HomeMy WebLinkAboutDraft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration - Part 1
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use
Project
Initial Study/
Mitigated Negative Declaration
Submitted to City of Arcadia
Development Services Department
240 West Huntington Drive
Arcadia, California 91066
Contact: Luis Torrico
T: (626) 574-5442
Prepared by Psomas
3 Hutton Centre Drive, Suite 200
Santa Ana, California 92707
T: (714) 751-7373
April 2020
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx i Table of Contents
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page
Section 1.0 Introduction ...................................................................................................... 1-1
1.1 Purpose of this Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration .................. 1-1
1.2 Project Overview..................................................................................... 1-1
1.3 Summary of Environmental Impacts ....................................................... 1-1
1.4 Project Review and Approval Process .................................................... 1-8
1.5 Organization of this Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration ........... 1-9
Section 2.0 Environmental Setting and Project Description ............................................ 2-1
2.1 Environmental Setting ............................................................................. 2-1
2.1.1 Project Location .......................................................................... 2-1
2.1.2 Existing Project Site Conditions .................................................. 2-1
2.1.3 Surrounding Area Conditions ...................................................... 2-2
2.2 Project Description.................................................................................. 2-2
2.2.1 Proposed On-Site Land Uses ..................................................... 2-3
2.2.2 Development Characteristics ...................................................... 2-4
2.2.3 Easements .................................................................................. 2-9
2.2.4 Off-Site Improvements .............................................................. 2-10
2.3 Construction Activities .......................................................................... 2-11
2.4 Discretionary Approvals ........................................................................ 2-12
Section 3.0 Environmental Checklist Form ........................................................................ 3-1
Section 4.0 Environmental Impact Questions and Analysis ............................................ 4-1
4.1 Aesthetics ............................................................................................... 4-1
4.1.1 Environmental Setting ................................................................. 4-1
4.1.2 Project Impacts ........................................................................... 4-1
4.1.3 Mitigation Measures .................................................................... 4-5
4.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources ....................................................... 4-6
4.2.1 Environmental Setting ................................................................. 4-6
4.2.2 Project Impacts ........................................................................... 4-6
4.2.3 Mitigation Measures .................................................................... 4-7
4.3 Air Quality ............................................................................................... 4-8
4.3.1 Environmental Setting ................................................................. 4-8
4.3.2 Project Impacts ......................................................................... 4-10
4.3.3 Mitigation Measures .................................................................. 4-18
4.4 Biological Resources ............................................................................ 4-19
4.4.1 Environmental Setting ............................................................... 4-19
4.4.2 Project Impacts ......................................................................... 4-20
4.4.3 Mitigation Measures .................................................................. 4-22
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx ii Table of Contents
4.5 Cultural Resources ............................................................................... 4-23
4.5.1 Environmental Setting ............................................................... 4-23
4.5.2 Impact Analysis ......................................................................... 4-26
4.5.3 Mitigation Program .................................................................... 4-27
4.6 Energy .................................................................................................. 4-28
4.6.1 Environmental Setting ............................................................... 4-28
4.6.2 Project Impacts ......................................................................... 4-29
4.6.3 Mitigation Measures .................................................................. 4-31
4.7 Geology and Soils................................................................................. 4-32
4.7.1 Environmental Setting ............................................................... 4-32
4.7.2 Project Impacts ......................................................................... 4-33
4.7.3 Mitigation Measures .................................................................. 4-38
4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions ................................................................. 4-39
4.8.1 Environmental Setting ............................................................... 4-39
4.8.2 Project Impacts ......................................................................... 4-40
4.8.3 Mitigation Measures .................................................................. 4-43
4.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials ....................................................... 4-44
4.9.1 Environmental Setting ............................................................... 4-44
4.9.2 Project Impacts ......................................................................... 4-45
4.9.3 Mitigation Measures .................................................................. 4-48
4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality ................................................................ 4-49
4.10.1 Environmental Setting ............................................................... 4-49
4.10.2 Project Impacts ......................................................................... 4-50
4.10.3 Mitigation Measures .................................................................. 4-55
4.11 Land Use and Planning ........................................................................ 4-56
4.11.1 Environmental Setting ............................................................... 4-56
4.11.2 Project Impacts ......................................................................... 4-57
4.11.3 Mitigation Measures .................................................................. 4-64
4.12 Mineral Resources ................................................................................ 4-65
4.12.1 Environmental Setting ............................................................... 4-65
4.12.2 Project Impacts ......................................................................... 4-65
4.12.3 Mitigation Measures .................................................................. 4-66
4.13 Noise .................................................................................................... 4-67
4.13.1 Environmental Setting ............................................................... 4-67
4.13.2 Project Impacts ......................................................................... 4-72
4.13.3 Mitigation Measures .................................................................. 4-82
4.14 Population and Housing ........................................................................ 4-83
4.14.1 Environmental Setting ............................................................... 4-83
4.14.2 Project Impacts ......................................................................... 4-83
4.14.3 Mitigation Measures .................................................................. 4-84
4.15 Public Services ..................................................................................... 4-85
4.15.1 Environmental Setting ............................................................... 4-85
4.15.2 Project Impacts ......................................................................... 4-86
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx iii Table of Contents
4.15.3 Mitigation Measures .................................................................. 4-89
4.16 Recreation ............................................................................................ 4-90
4.16.1 Environmental Setting ............................................................... 4-90
4.16.2 Project Impacts ......................................................................... 4-91
4.16.3 Mitigation Measures .................................................................. 4-92
4.17 Transportation....................................................................................... 4-93
4.17.1 Environmental Setting ............................................................... 4-93
4.17.2 Project Impacts ......................................................................... 4-96
4.17.3 Minimization and Mitigation Measures .................................... 4-110
4.18 Tribal Cultural Resources ................................................................... 4-113
4.18.1 Existing Conditions ................................................................. 4-113
4.18.2 Impact Analysis ....................................................................... 4-115
4.18.3 Mitigation Measures ................................................................ 4-116
4.19 Utilities and Service Systems ............................................................. 4-117
4.19.1 Environmental Setting ............................................................. 4-117
4.19.2 Project Impacts ....................................................................... 4-118
4.19.3 Mitigation Measures ................................................................ 4-121
4.20 Wildfire ................................................................................................ 4-122
4.20.1 Environmental Setting ............................................................. 4-122
4.20.2 Project Impacts ....................................................................... 4-122
4.20.3 Mitigation Measures ................................................................ 4-123
4.21 Mandatory Findings of Significance .................................................... 4-124
Section 5.0 Report Preparers and Contributors ................................................................ 5-1
Section 6.0 References ........................................................................................................ 6-1
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx iv Table of Contents
TABLES
Table Page
1 Summary of Project Design Features, Regulatory Requirements, and Mitigation
Measures ....................................................................................................................... 1-2
2 Project Commercial Unit Summary ................................................................................ 2-3
3 Project Residential Unit Summary ................................................................................. 2-4
4 Project Construction Schedule ..................................................................................... 2-11
5 California and National Ambient Air Quality Standards .................................................. 4-9
6 Attainment Status of Criteria Pollutants in the South Coast Air Basin.......................... 4-10
7 South Coast Air Quality Management District Air Quality Significance Thresholds ..... 4-12
8 Estimated Maximum Daily Regional Construction Emissions ...................................... 4-13
9 Construction-Phase Localized Significance Threshold Emissions .............................. 4-14
10 Existing Daily Operational Emissions ........................................................................... 4-14
11 Peak Daily Net Operational Emissions ........................................................................ 4-15
12 Cultural Resource Studies Intersection with the Project Site ....................................... 4-24
13 Previously-Identified Historic-Era Properties Within the Project Site ........................... 4-25
14 Energy Use During Construction .................................................................................. 4-30
15 Energy Use During Operations .................................................................................... 4-30
16 Estimated Annual Greenhouse Gas Emissions From Construction ............................. 4-41
17 Estimated Annual Greenhouse Gas Emissions From Existing Use ............................. 4-41
18 Estimated Annual Greenhouse Gas Emissions From Project Operation ..................... 4-42
19 Estimated Total Annual Greenhouse Gas Emissions .................................................. 4-42
20 Land Use and Zoning Designations Near the Project Site ........................................... 4-57
21 Project Consistency With The Commercial Business District Zone Development
Standards ..................................................................................................................... 4-60
22 Project Consistency With The Downtown Mixed-Use Zone Development
Standards ..................................................................................................................... 4-62
23 Summary of Short-Term Ambient Noise Level Measurements .................................... 4-68
24 City of Arcadia Guidelines for Noise Compatible Land Uses ....................................... 4-70
25 City of Arcadia Interior/Exterior Noise Standards ......................................................... 4-71
26 Stationary Source Noise Limits .................................................................................... 4-72
27 Construction Noise Levels at Noise-Sensitive Uses .................................................... 4-75
28 Existing and Projected Traffic Noise Levels ................................................................. 4-77
29 Vibration Damage Threshold Criteria ........................................................................... 4-79
30 Vibration Annoyance Criteria ....................................................................................... 4-80
31 Vibration Levels For Construction Equipment .............................................................. 4-80
32 Vibration Annoyance Criteria at Sensitive Uses ........................................................... 4-81
33 Structural Damage Criteria at Sensitive Uses .............................................................. 4-81
34 Parks and Recreational Facilities Within a Half-Mile of the Project .............................. 4-90
35 Significant Impact Thresholds – ICU Methodology ...................................................... 4-94
36 Existing (2018) Intersection Level of Service ............................................................... 4-95
37 Project Trip Generation ................................................................................................ 4-97
38 Impact Analysis for Existing Without Project and Existing With Project ....................... 4-99
39 Cumulative Projects From the Traffic Study ............................................................... 4-100
40 Cumulative Projects Trip Generation ......................................................................... 4-101
41 Cumulative Plus Project Impacts Analysis ................................................................. 4-103
42 Total Cumulative Impacts Analysis ............................................................................ 4-105
43 Total Domestic Water Demand .................................................................................. 4-119
44 Related Projects ......................................................................................................... 4-125
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx v Table of Contents
EXHIBITS
Exhibit Follows Page
1 Vicinity Map .................................................................................................................... 2-1
2 Aerial Map ...................................................................................................................... 2-1
3a–f Site Photographs ............................................................................................................ 2-1
4a Illustrative Site Plan ........................................................................................................ 2-2
4b–h Plan Views ..................................................................................................................... 2-2
5a–c Unit Plans ....................................................................................................................... 2-3
6a–f Perspective Renderings ................................................................................................. 2-4
6g–i Elevations ....................................................................................................................... 2-4
7a–c Material Finishes ............................................................................................................ 2-4
8 Roof Plan ....................................................................................................................... 2-5
9a Typical Views of Project Landscape Elements ................................................................ 2-5
9b Site Plan ......................................................................................................................... 2-5
9c–i Renderings ..................................................................................................................... 2-5
9j Parking Device Specification .......................................................................................... 2-7
10 Pre-Project Hydrology Plan ............................................................................................ 2-7
11 Post-Project Hydrology Plan .......................................................................................... 2-8
12 Wet Utility Point of Connection ....................................................................................... 2-8
13 Zoning Map .................................................................................................................. 4-56
14 Hourly Noise Levels ..................................................................................................... 4-68
15 Temporary Construction Noise Barrier Map ................................................................... 4-73
16 Study Intersections ........................................................................................................ 4-94
17 Project Trip Distribution ................................................................................................ 4-97
18 Cumulative Projects Map ........................................................................................... 4-100
APPENDICES
Appendix
A Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Calculations, Including CalEEmod Output
B Historic Resources Assessment
C Energy Calculations
D Geotechnical Report
E Los Angeles County Natural History Museum Records Search
F Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
G Noise Calculations
H Traffic Study
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx vi Table of Contents
This page intentionally left blank
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 1-1 Introduction
SECTION 1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 PURPOSE OF THIS INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (California Public Resources
Code §21000 et seq.) (OLC 2019) and the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations,
Title 14, §15000 et seq.) (OAL 2019), this Initial Study (IS) has been prepared as documentation
for a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for the proposed Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
(Project). This Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) includes a description of
the Project; the location of the Project site; an evaluation of the potential environmental impacts
that would result from Project implementation; the findings from the environmental review; and
recommended mitigation measures to reduce significant impacts on the environment.
Pursuant to Section 15367 of the State CEQA Guidelines (OAL 2019), the City of Arcadia (City) is
the lead agency for the Project. The lead agency is the public agency that has the principal
responsibility for carrying out or approving a project that may have a significant effect upon the
environment. The City, as lead agency, has the authority for Project approval and certification of
the accompanying environmental documentation.
1.2 PROJECT OVERVIEW
New World International Investment, LLC (Developer) proposes to construct a mixed-use
development consisting of two buildings that would contain 139 residential units and 10,200 square
feet (sf) of ground-floor commercial uses. More detailed information on the proposed Project is
provided in Section 2.2 of this IS/MND.
1.3 SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
The analysis in Section 3 of this IS/MND finds that implementation of the Project would have no
impact or less than significant impacts for the following environmental topics:
Aesthetics;
Air Quality;
Agriculture and Forestry Resources;
Biological Resources;
Energy;
Greenhouse Gas Emissions;
Hydrology and Water Quality;
Land Use and Planning;
Mineral Resources;
Population and Housing;
Public Services;
Recreation;
Utilities and Service Systems; and
Wildfire.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 1-2 Introduction
As described in Sections 3 and 4 of this IS/MND, construction and operation of the Project would
have significant impacts related to the following environmental topics unless the recommended
mitigation measures (MMs) described below in Table 1, Summary of Project Design Features,
Regulatory Requirements, and Mitigation Measures, are implemented:
Cultural Resources;
Geology and Soils;
Hazards and Hazardous Materials;
Noise and Vibration;
Transportation; and
Tribal Cultural Resources.
With implementation of these MMs, as well as identified Regulatory Requirements (RRs) and
Project Design Features (PDFs), the Project would have less than significant impacts for each of
these environmental topics. Therefore, no significant and unavoidable impacts would result due to
Project implementation.
According to the State CEQA Guidelines Section 15070 to 15075 (OAL 2019), an IS/MND is the
appropriate environmental document for the Project because, after incorporation of the
recommended mitigation measures, potentially significant environmental impacts would be
eliminated or reduced to a level considered less than significant.
TABLE 1
SUMMARY OF PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES, REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS,
AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Topic MM/PDF/RR
Aesthetics
RR AES-1 The Developer shall prepare a Lighting Plan that provides the type and location of proposed
exterior lighting and signage, subject to the review and approval of the City’s Development
Services Department. All new lighting will be shielded and down-cast, such that the light is
not cast onto adjacent properties or visible from above, and all new lighting would be
reviewed to ensure compliance with the standards codified in Section 9103.01 of the City of
Arcadia Development Code .
Air Quality
RR AQ-1 The Project will be conducted in compliance with all applicable South Coast Air Quality
Management District (SCAQMD) rules and permitting requirements, including but not limited
to:
SCAQMD Rule 403, Fugitive Dust, for controlling fugitive dust and avoiding
nuisance. Compliance with this rule will reduce short-term particulate pollutant
emissions.
SCAQMD Rule 402, Nuisance, which states that a Project will not “discharge from
any source whatsoever such quantities of air contaminants or other material which
cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to any considerable number of
persons or to the public, or which endanger the comfort, repose, health or safety
of any such persons or the public, or which cause, or have a natural tendency to
cause, injury or damage to business or property”.
SCAQMD Rule 1113, Architectural Coatings, which limits the volatile organic
content (VOC) of architectural coatings used for the Project.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 1-3 Introduction
TABLE 1
SUMMARY OF PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES, REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS,
AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Topic MM/PDF/RR
Biological Resources
RR BIO-1 Prior to approval of grading plans, the Development Services Department shall verify that
the following note is included on the contractor specifications to ensure compliance with the
Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA):
To avoid impacts on nesting birds, vegetation on the Project site should be cleared between
September 1 and January 31. If vegetation clearing occurs during the peak nesting season
(between February 1 and August 31), a pre-construction survey shall be conducted by a
qualified biologist to identify if there are any active nesting locations. If the biologist does not
find any active nests within the impact area, the vegetation clearing/construction work will
be allowed. If the biologist finds an active nest within the construction area and determines
that the nest may be impacted by construction activities, the biologist will delineate an
appropriate buffer zone around the nest depending on the species and the type of
construction activity. Construction activities shall be prohibited in the buffer zone until a
qualified biologist determines the nest is abandoned.
RR BIO-2 As required by the City’s Comprehensive Tree Management Program, the Developer will
obtain a permit from the Arcadia Public Works Services Department for the removal and
planting of street trees associated with the Project. The Developer will abide by the
standards set forth in the permit, as well as standards contained in the Comprehensive Tree
Management Program and other applicable sections of the Development and Municipal
Codes.
RR BIO-3 The Developer shall submit the Project’s landscape plans, which will include the proposed
locations and species of replacement street trees, to the Arcadia Public Works Services
Department for review. Street tree species will consist of those set forth in the City’s Street
Tree Master Plan.
Cultural Resources
RR CUL-1 If human remains are encountered during excavation activities, all work shall halt in the
immediate vicinity of the discovery and the Los Angeles County Coroner shall be notified
(California Public Resources Code §5097.98). The Coroner shall determine whether the
remains are of forensic interest. If the Coroner determines that the remains are prehistoric,
s/he will contact the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC). The NAHC shall be
responsible for designating the most likely descendant (MLD), who will be responsible for
the ultimate disposition of the remains, as required by Section 7050.5 of the California Health
and Safety Code. The MLD shall make his/her recommendation within 48 hours of being
granted access to the site. The MLD’s recommendation shall be followed if feasible and may
include scientific removal and non-destructive analysis of the human remains and any items
associated with Native American burials (California Health and Safety Code §7050.5). If the
landowner rejects the MLD’s recommendations, the landowner shall rebury the remains with
appropriate dignity on the property in a location that will not be subject to further subsurface
disturbance (California Public Resources Code §5097.98).
MM CUL-1 Prior to the issuance of a demolition permit, the Applicant shall submit the name and
qualifications of a qualified archaeologist to the City of Arcadia Development Services
Department for review and approval. Once approved, the qualified archaeologist shall be
retained by the Applicant. In the event that suspected cultural (archaeological) resources or
tribal cultural resources are inadvertently unearthed during excavation activities, the
contractor shall immediately cease all earth-disturbing activities within a 100-foot radius of
the area of discovery. The Project contractor or Applicant shall contact the qualified
archaeologist to request an evaluation of the significance of the find and determine an
appropriate course of action. If avoidance of the resource(s) is not feasible, salvage
operation requirements pursuant to Section 15064.5 of the State California Environmental
Quality Act Guidelines shall be followed. After the find has been appropriately avoided or
mitigated, work in the area may resume.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 1-4 Introduction
TABLE 1
SUMMARY OF PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES, REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS,
AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Topic MM/PDF/RR
Energy
RR ENR-1 The Project shall be consistent with the Title 24 energy efficiency standards and the
mandatory requirements of the CALGreen code. Construction activities shall comply with
idling requirements and maintenance requirements for on- and off-road vehicles.
Geology and Soils
PDF GEO-1 The Project building design specifications shall include recommendations from the
Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Mixed Use Development, 117 and 129 E. Huntington
Drive, 124, 126, and 134 Wheeler Avenue, Arcadia, California (Geocon West, Inc. 2018).
These recommendations include, but are not limited to, specifications for the following:
Demolition and site preparation
Fill placement
Remedial grading and over excavation
Foundation recommendations
Building Floor Slabs and reinforcement
The Project building design specifications shall be verified by the City of Arcadia Building
Official prior to issuance of a demolition permit.
