles Times 1951 Advertisement titled Doctors & Lawyers. March 4, page 63. 1953a Advertisement titled Auction, Home & Income. January 9, page 40. 1953b Daum Estate Enters Probate. September 1, page 22. R.J. Daum n.d. Our History. Accessed online in May 2018 at the R.J. Daum Construction Company website at: http://www.rjdaum.com/ history_page.htm. §¨¦210 FOOTHILL BOULEVARD HUNTINGTON DRIVE DUARTE RO A D SANTA ANITA AVENUE§¨¦210 COLORADO BOULEVARDSANTA ANITA AVENUEORANGE GROVE AVENUE CAMINO REAL AVENUE §¨¦210 I:\CTA1401.01\Reports\Cultural\DPRlocation.mxd (5/21/2018) DPR 523J (1/95)*Required Information Page  of  *Map Name: *Scale: 1:24000 *Date of Map: 1981 & 1988; 2017 *Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) 180 West Huntington Drive Primary # HRI # Trinomial State of California - Resource Agency DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION LOCATION MAP HUNTINGTON DRIVEAIN: 5775-024-015 180 West Huntington Drive USGS 7.5' Quad, El Monte & Mt. Wilson; Google Earth TrafficImpactStudy  For:  SantaAnitaInnRedevelopmentProject IntheCity ofArcadia   Preparedfor: ChateauOperatingGroup   April,2018   Santa Anita Inn Redevelopment Project TIA April 20181 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..................................................................................................................... 5 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................... 6 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ...................................................................................................................... 6 STUDY METHODOLOGY .................................................................................................................. 10 Roadway Level of Service Analysis .................................................................................. 12 Intersection Level of Service Analysis Criteria .................................................................. 12 PHASE 1: EXISTING (2018) CONDITIONS........................................................................................ 13 Study Area Freeway and Roadway Descriptions ................................................................ 13 PHASE 1: CUMULATIVE PROJECTS & AMBIENT GROWTH ........................................................ 19 Near-Future Transportation Improvements ........................................................................ 25 PHASE 1: EXISTING (2018) + CUMULATIVE + AMBIENT CONDITIONS ..................................... 26 Daily Roadway Segment Analysis ..................................................................................... 26 Peak Hour Intersection Analysis ........................................................................................ 26 PHASE 1: PROJECT TRAFFIC ............................................................................................................ 30 Project Trip Generation ..................................................................................................... 30 Project Trip Distribution .................................................................................................... 3 2  PHASE 1: EXISTING (2018) + CUMULATIVE + AMBIENT + PROJECT CONDITIONS................. 38 PHASE 1: SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS AND RECOMMENDED MITIGATION ................................... 42 SITE PLAN AND PARKING ANALYSIS............................................................................................ 42 Site Access ........................................................................................................................ 42 Parking .............................................................................................................................. 43 Construction Traffic .......................................................................................................... 43 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS: POST-PHASE 1 ........................................................ 44 PHASE 2: EXISTING (2019) CONDITIONS........................................................................................ 45 PHASE 2: AMBIENT GROWTH ......................................................................................................... 49 PHASE 2: EXISTING (2019) + AMBIENT CONDITIONS .................................................................. 52 Daily Roadway Segment Analysis ..................................................................................... 52 Peak Hour Intersection Analysis ........................................................................................ 53 PHASE 2: PROJECT TRAFFIC ............................................................................................................ 56 Project Trip Generation ..................................................................................................... 56 Project Trip Distribution .................................................................................................... 5 6  PHASE 2: EXISTING (2019) + AMBIENT + PROJECT CONDITIONS .............................................. 60 PHASE 2: SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS AND RECOMMENDED MITIGATION ................................... 64 SITE PLAN AND PARKING ANALYSIS............................................................................................ 64 Santa Anita Inn Redevelopment Project TIA April 20182 Site Access ........................................................................................................................ 64 Parking .............................................................................................................................. 64 Construction Traffic: Phase 2 ............................................................................................ 64 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS: POST-PHASE 2 ........................................................ 66 APPENDICES Santa Anita Inn Redevelopment Project TIA April 20183 LIST OF TABLES TABLE 1- ROADWAY SEGMENTSANALYZED ............................................................................................. 10 TABLE2-STUDYAREAINTERSECTIONS ..................................................................................................... 11 TABLE3-ICULEVELOFSERVICE(LOS) DEFINITIONS .............................................................................. 12 TABLE 4-SUMMARY OF ROADWAYANALYSIS:EXISTING(2018)LEVELOFSERVICE ........................ 14 TABLE 5-SUMMARY OFINTERSECTIONANALYSIS: EXISTING(2018)LEVEL OFSERVICE ................. 15 TABLE 6-CUMULATIVE PROJECTSWEEKDAYTRIP GENERATION ......................................................... 20 TABLE7-CUMULATIVEPROJECTSSATURDAYTRIPGENERATION ....................................................... 21 TABLE 8-SUMMARY OF ROADWAYSEGMENT ANALYSIS: EXISTING (2018)+CUMULATIVE+ AMBIENT ........................................................................................................................................................... 26 TABLE 9-SUMMARY OFINTERSECTIONANALYSIS: EXISTING(2018)+ CUMULATIVE +AMBIENT .. 27 TABLE10-SUMMARYOFPROJECTTRIPGENERATION–PHASE1 ........................................................... 31 TABLE 11-SUMMARYOF ROADWAY ANALYSIS: EXISTING (2018)+CUMULATIVE + AMBIENT+ PROJECTLEVELOFSERVICE ......................................................................................................................... 38 TABLE 12-SUMMARYOFINTERSECTION ANALYSIS: EXISTING (2018)+CUMULATIVE + AMBIENT + PROJECTLEVELOFSERVICE ......................................................................................................................... 39 TABLE 13-SUMMARYOF ROADWAY ANALYSIS: EXISTING (2019)LEVELOFSERVICE....................... 45 TABLE 14-SUMMARYOFINTERSECTION ANALYSIS: EXISTING (2019)LEVELOFSERVICE ............... 46 TABLE 15-SUMMARYOF ROADWAY SEGMENT ANALYSIS: EXISTING (2019)+ AMBIENT .................. 52 TABLE 16-SUMMARYOFINTERSECTION ANALYSIS: EXISTING (2019)+ AMBIENT ............................. 53 TABLE 17-SUMMARYOF ROADWAY ANALYSIS: EXISTING (2019)+AMBIENT+PROJECT LEVELOF SERVICE ............................................................................................................................................................ 60 TABLE 18-SUMMARYOFINTERSECTION ANALYSIS: EXISTING (2019)+ AMBIENT + PROJECT LEVEL OFSERVICE ....................................................................................................................................................... 61 Santa Anita Inn Redevelopment Project TIA April 20184 LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 1–PROJECT STUDY AREA ................................................................................................7 FIGURE 2–PROJECT SITE PLAN –PHASE 1 ....................................................................................8 FIGURE 3–PROJECT SITE PLAN –PHASE 2 ....................................................................................9 FIGURE 4–EXISTING APPROACH LANE CONFIGURATIONS .......................................................... 16 FIGURE 5–EXISTING (2018) WEEKDAY PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION TURN MOVEMENT VOLUMES ................................................................................................................................................. 17 FIGURE 6–EXISTING (2018) SATURDAY PMPEAK HOUR INTERSECTION TURN MOVEMENT VOLUMES .................................................................................................................................. 18 FIGURE 7–LOCATIONS OF CUMULATIVE PROJECTS .................................................................... 22 FIGURE 8–CUMULATIVE +AMBIENT PROJECTS WEEKDAY TURN MOVEMENT VOLUMES ............ 23 FIGURE 9–CUMULATIVE +AMBIENT PROJECTS SATURDAY TURN MOVEMENT VOLUMES ........... 24 FIGURE 10–EXISTING (2018) +CUMULATIVE +AMBIENT WEEKDAY TURN MOVEMENT VOLUMES ................................................................................................................................................. 28 FIGURE 11–EXISTING (2018) +CUMULATIVE +AMBIENT SATURDAY TURN MOVEMENT VOLUMES ................................................................................................................................................. 29 FIGURE 12–PROJECT TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION ............................................................................ 33 FIGURE 13–PROJECT TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION TURN MOVEMENT PERCENTAGES ......................... 35 FIGURE 14–PROJECT WEEKDAY TURN MOVEMENT VOLUMES ................................................... 36 FIGURE 15–PROJECT SATURDAY TURN MOVEMENT VOLUMES .................................................. 37 FIGURE 16–EXISTING (2018) +CUMULATIVE +AMBIENT +PROJECT WEEKDAY TURN MOVEMENT VOLUMES ............................................................................................................... 40 FIGURE 17–EXISTING (2018) +CUMULATIVE +AMBIENT (2%)+PROJECT SATURDAY TURN MOVEMENT VOLUMES ............................................................................................................... 41 FIGURE 18–EXISTING (2019) WEEKDAY PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION TURN MOVEMENT VOLUMES ................................................................................................................................................. 47 FIGURE 19–EXISTING (2019) SATURDAY PMPEAK HOUR INTERSECTION TURN MOVEMENT VOLUMES .................................................................................................................................. 48 FIGURE 20–AMBIENT (2019-2020) WEEKDAY TURN MOVEMENT VOLUMES .............................. 50 FIGURE 21–AMBIENT (2019-2020) SATURDAY TURN MOVEMENT VOLUMES ............................. 51 FIGURE 22–EXISTING (2019) +AMBIENT WEEKDAY TURN MOVEMENT VOLUMES ..................... 54 FIGURE 23–EXISTING (2019) +AMBIENT SATURDAY TURN MOVEMENT VOLUMES .................... 55 FIGURE 24–PROJECT WEEKDAY TURN MOVEMENT VOLUMES ................................................... 58 FIGURE 25–PROJECT SATURDAY TURN MOVEMENT VOLUMES .................................................. 59 FIGURE 26–EXISTING (2019) +AMBIENT+PROJECT WEEKDAY TURN MOVEMENT VOLUMES..... 62 FIGURE 27–EXISTING (2019) +AMBIENT +PROJECT SATURDAY TURN MOVEMENT VOLUMES ... 63 Santa Anita Inn Redevelopment Project TIA April 20185 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report documents the results of a traffic impact study completed for the proposed redevelopment of the Santa Anita Inn at its current location at 130 W. Huntington Drive in the City of Arcadia, California. This study was performed in accordance with the Los Angeles County Congestion Management Program (CMP) guidelines for completing a traffic study under the direction of City of Arcadia staff. Based upon the analysis documented in this report, the following are our conclusions and recommendations: ƒThe proposed redevelopment of the Santa Anita Inn would include demolition of the existing 106-room Santa Anita Inn and the subsequent installation of new buildings for hotel, residential, and retail uses. Phase 1 of the expansion would include a new 227-room hotel and demolition of the 106 existing hotel rooms. Phase 2 of would include a new 96-unit residential condominium and 38,485 square feet of retail use in the southern portion. The development will also include the addition of parking to accommodate the new buildings. ƒThe project Phase 1 will generate a total of 1,012 daily trips on weekday, 58 in the AM peak and 73 in the PM peak, and 991 trips on Saturday, 87 of which are during the peak hour. ƒThe proposed Phase 1 redevelopment will not have any significant impacts at any of the study intersections or study roadways. ƒPhase 1 parking is planned to include 227 total spaces. ƒThe trip generation calculations indicate that Phase 2 will result in an additional 1,762 daily trips on a weekday with 71 trips in the AM peak and 150 trips in the PM peak, and 1,801 trips on Saturday including 174 trips during the peak hour. ƒPhase 2 of the redevelopment will not have significant impacts on the study intersections. ƒPhase 2 of the development is planned to include the addition of 503 parking spaces for, bringing the total to 585 spaces sitewide. ƒThe Phase 2 development includes the addition of a one-way drive-aisle for access to the parking lot and subterranean parking. This configuration should be sufficient to handle the projected traffic generated by condominium residents and visitors. ƒConstruction traffic (deliveries, etc.) during Phase 1 and Phase 2 shall be scheduled during off- peak hours to minimize impact on adjacent roadways. Construction is expected to impact the adjacent roadways temporarily (approximately a year per phase). In the immediate project work area, flagmen and lane channelization devices will regulate access and parking during work hours. Santa Anita Inn Redevelopment Project TIA April 20186 INTRODUCTION This report documents the results of a traffic impact study and parking analysis completed for the proposed redevelopment of Santa Anita Inn at its current location at 130 W. Huntington Drive in the City of Arcadia, California. This study was performed in accordance to the Los Angeles County Congestion Management Program (CMP) guidelines for completing a traffic study under the direction of City of Arcadia staff. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed redevelopment of Santa Anita Inn would be conducted in two phases. Phase 1 is set to be complete by the year 2019 and would include the demolition of the existing 106 rooms within the existing Santa Anita Inn as well as the construction of the following in the northern portion of the site: ƒA new 227-room hotel Phase 2 is set to be completed by the year of 2020 and would include construction of the following: ƒA new 96-unit residential condominium ƒ38,485 square feet of retail/commercial development Figure 1 illustrates the project site location and the study area intersections, and Figures 2 and 3 illustrate the proposed project redevelopment and site plan. Santa Anita Inn Redevelopment Project TIA April 201810 STUDY METHODOLOGY This document analyzes the study area roadways and traffic intersection conditions for both Phase 1 and 2 under the following five scenarios for weekday and Saturday: Phase 1 (Hotel): x Existing (2018) x Existing (2018) + Cumulative + Ambient x Existing (2018) + Cumulative + Ambient + Project Phase 2 (Condominiums/Retail): x Existing (2019) + Ambient x Existing (2019) + Ambient + Project The project study area was defined by the City of Arcadia upon initiation of the study. The hotel developments are expected to be constructed and operating by the year 2019. The condominium development is expected to be constructed and operating by the year 2020. Analysis of traffic that will be generated from cumulative projects (approved developments) includes projects that are expected to be developed and operational by the year 2019 in proximity (2-mile radius) of the proposed Project. Over periods there is an ambient increase in traffic due to urban gr owth. For this reason, we are accounting for a 2% per year ambient growth rate per discussion with City of Arcadia staff. For phase 1 this growth is accounted for from the date of the traffic counts collection to 2019 and for phase 2 from 2019 to 2020. Twelve roadway segments were analyzed for average daily traffic (ADT) impacts. Four intersections were analyzed as part of weekday peak-hour project traffic impacts, and the same four were analyzed for Saturday PM peak-hour project traffic impacts.Table 1 presents the roadway segments analyzed for this study. TABLE 1 - ROADWAY SEGMENTS ANALYZED Roadway Segment 1 Huntington Dr Baldwin Ave to Holly Dr 2 Huntington Dr (EB) Holly Dr to Santa Clara St 3 Huntington Dr (WB) Holly Dr to Colorado Pl 4 Huntington Dr Santa Clara St to Santa Anita Ave 5 Duarte Rd Holly Dr to Santa Anita Ave 6 Live Oak Ave Santa Anita Ave to Second Ave 7 Baldwin Ave Colorado St to Santa Anita Mall Dwy A 8 Baldwin Ave Santa Anita Mall Dwy A to Huntington Dr 9 Santa Anita Ave Foothill Blvd to I-210 WB Ramps 10 Santa Anita Ave Colorado Blvd to Santa Clara St 11 Santa Anita Ave Santa Clara St to Huntington Dr 12 Santa Anita Ave Huntington Dr to Campus Dr Source: City of Arcadia, 2013. Santa Anita Inn Redevelopment Project TIA April 201811 Four intersections were selected in consultation with City staff for analyzing potential peak-hour project traffic impacts during weekdays and on Saturdays. Roadway level of service, site access, the site plan’s internal circulation, and parking access were also evaluated ar ound the project vicinity.Table 2 presents the study area intersections, their control, jurisdiction, and day of analysis. TABLE 2 - STUDY AREA INTERSECTIONS Intersection Control Jurisdiction Analysis Weekday Saturday 1 Huntington Dr/Santa Anita Ave signal City of Arcadia XX 2 Huntington Dr/Santa Clara St signal City of Arcadia XX 3 Huntington Dr/Colorado Place signal City of Arcadia XX 4 Huntington Dr/Holly Ave/Campus Dr signal City of Arcadia XX Source: City of Arcadia, 2013 Santa Anita Inn Redevelopment Project TIA April 201812 Roadway Level of Service Analysis The Los Angeles County CMP does not specifically require the analysis of roadways for a traffic study. However, it is useful to perform the analysis in order to compare the overall roadway level of service with and without the proposed project. Roadway level of service (LOS) is based on capacity per lane per day and is assigned letter grades A through F similar to intersection LOS (described below) based on a volume-to-capacity (V/C) ratio. The analyses determined the level of service for the roadway segments and the change in the volume-to-capacity ratio produced by project traffic. Volumes are derived from traffic counts conducted in 2012. Intersection Level of Service Analysis Criteria The CMP traffic analysis guidelines require the use of the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) method to calculate the intersection LOS.Table 3 presents the capacity utilization ratio and the corresponding LOS, using the ICU methodology. TABLE 3 - ICU LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) DEFINITIONS ICU Value Level of Service (LOS) 0 to 60% A >60% to 70% B >70% to 80% C >80% to 90% D >90% to 100% E >100% F Source: Los Angeles County CMP The City of Arcadia utilizes CMP traffic impact study guidelines that define a ‘significant traffic impact’ as an increase in demand by at least 2% where the intersection would operate at LOS F with project traffic. Analysis of Existing (2018) traffic conditions is based upon traffic counts provided by the City of Arcadia. The traffic count worksheets are provided in Appendix A. The weekday peak-hour intersection traffic counts were conducted between the hours of 7 a.m. and 9 a.m. (AM peak), and 4 p.m. and 6 p.m. (PM peak) on typical weekdays while school was in session, during May and October 2011, and September and October 2013. Saturday peak-hour traffic counts were obtained in October 2012. Saturday peak-hour analysis only considers the PM peak hour (4-6pm) in this report. For the purposes of this report, an ambient growth rate of approximately 2% per year, compounded, is applied to each year from the count year to the analysis year. Santa Anita Inn Redevelopment Project TIA April 201813 PHASE 1: EXISTING (2018) CONDITIONS A description of study area roadways and analysis of existing r oadway and intersection operating conditions is provided in the following paragraphs. Study Area Freeway and Roadway Descriptions Foothill Freeway (I-210) is located north the project site. The I-210 Freeway provides regional access to the San Fernando Valley to the west and San Bernardino to the east. The freeway provides for four travel lanes plus one high occupancy vehicle lane (minimum 2 occupants) in each direction in the vicinity of City of Arcadia. The I-210 Freeway carries heavy volumes of traffic, especially during peak periods of the day. Access to the project site from the freeway is provided by ramps at Santa Anita Avenue and at Huntington Drive. The posted speed limit on I-210 is 65 mph. Baldwin Avenue is located west of the project site. Baldwin Avenue is a north-south primary arterial roadway with two lanes in each direction except for a segment with three northbound lanes adjacent to the Santa Anita Mall and the Los Angeles County Arboretum. The roadway provides for regional travel in the western San Gabriel Valley. The posted speed limit on Baldwin Ave is 30 mph between Huntington Drive and Camino Real Ave and 40 mph everywhere else. Santa Anita Avenue is located east of the project site. Santa Anita Avenue is a north-south primary arterial roadway with two to three travel lanes in each direction. The street provides for regional travel in the San Gabriel Valley and carries moderate to heavy volumes of traffic. Access to the project site is provided from the Foothill (I-210) Freeway via Santa Anita Avenue. The posted speed limit on Santa Anita Avenue is 40 mph. Second Avenue is located east of the project site. Second Avenue is a north-south secondary arterial roadway that provides for local travel within the City of Arcadia. The street has one to two lanes in each direction and provides access to the downtown area of the City. The posted speed limit on Second Avenue is 35 mph. Foothill Boulevard is located north of the project site. Foothill Boulevard is an east-west primary arterial that provides for travel between Pasadena, Arcadia, and Monrovia. The street has two lanes in each direction. The posted speed limit on Foothill Boulevard is 45 mph west of Santa Anita Avenue and 40 mph east of Santa Anita Avenue. Colorado Boulevard is located north of the project site. Colorado Boulevard is an east-west collector roadway with two lanes in each direction. The posted speed limit on Colorado Boulevard is 35 mph. Colorado Place is located directly north of the project site. Colorado Place is a primary arterial roadway that provides a regional connection between Colorado Street and Huntington Drive. The street has two lanes in each direction. The posted speed limit on Colorado Place is 40 mph. Santa Clara Street is located east of the project site. Santa Clara Street is an east-west secondary arterial with two lanes in each direction west of Santa Anita Avenue and a collector roadway with one lane in each direction east of Santa Anita Avenue in the downtown area. The posted speed limit on Santa Clara Street is 35 mph. Huntington Drive is located adjacent to the project site. Huntington Drive is an east-west major arterial west of Colorado Place and a primary arterial east of Colorado Place that provides for regional east-west Santa Anita Inn Redevelopment Project TIA April 201814 travel in the San Gabriel Valley. The street has four lanes in each direction west of Colorado Place and two lanes in each direction east of Colorado Place. The posted speed limit on Huntington is 30 mph between Fifth Street and Colorado Place and 45 mph west of Colorado Place. Duarte Road is located south of the project site. Duarte Road is an east-west secondary arterial that provides for travel between the cities of Temple City, Arcadia, Monrovia, and Duarte. The street has two lanes in each direction. The posted speed limit on Duarte Road is 35 mph west of Santa Anita Avenue and 40 mph east of Santa Anita Avenue. Live Oak Avenue is located south of the project site. Live Oak Avenue is an east-west primary arterial that provides for regional travel in the north San Gabriel Valley. The street has two lanes in each direction. The posted speed limit on Live Oak Avenue is 40 mph west of Santa Anita Avenue and 35 mph east of Santa Anita Avenue. Table 4 below presents the existing roadway segment traffic volumes and their corresponding LOS. Level of service is based on a lane capacity of 10,000 vehicles per day. TABLE 4 - SUMMARY OF ROADWAY ANALYSIS: EXISTING (2018) LEVEL OF SERVICE Roadway Segment Lanes Capacity Volume V/C LOS Huntington Dr Baldwin Ave to Holly Dr 8 80,000 35,873 0.448 A Huntington Dr (EB) Holly Dr to Santa Clara St 3 30,000 14,558 0.485 A Huntington Dr (WB) Holly Dr to Colorado Pl 3 30,000 16,969 0.566 A Huntington Dr Santa Clara St to Santa Anita Ave 4 40,000 26,229 0.656 B Duarte Rd Holly Dr to Santa Anita Ave 4 40,000 25,419 0.635 B Live Oak Ave Santa Anita Ave to Second Ave 4 40,000 29,892 0.747 C Baldwin Ave Colorado St to Santa Anita Mall Dwy A 4 40,000 33,953 0.849 D Baldwin Ave* Santa Anita Mall Dwy A to Huntington Dr 5 50,000 30,255 0.605 B Santa Anita Ave Foothill Blvd to I-210 WB Ramps 4 40,000 29,246 0.731 C Santa Anita Ave Colorado Blvd to Santa Clara St 4 40,000 32,724 0.818 D Santa Anita Ave Santa Clara St to Huntington Dr 4 40,000 25,642 0.641 B Santa Anita Ave Huntington Dr to Campus Dr 4 40,000 28,909 0.723 C *Baldwin Avenue has three northbound and two southbound lanes in this segment. Source: City of Arcadia, 2013 Santa Anita Inn Redevelopment Project TIA April 201815 Table 5 presents the Existing (2018) peak-hour intersection operating conditions. The existing study area intersection approach lane configurations utilized for all analysis scenarios are illustrated in Figure 4. Existing weekday peak-hour traffic volumes at each study area intersection are illustrated in Figure 5 and existing Saturday peak-hour traffic volumes are illustrated in Figure 6. TABLE 5 - SUMMARY OF INTERSECTION ANALYSIS: EXISTING (2018) LEVEL OF SERVICE Weekday Saturday Intersection AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour V/C LOS V/C LOS V/C LOS 1 Huntington Dr/Santa Anita Ave 0.744 C 0.819 D 0.697 B 2 Huntington Dr/Santa Clara St 0.828 D 0.725 C 0.602 A 3 Huntington Dr/Colorado Pl 0.541 A 0.804 C 0.583 A 4 Huntington Dr/Holly Ave 0.773 C 0.552 A 0.604 A The table indicates that all study area intersections operate at LOS D or better during both AM and PM peak hours. ICU analysis worksheets for the existing conditions scenario are provided in Appendix B. Santa Anita Inn Redevelopment Project TIA April 201819 PHASE 1: CUMULATIVE PROJECTS & AMBIENT GROWTH Traffic volumes expected to be generated from cumulative projects (approved development projects expected to be completed by 2019) were utilized to simulate future traffic conditions after the cumulative projects are built and become occupied/operational in the year 2019 when phase one of the Santa Anita Inn redevelopment is expected to be completed. Cumulative project information was obtained from the City of Arcadia via e-mail. Trip generation rates for these cumulative projects, were calculated per the Institute of Transportation Engineers’ (ITE) Trip Generation Ma nual. The projects were identified in consultation with city staff as cumulative projects for the cumulative 2019 land analysis. As part of the increase in traffic due to cumulative projects being completed, we must also account for the ambient traffic growth due to time passing between the existing condition and completion of the project(s). For the purposes of this report, the ambient growth rate is approximately 2% per year and is compounded each year. This growth rate is applied from the existing condition to the opening year. In the case of Phase 1, an ambient growth rate will cover the year the counts were collected to 2019. For trips generated by ambient growth see ICU analysis in appendices B and C. Tables 6 and 7 present the trips generated by these projects on weekdays and Saturdays, respectively, including ambient growth. The locations of the cumulative projects are illustrated in Figure 7. Cumulative project intersection traffic volumes are illustrated in Figures 8 and 9. Santa Anita Inn Redevelopment Project TIA April 201820 TABLE 6 - CUMULATIVE PROJECTS WEEKDAY TRIP GENERATION Cumulative Projects Weekday Generated Trips Cumulative Project ITE Land Use Code Units Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour In Out In Out 1 Retail to Restaurant conversion* - 400 S. Baldwin Ave. 932 20,000 sq. ft. 2,544 0 0 132 91 2 Condominium – 845 W. Huntington Drive 230 10 Units 60 1 3 3 2 3 Condominium – 714 S. Old Ranch Drive 230 11 Units 64 1 4 4 2 4 Performing Arts Center – 180 Campus Drive 441 1,200 seats - 0 0 12 12 5 Medical Office – 161 Colorado Place*720 64,225 sq. ft. 1,866 113 34 55 131 6 Townhomes – 650 W. Huntington Drive 230 34 Units 198 3 12 12 6 7 Rusnak Mercedes – 55 W. Huntington Drive**841 25,000 sq. ft. 38 service bays 138 32 10 12 15 8 Medical Office – 289 W. Huntington Drive.†720 72,000 sq. ft. 2,602 136 36 72 185 9 Arroyo Pacific Academy High School – 325 N. Santa Anita Ave. 530 280 Students 480 82 38 17 19 10 Mixed Use Project – 57 Wheeler Ave.220/820 38 Units, 17,850 sq. ft. commercial 1,018 15 21 48 42 11 Condominium – 501 N. Santa Anita Ave.230 20 Units 118 2 7 7 3 Cumulative Project TOTALS 9,088 385 165 374 508 Sources: ITE Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition, 2012; City of Arcadia, 2013. *Trip Generation values are from existing Traffic Impact Analysis of 125 W. Huntington Dr and 161 Colorado Pl Project, August 2012. Only weekday trips were analyzed. **Trip Generation values are from existing Traffic Impact Analysis report prepared by Kimley-Horn and addendum dated September 30, 2013. †Trip Generation values are from existing Traffic Impact Analysis report for the Hale Medical Center Project, March 11, 2013. ƇAmbient growth rate accounted for from year of counts to 2019. Santa Anita Inn Redevelopment Project TIA April 201821 TABLE 7 - CUMULATIVE PROJECTS SATURDAY TRIP GENERATION Saturday Generated Trips Cumulative Project Units Daily PM Peak Hour In Out 1 Retail to Restaurant conversion* - 400 S. Baldwin Ave. 20,000 sq. ft. 3,168 150 132 2 Condominium – 845 W. Huntington Drive 10 Units 58 3 2 3 Condominium – 714 S. Old Ranch Drive 11 Units 64 4 2 4 Performing Arts Center – 180 Campus Drive 1,200 seats - - - 5 Medical Office – 161 Colorado Place*64,225 sq. ft. - - - 6 Townhomes – 650 W. Huntington Drive 34 Units 194 12 6 7 Rusnak Mercedes – 55W. Huntington Drive** 25,000 sq. ft. 38 service bays 35 4 5 8 Medical Office – 289 W. Huntington Drive.†72,000 sq. ft. 13 2 2 9 Arroyo Pacific Academy High School – 325 N. Santa Anita Ave. 280 Students 171 20 11 10 Mixed Use Project – 57 Wheeler Ave. 38 Units, 17,850 sq. ft. commercial 1,135 55 51 11 Condominium – 501 N. Santa Anita Ave.20 Units 113 5 4 Cumulative Project TOTALS 4,951 255 215 Sources: ITE Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition, 2012; City of Arcadia, 2013. *Trip Generation values are from existing Traffic Impact Analysis of 125 W. Huntington Dr and 161 Colorado Pl Project, August 2012. Only weekday trips were analyzed. **Trip Generation values are from existing Traffic Impact Analysis report prepared by Kimley-Horn and addendum dated September 30, 2013. †Trip Generation values are from existing Traffic Impact Analysis report for the Hale Medical Center Project, March 11, 2013. ƇAmbient growth rate accounted for from year of counts to 2019. Santa Anita Inn Redevelopment Project TIA April 201825 Near-Future Transportation Improvements Planning is currently underway for an extension of the Metro Go ld Line from its current terminal station at Sierra Madre Villa to Montclair through Arcadia. A station to serve the City is proposed between Santa Anita Avenue and First Avenue adjacent to Front Street. The Gold Line crossing at Santa Anita Avenue will have a grade separation while the crossing at First Avenue and Santa Clara will be at grade. City staff has been informed that the project will include restriping of the Santa Anita Avenue and Colorado Boulevard intersection and a proposed 8-phase traffic signal system at Santa Anita Avenue and Santa Clara Street. Based on our experience with similar projects, transit improvements are expected to boost transit ridership in this area, thereby alleviating traffic congestion. Santa Anita Inn Redevelopment Project TIA April 201826 PHASE 1: EXISTING (2018) + CUMULATIVE + AMBIENT CONDITIONS Daily Roadway Segment Analysis Daily cumulative project and ambient traffic volumes were added to the Existing (2018) weekday roadway segment traffic volumes to simulate future traffic conditions without the project traffic conditions. Ambient growth was then calculated for time passage between the year of the counts (2012) and 2019, or seven years.Table 8 presents a summary of the Existing (2018) + Cumulative + Ambient roadway segment analysis. The table indicates that all of the roadway segments analyzed would operate at LOS D or better with the addition of cumulative and ambient project traffic. TABLE 8 - SUMMARY OF ROADWAY SEGMENT ANALYSIS: EXISTING (2018) + CUMULATIVE + AMBIENT Roadway Segment Lanes Capacity Added Volume Volume V/C LOS Change* Huntington Dr Baldwin Ave to Holly Dr 8 80,000 2,495 38,368 0.480 A 0.031 Huntington Dr (EB)Holly Dr to Santa Clara St 3 30,000 1,774 16,332 0.544 A 0.059 Huntington Dr (WB)Holly Dr to Colorado Pl 3 30,000 2,676 19,645 0.655 B 0.089 Huntington Dr Santa Clara St to Santa Anita Ave 4 40,000 1,965 28,195 0.705 B 0.049 Duarte Rd Holly Dr to Santa Anita Ave 4 40,000 704 26,122 0.653 B 0.018 Live Oak Ave Santa Anita Ave to Second Ave 4 40,000 616 30,508 0.763 C 0.015 Baldwin Ave Colorado St to Santa Anita Mall Dwy A 4 40,000 1,817 35,769 0.894 D 0.045 Baldwin Ave**Santa Anita Mall Dwy A to Huntington Dr 5 50,000 1,743 31,998 0.640 B 0.035 Santa Anita Ave Foothill Blvd to I-210 WB Ramps 4 40,000 982 30,229 0.756 C 0.025 Santa Anita Ave Colorado Blvd to Santa Clara St 4 40,000 1,741 34,465 0.862 D 0.044 Santa Anita Ave Santa Clara St to Huntington Dr 4 40,000 1,409 27,050 0.676 B 0.035 Santa Anita Ave Huntington Dr to Campus Dr 4 40,000 1,223 30,131 0.753 C 0.031 *Change relative to the Existing (2013) scenario. **Baldwin Avenue has three northbound and two southbound lanes in this segment. Source: City of Arcadia, 2013 Ambient growth rate accounted for from 2018 to 2019. Peak Hour Intersection Analysis Peak hour cumulative project traffic was added to the Existing (2018) peak hour intersection traffic volumes to simulate future traffic conditions without the project.Table 9 presents a summary of the Existing (2018) + Cumulative + Ambient intersection analysis. The peak-hour intersection traffic volumes for the Existing (2018) + Cumulative + Ambient scenario are illustrated in Figures 10 and 11 for weekdays and Saturdays, respectively. ICU analysis worksheets for this scenario are provided in Appendix C. Santa Anita Inn Redevelopment Project TIA April 201827 TABLE 9 - SUMMARY OF INTERSECTION ANALYSIS: EXISTING (2018) + CUMULATIVE + AMBIENT Weekday Saturday Intersection AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour V/C LOS Change* V/C LOS Change* V/C LOS Change* 1 Huntington Dr/Santa Anita Ave 0.795 C 0.050 0.863 D 0.044 0.726 C 0.030 2 Huntington Dr/Santa Clara St 0.871 D 0.043 0.767 C 0.042 0.613 B 0.021 3 Huntington Dr/Colorado Pl 0.581 A 0.040 0.839 D 0.036 0.598 A 0.015 4 Huntington Dr/Holly Ave 0.831 D 0.059 0.594 A 0.042 0.628 B 0.024 *Change compared to the Existing (2018) scenario. Source: Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc., 2013 The analysis summarized in Table 9 indicates that no intersections will experience significant impacts on weekdays or weekends due to an increase in traffic from the cumulative projects. Santa Anita Inn Redevelopment Project TIA April 201830 PHASE 1: PROJECT TRAFFIC Project Trip Generation The number of trips generated by the project was developed by Kimley-Horn and Associates based upon the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition, and number of rooms in the new hotel. The property owner/developer was able to provide existing and proposed number of hotel rooms to calculate the development of the number of trips generated by the project. The existing hotel will be demolished as part of this project and a trip credit will be ta ken for those removed hotel rooms. Trip generation was developed for the existing hotel site and for the expanded site. The number of trips that constitute “project” trips was identified as the difference between these two trip generations.Table 10 presents the project trip generation for weekdays and Saturdays. TripGenerationRates1 ITE AMPeakHour PeakHour LandUse Code Unit Daily In Out Total In Out Total Daily In Out Total Hotel 310 Room 8.36 0.277 0.193 0.47 0.306 0.294 0.60 8.19 0.403 0.317 0.72 TripGenerationEstimates AMPeakHour PeakHour LandUse Quantity Unit Daily In Out Total In Out Total Daily In Out Total Hotel 106 Room 886 29 20 49 32 31 63 868 43 34 76 Hotel 227 Room 1,898 63 44 107 69 67 136 1,859 92 72 163 TotalNetNewTrips 1,012 34 24 58 37 36 73 991 49 38 87 1Source:InstituteofTransportationEngineers(ITE)TripGenerationManual,10thEdition 2Source:InstituteofTransportationEngineers(ITE)TripGenerationHandbook,3rdEdition PMPeakHour ExistingLandUse ProposedLandUse TABLE10 SUMMARYOFPROJECTTRIPGENERATION PHASE1 Weekday Saturday PMPeakHour Weekday Saturday SantaAnitaInnRedevelopmentProject TrafficImpactStudy Kimley-HornandAssociates,Inc. Santa Anita Inn Redevelopment Project TIA April 201832 The trip generation calculations indicate that there would be 1,012 net daily trips added due to project traffic during the average weekday and 991 net daily trips added on Saturday. Fifty-eight (58) net trips would be added by the project in the AM peak hour and 73 net trips added in the PM peak hour on weekdays. On Saturdays, it is estimated that 87 trips would be added in the peak hour. Project Trip Distribution The distribution of project traffic was based upon local knowledge, proposed land uses and input from the City of Arcadia. Project traffic is determined by the number of rooms at each hotel, and a large proportion of tenants who park their vehicles during the evening and night hours and leave at the time of checkout in the morning or afternoon. Due to the increased number of rooms that are being added to the site after the redevelopment, it follows that more trips would originate around the project site. Project traffic was assigned to the study area roadway network based upon distribution patterns that considered the adjacent land uses, freeway access, arterial capacities, and the likely origins of hotel tenants. The project trip distribution percentages and project trip assignments are illustrated in Figure 12. More detailed turn movement percentages for project trips are presented in Figure 13. The resulting project-added intersection weekday peak-hour traffic volumes are illustrated in Figure 14, and project- added intersection Saturday peak-hour traffic volumes are illustrated in Figure 15. It is assumed that Saturday trip distribution would be the same as the distribution of project traffic during weekdays. Santa Anita Inn Redevelopment Project TIA April 201838 PHASE 1: EXISTING (2018) + CUMULATIVE + AMBIENT + PROJECT CONDITIONS Project traffic was added to the Existing + Cumulative + Ambient scenario to determine whether or not the project would cause any significant peak-hour traffic impacts. An ambient traffic increase of 2% was also included to account for ambient traffic increase per year.Table 11 presents a summary of the Existing + Cumulative + Project roadway analysis, and Table 12 provides a summary of the Existing + Cumulative + Project intersection analysis.Figures 16 and 17 provide the Existing + Cumulative + Project traffic volumes at the study area intersections for weekdays and Saturdays, respectively. ICU worksheets for this scenario are provided in Appendix C. All analyzed roadway segments remained at LOS D or better with the addition of project traffic. TABLE 11 - SUMMARY OF ROADWAY ANALYSIS: EXISTING (2018) + CUMULATIVE + AMBIENT + PROJECT LEVEL OF SERVICE Roadway Segment Lanes Capacity Added Volume Volume V/C LOS Change* Huntington Dr Baldwin Ave to Holly Dr 8 80,000 354 38,722 0.484 A 0.004 Huntington Dr (EB)Holly Dr to Santa Clara St 3 30,000 101 16,433 0.548 A 0.003 Huntington Dr (WB)Holly Dr to Colorado Pl 3 30,000 354 20,000 0.667 B 0.012 Huntington Dr Santa Clara St to Santa Anita Ave 4 40,000 455 28,650 0.716 C 0.011 Duarte Rd Holly Dr to Santa Anita Ave 4 40,000 0 26,122 0.653 B 0.000 Live Oak Ave Santa Anita Ave to Second Ave 4 40,000 0 30,508 0.763 C 0.000 Baldwin Ave Colorado St to Santa Anita Mall Dwy A 4 40,000 253 36,023 0.901 D 0.006 Baldwin Ave**Santa Anita Mall Dwy A to Huntington Dr 5 50,000 253 32,251 0.645 B 0.005 Santa Anita Ave Foothill Blvd to I-210 WB Ramps 4 40,000 405 30,633 0.766 C 0.010 Santa Anita Ave Colorado Blvd to Santa Clara St 4 40,000 354 34,820 0.870 D 0.009 Santa Anita Ave Santa Clara St to Huntington Dr 4 40,000 354 27,404 0.685 B 0.009 Santa Anita Ave Huntington Dr to Campus Dr 4 40,000 51 30,182 0.755 C 0.001 *Change relative to the Existing (2013) + Cumulative + Ambient scenario. **Baldwin Avenue has three northbound and two southbound lanes in this segment. Source: City of Arcadia, 2013; Kimley-Horn & Associates, 2013. Santa Anita Inn Redevelopment Project TIA April 201839 The City of Arcadia utilizes CMP traffic impact study guidelines that define a significant traffic impact as an increase in demand by at least 2% where the intersection would operate at LOS E or F with project traffic.Table 12 below shows that all intersections would operate at LOS D or better. TABLE 12 - SUMMARY OF INTERSECTION ANALYSIS: EXISTING (2018) + CUMULATIVE + AMBIENT + PROJECT LEVEL OF SERVICE Weekday Saturday Intersection AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Impact PM Peak Hour Impact V/C LOS Change* V/C LOS Change* V/C LOS Change* 1 Huntington Dr/Santa