RR GEO-1 Geotechnical design considerations for Project implementation are governed by the Arcadia
Building Code, as set forth in Article VIII of the Municipal Code, which incorporates by
reference the California Building Code (CBC), including the California Building, Plumbing,
Mechanical, Electrical and Existing Building Codes (CBSC 2019). Future buildings and
structures shall be designed in accordance with applicable requirements of the CBC, the
Arcadia Municipal Code, and any applicable building and seismic codes in effect at the time
the grading plans are approved.
MM GEO-1 Prior to the issuance of a demolition permit, the Applicant shall submit the name and
qualifications of a qualified paleontologist to the City of Arcadia Development Services
Department for review and approval. Once approved, the qualified paleontologist shall be
retained by the Applicant on an on-call basis to observe grading activities in the older
Quaternary Alluvium on the Project site and to salvage and catalogue fossils as necessary.
At the Project’s Pre-Grade Meeting, the paleontologist shall discuss the sensitivity of the
sediment being graded and shall establish procedures for monitoring. Protocols must be
developed and explained for temporarily halting or redirecting work to permit sampling,
identification, and evaluation of any fossils discovered. If the fossils are deemed significant,
the paleontologist shall determine appropriate actions, in cooperation with the City of
Arcadia, to recover and treat the fossils and to prepare them to the point of identification. A
final Paleontological Resources Monitoring Report shall include a catalogue and analysis of
the fossils found; a summary of their significance; and the repository that will curate the
fossils in perpetuity.
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
RR HAZ-1 Activities at the Project site shall comply with existing federal, State, and local regulations
regarding hazardous material use, storage, disposal, and transport to prevent Project-
related risks to public health and safety. All on-site generated waste that meets hazardous
waste criteria shall be stored, manifested, transported, and disposed of in accordance with
the California Code of Regulations (Title 22) and in a manner to the satisfaction of the local
Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA), as applicable. Any hazardous materials removed
from the Project site shall be transported only by a Licensed Hazardous Waste Hauler, who
shall be in compliance with all applicable State and federal requirements, including
U.S. Department of Transportation regulations under Title 49 (Hazardous Materials
Transportation Act) and Title 40, Section 263 (Subtitle C of the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act) of the Code of Federal Regulations; California Department of Transportation
(Caltrans) standards; and Division of Occupational Safety and Health (Cal/OSHA)
standards.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 1-5 Introduction
TABLE 1
SUMMARY OF PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES, REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS,
AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Topic MM/PDF/RR
MM HAZ-1 Prior to the issuance of a demolition permit, pre-demolition surveys for asbestos-containing
materials (ACMs) and lead-based paint (LBP) shall be performed for the structures proposed
for demolition. All surveys, inspections, and analyses shall be performed by fully licensed
and qualified individuals in accordance with all applicable federal, State, and local
regulations. If the pre-demolition surveys/inspections do not identify ACMs or LBP, the
Developer shall provide documentation to the City of the survey/inspection showing that no
further abatement actions are required. If the pre-demolition surveys/inspections identify
ACMs or LBP, all such materials shall be handled in accordance with applicable regulations,
including, but not limited to 15 United States Code (USC) Chapter 53 Toxic Substances
Control; Division of Occupational Safety and Health (Cal/OSHA) regulations (8 CCR Section
1529 [Asbestos] and Section 1532.1 [Lead]); and SCAQMD Rule 1403 (Asbestos Emissions
from Demolition/Renovation Activities). After demolition, the Developer shall provide
documentation to the City illustrating that abatement of any ACMs or LBP identified in the
demolished structure has been completed in full compliance with applicable regulations.
Hydrology and Water Quality
RR HWQ-1 Prior to the City’s issuance of a demolition permit, the Developer shall obtain coverage under
the General Permit for Discharges of Storm Water Associated with Construction Activity,
which will require the development and implementation of a project-specific Storm Water
Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP).
Noise
RR NOI-1 Prior to issuance of grading permits, the project shall submit a noise control plan that
demonstrates, to the satisfaction of the City of Arcadia, that project construction would
comply with the following and would reduce noise levels to levels consistent with the City’s
Noise Ordinance and the Noise Element:
The Project would adhere to Article IV, Chapter 6 of the City Development Code
and the Developer’s contractor will monitor noise levels throughout construction to
ensure compliance.
All internal combustion–driven equipment would be equipped with mufflers that are
in good condition and appropriate for the equipment.
Construction noise reduction methods such as shutting off idling equipment,
maximizing the distance between construction equipment staging areas and
occupied residential areas, and use of electric air compressors and similar power
tools, rather than diesel equipment, shall be used where feasible. Unattended
construction vehicles shall not idle for more than 5 minutes when located within
300 feet of any residential properties.
Noise attenuation measures, which may include, but are not limited to, temporary
noise barriers or noise blankets around stationary construction noise sources,
would be implemented for neighboring properties when requested and directed to
do so by the City. Temporary sound barriers can be effective for noise mitigation,
sound barriers must have a density of at least 4 pounds per square foot [i.e., ¾
inch plywood] or a Sound Transmission Class rating of 25 or greater with no holes,
gaps, or cracks such as plywood or construction-grade sound blankets or curtains.
Temporary sound barriers shall be located along the perimeter of the Project site
boundary where there are no masonry buildings and are shown in Exhibit 15.
These sound barriers shall have a minimum height of 10 feet. Site access shall
consist of a movable barrier.
During construction, stockpiling and vehicle staging areas shall be located as far
as practical from noise sensitive receptors.
Construction hours, allowable workdays, and the phone number of the job
superintendent shall be clearly posted at all construction entrances to allow
surrounding property owners and residents to contact the job superintendent if
necessary. In the event the City receives a complaint, appropriate corrective
actions shall be implemented.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 1-6 Introduction
TABLE 1
SUMMARY OF PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES, REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS,
AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Topic MM/PDF/RR
Two weeks prior to the beginning of construction, notification must be provided to
properties within 150 feet of the project site disclosing the construction schedule,
including the various types of activities that would be occurring throughout the
duration of the construction period.
The notification provided to neighboring properties shall give a contact phone
number for a “construction liaison” contact person to direct any questions or
complaints during project construction. All complaints shall be responded to in a
method deemed satisfactory by the City of Arcadia. The construction liaison would
determine the cause of the noise complaints; and institute reasonable measures
to correct the problem in consultation with the City of Arcadia. The phone number
of the construction liaison should be conspicuously posted at the construction site.
Methods for simultaneously implementing MM NOI-1.
MM NOI-1 The Developer shall require that all construction contractors restrict the operation of the
following construction equipment to beyond the following distances from off-site buildings:
(1) vibratory rollers and large bulldozers – 25 feet, and (2) loaded trucks and other large
equipment (vehicle weight greater than 25,000 lbs.) – 15 feet. Any activities occurring within
5 feet of existing property line shall use non-vibration intensive methods such as use of
concrete saws, universal processors, expansive agents for demolition.
Public Services
RR PUB-1 The Developer shall comply with all applicable codes, ordinances and regulations, including
the most current edition of the California Fire Code and the City of Arcadia Municipal Code
and Development Code, regarding fire prevention and suppression measures; fire hydrants;
fire access; water availability; and other, similar requirements. Prior to issuance of building
permits, the City of Arcadia Development Services Department and the Arcadia Fire
Department shall verify compliance with applicable codes and that appropriate fire safety
measures are included in the Project design. All such codes and measures shall be
implemented prior to occupancy.
RR PUB-2 Prior to issuance of the building permit, the Developer shall pay new development fees to
the Arcadia Unified School District (AUSD) pursuant to Section 65995 of the California
Government Code. As an option to the payment of developer fees, the AUSD and the
Developer can enter into a facility and funding agreement, if approved by both parties.
Evidence that agreements have been executed shall be submitted to the Development
Services Department, or fees shall be paid with each building permit.
RR PUB-3 In accordance with the City’s Ordinance 2237 and Section 9105.15 of the City’s
Development Code, prior to the issuance of the building permit, the Developer shall remit
the most current park facilities impact fee and/or other negotiated park fees to the City. All
money collected as fees imposed shall be deposited in the Park Facilities Impact Fee
Program and shall be used for the acquisition, development, and improvement of public
parks and recreational facilities in the City, as proposed by the City’s Parks and Recreation
Master Plan. The Development Services Department shall confirm compliance with this
requirement prior to issuance of a building permit.
Transportation
MM TRANS-1 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a Construction Management Plan shall be prepared
by the Developer for the review and approval of the City of Arcadia and any other affected
jurisdictions in accordance with the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD).
Construction activities shall comply with the approved plan to the satisfaction of the City of
Arcadia. The Developer will begin coordination with the City on the Construction
Management Plan as soon as practicable during the final design process and in advance of
construction so that effective measures can be developed to avoid, minimize, and mitigate
construction impacts to parking and circulation within the City of Arcadia downtown.
At a minimum, the Construction Management Plan shall:
Describe the duration and location of lane closures (if any).
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 1-7 Introduction
TABLE 1
SUMMARY OF PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES, REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS,
AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Topic MM/PDF/RR
Address traffic control for any partial street closures, detours, or other disruption to
traffic circulation during project construction, including as-needed use of
flagpersons and signage.
Identify the routes that construction vehicles would utilize for the delivery of
construction materials to access the project site. Haul routes would follow the City’s
approved truck routes and avoid residential streets.
Identify the location of parking and materials storage for construction workers
during all phases of construction. Parking for construction workers would be
provided on-site or at additional off-site locations that are not on public streets.
Identify of emergency access points/routes.
Specify the hours during which transport activities can occur and methods to
mitigate construction-related impacts to adjacent streets.
Require the contractor to keep all haul routes clean and free of debris including but
not limited to gravel and dirt as a result of its operations. The contractor shall clean
adjacent streets, as directed by the City Engineer (or representative of the City
Engineer), of any material, which may have been spilled, tracked, or blown onto
adjacent streets or areas.
All hauling or transport of oversize loads would occur between the hours of 7:00
AM and 5:00 PM only, Monday through Friday, unless approved otherwise by the
City Engineer. No hauling or transport shall be allowed during nighttime hours,
weekends or Federal holidays.
Include details on the maintenance of bicycle and pedestrian facilities and
connectivity through the Project to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
Require that haul trucks entering or exiting public streets shall at all times yield to
public traffic, pedestrians, bicyclists, and other users.
Provisions for the contractor to repair existing pavement, streets, curbs, sidewalks,
and/or gutters that may be altered during project construction. The repairs shall be
completed in consultation with and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
Require that all construction-related parking and staging of vehicles will be kept
out of the adjacent public roadways and will occur either on-site or on designated
off-site parcels that would not adversely affect access to or parking within the
downtown.
Use of temporary fencing around the project site (e.g., temporary fencing with
opaque material).
MM TRANS-2 Technical Review: Prior to the issuance of a demolition permit for the Project, the Applicant
shall submit written proof to the City that engineering drawings and calculations as well as
construction work plans and methods including any crane placement and radius have been
submitted to Metro for review. Approval from Metro shall not be required to proceed with the
Project.
MM TRANS-3 Overhead Catenary System (OCS): The Applicant shall take all necessary measures to
protect the OCS from damage due to Project activities during and after construction. During
construction, the Applicant shall post warning signage for equipment working around the
OCS wires.
MM TRANS-4 Construction Safety: The construction and operation of the Project shall not disrupt the
operation and maintenance activities of the Metro Gold Line or the structural and systems
integrity of Metro’s light rail infrastructure. Not later than one month before Project
construction, the Applicant shall schedule a pre-construction meeting to discuss Project
construction, communication protocols, and other related topics. The meeting would include
the Applicant, key Project construction personnel, the City of Arcadia, and Metro staff, which
may include staff from Real Estate, Construction Management, and Construction Safety
staff. During Project construction, the Applicant shall coordinate with Metro as needed to
ensure that Metro infrastructure and operations are not compromised by construction
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 1-8 Introduction
TABLE 1
SUMMARY OF PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES, REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS,
AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Topic MM/PDF/RR
activities or permanent build conditions. The Applicant shall notify Metro of any changes to
construction activities that may impact the use of the ROW. The Applicant shall allow Metro
staff to monitor demolition and/or construction activities to confirm no impacts have occurred
to the Gold Line right-of-way.
Utilities and Service Systems
RR UTIL-1 The Developer shall comply with all applicable regulations and restrictions set forth in the
City’s Municipal Code, including Section 7472 regarding restrictions on discharges into the
sewer and Section 5130 regarding achievement of annual waste diversion rates and other
applicable requirements in compliance with but not limited to Assembly Bill 939, Assembly
Bill 341, and Assembly Bill 1826.
1.4 PROJECT REVIEW AND APPROVAL PROCESS
Pursuant to Section 15072 of the State CEQA Guidelines (OAL 2019), a Notice of the Intent (NOI)
to adopt an MND for the proposed Project has been sent by the City to the public and applicable
responsible and trustee agencies. The NOI and associated public review period has been filed by
the County of Los Angeles Recorder’s Office in Norwalk, published in the Arcadia Weekly, and
mailed to the last known name and address of all organizations and individuals who have previously
requested such notice in writing. Due to COVID-19, City Hall is closed to the public. However, the
Initial Study and Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration may be viewed on the City’s website at
www.arcadiaca.gov/projects. You may also request a copy by emailing Senior Planner, Luis Torrico
at ltorrico@arcadiaca.gov.
The associated technical reports are also available electronically online during the public review
period at: www.arcadiaca.gov/projects.
In accordance with the requirements set forth in Sections 15073 and 15105 of the State CEQA
Guidelines, this IS/MND will be available for public review and comment for 29 days from April 23
through May 22, 2020 (OAL 2019). In reviewing the IS/MND, affected public agencies and the
interested public should focus on the adequacy of the document in identifying and analyzing the
Project’s environmental impacts and the ways in which the potentially significant effects of the
Project can be avoided or mitigated.
Written comments on the IS/MND and the analysis contained herein may be sent to Mr. Luis Torrico
via email at ltorrico@arcadiaca.gov, or mailed to the address listed below:
Mr. Luis Torrico
Senior Planner
City of Arcadia Development Services Department
240 West Huntington Drive
P.O. Box 60021
Arcadia, California 91066
Following receipt and evaluation of comments from agencies, organizations, and/or individuals that
are received during the public review period, the City will determine whether any substantial new
environmental issues have been raised that necessitate changes to the IS/MND in accordance with
CEQA requirements. If so, further documentation, such as an environmental impact report (EIR) or
recirculation of the IS/MND may be required. If not, the Project and the environmental
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 1-9 Introduction
documentation would be submitted to the City’s Planning Commission and would subsequently be
submitted to the City Council for consideration. In accordance with Section 15074 of the State
CEQA Guidelines (OAL 2019), prior to approving the Project, the City Council may consider the
MND together with any comments received during the public review process. The City Council will
adopt the proposed MND only if it finds that that there is no substantial evidence that the Project
would have a significant effect on the environment.
1.5 ORGANIZATION OF THIS INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
The IS/MND is organized into the following sections:
Section 1 – Introduction. This section provides an overview of the purpose and
conclusions of the IS/MND, as well as a discussion of the public review and approval
process for the Project.
Section 2 – Environmental Setting and Project Description. This section provides a
description of the Project location; a discussion of the existing environmental setting of the
Project site and vicinity; a description of the Project; and a list of discretionary approvals
required for the Project.
Section 3 – Environmental Checklist Form. This section contains a summary checklist
with Project information and environmental factors potentially affected, as well as a
signature block for the Lead Agency.
Section 4 – Environmental Impact Questions and Analysis. This section contains an
analysis of the Project’s environmental setting and environmental impacts. This section
describes applicable RRs that the Project would comply with, which would minimize
environmental impacts as well as PDFs that have been incorporated into the Project. This
section also includes MMs that would be implemented to eliminate potentially significant
effects or reduce potentially significant effects to a level considered less than significant.
The environmental checklist form also includes “mandatory findings of significance” required
by CEQA.
Section 5 – Report Preparers and Contributors. This section identifies the individuals
prepared and contributed to the preparation of the IS/MND.
Section 6 – References. This section identifies references used in preparation of the
IS/MND.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 1-10 Introduction
This page intentionally left blank
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 2-1 Environmental Setting and Project Description
SECTION 2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION
2.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
2.1.1 PROJECT LOCATION
The Project site is approximately 75,530 square feet (1.74 acres) and is located at 124-134
Wheeler Avenue and 117-129 E. Huntington Drive in the downtown of the City of Arcadia in Los
Angeles County, California. Exhibit 1, Vicinity Map, depicts the Project site in the context of the
local and regional roadway system. As shown on the aerial photograph provided as Exhibit 2,
Aerial Map, the site is located within a fully developed portion of the City, surrounded by existing
structures, roadways, and parking lots. The southern portion of the Project site fronts
E. Huntington Drive, a principal east-west travel corridor1 (Arcadia 2010a). The Project site is
located approximately one block east of Santa Anita Avenue (refer to Exhibit 1), which is a
principal north-south travel corridor (Arcadia 2010a). The Los Angeles County Metropolitan
Transportation Authority (Metro) Gold Line alignment is located approximately 45 feet northeast
of the Project site, and the Arcadia Gold Line Station is located approximately 0.15-mile northwest
of the Project site near the intersection of N. 1st Avenue and Santa Clara Street. The Project site
can be regionally accessed from U.S. Interstate (I) 210, which is located approximately 0.3 mile
north of the Project site, via the Santa Anita Avenue and Huntington Drive interchanges.
2.1.2 EXISTING PROJECT SITE CONDITIONS
The Project site consists of seven contiguous parcels located in the City of Arcadia (Assessor
Parcel Numbers 5773-010-901, -007, -008, -018, -019, -020, and -021). As shown in Exhibit 2,
Aerial Map, the Project site contains a total of five existing buildings, including two commercial
buildings fronting E. Huntington Drive and an associated surface parking lot, as well as two
commercial buildings, an automobile repair shop, and a surface City-owned parking lots that
fronts Wheeler Avenue to the north.
The Project site contains ornamental landscaping and trees within planters located around the
perimeters of the site’s surface parking lots. Also, there are street trees which occur along E.
Huntington Drive and Wheeler Avenue adjacent to the Project. The existing conditions of the
Project site and the vicinity are shown in Exhibits 3a–f, Site Photographs.
The two Project parcels fronting E. Huntington Drive (APN 5773-010-007 and 5773-010-008)
have a land use designation of Commercial and are zoned as Commercial Business District
(CBD) with a Downtown Overlay and a Downtown Parking Overlay. These two Project parcels
are permitted a maximum building height of 60 feet, maximum residential density of 80 units per
acre, and maximum floor area ratio (FAR)2 of 1.0., applicable only to the nonresidential
component of a development. The remaining five Project parcels to the north fronting Wheeler
Avenue (APNs 5773-010-901, -021, -020, -019, and -018) are zoned Downtown Mixed Use
(DMU) with a Downtown Parking Overlay. These parcels are permitted a maximum building height
of 60 feet, maximum residential density of 80 units per acre, and maximum FAR of 1.0, applicable
only to the nonresidential component of a development (Arcadia 2018).
1 A principal travel corridor is a term used for roadways with a capacity to carry the highest volumes of vehicles (in
the range of 22,000 to 35,000 vehicles daily) that generally connect between adjacent cities and are typically four-
lane streets.
2 Floor Area Ratio (FAR) is the relationship between the total amount of usable floor area in a building and the total
area of the lot on which the building stands. The ratio is determined by dividing the total or gross floor area of the
building by the gross area of the lot.