Anita Ave 0.805 D 0.010 0.863 D 0.001 NO 0.727 C 0.001 NO 2 Huntington Dr/Santa Clara St 0.881 D 0.010 0.779 C 0.013 NO 0.628 B 0.015 NO 4 Huntington Dr/Colorado Pl 0.593 A 0.011 0.852 D 0.012 NO 0.615 B 0.016 NO 5 Huntington Dr/Holly Ave 0.832 D 0.001 0.595 A 0.001 NO 0.629 B 0.001 NO *Change compared to the Existing (2018) + Cumulative + Ambient scenario. Source: Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc., 2013 Santa Anita Inn Redevelopment Project TIA April 201842 PHASE 1: SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS AND RECOMMENDED MITIGATION Per the County of Los Angeles Congestion Management Program (CMP), a ‘significant traffic impact’ is defined as an increase of 0.02 or more in the volume-to-capacity (V/C) ratio at an intersection when the resultant level of service (LOS) is at E or F. The Existing (2018) + Cumulative + Ambient + Project analysis scenario (Table 12) indicated that the Santa Anita Inn redevelopment project would not have any significant impacts. Therefore, mitigation measures are not recommended. SITE PLAN AND PARKING ANALYSIS Site Access The site plan, previously shown in Figures 2 and 3, proposes to redevelop the Santa Anita Inn. The project would include demolition of the existing 106-room Santa Anita Inn and the subsequent installation of new buildings for hotel, residential, and retail uses. Phase 1 of the expansion would include a new 227-room hotel on the northern portion of the site. There is an existing driveway directly south of Colorado Place that will be removed. Ingress and egress will be primarily through a new driveway located to the west of the Huntington Avenue and Colorado Place intersection. Additionally, there are two driveways off Huntington Drive. Santa Anita Inn Redevelopment Project TIA April 201843 Parking According to the site plan, on-site parking would be provided f or employees, and customers. The hotel site will provide only surface parking for these purposes. Phase 1 parking is planned to include 227 total spaces. Construction Traffic No construction activities with heavy equipment should occur beyond the normal weekday construction hours of 7 am to 7 pm. These activities would impact adjacent residents and may require after-hour permits. When feasible, materials being delivered to the site during the construction period should be scheduled at times that are not in conflict with peak public use of the roadways so that congestion is limited. The potential impacts of construction traffic on the traffic op erations within the study area will be temporary and are expected to last up to one year. The impacts of construction-related trips (trucks and construction employees) on the street system should be considered negligible since these trips can be scheduled and their frequency increased during off-peak (mid-day) hours. Any required excavation and hauling of material should also be scheduled for the mid-day period in order to reduce the impacts of traffic during construction. The specifics of a work zone traffic control plan, which includes the use of flagmen and lane channelization devices, should be established in accordance wit h City guidelines. Contractor traffic control plans will need to be approved by the City of Arcadia. A flagman should be available at all times when construction activities are occurring to ensure vehicle and pedestrian safety, and they should be used whenever trucks are leaving the project site to prevent the impedance of the flow of traffic. The contractor should ensure the safety of pedestrians by installing a construction fence on the project site perimeter. The contractor should provide an estimate of truck volume and schedule. Areas should be designated by the City for the staging of all trucks. All earth-moving and ready-mix trucks should be equipped with two-way radios so that the drivers at the staging areas are linked to a person controlling traffic at the project site. Trucks should follow a City-approved route to the project site, and recommended streets to utilize include Santa Anita Avenue, Huntington Drive, and Santa Clara Street. Santa Anita Avenue and Huntington Drive provide direct access to the I-210 Freeway. When feasible, materials being delivered to the site should be scheduled with the least inconvenience to the public. Timing of material delivery would be subject to the approval of the City Engineer. The contractor should have a designated employee controlling the logistics of all deliveries. All materials requiring assembly should be accommodated on-site. Santa Anita Inn Redevelopment Project TIA April 201844 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS: POST-PHASE 1 Based upon the analysis documented in this report, the following conclusions and recommendations can be made. ƒThe proposed redevelopment of the Santa Anita Inn would include demolition of the existing 106-room Santa Anita Inn and the subsequent installation of new buildings for hotel, residential, and retail uses. Phase 1 of the expansion would include a new 227-room hotel and demolition of the 106 existing hotel rooms. ƒThe project Phase 1 will generate a total of 1,012 daily trips on weekday, 58 in the AM peak and 73 in the PM peak, and 991 trips on Saturday, 87 of which are during the peak hour. ƒThe proposed Phase 1 redevelopment will not have any significant impacts at any of the study intersections or study roadways. ƒPhase 1 parking is planned to include 227 total spaces. ƒConstruction traffic (deliveries, etc.) during Phase 1 and Phase 2 shall be scheduled during off- peak hours to minimize impact on adjacent roadways. Construction is expected to impact the adjacent roadways temporarily (approximately a year per phase). In the immediate project work area, flagmen and lane channelization devices will regulate access and parking during work hours. Santa Anita Inn Redevelopment Place Project TIA April 201845 PHASE 2: EXISTING (2019) CONDITIONS Table 13 below presents the existing roadway segment traffic volumes and their corresponding LOS in the year 2019. Level of service is based on a lane capacity of 10,000 vehicles per day. These values are derived from the project completion traffic volume information as determined in the previous Phase 1 section. It is assumed that the final conditions of the first phase of the project will be the existing conditions for the second phase of the project. TABLE 13 - SUMMARY OF ROADWAY ANALYSIS: EXISTING (2019) LEVEL OF SERVICE Roadway Segment Lanes Capacity Volume V/C LOS Huntington Dr Baldwin Ave to Holly Dr 8 80,000 38,722 0.484 A Huntington Dr (EB) Holly Dr to Santa Clara St 3 30,000 16,433 0.548 A Huntington Dr (WB)Holly Dr to Colorado Pl 3 30,000 20,000 0.667 B Huntington Dr Santa Clara St to Santa Anita Ave 4 40,000 28,650 0.716 C Duarte Rd Holly Dr to Santa Anita Ave 4 40,000 26,122 0.653 B Live Oak Ave Santa Anita Ave to Second Ave 4 40,000 30,508 0.763 C Baldwin Ave Colorado St to Santa Anita Mall Dwy A 4 40,000 36,023 0.901 D Baldwin Ave* Santa Anita Mall Dwy A to Huntington Dr 5 50,000 32,251 0.645 B Santa Anita Ave Foothill Blvd to I-210 WB Ramps 4 40,000 30,633 0.766 C Santa Anita Ave Colorado Blvd to Santa Clara St 4 40,000 34,820 0.870 D Santa Anita Ave Santa Clara St to Huntington Dr 4 40,000 27,404 0.685 B Santa Anita Ave Huntington Dr to Campus Dr 4 40,000 30,182 0.755 C *Baldwin Avenue has three northbound and two southbound lanes in this segment. Source: City of Arcadia, 2013 Santa Anita Inn Redevelopment Place Project TIA April 201846 Table 14 presents the Existing (2019) peak-hour intersection operating conditions. Existing weekday peak-hour traffic volumes at each study area intersection are illustrated in Figure 18 and existing Saturday peak-hour traffic volumes are illustrated in Figure 19. TABLE 14 - SUMMARY OF INTERSECTION ANALYSIS: EXISTING (2019) LEVEL OF SERVICE Weekday Saturday Intersection AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour V/C LOS V/C LOS V/C LOS 1 Huntington Dr/Santa Anita Ave 0.805 D 0.863 D 0.727 C 2 Huntington Dr/Santa Clara St 0.881 D 0.779 C 0.628 B 3 Huntington Dr/Colorado Pl 0.593 A 0.852 D 0.615 B 4 Huntington Dr/Holly Ave 0.832 D 0.595 A 0.629 B The table indicates that all study area intersections currently operate at LOS D or better during both AM and PM peak hours. ICU analysis worksheets for the existing conditions scenario are provided in Appendix D. Santa Anita Inn Redevelopment Place Project TIA April 201849 PHASE 2: AMBIENT GROWTH Per City direction, this portion of the traffic study will not include any cumulative projects to be completed between 2019 and 2020. There are no approved projects to be completed in this time span. However, this analysis will account for the ambient traffic growth due to time passing between this report and actual construction of the project(s). For the purposes of this report, the ambient growth rate is approximately 2% per year. This growth rate is applied from the existing condition to the opening year. In the case of Phase 2 of this development, ambient growth will be accounted for over one year.Figures 20 and 21 show the ambient growth between 2019 and 2020. Santa Anita Inn Redevelopment Place Project TIA April 201852 PHASE 2: EXISTING (2019) + AMBIENT CONDITIONS Daily Roadway Segment Analysis The ambient traffic volumes were added to the Existing (2019) weekday roadway segment traffic volumes to simulate future traffic conditions without the project traffic conditions.Table 15 presents a summary of the Existing (2019) + Ambient roadway segment analysis. The table indicates that all the roadway segments analyzed would operate at LOS D or better with the addition of cumulative and ambient project traffic, with the exception of Baldwin Avenue between Colorado Street and Santa Anita Mall Driveway A, which would operate at LOS E. TABLE 15 - SUMMARY OF ROADWAY SEGMENT ANALYSIS: EXISTING (2019) + AMBIENT Roadway Segment Lanes Capacity Added Volume Volume V/C LOS Change* Huntington Dr Baldwin Ave to Holly Dr 8 80,000 774 39,496 0.494 A 0.010 Huntington Dr (EB)Holly Dr to Santa Clara St 3 30,000 329 16,762 0.559 A 0.011 Huntington Dr (WB)Holly Dr to Colorado Pl 3 30,000 400 20,400 0.680 B 0.013 Huntington Dr Santa Clara St to Santa Anita Ave 4 40,000 573 29,223 0.731 C 0.014 Duarte Rd Holly Dr to Santa Anita Ave 4 40,000 523 26,645 0.666 B 0.013 Live Oak Ave Santa Anita Ave to Second Ave 4 40,000 610 31,118 0.778 C 0.015 Baldwin Ave Colorado St to Santa Anita Mall Dwy A 4 40,000 720 36,743 0.919 E 0.018 Baldwin Ave**Santa Anita Mall Dwy A to Huntington Dr 5 50,000 645 32,896 0.658 B 0.013 Santa Anita Ave Foothill Blvd to I-210 WB Ramps 4 40,000 613 31,246 0.781 C 0.015 Santa Anita Ave Colorado Blvd to Santa Clara St 4 40,000 696 35,516 0.888 D 0.017 Santa Anita Ave Santa Clara St to Huntington Dr 4 40,000 548 27,952 0.699 B 0.014 Santa Anita Ave Huntington Dr to Campus Dr 4 40,000 604 30,786 0.770 C 0.015 *Change relative to the Existing (2019) scenario. **Baldwin Avenue has three northbound and two southbound lanes in this segment. Source: City of Arcadia, 2013 Ambient growth rate accounted for from 2019 to 2020, 1 year. Santa Anita Inn Redevelopment Place Project TIA April 201853 Peak Hour Intersection Analysis The ambient growth traffic was added to the Existing (2019) peak hour intersection traffic volumes to simulate future traffic conditions without the project.Table 16 presents a summary of the Existing (2019) + Ambient intersection analysis. The peak-hour intersection traffic volumes for the Existing (2019) + Ambient scenario are illustrated in Figures 22 and 23 for weekdays and Saturdays, respectively. TABLE 16 - SUMMARY OF INTERSECTION ANALYSIS: EXISTING (2019) + AMBIENT Intersection Weekday Saturday AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour V/C LOS Change* V/C LOS Change* V/C LOS Change* 1 Huntington Dr/Santa Anita Ave 0.819 D 0.014 0.878 D 0.015 0.739 C 0.012 2 Huntington Dr/Santa Clara St 0.896 D 0.016 0.793 C 0.014 0.638 B 0.010 3 Huntington Dr/Colorado Pl 0.597 A 0.010 0.866 D 0.015 0.625 B 0.010 4 Huntington Dr/Holly Ave 0.846 D 0.014 0.606 A 0.011 0.641 B 0.012 *Change compared to the Existing (2019) scenario. Source: Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc., 2013 The table indicates that all study area intersections will operate at LOS D or better during both AM and PM peak hours. ICU analysis worksheets for the existing condit ions scenario are provided in Appendix C. Santa Anita Inn Redevelopment Place Project TIA April 201856 PHASE 2: PROJECT TRAFFIC Project Trip Generation The number of trips generated by the project was developed by Kimley-Horn and Associates based upon the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition, the number of proposed units, and square footage of r etail. Trip generation was developed for the expanded site (Phase 2).Table 17 presents the project trip generation for weekdays and Saturdays. The trip generation calculations indicate that Phase 2 will result in an additional 1,762 daily trips on a weekday with 71 trips in the AM peak and 150 trips in the PM peak, and 1,801 trips on Saturday including 174 trips during the peak hour. Project Trip Distribution Project trip distribution for Phase 2 is assumed to be similar Phase 1 as access points are in the same vicinity. See Figure 12 for distribution. Trip assignment is shown on Figures 24 and 25. TripGenerationRates1 ITE AMPeakHour PeakHour LandUse Code Unit Daily In Out Total In Out Total Daily In Out Total MultifamilyHousing(Mid-Rise) 221 DU 5.44 0.094 0.266 0.36 0.268 0.172 0.44 4.91 0.216 0.224 0.44 ShoppingCenter 820 KSF37.75 0.583 0.357 0.94 1.829 1.981 3.81 46.12 2.340 2.160 4.50 TripGenerationEstimates AMPeakHour PeakHour LandUse Quantity Unit Daily In Out Total In Out Total Daily In Out Total MultifamilyHousing(Mid-Rise) 96 DU 522 9 26 35 26 16 42 471 21 22 43 -94 0 0 0 -12 -7 -19 -219 -10 -10 -20 ShoppingCenter 38.485 KSF1,453 22 14 36 70 76 146 1,775 90 83 173 -119 0 0 0 -7 -12 -19 -226 -9 -13 -22 TotalNewTrips 1,762 31 40 71 77 73 150 1,801 92 82 174 Weekday Weekday Saturday Saturday PMPeakHour PMPeakHour SUMMARYOFPROJECTTRIPGENERATION PHASE2 TABLE17 ProposedLandUse 1Source:InstituteofTransportationEngineers(ITE)TripGenerationManual,10thEdition 2Source:InstituteofTransportationEngineers(ITE)TripGenerationHandbook,3rdEdition ǦInternalCapture2 ǦInternalCapture2 SantaAnitaInnRedevelopmentProject TrafficImpactStudy Kimley-HornandAssociates,Inc. Santa Anita Inn Redevelopment Place Project TIA April 201860 PHASE 2: EXISTING (2019) + AMBIENT + PROJECT CONDITIONS Project traffic was added to the Existing (2019) + Ambient scenario to determine whether or not the project would cause any significant peak-hour traffic impacts.Table 18 presents a summary of the Existing + Ambient + Project roadway analysis, and Table 19 provides a summary of the Existing + Ambient + Project intersection analysis.Figures 26 and 27 provide the Existing + Ambient + Project traffic volumes at the study area intersections for weekdays and Saturdays, respectively. ICU worksheets for this scenario are provided in Appendix C. All analyzed roadway segments remained at LOS D or better with the addition of project traffic, with the exception of Baldwin Avenue between Colorado Street and Santa Anita Mall Driveway A, which operates at LOS E. However, this segment operates at LOS E before the addition of project traffic, and the change in V/C does not exceed 2%. TABLE 18 - SUMMARY OF ROADWAY ANALYSIS: EXISTING (2019) + AMBIENT+ PROJECT LEVEL OF SERVICE Roadway Segment Lanes Capacity Added Volume Volume V/C LOS Change* Huntington Dr Baldwin Ave to Holly Dr 8 80,000 575 40,071 0.501 A 0.007 Huntington Dr (EB)Holly Dr to Santa Clara St 3 30,000 164 16,926 0.564 A 0.005 Huntington Dr (WB)Holly Dr to Colorado Pl 3 30,000 575 20,974 0.699 B 0.019 Huntington Dr Santa Clara St to Santa Anita Ave 4 40,000 739 29,962 0.749 C 0.018 Duarte Rd Holly Dr to Santa Anita Ave 4 40,000 0 26,645 0.666 B 0.000 Live Oak Ave Santa Anita Ave to Second Ave 4 40,000 0 31,118 0.778 C 0.000 Baldwin Ave Colorado St to Santa Anita Mall Dwy A 4 40,000 411 37,154 0.929 E 0.010 Baldwin Ave**Santa Anita Mall Dwy A to Huntington Dr 5 50,000 411 33,307 0.666 B 0.008 Santa Anita Ave Foothill Blvd to I-210 WB Ramps 4 40,000 657 31,903 0.798 C 0.016 Santa Anita Ave Colorado Blvd to Santa Clara St 4 40,000 575 36,091 0.902 D 0.014 Santa Anita Ave Santa Clara St to Huntington Dr 4 40,000 575 28,527 0.713 C 0.014 Santa Anita Ave Huntington Dr to Campus Dr 4 40,000 82 30,867 0.772 C 0.002 *Change relative to the Existing (2019) + Ambient. **Baldwin Avenue has three northbound and two southbound lanes in this segment. Source: City of Arcadia, 2013; Kimley-Horn & Associates, 2013. Santa Anita Inn Redevelopment Place Project TIA April 201861 The City of Arcadia utilizes CMP traffic impact study guidelines that define a significant traffic impact as an increase in demand by at least 2% where the intersection would operate at LOS E or F with project traffic.Table 19 below shows that no intersections will experience a significant impact due to the addition of project traffic. TABLE 19 - SUMMARY OF INTERSECTION ANALYSIS: EXISTING (2019) + AMBIENT + PROJECT LEVEL OF SERVICE Weekday Saturday Intersection AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Impact PM Peak Hour Impact V/C LOS Change* V/C LOS Change* V/C LOS Change* 1 Huntington Dr/Santa Anita Ave 0.835 D 0.016 0.880 D 0.001 NO 0.741 C 0.001 NO 2 Huntington Dr/Santa Clara St 0.909 E 0.013 0.819 D 0.026 NO 0.668 B 0.030 NO 3 Huntington Dr/Colorado Pl 0.608 B 0.010 0.892 D 0.026 NO 0.655 B 0.031 NO 4 Huntington Dr/Holly Ave 0.846 D 0.001 0.607 B 0.002 NO 0.643 B 0.002 NO *Change compared to the Existing (2019) + Ambient. Source: Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc., 2013 Santa Anita Inn Redevelopment Place Project TIA April 201864 PHASE 2: SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS AND RECOMMENDED MITIGATION Per the County of Los Angeles Congestion Management Program (CMP), a ‘significant traffic impact’ is defined as an increase of 0.02 or more in the volume-to-capacity (V/C) ratio at an intersection when the resultant level of service (LOS) is at E or F. The Existing (2019) + Cumulative + Project analysis scenario (Table 20) indicated that the Santa Anita Inn redevelopment project would not have a significant impact on the study intersections due to the addition of project traffic in Phase 2. SITE PLAN AND PARKING ANALYSIS Site Access The site plan, shown in Figures 2 and 3, proposes to redevelop the Santa Anita Inn. The project would include demolition of the existing 106-room Santa Anita Inn and the subsequent installation of new buildings for hotel and residential uses. Phase 2 of the expansion would include a new 96-unit residential condominium and 38,485 square feet of retail. The Phase 2 development includes the addition of a one- way drive-aisle for access to the parking lot and subterranean parking. This configuration should be sufficient to handle the projected traffic generated by condominium residents and visitors. Parking According to the site plan, on-site parking would be provided for residents and visitors. Phase 2 of the development is planned to include the addition of 503 parking spaces via a parking garage, for a total parking supply of 585 spaces for the entire site. Construction Traffic: Phase 2 No construction activities with heavy equipment should occur beyond the normal weekday construction hours of 7 am to 7 pm. These activities would impact adjacent residents and may require after-hour permits. When feasible, materials being delivered to the site during the construction period should be scheduled at times that are not in conflict with peak public use of the roadways so that congestion is limited. The potential impacts of construction traffic on the traffic op erations within the study area will be temporary and are expected to last up to one year. The impacts of construction-related trips (trucks and construction employees) on the street system should be considered negligible since these trips can be scheduled and their frequency increased during off-peak (mid-day) hours. Any required excavation and hauling of material should also be scheduled for the mid-day period in order to reduce the impacts of traffic during construction. The specifics of a work zone traffic control plan, which includes the use of flagmen and lane channelization devices, should be established in accordance wit h City guidelines. Contractor traffic control plans will need to be approved by the City of Arcadia. A flagman should be available at all times when construction activities are occurring to ensure vehicle and pedestrian safety, and they should be used whenever trucks are leaving the project site to prevent the impedance of the flow of traffic. The contractor should ensure the safety of pedestrians by installing a construction fence on the project site Santa Anita Inn Redevelopment Place Project TIA April 201865 perimeter. The contractor should provide an estimate of truck volume and schedule. Areas should be designated by the City for the staging of all trucks. All earth-moving and ready-mix trucks should be equipped with two-way radios so that the drivers at the staging areas are linked to a person controlling traffic at the project site. Trucks should follow a City-approved route to the project site, and recommended streets to utilize include Santa Anita Avenue, Huntington Drive, and Santa Clara Street. Santa Anita Avenue and Huntington Drive provide direct access to the I-210 Freeway. When feasible, materials being delivered to the site should be scheduled with the least inconvenience to the public. Timing of material delivery would be subject to the approval of the City Engineer. The contractor should have a designated employee controlling the logistics of all deliveries. All materials requiring assembly should be