SantaAnitaGolf Course
BonitaPark
ArcadiaCountyPark
NewcastlePark
Forest Park
C
oloradoPl W H u n t i n g t o n D rHuntington Dr
W Foothill Blvd
Santa Anita AveFoothill Blvd E Foothill Blvd
First AveColorado Blvd
W Duarte Rd
W Colorado BlvdSanta Anita AveN Santa Anita AveS 1st AveFlowerSt N 4th AveGateway DrSanRafaelRdWigwa
m
AveE Woodland Ave
S Lincoln PlM or lan Pl
Joyce AveNorthview AveRamo
n
a
RdGarfield PlRolyn
Pl OakhavenRdOakglenAveValencia WayFoothill BlvdWoodland L n
SanLuisReyRd S anAntonioRdWhisperingPi nesD rMc Kinley PlN Lincoln PlW Forest Ave
Ran
c
h
o
RdWheeler Ave
E Haven Ave
E Floral Ave
E N e w m a n A v e
W Sycamo r e A v e
E Fo r e s t A v e
W Chestnut Ave
W Walnut Ave
W Olive Ave
N 1st AveS anMiguelDrW Floral Av e
La Porte St
Hacienda Dr
N Madison AveHighland Oaks DrOakwood DrW Hillcrest Blvd
Santa
CruzRd
Laurel Ave
Fano St
Alta St
R
o
d
e
o
R
d
N 5th AveS Madison AveSantaRosaRdEncino AveBonita St
Alice St S 5th AveE Sycamore Ave
S 3rd AveDiamond St
E Santa Clara St
California St
S 2nd AveGenoa St
El Dorado StN2ndAve§¨210
D:\Projects\3NWI\010100\MXD\ex_LV_RL_20190611.mxd²
A N G E L E S N A T I O N A L F O R E S T
San GabrielReservoir
Project Site§¨5
§¨210
§¨605
§¨10
ST19
§¨5
§¨405
§¨210
§¨105
§¨10
§¨710§¨110 §¨605
ST19
ST170
ST107
ST72
ST134
ST110
ST60
ST213
ST57
ST710
ST91
£¤101
Los AngelesOrange
Anaheim
Los Angeles
Downey
Whittier
Lakewood
Pasadena
Glendale
Hawthorne
Buena Park
West CovinaWest Hollywood
Vicinity Map
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Exhibit 1
(Rev: 6-11-2019 MMD) R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\Graphics\ex_LV_RL.pdf
1,000 0 1,000500Feet
Project Site
Aerial Source: LAR-IAC 2014
Exhibit 2
(Rev: 6-13-2019 MMD) R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\Graphics\ex_Aerial.pdf
Los
A
n
g
e
l
e
s
M
e
t
r
o
G
o
l
d
L
i
n
e
Huntington Dr
S 1st AveIndi
a
n
a
S
t
Wheeler Ave
N 1st Ave5773010007
577301000857730100185773010019577301002057730100215773010901
D:\Projects\3NWI\010100\MXD\ex_Aerial_20190611.mxd100 0 10050Feet²
Aerial Source: LAR-IAC 2014
Project Site
Aerial Map
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Exhibit 3a
(Rev: 6-13-2019 MKM) R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\Graphics\ex3_Photo_Locations_20190613.pdf
<
!<!<!<!<!<!<!<
!<!<!Los
A
n
g
e
l
e
s
M
e
t
r
o
G
o
l
d
L
i
n
e
View 10
View 6View 5
View 4
View 1 View 2
View 7
View 8
View 9
View 3
Huntington Dr
S 1st AveIndi
a
n
a
S
t
Wheeler Ave
N 1st Ave5773010007
577301000857730100185773010019577301002057730100215773010901
D:\Projects\3NWI\010100\MXD\ex_Photo_Locations_20190613.mxd100 0 10050Feet²
Aerial Source: LAR-IAC 2014
Project Site
<
!Photo Locations
Photos of Existing Project Setting
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Site Photographs Exhibit 3b
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
View 2
(06/13/2019 SAK) R:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\Ex_SP1.pdfD:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\MND\ex_SP1_20190613.aiView 1
Site Photographs Exhibit 3c
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
View 4
(06/13/2019 SAK) R:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\Ex_SP2.pdfD:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\MND\ex_SP2_20190613.aiView 3
View 5View 6(06/13/2019 SAK) R:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\Ex_SP3.pdfD:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\MND\ex_SP3_20190613.aiExhibit 3dHuntington Plaza Mixed-Use ProjectSite Photographs
Site Photographs Exhibit 3e
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
View 8
(06/13/2019 SAK) R:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\Ex_SP4.pdfD:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\MND\ex_SP4_20190613.aiView 7
Site Photographs Exhibit 3f
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
View 10
(06/13/2019 SAK) R:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\Ex_SP5.pdfD:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\MND\ex_SP5_20190613.aiView 9
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 2-2 Environmental Setting and Project Description
The elevated Metro Gold Line light rail alignment is located adjacent to the Project
site east of Indiana Avenue and the Arcadia Gold Line Station is located on the northwest corner
of N. 1st Avenue and Santa Clara Street, approximately 0.15 mile northwest of the Project site.
2.1.3 SURROUNDING AREA CONDITIONS
As shown in Exhibit 2, Aerial Map, the Project site is surrounded by existing urban development,
including commercial uses such as retail and office businesses. One- and two-story structures as
well as surface parking lots are located adjacent to the Project site north of E. Huntington Drive
and east of N. 1st Avenue. Single-story retail and office buildings and surface parking are located
on the opposite (south) side of E. Huntington Drive. A single-story building occupied by Girl Scouts
Greater Los Angeles as well as a two-story office building and parking are located north of the
Project site across Wheeler Avenue.
Vehicular access to the Project site is provided via driveways from Wheeler Avenue, Indiana
Street, and E. Huntington Drive. All of the existing buildings and parking lots have secondary
access from N. 1st Avenue to the west via a one-way public alley that is located between Wheeler
Avenue and E. Huntington Drive, which generally splits the five Project parcels to the north from
the two Project parcels to the south.
In the Project vicinity, Wheeler Avenue is a two-lane road; Indiana Street is a two-lane access
road that spans less than 0.1-mile; N. 1st Avenue consists of one lane for northbound traffic, one
lane for southbound traffic, one dedicated left turn lane, and bike lanes on either side of the street;
and E. Huntington Drive is a four-lane divided road with dedicated left turn lanes. Street parking
is permitted on either side of Wheeler Avenue, N. 1st Avenue, and E. Huntington Drive.
2.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Project involves the construction and operation of a mixed-use development consisting of
two buildings that would contain 139 units and 10,200 sf of ground-floor commercial uses.
Proposed Project plans are included as Exhibits 4a through 4h, Illustrative Site Plan and Plan
Views. The northern building, Building 2, would contain a subterranean parking garage and 5
levels of development at- or above-ground level, consisting of a ground level parking garage and
four stories of supporting multifamily residential units, open space areas, and a clubhouse on
Levels 2 through 5. The southern building, Building 1, would be located above a portion of the
subterranean parking garage and would also include 5 levels of development at- or above-ground
level, consisting of 10,200 sf of commercial uses and surface parking on the ground level and
four stories of multifamily residential units and open space areas on Levels 2 through 5. The
Project would include landscaping, enhanced paving and hardscape features, a public plaza
adjacent to E. Huntington Drive, open space areas for residents, and a clubhouse for residents.
The Project would construct a subterranean parking garage beneath both buildings as well as a
ground-level parking garage within the northern building (Building 2) fronting Wheeler Avenue.
The Project would also require connections to existing off-site utilities, as described in more detail
in Section 2.2.2.
The Project is located within the City’s DMU and CBD zones with a Downtown Parking Overlay
and would advance the City’s goal as embodied in the General Plan of providing the residential
uses necessary to support and complement the existing and proposed businesses in downtown
as well as the nearby Arcadia Gold Line Station. The goal of the Project is to transform the Project
site within the City’s downtown into a more vibrant, dynamic, transit- and pedestrian-oriented
mixed-use development.
Source: Humphreys & Partners Architects, L.P., Juy 2019(08/27/2019 SAK) R:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\Ex_Illustrative Site Plan_1.pdfD:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\MND\ex_Project_Illustrative_Site_Plan_and_Plan_Views1_20190827.aiHuntington Plaza Mixed-Use ProjectIllustrative Site PlanExhibit 4a
Source: Humphreys & Partners Architects, L.P., July 2019(08/28/2019 SAK) R:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\Ex_Plan Views_2.pdfD:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\MND\ex_Project_Illustrative_Site_Plan_and_Plan_Views2_20190828.aiHuntington Plaza Mixed-Use ProjectLevel B1 (Sub-T Parking) PlanExhibit 4bHUNTINGTON DRN FIRST AVE.METRO GOLD LINE
Source: Humphreys & Partners Architects, L.P., July 2019(08/282019 SAK) R:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\Ex_Plan Views_3.pdfD:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\MND\ex_Project_Illustrative_Site_Plan_and_Plan_Views3_20190828.aiHuntington Plaza Mixed-Use ProjectLevel 1 (Ground Level) PlanExhibit 4c
Source: Humphreys & Partners Architects, L.P., July 2019(08/28/2019 SAK) R:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\Ex_Plan Views_4.pdfD:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\MND\ex_Project_Illustrative_Site_Plan_and_Plan_Views4_20190828.aiHuntington Plaza Mixed-Use ProjectLevel 2 (Podium Level) PlanExhibit 4d
Source: Humphreys & Partners Architects, L.P., July 2019(08/28/2019 SAK) R:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\Ex_Plan Views_5.pdfD:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\MND\ex_Project_Illustrative_Site_Plan_and_Plan_Views5_20190828.aiHuntington Plaza Mixed-Use ProjectLevel 3 PlanExhibit 4eHUNTINGTON DRN FIRST AVE.B2B1 B1B1B1C2B2-ALTB6B5B4 B4C3 C3B3 B3B5B5 B5B7B7B7B7C1C1C2-ALTC2C2C2C2B1 B1 B1 B1 B1B6 B6 B6
Source: Humphreys & Partners Architects, L.P., July 2019(08/28/2019 SAK) R:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\Ex_Plan Views_6.pdfD:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\MND\ex_Project_Illustrative_Site_Plan_and_Plan_Views6_20190828.aiHuntington Plaza Mixed-Use ProjectLevel 4 Plan (Roof Garden)Exhibit 4fHUNTINGTON DRN FIRST AVE.ALLEYINDIANA ST.METRO GOLD LINEB2B1 B1B1B1C2B2-ALTB6B5B4 B4B3 B3B5B5 B5B7B7C4-TH-LC4-TH-LC1C1C2-ALTC2A1C2C2C2B1 B1B1B1 B1B6B6B6
Source: Humphreys & Partners Architects, L.P., July 2019(08/28/2019 SAK) R:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\Ex_Plan Views_7.pdfD:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\MND\ex_Project_Illustrative_Site_Plan_and_Plan_Views7_20190828.aiHuntington Plaza Mixed-Use ProjectLevel 5 Plan (Roof Garden)Exhibit 4gLorem ipsumHUNTINGTON DRN FIRST AVE.ALLEYWHEELER AVE.INDIANA ST.METRO GOLD LINEB2B1 B1B1B1C2B2-ALTB6B5A1B5B5 B5B7B7C4-TH-UC4-TH-UC1C1C2-ALTC2 C2C2B1 B1 B1 B1 B1B6 B6 B6
Source: Humphreys & Partners Architects, L.P., July 2019(08/28/2019 SAK) R:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\Ex_Plan Views_8.pdfD:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\MND\ex_Project_Illustrative_Site_Plan_and_Plan_Views8_20190828.aiHuntington Plaza Mixed-Use ProjectRoof PlanExhibit 4h
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 2-3 Environmental Setting and Project Description
2.2.1 PROPOSED ON-SITE LAND USES
The Project would include 10,200 sf of ground-level retail space that would be divided amongst
five separate retail units ranging in size from 1,100 sf to 3,200 sf as detailed in Table 2, Project
Commercial Unit Summary, and as depicted in Exhibit 4c, Level 1 (Ground Level) Plan.
TABLE 2
PROJECT COMMERCIAL UNIT SUMMARY
Unit Number Total Net Square Footage
Commercial 1 2,000
Commercial 2 3,200
Commercial 3 1,100
Commercial 4 2,000
Commercial 5 1,900
Total 10,200
sf: square feet
Source: Humphreys & Partners Architects, L.P., July 2019.
The Project would include 139 multifamily residential units, including 2 one-bedroom units, 100
two-bedroom units, and 37 three-bedroom units. All residential units would be one story. A
breakdown of the mix of units is provided in Table 3, Project Residential Unit Summary.
Exhibits 4d through 4g, Level 2 (Podium Level) Plan, Level 3 Plan, Level 4 Plan (Roof Garden),
Level 5 Plan (Roof Garden), and Exhibits 5a through 5c, Unit Plans, depict the layout of each of
the residential units.
Source: Humphreys & Partners Architects, L.P., July 2019(08/28/2019 SAK) R:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\Ex_Unit Plans_1.pdfD:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\MND\ex_Unit_Plans1_20190828.aiHuntington Plaza Mixed-Use ProjectUnit PlansExhibit 5a
Source: Humphreys & Partners Architects, L.P., July 2019(08/28/2019 SAK) R:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\Ex_Unit Plans_2.pdfD:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\MND\ex_Unit_Plans2_20190828.aiHuntington Plaza Mixed-Use ProjectUnit PlansExhibit 5b
Source: Humphreys & Partners Architects, L.P., July 2019(08/282019 SAK) R:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\Ex_Unit Plans_3.pdfD:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\MND\ex_Unit_Plans3_20190828.aiHuntington Plaza Mixed-Use ProjectUnit PlansExhibit 5c
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 2-4 Environmental Setting and Project Description
TABLE 3
PROJECT RESIDENTIAL UNIT SUMMARY
Unit/Description
Net Space per
Unit (sf)
Number of
Units
Total Indoor
Area for Each
Unit Type (sf)*
Deck Area for
Each Unit Type
(sf)
A1 (one bedroom) 867 2 1,734 42
Unit A Subtotal N/A 2 1,734 N/A
B1 (two bedroom) 1,066 36 38,376 42
B2 (two bedroom) 1,084 4 4,336 0
B2-ALT (two bedroom) 1,117 4 4,468 64
B3 (two bedroom) 1,212 6 7,272 71
B4 (two bedroom) 1,057 6 6,342 71
B5 (two bedroom) 1,198 16 19,168 67
B6 (two bedroom) 1,132 16 18,112 47
B7 (two bedroom) 914 12 10,968 42
Unit B Subtotal N/A 100 109,042 N/A
C1 (three bedroom) 1,343 8 10,744 106
C2 (three bedroom) 1,606 19 0,514 78
C2-ALT (three bedroom) 1,484 4 5,936 78
C3 (three bedroom) 1,459 4 5,836 52
C4-TH1 (three bedroom) 1,727 2 3,454 84
Unit C Subtotal N/A 37 56,484 N/A
Total N/A 139 167,260 8,050
sf: square feet
Source: Humphreys & Partners Architects, L.P., July 2019.
2.2.2 DEVELOPMENT CHARACTERISTICS
Building Design
Exhibits 6a through 6i, Perspective Renderings and Elevations, depict the proposed Project from
various vantage points showing the size, appearance, and key features of the proposed buildings.
As shown in Exhibits 7a through 7c, Material Finishes, the exterior of the two buildings would
include a mix of La Habra Smooth Gray and Aspen Smooth plaster walls, black, light brown, and
dark red brick veneer, with aesthetic details including brushed carbon finishes, brushed bronze
accents, ground floor columns, longboard privacy screens, and metal siding. Projected awnings
and painted metal window panes and doorways would highlight the ground-floor commercial
spaces. Project entrances would feature aluminum store front systems with metal canopies, and
ground-floor windows would include extruded metal openings. A feature wall containing artwork
(either a mural or a mosaic) and/or Route 66 signage may be incorporated on the eastern and
northern edges of Building 2 that fronts Wheeler Avenue and Indiana Street, which would primarily
be visible from Wheeler Avenue, Indiana Street, the Metro Gold Line, and commercial uses to the
east of the Gold Line alignment.
The heights of the proposed buildings are depicted in Exhibit 8, Roof Plan. Both Building 1 and
Building 2 would be constructed to a height of 58-feet 6-inches tall to the top of the parapet and
63 feet to the top of the stair well and elevator overrun when measured from ground level. Both
Source: Humphreys & Partners Architects, L.P., July 2019(08/28/2019 SAK) R:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\Ex_Perspective Rendering_1.pdfD:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\MND\ex_Perspective_Renderings_and_Elevations1_20190828.aiHuntington Plaza Mixed-Use ProjectPerspective RenderingExhibit 6aLorem ipsumHuntington Dr.Maximized store frontto activate downtown environmentRetail Paseo4 Story Residential Behind Corridor1. view of retail plaza From Huntington Dr.Sky Deck @ Level 4to activate street frontageMassing Stepback @ Level 4Massing Stepback @ Level 5Main Plaza
Source: Humphreys & Partners Architects, L.P., July 2019(08/28/2019 SAK) R:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\Ex_Perspective Rendering_2.pdfHuntington Plaza Mixed-Use ProjectPerspective RenderingExhibit 6bLorem ipsumHuntington Dr.Main Plaza1. view from Huntington Dr. Main massing & Center Entry PlazaHuntington Dr.Sky Deck @ Level 4 to activate street scapePrimary Stepback@ Level 4Resident Entry3. viewing west from Huntington Dr.Secondary Stepback@ Level 5Horizontal emphasis for fast traffic2. Bird’s eye view from East -South cornerCity Parking LotHuntington Dr.Indiana st.Wheeler ave.N. First Ave.Bldg2Metro GoldlineBldg 1KEYMAP123
Source: Humphreys & Partners Architects, L.P., July 2019(08/28/2019 SAK) R:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\Ex_Perspective Rendering_3.pdfD:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\MND\ex_Perspective_Renderings_and_Elevations3_20190828.aiHuntington Plaza Mixed-Use ProjectPerspective RenderingExhibit 6cLorem ipsumKEYMAP1232. view from Alley , Rear massing & Motor PlazaMassing step back @ Level 4Base pattern for pedestrian scale architectureSingle CorridorRetail SignageWheeler avePedetrian Access (mid block connection : paseo)Artwork potential as a Landmark for city of ArcadiaRetail ParkingResidnet Entry1. view From Alley (Indiana St.)City Parking LotALLEY3. view of interior Motor PlazaCity Parking LotRetail Parking LotResident entryResident entryALLEY16
Source: Humphreys & Partners Architects, L.P., July 2019(08/28/2019 SAK) R:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\Ex_Perspective Rendering_4.pdfD:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\MND\ex_Perspective_Renderings_and_Elevations4_20190828.aiHuntington Plaza Mixed-Use ProjectPerspective RenderingExhibit 6dLorem ipsumKEYMAP123Wheeler Ave.N First Ave.Metro GoldlineParking entryParking (city , retail & guest )1. Bird’s eye view from Metro GoldlineBldg#2 4 story ResidentialBldg#1 2~4 story ResidentialAlleyMetro GoldlineHuntington Dr.AlleyBldg#2 4 story ResidentialBldg#1 2~4 story Residential3. Impact zone at Metro Gold Line, View OpportunityMetro GoldlineHuntington Dr.2. View of stepped skyline from Huntington Dr.Bldg#1 Bldg#2 17
Source: Humphreys & Partners Architects, L.P., July 2019D:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\MND\ex_Perspective_Renderings_and_Elevations5_20190828.aiHuntington Plaza Mixed-Use ProjectPerspective RenderingExhibit 6eLorem ipsumHorizontal emphasis for fast trafficArtwork potential as a Landmark for city of ArcadiaKEYMAP123Wheeler aveIndiana St.AlleyParking (city , retail & guest )1. view from Indiana St.ENTRY PLAZAMetro GoldlineIndiana StAlleyEntry Plaza2. Bird’s eye view of Alley frontageTwo tower for pedestrian scale architectureMain Module for B, C typeWheeler ave 3. view from Wheeler AvenueParking (city , retail & resident )
Source: Humphreys & Partners Architects, L.P., July 2019(08/28/2019 SAK) R:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\Ex_Perspective Rendering_6.pdfD:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\MND\ex_Perspective_Renderings_and_Elevations6_20190828.aiHuntington Plaza Mixed-Use ProjectPerspective RenderingExhibit 6fLorem ipsumCity Parking LotALLEYParking Access (city , retail & guest )Artwork potential as a Landmark for city of ArcadiaResidential Entry1. view of exposed main cornerHorizontal emphasis for fast trafficMetro GoldlineWheeler Ave.Indiana StParking (city , retail & resident )3. view of North Elevation from Gold Line2. view of South Elevation from Huntington Dr.Bldg#1 2~4 story ResidentialBldg#2 4 story ResidentialKEYMAP12319
Source: Humphreys & Partners Architects, L.P., July 2019(08/28/2019 SAK) R:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\Ex_Elevation_7.pdfD:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\MND\ex_Perspective_Renderings_and_Elevations7_20190828.aiHuntington Plaza Mixed-Use ProjectElevation (Bldg 2: Wheeler Avenue)Exhibit 6gLorem ipsum0’16’ 32’8’Metro GoldlineAlleyParking Entry “A”Parking Entry “B”Alley Parking Resident EntryBldg#2 4 story Residential (Max 60’ Height )Egress StairEgress StairCourtyard 1Courtyard 21. Bldg #2 South Elevation (Alley & Entry Plaza) Wheeler Ave.TransfromerMetro Gold LinePublic Parking Parking Entry “C”Garage perforated wallBldg#2 4 story Residential (Max 60’ Height ) Module “B type unit” Module “B type Corner unit”Egress StairBase elementspodium level unit with Brick2. Bldg #2 North Elevation (Alley & Entry Plaza) Module “C type unit”Deck @ Level 2,3,4
Source: Humphreys & Partners Architects, L.P., July 2019(08/28/2019 SAK) R:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\Ex_Elevation_8.pdfD:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\MND\ex_Perspective_Renderings_and_Elevations8_20190828.aiHuntington Plaza Mixed-Use ProjectElevation (Bldg 1: Huntington Drive)Exhibit 6hLorem ipsum0’16’ 32’8’Alley Parking Metro GoldlineHuntington Dr.Retail PlazaBldg#1 2~4 story Residential (Max 60’ Height )Mid-block connectionRetail PaseoSky Deck at Level 4Retail #2Retail #3Retail #1Sky Deck at Level 4Corridor at Level 51. Bldg #1 South Elevation ( Retail Entry Plaza) 2 Story Residential3 Story Residential3 Story ResidentialRetail #5Retail #2Metro GoldlineIndiana St.Indiana St.N. First Ave.N. First Ave.Retail Paseoloading zoneResident EntryBldg#1 2~4 story Residential (Max 60’ Height )Egress StairEgress StairMotor Court with Retail ParkingResident entry Lobby2. Bldg #1 Northh Elevation (Alley & Motor Court)
(08/28/2019 SAK) R:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\Ex_Elevation_9.pdfD:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\MND\ex_Perspective_Renderings_and_Elevations9_20190828.aiHuntington Plaza Mixed-Use ProjectElevation (Indiana Street & N. First Avenue)Exhibit 6iLorem ipsum0’16’ 32’8’Metro GoldlineAlleyRetail at GroundRetail at GroundtransfromerPublic Parking at GroundHuntington Dr.Bldg#2 4 story Residential (Max 60’ Height )Bldg#1 2~4 story Residential (Max 60’ Height )Stair & ElevatorArt work potentialEntry Retail Plaza2. East Elevation (Metro Gold Line) Stair & ElevatorMetro GoldlinePublic Parking at GroundHuntington Dr.Bldg#2 4 story Residential (Max 60’ Height )Bldg#1 2~4 story Residential (Max 60’ Height )Stair & ElevatorArt work potentialEntry Retail PlazaStair & ElevatorWheeler Ave.Alley1. West Elevation (N First Ave) Sky Deck at Level 4Sky Deck at Level 4Source: Humphreys & Partners Architects, L.P., July 2019
Source: Humphreys & Partners Architects, L.P., July 2019(08/28/2019 SAK) R:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\Ex_Material Finishes_1.pdfD:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\MND\ex_Project_Material Finishes1_20190828.aiHuntington Plaza Mixed-Use ProjectMaterial FinishesExhibit 7a1. LA HABRASMOOTH PLASTERGRAY1-2. ASPENSMOOTH PLASTER2. ALUCOBONDBRUSHEDCARBONFINISH3. BRUSHED BRONZEACCENTS4. BRICK VENEERBLACK & LIGHT BROWN & DARK RED5. GROUND FLOOR COLUMN7. METAL SIDEING SYSTEM 8. ALUMINUMSTORE FRONT SYSTEM9. METAL CANOPY6. LONGBOARDPRIVACY SCREEN10. METALEXTRUDED OPENING122163444567898
Source: Humphreys & Partners Architects, L.P., July 2019(08/28/2019 SAK) R:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\Ex_Material Finishes_2.pdfD:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\MND\ex_Project_Material Finishes2_20190828.aiHuntington Plaza Mixed-Use ProjectMaterial FinishesExhibit 7b1. LA HABRASMOOTH PLASTERGRAY1-2. ASPENSMOOTH PLASTER2. ALUCOBONDBRUSHEDCARBONFINISH3. BRUSHED BRONZEACCENTS4. BRICK VENEERBLACK & LIGHT BROWN & DARK RED5. GROUND FLOOR COLUMN7. METAL SIDEING SYSTEM 8. ALUMINUMSTORE FRONT SYSTEM9. METAL CANOPY6. LONGBOARDPRIVACY SCREEN10. METALEXTRUDED OPENING510121-21-24445944
Source: Humphreys & Partners Architects, L.P., July 2019(08/28/2019 SAK) R:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\Ex_Material Finishes_3.pdfD:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\MND\ex_Project_Material Finishes3_20190828.aiHuntington Plaza Mixed-Use ProjectMaterial FinishesExhibit 7c1. LA HABRASMOOTH PLASTERGRAY1-2. ASPENSMOOTH PLASTER2. ALUCOBONDBRUSHEDCARBONFINISH3. BRUSHED BRONZEACCENTS4. BRICK VENEERBLACK & LIGHT BROWN & DARK RED5. GROUND FLOOR COLUMN7. METAL SIDEING SYSTEM 8. ALUMINUMSTORE FRONT SYSTEM9. METAL CANOPY6. LONGBOARDPRIVACY SCREEN10. METALEXTRUDED OPENING771-2816459111027414
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 2-5 Environmental Setting and Project Description
buildings would be constructed above a subterranean parking garage, and would be divided from
each other by a 41 foot-wide one-way public alley that divides the Project site.
The Project is designed to activate the street frontage by orienting the Project’s retail components
and a public open space area towards the E. Huntington Drive streetscape. The Land Use and
Community Design Element of the City’s General Plan identifies the ¼-mile radius surrounding
the Arcadia Gold Line Station as an “activity node”, which is defined as “places of pedestrian
activity and excitement. These are places where people congregate, socialize, and shop. Activity
nodes are also places where residents can leisurely stroll, participate in a recreational activity, or
relax and experience the outdoors” (Arcadia 2010a). To accomplish this goal, the Project would
include a pedestrian-scaled outdoor plaza area opening the Project site to the streetscape along
E. Huntington Drive, as well as a retail paseo that would connect between E. Huntington Drive,
on-site retail uses, and the public alley that bisects the Project site. Project features have been
incorporated and Project design has been developed to comply with the City Center Design Plan
(Onyx Architects 2018), as described in more detail in Section 4.11, Land Use and Planning.
Open Space Areas and Landscaping
Exhibits 9a through 9i, Typical Views of Project Landscape Elements, Site Plans, and Renderings,
depict the open spaces that would be provided as part of the proposed Project. The City requires
100 sf per unit minimum open space for residential uses in the DMU and CBD zones, which
results in a required minimum of 13,900 sf of open space for the 139 proposed residential units.
Per the Development Code, open space may be in the form of private or common open space via
balconies, courtyards, at-grade patios, rooftop gardens, and/or terraces. The Project proposes
24,370 sf of open space, which is approximately 43 percent more open space than what is
required. This would include 7,732 sf of open space at ground level, 5,556 sf at Level 2, 8,050 sf
of private open space (e.g., decks), and 3,032 sf at the Skydeck on Level 4. More details on these
open space areas is provided below.
Building 1 would be centered around a public outdoor plaza that would connect the Project to the
streetscape along E. Huntington Drive. The public plaza would feature a lawn area as well as
ornamental plantings, seating, and other exterior furnishings. The public plaza would incorporate
decorative paving and lighting features to enhance its visual interest from the street. The plaza
would be accessible to the public from E. Huntington Drive and via a retail paseo walkway that
would connect to the public alley, Building 2, and parking structure in the north portion of the
Project site. The plaza would be open to the public but would be owned and maintained by the
Developer.
Level 2 of the Project’s Building 2 would include 5,556 sf of open space, including an indoor
clubhouse and two open-air courtyards. These spaces would be provided for the exclusive use of
residents and resident guests. The western courtyard would contain a wading pool, seating,
landscaping, a sculpture, decorative hardscape, artificial turf with seating, wood decking, multi-
toned accent pavers, decorative lighting, and an outdoor kitchen with pergola and community
table. The eastern courtyard would contain a water feature, prefabricated fire pit, seating,
landscaping, a sculpture, decorative hardscape, artificial turf with seating, wood decking, multi-
toned accent pavers, lighting spheres, planting pots, shade trees, wood benches, hammocks, and
decorative lighting.
Level 4 of Building 1 would include two rooftop skydecks totaling 3,032 sf of open space. The two
rooftop decks would each include multi-toned accent paving, wood decking, outdoor seating,
artificial turf with seating, a prefabricated fire pit, decorative hardscape, landscaping, and lighting
spheres.
Source: Humphreys & Partners Architects, L.P., July 2019(08/28/2019 SAK) R:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\Ex_Roof Plan.pdfD:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\MND\ex_Roof Plan_20190828.aiHuntington Plaza Mixed-Use ProjectRoof PlanExhibit 8HUNTINGTON DRN FIRST AVE.ALLEYSECTION A-A’SECTION B-B’INDIANA ST.METRO GOLD LINERETAIL PLAZAMOTOR COURT5F4F3F2F1F5F4F3F2F1FB1FSKY DECK @ LEVEL 4ROOF @ LEVEL 5PEDESTRIAN CONNECTION5F4F3F2F1FB1F5F4F3F2F1FB1F
(08/28/2019 SAK) R:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\Ex_Project Landscape Elements.pdfD:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\MND\ex_Inspirational Impage_Site Plans_Renderings1_20190828.aiHuntington Plaza Mixed-Use ProjectTypical Views of Project Landscape ElementsExhibit 9aNot to Scale
Source: Humphreys & Partners Landscape Architecture, 2019(08/28/2019 SAK) R:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\Ex_Site Plan.pdfD:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\MND\ex_Inspirational Impage_Site Plans_Renderings2_20190828.aiHuntington Plaza Mixed-Use ProjectSite PlanExhibit 9bNot to Scale
Source: Humphreys & Partners Landscape Architecture, 2019D:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\MND\ex_Inspirational Impage_Site Plans_Renderings3_20190828.aiHuntington Plaza Mixed-Use ProjectGround Level Colored Plan - PlazaExhibit 9cNot to Scale
Source: Humphreys & Partners Landscape Architecture, 2019(08/28/2019 SAK) R:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\Ex_Ground Level Colored Plan - Alley.pdfD:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\MND\ex_Inspirational Impage_Site Plans_Renderings4_20190828.aiHuntington Plaza Mixed-Use ProjectGround Level Colored Plan - AlleyExhibit 9dNot to Scale
Source: Humphreys & Partners Landscape Architecture, 2019(08/28/2019 SAK) R:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\Ex_Podium Amenitits Colored Plan.pdfD:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\MND\ex_Inspirational Impage_Site Plans_Renderings5_20190828.aiHuntington Plaza Mixed-Use ProjectPodium Amenities Colored PlanExhibit 9eNot to Scale
Source: Humphreys & Partners Landscape Architecture, 2019(08/28/2019 SAK) R:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\Ex_Podium Amenitits Preliminary Perspective A.pdfD:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\MND\ex_Inspirational Impage_Site Plans_Renderings6_20190828.aiHuntington Plaza Mixed-Use ProjectPodium Amenities Preliminary Perspective AExhibit 9fNot to Scale
Source: Humphreys & Partners Landscape Architecture, 2019D:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\MND\ex_Inspirational Impage_Site Plans_Renderings7_20190828.aiHuntington Plaza Mixed-Use ProjectPodium Amenities Preliminary Perspective BExhibit 9gSECONDARY AMENITY COLOR PLANNot to Scale
Source: Humphreys & Partners Landscape Architecture, 2019(08/28/2019 SAK) R:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\Ex_Roof Deck Colored Plan.pdfD:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\MND\ex_Inspirational Impage_Site Plans_Renderings8_20190828.aiHuntington Plaza Mixed-Use ProjectRoof Deck Colored PlanExhibit 9hAMENITY SPACESLegend2’ x 2’ Multi-Toned Accent PavingAWood DeckingBOutdoor C$UWL¿FLDO7XUIZ$GLURQGDFNPrefab Fire PitPrefab Pot w/ Shade TreeDecorative RockLighting SpheresDEFGHAABBBBGGHHHHBBBCCCDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDEEEFFFFFFFFFFFFCCCBBBBAGENERAL NOTES:The images, illustrations, drawings, and statements (“information”) contained herein are based upon a preliminary review of the entitlement requirements; thus are subject to change during the design review process. The information is provided merely to assist in how the site may eventually be developed. Consequently, there is no guarantee that the improvements depicted will be built, or if built, will be of the same type, material, size, appearance, or use as presented.Not to Scale
Source: Humphreys & Partners Landscape Architecture, 2019(08/28/2019 SAK) R:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\Ex_Roof Deck Preliminary Perspective C.pdfD:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\MND\ex_Inspirational Impage_Site Plans_Renderings9_20190828.aiHuntington Plaza Mixed-Use ProjectRoof Deck Preliminary Perspective CExhibit 9iNot to Scale
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 2-6 Environmental Setting and Project Description
The Project would include removal of existing mature trees on the project site and along the
project’s E. Huntington Drive and Wheeler Avenue frontages. The Project includes the provision
of on-site landscaping as well the installation of six street trees along the Project’s E. Huntington
Drive frontage and seven street trees along the Project’s Wheeler Avenue frontage, some of
which would include tree grates.
Circulation and Parking
Vehicular Circulation
As shown in Exhibit 4b, Level B1 (Sub-T Parking) Plan, primary vehicular access to the Project’s
parking structure is proposed via an entry driveway accessible from Wheeler Avenue as well as
from two parking entrances that are proposed from the public, one-way alley that is located
between Wheeler Avenue and E. Huntington Drive. Access to the 39 surface parking for retail
uses is proposed exclusively from the public alley, which runs west-to-east and provides access
from N. 1st Avenue. Vehicles would be able to leave the site via the driveway onto Wheeler Avenue
or via the public alley by traveling east towards Indiana Street.
Non-Vehicular Circulation
Secured/keyed residential access to the Project would be provided at the entry lobbies,
staircases, and elevators depicted in Exhibits 4a through 4h, Illustrative Site Plan and Plan Views.
All residential units would be accessible from interior walkways, proposed to connect to the
elevators and stairwells. The two elevators would provide access to the basement parking garage,
the ground floor, and all four levels of residential units.
Also, a retail paseo walkway is proposed to provide ground-level pedestrian connectivity through
the Project from E. Huntington Drive in the south across the public alley to the entry lobby of
Building 2.
Automobile Parking
The City’s off-street parking requirements are set forth in Section 9103.07.070 of the Development
Code, which covers Mixed-Use (Nonresidential and Residential Combined) Parking Standards
(Arcadia 2019). In accordance with the Development Code parking regulations, the following
minimum parking requirements apply to the Project:
Mixed-Use Residential. 1.5 parking spaces for every dwelling unit, plus 1.0 guest parking
space for every 3 units.
Retail. 1 parking space per 200 sf of gross floor area (GFA).
It should be noted that, for commercial uses located within 1,320 feet (¼ mile) of a light rail station,
the City Code permits a reduction of 25 percent to be applied to the off-street parking requirement
(Arcadia 2019). Based on direct application of the Development Code parking requirements, a
total of 295 spaces are required for the Project as summarized below:
Mixed-Use Residential. 209 spaces (139 units x 1.5 spaces/unit)
Mixed-Use Residential (Guest). 47 spaces (139 units ÷ 3)
Retail. 39 spaces (10,200 GFA ÷ 1,000 GFA x 5.0 spaces x 0.75)
______________________________________________________________
Total City Code Required Project Parking = 295 spaces
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 2-7 Environmental Setting and Project Description
In addition to the 295 spaces required per the Development Code requirements, the Project is
required to provide for the replacement of 55 existing surface parking stalls that would be
temporarily lost as part of the Project’s implementation, which would result in a total of 350 parking
stalls required for the Project overall.
Based on these requirements, the Project proposes 350 parking spaces, which are located as
shown in Exhibits 4b and 4c, Illustrative Site Plan and Plan Views. The Project would incorporate
a parking stacker system which allows one car to be parked above another, as shown in Exhibit 9j,
Parking Device Specification, which would provide 50 of the 350 Project parking spaces.
Bicycle Parking
As required by Arcadia Development Code Section 9103.07.150, the Project would include long-
term and short-term bicycle parking. For multifamily uses, 0.2 spaces per unit are required. For
nonresidential uses such as retail, short term bicycle parking should be provided equivalent to
5 percent of the vehicle parking stalls provided, with a minimum of one two-bicycle capacity rack.
For nonresidential uses, long-term bicycle parking is also required for 5 percent of vehicle parking
stalls provided, with a minimum of one two-bicycle capacity rack. The Development Code requires
that long-term bicycle parking shall include one of the following:
Covered, lockable enclosures with permanently anchored racks for bicycles;
Lockable bike rooms with permanently anchored racks; or
Lockable, permanently anchored bicycle lockers.
The Project proposes installation of 32 bicycle parking stalls, including 20 in Building 1 and 12 in
Building 2.
Infrastructure
The Project would include the installation of and connection to storm drain, water quality, and
potable water infrastructure systems, as well as on- and off-site utility relocations, to
accommodate the needs of the proposed mixed-use development. The necessary on- and off-
site infrastructure would be constructed and/or relocated by the Developer according to
specifications set by the City. The following is a brief description of the proposed infrastructure
and utility systems.
Drainage and Water Quality Treatment
As shown in Exhibit 10, Pre-Project Hydrology Plan, in the existing condition, storm water runoff
from the Project site is conveyed into an existing catch basin just south of the alley on the Project
site, as well as via two separate ribbon gutter systems within the existing parking lots that convey
storm water off-site to the curb and gutters that run along E. Huntington Drive and N. 1st Avenue,
each of which ultimately flow into catch basins. Over four miles of City-maintained storm water
management facilities are present in Arcadia, which connect to regional flood control and runoff
conveyance facilities (Arcadia 2010b). The City’s storm water generally flows in a southerly
direction through the Eaton Wash, Arcadia Wash, Santa Anita Wash, Sierra Madre Wash, and
Sawpit Wash toward the Rio Hondo, which runs southwest into Whittier Narrows and continues
southwest to join the Los Angeles River in Downey (Arcadia 2010a).