accommodated on-site. Santa Anita Inn Redevelopment Place Project TIA April 201866 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS: POST-PHASE 2 Based upon the analysis documented in this report, the following conclusions and recommendations can be made. ƒThe proposed redevelopment of the Santa Anita Inn would include demolition of the existing 106-room Santa Anita Inn and the subsequent installation of new buildings for hotel, residential, and retail uses. Phase 1 of the expansion would include a new 227-room hotel and demolition of the 106 existing hotel rooms. Phase 2 of would include a new 96-unit residential condominium and 38,485 square feet of retail use in the southern portion. The development will also include the addition of parking to accommodate the new buildings. ƒThe trip generation calculations indicate that Phase 2 will result in an additional 1,762 daily trips on a weekday with 71 trips in the AM peak and 150 trips in the PM peak, and 1,801 trips on Saturday including 174 trips during the peak hour. ƒPhase 2 of the redevelopment will not have significant impacts on the study intersections. ƒThe Phase 2 development includes the addition of a one-way drive-aisle for access to the parking lot and subterranean parking. This configuration should be sufficient to handle the projected traffic generated by condominium residents and visitors. ƒConstruction traffic (deliveries, etc.) during Phase 1 and Phase 2 shall be scheduled during off- peak hours to minimize impact on adjacent roadways. Construction is expected to impact the adjacent roadways temporarily (approximately a year per phase). In the immediate project work area, flagmen and lane channelization devices will regulate access and parking during work hours. Santa Anita Inn Redevelopment Place Project TIA March 201867 APPENDIX A: TRAFFIC COUNT SHEETS WILTEC Phone: (626) 564-1944 Fax: (626) 564-0969 24-HOUR ADT COUNT SUMMARY CLIENT: CITY OF ARCADIA PROJECT: ARCADIA ADT TRAFFIC COUNTS LOCATION: FOOTHILL BOULEVARD BETWEEN BALDWIN AVENUE AND SANTA ANITA AVENUE DATE: WEDNESDAY OCTOBER 17, 2012 DIRECTION: EB DIRECTION: WB TIME 00-15 15-30 30-45 45-60 HOUR TIME 00-15 15-30 30-45 45-60 HOUR TOTALS TOTALS 0:00 7 8 7 7 29 0:00 6 11 7 3 27 1:00 8 1 2 5 16 1:00 3 8 6 6 23 2:002231 8 2:001140 6 3:00 0 2 4 6 12 3:00 2 3 4 6 15 4:00 1 7 6 7 21 4:00 5 11 16 23 55 5:00 7 5 7 16 35 5:00 19 18 27 40 104 6:00 22 22 20 33 97 6:00 66 112 128 205 511 7:00 37 48 78 116 279 7:00 249 372 328 378 1327 8:00 161 98 78 101 438 8:00 339 356 360 335 1390 9:00 80 61 81 86 308 9:00 195 172 177 170 714 10:00 87 98 88 87 360 10:00 151 132 124 138 545 11:00 92 101 134 114 441 11:00 106 132 148 128 514 12:00 96 108 138 108 450 12:00 135 110 124 118 487 13:00 118 140 104 122 484 13:00 130 122 120 123 495 14:00 138 138 183 172 631 14:00 120 121 118 155 514 15:00 146 193 204 226 769 15:00 133 138 127 145 543 16:00 192 272 262 245 971 16:00 118 127 116 145 506 17:00 322 330 311 281 1244 17:00 148 138 170 155 611 18:00 311 244 248 174 977 18:00 152 156 127 113 548 19:00 124 115 110 92 441 19:00 94 86 84 64 328 20:00 86 76 81 94 337 20:00 58 58 58 38 212 21:00 77 71 58 46 252 21:00 52 45 39 27 163 22:00 55 42 32 26 155 22:00 33 22 24 23 102 23:00 26 24 15 18 83 23:00 16 8 23 9 56 TOTAL 8838 TOTAL 9796 AM PEAK HOUR 0730-0830 AM PEAK HOUR 0745-0845 VOLUME 453 VOLUME 1433 PM PEAK HOUR 1700-1800 PM PEAK HOUR 1730-1830 VOLUME 1244 VOLUME 633 TOTAL BI-DIRECTIONAL VOLUME 18634 WILTEC Phone: (626) 564-1944 Fax: (626) 564-0969 24-HOUR ADT COUNT SUMMARY CLIENT: CITY OF ARCADIA PROJECT: ARCADIA ADT TRAFFIC COUNTS LOCATION: HUNTINGTON DRIVE BETWEEN BALDWIN AVENUE AND HOLLY DRIVE DATE: WEDNESDAY OCTOBER 17, 2012 DIRECTION: EB DIRECTION: WB TIME 00-15 15-30 30-45 45-60 HOUR TIME 00-15 15-30 30-45 45-60 HOUR TOTALS TOTALS 0:00 38 34 22 22 116 0:00 22 36 16 19 93 1:00 18 11 8 8 45 1:00 14 10 11 6 41 2:00 12 12 9 10 43 2:00 13 10 8 6 37 3:00 8 6 9 9 32 3:00 5 5 4 6 20 4:00 9 5 5 22 41 4:00 8 9 15 18 50 5:00 20 27 31 57 135 5:00 26 32 38 49 145 6:00 23 68 72 136 299 6:00 59 88 110 162 419 7:00 148 206 317 408 1079 7:00 214 238 332 313 1097 8:00 302 192 179 194 867 8:00 348 322 302 292 1264 9:00 220 190 170 182 762 9:00 262 244 242 186 934 10:00 176 184 194 226 780 10:00 211 166 178 196 751 11:00 209 202 200 212 823 11:00 192 212 206 253 863 12:00 199 222 224 241 886 12:00 248 260 211 243 962 13:00 226 234 250 278 988 13:00 214 200 182 210 806 14:00 254 274 309 342 1179 14:00 202 225 204 242 873 15:00 368 327 323 336 1354 15:00 296 242 247 188 973 16:00 315 378 414 425 1532 16:00 234 254 269 261 1018 17:00 432 480 441 453 1806 17:00 278 274 304 274 1130 18:00 422 440 355 348 1565 18:00 256 270 199 256 981 19:00 288 292 240 207 1027 19:00 200 218 201 157 776 20:00 208 180 166 169 723 20:00 152 122 145 117 536 21:00 164 176 122 116 578 21:00 140 124 126 105 495 22:00 98 98 86 64 346 22:00 75 78 54 38 245 23:00 38 55 48 56 197 23:00 37 38 41 26 142 TOTAL 17203 TOTAL 14651 AM PEAK HOUR 0715-0815 AM PEAK HOUR 0730-0830 VOLUME 1233 VOLUME 1315 PM PEAK HOUR 1700-1800 PM PEAK HOUR 1700-1800 VOLUME 1806 VOLUME 1130 TOTAL BI-DIRECTIONAL VOLUME 31854 WILTEC Phone: (626) 564-1944 Fax: (626) 564-0969 24-HOUR ADT COUNT SUMMARY CLIENT: CITY OF ARCADIA PROJECT: ARCADIA ADT TRAFFIC COUNTS LOCATION: HUNTINGTON DRIVE BETWEEN HOLLY DRIVE AND SANTA CLARA STREET DATE: WEDNESDAY OCTOBER 17, 2012 DIRECTION: EB DIRECTION: O TIME 00-15 15-30 30-45 45-60 HOUR TIME 00-15 15-30 30-45 45-60 HOUR TOTALS TOTALS 0:00 16 18 12 12 58 0:00 0 0 0 0 0 1:00 8 8 10 6 32 1:00 0 0 0 0 0 2:00 9 6 5 2 22 2:00 0 0 0 0 0 3:00 1 5 6 5 17 3:00 0 0 0 0 0 4:00 3 6 6 19 34 4:00 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 19 26 30 46 121 5:00 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 40 52 70 138 300 6:00 0 0 0 0 0 7:00 96 141 228 374 839 7:00 0 0 0 0 0 8:00 262 229 184 182 857 8:00 0 0 0 0 0 9:00 179 158 190 134 661 9:00 0 0 0 0 0 10:00 184 139 168 206 697 10:00 0 0 0 0 0 11:00 193 167 168 188 716 11:00 0 0 0 0 0 12:00 170 192 175 184 721 12:00 0 0 0 0 0 13:00 172 194 184 212 762 13:00 0 0 0 0 0 14:00 224 212 207 264 907 14:00 0 0 0 0 0 15:00 281 239 252 223 995 15:00 0 0 0 0 0 16:00 246 236 288 247 1017 16:00 0 0 0 0 0 17:00 269 309 289 269 1136 17:00 0 0 0 0 0 18:00 296 280 244 237 1057 18:00 0 0 0 0 0 19:00 193 196 190 136 715 19:00 0 0 0 0 0 20:00 130 129 113 104 476 20:00 0 0 0 0 0 21:00 118 104 112 65 399 21:00 0 0 0 0 0 22:00 70 65 60 52 247 22:00 0 0 0 0 0 23:00 37 30 38 36 141 23:00 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 12927 TOTAL 0 AM PEAK HOUR 0730-0830 AM PEAK HOUR 0000-0100 VOLUME 1093 VOLUME 0 PM PEAK HOUR 1715-1815 PM PEAK HOUR 1200-1300 VOLUME 1163 VOLUME 0 TOTAL BI-DIRECTIONAL VOLUME 12927 WILTEC Phone: (626) 564-1944 Fax: (626) 564-0969 24-HOUR ADT COUNT SUMMARY CLIENT: CITY OF ARCADIA PROJECT: ARCADIA ADT TRAFFIC COUNTS LOCATION: HUNTINGTON DRIVE BETWEEN HOLLY DRIVE AND COLORADO PLACE DATE: WEDNESDAY OCTOBER 17, 2012 DIRECTION: WB DIRECTION: O TIME 00-15 15-30 30-45 45-60 HOUR TIME 00-15 15-30 30-45 45-60 HOUR TOTALS TOTALS 0:00 19 16 14 10 59 0:00 0 0 0 0 0 1:00 12 12 15 16 55 1:00 0 0 0 0 0 2:00 8 6 10 2 26 2:00 0 0 0 0 0 3:00 4 6 4 8 22 3:00 0 0 0 0 0 4:00 11 3 9 16 39 4:00 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 22 26 44 52 144 5:00 0 0 0 0 0 6:00 68 105 137 176 486 6:00 0 0 0 0 0 7:00 240 280 352 413 1285 7:00 0 0 0 0 0 8:00 418 379 348 322 1467 8:00 0 0 0 0 0 9:00 266 234 246 202 948 9:00 0 0 0 0 0 10:00 240 240 226 228 934 10:00 0 0 0 0 0 11:00 222 220 222 266 930 11:00 0 0 0 0 0 12:00 220 222 219 218 879 12:00 0 0 0 0 0 13:00 223 217 211 275 926 13:00 0 0 0 0 0 14:00 239 243 233 254 969 14:00 0 0 0 0 0 15:00 221 220 230 192 863 15:00 0 0 0 0 0 16:00 202 231 221 207 861 16:00 0 0 0 0 0 17:00 272 268 272 268 1080 17:00 0 0 0 0 0 18:00 225 245 220 206 896 18:00 0 0 0 0 0 19:00 194 205 215 147 761 19:00 0 0 0 0 0 20:00 141 147 138 138 564 20:00 0 0 0 0 0 21:00 117 128 110 106 461 21:00 0 0 0 0 0 22:00 69 72 56 49 246 22:00 0 0 0 0 0 23:00 53 46 42 26 167 23:00 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 15068 TOTAL 0 AM PEAK HOUR 0730-0830 AM PEAK HOUR 0000-0100 VOLUME 1562 VOLUME 0 PM PEAK HOUR 1700-1800 PM PEAK HOUR 1200-1300 VOLUME 1080 VOLUME 0 TOTAL BI-DIRECTIONAL VOLUME 15068 WILTEC Phone: (626) 564-1944 Fax: (626) 564-0969 24-HOUR ADT COUNT SUMMARY CLIENT: CITY OF ARCADIA PROJECT: ARCADIA ADT TRAFFIC COUNTS LOCATION: HUNTINGTON DRIVE BETWEEN SANTA CLARA STREET AND SANTA ANITA AVENUE DATE: WEDNESDAY OCTOBER 17, 2012 DIRECTION: EB DIRECTION: WB TIME 00-15 15-30 30-45 45-60 HOUR TIME 00-15 15-30 30-45 45-60 HOUR TOTALS TOTALS 0:00 21 20 13 10 64 0:00 13 22 23 15 73 1:00 14 8 9 0 31 1:00 8 12 4 4 28 2:00 9 7 5 2 23 2:00 9 1 6 6 22 3:00 2 4 7 5 18 3:00 5 8 3 8 24 4:00 6 8 8 6 28 4:00 8 12 11 16 47 5:00 10 14 21 24 69 5:00 25 30 40 48 143 6:00 24 34 36 58 152 6:00 68 82 143 184 477 7:00 65 68 124 192 449 7:00 244 324 374 372 1314 8:00 184 118 104 106 512 8:00 374 382 344 297 1397 9:00 112 110 126 90 438 9:00 278 220 188 169 855 10:00 103 107 119 142 471 10:00 176 161 150 189 676 11:00 118 151 152 169 590 11:00 140 189 166 172 667 12:00 139 150 134 144 567 12:00 161 150 188 169 668 13:00 142 145 162 166 615 13:00 171 163 170 172 676 14:00 162 167 164 216 709 14:00 165 166 142 163 636 15:00 230 219 261 251 961 15:00 168 187 170 132 657 16:00 259 290 340 387 1276 16:00 154 138 152 156 600 17:00 344 370 383 360 1457 17:00 192 192 214 193 791 18:00 376 310 291 244 1221 18:00 174 201 174 146 695 19:00 164 152 180 136 632 19:00 128 162 148 112 550 20:00 104 111 92 104 411 20:00 102 87 100 86 375 21:00 85 84 76 47 292 21:00 86 91 87 67 331 22:00 53 66 39 34 192 22:00 58 56 46 24 184 23:00 24 30 34 31 119 23:00 32 29 29 18 108 TOTAL 11297 TOTAL 11994 AM PEAK HOUR 0730-0830 AM PEAK HOUR 0730-0830 VOLUME 618 VOLUME 1502 PM PEAK HOUR 1715-1815 PM PEAK HOUR 1700-1800 VOLUME 1489 VOLUME 791 TOTAL BI-DIRECTIONAL VOLUME 23291 WILTEC Phone: (626) 564-1944 Fax: (626) 564-0969 24-HOUR ADT COUNT SUMMARY CLIENT: CITY OF ARCADIA PROJECT: ARCADIA ADT TRAFFIC COUNTS LOCATION: DUARTE ROAD BETWEEN HOLLY DRIVE AND SANTA ANITA AVENUE DATE: WEDNESDAY OCTOBER 17, 2012 DIRECTION: EB DIRECTION: WB TIME 00-15 15-30 30-45 45-60 HOUR TIME 00-15 15-30 30-45 45-60 HOUR TOTALS TOTALS 0:00 36 13 13 10 72 0:00 9 19 10 10 48 1:00 9 4 10 11 34 1:00 5 5 5 10 25 2:00 4 5 5 5 19 2:00 12 3 4 4 23 3:00 4 4 2 7 17 3:00 2 4 4 9 19 4:00 2 3 4 7 16 4:00 4 5 11 12 32 5:00 7 17 9 29 62 5:00 16 17 17 36 86 6:00 22 24 37 59 142 6:00 37 66 83 125 311 7:00 69 100 192 268 629 7:00 180 231 338 365 1114 8:00 163 174 132 126 595 8:00 348 244 236 260 1088 9:00 135 106 92 117 450 9:00 212 180 172 173 737 10:00 114 113 129 148 504 10:00 160 149 151 157 617 11:00 134 118 141 131 524 11:00 146 166 168 131 611 12:00 161 136 162 136 595 12:00 212 149 141 156 658 13:00 159 110 164 154 587 13:00 141 126 162 181 610 14:00 152 145 190 254 741 14:00 168 166 152 236 722 15:00 208 200 211 195 814 15:00 276 236 181 164 857 16:00 208 238 218 262 926 16:00 152 163 217 212 744 17:00 268 290 274 322 1154 17:00 192 211 224 230 857 18:00 294 252 217 196 959 18:00 275 246 214 176 911 19:00 184 160 180 141 665 19:00 149 150 170 125 594 20:00 140 118 107 100 465 20:00 140 109 119 114 482 21:00 128 96 108 87 419 21:00 106 101 134 65 406 22:00 78 58 39 46 221 22:00 72 49 34 29 184 23:00 34 27 32 22 115 23:00 32 26 28 24 110 TOTAL 10725 TOTAL 11846 AM PEAK HOUR 0730-0830 AM PEAK HOUR 0730-0830 VOLUME 797 VOLUME 1295 PM PEAK HOUR 1715-1815 PM PEAK HOUR 1730-1830 VOLUME 1180 VOLUME 975 TOTAL BI-DIRECTIONAL VOLUME 22571 WILTEC Phone: (626) 564-1944 Fax: (626) 564-0969 24-HOUR ADT COUNT SUMMARY CLIENT: CITY OF ARCADIA PROJECT: ARCADIA ADT TRAFFIC COUNTS LOCATION: LIVE OAK AVENUE BETWEEN SANTA ANITA AVENUE AND SECOND AVENUE DATE: WEDNESDAY OCTOBER 17, 2012 DIRECTION: EB DIRECTION: WB TIME 00-15 15-30 30-45 45-60 HOUR TIME 00-15 15-30 30-45 45-60 HOUR TOTALS TOTALS 0:00 24 18 22 10 74 0:00 26 20 12 15 73 1:00 16 16 13 5 50 1:00 11 14 6 14 45 2:00 21 11 9 4 45 2:00 12 4 11 8 35 3:00 4 8 12 11 35 3:00 7 4 6 9 26 4:00 7121126 56 4:0012102035 77 5:00 15 32 37 55 139 5:00 40 44 74 82 240 6:00 45 52 74 94 265 6:00 100 150 210 286 746 7:00 82 126 139 222 569 7:00 312 422 370 390 1494 8:00 234 225 174 182 815 8:00 318 344 292 287 1241 9:00 148 158 134 156 596 9:00 228 203 195 161 787 10:00 132 146 139 140 557 10:00 184 185 162 157 688 11:00 138 162 158 154 612 11:00 136 175 150 147 608 12:00 154 198 184 188 724 12:00 168 154 158 172 652 13:00 202 198 188 234 822 13:00 154 160 162 168 644 14:00 205 206 212 242 865 14:00 156 163 173 182 674 15:00 252 282 282 363 1179 15:00 158 161 183 144 646 16:00 302 356 315 386 1359 16:00 151 169 180 220 720 17:00 340 439 384 404 1567 17:00 245 247 251 310 1053 18:00 364 402 287 268 1321 18:00 256 200 226 166 848 19:00 200 192 159 148 699 19:00 136 140 114 110 500 20:00 160 137 108 149 554 20:00 112 94 102 80 388 21:00 109 96 101 82 388 21:00 90 95 69 57 311 22:00 89 72 42 50 253 22:00 66 47 50 48 211 23:00 42 43 37 27 149 23:00 51 32 32 28 143 TOTAL 13693 TOTAL 12850 AM PEAK HOUR 0745-0845 AM PEAK HOUR 0715-0815 VOLUME 855 VOLUME 1500 PM PEAK HOUR 1715-1815 PM PEAK HOUR 1715-1815 VOLUME 1591 VOLUME 1064 TOTAL BI-DIRECTIONAL VOLUME 26543 WILTEC Phone: (626) 564-1944 Fax: (626) 564-0969 24-HOUR ADT COUNT SUMMARY CLIENT: CITY OF ARCADIA PROJECT: ARCADIA ADT TRAFFIC COUNTS LOCATION: BALDWIN AVENUE BETWEEN COLORADO STREET AND SANTA ANITA MALL DRIVEWAY A DATE: WEDNESDAY OCTOBER 17, 2012 DIRECTION: NB DIRECTION: SB TIME 00-15 15-30 30-45 45-60 HOUR TIME 00-15 15-30 30-45 45-60 HOUR TOTALS TOTALS 0:00 38 40 24 16 118 0:00 28 20 15 20 83 1:00 18 16 12 10 56 1:00 13 12 10 10 45 2:00 12 10 7 5 34 2:00 13 13 13 9 48 3:00 8 7 5 4 24 3:00 14 18 19 26 77 4:00 12 22 21 14 69 4:00 26 54 58 67 205 5:00 28 39 51 58 176 5:00 60 46 79 66 251 6:00 70 70 134 118 392 6:00 70 80 111 128 389 7:00 186 212 242 288 928 7:00 126 140 170 206 642 8:00 252 270 234 181 937 8:00 198 201 168 210 777 9:00 220 188 182 199 789 9:00 170 200 194 222 786 10:00 190 183 204 206 783 10:00 212 224 234 264 934 11:00 220 226 242 254 942 11:00 202 270 256 303 1031 12:00 269 281 241 294 1085 12:00 276 248 250 276 1050 13:00 278 304 271 280 1133 13:00 250 226 240 246 962 14:00 276 292 254 276 1098 14:00 213 226 230 240 909 15:00 280 280 256 262 1078 15:00 232 232 266 254 984 16:00 250 263 270 244 1027 16:00 237 258 246 262 1003 17:00 281 259 266 260 1066 17:00 263 273 297 266 1099 18:00 248 222 210 258 938 18:00 318 283 250 254 1105 19:00 228 210 216 206 860 19:00 258 248 218 183 907 20:00 174 202 170 172 718 20:00 142 146 130 115 533 21:00 247 216 149 150 762 21:00 116 120 82 98 416 22:00 107 90 74 35 306 22:00 92 68 57 48 265 23:00 55 50 33 37 175 23:00 32 42 40 40 154 TOTAL 15494 TOTAL 14655 AM PEAK HOUR 0730-0830 AM PEAK HOUR 1100-1200 VOLUME 1052 VOLUME 1031 PM PEAK HOUR 1245-1345 PM PEAK HOUR 1730-1830 VOLUME 1147 VOLUME 1164 TOTAL BI-DIRECTIONAL VOLUME 30149 WILTEC Phone: (626) 564-1944 Fax: (626) 564-0969 24-HOUR ADT COUNT SUMMARY CLIENT: CITY OF ARCADIA PROJECT: ARCADIA ADT TRAFFIC COUNTS LOCATION: BALDWIN AVENUE BETWEEN SANTA ANITA MALL DRIVEWAY A AND HUNTINGTON DRIVE DATE: WEDNESDAY OCTOBER 17, 2012 DIRECTION: NB DIRECTION: SB TIME 00-15 15-30 30-45 45-60 HOUR TIME 00-15 15-30 30-45 45-60 HOUR TOTALS TOTALS 0:00 28 22 17 15 82 0:00 28 20 17 22 87 1:00 14 14 10 10 48 1:00 18 12 11 9 50 2:00 10 11 11 4 36 2:00 10 11 8 3 32 3:00 12 7 15 15 49 3:00 7 10 8 8 33 4:00 18 32 35 50 135 4:00 7 13 10 10 40 5:00 50 44 66 75 235 5:00 18 23 30 36 107 6:00 75 76 144 154 449 6:00 46 55 72 116 289 7:00 188 204 246 294 932 7:00 112 136 192 218 658 8:00 282 266 244 192 984 8:00 174 193 146 194 707 9:00 210 186 164 228 788 9:00 152 162 177 166 657 10:00 178 194 220 195 787 10:00 162 157 168 196 683 11:00 210 210 183 262 865 11:00 169 186 220 220 795 12:00 218 230 218 267 933 12:00 238 226 200 178 842 13:00 230 253 224 219 926 13:00 188 170 252 209 819 14:00 248 235 224 225 932 14:00 214 196 223 230 863 15:00 277 250 210 246 983 15:00 234 204 221 214 873 16:00 234 208 230 215 887 16:00 224 238 243 246 951 17:00 220 196 251 220 887 17:00 282 284 300 266 1132 18:00 229 189 211 208 837 18:00 266 267 232 236 1001 19:00 224 180 184 162 750 19:00 222 228 214 184 848 20:00 136 135 107 122 500 20:00 182 156 160 146 644 21:00 154 123 92 82 451 21:00 161 148 106 106 521 22:00 55 62 51 29 197 22:00 92 70 65 48 275 23:00 40 32 22 32 126 23:00 36 44 42 38 160 TOTAL 13799 TOTAL 13067 AM PEAK HOUR 0730-0830 AM PEAK HOUR 1100-1200 VOLUME 1088 VOLUME 795 PM PEAK HOUR 1500-1600 PM PEAK HOUR 1700-1800 VOLUME 983 VOLUME 1132 TOTAL BI-DIRECTIONAL VOLUME 26866 WILTEC Phone: (626) 564-1944 Fax: (626) 564-0969 24-HOUR ADT COUNT SUMMARY CLIENT: CITY OF ARCADIA PROJECT: ARCADIA ADT TRAFFIC COUNTS LOCATION: SANTA ANITA AVENUE BETWEEN FOOTHILL BOULEVARD AND I-210 WESTBOUND RAMPS DATE: WEDNESDAY OCTOBER 17, 2012 DIRECTION: NB DIRECTION: SB TIME 00-15 15-30 30-45 45-60 HOUR TIME 00-15 15-30 30-45 45-60 HOUR TOTALS TOTALS 0:00 26 25 25 22 98 0:00 10 13 10 6 39 1:00 13 8 6 9 36 1:00 8 4 10 8 30 2:00 5 11 5 8 29 2:00 4 5 2 3 14 3:00 5 9 10 10 34 3:00 5 10 4 7 26 4:00 7 9 14 11 41 4:00 13 14 17 24 68 5:00 18 20 20 43 101 5:00 54 63 73 117 307 6:00 53 78 77 108 316 6:00 120 152 186 186 644 7:00 138 180 232 314 864 7:00 210 267 346 280 1103 8:00 328 262 220 213 1023 8:00 250 259 240 226 975 9:00 194 178 172 189 733 9:00 216 200 191 206 813 10:00 189 176 172 176 713 10:00 198 206 208 205 817 11:00 185 216 173 150 724 11:00 200 213 211 174 798 12:00 176 180 188 190 734 12:00 168 185 184 173 710 13:00 219 218 190 187 814 13:00 188 184 185 160 717 14:00 181 194 216 190 781 14:00 196 216 212 284 908 15:00 248 230 220 194 892 15:00 220 190 210 203 823 16:00 177 186 210 222 795 16:00 236 242 228 242 948 17:00 218 219 222 249 908 17:00 258 235 203 254 950 18:00 267 234 200 226 927 18:00 228 218 206 175 827 19:00 226 167 201 174 768 19:00 178 163 117 106 564 20:00 148 138 123 142 551 20:00 110 105 100 84 399 21:00 156 135 140 108 539 21:00 96 78 74 62 310 22:00 90 72 74 66 302 22:00 61 58 40 39 198 23:00 40 48 43 27 158 23:00 30 37 22 12 101 TOTAL 12881 TOTAL 13089 AM PEAK HOUR 0730-0830 AM PEAK HOUR 0715-0815 VOLUME 1136 VOLUME 1143 PM PEAK HOUR 1730-1830 PM PEAK HOUR 1615-1715 VOLUME 972 VOLUME 970 TOTAL BI-DIRECTIONAL VOLUME 25970 WILTEC Phone: (626) 564-1944 Fax: (626) 564-0969 24-HOUR ADT COUNT SUMMARY CLIENT: CITY OF ARCADIA PROJECT: ARCADIA ADT TRAFFIC COUNTS LOCATION: SANTA ANITA AVENUE BETWEEN COLORADO BOULEVARD AND SANTA CLARA STREET DATE: WEDNESDAY OCTOBER 17, 2012 DIRECTION: NB DIRECTION: SB TIME 00-15 15-30 30-45 45-60 HOUR TIME 00-15 15-30 30-45 45-60 HOUR TOTALS TOTALS 0:00 23 26 18 19 86 0:00 18 22 13 12 65 1:00 9 9 3 7 28 1:00 7 14 6 12 39 2:00 21 10 11 12 54 2:00 10 7 4 6 27 3:00 4 14 9 10 37 3:00 5 9 6 5 25 4:00 13 8 22 30 73 4:00 10 14 20 19 63 5:00 36 50 67 74 227 5:00 30 34 62 82 208 6:00 86 119 162 168 535 6:00 76 123 106 160 465 7:00 178 252 252 330 1012 7:00 148 210 270 288 916 8:00 279 288 223 184 974 8:00 246 227 240 257 970 9:00 207 204 194 222 827 9:00 204 190 174 220 788 10:00 178 189 185 211 763 10:00 238 231 198 245 912 11:00 208 206 192 186 792 11:00 218 214 234 226 892 12:00 242 200 237 190 869 12:00 203 198 224 219 844 13:00 238 230 203 240 911 13:00 222 214 242 220 898 14:00 238 246 230 254 968 14:00 208 208 222 314 952 15:00 304 296 248 233 1081 15:00 217 185 218 248 868 16:00 204 228 254 254 940 16:00 210 240 256 254 960 17:00 266 236 292 228 1022 17:00 272 254 266 280 1072 18:00 295 234 206 221 956 18:00 277 266 242 282 1067 19:00 224 192 235 195 846 19:00 222 242 208 179 851 20:00 178 164 128 154 624 20:00 154 150 140 156 600 21:00 186 163 149 105 603 21:00 112 130 120 102 464 22:00 81 78 64 56 279 22:00 71 78 56 48 253 23:00 52 56 46 45 199 23:00 57 35 32 29 153 TOTAL 14706 TOTAL 14352 AM PEAK HOUR 0730-0830 AM PEAK HOUR 0730-0830 VOLUME 1149 VOLUME 1031 PM PEAK HOUR 1445-1545 PM PEAK HOUR 1730-1830 VOLUME 1102 VOLUME 1089 TOTAL BI-DIRECTIONAL VOLUME 29058 WILTEC Phone: (626) 564-1944 Fax: (626) 564-0969 24-HOUR ADT COUNT SUMMARY CLIENT: CITY OF ARCADIA PROJECT: ARCADIA ADT TRAFFIC COUNTS LOCATION: SANTA ANITA AVENUE BETWEEN SANTA CLARA STREET AND HUNTINGTON DRIVE DATE: WEDNESDAY OCTOBER 17, 2012 DIRECTION: NB DIRECTION: SB TIME 00-15 15-30 30-45 45-60 HOUR TIME 00-15 15-30 30-45 45-60 HOUR TOTALS TOTALS 0:00 14 20 12 15 61 0:00 22 20 18 11 71 1:00 8 10 5 6 29 1:00 10 12 6 16 44 2:00 15 8 4 8 35 2:00 10 8 4 6 28 3:00 3 13 7 9 32 3:00 5 6 5 2 18 4:00 8 8 24 34 74 4:00 4 14 10 11 39 5:00 37 45 68 73 223 5:00 16 22 31 45 114 6:00 82 114 144 155 495 6:00 56 68 60 93 277 7:00 162 230 212 236 840 7:00 108 162 213 236 719 8:00 234 254 204 140 832 8:00 179 167 170 170 686 9:00 184 168 172 178 702 9:00 164 132 123 174 593 10:00 138 160 136 178 612 10:00 162 187 146 157 652 11:00 152 178 148 138 616 11:00 164 170 186 168 688 12:00 180 156 188 164 688 12:00 164 170 164 166 664 13:00 174 194 168 194 730 13:00 156 175 174 158 663 14:00 180 184 177 183 724 14:00 154 140 193 241 728 15:00 239 228 196 177 840 15:00 210 148 173 190 721 16:00 149 165 190 208 712 16:00 192 190 204 203 789 17:00 190 194 188 186 758 17:00 256 170 218 230 874 18:00 236 200 156 168 760 18:00 216 208 184 208 816 19:00 146 156 142 135 579 19:00 172 224 202 133 731 20:00 144 114 94 113 465 20:00 124 124 116 154 518 21:00 129 104 108 74 415 21:00 101 109 108 100 418 22:00 56 62 35 44 197 22:00 66 64 56 46 232 23:00 38 36 25 31 130 23:00 48 32 27 30 137 TOTAL 11549 TOTAL 11220 AM PEAK HOUR 0730-0830 AM PEAK HOUR 0730-0830 VOLUME 936 VOLUME 795 PM PEAK HOUR 1445-1545 PM PEAK HOUR 1700-1800 VOLUME 846 VOLUME 874 TOTAL BI-DIRECTIONAL VOLUME 22769 WILTEC Phone: (626) 564-1944 Fax: (626) 564-0969 24-HOUR ADT COUNT SUMMARY CLIENT: CITY OF ARCADIA PROJECT: ARCADIA ADT TRAFFIC COUNTS LOCATION: SANTA ANITA AVENUE BETWEEN HUNTINGTON DRIVE AND CAMPUS DRIVE DATE: WEDNESDAY OCTOBER 17, 2012 DIRECTION: NB DIRECTION: SB TIME 00-15 15-30 30-45 45-60 