The proposed project drainage and water quality treatment system for the Project is shown in
Exhibit 11, Post-Project Hydrology Plan. Runoff from Building 2 rooftops would be conveyed south
towards the alley, and into a new 12-inch storm drain pipe that would be installed along the same
Source: Humphreys & Partners Landscape Architecture, July 2019(08/28/2019 SAK) R:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\Ex_Roof Deck Preliminary Perspective C.pdfD:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\MND\ex_Parking_Devise_Specification_20190828.aiHuntington Plaza Mixed-Use ProjectParking Device SpecificationExhibit 9j127(6 ˖ 5HFRPPHQGHGFDUVL]HVDUHOLVWHGDERYH˖ $GGLWLRQDOVL]HVFDQEHFXVWRPL]HG6HH&DU6L]HVSDJH˖(DFKGLPHQVLRQKDVDWROHUDQFHRI ˒IRUOHQJWK˒IRUZLGWKDQG˒IRUKHLJKW˖ 5HFRPPHQG˒GHSUHVVHGVODELIGRLQJJURXQGOHYHOLQVWDOODWLRQIRUIODWGULYLQJRQWRSODWIRUP˖8VDEOHVSDFHGLPHQVLRQVZLOOQRWFKDQJHIRUIODWSDOOHWV˖ ˒QHHGHGIURPEDFNRIUHDUFROXPQWRIDFHRIZDOO&$56,=(60,1,080 5(&200(1'('833(5ˎ˒ˎ˒*5281'ˎ˒ˎ˒+(,*+7237,216ˎPLQˎ˒PLQ VHHWDEOH ˎ˒PLQ VHHWDEOH *5281'833(5/(1*7+:,'7+833(5ˎ˒ˎ˒*5281'ˎ˒ˎ˒ˎŔ˒127(6 ˖'HSWKGHSHQGVRQWKHFRQFUHWHVWUHQJWKVSHFL̙HG˖ 7\SLFDOEDVHSODWHGLPHQVLRQVDUH˒[˒GHVLJQPD\YDU\EDVHGRQGHVLJQ˖ ˒WKLFNSODWHZLWK˒+66GHVLJQPD\YDU\EDVHGRQDFWXDOGHVLJQ˖ 8VHH[LVWLQJEXLOGLQJIRRWLQJWRVXSSRUW3X]]OHVWHHOFROXPQ˖ ,IQRH[LVWLQJEXLOGLQJIRRWLQJLVDYDLODEOHWKHQˎ[ˎIRRWLQJZLWKˎWKLFNVODELVW\SLFDOO\UHTXLUHG1RWH 6WDQGDUGORDGLVOEVSHUYHKLFOH+HDYLHUORDGVDYDLODEOH,QGLYLGXDOFDUVVKRXOGEHPHDVXUHGIRUVL]HŵW$ERYHLVDVDPSOHOLVWRIPRGHOFDUVWKDWFDQŵWRQWKHGLIIHUHQWSODWIRUPVL]HVJLYHQDőKRUL]RQWDOFOHDUKHLJKW7KLVOLVWLVQRWPHDQWWREHFRPSUHKHQVLYHRUH[DKDXVWLYH/$5*(%0:6HULHV $XGL4 7HVOD0RGHO6 9ROYR;&0(',80$XGL$%0:;'RGJH'XUDQJR -HHS*UDQG&KHURNHH60$//$FXUD,/;%0:6HULHV+RQGD&LYLF/H[XV,6/$5*(0(',8060$///(1*7+ :,'7+ /(1*7+ :,'7+ /(1*7+ :,'7+ˎ˒ ˎ˒ ˎ˒ ˎ˒ ˎ ˒ ˎ˒ˎ˒ ˎ˒ ˎ˒ ˎ˒ ˎ ˒ ˎ˒127$9$,/$%/( 127$9$,/$%/( 127$9$,/$%/( 127$9$,/$%/(ˎ ˒ ˎ˒127(6 ˖ 5HFRPPHQGHGFDUVL]HVDUHOLVWHGDERYH˖ $GGLWLRQDOVL]HVFDQEHFXVWRPL]HG˖(DFKGLPHQVLRQKDVDWROHUDQFHRI ˒IRUOHQJWK˒IRUZLGWKDQG˒IRUKHLJKW˖5HFRPPHQG˒GHSUHVVHGVODELIGRLQJJURXQGOHYHOLQVWDOODWLRQIRUIODWGULYLQJRQWRSODWIRUP˖8VDEOHVSDFHGLPHQVLRQVZLOOQRWFKDQJHIRUIODWSDOOHWV6$03/(&$5/,67
Source: Fuscoe Engineering 2019(06/12/2019 SAK) R:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\Ex_Pre Project Hydrology.pdfD:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\MND\ex_Pre Project Hydrology_20190612.aiHuntington Plaza Mixed-Use ProjectPre-Project Hydrology PlanExhibit 10HUNTINGTON PLAZAPRE PROJECT HYDROLOGYLEGEND
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 2-8 Environmental Setting and Project Description
general alignment of the existing ribbon gutters that run east to west towards N. 1st Avenue
beneath the alley. A sump pump would be installed in the southwest portion of Building 2 to pump
storm water off-site to the existing storm drain catch basin located on N. 1st Avenue
(Willrodt 2019).
For the drainage area south of the alley, flows would be pumped to an existing catch basin located
in E. Huntington Drive approximately 250 feet east of N. 1st Avenue. Runoff from Building 1
rooftops would be conveyed via downspouts to a proposed pipeline that would flow south off-site
into the existing catch basin on the north side of E. Huntington Drive. A sump pump would be
installed in the southwest portion of Building 1 to pump storm water off-site (Willrodt 2019).
As discussed in more detail in Section 4.10, Hydrology and Water Quality, a LID Plan will be
prepared for the Project to further analyze and specify appropriate source-control best
management practices (BMPs) , site-design BMPs, and hydraulic source-control BMPs that would
be incorporated into the Project to control pollutants, pollutant loads, and runoff volumes to the
maximum extent feasible by minimizing impervious surface area and control runoff from
impervious surfaces through infiltration, evapotranspiration, bioretention, and/or rainfall harvest
and use.
Potable Water
The City of Arcadia Public Works Services Department is responsible for producing, storing, and
distributing potable water to the City and maintaining the City’s water system infrastructure. The
existing water infrastructure adjacent to the Project would include an 8-inch main pipeline located
in Wheeler Avenue, a 12-inch ductile iron main pipeline in Huntington Avenue, and an 8-inch cast
iron pipeline in Wheeler Avenue (Willrodt 2019).
Water service is available from existing infrastructure at E. Huntington Drive and Wheeler Avenue,
and the City of Arcadia has confirmed that these demands can be accommodated with the existing
potable water infrastructure as described in more detail in Section 4.19, Utilities and Service
Systems (Willrodt 2019).
As shown in Exhibit 12, Wet Utility Point of Connection, the Project’s proposed water infrastructure
for the project will include domestic, irrigation, and fire water service lines, meters, and backflow
preventers. Building 2 would connect to the existing water main in Wheeler Avenue via a 6-inch
domestic water service line, meter, and back flow prevention device, and a 6” fire water service
line, meter, and back flow prevention device. Building 1 would connect to the existing water main
in Huntington Drive to the south of the Project site via a 6-inch domestic water service line, meter,
and back flow prevention device, a 6-inch fire water service line, meter, and back flow prevention
device, and a 2-inch irrigation water service line, meter, and back flow prevention device. Any
portions of Wheeler Avenue or Huntington Drive that are disturbed during Project construction
would be repaved in-kind as described in MM TRANS-1.
Sewer
In the existing condition, sewage from the Project site is conveyed via an 8-inch pipeline located
in the alley flowing easterly towards Indiana Street and an 8-inch pipeline flowing westerly in
Wheeler Ave towards a 15-inch trunk line sewer main owned and maintained by the Sanitation
Districts of Los Angeles County (LACSD) and located in N. 1st Avenue (Willrodt 2019).
Local sewer main lines are maintained by the City and convey wastewater into trunk lines that are
maintained by the LACSD. The City’s sewer system has approximately 138 miles of sewer pipes,
15 miles of County-owned pipelines, six siphons, and one pump station. The City’s sewer system
Source: Fuscoe Engineering 2019(09/09/2019 SAK) R:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\Ex_Pre Project Hydrology.pdfD:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\MND\ex_Post Project Hydrology_20190909.aiHuntington Plaza Mixed-Use ProjectPost-Project Hydrology PlanExhibit 11
Source: Fuscoe Engineering 2019(09/09/2019 SAK) R:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\Ex_Wet Utility POC.pdfD:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\MND\ex_Wet_Utility_POC_20190909.aiHuntington Plaza Mixed-Use ProjectWet Utility Point of ConnectionExhibit 12
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 2-9 Environmental Setting and Project Description
serves existing developments in the City, with connections to the sewer systems of the Cities of
Sierra Madre, Temple City, and Monrovia and in unincorporated County areas that allow for
sewage conveyance through the Arcadia system to the LACSD sewer trunk lines (Arcadia 2010b).
As shown in Exhibit 12, Wet Utility Point of Connection, the Project proposes to connect to the
existing 15-inch LACSD trunk line sewer main located in N. 1st Avenue. LACSD has confirmed
that sewage generated by the Project can be accommodated with the existing sewage pipeline
infrastructure, and no capacity driven expansions and/or relocations are required. The Project’s
sewer connection point in N. 1st Avenue would require the new construction of approximately 200
feet of new 8-inch City sewer main (with manholes) beneath the existing public alley corridor,
which would require trenching, demolition/removal of approximately 230 feet of existing 8-inch
sewer. This new sewer main would have two proposed sewer laterals that would connect from
Building 2 to the north and Building 1 to the south. Areas within the public right-of-way disturbed
during construction would be repaved once these activities are completed as required in MM
TRANS-1 (Willrodt 2019).
Dry Utilities
Dry utility service would be provided by Southern California Edison (SCE) (electricity service),
Southern California Gas Company (gas service), AT&T (telephone service), and Charter
Communications (cable/internet service) from existing facilities near the Project site. The Project
would require the relocation of the existing dry utility lines which span the Project site running
east-to-west and west-to-east along the northern edge of the existing public alley and that include
electricity, telephone, and cable lines. The Project team is coordinating with the dry utility
providers, including SCE, to identify three work orders which would need to be implemented to
accommodate the Project. Work Order #1 would involve the relocation and partial undergrounding
of existing overhead utilities within the Project site and along the Project perimeter. With the
consent of the three neighboring properties to the west of the Project site and south of the alley,
Work Order #1 would also include undergrounding of overhead utilities serving these three
parcels as well. Also, as part of Work Order #1, two new anchor power poles would be constructed
on the eastern and western sides of the Project site adjacent to the alley. Existing utility service
to adjacent and nearby parcels would be maintained throughout Project construction, and would
only be switched to feed from the underground conduit/substructure and new power poles once
they are constructed and ready for use. Thereafter, the existing poles could be removed. Work
Order #2 and #3 would involve requests to the utility companies to prepare feeder lines to the two
new buildings.
The Project would also connect to existing gas infrastructure near the site. The nearest
distribution gas main is the distribution main located in Wheeler, which would most likely be the
gas feed point for this Project based on coordination with the utility provider conducted to date.
2.2.3 EASEMENTS
The following easements would be required to implement the proposed Project:
An existing 4-foot SCE utility easement north of the public alley would need to be
maintained as it is currently occupied with overhead electrical power infrastructure serving
the three off-site parcels fronting N. 1st Avenue to the west. Relocation and partial
undergrounding of this line would occur as described above.
An additional easement will be required from the adjacent parcels for the conversion along
the western Project property line. The exact width of this additional easement is not yet
finalized with the utility agencies. However, as currently proposed the Project would
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 2-10 Environmental Setting and Project Description
involve a request for an additional 5-foot easement from the adjacent properties to
accommodate the utility work described above.
Part of the Project includes the purchase of a City Parking Lot, which would be
incorporated into the overall Project site. The City Parking Lot currently contains 55
surface parking spaces. As part of the Project, these 55 parking spaces would be replaced
at a 1:1 ratio within the Project’s parking structure. The parking spaces would be located
on the ground floor of the structure and would be accessible to the public following
construction. One of the required approvals for the Project is a Development Agreement
(DA). The DA will require that a Parking Access Easement be recorded prior to the
completion of construction to ensure that the 55 parking spaces remain public and
accessible at all times. An existing easement for a public alley currently exists within the
Project site and would need to be relinquished by the City to allow for the Project’s
construction of a subterranean parking structure and other Project improvements within
the existing easement area. A new surface access easement conveying public access
rights through the public alley would be dedicated to the City by the Applicant as a
condition of approval. These activities would occur concurrently with the vesting tentative
tract map and other entitlements required for the Project as described in more detail below
in Section 2.4.
2.2.4 OFF-SITE IMPROVEMENTS
As a part of Project implementation, the following off-site improvements are anticipated
(Willrodt 2019):
The construction of the new subterranean parking garage facility that would span from
Building 2 to the Building 1 footprints and would require approximately 230 feet of the
western terminus of the existing 8-inch sewer main to be removed. The Project intends to
leave the remaining sewer segment east of the Project site intact so the existing active
properties east of the Project would continue to have uninterrupted sewer service.
The preferred Project sewer main outfall connection point in N. 1st Avenue would require
the construction of approximately 200 feet of a new 8-inch sewer main (with manholes)
within the existing alley corridor. The new sewer segment would be constructed prior to
the removal of the operating sewer segment (noted above) to allow properties lying west
of the Project to continue to have uninterrupted sewer service.
An “open cut” approach to construction of the new subterranean parking garage facility
that spans from Building 2 to Building 1 would be utilized, which would require the existing
alley pavement surface and subgrade materials to be excavated, removed, and replaced.
The alley at this location would be reconstructed once the parking basement structure is
formed and cured.
Project construction would require temporary closures of the alley within and near the
Project site as well as temporary closures of sidewalks along E. Huntington Drive and
Wheeler Avenue.
Utility relocation would occur within the public alley and within 1st Street, Wheeler Avenue,
and E. Huntington Drive off-site as described in more detail above in Sections 2.2.2 and
2.2.3.
Decorative accent paving would be installed along the public alley from 1st Avenue to the
eastern Project limits.
Construction staging and parking may occur on nearby parcels in cooperation with the
Property owners and consistent with MM TRANS-1, which requires the development and
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 2-11 Environmental Setting and Project Description
contents of a Construction Management Plan that will be developed and implemented by
the Developer to the satisfaction of the City.
The Project would require the removal of two street trees off-site along E. Huntington Drive
in addition to an additional ten tree removals within the Project site.
In addition to on-site landscaping, approximately six street trees would be planted off-site
along the Project’s E. Huntington Drive frontage and seven street trees would be planted
along the Project’s Wheeler Avenue frontage, although the ultimate number will be
determined by the Public Works Services department, some of which would include tree
grates. Along the Project’s E. Huntington Drive frontage, the existing sidewalk would be
replaced with exposed aggregate paving. Along the Project’s Wheeler Avenue frontage,
the existing sidewalk would be replaced with a natural gray concrete sidewalk.
All of the noted items above would be designed and constructed in accordance with City
requirements and standards, and would require City approval.
2.3 CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES
The information in this section has been provided by the Project architect and engineer.
Construction of the Project is planned to last approximately 33 months and is planned to begin in
2020 and be completed in 2022, as outlined in Table 4, Project Construction Schedule.
TABLE 4
PROJECT CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE
Project Activity Duration or Timing
Construction Begins 2020
Demolition 2 months
Site Preparation, Grading, Trenching 8 months
Building Construction 23 months
Paving 3 months (would occur during
building construction)
Architectural Coating 3 months (would occur during
building construction)
Project Opens to the Public 2022
Source: Willrodt 2019.
Project construction would begin with the demolition and removal of the five existing structures
on the site. Demolition activities would occur for approximately two months. It is estimated that a
total of approximately 6,000 tons of debris would be exported off site during demolition activities.
It is also anticipated that 44,420 cubic yards of soil would be removed from the site. During the
demolition and grading activities, trucks are expected to enter and leave the Project site on a
regular basis during working hours. The number of truck trips traveling along the City-designated
truck routes would vary daily depending on the nature of the construction activity at the site.
Demolition debris removal from the Project site would generate an estimated 680 trips over a
2-month demolition phase. On average it is anticipated that 15 truck hauls per day or
approximately 2 trips per hour would occur during that phase. Excavation is anticipated to
generate a total of 6,346 total truck trips over an 8-month excavation period with an average of
36 truck trips per day or 4 trips per work hour (Psomas 2019a). In addition, asphalt and concrete
removals would generate a total of 258 one-way truck trips (Willrodt 2019).
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 2-12 Environmental Setting and Project Description
Following demolition, excavation and shoring work would occur for approximately eight months.
This work would require export of approximately 44,420 cubic yards (cy) of soil. This would
generate an estimated 3,173 one-way truck trips (Willrodt 2019). The Project will be constructed
so that no pile driving would be required to install the Project’s shoring or to implement any other
Project construction activities (Berliner 2019).
Trenching and relocation of utilities, including water, sewer, electrical, and storm drain
infrastructure would occur over approximately one month and would occur during the latter half
of the excavation and shoring work described above. More information related to utility relocations
are provided in Sections 2.2.2, 2.2.3, 2.2.4, and 4.19 of this document. After utilities are relocated,
the alley would be repaved with decorative paving.
Building construction would occur for approximately 23 months, including paving and application
of architectural coatings (e.g., exterior paints). During construction activities, trucks are expected
to enter and leave the site on a regular basis. Trucks are anticipated to access the Project site
primarily via I-210 and larger arterials (e.g., Santa Anita Avenue and E. Huntington Drive), and
would follow City-designated haul routes avoiding residential streets. No pile driving would be
required for building foundations (Berliner 2019).
Construction staging and worker parking would be accommodated within the Project site and/or
nearby parcels, as will be detailed in a Construction Management Plan that will be submitted to
the City for approval prior to issuance of the grading permit. As discussed further in Section 4.17,
Transportation, the Construction Management Plan would identify the equipment and vehicle
staging areas, stockpiling of materials, fencing (e.g., temporary fencing with opaque material),
and haul routes.
Project construction would require the removal of approximately 12 existing trees on and near the
site. This would include 2 trees along Wheeler Avenue and the remaining 10 trees within the
project parcels. The trees proposed for removal consist of 4 Carrotwood (Cupaniopsis
anacardioides), 7 queen palms (Syagrus romanzoffiana) and 1 pygmy palm (Phoenix roebelenii)
2.4 DISCRETIONARY APPROVALS
This IS/MND is intended to serve as the primary environmental document for all actions
associated with the Project, including all discretionary approvals requested or required to
implement the Project. In addition, this is the primary reference document for the formulation and
implementation of a mitigation monitoring program for the Project. Based on information provided
by the City of Arcadia, the proposed Project would not require a general plan amendment.
The actions and/or approvals that the City needs to consider for the Project include but are not
limited to the following:
Adoption of the Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project IS/MND.
Certificate of Demolition. Required for demolition of existing structures in the City
Conditional Use Permit. As required by the Arcadia Zoning Regulations, projects
including multifamily dwellings in the CBD and DMU zones require issuance of a
conditional use permit.
Vesting Tentative Tract Map (VTTM). The Project’s VTTM proposes to merge the
collective existing subdivided property and re-subdivide the property into 6 new lots
including one comprehensive ground lot (Lot 1) and 5 air-space lots for the purposes of
spatially containing: residential vehicular parking (Lot 2), retail vehicular parking (Lots 3 &
4), City vehicular parking (Lot 4), Retail space (Lot 5) and residential space (Lot 6 including
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 2-13 Environmental Setting and Project Description
an allocation of 139 residential condominiums). This entitlement is also required to vacate
the air-space beneath the public alley so that a portion of the subterranean parking
structure can be constructed there as well as other related components.