HOUR TIME 00-15 15-30 30-45 45-60 HOUR TOTALS TOTALS 0:00 20 16 14 15 65 0:00 26 30 18 14 88 1:00 9 4 2 4 19 1:00 12 12 8 10 42 2:00 13 10 6 10 39 2:00 16 8 5 9 38 3:00 2 14 7 8 31 3:00 3 6 8 4 21 4:00 5 12 24 34 75 4:00 5 16 8 16 45 5:00 34 38 70 76 218 5:00 16 20 32 33 101 6:00 90 130 140 195 555 6:00 46 62 54 94 256 7:00 220 306 324 354 1204 7:00 104 140 263 257 764 8:00 358 312 277 200 1147 8:00 204 155 164 158 681 9:00 253 214 206 194 867 9:00 163 124 134 142 563 10:00 172 196 155 202 725 10:00 165 136 166 144 611 11:00 174 190 154 152 670 11:00 146 152 162 146 606 12:00 204 174 191 156 725 12:00 146 156 151 160 613 13:00 199 200 182 202 783 13:00 154 170 184 137 645 14:00 212 182 212 288 894 14:00 156 143 208 260 767 15:00 318 289 248 193 1048 15:00 218 189 193 204 804 16:00 180 202 220 232 834 16:00 216 230 237 256 939 17:00 238 233 246 255 972 17:00 288 242 266 271 1067 18:00 304 246 196 182 928 18:00 286 250 250 218 1004 19:00 192 177 185 164 718 19:00 202 210 204 168 784 20:00 152 134 101 122 509 20:00 148 128 126 158 560 21:00 142 114 114 83 453 21:00 112 128 106 106 452 22:00 61 73 46 40 220 22:00 84 76 44 45 249 23:00 31 33 21 32 117 23:00 50 38 34 32 154 TOTAL 13816 TOTAL 11854 AM PEAK HOUR 0730-0830 AM PEAK HOUR 0730-0830 VOLUME 1348 VOLUME 879 PM PEAK HOUR 1445-1545 PM PEAK HOUR 1730-1830 VOLUME 1143 VOLUME 1073 TOTAL BI-DIRECTIONAL VOLUME 25670 WILTEC Phone: (626) 564-1944 Fax: (626) 564-0969 Email: info@wiltecusa.com 5-LEG INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNT SUMMARY CLIENT: CITY OF ARCADIA PROJECT: ARCADIA TRAFFIC COUNTS DATE: THURSDAY SEPTEMBER 6, 2012 PERIOD: 7:00 AM TO 9:00 AM INTERSECTION: N/S HOLLY AVENUE/TRACK DRIVEWAY E/W HUNTINGTON DRIVE/CAMPUS DRIVE 15 MIN COUNTS PERIOD ABCDEFGH I JKLMNOPQRSTUVTOTALS 700-715 0 0 0 0 0 156 13 7 0 14 0 40 8 4 19 0 46 6 28 77 0 12 430 715-730 0 0 0 0 0 149 26 18 0 19 0 39 11 7 23 0 40 13 91 122 0 4 562 730-745 1 0 1 0 0 207 40 43 0 43 0 39 16 18 30 0 63 9 153 109 0 0 772 745-800 0 3 0 1 1 233 59 32 0 96 0 82 35 23 43 0 52 25 135 162 0 0 982 800-815 0 0 0 0 0 204 50 8 1 31 0 98 43 10 60 0 58 21 69 134 0 2 789 815-830 0 2 0 0 0 200 28 5 1 48 1 84 14 15 42 1 60 13 61 172 0 5 752 830-845 10110202325410025462905252313304 537 845-900 0 0 0 0 0 201 28 5 0 18 0 51 4 7 27 0 33 13 32 139 0 5 563 HOUR TOTALS PERIOD ABCDEFGH I JKLMNOPQRSTUVTOTALS 700-800 1 3 1 1 1 745 138 100 0 172 0 200 70 52 115 0 201 53 407 470 0 16 2746 715-815 1 3 1 1 1 793 175 101 1 189 0 258 105 58 156 0 213 68 448 527 0 6 3105 730-830 1 5 1 1 1 844 177 88 2 218 1 303 108 66 175 1 233 68 418 577 0 7 3295 745-845 1 5 1 2 1 839 169 50 6 185 1 289 96 54 174 1 222 64 288 601 0 11 3060 800-900 1 2 1 1 0 807 138 23 6 107 1 258 65 38 158 1 203 52 185 578 0 16 2641 SB SANTA ANITA TRACK WB HUNTINGTON DRIVE WB CAMPUS DRIVE NB HOLLY AVENUE EB CAMPUS/HUNTINGTON SB SANTA ANITA TRACK WB HUNTINGTON DRIVE WB CAMPUS DRIVE NB HOLLY AVENUE EB CAMPUS/HUNTINGTON WILTEC Phone: (626) 564-1944 Fax: (626) 564-0969 Email: info@wiltecusa.com 5-LEG INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNT SUMMARY CLIENT: CITY OF ARCADIA PROJECT: ARCADIA TRAFFIC COUNTS DATE: THURSDAY SEPTEMBER 6, 2012 PERIOD: 4:00 PM TO 6:00 PM INTERSECTION: N/S HOLLY AVENUE/TRACK DRIVEWAY E/W HUNTINGTON DRIVE/CAMPUS DRIVE 15 MIN COUNTS PERIOD ABCDEFGH I JKLMNOPQRSTUVTOTALS 400-415 0 0 0 0 0 172 46 13 4 12 0 23 5 4 15 0 25 39 118 237 0 5 718 415-430 3 0 0 0 0 205 38 8 4 16 0 32 1 1 33 0 20 42 170 268 0 4 845 430-445 0 1 0 0 0 157 40 12 6 13 1 47 8 1 20 0 24 34 132 216 0 4 716 445-500 3 0 0 0 0 195 42 19 2 8 0 37 4 8 20 0 14 45 143 259 0 3 802 500-515 1 0 0 0 0 254 49 18 2 11 0 33 15 2 21 0 23 56 145 253 0 2 885 515-530 1 0 1 0 0 216 43 13 3 11 0 24 6 4 23 0 15 60 172 240 0 1 833 530-545 0 0 1 0 0 224 39 7 4 13 0 35 7 7 5 0 39 54 172 269 0 2 878 545-600 1 0 0 0 0 202 24 7 0 9 0 39 5 3 10 0 21 37 168 239 0 8 773 HOUR TOTALS PERIOD ABCDEFGH I JKLMNOPQRSTUVTOTALS 400-500 6 1 0 0 0 729 166 52 16 49 1 139 18 14 88 0 83 160 563 980 0 16 3081 415-500 7 1 0 0 0 811 169 57 14 48 1 149 28 12 94 0 81 177 590 996 0 13 3248 430-530 5 1 1 0 0 822 174 62 13 43 1 141 33 15 84 0 76 195 592 968 0 10 3236 445-545 5 0 2 0 0 889 173 57 11 43 0 129 32 21 69 0 91 215 632 1021 0 8 3398 500-600 3 0 2 0 0 896 155 45 9 44 0 131 33 16 59 0 98 207 657 1001 0 13 3369 EB CAMPUS/HUNTINGTON WB HUNTINGTON DRIVE WB CAMPUS DRIVE NB HOLLY AVENUE EB CAMPUS/HUNTINGTON SB SANTA ANITA TRACK SB SANTA ANITA TRACK WB HUNTINGTON DRIVE WB CAMPUS DRIVE NB HOLLY AVENUE WILTEC Phone: (626) 564-1944 Fax: (626) 564-0969 INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNT SUMMARY CLIENT: CITY OF ARCADIA PROJECT: ARCADIA TRAFFIC COUNTS DATE: THURSDAY SEPTEMBER 6TH, 2012 PERIODS: 7:00 AM TO 9:00 AM AND 4:00 PM TO 6:00 PM INTERSECTION: N/S BALDWIN AVENUE E/W HUNTINGTON DRIVE 15 MIN COUNTS 7:00 AM TO 9:00 AM 123456789101112 PERIOD SBRT SBTH SBLT WBRT WBTH WBLT NBRT NBTH NBLT EBRT EBTH EBLT TOTAL AM PEAK HOUR 700-715 16 74 16 29 205 16 20 116 32 18 81 22 645 730-830 184 715-730 17 59 45 44 219 14 30 153 55 13 125 37 811 730-745 26 84 66 49 246 22 37 176 54 24 214 51 1049 118 421 172 1026 745-800 25 129 68 45 232 29 59 187 59 38 181 48 1100 800-815 29 104 14 53 293 38 39 176 78 24 150 67 1065 112 815-830 38 104 24 37 255 23 46 188 74 25 124 36 974 830-845 38 90 32 40 244 27 41 147 55 29 133 45 921 845-900 26 110 22 30 215 28 46 141 66 42 141 35 902 202 HOUR TOTALS 123456789101112 HUNTINGTON D 669 265 727 181 TIME SBRT SBTH SBLT WBRT WBTH WBLT NBRT NBTH NBLT EBRT EBTH EBLT TOTAL 700-800 84 346 195 167 902 81 146 632 200 93 601 158 3605 111 715-815 97 376 193 191 990 103 165 692 246 99 670 203 4025 BALDWIN AVENUE 730-830 118 421 172 184 1026 112 181 727 265 111 669 202 4188 745-845 130 427 138 175 1024 117 185 698 266 116 588 196 4060 800-900 131 408 92 160 1007 116 172 652 273 120 548 183 3862 15 MIN COUNTS 4:00 PM TO 6:00 PM 123456789101112 PERIOD SBRT SBTH SBLT WBRT WBTH WBLT NBRT NBTH NBLT EBRT EBTH EBLT TOTAL PM PEAK HOUR 400-415 44 132 55 48 135 59 51 101 51 47 307 66 1096 500-600 120 415-430 52 150 41 36 160 70 63 131 32 61 343 58 1197 430-445 42 154 57 40 179 54 49 102 34 71 315 41 1138 150 595 207 728 445-500 50 115 42 33 177 58 66 130 39 58 351 61 1180 500-515 41 128 46 33 179 69 58 107 45 85 364 51 1206 301 515-530 44 143 50 20 177 77 68 115 40 88 389 76 1287 530-545 32 144 61 41 198 94 61 133 46 91 377 48 1326 545-600 33 180 50 26 174 61 63 139 39 103 398 76 1342 251 HOUR TOTALS 123456789101112 HUNTINGTON D 1528 170 494 250 TIME SBRT SBTH SBLT WBRT WBTH WBLT NBRT NBTH NBLT EBRT EBTH EBLT TOTAL 400-500 188 551 195 157 651 241 229 464 156 237 1316 226 4611 367 415-515 185 547 186 142 695 251 236 470 150 275 1373 211 4721 BALDWIN AVENUE 430-530 177 540 195 126 712 258 241 454 158 302 1419 229 4811 445-545 167 530 199 127 731 298 253 485 170 322 1481 236 4999 500-600 150 595 207 120 728 301 250 494 170 367 1528 251 5161 WILTEC Phone: (626) 564-1944 Fax: (626) 564-0969 INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNT SUMMARY CLIENT: CITY OF ARCADIA PROJECT: ARCADIA TRAFFIC COUNTS DATE: THURSDAY SEPTEMBER 6TH, 2012 PERIODS: 7:00 AM TO 9:00 AM AND 4:00 PM TO 6:00 PM INTERSECTION: N/S SANTA ANITA AVENUE E/W SANTA CLARA STREET 15 MIN COUNTS 7:00 AM TO 9:00 AM 123456789101112 PERIOD SBRT SBTH SBLT WBRT WBTH WBLT NBRT NBTH NBLT EBRT EBTH EBLT TOTAL AM PEAK HOUR 700-715 58 93 8 10 38 11 8 185 7 1 12 25 456 730-830 64 715-730 48 160 8 17 78 12 8 194 3 4 17 20 569 730-745 61 177 9 14 76 21 10 234 5 3 31 59 700 279 614 80 295 745-800 83 165 23 20 83 14 19 210 13 1 30 81 742 800-815 67 121 30 14 47 11 12 218 8 6 35 50 619 62 815-830 6815118168916 822319102553696 830-845 57 147 22 17 57 9 9 200 17 7 30 44 616 845-900 57 150 26 18 40 16 13 181 8 4 20 23 556 243 HOUR TOTALS 123456789101112 SANTA CLARA S 121 45 885 49 TIME SBRT SBTH SBLT WBRT WBTH WBLT NBRT NBTH NBLT EBRT EBTH EBLT TOTAL 700-800 250 595 48 61 275 58 45 823 28 9 90 185 2467 20 715-815 259 623 70 65 284 58 49 856 29 14 113 210 2630 SANTA ANITA AVENUE 730-830 279 614 80 64 295 62 49 885 45 20 121 243 2757 745-845 275 584 93 67 276 50 48 851 57 24 120 228 2673 800-900 249 569 96 65 233 52 42 822 52 27 110 170 2487 15 MIN COUNTS 4:00 PM TO 6:00 PM 123456789101112 PERIOD SBRT SBTH SBLT WBRT WBTH WBLT NBRT NBTH NBLT EBRT EBTH EBLT TOTAL PM PEAK HOUR 400-415 411273014392216132 5115263552 415-515 87 415-430 37 183 38 17 33 16 30 156 5 9 63 77 664 430-445 471573824311418142 2106487634 174667145 129 445-500 511813519251113159 4105982649 500-515 391463427402023174 2136289669 61 515-530 391743522301519186 4126160657 530-545 43 155 33 19 27 10 14 181 2 5 33 58 580 545-600 351733621361742168 4113145619 335 HOUR TOTALS 123456789101112 SANTA CLARA S 248 13 631 84 TIME SBRT SBTH SBLT WBRT WBTH WBLT NBRT NBTH NBLT EBRT EBTH EBLT TOTAL 400-500 176 648 141 74 128 63 77 589 16 40 238 309 2499 42 415-515 174 667 145 87 129 61 84 631 13 42 248 335 2616 SANTA ANITA AVENUE 430-530 176 658 142 92 126 60 73 661 12 45 246 318 2609 445-545 172 656 137 87 122 56 69 700 12 40 215 289 2555 500-600 156 648 138 89 133 62 98 709 12 41 187 252 2525 WILTEC Phone: (626) 564-1944 Fax: (626) 564-0969 INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNT SUMMARY CLIENT: CITY OF ARCADIA PROJECT: ARCADIA TRAFFIC COUNTS DATE: THURSDAY SEPTEMBER 6TH, 2012 PERIODS: 7:00 AM TO 9:00 AM AND 4:00 PM TO 6:00 PM INTERSECTION: N/S SANTA ANITA AVENUE E/W COLORADO BOULEVARD 15 MIN COUNTS 7:00 AM TO 9:00 AM 123456789101112 PERIOD SBRT SBTH SBLT WBRT WBTH WBLT NBRT NBTH NBLT EBRT EBTH EBLT TOTAL AM PEAK HOUR 700-715 22 179 8 45 44 21 5 223 15 3 8 9 582 730-830 220 715-730 31 197 11 46 82 16 6 229 20 6 11 13 668 730-745 21 266 10 59 120 25 12 253 31 8 12 19 836 133 946 79 471 745-800 27 233 32 54 111 27 22 271 34 24 45 33 913 800-815 37 224 21 54 124 16 17 236 37 13 44 15 838 89 815-830 48 223 16 53 116 21 11 260 35 6 23 11 823 830-845 44 244 18 37 113 19 10 212 35 7 14 9 762 845-900 4222120369016 620738132914732 78 HOUR TOTALS 123456789101112 COLORADO BOU 124 137 1020 62 TIME SBRT SBTH SBLT WBRT WBTH WBLT NBRT NBTH NBLT EBRT EBTH EBLT TOTAL 700-800 101 875 61 204 357 89 45 976 100 41 76 74 2999 51 715-815 116 920 74 213 437 84 57 989 122 51 112 80 3255 SANTA ANITA AVENUE 730-830 133 946 79 220 471 89 62 1020 137 51 124 78 3410 745-845 156 924 87 198 464 83 60 979 141 50 126 68 3336 800-900 171 912 75 180 443 72 44 915 145 39 110 49 3155 15 MIN COUNTS 4:00 PM TO 6:00 PM 123456789101112 PERIOD SBRT SBTH SBLT WBRT WBTH WBLT NBRT NBTH NBLT EBRT EBTH EBLT TOTAL PM PEAK HOUR 400-415 16 190 17 29 26 9 17 207 12 37 129 23 712 500-600 180 415-430 8 200 21 25 18 14 22 224 8 35 136 30 741 430-445 9 192 31 43 23 15 27 223 11 37 128 25 764 68 830 102 102 445-500 14 208 22 38 23 13 23 244 15 45 145 26 816 500-515 16 203 26 42 26 12 26 232 15 35 134 29 796 52 515-530 22 197 18 41 26 9 20 261 10 27 159 20 810 530-545 112212656191332261 63013922836 545-600 192093241311825237 84115033844 104 HOUR TOTALS 123456789101112 COLORADO BOU 582 39 991 103 TIME SBRT SBTH SBLT WBRT WBTH WBLT NBRT NBTH NBLT EBRT EBTH EBLT TOTAL 400-500 47 790 91 135 90 51 89 898 46 154 538 104 3033 133 415-515 47 803 100 148 90 54 98 923 49 152 543 110 3117 SANTA ANITA AVENUE 430-530 61 800 97 164 98 49 96 960 51 144 566 100 3186 445-545 63 829 92 177 94 47 101 998 46 137 577 97 3258 500-600 68 830 102 180 102 52 103 991 39 133 582 104 3286 WILTEC Phone: (626) 564-1944 Fax: (626) 564-0969 INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNT SUMMARY CLIENT: CITY OF ARCADIA PROJECT: ARCADIA TRAFFIC COUNTS DATE: THURSDAY SEPTEMBER 6TH, 2012 PERIODS: 7:00 AM TO 9:00 AM AND 4:00 PM TO 6:00 PM INTERSECTION: N/S SANTA ANITA AVENUE E/W I-210 EB RAMPS 15 MIN COUNTS 7:00 AM TO 9:00 AM 123456789101112 PERIOD SBRT SBTH SBLT WBRT WBTH WBLT NBRT NBTH NBLT EBRT EBTH EBLT TOTAL AM PEAK HOUR 700-715 01284600043232083030562 730-830 0 715-730 01574000045248089030609 730-745 019357000682730116034741 0674263 0 745-800 015559000622900138059763 800-815 015871000642580116165733 0 815-830 016876000512570125152730 830-845 018453000512370122060707 845-900 014738000512020122149610 210 HOUR TOTALS 123456789101112 I-210 EB RAMPS 2 0 1078 245 TIME SBRT SBTH SBLT WBRT WBTH WBLT NBRT NBTH NBLT EBRT EBTH EBLT TOTAL 700-800 06332020002181043042601532675 495 715-815 06632270002391069045911882846 SANTAANITAAVENUE 730-830 0 674 263 0 0 0 245 1078 0 495 2 210 2967 745-845 0 665 259 0 0 0 228 1042 0 501 2 236 2933 800-900 0 657 238 0 0 0 217 954 0 485 3 226 2780 15 MIN COUNTS 4:00 PM TO 6:00 PM 123456789101112 PERIOD SBRT SBTH SBLT WBRT WBTH WBLT NBRT NBTH NBLT EBRT EBTH EBLT TOTAL PM PEAK HOUR 400-415 01655200067211047528575 500-600 0 415-430 016954000712350471231619 430-445 01724300074241047829614 0779184 0 445-500 02185200060229049524637 500-515 018540000762570421428642 0 515-530 02085600064276060849721 530-545 017239000752840561631673 545-600 021449000492440552142674 150 HOUR TOTALS 123456789101112 I-210 EB RAMPS 59 0 1061 264 TIME SBRT SBTH SBLT WBRT WBTH WBLT NBRT NBTH NBLT EBRT EBTH EBLT TOTAL 400-500 07242010002729160190301122445 213 415-515 07441890002819620185391122512 SANTAANITAAVENUE 430-530 0 783 191 0 0 0 274 1003 0 198 35 130 2614 445-545 0 783 187 0 0 0 275 1046 0 207 43 132 2673 500-600 0 779 184 0 0 0 264 1061 0 213 59 150 2710 WILTEC Phone: (626) 564-1944 Fax: (626) 564-0969 INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNT SUMMARY CLIENT: CITY OF ARCADIA PROJECT: ARCADIA TRAFFIC COUNTS DATE: THURSDAY SEPTEMBER 6TH, 2012 PERIODS: 7:00 AM TO 9:00 AM AND 4:00 PM TO 6:00 PM INTERSECTION: N/S SANTA ANITA AVENUE E/W I-210 WB RAMPS 15 MIN COUNTS 7:00 AM TO 9:00 AM 123456789101112 PERIOD SBRT SBTH SBLT WBRT WBTH WBLT NBRT NBTH NBLT EBRT EBTH EBLT TOTAL AM PEAK HOUR 700-715 134 119 0 33 0 51 165 116 0 0 0 0 618 730-830 266 715-730 154 157 0 54 1 39 147 129 0 0 0 0 681 730-745 126 203 0 62 0 38 143 160 0 0 0 0 732 409 748 0 19 745-800 951780537401321960000701 800-815 103 158 0 62 6 46 110 241 0 0 0 0 726 178 815-830 85 209 0 89 6 54 127 190 0 0 0 0 760 830-845 91 164 0 80 15 56 113 177 0 0 0 0 696 845-900 79 161 0 70 8 46 97 151 0 0 0 0 612 0 HOUR TOTALS 123456789101112 I-210 WB RAMPS 00787512 TIME SBRT SBTH SBLT WBRT WBTH WBLT NBRT NBTH NBLT EBRT EBTH EBLT TOTAL 700-800 5096570202816858760100002732 0 715-815 478 696 0 231 14 163 532 726 0 0 0 0 2840 SANTA ANITA AVENUE 730-830 40974802661917851278700002919 745-845 37470902843419648280400002883 800-900 35869203013520244775900002794 15 MIN COUNTS 4:00 PM TO 6:00 PM 123456789101112 PERIOD SBRT SBTH SBLT WBRT WBTH WBLT NBRT NBTH NBLT EBRT EBTH EBLT TOTAL PM PEAK HOUR 400-415 59 175 0 42 0 48 102 129 0 0 0 0 555 500-600 288 415-430 48 183 0 39 0 58 100 134 0 0 0 0 562 430-445 55 168 0 54 0 68 137 148 0 0 0 0 630 233 722 0 22 445-500 46 192 0 60 1 70 115 145 0 0 0 0 629 500-515 73 171 0 86 5 72 130 137 0 0 0 0 674 279 515-530 66 171 0 62 11 77 157 158 0 0 0 0 702 530-545 48 185 0 75 6 58 131 183 1 0 0 0 687 545-600 46 195 0 65 0 72 116 171 1 0 0 0 666 0 HOUR TOTALS 123456789101112 I-210 WB RAMPS 02649534 TIME SBRT SBTH SBLT WBRT WBTH WBLT NBRT NBTH NBLT EBRT EBTH EBLT TOTAL 400-500 2087180195124445455600002376 0 415-515 2227140239626848256400002495 SANTAANITAAVENUE 430-530 24070202621728753958800002635 445-545 23371902832327753362310002692 500-600 23372202882227953464920002729 WILTEC Phone: (626) 564-1944 Fax: (626) 564-1944 E-mail: info@wiltecusa.com INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNT SUMMARY CLIENT: CITY OF ARCADIA PROJECT: ARCADIA TRAFFIC COUNTS DATE: WEDNESDAY OCTOBER 10, 2012 PERIODS: 7:00 AM TO 9:00 AM AND 4:00 PM TO 6:00 PM INTERSECTION: N/S SECOND AVENUE E/W HUNTINGTON DRIVE CITY: ARCADIA 15 MIN COUNTS 7:00 AM TO 9:00 AM 123456789101112 PERIOD SBRT SBTH SBLT WBRT WBTH WBLT NBRT NBTH NBLT EBRT EBTH EBLT TOTAL PEAK HOUR 700-715 19 56 23 4 56 6 4 16 14 9 207 15 429 730-830 45 715-730 33 67 28 3 65 3 7 40 25 16 263 14 564 730-745 54 101 39 4 90 9 12 55 18 21 274 28 705 217 412 126 461 745-800 55 120 28 16 120 9 7 63 13 24 264 23 742 800-815 64 126 31 13 124 10 12 39 19 16 232 26 712 35 815-830 44 65 28 12 127 7 4 48 16 17 264 18 650 830-845 44 61 21 5 119 8 12 32 11 17 241 32 603 845-900 55 82 23 6 107 3 6 40 9 10 217 36 594 95 HOUR TOTALS 123456789101112 HUNTINGTON D 1034 66 205 35 TIME SBRT SBTH SBLT WBRT WBTH WBLT NBRT NBTH NBLT EBRT EBTH EBLT TOTAL 700-800 161 344 118 27 331 27 30 174 70 70 1008 80 2440 78 715-815 206 414 126 36 399 31 38 197 75 77 1033 91 2723 SECOND AVENUE 730-830 217 412 126 45 461 35 35 205 66 78 1034 95 2809 745-845 207 372 108 46 490 34 35 182 59 74 1001 99 2707 800-900 207 334 103 36 477 28 34 159 55 60 954 112 2559 15 MIN COUNTS 4:00 PM TO 6:00 PM 123456789101112 PERIOD SBRT SBTH SBLT WBRT WBTH WBLT NBRT NBTH NBLT EBRT EBTH EBLT TOTAL PEAK HOUR 400-415 43 38 11 9 162 7 9 58 11 10 151 37 546 500-600 75 415-430 49 51 10 9 212 8 10 45 29 14 148 41 626 430-445 3156 82529410 965241513749723 17820748 1207 445-500 35 41 6 21 252 10 6 60 10 17 161 51 670 500-515 37 53 12 18 284 10 13 67 24 19 177 52 766 47 515-530 42 54 10 22 316 14 11 41 14 13 192 55 784 530-545 48 54 11 23 305 9 11 70 20 11 146 51 759 545-600 51 46 15 12 302 14 11 62 14 17 155 50 749 208 HOUR TOTALS 123456789101112 HUNTINGTON D 670 72 240 46 TIME SBRT SBTH SBLT WBRT WBTH WBLT NBRT NBTH NBLT EBRT EBTH EBLT TOTAL 400-500 158 186 35 64 920 35 34 228 74 56 597 178 2565 60 415-515 152 201 36 73 1042 38 38 237 87 65 623 193 2785 SECOND AVENUE 430-530 145 204 36 86 1146 44 39 233 72 64 667 207 2943 445-545 162 202 39 84 1157 43 41 238 68 60 676 209 2979 500-600 178 207 48 75 1207 47 46 240 72 60 670 208 3058 WILTEC Phone: (626) 564-1944 Fax: (626) 564-1944 E-mail: info@wiltecusa.com INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNT SUMMARY CLIENT: CITY OF ARCADIA PROJECT: ARCADIA TRAFFIC COUNTS DATE: WEDNESDAY OCTOBER 10, 2012 PERIODS: 7:00 AM TO 9:00 AM AND 4:00 PM TO 6:00 PM INTERSECTION: N/S MORLAN PLACE E/W HUNTINGTON DRIVE CITY: ARCADIA 15 MIN COUNTS 7:00 AM TO 9:00 AM 123456789101112 PERIOD SBRT SBTH SBLT WBRT WBTH WBLT NBRT NBTH NBLT EBRT EBTH EBLT TOTAL PEAK HOUR 700-715 200823000000613304 730-830 20 715-730 200529800000842391 730-745 0 0 0 4 356 0 0 0 0 0 128 0 488 9 0 0 1359 745-800 1004358000001805548 800-815 4005336000001513499 0 815-830 4007309000001021423 830-845 3004277000001121397 845-900 400826300000974376 9 HOUR TOTALS 123456789101112 HUNTINGTON D 561 0 0 0 TIME SBRT SBTH SBLT WBRT WBTH WBLT NBRT NBTH NBLT EBRT EBTH EBLT TOTAL 700-800 50021124200000453101731 0 715-815 70018134800000543101926 MORLANPLACE 730-830 9002013590000056191958 745-845 12 0 0 20 1280 0 0 0 0 0 545 10 1867 800-900 15 0 0 24 1185 0 0 0 0 0 462 9 1695 15 MIN COUNTS 4:00 PM TO 6:00 PM 123456789101112 PERIOD SBRT SBTH SBLT WBRT WBTH WBLT NBRT NBTH NBLT EBRT EBTH EBLT TOTAL PEAK HOUR 400-415 70051540000016827361 500-600 13 415-430 60031330000019127360 430-445 7003130000002846430 2404 700 445-500 5002133000002953438 500-515 12005167000003232509 0 515-530 3013172000003512532 530-545 5034186000003938599 545-600 4001175000003183501 15 HOUR TOTALS 123456789101112 HUNTINGTON D 1385 0 0 0 TIME SBRT SBTH SBLT WBRT WBTH WBLT NBRT NBTH NBLT EBRT EBTH EBLT TOTAL 400-500 25 0 0 13 550 0 0 0 0 0 938 63 1589 0 415-515 30 0 0 13 563 0 0 0 0 0 1093 38 1737 MORLAN PLACE 430-530 27 0 1 13 602 0 0 0 0 0 1253 13 1909 445-545 25 0 4 14 658 0 0 0 0 0 1362 15 2078 500-600 24 0 4 13 700 0 0 0 0 0 1385 15 2141 WILTEC Phone: (626) 564-1944 Fax: (626) 564-1944 E-mail: info@wiltecusa.com INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNT SUMMARY CLIENT: CITY OF ARCADIA PROJECT: ARCADIA TRAFFIC COUNTS DATE: WEDNESDAY OCTOBER 10, 2012 PERIODS: 7:00 AM TO 9:00 AM AND 4:00 PM TO 6:00 PM INTERSECTION: N/S SANTA ANITA AVENUE E/W MORLAN PLACE CITY: ARCADIA 15 MIN COUNTS 7:00 AM TO 9:00 AM 123456789101112 PERIOD SBRT SBTH SBLT WBRT WBTH WBLT NBRT NBTH NBLT EBRT EBTH EBLT TOTAL PEAK HOUR 700-715 2106230131892012311 730-830 26 715-730 11315504162132001378 730-745 3204330042452420470 2771234 4 745-800 51865515131870300410 800-815 81531292272390501438 7 815-830 1116914 9 1 013202 5 0 1 1426 830-845 21669604132165121425 845-900 714611804121675414369 2 HOUR TOTALS 123456789101112 MORLAN PLACE 3787337 TIME SBRT SBTH SBLT WBRT WBTH WBLT NBRT NBTH NBLT EBRT EBTH EBLT TOTAL 700-800 11 627 15 16 1 10 36 834 6 7 3 3 1569 12 715-815 17 674 25 22 3 11 40 884 4 12 2 2 1696 SANTA ANITA AVENUE 730-830 27 712 34 26 4 7 37 873 7 12 3 2 1744 745-845 26 674 40 29 4 11 46 844 10 9 3 3 1699 800-900 28 634 46 32 3 10 45 824 15 10 4 7 1658 15 MIN COUNTS 4:00 PM TO 6:00 PM 123456789101112 PERIOD SBRT SBTH SBLT WBRT WBTH WBLT NBRT NBTH NBLT EBRT EBTH EBLT TOTAL PEAK HOUR 400-415 4 153 8 13 1 8 12 134 2 2 4 20 361 445-545 55 415-430 2 191 15 14 1 7 12 144 1 5 17 20 429 430-445 7 173 12 15 1 4 12 184 2 3 3 6 422 9 800 35 20 445-500 3209 621 5 620143 1 2 0 6422 500-515 2 193 8 11 8 10 13 184 0 4 3 2 438 37 515-530 32011412 31116189 1 5 4 2461 530-545 1 197 7 11 4 10 13 203 0 6 1 4 457 545-600 41881311111121691203415 14 HOUR TOTALS 123456789101112 MORLAN PLACE 8271962 TIME SBRT SBTH SBLT WBRT WBTH WBLT NBRT NBTH NBLT EBRT EBTH EBLT TOTAL 400-500 16 726 41 63 8 25 56 605 6 12 24 52 1634 17 415-515 14 766 41 61 15 27 57 655 4 14 23 34 1711 SANTA ANITA AVENUE 430-530 15 776 40 59 17 31 61 700 4 14 10 16 1743 445-545 98003555203762719 217 8141778 500-600 10 779 42 45 16 42 54 745 2 17 8 11 1771 WILTEC Phone: (626) 564-1944 Fax: (626) 564-0969 INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNT SUMMARY CLIENT: CITY OF ARCADIA PROJECT: ARCADIA TRAFFIC COUNTS DATE: SATURDAY, OCTOBER 13, 2012 PERIOD: 4:00 PM TO 6:00 PM INTERSECTION: N/S SANTA ANITA AVENUE E/W HUNTINGTON DRIVE 15 MIN COUNTS 123456789101112 PERIOD SBRT SBTH SBLT WBRT WBTH WBLT NBRT NBTH NBLT EBRT EBTH EBLT TOTAL 400-415 19 99 20 18 133 27 46 125 36 34 195 29 781 415-430 24 116 26 25 111 37 26 127 31 50 197 23 793 430-445 15 110 26 19 108 29 37 114 34 46 175 32 745 445-500 23 103 44 17 101 27 35 122 50 41 176 16 755 500-515 17 146 54 15 125 41 26 109 32 26 180 23 794 