Architectural Design Review. An architectural design review will be conducted to ensure
that the Project complies with the City’s Design Guidelines. Given the Project is a mixed-
use development and proposing more than 20 residential units, it will also be subject to
design review by the Planning Commission and City Council.
Development Agreement. As mentioned above, the Project includes the purchase of a
City Parking Lot, which would be incorporated into the overall Project site. The City Parking
Lot currently contains 55 surface parking spaces. As part of the Project, these 55 parking
spaces would be replaced at a 1:1 ratio within the Project’s parking structure. The parking
spaces would be located on the ground floor of the structure and would be accessible to
the public following construction. One of the required entitlements for the Project is a DA.
The DA will require that a Parking Access Easement be recorded prior to the completion
of construction to ensure that the 55 parking spaces remain public and accessible at all
times.
Encroachment Permits. The Project may require issuance of an encroachment permit
from the City for construction within the City’s right-of-way for sidewalk and/or
infrastructure improvements.
Subsequent approvals (which would require separate processing through the City) would include a
grading permit, building permits, street improvement plans, and utility plans.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 2-14 Environmental Setting and Project Description
This page intentionally left blank
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 3-1 Environmental Checklist Form
SECTION 3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
1. Project Title: Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Arcadia
240 West Huntington Drive
Arcadia, California 91066
3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Mr. Luis Torrico, Senior Planner
Development Services Department
(626) 574-5442
4. Project Location: 124-134 Wheeler Avenue and
117-129 E. Huntington Drive
Arcadia, California 91006
5. Project Sponsor’s Name and Address: New World International Investment, LLC
23341 Golden Springs, Suite 200
Diamond Bar, California 91765
6. General Plan Designation: Commercial
Downtown Mixed Use (DMU)
7. Zoning: Commercial Business District (CBD)
Downtown Mixed Use (DMU)
8. Description of Project: The proposed Project involves the construction of two five-story
buildings with approximately 10,200 sf of retail and 139 residential units on a 1.74-acre site
located between E. Huntington Drive and Wheeler Avenue in the City of Arcadia. The ground
floor would contain retail and parking, and the upper four floors would contain residential
condominium units. Parking is proposed at ground level and below ground. The Project would
provide a public outdoor plaza with seating and landscaping, connecting the Project site to
the E. Huntington Drive streetscape located to the south.
9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: The Project is located in the downtown area of the
City, just north of E. Huntington Drive, east of N. 1st Avenue, south of Wheeler Avenue, and
west of Indiana Street. The Project site is immediately surrounded by existing urban
development, including commercial retail, office, and associated parking. Immediately to the
east (on the other side of Indiana Street) are the Gold Line tracks and approximately 0.15-mile
northwest of the Project site is the Arcadia Gold Line Station.
10. Other Public Agencies Whose Approval May Be Required: Los Angeles County Sanitation
District.
11. Have California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the
project area requested consultation pursuant to Public Resources Code section
21080.3.1? If so, is there a plan for consultation that includes, for example, the
determination of significance of impacts to tribal cultural resources, procedures
regarding confidentiality, etc.? Yes. The tribal consultation requirements of AB 52 have
been implemented for this Project as described in more detail in Section 4.18 of this document.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 3-2 Environmental Checklist Form
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this Project, involving
at least one impact that is a “Potentially Significant Impact” without implementation of MM’s, as
indicated in Section 4.0 of this IS/MND.
Aesthetics Agriculture and Forest Resources
Air Quality Biological Resources
Cultural Resources Energy
Geology and Soils Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Hazards and Hazardous Materials Hydrology and Water Quality
Land Use and Planning Mineral Resources
Noise Population and Housing
Public Services Recreation
Transportation Tribal Cultural Resources
Utilities and Service Systems Wildfire
Mandatory Findings of Significance
DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the Project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE
DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the Project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a
significant effect in this case because revisions in the Project have been made by or agreed to by the
Project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that the Project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the Project MAY have a “potentially significant impact” or “potentially significant unless
mitigated” impact on the environment, but at least one effect (1) has been adequately analyzed in an
earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and (2) has been addressed by mitigation
measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the Project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all
potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE
DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant
to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are
imposed upon the Project, nothing further is required.
__________________________________________ ___________________
Signature of Lead Agency Representative Date
__________________________________________ ____________________
Printed name Agency
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-1 Environmental Checklist Form
SECTION 4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT QUESTIONS AND ANALYSIS
4.1 AESTHETICS Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section 21099, would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but
not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic
buildings within a State scenic highway?
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or
quality of public views of the site and its surroundings?
(Public views are those that are experienced from
publicly accessible vantage point). If the project is in an
urbanized area, would the project conflict with
applicable zoning and other regulations governing
scenic quality?
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which
would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the
area?
4.1.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The Project site is within the downtown area of the City, just north of E. Huntington Drive and east
of N. 1st Avenue. Exhibit 2, Aerial Map, provides an aerial photograph showing the Project site
and surrounding area. The Project site currently consists of three one-story buildings and two two-
story buildings and associated surface parking lots. The Project site is immediately surrounded
by existing urban development, including retail and office uses with surface parking lots.
As described in State CEQA Guidelines §20199 (OAL 2019), transit priority areas are defined as
areas within one-half mile of a major transit stop, which includes the Project site. Pursuant to
CEQA Statute §21099(d)(1), aesthetic impacts of a mixed-use residential project on an infill site
within a transit priority area shall not be considered significant impacts on the environment.
Because the proposed Project meets the qualifications of a transit priority area, this section
primarily focuses on considering aesthetic impacts pursuant to a review of the local design review
ordinances applicable to the Project.
4.1.2 PROJECT IMPACTS
Regulatory Requirements
RR AES-1 The Developer shall prepare a Lighting Plan that provides the type and location of
proposed exterior lighting and signage, subject to the review and approval of the
City’s Development Services Department. All new lighting will be shielded and
down-cast, such that the light is not cast onto adjacent properties or visible from
above, and all new lighting would be reviewed to ensure compliance with the
standards codified in Section 9103.01 of the City of Arcadia Development Code
.Impact Discussion
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-2 Environmental Checklist Form
a) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
Less than Significant Impact. A scenic vista is defined as a viewpoint that provides expansive
views of a highly valued landscape for the benefit of the general public. A substantial adverse
effect to a scenic vista is one that degrades the view from a designated viewing location. The City
of Arcadia General Plan (Arcadia 2010a) provides no mention of scenic vistas explicitly; however,
the General Plan Resource Sustainability Element mentions the undeveloped hillsides to the north
of the Project site within the San Gabriel Mountains as creating a scenic backdrop to the City
(Arcadia 2010a). Although the Project would potentially obstruct views of the hillsides for a limited
number of viewers from E. Huntington Drive or properties to the south, the Project would not
substantially damage any scenic resources.
In addition, the General Plan (Arcadia 2010a) describes the importance of the City’s urban forest in
enhancing the aesthetic quality of the City, and it identifies E. Huntington Drive and other major
corridors in the City for their scenic and picturesque qualities, primarily due to the large, mature
street trees on both sides of the street and within its medians. As described in more detail in
Section 4.4, Biological Resources, the Arcadia City Council has adopted ordinances addressing the
protection of trees in the City, which further demonstrate the importance of the City’s urban forest.
Project construction would require the removal of a total of 12 trees including 2 street trees along
E. Huntington Drive. As shown in Exhibits 9b through 9d, Typical Views of Project Landscape
Elements, Site Plans, and Renderings, these trees would be replaced with approximately six street
trees would be planted off-site along the Project’s E. Huntington Drive frontage and seven street
trees would be planted along the Project’s Wheeler Avenue frontage, although the ultimate
number would be determined by the Public Works Services Department, some of which would
include tree grates, thereby avoiding any decline in tree canopy coverage within the City and at the
Project site. The Project would also install additional ornamental landscaping at ground level as well
as trees and ornamental landscaping within the private open space areas that would be provided
for residents. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
b) Would the project substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited
to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State scenic highway?
No Impact. The Project is not located along or near a State scenic highway. The nearest
designated State scenic highways are State Route (SR) 110 (Arroyo Seco Parkway) and SR 2
(Angeles Crest Highway), located seven and nine miles, respectively, from the Project site
(Caltrans 2011). Given the distance, no damage to scenic resources within a State scenic
highway would result from the Project and no mitigation is required.
c) Would the project substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of
public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are
experienced from publicly accessible vantage point). If the project is in an
urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other
regulations governing scenic quality?
Less Than Significant Impact. The Project site is located within the City’s downtown and is
immediately surrounded by existing urban development, including commercial retail, office, and
associated parking. The Project would adhere to the applicable development standards for CBD
and DMU zones with a Downtown Parking Overlay, as well as other citywide policies and
requirements including but not limited to Section 9103.09 of the Development Code covering
landscaping, Sections 7554.2-7554.9 covering the City’s Water Efficient Landscaping Ordinance,
Section 91303.01.080 regarding mechanical and electrical equipment screening, Section
9103.01.130 regarding trash enclosures, and Section 9103.11 regarding signage (Arcadia 2019).
Also, the Project is located within the City Center Design Plan (Onyx Architects 2018). Project
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-3 Environmental Checklist Form
consistency with the City’s Development Code, including development standards for the CBD and
DMU zones and the City Center Design Plan, is discussed in more detail in Section 4.11, Land
Use and Planning, of this IS/MND.
As part of the Project’s design review process, the Developer has prepared a landscape plan that
provides the proposed plant palette and location of proposed landscaping, hardscaping, and other
related features, which have been submitted to the City for review and approval as well as
renderings and colors and materials boards, which have undergone the City’s Design Review
process, which is in place to ensure consistency with the applicable zoning and other applicable
regulations, including those that govern scenic quality.
During demolition and construction activities associated with the Project, construction equipment,
demolition activities, short-term stockpiles of building debris, and ingress and egress of haul
trucks would be visible. This temporary visual change is less than significant because of its
temporary nature and because the views would be typical of construction sites for mixed-use
projects in an urban environment. No mitigation is required.
With implementation of the Project, the views of the Project site from off-site locations would be
altered. Refer to Exhibits 6a through 6i, Perspective Renderings and Elevations, for depictions of
the proposed structures. The height and general massing of the proposed mixed-use building,
which would have a maximum of 5 floors above-ground and would be a maximum of 63 feet tall
including mechanical equipment, would be substantially taller than the existing 1- and 2-story
structures and surface parking lots on the site and would be taller than adjacent structures,
particularly those along E. Huntington Drive. Also, the Project’s design is more modern and the
colors and materials are different from those used for many of the storefronts and other adjacent
buildings near the site. However, as described in more detail in Section 4.11, Land Use and
Planning, the Project’s height, massing, design, and colors and materials , as well as Project
consistency with the City Center Design Plan, have been reviewed by the City and are considered
to be consistent with applicable zoning and other requirements applicable to the site. The Project
would be similar to other mixed-use projects in the vicinity of the Gold Line alignment, including a
similar development northwest of the Project site on Wheeler Avenue. The Project is consistent
with the City’s vision for the area as exemplified in the City Center Design Plan (Onyx Architects
2018). The Project would comply with the height limit (60 feet plus an additional 10 feet for
mechanical equipment), residential density (80 units per acre), and floor-to-area ratio (1.0)
allowed in the CBD and DMU zones (Arcadia 2018). Also, the Project’s southern structure
(Building 2) along E. Huntington Drive has been designed to gradually increase in height, or step
back, with a primary step back at Level 4 and a secondary step back at Level 5 which would
gradually increase the scale and massing of the building so it is more consistent with the
streetscape and nearby buildings. Similarly, the center of the Project’s frontage with E. Huntington
Drive incorporates a pedestrian-scale main plaza that is flanked by ground floor retail and an
urban paseo connecting to the northern portion of the site as well as two skydecks at Level 4 that
help to better incorporate the Project into the E. Huntington Drive streetscape and to better relate
the Project site to neighboring structures.
Although the proposed Project would be taller than the adjacent structures, distant views of the
San Gabriel Mountains to the north would not be substantially impacted by Project
implementation. Pedestrians along E. Huntington Drive already have views to the north obscured
due to the Project site’s distance to the San Gabriel Mountains (approximately 1.2 to 2.0 miles),
existing intervening structures, and mature street trees. Project implementation would not
substantially degrade the quality or character of views of the San Gabriel Mountains.
Land uses surrounding the Project site include various one- and two-story office and retail uses.
Although the Project buildings would be taller than the existing surrounding land uses, the
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-4 Environmental Checklist Form
Project’s pedestrian amenities, including architecturally interesting frontages, landscaping, and
public plaza area, would create a pedestrian-friendly environment and aesthetically pleasing
streetscape. While the views of the Project site from surrounding vantage points would be altered
with Project implementation, the Project would not substantially degrade the existing visual
character or quality of the site or its surroundings and would improve the aesthetics and
pedestrian amenities of the area. The introduction of residential, retail, and parking uses to the
Project site would not be out of scale, size, or character with the existing surrounding urban setting
and would be visually compatible with the existing surrounding uses.
As identified in the Land Use and Community Design Element of the General Plan, the City
downtown has been targeted as an area for revitalization. The General Plan includes a conceptual
plan for downtown Arcadia that illustrates the types of design elements desired for this area,
emphasizing pedestrian access and open space and integrating the Arcadia Gold Line Station
with higher density residential, mixed-use, and commercial areas via a system of pedestrian
alleyways and plazas (Arcadia 2010a). As such, the Project’s proposed mix of commercial and
residential uses is consistent with, and a furtherance of, the City’s intended development pattern
for the downtown. The proposed land uses would be compatible with existing office,
commercial/retail, residential, and transit uses in the vicinity of the Project site. Therefore,
aesthetic changes resulting from the Project would be less than significant and no mitigation is
required.
d) Would the project create a new source of substantial light or glare which would
adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
Less Than Significant Impact. The location of the Project site is in an area already subject to
nighttime lighting from existing uses. The Project site currently contains on-site lighting associated
with existing buildings and the surface parking lot. In addition, street lighting is located on the
sidewalks along E. Huntington Drive, Wheeler Avenue, Indiana Street, and the alleyway bisecting
the Project site.
The Project would introduce exterior light sources into the Project site suitable for
residential/commercial development, including lighting at Project site entrances, storefronts, and
within individual residential balconies. All lighting fixtures shall be appropriate in scale, intensity,
and height for the proposed Project. The Project’s lighting would be consistent with other light
generated by existing and surrounding land uses and roadways and would be in compliance with
the City’s restrictions on exterior lighting (see RR AES-1) including Section 9103.07.060 of the
Development Code for Parking Lot Lighting and Section 9103.01.120 Development Code for
Exterior Lighting, which primarily focus on preventing spillage of lighting and glare onto adjacent
properties (Arcadia 2019). Consistent with City requirements, exterior lighting would be hooded
and arranged to reflect away from adjoining properties and streets. Due to the urban nature of the
Project site, surrounding areas and existing lighting, as well as the lack of sensitive receptors for
lighting (e.g., single-family residential), impacts associated with lighting the Project would be less
than significant.
Glare is caused by light reflections from pavement, vehicles, and building materials (e.g.,
reflective glass and polished surfaces). During daylight hours, the amount of glare depends on
intensity and direction of sunlight. Glare can create hazards to motorists and nuisances for
pedestrians and other viewers. The Project would be constructed with materials and finishes that
are common for infill development and are not highly-reflective. Furthermore, as discussed above,
Project light fixtures would be directed downward and shielded or recessed in such a manner so
that light trespass is minimized and light from the project is not perceptible at or beyond the
property line. The Project does not include any uses that would have the potential to create
noticeable glare from sunlight, vehicle lights, or outdoor lighting which have the potential to pose
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-5 Environmental Checklist Form
a hazard to motorists traveling in the Project vicinity or that would affect surrounding uses.
Therefore, less than significant impacts would occur, and no mitigation is required.
4.1.3 MITIGATION MEASURES
Project implementation would not result in significant impacts related to aesthetics; therefore, no
mitigation measures are required.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-6 Environmental Checklist Form
4.2 AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY
RESOURCES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
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:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or
Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as
shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland
Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California
Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a
Williamson Act contract?
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of,
forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code
section 12220[g]), timberland (as defined by Public
Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned
Timberland Production (as defined by Government
Code section 51104[g])?
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest
land to non-forest use?
e) Involve other changes in the existing environment
which, due to their location or nature, could result in
conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or
conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
4.2.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The Project site does not currently support any agricultural uses or activities or forestry resources.
4.2.2 PROJECT IMPACTS
Regulatory Requirements
None required.
Impact Discussion
a) Would the project convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of
Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to
non-agricultural use?
b) Would the project conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson
Act contract?
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-7 Environmental Checklist Form
c) Would the project conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land
(as defined in Public Resources Code, Section 12220[g]), timberland (as defined by
Public Resources Code, Section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production
(as defined by Government Code, Section 51104[g])?
d) Would the project result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to
non-forest use?
e) Would the project 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?
No Impact. The Project site is in an urbanized area and would not convert farmland to a non-
agricultural use. The site is zoned as DMU and CBD and is developed with commercial land uses
and surface parking lots (Arcadia 2010a). No portion of the Project site is covered by a Williamson
Act Contract or located on land designated as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of
Statewide Importance according to the 2016 California Department of Conservation, Farmland
Mapping and Monitoring Program (DOC 2016a). The City of Arcadia General Plan’s Land Use
and Community Design Element does not identify any agricultural production areas within the
City’s corporate boundaries (Arcadia 2010a). In addition, the Project site does not contain
designated forest land or timberland as defined in the California Public Resources Code
(§§12220[g] and 4526, respectively) (OLC 2019). Therefore, no impacts to agricultural resources,
forest land, or timberland would result from Project implementation, and no mitigation is required.
4.2.3 MITIGATION MEASURES
Project implementation would not result in significant impacts related to agriculture and forestry
resources; therefore, no mitigation measures are required.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-8 Environmental Checklist Form
4.3 AIR QUALITY Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan?
b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of
any criteria pollutant for which the project region is in
non-attainment under an applicable federal or state
ambient air quality standard?
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to
odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of
people?
4.3.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The Project site is in the Los Angeles County portion of the South Coast Air Basin (SoCAB) and,
for air quality regulation and permitting, is under the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality
Management District (SCAQMD). The SoCAB is a 6,600-square-mile area bound by the Pacific
Ocean to the west, the San Gabriel, San Bernardino, and San Jacinto Mountains to the north and
east, and the San Diego County line to the south. The SoCAB includes all of Orange County and
the non-desert portions of Los Angeles, Riverside, and San Bernardino Counties, in addition to
the San Gorgonio Pass area of Riverside County. The SoCAB’s terrain and geographical location
(e.g., a coastal plain with connecting broad valleys and low hills) determine its distinctive semi-
arid climate, which is characterized by moderate temperatures, oceanic influence, and
precipitation that is limited to a few storms during the winter (November through April).