515-530 30 143 59 17 117 37 43 153 36 19 156 22 832 530-545 13 138 59 21 101 23 28 152 31 10 151 25 752 545-600 14 126 38 23 111 32 29 117 15 14 144 10 673 HOUR TOTALS 123456789101112 PERIOD SBRT SBTH SBLT WBRT WBTH WBLT NBRT NBTH NBLT EBRT EBTH EBLT TOTAL 400-500 81 428 116 79 453 120 144 488 151 171 743 100 3074 415-515 79 475 150 76 445 134 124 472 147 163 728 94 3087 430-530 85 502 183 68 451 134 141 498 152 132 687 93 3126 445-545 83 530 216 70 444 128 132 536 149 96 663 86 3133 500-600 74 553 210 76 454 133 126 531 114 69 631 80 3051 PM PEAK HOUR 445-545 70 83 530 216 444 128 86 HUNTINGTON DRIVE 663 149 536 132 96 SANTA ANITA AVENUE WILTEC Phone: (626) 564-1944 Fax: (626) 564-0969 INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNT SUMMARY CLIENT: CITY OF ARCADIA PROJECT: ARCADIA TRAFFIC COUNTS DATE: SATURDAY, OCTOBER 13, 2012 PERIOD: 4:00 PM TO 6:00 PM INTERSECTION: N/S SANTA CLARA AVENUE E/W HUNTINGTON DRIVE 15 MIN COUNTS 123456789101112 PERIOD SBRT SBTH SBLT WBRT WBTH WBLT NBRT NBTH NBLT EBRT EBTH EBLT TOTAL 400-415 62 0 0 9 186 0 129 85 15 0 107 4 597 415-430 86 0 0 1 162 0 143 103 13 0 124 21 653 430-445 98 0 0 0 170 0 133 80 21 0 141 9 652 445-500 66 0 0 1 165 0 135 88 12 0 102 9 578 500-515 58 0 0 2 160 0 160 90 20 0 54 27 571 515-530 67 0 0 1 170 0 129 89 16 0 45 19 536 530-545 63 0 0 0 172 0 169 99 20 0 50 30 603 545-600 77 0 0 0 155 0 130 67 12 0 57 9 507 HOUR TOTALS 123456789101112 PERIOD SBRT SBTH SBLT WBRT WBTH WBLT NBRT NBTH NBLT EBRT EBTH EBLT TOTAL 400-500 312 0 0 11 683 0 540 356 61 0 474 43 2480 415-515 308 0 0 4 657 0 571 361 66 0 421 66 2454 430-530 289 0 0 4 665 0 557 347 69 0 342 64 2337 445-545 254 0 0 4 667 0 593 366 68 0 251 85 2288 500-600 265 0 0 3 657 0 588 345 68 0 206 85 2217 PM PEAK HOUR 400-500 11 312 0 0 683 0 43 HUNTINGTON DRIVE 474 61 356 540 0 SANTA CLARA AVENUE WILTEC Phone: (626) 564-1944 Fax: (626) 564-0969 INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNT SUMMARY CLIENT: CITY OF ARCADIA PROJECT: ARCADIA TRAFFIC COUNTS DATE: SATURDAY, OCTOBER 13, 2012 PERIOD: 4:00 PM TO 6:00 PM INTERSECTION: N/S COLORADO PLACE E/W HUNTINGTON DRIVE 15 MIN COUNTS 123456789101112 PERIOD SBRT SBTH SBLT WBRT WBTH WBLT NBRT NBTH NBLT EBRT EBTH EBLT TOTAL 400-415 330136382350000000442 415-430 200144282750000000467 430-445 200122362020000000380 445-500 120125362130000000386 500-515 10086402080000000344 515-530 8065352600000000368 530-545 7060301790000000276 545-600 6079412080000000334 HOUR TOTALS 123456789101112 PERIOD SBRT SBTH SBLT WBRT WBTH WBLT NBRT NBTH NBLT EBRT EBTH EBLT TOTAL 400-500 85052713892500000001675 415-515 62047714089800000001577 430-530 50039814788300000001478 445-545 37033614186000000001374 500-600 31029014685500000001322 PM PEAK HOUR 400-500 138 85 0 527 925 0 0 HUNTINGTON DRIVE 0 0 0 0 0 COLORADO PLACE WILTEC Phone: (626) 564-1944 Fax: (626) 564-0969 Email: info@wiltecusa.com 5-LEG INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNT SUMMARY CLIENT: CITY OF ARCADIA PROJECT: ARCADIA TRAFFIC COUNTS DATE: SATURDAY, OCTOBER 13, 2012 PERIOD: 4:00 PM TO 6:00 PM INTERSECTION: N/S HOLLY/TRACK DRIVEWAY E/W HUNTINGTON DRIVE 15 MIN COUNTS PERIODABCDEFGH I JKLMNOPQRSTUVTOTALS 400-415 261974218647618062614164315110817287785 415-430 36 25 4 8 11 180 29 3 2 7 2 53 4 8 23 4 33 50 113 181 11 4 791 430-445 22154342184360324851010324409820394774 445-500 1713244163276062449111832938115206130730 500-515 3030513617245131403791216253679020623816 515-530 45194651412870714091222456369515755704 530-545 51228862304510022436516130409522296857 545-600 322342417233206033151521328509621174761 HOUR TOTALS PERIOD A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V TOTALS 400-500 101 72 17 19 21 747 146 21 3 24 6 207 24 43 67 14 117 179 434 762 41 15 3080 415-500 105 83 15 28 25 733 144 28 3 20 6 182 27 41 67 12 139 195 416 796 35 11 3111 430-530 114 77 15 26 19 694 143 32 1 20 5 169 32 45 66 12 162 181 398 772 29 12 3024 445-545 143 84 19 31 21 706 145 36 1 19 5 164 33 40 72 10 168 181 395 791 29 14 3107 500-600 158 94 21 29 21 715 151 32 1 19 3 153 39 44 75 10 167 193 376 796 23 18 3138 SB SANTA ANITA TRACK WB HUNTINGTON DRIVE WB CAMPUS DRIVE NB HOLLY AVENUE EB CAMPUS/HUNTINGTON SB SANTA ANITA TRACK WB HUNTINGTON DRIVE WB CAMPUS DRIVE NB HOLLY AVENUE EB CAMPUS/HUNTINGTON WILTEC Phone: (626) 564-1944 Fax: (626) 564-0969 INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNT SUMMARY CLIENT: CITY OF ARCADIA PROJECT: ARCADIA TRAFFIC COUNTS DATE: SATURDAY, OCTOBER 13, 2012 PERIOD: 4:00 PM TO 6:00 PM INTERSECTION: N/S BALDWIN AVENUE E/W HUNTINGTON DRIVE 15 MIN COUNTS 123456789101112 PERIOD SBRT SBTH SBLT WBRT WBTH WBLT NBRT NBTH NBLT EBRT EBTH EBLT TOTAL 400-415 89 167 46 46 194 85 89 188 32 53 270 55 1314 415-430 62 148 27 45 216 86 69 145 43 49 295 94 1279 430-445 66 158 39 53 241 104 52 171 38 38 305 112 1377 445-500 74 155 66 40 180 88 71 175 39 48 299 84 1319 500-515 71 167 45 69 204 92 55 161 42 60 205 77 1248 515-530 69 166 52 39 225 84 66 151 47 53 179 61 1192 530-545 71 174 50 43 226 91 67 155 34 47 175 75 1208 545-600 54 160 60 39 191 92 67 129 38 60 187 65 1142 HOUR TOTALS 123456789101112 PERIOD SBRT SBTH SBLT WBRT WBTH WBLT NBRT NBTH NBLT EBRT EBTH EBLT TOTAL 400-500 291 628 178 184 831 363 281 679 152 188 1169 345 5289 415-515 273 628 177 207 841 370 247 652 162 195 1104 367 5223 430-530 280 646 202 201 850 368 244 658 166 199 988 334 5136 445-545 285 662 213 191 835 355 259 642 162 208 858 297 4967 500-600 265 667 207 190 846 359 255 596 161 220 746 278 4790 PM PEAK HOUR 400-500 184 291 628 178 831 363 345 HUNTINGTON DRIVE 1169 152 679 281 188 BALDWIN AVENUE WILTEC Phone: (626) 564-1944 Fax: (626) 564-0969 INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNT SUMMARY CLIENT: CITY OF ARCADIA PROJECT: ARCADIA TRAFFIC COUNTS DATE: SATURDAY, OCTOBER 13, 2012 PERIOD: 4:00 PM TO 6:00 PM INTERSECTION: N/S MORLAN PLACE E/W HUNTINGTON DR 15 MIN COUNTS 123456789101112 PERIOD SBRT SBTH SBLT WBRT WBTH WBLT NBRT NBTH NBLT EBRT EBTH EBLT TOTAL 400-415 2003186000002512444 415-430 4012156000002612426 430-445 3022159000002543423 445-500 3000175100002354418 500-515 4003162000002265400 515-530 5001166000001782352 530-545 1022161000001912359 545-600 0011152000001921347 HOUR TOTALS 123456789101112 PERIOD SBRT SBTH SBLT WBRT WBTH WBLT NBRT NBTH NBLT EBRT EBTH EBLT TOTAL 400-500 12 0 3 7 676 1 0 0 0 0 1001 11 1711 415-515 1403765210000976141667 430-530 1502666210000893141593 445-545 1302666410000830131529 500-600 10 0 3 7 641 0 0 0 0 0 787 10 1458 PM PEAK HOUR 400-500 7 12 0 3 676 1 11 HUNTINGTON DR 1001 0 0 0 0 MORLAN PLACE WILTEC Phone: (626) 564-1944 Fax: (626) 564-0969 INTERSECTION TURNING MOVEMENT COUNT SUMMARY CLIENT: CITY OF ARCADIA PROJECT: ARCADIA TRAFFIC COUNTS DATE: SATURDAY, OCTOBER 13, 2012 PERIOD: 4:00 PM TO 6:00 PM INTERSECTION: N/S SANTA ANITA AVENUE E/W MORLAN PLACE 15 MIN COUNTS 123456789101112 PERIOD SBRT SBTH SBLT WBRT WBTH WBLT NBRT NBTH NBLT EBRT EBTH EBLT TOTAL 400-415 0159470581944400385 415-430 2147532881610201339 430-445 0145651481443305324 445-500 2161462551451100332 500-515 0201370671692302400 515-530 3 245 2 11 1 5 3 180 2 4 0 0 456 530-545 1213240551960001427 545-600 0182690241400101345 HOUR TOTALS 123456789101112 PERIOD SBRT SBTH SBLT WBRT WBTH WBLT NBRT NBTH NBLT EBRT EBTH EBLT TOTAL 400-500 4 612 19 21 5 22 29 644 8 10 0 6 1380 415-515 465418215232861969081395 430-530 5 752 15 29 4 20 23 638 8 11 0 7 1512 445-545 682011283212069058031615 500-600 484113311181968548041628 PM PEAK HOUR 500-600 31 484113 1 18 4 MORLAN PLACE 0 4 685 19 8 SANTA ANITA AVENUE Santa Anita Inn Redevelopment Place Project TIA March 201868 APPENDIX B: PHASE 1: ICU WORKSHEETS FOR EXISTING (2018) + CUMULATIVE CONDITIONS INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION WORKSHEET INTERSECTION:# 1 N/S:Santa Anita Ave E/W:Huntington Dr DATE OF COUNTS:05/26/11 Notes: ANALYSIS PERIOD: PHASE ONE - AM Peak Hour Existing (2018) Conditions Existing (2018) + Cumulative + Ambient No. AM Peak Crit. Am.+Cum. AM Peak Crit. Movemnt Lanes Cap. Vol. V/C Mvmt. Vol. Vol. V/C Mvmt. NL 2 2880 442 0.153 1 35 477 0.166 1 NR 1 1600 109 0.068 0 2 111 0.069 0 NT 2 3200 1030 0.322 0 71 1101 0.344 0 SL 2 2880 67 0.023 0 1 68 0.024 0 SR 1 1600 80 0.050 0 31 111 0.069 0 ST 2 3200 678 0.212 1 43 721 0.225 1 EL 1 1600 65 0.041 1 18 83 0.052 1 ER 1 1600 233 0.146 0 6 239 0.149 0 ET 2 3200 456 0.143 0 17 473 0.148 0 WL 1 1600 83 0.052 0 1 84 0.053 0 WR 1 1600 61 0.038 0 1 62 0.039 0 WT 2 3200 763 0.238 1 43 806 0.252 1 N/S component 0.365 N/S component 0.391 E/W component 0.279 E/W component 0.304 Rt.Tn. comp.0.000 Rt.Tn. comp.0.000 Clearance Interval 0.100 Clearance Interval 0.100 ICU 0.744 ICU 0.795 LOS C LOS C Critical movement identified by a 1. Project Impact: 0.050 Ten lanes for a right turn indicates free movement. NA - Not Applicable INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION WORKSHEET INTERSECTION:# 1 N/S:Santa Anita Ave E/W:Huntington Dr DATE OF COUNTS:05/26/11 Notes:0 ANALYSIS PERIOD: PHASE ONE - PM Peak Hour Existing (2018) Conditions Existing (2018) + Cumulative + Ambient No. PM Peak Crit. Am.+Cum. PM Peak Crit. Movemnt Lanes Cap. Vol. V/C Mvmt. VOL. Vol. V/C Mvmt. NL 2 2880 181 0.063 0 17 198 0.069 0 NR 1 1600 164 0.103 0 5 169 0.106 0 NT 2 3200 757 0.237 1 66 823 0.257 1 SL 2 2880 142 0.049 1 3 145 0.050 1 SR 1 1600 87 0.054 0 27 114 0.071 0 ST 2 3200 636 0.199 0 69 705 0.220 0 EL 1 1600 119 0.074 0 11 130 0.081 0 ER 1 1600 522 0.326 0 12 534 0.334 0 ET 2 3200 1102 0.344 1 56 1158 0.362 1 WL 1 1600 142 0.089 1 7 149 0.093 1 WR 1 1600 90 0.056 0 1 91 0.057 0 WT 2 3200 580 0.181 0 26 606 0.189 0 N/S component 0.286 N/S component 0.308 E/W component 0.433 E/W component 0.455 Rt.Tn. comp.0.000 Rt.Tn. comp.0.000 Clearance Interval 0.100 Clearance Interval 0.100 ICU 0.819 ICU 0.863 LOS D LOS D Critical movement identified by a 1. Project Impact: 0.044 Ten lanes for a right turn indicates free movement. NA - Not Applicable PH1-ICU-Exist+Cum+Amb.xls / 1 4/23/2018 / 9:17 AM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION WORKSHEET INTERSECTION:# 2 N/S:Santa Clara St E/W:Huntington Dr DATE OF COUNTS:05/26/11 Notes: ANALYSIS PERIOD: PHASE ONE - AM Peak Hour Existing (2018) Conditions Existing (2018) + Cumulative + Ambient No. AM Peak Crit. Project AM Peak Crit. Movemnt Lanes Cap. Vol. V/C Mvmt. Vol. Vol. V/C Mvmt. NL 1 1600 76 0.048 0 26 102 0.064 0 NR 2 3200 584 0.183 1 37 621 0.194 1 NT 2 3200 527 0.165 1 21 548 0.171 1 SL 0 0 0 0.000 1 0 0 0.000 1 SR 2 3200 763 0.238 1 23 786 0.246 1 ST 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 EL 1 1600 8 0.005 1 1 9 0.006 1 ER 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 ET 3 4800 132 0.028 0 3 135 0.028 0 WL 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 WR 0.5 800 18 0.023 0 1 19 0.024 0 WT 2.5 4000 1229 0.307 1 96 1325 0.331 1 N/S component 0.165 N/S component 0.171 E/W component 0.312 E/W component 0.337 Rt.Tn. comp. 0.251 Rt.Tn. comp. 0.263 Clearance Interval 0.100 Clearance Interval 0.100 ICU 0.828 ICU 0.871 LOS D LOS D Critical movement identified by a 1. Project Impact: 0.043 Ten lanes for a right turn indicates free movement. NA - Not Applicable INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION WORKSHEET INTERSECTION:# 2 N/S:Santa Clara St E/W:Huntington Dr DATE OF COUNTS:05/26/11 Notes:0 ANALYSIS PERIOD: PHASE ONE - PM Peak Hour Existing (2018) Conditions Existing (2018) + Cumulative + Ambient No. PM Peak Crit. PROJ. PM Peak Crit. Movemnt Lanes Cap. Vol. V/C Mvmt. VOL. Vol. V/C Mvmt. NL 1 1600 118 0.074 0 25 143 0.089 0 NR 2 3200 794 0.248 1 56 850 0.266 1 NT 2 3200 652 0.204 1 57 709 0.222 1 SL 0 0 0 0.000 1 0 0 0.000 1 SR 2 3200 519 0.162 1 26 545 0.170 1 ST 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 EL 1 1600 78 0.049 1 2 80 0.050 1 ER 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 ET 3 4800 1010 0.210 0 20 1030 0.215 0 WL 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 WR 0.5 800 20 0.025 0 0 20 0.025 0 WT 2.5 4000 857 0.214 1 66 923 0.231 1 N/S component 0.204 N/S component 0.222 E/W component 0.263 E/W component 0.281 Rt.Tn. comp. 0.158 Rt.Tn. comp. 0.164 Clearance Interval 0.100 Clearance Interval 0.100 ICU 0.725 ICU 0.767 LOS C LOS C Critical movement identified by a 1. Project Impact: 0.042 Ten lanes for a right turn indicates free movement. NA - Not Applicable PH1-ICU-Exist+Cum+Amb.xls / 2 4/23/2018 / 9:17 AM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION WORKSHEET INTERSECTION:# 3 N/S:Colorado Pl E/W:Huntington Dr DATE OF COUNTS:10/13/11 Notes: ANALYSIS PERIOD: PHASE ONE - AM Peak Hour Existing (2018) Conditions Existing (2018) + Cumulative + Ambient No. AM Peak Crit. Project AM Peak Crit. Movemnt Lanes Cap. Vol. V/C Mvmt. Vol. Vol. V/C Mvmt. NL 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 NR 1 1600 16 0.010 1 0 16 0.010 1 NT 0 0 0 0.000 1 0 0 0.000 1 SL 2 3200 142 0.044 1 4 146 0.046 1 SR 1 1600 114 0.071 1 22 136 0.085 1 ST 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 EL 0 0 0 0.000 1 0 0 0.000 1 ER 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 ET 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 WL 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 WR 10.0 16000 887 0.055 0 31 918 0.057 0 WT 3.0 4800 1513 0.315 1 121 1634 0.340 1 N/S component 0.044 N/S component 0.046 E/W component 0.315 E/W component 0.340 Rt.Tn. comp. 0.081 Rt.Tn. comp. 0.095 Clearance Interval 0.100 Clearance Interval 0.100 ICU 0.541 ICU 0.581 LOS A LOS A Critical movement identified by a 1. Project Impact:0.040 Ten lanes for a right turn indicates free movement. NA - Not Applicable INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION WORKSHEET INTERSECTION:# 3 N/S:Colorado Pl E/W:Huntington Dr DATE OF COUNTS:10/13/11 Notes:0 ANALYSIS PERIOD: PHASE ONE - PM Peak Hour Existing (2018) Conditions Existing (2018) + Cumulative + Ambient No. PM Peak Crit. PROJ. PM Peak Crit. Movemnt Lanes Cap. Vol. V/C Mvmt. VOL. Vol. V/C Mvmt. NL 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 NR 1 1600 65 0.041 1 2 67 0.042 1 NT 0 0 0 0.000 1 0 0 0.000 1 SL 2 3200 1171 0.366 1 23 1194 0.373 1 SR 1 1600 90 0.056 1 12 102 0.064 1 ST 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 EL 0 0 0 0.000 1 0 0 0.000 1 ER 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 ET 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 WL 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 WR 10.0 16000 257 0.016 0 20 277 0.017 0 WT 3.0 4800 1157 0.241 1 94 1251 0.261 1 N/S component 0.366 N/S component 0.373 E/W component 0.241 E/W component 0.261 Rt.Tn. comp. 0.097 Rt.Tn. comp. 0.106 Clearance Interval 0.100 Clearance Interval 0.100 ICU 0.804 ICU 0.839 LOS C LOS D Critical movement identified by a 1. Project Impact:0.036 Ten lanes for a right turn indicates free movement. NA - Not Applicable PH1-ICU-Exist+Cum+Amb.xls / 3 Rev 4/23/2018 / 9:17 AM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION WORKSHEET INTERSECTION:# 4 N/S:Holly Dr E/W:Huntington Dr DATE OF COUNTS:09/06/12 Notes: ANALYSIS PERIOD: PHASE ONE - AM Peak Hour Existing (2018) Conditions Existing (2018) + Cumulative + Ambient No. AM Peak Crit. Project AM Peak Crit. Movemnt Lanes Cap. Vol. V/C Mvmt. Vol. Vol. V/C Mvmt. NL 1.3 2080 262 0.126 1 6 268 0.129 1 NR 0.3 480 197 0.410 1 19 216 0.450 1 NT 0.3 480 1 0.002 0 0 1 0.002 0 SL 1.5 2400 1 0.000 0 0 1 0.000 0 SR 1 1600 1 0.001 0 0 1 0.001 0 ST 1.5 2400 7 0.003 1 0 7 0.003 1 EL 2 2880 8 0.003 0 5 13 0.005 0 ER 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 ET 3 4800 650 0.135 1 78 728 0.152 1 WL 2 2880 301 0.105 1 19 320 0.111 1 WR 0.5 800 1 0.001 0 0 1 0.001 0 WT 3.5 5600 950 0.170 0 42 992 0.177 0 N/S component 0.129 N/S component 0.132 E/W component 0.240 E/W component 0.263 Rt.Tn. comp.0.304 Rt.Tn. comp.0.337 Clearance Interval 0.100 Clearance Interval 0.100 ICU 0.773 ICU 0.831 LOS C LOS D Critical movement identified by a 1. Project Impact: 0.059 Ten lanes for a right turn indicates free movement. NA - Not Applicable INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION WORKSHEET INTERSECTION:# 4 N/S:Holly Dr E/W:Huntington Dr DATE OF COUNTS:09/06/12 Notes:0 ANALYSIS PERIOD: PHASE ONE - PM Peak Hour Existing (2018) Conditions Existing (2018) + Cumulative + Ambient No. PM Peak Crit. PROJ. PM Peak Crit. Movemnt Lanes Cap. Vol. V/C Mvmt. VOL. Vol. V/C Mvmt. NL 1.3 2080 102 0.049 1 3 105 0.050 1 NR 0.3 480 78 0.163 1 8 86 0.179 1 NT 0.3 480 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 SL 1.5 2400 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 SR 1 1600 6 0.004 0 22 28 0.018 1 ST 1.5 2400 2 0.001 1 0 2 0.001 1 EL 2 2880 9 0.003 0 13 22 0.008 0 ER 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 ET 3 4800 1150 0.240 1 71 1221 0.254 1 WL 2 2880 271 0.094 1 71 342 0.119 1 WR 0.5 800 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 WT 2.5 4000 1001 0.250 0 122 1123 0.281 0 N/S component 0.050 N/S component 0.051 E/W component 0.334 E/W component 0.373 Rt.Tn. comp.0.068 Rt.Tn. comp.0.069 Clearance Interval 0.100 Clearance Interval 0.100 ICU 0.552 ICU 0.594 LOS A LOS A Critical movement identified by a 1. Project Impact: 0.042 Ten lanes for a right turn indicates free movement. NA - Not Applicable PH1-ICU-Exist+Cum+Amb.xls / 4 4/23/2018 / 9:17 AM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION WORKSHEET INTERSECTION:# 1 N/S:Santa Anita Ave E/W:Huntington Dr DATE OF COUNTS:05/26/11 Notes:0 ANALYSIS PERIOD: PHASE ONE - Saturday PM Peak Hour Existing (2018) Conditions Existing (2018) + Cumulative + Ambient No. PM Peak Crit. PROJ. PM Peak Crit. Movemnt Lanes Cap. Vol. V/C Mvmt. VOL. Vol. V/C Mvmt. NL 2 2880 168 0.058 0 4 172 0.060 0 NR 1 1600 149 0.093 0 3 152 0.095 0 NT 2 3200 604 0.189 1 57 661 0.207 1 SL 2 2880 243 0.084 1 5 248 0.086 1 SR 1 1600 93 0.058 0 15 108 0.068 0 ST 2 3200 597 0.187 0 51 648 0.203 0 EL 1 1600 97 0.061 0 11 108 0.068 0 ER 1 1600 108 0.068 0 3 111 0.069 0 ET 2 3200 747 0.233 1 19 766 0.239 1 WL 1 1600 144 0.090 1 7 151 0.094 1 WR 1 1600 79 0.049 0 1 80 0.050 0 WT 2 3200 500 0.156 0 11 511 0.160 0 N/S component 0.273 N/S component 0.293 E/W component 0.323 E/W component 0.334 Rt.Tn. comp. 0.000 Rt.Tn. comp. 0.000 Clearance Interval 0.100 Clearance Interval 0.100 ICU 0.697 ICU 0.726 LOS B LOS C Critical movement identified by a 1. Project Impact: 0.030 Ten lanes for a right turn indicates free movement. NA - Not Applicable PH1-ICU-Exist+Cum+Amb SAT.xls / 1 4/23/2018 / 9:16 AM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION WORKSHEET INTERSECTION:# 2 N/S:Santa Clara St E/W:Huntington Dr DATE OF COUNTS:05/26/11 Notes:0 ANALYSIS PERIOD: PHASE ONE - Saturday PM Peak Hour Existing (2018) Conditions Existing (2018) + Cumulative + Ambient No. AM Peak Crit. PROJ. AM Peak Crit. Movemnt Lanes Cap. Vol. V/C Mvmt. VOL. Vol. V/C Mvmt. NL 1 1600 69 0.043 0 1 70 0.044 0 NR 2 3200 608 0.190 1 25 633 0.198 1 NT 2 3200 401 0.125 1 16 417 0.130 1 SL 0 0 0 0.000 1 0 0 0.000 1 SR 2 3200 351 0.110 1 18 369 0.115 1 ST 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 EL 1 1600 48 0.030 1 1 49 0.031 1 ER 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 ET 3 4800 534 0.111 0 10 544 0.113 0 WL 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 WR 0.5 800 12 0.015 0 1 13 0.016 0 WT 2.5 4000 769 0.192 1 30 799 0.200 1 N/S component 0.125 N/S component 0.130 E/W component 0.222 E/W component 0.230 Rt.Tn. comp. 0.144 Rt.Tn. comp. 0.152 Clearance Interval 0.100 Clearance Interval 0.100 ICU 0.592 ICU 0.613 LOS A LOS B Critical movement identified by a 1.Project Impac 0.021 Ten lanes for a right turn indicates free movement. NA - Not Applicable PH1-ICU-Exist+Cum+Amb SAT.xls / 2 4/23/2018 / 9:16 AM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION WORKSHEET INTERSECTION:# 3 N/S:Colorado Pl E/W:Huntington Dr DATE OF COUNTS:10/13/11 Notes:0 ANALYSIS PERIOD: PHASE ONE - Saturday PM Peak Hour Existing (2018) Conditions Existing (2018) + Cumulative + Ambient No. PM Peak Crit. PROJ. PM Peak Crit. Movemnt Lanes Cap. Vol. V/C Mvmt. VOL. Vol. V/C Mvmt. NL 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 NR 1 1600 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 NT 0 0 0 0.000 1 0 0 0.000 1 SL 2 2880 593 0.206 1 12 605 0.210 1 SR 1 1600 96 0.060 1 2 98 0.061 1 ST 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 EL 0 0 0 0.000 1 0 0 0.000 1 ER 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 ET 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 WL 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 WR 10.0 16000 155 0.010 0 4 159 0.010 0 WT 3.0 4800 1042 0.217 1 48 1090 0.227 1 N/S component 0.206 N/S component 0.210 E/W component 0.217 E/W component 0.227 Rt.Tn. comp. 0.060 Rt.Tn. comp. 0.061 Clearance Interval 0.100 Clearance Interval 0.100 ICU 0.583 ICU 0.598 LOS A LOS A Critical movement identified by a 1. Project Impac 0.015 Ten lanes for a right turn indicates free movement. NA - Not Applicable PH1-ICU-Exist+Cum+Amb SAT.xls / 3 Rev 4/23/2018 / 9:16 AM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION WORKSHEET INTERSECTION:#4 N/S:Holly Dr E/W:Huntington Dr DATE OF COUNTS:09/06/12 Notes:0 ANALYSIS PERIOD: PHASE ONE - Saturday PM Peak Hour Existing (2018) Conditions Existing (2018) + Cumulative + Ambient No. PM Peak Crit. PROJ. PM Peak Crit. Movemnt Lanes Cap. Vol. V/C Mvmt. VOL. Vol. V/C Mvmt. NL 1.3 2128 188 0.088 1 4 192 0.090 1 NR 0.3 544 84 0.154 1 2 86 0.158 1 NT 0.3 528 11 0.021 0 0 11 0.021 0 SL 1.5 2400 33 0.014 0 0 33 0.014 0 SR 1 1600 178 0.111 1 27 205 0.128 1 ST 1.5 2400 130 0.054 1 2 132 0.055 1 EL 2 2880 46 0.016 0 20 66 0.023 0 ER 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 ET 3 4800 896 0.187 1 42 938 0.195 1 WL 2 2880 207 0.072 1 4 211 0.073 1 WR 0.5 800 24 0.030 0 0 24 0.030 0 WT 2.5 4000 805 0.201 0 43 848 0.212 0 N/S component 0.143 N/S component 0.145 E/W component 0.259 E/W component 0.269 Rt.Tn. comp. 0.103 Rt.Tn. comp. 0.114 Clearance Interval 0.100 Clearance Interval 0.100 ICU 0.604 ICU 0.628 LOS A LOS B Critical movement identified by a 1. Project Impac 0.024 Ten lanes for a right turn indicates free movement. NA - Not Applicable PH1-ICU-Exist+Cum+Amb SAT.xls / 4 4/23/2018 / 9:16 AM Santa Anita Inn Redevelopment Place Project TIA March 201869 APPENDIX C: PHASE 1: ICU WORKSHEETS FOR EXISTING (2018) + CUMULATIVE + PROJECT CONDITIONS INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION WORKSHEET INTERSECTION:# 1 N/S:Santa Anita Ave E/W:Huntington Dr DATE OF COUNTS:05/26/11 Notes: ANALYSIS PERIOD: PHASE ONE - AM Peak Hour Existing (2018) + Cumulative + Ambient Ex (2018) + Cumulative + Ambient + Project No. AM Peak Crit. Project AM Peak Crit. Movemnt Lanes Cap. Vol. V/C Mvmt. Vol. Vol. V/C Mvmt. NL 2 2880 477 0.166 1 2 479 0.166 1 NR 1 1600 111 0.069 0 0 111 0.069 0 NT 2 3200 1101 0.344 0 0 1101 0.344 0 SL 2 2880 68 0.024 0 0 68 0.024 0 SR 1 1600 111 0.069 0 9 120 0.075 0 ST 2 3200 721 0.225 1 0 721 0.225 1 EL 1 1600 83 0.052 1 13 96 0.060 1 ER 1 1600 239 0.149 0 1 240 0.150 0 ET 2 3200 473 0.148 0 1 474 0.148 0 WL 1 1600 84 0.053 0 0 84 0.053 0 WR 1 1600 62 0.039 0 0 62 0.039 0 WT 2 3200 806 0.252 1 5 811 0.253 1 N/S component 0.391 N/S component 0.392 E/W component 0.304 E/W component 0.313 Rt.Tn. comp.0.000 Rt.Tn. comp.0.000 Clearance Interval 0.100 Clearance Interval 0.100 ICU 0.795 ICU 0.805 LOS C LOS D Critical movement identified by a 1. Project Impact: 0.010 Ten lanes for a right turn indicates free movement. NA - Not Applicable INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION WORKSHEET INTERSECTION:# 1 N/S:Santa Anita Ave E/W:Huntington Dr DATE OF COUNTS:05/26/11 Notes:0 ANALYSIS PERIOD: PHASE ONE - PM Peak Hour Existing (2018) + Cumulative + Ambient Ex (2018) + Cumulative + Ambient + Project No. PM Peak Crit. PROJ. PM Peak Crit. Movemnt Lanes Cap. Vol. V/C Mvmt. VOL. Vol. V/C Mvmt. NL 2 2880 198 0.069 0 2 200 0.069 0 NR 1 1600 169 0.106 0 0 169 0.106 0 NT 2 3200 823 0.257 1 0 823 0.257 1 SL 2 2880 145 0.050 1 0 145 0.050 1 SR 1 1600 114 0.071 0 9 123 0.077 0 ST 2 3200 705 0.220 0 0 705 0.220 0 EL 1 1600 130 0.081 0 20 150 0.094 0 ER 1 1600 534 0.334 0 2 536 0.335 0 ET 2 3200 1158 0.362 1 2 1160 0.363 1 WL 1 1600 149 0.093 1 0 149 0.093 1 WR 1 1600 91 0.057 0 0 91 0.057 0 WT 2 3200 606 0.189 0 6 612 0.191 0 N/S component 0.308 N/S component 0.308 E/W component 0.455 E/W component 0.456 Rt.Tn. comp.0.000 Rt.Tn. comp.0.000 Clearance Interval 0.100 Clearance Interval 0.100 ICU 0.863 ICU 0.863 LOS D LOS D Critical movement identified by a 1. Project Impact: 0.001 Ten lanes for a right turn indicates free movement. NA - Not Applicable PH1-ICU-Exist+Cum+Amb+Proj.xls / 1 4/23/2018 / 9:17 AM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION WORKSHEET INTERSECTION:# 2 N/S:Santa Clara St E/W:Huntington Dr DATE OF COUNTS:05/26/11 Notes: ANALYSIS PERIOD: PHASE ONE - AM Peak Hour Existing (2018) + Cumulative + Ambient Ex (2018) + Cumulative + Ambient + Project No. AM Peak Crit. Project AM Peak Crit. Movemnt Lanes Cap. Vol. V/C Mvmt. Vol. Vol. V/C Mvmt. NL 1 1600 102 0.064 0 0 102 0.064 0 NR 2 3200 621 0.194 1 16 637 0.199 1 NT 2 3200 548 0.171 1 0 548 0.171 1 SL 0 0 0 0.000 1 0 0 0.000 1 SR 2 3200 786 0.246 1 3 789 0.247 1 ST 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 EL 1 1600 9 0.006 1 0 9 0.006 1 ER 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 ET 3 4800 135 0.028 0 0 135 0.028 0 WL 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 WR 0.5 800 19 0.024 0 0 19 0.024 0 WT 2.5 4000 1325 0.331 1 15 1340 0.335 1 N/S component 0.171 N/S component 0.171 E/W component 0.337 E/W component 0.341 Rt.Tn. comp. 0.263 Rt.Tn. comp. 0.269 Clearance Interval 0.100 Clearance Interval 0.100 ICU 0.871 ICU 0.881 LOS D LOS D Critical movement identified by a 1. Project Impact:0.010 Ten lanes for a right turn indicates free movement. NA - Not Applicable INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION WORKSHEET INTERSECTION:# 2 N/S:Santa Clara St E/W:Huntington Dr DATE OF COUNTS:05/26/11 Notes:0 ANALYSIS PERIOD: PHASE ONE - PM Peak Hour Existing (2018) + Cumulative + Ambient Ex (2018) + Cumulative + Ambient + Project No. PM Peak Crit. PROJ. PM Peak Crit. Movemnt Lanes Cap. Vol. V/C Mvmt. VOL. Vol. V/C Mvmt. NL 1 1600 143 0.089 0 0 143 0.089 0 NR 2 3200 850 0.266 1 23 873 0.273 1 NT 2 3200 709 0.222 1 0 709 0.222 1 SL 0 0 0 0.000 1 0 0 0.000 1 SR 2 3200 545 0.170 1 4 549 0.172 1 ST 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 EL 1 1600 80 0.050 1 0 80 0.050 1 ER 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 ET 3 4800 1030 0.215 0 0 1030 0.215 0 WL 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 WR 0.5 800 20 0.025 0 0 20 0.025 0 WT 2.5 4000 923 0.231 1 17 940 0.235 1 N/S component 0.222 N/S component 0.222 E/W component 0.281 E/W component 0.285 Rt.Tn. comp. 0.164 Rt.Tn. comp. 0.173 Clearance Interval 0.100 Clearance Interval 0.100 ICU 0.767 ICU 0.779 LOS C LOS C Critical movement identified by a 1. Project Impact:0.013 Ten lanes for a right turn indicates free movement. NA - Not Applicable PH1-ICU-Exist+Cum+Amb+Proj.xls / 2 4/23/2018 / 9:17 AM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION WORKSHEET INTERSECTION:#3 N/S:Colorado Pl E/W:Huntington Dr DATE OF COUNTS:10/13/11 Notes: ANALYSIS PERIOD: PHASE ONE - AM Peak Hour Existing (2018) + Cumulative + Ambient Ex (2018) + Cumulative + Ambient + Project No. AM Peak Crit. Project AM Peak Crit. Movemnt Lanes Cap. Vol. V/C Mvmt. Vol. Vol. V/C Mvmt. NL 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 NR 1 1600 16 0.010 1 0 16 0.010 1 NT 0 0 0 0.000 1 0 0 0.000 1 SL 2 3200 146 0.046 1 0 146 0.046 1 SR 1 1600 136 0.085 1 12 148 0.093 1 ST 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 EL 0 0 0 0.000 1 0 0 0.000 1 ER 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 ET 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 WL 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 WR 10.0 16000 918 0.057 0 0 918 0.057 0 WT 3.0 4800 1634 0.340 1 19 1653 0.344 1 N/S component 0.046 N/S component 0.046 E/W component 0.340 E/W component 0.344 Rt.Tn. comp. 0.095 Rt.Tn. comp. 0.103 Clearance Interval 0.100 Clearance Interval 0.100 ICU 0.581 ICU 0.593 LOS A LOS A Critical movement identified by a 1. Project Impact:0.011 Ten lanes for a right turn indicates free movement. NA - Not Applicable INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION WORKSHEET INTERSECTION:#3 N/S:Colorado Pl E/W:Huntington Dr DATE OF COUNTS:10/13/11 Notes:0 ANALYSIS PERIOD: PHASE ONE - PM Peak Hour Existing (2018) + Cumulative + Ambient Ex (2018) + Cumulative + Ambient + Project No. PM Peak Crit. PROJ. PM Peak Crit. Movemnt Lanes Cap. Vol. V/C Mvmt. VOL. Vol. V/C Mvmt. NL 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 NR 1 1600 67 0.042 1 0 67 0.042 1 NT 0 0 0 0.000 1 0 0 0.000 1 SL 2 3200 1194 0.373 1 0 1194 0.373 1 SR 1 1600 102 0.064 1 13 115 0.072 1 ST 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 EL 0 0 0 0.000 1 0 0 0.000 1 ER 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 ET 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 WL 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 WR 10.0 16000 277 0.017 0 0 277 0.017 0 WT 3.0 4800 1251 0.261 1 20 1271 0.265 1 N/S component 0.373 N/S component 0.373 E/W component 0.261 E/W component 0.265 Rt.Tn. comp. 0.106 Rt.Tn. comp. 0.114 Clearance Interval 0.100 Clearance Interval 0.100 ICU 0.839 ICU 0.852 LOS D LOS D Critical movement identified by a 1. Project Impact:0.012 Ten lanes for a right turn indicates free movement. NA - Not Applicable PH1-ICU-Exist+Cum+Amb+Proj.xls / 3 Rev 4/23/2018 / 9:17 AM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION WORKSHEET INTERSECTION:#4 N/S:Holly Dr E/W:Huntington Dr DATE OF COUNTS:09/06/12 Notes: ANALYSIS PERIOD: PHASE ONE - AM Peak Hour Existing (2018) + Cumulative + Ambient Ex (2018) + Cumulative + Ambient + Project No. AM Peak Crit. Project AM Peak Crit. Movemnt Lanes Cap. Vol. V/C Mvmt. Vol. Vol. V/C Mvmt. NL 1.3 2080 268 0.129 1 0 268 0.129 1 NR 0.3 480 216 0.450 1 0 216 0.450 1 NT 0.3 480 1 0.002 0 0 1 0.002 0 SL 1.5 2400 1 0.000 0 0 1 0.000 0 SR 1 1600 1 0.001 0 0 1 0.001 0 ST 1.5 2400 7 0.003 1 0 7 0.003 1 EL 2 2880 13 0.005 0 0 13 0.005 0 ER 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 ET 3 4800 728 0.152 1 3 731 0.152 1 WL 2 2880 320 0.111 1 0 320 0.111 1 WR 0.5 800 1 0.001 0 0 1 0.001 0 WT 2.5 4000 992 0.248 0 8 1000 0.250 0 N/S component 0.132 N/S component 0.132 E/W component 0.263 E/W component 0.263 Rt.Tn. comp.0.337 Rt.Tn. comp.0.337 Clearance Interval 0.100 Clearance Interval 0.100 ICU 0.831 ICU 0.832 LOS D LOS D Critical movement identified by a 1. Project Impact: 0.001 Ten lanes for a right turn indicates free movement. NA - Not Applicable INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION WORKSHEET INTERSECTION:#4 N/S:Holly Dr E/W:Huntington Dr DATE OF COUNTS:09/06/12 Notes:0 ANALYSIS PERIOD: PHASE ONE - PM Peak Hour Existing (2018) + Cumulative + Ambient Ex (2018) + Cumulative + Ambient + Project No. PM Peak Crit. PROJ. PM Peak Crit. Movemnt Lanes Cap. Vol. V/C Mvmt. VOL. Vol. V/C Mvmt. NL 1.3 2080 105 0.050 1 0 105 0.050 1 NR 0.3 480 86 0.179 1 0 86 0.179 1 NT 0.3 480 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 SL 1.5 2400 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 SR 1 1600 28 0.018 1 0 28 0.018 1 ST 1.5 2400 2 0.001 1 0 2 0.001 1 EL 2 2880 22 0.008 0 0 22 0.008 0 ER 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 ET 3 4800 1221 0.254 1 4 1225 0.255 1 WL 2 2880 342 0.119 1 0 342 0.119 1 WR 0.5 800 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 WT 2.5 4000 1123 0.281 0 13 1136 0.284 0 N/S component 0.051 N/S component 0.051 E/W component 0.373 E/W component 0.374 Rt.Tn. comp.0.069 Rt.Tn. comp.0.069 Clearance Interval 0.100 Clearance Interval 0.100 ICU 0.594 ICU 0.595 LOS A LOS A Critical movement identified by a 1. Project Impact: 0.001 Ten lanes for a right turn indicates free movement. NA - Not Applicable PH1-ICU-Exist+Cum+Amb+Proj.xls / 4 4/23/2018 / 9:17 AM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION WORKSHEET INTERSECTION:# 1 N/S:Santa Anita Ave E/W:Huntington Dr DATE OF COUNTS:05/26/11 Notes:0 ANALYSIS PERIOD: PHASE ONE - Saturday PM Peak Hour Existing (2018) + Cumulative + Ambient Ex (2018) + Cumulative + Ambient + Project No. AM Peak Crit. PROJ. AM Peak Crit. Movemnt Lanes Cap. Vol. V/C Mvmt. VOL. Vol. V/C Mvmt. NL 2 2880 172 0.060 0 2 174 0.060 0 NR 1 1600 152 0.095 0 0 152 0.095 0 NT 2 3200 661 0.207 1 0 661 0.207 1 SL 2 2880 248 0.086 1 0 248 0.086 1 SR 1 1600 108 0.068 0 12 120 0.075 0 ST 2 3200 648 0.203 0 0 648 0.203 0 EL 1 1600 108 0.068 0 21 129 0.081 0 ER 1 1600 111 0.069 0 2 113 0.071 0 ET 2 3200 766 0.239 1 2 768 0.240 1 WL 1 1600 151 0.094 1 0 151 0.094 1 WR 1 1600 80 0.050 0 0 80 0.050 0 WT 2 3200 511 0.160 0 7 518 0.162 0 N/S component 0.293 N/S component 0.293 E/W component 0.334 E/W component 0.334 Rt.Tn. comp. 0.000 Rt.Tn. comp. 0.000 Clearance Interval 0.100 Clearance Interval 0.100 ICU 0.726 ICU 0.727 LOS C LOS C Critical movement identified by a 1. Project Impact: 0.001 Ten lanes for a right turn indicates free movement. NA - Not Applicable PH1-ICU-Exist+Cum+Amb+Proj SAT.xls / 1 4/23/2018 / 9:17 AM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION WORKSHEET INTERSECTION:# 2 N/S:Santa Clara St E/W:Huntington Dr DATE OF COUNTS:05/26/11 Notes:0 ANALYSIS PERIOD: PHASE ONE - Saturday PM Peak Hour Existing (2018) + Cumulative + Ambient Ex (2018) + Cumulative + Ambient + Project No. AM Peak Crit. PROJ. AM Peak Crit. Movemnt Lanes Cap. Vol. V/C Mvmt. VOL. Vol. V/C Mvmt. NL 1.0 1600 70 0.044 0 0 70 0.044 0 NR 2.0 3200 633 0.198 1 25 658 0.206 1 NT 2.0 3200 417 0.130 1 0 417 0.130 1 SL 0.0 0 0 0.000 1 0 0 0.000 1 SR 2.0 3200 369 0.115 1 5 374 0.117 1 ST 0.0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 EL 1.0 1600 49 0.031 1 0 49 0.031 1 ER 0.0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 ET 3.0 4800 544 0.113 0 0 544 0.113 0 WL 0.0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 WR 0.5 800 13 0.016 0 0 13 0.016 0 WT 2.5 4000 799 0.200 1 23 822 0.206 1 N/S component 0.130 N/S component 0.130 E/W component 0.230 E/W component 0.236 Rt.Tn. comp. 0.152 Rt.Tn. comp. 0.162 Clearance Interval 0.100 Clearance Interval 0.100 ICU 0.613 ICU 0.628 LOS B LOS B Critical movement identified by a 1. Project Impact: 0.015 Ten lanes for a right turn indicates free movement. NA - Not Applicable PH1-ICU-Exist+Cum+Amb+Proj SAT.xls / 2 4/23/2018 / 9:17 AM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION WORKSHEET INTERSECTION:# 3 N/S:Colorado Pl E/W:Huntington Dr DATE OF COUNTS:10/13/11 Notes:0 ANALYSIS PERIOD: PHASE ONE - Saturday PM Peak Hour Existing (2018) + Cumulative + Ambient Ex (2018) + Cumulative + Ambient + Project No. PM Peak Crit. PROJ. PM Peak Crit. Movemnt Lanes Cap. Vol. V/C Mvmt. VOL. Vol. V/C Mvmt. NL 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 NR 1 1600 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 NT 0 0 0 0.000 1 0 0 0.000 1 SL 2 2880 605 0.210 1 0 605 0.210 1 SR 1 1600 98 0.061 1 17 115 0.072 1 ST 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 EL 0 0 0 0.000 1 0 0 0.000 1 ER 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 ET 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 WL 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 WR 10.0 16000 159 0.010 0 0 159 0.010 0 WT 3.0 4800 1090 0.227 1 27 1117 0.233 1 N/S component 0.210 N/S component 0.210 E/W component 0.227 E/W component 0.233 Rt.Tn. comp. 0.061 Rt.Tn. comp. 0.072 Clearance Interval 0.100 Clearance Interval 0.100 ICU 0.598 ICU 0.615 LOS A LOS B Critical movement identified by a 1. Project Impact: 0.016 Ten lanes for a right turn indicates free movement. NA - Not Applicable PH1-ICU-Exist+Cum+Amb+Proj SAT.xls / 3 Rev 4/23/2018 / 9:17 AM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION WORKSHEET INTERSECTION:# 4 N/S:Holly Dr E/W:Huntington Dr DATE OF COUNTS:09/06/12 Notes:0 ANALYSIS PERIOD: PHASE ONE - Saturday PM Peak Hour Existing (2018) + Cumulative + Ambient Ex (2018) + Cumulative + Ambient + Project No. AM Peak Crit. PROJ. AM Peak Crit. Movemnt Lanes Cap. Vol. V/C Mvmt. VOL. Vol. V/C Mvmt. NL 1.3 2128 192 0.090 1 0 192 0.090 1 NR 0.3 544 86 0.158 1 0 86 0.158 1 NT 0.3 528 11 0.021 0 0 11 0.021 0 SL 1.5 2400 33 0.014 0 0 33 0.014 0 SR 1 1600 205 0.128 1 0 205 0.128 1 ST 1.5 2400 132 0.055 1 0 132 0.055 1 EL 2 2880 66 0.023 0 0 66 0.023 0 ER 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 ET 3 4800 938 0.195 1 5 943 0.196 1 WL 2 2880 211 0.073 1 0 211 0.073 1 WR 0.5 800 24 0.030 0 0 24 0.030 0 WT 2.5 4000 848 0.212 0 14 862 0.216 0 N/S component 0.145 N/S component 0.145 E/W component 0.269 E/W component 0.270 Rt.Tn. comp. 0.114 Rt.Tn. comp. 0.114 Clearance Interval 0.100 Clearance Interval 0.100 ICU 0.628 ICU 0.629 LOS B LOS B Critical movement identified by a 1. Project Impact: 0.001 Ten lanes for a right turn indicates free movement. NA - Not Applicable PH1-ICU-Exist+Cum+Amb+Proj SAT.xls / 4 4/23/2018 / 9:17 AM Santa Anita Inn Redevelopment Place Project TIA March 201870 APPENDIX D: PHASE 2: ICU WORKSHEETS FOR EXISTING (2019) + AMBIENT CONDITIONS INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION WORKSHEET INTERSECTION:# 1 N/S:Santa Anita Ave E/W:Huntington Dr DATE OF COUNTS:05/26/11 Notes: ANALYSIS PERIOD: PHASE TWO- AM Peak Hour Existing (2019) Conditions Existing (2019) + Ambient No. AM Peak Crit. Project AM Peak Crit. Movemnt Lanes Cap. Vol. V/C Mvmt. Vol. Vol. V/C Mvmt. NL 2 2880 479 0.166 1 10 489 0.170 1 NR 1 1600 111 0.069 0 2 113 0.071 0 NT 2 3200 1101 0.344 0 22 1123 0.351 0 SL 2 2880 68 0.024 0 1 69 0.024 0 SR 1 1600 120 0.075 0 2 122 0.076 0 ST 2 3200 721 0.225 1 14 735 0.230 1 EL 1 1600 96 0.060 1 2 98 0.061 1 ER 1 1600 240 0.150 0 5 245 0.153 0 ET 2 3200 474 0.148 0 9 483 0.151 0 WL 1 1600 84 0.053 0 2 86 0.054 0 WR 1 1600 62 0.039 0 1 63 0.039 0 WT 2 3200 811 0.253 1 16 827 0.258 1 N/S component 0.392 N/S component 0.399 E/W component 0.313 E/W component 0.320 Rt.Tn. comp.0.000 Rt.Tn. comp.0.000 Clearance Interval 0.100 Clearance Interval 0.100 ICU 0.805 ICU 0.819 LOS D LOS D Critical movement identified by a 1. Project Impact: 0.014 Ten lanes for a right turn indicates free movement. NA - Not Applicable INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION WORKSHEET INTERSECTION:# 1 N/S:Santa Anita Ave E/W:Huntington Dr DATE OF COUNTS:05/26/11 Notes:0 ANALYSIS PERIOD: PHASE TWO - PM Peak Hour Existing (2019) Conditions Existing (2019) + Ambient No. PM Peak Crit. PROJ. PM Peak Crit. Movemnt Lanes Cap. Vol. V/C Mvmt. VOL. Vol. V/C Mvmt. NL 2 2880 200 0.069 0 4 204 0.071 0 NR 1 1600 169 0.106 0 3 172 0.108 0 NT 2 3200 823 0.257 1 16 839 0.262 1 SL 2 2880 145 0.050 1 3 148 0.051 1 SR 1 1600 123 0.077 0 2 125 0.078 0 ST 2 3200 705 0.220 0 14 719 0.225 0 EL 1 1600 150 0.094 0 3 153 0.096 0 ER 1 1600 536 0.335 0 11 547 0.342 0 ET 2 3200 1160 0.363 1 23 1183 0.370 1 WL 1 1600 149 0.093 1 3 152 0.095 1 WR 1 1600 91 0.057 0 2 93 0.058 0 WT 2 3200 612 0.191 0 12 624 0.195 0 N/S component 0.308 N/S component 0.314 E/W component 0.456 E/W component 0.465 Rt.Tn. comp.0.000 Rt.Tn. comp.0.000 Clearance Interval 0.100 Clearance Interval 0.100 ICU 0.863 ICU 0.878 LOS D LOS D Critical movement identified by a 1. Project Impact: 0.015 Ten lanes for a right turn indicates free movement. NA - Not Applicable PH2-ICU-Exist+Amb.xls / 1 4/23/2018 / 9:18 AM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION WORKSHEET INTERSECTION:# 2 N/S:Santa Clara St E/W:Huntington Dr DATE OF COUNTS:05/26/11 Notes: ANALYSIS PERIOD: PHASE TWO- AM Peak Hour Existing (2019) Conditions Existing (2019) + Ambient No. AM Peak Crit. Project AM Peak Crit. Movemnt Lanes Cap. Vol. V/C Mvmt. Vol. Vol. V/C Mvmt. NL 1 1600 102 0.064 0 2 104 0.065 0 NR 2 3200 637 0.199 1 13 650 0.203 1 NT 2 3200 548 0.171 0 11 559 0.175 1 SL 0 0 0 0.000 1 0 0 0.000 1 SR 2 3200 789 0.247 1 16 805 0.252 1 ST 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 EL 1 1600 9 0.006 1 0 9 0.006 1 ER 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 ET 3 4800 135 0.028 0 3 138 0.029 0 WL 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 WR 0.5 800 19 0.024 0 0 19 0.024 0 WT 2.5 4000 1340 0.335 1 27 1367 0.342 1 N/S component 0.171 N/S component 0.175 E/W component 0.341 E/W component 0.347 Rt.Tn. comp. 0.269 Rt.Tn. comp. 0.274 Clearance Interval 0.100 Clearance Interval 0.100 ICU 0.881 ICU 0.896 LOS D LOS D Critical movement identified by a 1. Project Impact:0.016 Ten lanes for a right turn indicates free movement. NA - Not Applicable INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION WORKSHEET INTERSECTION:# 2 N/S:Santa Clara St E/W:Huntington Dr DATE OF COUNTS:05/26/11 Notes:0 ANALYSIS PERIOD: PHASE TWO - PM Peak Hour Existing (2019) Conditions Existing (2019) + Ambient No. PM Peak Crit. PROJ. PM Peak Crit. Movemnt Lanes Cap. Vol. V/C Mvmt. VOL. Vol. V/C Mvmt. NL 1 1600 143 0.089 0 3 146 0.091 0 NR 2 3200 873 0.273 1 17 890 0.278 1 NT 2 3200 709 0.222 1 14 723 0.226 1 SL 0 0 0 0.000 1 0 0 0.000 1 SR 2 3200 549 0.172 1 11 560 0.175 1 ST 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 EL 1 1600 80 0.050 1 2 82 0.051 1 ER 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 ET 3 4800 1030 0.215 0 21 1051 0.219 0 WL 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 WR 0.5 800 20 0.025 0 0 20 0.025 0 WT 2.5 4000 940 0.235 1 19 959 0.240 1 N/S component 0.222 N/S component 0.226 E/W component 0.285 E/W component 0.291 Rt.Tn. comp. 0.173 Rt.Tn. comp. 0.176 Clearance Interval 0.100 Clearance Interval 0.100 ICU 0.779 ICU 0.793 LOS C LOS C Critical movement identified by a 1. Project Impact:0.014 Ten lanes for a right turn indicates free movement. NA - Not Applicable PH2-ICU-Exist+Amb.xls / 2 4/23/2018 / 9:18 AM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION WORKSHEET INTERSECTION:# 3 N/S:Colorado Pl E/W:Huntington Dr DATE OF COUNTS:10/13/11 Notes: ANALYSIS PERIOD: PHASE TWO- AM Peak Hour Existing (2019) Conditions Existing (2019) + Ambient No. AM Peak Crit. Project AM Peak Crit. Movemnt Lanes Cap. Vol. V/C Mvmt. Vol. Vol. V/C Mvmt. NL 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 NR 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 NT 0 0 0 0.000 1 0 0 0.000 1 SL 2 2880 146 0.051 1 3 149 0.052 1 SR 1 1600 148 0.093 1 3 151 0.094 1 ST 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 EL 0 0 0 0.000 1 0 0 0.000 1 ER 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 ET 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 WL 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 WR 10.0 16000 918 0.057 0 18 936 0.059 0 WT 3.0 4800 1653 0.344 1 33 1686 0.351 1 N/S component 0.051 N/S component 0.052 E/W component 0.344 E/W component 0.351 Rt.Tn. comp. 0.093 Rt.Tn. comp. 0.094 Clearance Interval 0.100 Clearance Interval 0.100 ICU 0.588 ICU 0.597 LOS A LOS A Critical movement identified by a 1. Project Impact:0.010 Ten lanes for a right turn indicates free movement. NA - Not Applicable INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION WORKSHEET INTERSECTION:# 3 N/S:Colorado Pl E/W:Huntington Dr DATE OF COUNTS:10/13/11 Notes:0 ANALYSIS PERIOD: PHASE TWO - PM Peak Hour Existing (2019) Conditions Existing (2019) + Ambient No. PM Peak Crit. PROJ. PM Peak Crit. Movemnt Lanes Cap. Vol. V/C Mvmt. VOL. Vol. V/C Mvmt. NL 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 NR 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 NT 0 0 0 0.000 1 0 0 0.000 1 SL 2 2880 1194 0.415 1 24 1218 0.423 1 SR 1 1600 115 0.072 1 2 117 0.073 1 ST 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 EL 0 0 0 0.000 1 0 0 0.000 1 ER 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 ET 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 WL 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 WR 10.0 16000 277 0.017 0 6 283 0.018 0 WT 3.0 4800 1271 0.265 1 25 1296 0.270 1 N/S component 0.415 N/S component 0.423 E/W component 0.265 E/W component 0.270 Rt.Tn. comp. 0.072 Rt.Tn. comp. 0.073 Clearance Interval 0.100 