Both the State and federal government have established health-based ambient air quality
standards (AAQS) for seven air pollutants. These pollutants include ozone (O3), carbon monoxide
(CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur dioxide (SO2), coarse particulate matter with a diameter of
10 microns or less (PM10), fine particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in diameter (PM2.5), and
lead. These standards are designed to protect the health and welfare of the populace with a
reasonable margin of safety. The AAQS described above are shown in Table 5, California and
National Ambient Air Quality Standards.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-9 Environmental Checklist Form
TABLE 5
CALIFORNIA AND NATIONAL AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
Pollutant Averaging Time
California
Standards
Federal Standards
Primarya Secondaryb
O3 1 Hour 0.09 ppm (180 µg/m3) – –
8 Hour 0.070 ppm (137 µg/m3) 0.070 ppm (137 µg/m3) Same as Primary
PM10 24 Hour 50 µg/m3 150 µg/m3 Same as Primary
AAM 20 µg/m3 – Same as Primary
PM2.5 24 Hour – 35 µg/m3 Same as Primary
AAM 12 µg/m3 12.0 µg/m3 15.0 µg/m3
CO
1 Hour 20 ppm (23 mg/m3) 35 ppm (40 mg/m3) –
8 Hour 9.0 ppm (10 mg/m3) 9 ppm (10 mg/m3) –
8 Hour
(Lake Tahoe) 6 ppm (7 mg/m3) – –
NO2
AAM 0.030 ppm (57 µg/m3) 0.053 ppm (100 µg/m3) Same as Primary
1 Hour 0.18 ppm (339 µg/m3) 0.100 ppm (188 µg/m3) –
SO2
24 Hour 0.04 ppm (105 µg/m3) 0.14 ppm (for certain
areas)c –
3 Hour – – 0.5 ppm
(1,300 µg/m3)
1 Hour 0.25 ppm (655 µg/m3) 0.075 ppm (196 µg/m3) –
Lead
30-day Avg. 1.5 µg/m3 – –
Calendar Quarter – 1.5 µg/m3
Same as Primary Rolling
3-month Avg. – 0.15 µg/m3
Visibility
Reducing
Particles
8 hour
Extinction coefficient of
0.23 per km – visibility ≥
10 miles
(0.07 per km – ≥30 miles
for Lake Tahoe) No
Federal
Standards Sulfates 24 Hour 25 µg/m3
Hydrogen
Sulfide 1 Hour 0.03 ppm (42 µg/m3)
Vinyl
Chloride 24 Hour 0.01 ppm (26 µg/m3)
O3: ozone; µg/m3: micrograms per cubic meter; PM10: large particulate matter; AAM: Annual Arithmetic Mean; PM2.5: fine
particulate matter; CO: carbon monoxide; mg/m3: milligrams per cubic meter; NO2: nitrogen dioxide; SO2: sulfur dioxide; ppm:
parts per million; km: kilometer; –: No Standard.
a National Primary Standards: The levels of air quality necessary, within an adequate margin of safety, to protect the public
health.
b National Secondary Standards: The levels of air quality necessary to protect the public welfare from any known or anticipated
adverse effects of a pollutant.
c On June 2, 2010, a new 1-hour SO2 standard was established and the existing 24-hour and annual primary standards were
revoked. To attain the 1-hour national standard, the 3-year average of the annual 99th percentile of the 1-hour daily maximum
concentrations at each site must not exceed 75 ppb. The 1971 SO2 national standards (24-hour and annual) remain in effect
until one year after an area is designated for the 2010 standard, except that in areas designated nonattainment for the 1971
standards, the 1971 standards remain in effect until implementation plans to attain or maintain the 2010 standards are
approved.
Note: More detailed information in the data presented in this table can be found at the CARB website (www.arb.ca.gov).
Source: CARB 2016.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-10 Environmental Checklist Form
Regional air quality is defined by whether the area has attained State and federal air quality
standards, as determined by air quality data from various monitoring stations. Areas that are
considered “nonattainment” are required to prepare plans and implement measures that will bring
the region into “attainment”. When an area has been reclassified from nonattainment to attainment
for a federal standard, the status is identified as “maintenance”, and there must be a plan and
measures established that will keep the region in attainment for the next ten years.
For the California Air Resources Board (CARB), an “unclassified” designation indicates that the
air quality data for the area are incomplete and there are no standards to support a designation
of attainment or nonattainment. Table 6, Attainment Status of Criteria Pollutants in the South
Coast Air Basin, summarizes the attainment status of the SoCAB for the criteria pollutants.
TABLE 6
ATTAINMENT STATUS OF CRITERIA POLLUTANTS IN
THE SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN
Pollutant State Federal
O3 (1-hour) Nonattainment Nonattainment O3 (8-hour)
PM10 Nonattainment Attainment/Maintenance
PM2.5 Nonattainment Nonattainment
CO Attainment Attainment/Maintenance
NO2 Attainment Attainment/Maintenance
SO2 Attainment Attainment
Lead Attainment Attainment/Nonattainment*
All others Attainment/Unclassified No Standards
O3: ozone; PM10: respirable particulate matter with a diameter of 10 microns or less; PM2.5: fine particulate
matter with a diameter of 2.5 microns or less; CO: carbon monoxide; NO2: nitrogen dioxide; SO2: sulfur dioxide.
* Los Angeles County is classified nonattainment for lead; the remainder of the SoCAB is in attainment of the
State and federal standards.
Sources: SCAQMD 2016, USEPA 2019a.
Sensitive Air Quality Receptors
Sensitive receptors include, but are not limited to, children, the elderly, persons with preexisting
respiratory or cardiovascular illness, and athletes and others who engage in frequent exercise.
The nearest sensitive receptors are residences located approximately 300 feet to the south of the
Project site on Alta Street.
4.3.2 PROJECT IMPACTS
Regulatory Requirements
RR AQ-1 The Project will be conducted in compliance with all applicable South Coast Air
Quality Management District (SCAQMD) rules and permitting requirements,
including but not limited to:
SCAQMD Rule 403, Fugitive Dust, for controlling fugitive dust and avoiding
nuisance. Compliance with this rule will reduce short-term particulate
pollutant emissions.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-11 Environmental Checklist Form
SCAQMD Rule 402, Nuisance, which states that a Project will not “discharge
from any source whatsoever such quantities of air contaminants or other
material which cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to any
considerable number of persons or to the public, or which endanger the
comfort, repose, health or safety of any such persons or the public, or which
cause, or have a natural tendency to cause, injury or damage to business or
property”.
SCAQMD Rule 1113, Architectural Coatings, which limits the volatile organic
content (VOC) of architectural coatings used for the Project.
Impact Discussion
a) Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air
quality plan?
Less than Significant Impact. The SCAQMD develops rules and regulations, establishes
permitting requirements for stationary sources, inspects emissions sources, and enforces such
measures through educational programs or fines, when necessary. It is directly responsible for
reducing emissions from stationary (area and point), mobile, and indirect sources and has
prepared an Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) that establishes a program of rules and
regulations directed at attaining the NAAQS and CAAQS.
The SCAQMD adopted the 2016 AQMP on March 3, 2017 (SCAQMD 2017b). The 2016 AQMP
incorporates the latest scientific and technical information and planning assumptions, including
the 2016-2040 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS),
updated emission inventory methodologies for various source categories, and SCAG’s latest
growth forecasts.
The main purpose of an AQMP is to bring an area into compliance with the requirements of federal
and State air quality standards. For a project to be consistent with the AQMP, the pollutants
emitted from the project should not (1) exceed the SCAQMD CEQA air quality significance
thresholds or (2) conflict with or exceed the assumptions in the AQMP.
In order to be consistent with the AQMP, the following analysis compares the Project’s
construction and operational emissions with the SCAQMD CEQA air quality significance
thresholds. A project may have a significant impact where project-related emissions would exceed
federal, State, or regional standards or thresholds, or where project-related emissions would
substantially contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation. The SCAQMD has
developed construction and operations thresholds to determine whether projects would potentially
result in contributing toward a violation of ambient air quality standards. The SCAQMD
recommends that projects be evaluated in terms of the quantitative thresholds established to
assess both the regional and localized impacts of project-related air pollutant emissions. The City
uses the current SCAQMD thresholds to determine whether a proposed project would have a
significant impact. These SCAQMD thresholds are identified in Table 7, South Coast Air Quality
Management District Air Quality Significance Thresholds.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-12 Environmental Checklist Form
TABLE 7
SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT
AIR QUALITY SIGNIFICANCE THRESHOLDS
Mass Daily Thresholds (lbs/day)
Pollutant Construction Operation
VOC 75 55
NOx 100 55
CO 550 550
PM10 150 150
PM2.5 55 55
SOx 150 150
Lead 3 3
lbs/day: pounds per day; VOC: volatile organic compound; NOx: nitrogen oxides;
CO: carbon monoxide; PM10: respirable particulate matter 10 microns or less in
diameter; PM2.5: fine particulate matter 2.5 microns or less in diameter; SOx: sulfur
oxides.
Source: SCAQMD 2015
Air pollutant emissions for the Project were estimated using the California Emissions Estimator
Model (CalEEMod) version 2016.3.2 computer program (CAPCOA 2017). CalEEMod is designed
to model construction and operational emissions for land development projects and allows for the
input of project- and county-specific information. For air quality modeling purposes, construction
of the Project was based on the Project’s construction assumptions and default assumptions
derived from CalEEMod. The input for operational emissions of the existing and proposed uses
was based on the vehicle trip generation rates provided in the traffic impact analysis (Appendix H)
and the proposed building area. Additional input details are included in Appendix A (Air Quality
and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Calculations including CalEEmod Output, Psomas 2019a).
Construction Emissions
Air pollutant emissions would occur from: construction equipment exhaust; fugitive dust from
demolition and site grading; exhaust and particulate emissions from trucks hauling demolition and
construction debris, soil, and building materials to and from the Project site; from automobiles and
light trucks driven to and from the Project site by construction workers; and VOCs from painting and
asphalt paving operations. The proposed Project would comply with applicable SCAQMD rules
and regulations as described in RR AQ-1, including Rule 402 for nuisance, Rule 403 for fugitive
dust control, and Rule 1113 for architectural coatings. Rule 403 measures include regular
watering of active grading areas and unpaved roads, limiting vehicle speeds on unpaved surfaces,
stabilizing stockpiled earth, and curtailing grading operations during high wind conditions
(SCAQMD 1976). Watering of active grading areas is included in the CalEEMod emissions
analysis and results in reduced PM10 and PM2.5 emissions. It should be noted that some Project
requirements and features (such as watering grading areas), although required Project elements,
are shown in the CalEEMod format as mitigation measures. SCAQMD Rule 1113 limits the VOC
content of architectural coatings (SCAQMD 1977). The emission reductions associated with
compliance with this rule have been included in the emissions calculations.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-13 Environmental Checklist Form
Regional Emissions Thresholds – Maximum Daily Regional Emissions
Table 8, Estimated Maximum Daily Regional Construction Emissions, presents the estimated
maximum daily emissions during construction of the proposed Project and compares the
estimated emissions with the SCAQMD’s daily regional emission thresholds. As shown in Table 8,
Project construction mass daily emissions would be less than the SCAQMD’s thresholds for all
criteria air pollutants.
TABLE 8
ESTIMATED MAXIMUM DAILY REGIONAL CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS
Year
Emissions (lbs/day)
VOC NOx CO SOx PM10 PM2.5
2020 3 26 21 <1 3 2
2021 3 18 20 <1 3 1
2022 22 23 29 <1 3 2
Maximum 22 26 29 <1 3 2
SCAQMD Thresholds (Table 7) 75 100 550 150 150 55
Exceeds SCAQMD Thresholds? No No No No No No
lbs/day: pounds per day; VOC: volatile organic compound; NOx: nitrogen oxides; CO: carbon monoxide; SOx: sulfur
oxides; PM10: respirable particulate matter 10 microns or less in diameter; PM2.5: fine particulate matter 2.5 microns or
less in diameter; SCAQMD: South Coast Air Quality Management District.
Note:
Source: SCAQMD 2015 (thresholds); see Appendix A for CalEEMod model outputs.
Construction-Phase Localized Significance Thresholds
In addition to the mass daily emissions thresholds established by the SCAQMD, short-term local
impacts to nearby sensitive receptors from on-site emissions of NO2, CO, PM10, and PM2.5 are
examined based on SCAQMD’s localized significance threshold (LST) methodology. To assess
local air quality impacts for development projects without complex dispersion modeling, the
SCAQMD developed screening (lookup) tables to assist lead agencies in evaluating impacts.
The LST method is recommended to be limited to projects that are five acres or less. For the
purposes of an LST analysis, the SCAQMD considers receptors where it is possible that an
individual could remain for 1 hour for NO2 and CO exposure and 24 hours for PM10 and PM2.5
exposure. The emissions limits in the lookup tables are based on the SCAQMD’s Ambient Air
Quality Standards (SCAQMD 2016). The closest receptors that may remain for 1 hour are retail
and office uses adjacent to the Project’s boundaries, and the closest receptor that may remain for
24 hours is the SpringHill Suites by Marriott hotel use east of the Project site, across the Gold
Line alignment.
Table 9, Construction-Phase Localized Significance Threshold Emissions, shows the maximum
daily on-site emissions for construction activities compared with the SCAQMD LST thresholds.
The Project site is approximately 1.74 acres in area. The thresholds shown are from the lookup
tables for a site that is 1 acre, which is based on the assumption that the most intensive phase of
construction that involves soil disturbance would not exceed 1 acre. The Project’s maximum daily
on-site emissions would occur during the demolition phase (for NOx and CO), and during the
grading/excavation phase (for PM10 and PM2.5). As shown in Table 9, localized emissions for all
criteria pollutants would be less than their respective thresholds. Therefore, localized air quality
impacts at receptors proximate to construction activities would be exposed to less than significant
air quality impacts.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-14 Environmental Checklist Form
TABLE 9
CONSTRUCTION-PHASE
LOCALIZED SIGNIFICANCE THRESHOLD EMISSIONS
Emissions and Thresholds
Emissions (lbs/day)
NOx CO PM10 PM2.5
Project maximum daily on-site emissions 21 15 3 2
Localized Significance Threshold* 89 623 5 3
Exceed threshold? No No No No
lbs/day: pounds per day; NOx: nitrogen oxides; CO: carbon monoxide; PM10: respirable particulate matter 10 microns or
less in diameter; PM2.5: fine particulate matter 2.5 microns or less in diameter.
Note: Data is for SCAQMD Source Receptor Area 9, East San Gabriel Valley
* NOx and CO thresholds are based on a distance of 25 meters (82 feet) of the Project site; PM10 and PM2.5 thresholds
are based on a distance of 40 meters (130 feet) from the Project site.
Source: SCAQMD 2009 (thresholds); see Appendix A for CalEEMod model outputs.
Operational Emissions
The ongoing operation of the Project would result in a long-term increase in air quality emissions.
This increase would be due to emissions from Project-generated vehicle trips and through
operational emissions from the ongoing use of the Project.
Existing development on the Project site includes five buildings which would be demolished to
allow for construction of the proposed Project. Existing operations generate air pollutant
emissions from a variety of sources including vehicle trips associated with the commercial
buildings; natural gas used for heating and hot water; landscape and building maintenance
equipment; and consumer products. Emissions from the existing uses of the Project site were
estimated using CalEEMod, and are shown in Table 10, Existing Daily Operational Emissions.
The CalEEMod model input was based on the vehicle trip generation rate provided in the traffic
impact analysis and the building area for the existing on-site uses: Dan’s Autocare and Arcadia
Party Rentals. The existing uses generate 102 daily trips (Psomas 2019e, Appendix H).
TABLE 10
EXISTING DAILY OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS
Source
Emissions (lbs/day)
VOC NOx CO SOx PM10 PM2.5
Area sources <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1
Energy sources <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1
Mobile sources <1 1 4 <1 1 <1
Total Existing Operational
Emissions* 1 1 4 <1 1 <1
lbs/day: pounds per day; VOC: volatile organic compounds; NOx: nitrogen oxides; CO: carbon monoxide; SOx: sulfur oxides;
PM10: respirable particulate matter 10 microns or less in diameter; PM2.5: fine particulate matter 2.5 microns or less in diameter;
SCAQMD: South Coast Air Quality Management District.
* Some totals do not add due to rounding.
Note: CalEEMod model data sheets are included in Appendix A.
Source: Psomas 2019a.
The following section provides an analysis of potential air quality impacts to regional and local air
quality with operation of the proposed Project. The net change in emissions associated with the
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-15 Environmental Checklist Form
Project was calculated by deducting the emissions that are currently occurring under existing
conditions. The potential operations-related air emissions have been analyzed, as discussed
below, for the regional and local criteria pollutant emissions and cumulative impacts.
Operations-Related Criteria Pollutant Analysis
Operational emissions are comprised of area, energy, and mobile source emissions. Area and
energy source emissions are based on CalEEMod assumptions for the specific land uses and
size. Mobile source emissions are based on estimated Project-related trip generation forecasts,
as contained in the Project traffic impact analysis (Appendix H). The Project would generate 958
daily trips with reduction of trips from pass-by and internal capture credits (Psomas 2019e,
Appendix H). Estimated peak daily net operational emissions are shown in Table 11, Peak Daily
Net Operational Emissions.
TABLE 11
PEAK DAILY NET OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS
Source
Emissions (lbs/day)
VOC NOx CO SOx PM10 PM2.5
Area sources 5 2 12 <1 <1 <1
Energy sources <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1
Mobile sources 2 4 21 <1 6 2
Total Operational Emissions* 6 7 33 <1 6 2
Less: Existing Emissions (Table 10) 1 1 4 <1 1 <1
Net Increase in Emissions 5 6 29 <1 5 2
SCAQMD Significance Thresholds
(Table 7) 55 55 550 150 150 55
Significant Impact? No No No No No No
lbs/day: pounds per day; VOC: volatile organic compounds; NOx: nitrogen oxides; CO: carbon monoxide; SOx: sulfur oxides;
PM10: respirable particulate matter 10 microns or less in diameter; PM2.5: fine particulate matter 2.5 microns or less in diameter;
SCAQMD: South Coast Air Quality Management District.
* Some totals do not add due to rounding.
Note: CalEEMod model data sheets are included in Appendix A.
Source: Psomas 2019a.
As shown in Table 11, Peak Daily Net Operational Emissions, the Project’s net operational
emissions would be less than the SCAQMD CEQA significance thresholds for all criteria
pollutants.
The Project site is zoned as DMU and CBD zones with a Downtown Parking Overlay. As
discussed further in Section 4.11, Land Use and Planning, the Project would be consistent with
the zoning and General Plan designations of the Project site with issuance of a Conditional Use
Permit for multifamily dwellings. Because the General Plans of cities within the SoCAB are used
to determine the regional emissions of the SoCAB, emissions related to the development of the
Project site are therefore consistent with the growth expectations for the region. In addition, the
amount of emissions generated by the Project is below the SCAQMD’s significance thresholds.
The Project is located within a half-mile of the Arcadia Gold Line Station. The proximity of the
Project site to the station would encourage the use of mass transit which is consistent with the
AQMP’s goal of using non-single occupancy vehicles. As such, the proposed Project would not
conflict with the 2016 AQMP. There would be a less than significant impact, and no mitigation is
required.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-16 Environmental Checklist Form
b) Would the project result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria
pollutant for which the project region is in non-attainment under an applicable
federal or state ambient air quality standard?
Less than Significant Impact. As identified in Table 6, Los Angeles County is a nonattainment
area for O3, PM10, and PM2.5. The Project would generate PM10, PM2.5, NO2, and O3 precursors
(NOx and VOC) during short-term construction and long-term operations.
Construction Activities
Construction activities associated with the proposed Project would result in less than significant
construction-related regional and localized air quality impacts, as quantified above in Tables 8
and 9, respectively.
SCAQMD’s policy with respect to cumulative impacts associated with the above-referenced
pollutants and their precursors is that impacts that would be directly less than significant would
also be cumulatively less than significant (SCAQMD 2003). As discussed under Threshold 4.3(a),
short-term construction emissions associated with the proposed Project would occur at less than
significant levels. Therefore, consistent with SCAQMD policy, the cumulative construction impact
of criteria pollutants would also be less than significant.