Clearance Interval 0.100 ICU 0.851 ICU 0.866 LOS D LOS D Critical movement identified by a 1. Project Impact:0.015 Ten lanes for a right turn indicates free movement. NA - Not Applicable PH2-ICU-Exist+Amb.xls / 3 rev 4/23/2018 / 9:18 AM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION WORKSHEET INTERSECTION:# 4 N/S:Holly Dr E/W:Huntington Dr DATE OF COUNTS:09/06/12 Notes: ANALYSIS PERIOD: PHASE TWO- AM Peak Hour Existing (2019) Conditions Existing (2019) + Ambient No. AM Peak Crit. Project AM Peak Crit. Movemnt Lanes Cap. Vol. V/C Mvmt. Vol. Vol. V/C Mvmt. NL 1.3 2080 268 0.129 1 5 273 0.131 1 NR 0.3 480 216 0.450 1 4 220 0.458 1 NT 0.3 480 1 0.002 0 0 1 0.002 0 SL 1.5 2400 1 0.000 0 0 1 0.000 0 SR 1 1600 1 0.001 0 0 1 0.001 0 ST 1.5 2400 7 0.003 1 0 7 0.003 1 EL 2 2880 13 0.005 0 0 13 0.005 0 ER 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 ET 3 4800 731 0.152 1 15 746 0.155 1 WL 2 2880 320 0.111 1 6 326 0.113 1 WR 0.5 800 1 0.001 0 0 1 0.001 0 WT 2.5 4000 1000 0.250 0 20 1020 0.255 0 N/S component 0.132 N/S component 0.134 E/W component 0.263 E/W component 0.269 Rt.Tn. comp.0.337 Rt.Tn. comp.0.343 Clearance Interval 0.100 Clearance Interval 0.100 ICU 0.832 ICU 0.846 LOS D LOS D Critical movement identified by a 1. Project Impact: 0.014 Ten lanes for a right turn indicates free movement. NA - Not Applicable INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION WORKSHEET INTERSECTION:# 4 N/S:Holly Dr E/W:Huntington Dr DATE OF COUNTS:09/06/12 Notes:0 ANALYSIS PERIOD: PHASE TWO - PM Peak Hour Existing (2019) Conditions Existing (2019) + Ambient No. PM Peak Crit. PROJ. PM Peak Crit. Movemnt Lanes Cap. Vol. V/C Mvmt. VOL. Vol. V/C Mvmt. NL 1.3 2080 105 0.050 1 2 107 0.051 1 NR 0.3 480 86 0.179 1 2 88 0.183 1 NT 0.3 480 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 SL 1.5 2400 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 SR 1 1600 28 0.018 1 1 29 0.018 1 ST 1.5 2400 2 0.001 1 0 2 0.001 1 EL 2 2880 22 0.008 0 0 22 0.008 0 ER 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 ET 3 4800 1225 0.255 1 25 1250 0.260 1 WL 2 2880 342 0.119 1 7 349 0.121 1 WR 0.5 800 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 WT 2.5 4000 1136 0.284 0 23 1159 0.290 0 N/S component 0.051 N/S component 0.052 E/W component 0.374 E/W component 0.382 Rt.Tn. comp.0.069 Rt.Tn. comp.0.072 Clearance Interval 0.100 Clearance Interval 0.100 ICU 0.595 ICU 0.606 LOS A LOS B Critical movement identified by a 1. Project Impact: 0.011 Ten lanes for a right turn indicates free movement. NA - Not Applicable PH2-ICU-Exist+Amb.xls / 4 4/23/2018 / 9:18 AM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION WORKSHEET INTERSECTION:# 1 N/S:Santa Anita Ave E/W:Huntington Dr DATE OF COUNTS:05/26/11 Notes:0 ANALYSIS PERIOD: PHASE TWO - Saturday PM Peak Hour Existing (2019) Conditions Existing (2019) + Ambient No. PM Peak Crit. PROJ. PM Peak Crit. Movemnt Lanes Cap. Vol. V/C Mvmt. VOL. Vol. V/C Mvmt. NL 2 2880 174 0.060 0 3 177 0.061 0 NR 1 1600 152 0.095 0 3 155 0.097 0 NT 2 3200 661 0.207 1 13 674 0.211 1 SL 2 2880 248 0.086 1 5 253 0.088 1 SR 1 1600 120 0.075 0 2 122 0.076 0 ST 2 3200 648 0.203 0 13 661 0.207 0 EL 1 1600 129 0.081 0 3 132 0.083 0 ER 1 1600 113 0.071 0 2 115 0.072 0 ET 2 3200 768 0.240 1 15 783 0.245 1 WL 1 1600 151 0.094 1 3 154 0.096 1 WR 1 1600 80 0.050 0 2 82 0.051 0 WT 2 3200 518 0.162 0 10 528 0.165 0 N/S component 0.293 N/S component 0.298 E/W component 0.334 E/W component 0.341 Rt.Tn. comp. 0.000 Rt.Tn. comp. 0.000 Clearance Interval 0.100 Clearance Interval 0.100 ICU 0.727 ICU 0.739 LOS C LOS C Critical movement identified by a 1. Project Impact: 0.012 Ten lanes for a right turn indicates free movement. NA - Not Applicable PH2-ICU-Exist+Amb SAT.xls / 1 4/23/2018 / 9:18 AM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION WORKSHEET INTERSECTION:# 2 N/S:Santa Clara St E/W:Huntington Dr DATE OF COUNTS:05/26/11 Notes:0 ANALYSIS PERIOD: PHASE TWO - Saturday PM Peak Hour Existing (2019) Conditions Existing (2019) + Ambient No. AM Peak Crit. PROJ. AM Peak Crit. Movemnt Lanes Cap. Vol. V/C Mvmt. VOL. Vol. V/C Mvmt. NL 1 1600 70 0.044 0 1 71 0.044 0 NR 2 3200 658 0.206 1 13 671 0.210 1 NT 2 3200 417 0.130 1 8 425 0.133 1 SL 0 0 0 0.000 1 0 0 0.000 1 SR 2 3200 374 0.117 1 7 381 0.119 1 ST 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 EL 1 1600 49 0.031 1 1 50 0.031 1 ER 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 ET 3 4800 544 0.113 0 11 555 0.116 0 WL 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 WR 0.5 800 13 0.016 0 0 13 0.016 0 WT 2.5 4000 822 0.206 1 16 838 0.210 1 N/S component 0.130 N/S component 0.133 E/W component 0.236 E/W component 0.241 Rt.Tn. comp. 0.162 Rt.Tn. comp. 0.165 Clearance Interval 0.100 Clearance Interval 0.100 ICU 0.628 ICU 0.638 LOS B LOS B Critical movement identified by a 1.Project Impac 0.010 Ten lanes for a right turn indicates free movement. NA - Not Applicable PH2-ICU-Exist+Amb SAT.xls / 2 4/23/2018 / 9:18 AM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION WORKSHEET INTERSECTION:# 3 N/S:Colorado Pl E/W:Huntington Dr DATE OF COUNTS:10/13/11 Notes:0 ANALYSIS PERIOD: PHASE TWO - Saturday PM Peak Hour Existing (2019) Conditions Existing (2019) + Ambient No. PM Peak Crit. PROJ. PM Peak Crit. Movemnt Lanes Cap. Vol. V/C Mvmt. VOL. Vol. V/C Mvmt. NL 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 NR 1 1600 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 NT 0 0 0 0.000 1 0 0 0.000 1 SL 2 2880 605 0.210 1 12 617 0.214 1 SR 1 1600 115 0.072 1 2 117 0.073 1 ST 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 EL 0 0 0 0.000 1 0 0 0.000 1 ER 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 ET 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 WL 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 WR 10.0 16000 159 0.010 0 3 162 0.010 0 WT 3.00 4800 1117 0.233 1 22 1139 0.237 1 N/S component 0.210 N/S component 0.214 E/W component 0.233 E/W component 0.237 Rt.Tn. comp. 0.072 Rt.Tn. comp. 0.073 Clearance Interval 0.100 Clearance Interval 0.100 ICU 0.615 ICU 0.625 LOS B LOS B Critical movement identified by a 1.Project Impac 0.010 Ten lanes for a right turn indicates free movement. NA - Not Applicable PH2-ICU-Exist+Amb SAT.xls / 3 Rev 4/23/2018 / 9:18 AM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION WORKSHEET INTERSECTION:#4 N/S:Holly Dr E/W:Huntington Dr DATE OF COUNTS:09/06/12 Notes:0 ANALYSIS PERIOD: PHASE TWO - Saturday PM Peak Hour Existing (2019) Conditions Existing (2019) + Ambient No. PM Peak Crit. PROJ. PM Peak Crit. Movemnt Lanes Cap. Vol. V/C Mvmt. VOL. Vol. V/C Mvmt. NL 1.3 2128 192 0.090 1 4 196 0.092 1 NR 0.3 544 86 0.158 1 2 88 0.162 1 NT 0.3 528 11 0.021 0 0 11 0.021 0 SL 1.5 2400 33 0.014 0 1 34 0.014 0 SR 1 1600 205 0.128 1 4 209 0.131 1 ST 1.5 2400 132 0.055 1 3 135 0.056 1 EL 2 2880 66 0.023 0 1 67 0.023 0 ER 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 ET 3 4800 943 0.196 1 19 962 0.200 1 WL 2 2880 211 0.073 1 4 215 0.075 1 WR 0.5 800 24 0.030 0 0 24 0.030 0 WT 2.5 4000 862 0.216 0 17 879 0.220 0 N/S component 0.145 N/S component 0.148 E/W component 0.270 E/W component 0.275 Rt.Tn. comp. 0.114 Rt.Tn. comp. 0.117 Clearance Interval 0.100 Clearance Interval 0.100 ICU 0.629 ICU 0.641 LOS B LOS B Critical movement identified by a 1.Project Impac 0.012 Ten lanes for a right turn indicates free movement. NA - Not Applicable PH2-ICU-Exist+Amb SAT.xls / 4 4/23/2018 / 9:18 AM Santa Anita Inn Redevelopment Place Project TIA March 201871 APPENDIX E: PHASE 2: ICU WORKSHEETS FOR EXISTING (2019) + AMBIENT + PROJECT CONDITIONS INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION WORKSHEET INTERSECTION:# 1 N/S:Santa Anita Ave E/W:Huntington Dr DATE OF COUNTS:05/26/11 Notes: ANALYSIS PERIOD: PHASE TWO - AM Peak Hour Existing (2019) + Ambient Existing (2019) + Ambient + Project No. AM Peak Crit. Project AM Peak Crit. Movemnt Lanes Cap. Vol. V/C Mvmt. Vol. Vol. V/C Mvmt. NL 2 2880 489 0.170 1 2 491 0.170 1 NR 1 1600 113 0.071 0 0 113 0.071 0 NT 2 3200 1123 0.351 0 0 1123 0.351 0 SL 2 2880 69 0.024 0 0 69 0.024 0 SR 1 1600 122 0.076 0 8 130 0.081 0 ST 2 3200 735 0.230 1 0 735 0.230 1 EL 1 1600 98 0.061 1 22 120 0.075 1 ER 1 1600 245 0.153 0 2 247 0.154 0 ET 2 3200 483 0.151 0 2 485 0.152 0 WL 1 1600 86 0.054 0 0 86 0.054 0 WR 1 1600 63 0.039 0 0 63 0.039 0 WT 2 3200 827 0.258 1 5 832 0.260 1 N/S component 0.399 N/S component 0.400 E/W component 0.320 E/W component 0.335 Rt.Tn. comp.0.000 Rt.Tn. comp.0.000 Clearance Interval 0.100 Clearance Interval 0.100 ICU 0.819 ICU 0.835 LOS D LOS D Critical movement identified by a 1. Project Impact: 0.016 Ten lanes for a right turn indicates free movement. NA - Not Applicable INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION WORKSHEET INTERSECTION:# 1 N/S:Santa Anita Ave E/W:Huntington Dr DATE OF COUNTS:05/26/11 Notes:0 ANALYSIS PERIOD: PHASE TWO - PM Peak Hour Existing (2019) + Ambient Existing (2019) + Ambient + Project No. PM Peak Crit. PROJ. PM Peak Crit. Movemnt Lanes Cap. Vol. V/C Mvmt. VOL. Vol. V/C Mvmt. NL 2 2880 204 0.071 0 4 208 0.072 0 NR 1 1600 172 0.108 0 0 172 0.108 0 NT 2 3200 839 0.262 1 0 839 0.262 1 SL 2 2880 148 0.051 1 0 148 0.051 1 SR 1 1600 125 0.078 0 19 144 0.090 0 ST 2 3200 719 0.225 0 0 719 0.225 0 EL 1 1600 153 0.096 0 40 193 0.121 0 ER 1 1600 547 0.342 0 4 551 0.344 0 ET 2 3200 1183 0.370 1 4 1187 0.371 1 WL 1 1600 152 0.095 1 0 152 0.095 1 WR 1 1600 93 0.058 0 0 93 0.058 0 WT 2 3200 624 0.195 0 12 636 0.199 0 N/S component 0.314 N/S component 0.314 E/W component 0.465 E/W component 0.466 Rt.Tn. comp.0.000 Rt.Tn. comp.0.000 Clearance Interval 0.100 Clearance Interval 0.100 ICU 0.878 ICU 0.880 LOS D LOS D Critical movement identified by a 1. Project Impact: 0.001 Ten lanes for a right turn indicates free movement. NA - Not Applicable PH2-ICU-Exist+Amb+Proj.xls / 1 4/23/2018 / 9:18 AM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION WORKSHEET INTERSECTION:# 2 N/S:Santa Clara St E/W:Huntington Dr DATE OF COUNTS:05/26/11 Notes: ANALYSIS PERIOD: PHASE TWO - AM Peak Hour Existing (2019) + Ambient Existing (2019) + Ambient + Project No. AM Peak Crit. Project AM Peak Crit. Movemnt Lanes Cap. Vol. V/C Mvmt. Vol. Vol. V/C Mvmt. NL 1 1600 104 0.065 0 0 104 0.065 0 NR 2 3200 650 0.203 1 26 676 0.211 1 NT 2 3200 559 0.175 1 0 559 0.175 1 SL 0 0 0 0.000 1 0 0 0.000 1 SR 2 3200 805 0.252 1 3 808 0.253 1 ST 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 EL 1 1600 9 0.006 1 0 9 0.006 1 ER 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 ET 3 4800 138 0.029 0 0 138 0.029 0 WL 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 WR 0.5 800 19 0.024 0 0 19 0.024 0 WT 2.5 4000 1367 0.342 1 14 1381 0.345 1 N/S component 0.175 N/S component 0.175 E/W component 0.347 E/W component 0.351 Rt.Tn. comp. 0.274 Rt.Tn. comp. 0.283 Clearance Interval 0.100 Clearance Interval 0.100 ICU 0.896 ICU 0.909 LOS D LOS E Critical movement identified by a 1. Project Impact:0.013 Ten lanes for a right turn indicates free movement. NA - Not Applicable INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION WORKSHEET INTERSECTION:# 2 N/S:Santa Clara St E/W:Huntington Dr DATE OF COUNTS:05/26/11 Notes:0 ANALYSIS PERIOD: PHASE TWO - PM Peak Hour Existing (2019) + Ambient Existing (2019) + Ambient + Project No. PM Peak Crit. PROJ. PM Peak Crit. Movemnt Lanes Cap. Vol. V/C Mvmt. VOL. Vol. V/C Mvmt. NL 1 1600 146 0.091 0 0 146 0.091 0 NR 2 3200 890 0.278 1 47 937 0.293 1 NT 2 3200 723 0.226 1 0 723 0.226 1 SL 0 0 0 0.000 1 0 0 0.000 1 SR 2 3200 560 0.175 1 8 568 0.178 1 ST 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 EL 1 1600 82 0.051 1 0 82 0.051 1 ER 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 ET 3 4800 1051 0.219 0 0 1051 0.219 0 WL 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 WR 0.5 800 20 0.025 0 0 20 0.025 0 WT 2.5 4000 959 0.240 1 35 994 0.249 1 N/S component 0.226 N/S component 0.226 E/W component 0.291 E/W component 0.300 Rt.Tn. comp. 0.176 Rt.Tn. comp. 0.193 Clearance Interval 0.100 Clearance Interval 0.100 ICU 0.793 ICU 0.819 LOS C LOS D Critical movement identified by a 1. Project Impact:0.026 Ten lanes for a right turn indicates free movement. NA - Not Applicable PH2-ICU-Exist+Amb+Proj.xls / 2 4/23/2018 / 9:18 AM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION WORKSHEET INTERSECTION:#3 N/S:Colorado Pl E/W:Huntington Dr DATE OF COUNTS:10/13/11 Notes: ANALYSIS PERIOD: PHASE TWO - AM Peak Hour Existing (2019) + Ambient Existing (2019) + Ambient + Project No. AM Peak Crit. Project AM Peak Crit. Movemnt Lanes Cap. Vol. V/C Mvmt. Vol. Vol. V/C Mvmt. NL 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 NR 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 NT 0 0 0 0.000 1 0 0 0.000 1 SL 2 2880 149 0.052 1 0 149 0.052 1 SR 1 1600 151 0.094 1 11 162 0.101 1 ST 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 EL 0 0 0 0.000 1 0 0 0.000 1 ER 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 ET 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 WL 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 WR 1.5 2400 936 0.390 0 0 936 0.390 0 WT 3.0 4800 1686 0.351 1 17 1703 0.355 1 N/S component 0.052 N/S component 0.052 E/W component 0.351 E/W component 0.355 Rt.Tn. comp.0.094 Rt.Tn. comp.0.101 Clearance Interval 0.100 Clearance Interval 0.100 ICU 0.597 ICU 0.608 LOS A LOS B Critical movement identified by a 1. Project Impact: 0.010 Ten lanes for a right turn indicates free movement. NA - Not Applicable INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION WORKSHEET INTERSECTION:#3 N/S:Colorado Pl E/W:Huntington Dr DATE OF COUNTS:10/13/11 Notes:0 ANALYSIS PERIOD: PHASE TWO - PM Peak Hour Existing (2019) + Ambient Existing (2019) + Ambient + Project No. PM Peak Crit. PROJ. PM Peak Crit. Movemnt Lanes Cap. Vol. V/C Mvmt. VOL. Vol. V/C Mvmt. NL 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 NR 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 NT 0 0 0 0.000 1 0 0 0.000 1 SL 2 2880 1218 0.423 1 0 1218 0.423 1 SR 1 1600 117 0.073 1 27 144 0.090 1 ST 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 EL 0 0 0 0.000 1 0 0 0.000 1 ER 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 ET 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 WL 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 WR 1.5 2400 283 0.118 0 0 283 0.118 0 WT 3 4800 1296 0.270 1 42 1338 0.279 1 N/S component 0.423 N/S component 0.423 E/W component 0.270 E/W component 0.279 Rt.Tn. comp.0.073 Rt.Tn. comp.0.090 Clearance Interval 0.100 Clearance Interval 0.100 ICU 0.866 ICU 0.892 LOS D LOS D Critical movement identified by a 1. Project Impact: 0.026 Ten lanes for a right turn indicates free movement. NA - Not Applicable PH2-ICU-Exist+Amb+Proj.xls / 3 Rev 4/23/2018 / 9:18 AM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION WORKSHEET INTERSECTION:#4 N/S:Holly Dr E/W:Huntington Dr DATE OF COUNTS:09/06/12 Notes: ANALYSIS PERIOD: PHASE TWO - AM Peak Hour Existing (2019) + Ambient Existing (2019) + Ambient + Project No. AM Peak Crit. Project AM Peak Crit. Movemnt Lanes Cap. Vol. V/C Mvmt. Vol. Vol. V/C Mvmt. NL 1.3 2080 273 0.131 1 0 273 0.131 1 NR 0.3 480 220 0.458 1 0 220 0.458 1 NT 0.3 480 1 0.002 0 0 1 0.002 0 SL 1.5 2400 1 0.000 0 0 1 0.000 0 SR 1 1600 1 0.001 0 0 1 0.001 0 ST 1.5 2400 7 0.003 1 0 7 0.003 1 EL 2 2880 13 0.005 0 0 13 0.005 0 ER 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 ET 3 4800 746 0.155 1 3 749 0.156 1 WL 2 2880 326 0.113 1 0 326 0.113 1 WR 0.5 800 1 0.001 0 0 1 0.001 0 WT 2.5 4000 1020 0.255 0 14 1034 0.259 0 N/S component 0.134 N/S component 0.134 E/W component 0.269 E/W component 0.269 Rt.Tn. comp.0.343 Rt.Tn. comp.0.343 Clearance Interval 0.100 Clearance Interval 0.100 ICU 0.846 ICU 0.846 LOS D LOS D Critical movement identified by a 1. Project Impact: 0.001 Ten lanes for a right turn indicates free movement. NA - Not Applicable INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION WORKSHEET INTERSECTION:#4 N/S:Holly Dr E/W:Huntington Dr DATE OF COUNTS:09/06/12 Notes:0 ANALYSIS PERIOD: PHASE TWO - PM Peak Hour Existing (2019) + Ambient Existing (2019) + Ambient + Project No. PM Peak Crit. PROJ. PM Peak Crit. Movemnt Lanes Cap. Vol. V/C Mvmt. VOL. Vol. V/C Mvmt. NL 1.3 2080 107 0.051 1 0 107 0.051 1 NR 0.3 480 88 0.183 1 0 88 0.183 1 NT 0.3 480 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 SL 1.5 2400 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 SR 1 1600 29 0.018 1 0 29 0.018 1 ST 1.5 2400 2 0.001 1 0 2 0.001 1 EL 2 2880 22 0.008 0 0 22 0.008 0 ER 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 ET 3 4800 1250 0.260 1 8 1258 0.262 1 WL 2 2880 349 0.121 1 0 349 0.121 1 WR 0.5 800 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 WT 2.5 4000 1159 0.290 0 26 1185 0.296 0 N/S component 0.052 N/S component 0.052 E/W component 0.382 E/W component 0.383 Rt.Tn. comp.0.072 Rt.Tn. comp.0.072 Clearance Interval 0.100 Clearance Interval 0.100 ICU 0.606 ICU 0.607 LOS B LOS B Critical movement identified by a 1. Project Impact: 0.002 Ten lanes for a right turn indicates free movement. NA - Not Applicable PH2-ICU-Exist+Amb+Proj.xls / 4 4/23/2018 / 9:18 AM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION WORKSHEET INTERSECTION:# 1 N/S:Santa Anita Ave E/W:Huntington Dr DATE OF COUNTS:05/26/11 Notes:0 ANALYSIS PERIOD: PHASE TWO - Saturday PM Peak Hour Existing (2019) + Ambient Existing (2019) + Ambient + Project No. AM Peak Crit. PROJ. AM Peak Crit. Movemnt Lanes Cap. Vol. V/C Mvmt. VOL. Vol. V/C Mvmt. NL 2 2880 177 0.061 0 5 182 0.063 0 NR 1 1600 155 0.097 0 0 155 0.097 0 NT 2 3200 674 0.211 1 0 674 0.211 1 SL 2 2880 253 0.088 1 0 253 0.088 1 SR 1 1600 122 0.076 0 23 145 0.091 0 ST 2 3200 661 0.207 0 0 661 0.207 0 EL 1 1600 132 0.083 0 45 177 0.111 0 ER 1 1600 115 0.072 0 4 119 0.074 0 ET 2 3200 783 0.245 1 4 787 0.246 1 WL 1 1600 154 0.096 1 0 154 0.096 1 WR 1 1600 82 0.051 0 0 82 0.051 0 WT 2 3200 528 0.165 0 14 542 0.169 0 N/S component 0.298 N/S component 0.298 E/W component 0.341 E/W component 0.342 Rt.Tn. comp. 0.000 Rt.Tn. comp. 0.000 Clearance Interval 0.100 Clearance Interval 0.100 ICU 0.739 ICU 0.741 LOS C LOS C Critical movement identified by a 1. Project Impact: 0.001 Ten lanes for a right turn indicates free movement. NA - Not Applicable PH2-ICU-Exist+Amb+Proj SAT.xls / 1 4/23/2018 / 9:18 AM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION WORKSHEET INTERSECTION:# 2 N/S:Santa Clara St E/W:Huntington Dr DATE OF COUNTS:05/26/11 Notes:0 ANALYSIS PERIOD: PHASE TWO - Saturday PM Peak Hour Existing (2019) + Ambient Existing (2019) + Ambient + Project No. AM Peak Crit. PROJ. AM Peak Crit. Movemnt Lanes Cap. Vol. V/C Mvmt. VOL. Vol. V/C Mvmt. NL 1 1600 71 0.044 0 0 71 0.044 0 NR 2 3200 671 0.210 1 53 724 0.226 1 NT 2 3200 425 0.133 1 0 425 0.133 1 SL 0 0 0 0.000 1 0 0 0.000 1 SR 2 3200 381 0.119 1 9 390 0.122 1 ST 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 EL 1 1600 50 0.031 1 0 50 0.031 1 ER 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 ET 3 4800 555 0.116 0 0 555 0.116 0 WL 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 WR 0.5 800 13 0.016 0 0 13 0.016 0 WT 2.5 4000 838 0.210 1 41 879 0.220 1 N/S component 0.133 N/S component 0.133 E/W component 0.241 E/W component 0.251 Rt.Tn. comp. 0.165 Rt.Tn. comp. 0.184 Clearance Interval 0.100 Clearance Interval 0.100 ICU 0.638 ICU 0.668 LOS B LOS B Critical movement identified by a 1. Project Impact: 0.030 Ten lanes for a right turn indicates free movement. NA - Not Applicable PH2-ICU-Exist+Amb+Proj SAT.xls / 2 4/23/2018 / 9:18 AM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION WORKSHEET INTERSECTION:# 3 N/S:Colorado Pl E/W:Huntington Dr DATE OF COUNTS:10/13/11 Notes:0 ANALYSIS PERIOD: PHASE TWO - Saturday PM Peak Hour Existing (2019) + Ambient Existing (2019) + Ambient + Project No. AM Peak Crit. PROJ. AM Peak Crit. Movemnt Lanes Cap. Vol. V/C Mvmt. VOL. Vol. V/C Mvmt. NL 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 NR 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 NT 0 0 0 0.000 1 0 0 0.000 1 SL 2 2880 617 0.214 1 0 617 0.214 1 SR 1 1600 117 0.073 1 32 149 0.093 1 ST 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 EL 0 0 0 0.000 1 0 0 0.000 1 ER 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 ET 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 WL 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 WR 10 16000 162 0.010 0 0 162 0.010 0 WT 3 4800 1139 0.237 1 51 1190 0.248 1 N/S component 0.214 N/S component 0.214 E/W component 0.237 E/W component 0.248 Rt.Tn. comp. 0.073 Rt.Tn. comp. 0.093 Clearance Interval 0.100 Clearance Interval 0.100 ICU 0.625 ICU 0.655 LOS B LOS B Critical movement identified by a 1. Project Impact: 0.031 Ten lanes for a right turn indicates free movement. NA - Not Applicable PH2-ICU-Exist+Amb+Proj SAT.xls / 3 Rev 4/23/2018 / 9:18 AM INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION WORKSHEET INTERSECTION:# 4 N/S:Holly Dr E/W:Huntington Dr DATE OF COUNTS:09/06/12 Notes:0 ANALYSIS PERIOD: PHASE TWO - Saturday PM Peak Hour Existing (2019) + Ambient Existing (2019) + Ambient + Project No. AM Peak Crit. PROJ. AM Peak Crit. Movemnt Lanes Cap. Vol. V/C Mvmt. VOL. Vol. V/C Mvmt. NL 1.3 2128 196 0.092 1 0 196 0.092 1 NR 0.3 544 88 0.162 1 0 88 0.162 1 NT 0.3 528 11 0.021 0 0 11 0.021 0 SL 1.5 2400 34 0.014 0 0 34 0.014 0 SR 1 1600 209 0.131 1 0 209 0.131 1 ST 1.5 2400 135 0.056 1 0 135 0.056 1 EL 2 2880 67 0.023 0 0 67 0.023 0 ER 0 0 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.000 0 ET 3 4800 962 0.200 1 9 971 0.202 1 WL 2 2880 215 0.075 1 0 215 0.075 1 WR 0.5 800 24 0.030 0 0 24 0.030 0 WT 2.5 4000 879 0.220 0 29 908 0.227 0 0.148 N/S component 0.148 E/W component 0.275 E/W component 0.277 Rt.Tn. comp. 0.117 Rt.Tn. comp. 0.117 Clearance Interval 0.100 Clearance Interval 0.100 ICU 0.641 ICU 0.643 LOS B LOS B Critical movement identified by a 1. Project Impact: 0.002 Ten lanes for a right turn indicates free movement. NA - Not Applicable PH2-ICU-Exist+Amb+Proj SAT.xls / 4 4/23/2018 / 9:18 AM