Operational Activities
As shown in Table 11, Peak Daily Net Operational Emissions, operational emissions for all
analyzed pollutants would be below the SCAQMD CEQA significance thresholds. Therefore, the
Project would not contribute to a cumulatively considerable net increase of a pollutant for which
the SoCAB is in nonattainment. Emissions of nonattainment pollutants or their precursors would
not be cumulatively considerable and would be less than significant; no mitigation would
be required.
c) Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
Less than Significant Impact. A significant impact may occur when a project would generate
pollutant concentrations to a degree that would significantly affect sensitive receptors, which
include populations that are more susceptible to the effects of air pollution than the population at
large. Exposure of sensitive receptors is addressed for the following situations: CO hotspots;
criteria pollutants and toxic air contaminants (TACs), specifically diesel particulate matter (DPM)
from on-site construction; exposure to off-site TAC emissions; and asbestos and lead-based paint
during demolition. Operational, long-term TACs may be generated by some industrial land uses;
commercial land uses (e.g., gas stations and dry cleaners); and diesel trucks on freeways.
Residential land uses do not generate substantial quantities of TACs and are therefore not
addressed in this report.
Carbon Monoxide Hotspot
In an urban setting, vehicle exhaust is the primary source of CO. Consequently, the highest CO
concentrations generally are found close to congested intersections. Under typical meteorological
conditions, CO concentrations tend to decrease as the distance from the emissions source (e.g.,
congested intersection) increases. The air basin is currently in a state of attainment for CO. The
East San Gabriel Valley 2 region for which the project area is located was recorded to have 0.8
parts per million 1-hour concentration and 0.6 parts per million 8-hour concentration (SCAQMD
2017). The California ambient air quality standard for a 1-hour concentration is 20 ppm and the
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-17 Environmental Checklist Form
8-hour concentration is 9 ppm. As such, the East San Gabriel Valley 2 region is exposed to CO
concentrations that are 4 percent and 7 percent of the 1-hour and 8-hour ambient quality
standards, respectively. Based on the Project’s Traffic Study (Psomas 2019e, Appendix H), the
Project would result in 37 AM trips and 109 PM trips. The increase in vehicle trips is relatively low
and is not of sufficient magnitude to contribute toward a CO hotspot. As such, Project-related
traffic would result in less than significant CO impacts.
Criteria Pollutants from On-Site Construction
Exposure of persons to NOx, CO, PM10, and PM2.5 emissions is discussed in response to
Threshold 4.3(a) above. There would be no significant impacts, and no additional mitigation is
required.
Toxic Air Contaminant Emissions from On-Site Construction
Construction activities would result in short-term, Project-generated emissions of DPM from the
exhaust of off-road, heavy-duty diesel equipment used for site preparation (e.g., demolition,
excavation, and grading); paving; building construction; and other miscellaneous activities. CARB
identified DPM as a TAC in 1998. The dose to which receptors are exposed is the primary factor
used to determine health risk. Dose is a function of the concentration of a substance or
substances in the environment and the duration of exposure to the substance. Thus, the risks
estimated for a maximally exposed individual (MEI) are higher if a fixed exposure occurs over a
longer time period. According to the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, health
risk assessments—which determine the exposure of sensitive receptors to TAC emissions—
should be based on a 40-year exposure period; however, such assessments should be limited to
the period/duration of activities associated with the Project.
There would be relatively few pieces of off-road, heavy-duty diesel equipment in operation, and
the total construction period would be relatively short when compared to a 40-year exposure
period. Combined with the highly dispersive properties of DPM and additional reductions in
particulate emissions from newer construction equipment, as required by United States
Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and CARB regulations, construction emissions of
TACs would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial emissions of TACs. The impact would
be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
Exposure to Off-Site Toxic Air Contaminant Emissions
The CARB Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective provides
guidance concerning land use compatibility with TAC sources (CARB 2005). While not a law or
adopted policy, the handbook offers advisory recommendations for siting sensitive receptors near
uses associated with TACs (such as freeways and high-traffic roads, commercial distribution
centers, rail yards, ports, refineries, dry cleaners, gasoline stations, and industrial facilities) to help
keep children and other sensitive populations out of harm’s way.
Projects of concern for mobile sources of TACs are typically those located within 500 feet of the
following types of facilities that emit significant quantities of DPM: urban roads with more than
100,000 vehicles per day; freeways or roads with a high heavy truck concentration; and/or near
rail yards, ports, and/or distribution centers. The Project site is more than 500 feet from any
freeway or major urban road. Although the Metro Gold Line alignment is located adjacent to the
project site, the Gold Line is powered by electricity and is not a significant source of DPM. With
respect to proximity to emissions from railroad sources, CARB recommends avoiding siting new
sensitive land uses within 1,000 feet of a major service and maintenance rail yard (CARB 2005);
the Project site is not located within 1,000 feet of this type of facility. CARB recommends not siting
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-18 Environmental Checklist Form
residences within 300 feet of a large gas station3 and that a sensitive land use should be sited at
least 50 feet from a typical gas-dispensing facility (CARB 2005). There is a gas station located at
102 E. Huntington Drive, 125 feet south of the Project’s southern boundary. This gas station has
8 pumps, which is consistent with a typical gas dispensing facility. Therefore, health risks
associated with locating sensitive receptors proximate to a gas station would be less than
significant. CARB also recommends not placing sensitive receptors within the same building as a
dry cleaner and avoiding siting residences within 500 feet of dry-cleaning operations with
2 machines using perchloroethylene. There are no dry cleaners within 500 feet of the Project site.
The Project also does not involve emission sources with the potential for substantial levels of
emissions of TACs. As such, no off-site sensitive uses would be exposed to significant levels
TACs. Impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
d) Would the project result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors)
adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
Less than Significant. Potential operational odors could be created by cooking activities
associated with residential uses. These odors would be similar to existing residential uses
surrounding the Project site and throughout the City and odors would be confined to the immediate
vicinity of the proposed dwelling units.
Furthermore, according to the SCAQMD’s CEQA Air Quality Handbook, land uses associated
with odor complaints typically include agricultural uses, wastewater treatment plants, food
processing plants, chemical plants, composting, refineries, landfills, dairies, and fiberglass
molding (SCAQMD 1993). The Project does not include any uses identified by the SCAQMD as
being associated with odors and, therefore, would not produce emissions which would lead to
odors. The Project uses are also regulated from nuisance odors or other objectionable emissions
by SCAQMD Rule 402 (RR AQ-1). Rule 402 prohibits any the discharge from any source of air
contaminants or other material which would cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to
people or the public. As such, the Project would have a less than significant impact regarding
other emissions and no mitigation is required.
4.3.3 MITIGATION MEASURES
Project implementation would not result in significant impacts related to air quality; therefore, no
mitigation measures are required.
3 A large gas station is defined by CARB as a facility with a throughput of 3.6 million gallons per year or greater.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-19 Environmental Checklist Form
4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or
through habitat modification, 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?
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?
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally
protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh,
vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling,
hydrological interruption, or other means?
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native
resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with
established native resident or migratory wildlife
corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery
sites?
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting
biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy
or ordinance?
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?
4.4.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The Project site is within an urban area and is surrounded entirely by development that consists
primarily of commercial uses. On-site vegetation includes ornamental street trees, landscaping
shrubs, and groundcover along the E. Huntington Drive and Wheeler Avenue frontages, as well
as some ornamental trees in the parking lot medians.
The City’s Tree Preservation Ordinance (Ordinance No. 2341) recognizes oaks, sycamores, and
mature trees as significant aesthetic and ecological resources and establishes policies for their
protection, removal, and replacement (Arcadia 2019). Protected trees include:
1. Quercus Engelmannii (Engelmann oak), or quercus agrifolia (coast live oak, California
live oak) with a trunk diameter larger than four (4) inches measured at a point four and
one-half (4½) feet above the root crown, or two (2) or more trunks measuring three (3)
inches each or greater in diameter, measured at a point four and one-half (4½) feet above
the root crown.
2. Any other living oak tree with a trunk diameter larger than twelve (12) inches measured
at a point four and one-half (4½) feet above the root crown, or two (2) or more trunks
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-20 Environmental Checklist Form
measuring ten (10) inches each or greater in diameter, measured at a point four and one-
half (41/2) feet above the root crown.
3. Plantanus racemosa (Sycamore) with a trunk diameter larger than six (6) inches
measured at a point four and one-half (4½) feet above the root crown, or two (2) or more
trunks measuring four (4) inches each or greater in diameter, measured at a point four
and one-half (4½) feet above the root crown.
4. Any tree, with the exception of the trees listed as Unprotected Trees, that have a trunk
diameter larger than twelve (12) inches measured at a point four and one-half (4 1/2) feet
above the root crown, or two (2) or more trunks measuring ten (1) inches each or greater
in diameter, measured at a point of four and one-half (4 1/2) feet above the root crown
and the tree is located within a required front, side, street-side, or rear yard setback.
The Project site does not contain any protected trees protected pursuant to the City’s Tree
Preservation Ordinance. Street trees within public right-of-way including those along E.
Huntington Drive and Wheeler Avenue are not subject to the City’s Tree Preservation Ordinance
but are protected pursuant to the City’s Comprehensive Tree Management Program as described
below.
The City’s Comprehensive Tree Management Program contained in Article IX, Chapter 8 of the
Municipal Code establishes additional policies for the regulation of the planting, maintenance,
removal, and replacement of City-owned trees on public property, including street trees. No street
tree may be planted, removed, cut, or otherwise damaged without first obtaining a permit from
the Arcadia Public Works Services Department. There are several street trees adjacent to the
Project site along E. Huntington Drive and Wheeler Avenue which qualify for protection pursuant
to these policies.
4.4.2 PROJECT IMPACTS
Regulatory Requirements
RR BIO-1 Prior to approval of grading plans, the Development Services Department shall
verify that the following note is included on the contractor specifications to ensure
compliance with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA):
To avoid impacts on nesting birds, vegetation on the Project site
should be cleared between September 1 and January 31. If vegetation
clearing occurs during the peak nesting season (between February 1
and August 31), a pre-construction survey shall be conducted by a
qualified biologist to identify if there are any active nesting locations. If
the biologist does not find any active nests within the impact area, the
vegetation clearing/construction work will be allowed. If the biologist
finds an active nest within the construction area and determines that
the nest may be impacted by construction activities, the biologist will
delineate an appropriate buffer zone around the nest depending on the
species and the type of construction activity. Construction activities
shall be prohibited in the buffer zone until a qualified biologist
determines the nest is abandoned.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-21 Environmental Checklist Form
RR BIO-2 As required by the City’s Comprehensive Tree Management Program, the
Developer will obtain a permit from the Arcadia Public Works Services Department
for the removal and planting of street trees associated with the Project. The
Developer will abide by the standards set forth in the permit, as well as standards
contained in the Comprehensive Tree Management Program and other applicable
sections of the Development and Municipal Codes.
RR BIO-3 The Developer shall submit the Project’s landscape plans, which will include the
proposed locations and species of replacement street trees, to the Arcadia Public
Works Services Department for review. Street tree species will consist of those set
forth in the City’s Street Tree Master Plan.
Impact Discussion
a) Would the project 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?
No Impact. The Project site is within an urban area and surrounded entirely by development,
which consists primarily of commercial uses. As discussed above, on-site vegetation includes
ornamental street trees, landscaping shrubs, trees, and groundcover. No Critical Habitat occurs
on the site or in the nearby vicinity, and on relevant records of candidate, sensitive, or special-
status species at or near the Project site are identified in the California Natural Diversity Database
(USFWS 2019, CDFW 2019). Therefore, the Project would have no impact and no mitigation is
required.
b) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other
sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and
regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and
Wildlife Service?
c) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected
wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through
direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
No Impact. The Project site does not contain riparian habitat, wetlands, or any other sensitive
natural vegetation community. The Project site is mostly paved and within a developed, urban
area. No impacts to riparian habitats, wetlands, or sensitive natural vegetation communities would
result from Project implementation. There would be no impact and no mitigation is required.
d) Would the project interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident
or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory
wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
Less than Significant Impact. Due to the presence of ornamental trees on site, there is the
potential nesting birds subject to the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA). The MBTA prohibits
activities that result in the direct take (defined as killing or possession) of birds covered by the
MBTA. Compliance with the provisions of the MBTA, including implementation of RR BIO-1, would
result in a less than significant impact and no mitigation is required.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-22 Environmental Checklist Form
e) Would the project conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting
biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
Less Than Significant Impact. As described above, the City’s municipal code regulates the
removal of certain trees on private property through the City’s Tree Preservation Ordinance and the
removal and planting of street trees through the City’s Comprehensive Tree Management Program.
Implementation of the Project would not affect any protected trees on private property; however,
a total of 7 street trees would be removed and replaced. With implementation of RR BIO-2 and
RR BIO-3 were developed consistent with City requirements and require the Developer to obtain
a permit and submit a landscaping plan for review and approval by the City Public Works Services
Department. The landscaping plan would include specifications for replacement street trees that
would need to be removed as part of the project. With incorporation of RR BIO-2 and BIO-3, a
less than significant impact would result from the Project, and no mitigation is required.
f) Would the project conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation
Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or
state habitat conservation plan?
No Impact. The Project site is not located within an adopted habitat conservation plan or natural
community conservation plan (Arcadia 2010a). Therefore, there would be no impact and no
mitigation measures are required.
4.4.3 MITIGATION MEASURES
Project implementation would not result in significant impacts related to biological resources;
therefore, no mitigation measures are required.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-23 Environmental Checklist Form
4.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance
of a historical resource pursuant to Section 15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance
of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section
15064.5?
c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred
outside of formal cemeteries?
In addition to adhering with the requirements of CEQA, the Project must also comply with Section
9107.07.030 of the City of Arcadia Development Code, which outlines the procedures for issuance
of Certificates of Demolition given that the Project proposes to demolish five structures on the site
that are over 50 years old. Consistent with City requirements, a qualified architectural historian
was retained to conduct an assessment to determine whether any of the five existing structures
have any historical significance and whether any of the buildings proposed for demolition are
eligible for listing in the California Register of Historic Resources. The Developer will submit the
report (Appendix B) along with an application for a certificate of demolition. As discussed in more
detail below, the Historic Resource Assessment (McGee 2020) provides evidence and supporting
documentation related to the lack of historic significance of the five structures proposed for
demolition on the Project site, including photographic evidence as to the current condition, and a
narrative evaluation by the qualified architectural historian. It should also be noted that the 2020
Historic Resource Assessment prepared by Kathryn McGee follows the City of Arcadia 2019
Development Code for Historic Preservation.
The Historic Resource Assessment (McGee 2020) also documents the structures and provides a
full evaluation of the structures. To comply with Section 9107.07 of the City Development Code,
the Developer will pay for an architectural historian to complete the California Department of Parks
and Recreation Primary Record Form (DPR 523A), a Building, Structure, and Object (BSO)
Record Form (DPR 523B); and Location Map Form (DPR 523J) and submit these forms with the
City's application for a Certificate of Demolition, if determined necessary by the City in addition to
the Historic Resource Assessment (McGee 2020) already prepared for the Project. If the DPR
forms are requested by the City, once they are complete the Project architectural historian or
Developer shall submit the completed DPR forms to the South Central Coastal Information Center
(SCCIC) at the California State University at Fullerton.
4.5.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Cultural Resources Records Search at the South-Central Costal Information Center
Information in this section is based upon the records searches and literature reviews of
information available from the South-Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC) and the Native
American Heritage Commission (NAHC). As mentioned above, additional information in this
section is derived from the Historic Resources Assessment for 124-134 E. Wheeler Avenue and
117-129 E. Huntington Drive, Arcadia, CA 91006 dated January 2020, which is provided in its
entirety in Appendix B (Historic Resources Assessment, McGee 2020).
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-24 Environmental Checklist Form
Previous Cultural Resources Studies
A literature review of documents on file at the SCCIC at California State University, Fullerton was
completed on March 20, 2019. The results of the records search identified 12 previous studies
that have been previously conducted within a half-mile of the Project area, which includes three
previous studies covering the Project site, which are described in more detail in Table 12, Cultural
Resource Studies Intersection with the Project Site. In general, prior studies within a half-mile of
the Project area consist of archaeological reconnaissance or Phase I cultural resource studies
conducted between 1984 and 2012. Three studies (LA-06859, LA-10896, and LA-12525)
evaluated portions of the Project area. LA-06859 is an overview study that encompasses the
entire City of Arcadia for the Arcadia General Plan. LA-06859 observed one resource (P-19-
188706) situated outside of the Project site to the southwest. LA-12525 reviewed the northeastern
boundary of the Project site along Indiana Street during the environmental review of the Gold
Line. LA-12525 did not observe cultural resources within the Project site. LA-10896, a historic
property survey conducted for the Gold Line, studied the northern and western portions of the
Project site and identified two resources within the Project site (P-19-189197 and P-19-189198).
TABLE 12
CULTURAL RESOURCE STUDIES INTERSECTION WITH THE PROJECT SITE
Report No Affiliation Year Author Title
LA-06859 LSA Associates,
Inc.
1996 Unknown Arcadia General Plan
LA-12525 Federal Highway
Administration,
Federal Transit
Administration
2003 Poka, Ervin NHPA Section 106 Review; Metro Gold
Line Phase II Extension Project
LA-10896 Myra L.
Frank/Jones &
Stokes, Applied
EarthWorks
2004 Greenwood, David Historic Properties Survey and Effects
Report for the Gold Line Phase II Project
(Pasadena to Montclair) Los Angeles
and San Bernardino Counties, CA
Source: Psomas 2019d.
Previously-Recorded Cultural Resources
SCCIC records indicate that a total of 42 previously recorded cultural resources have been
identified within a half-mile of the Project site, all of which are historic-era buildings or structures.
A summary for the two previously-identified cultural resources within the Project site and that
would be demolished as part of the Project are provided in Table 13, Previously-Identified Historic-
Era Properties Within the Project Site.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-25 Environmental Checklist Form
TABLE 13
PREVIOUSLY-IDENTIFIED HISTORIC-ERA PROPERTIES WITHIN THE PROJECT
SITE
Primary Recorded By
Over 50
Years
Old? Type
Name
P-19-
189198
2003 (David
Greenwood, Myra
Frank & Assoc. / Jones
& Stokes)
Yes Building Resource Name - Arcadia Party Rentals
P-19-
189197
2003 (David
Greenwood, Myra
Frank & Assoc. / Jones
& Stokes)
Yes Building Resource Name - Omni Facility Group
Source: Psomas 2019d.
More detailed descriptions of P-19-189197 and P-19-189198 are provided below. According to
records searches conducted for the Project, no prehistoric resources have been previously
observed within the Project site or within a half mile of the Project site
Resource P-19-189197 consists of a multi-story commercial building designed with Monterey
style influences. The building is rectangular in plan and sited adjacent to the sidewalk on Wheeler
Avenue at the northern portion of the Project site. The building has been heavily modified
throughout the years. Originally constructed in 1946 as a multi-family residence, the building was
converted to mixed commercial and residential use. The building has stucco exterior walls and a
composition-covered side facing gable roof and a partial balcony with picket railing. The building
has been modified to add three pedestrian entrances and one loading entrance. The windows
have been changed to fixed pane and vinyl slider windows. The alterations made to the building
no longer sustain the original integrity of materials, design, workmanship, association and feeling.
This resource has been deemed ineligible for the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) by
consensus through the Section 106 process and was not evaluated for the California Register of
Historical Resources (CRHR) or Local Listing. The Historic Resource Assessment prepared for
the Project, which is included as Appendix B, assesses this property against the City’s local
criteria, and confirms that this structure is not historically significant and is not eligible for listing
(McGee 2020).
Resource P-19-189198 is currently used by Arcadia Party Rentals. The resource contains one
structure characterized as a contemporary style, two story, rectangular industrial building with
scored plaster and brick walls. It has an off-center store front entrance, a brick panel on the
western side of the façade and original brick siding on the western façade. The building is a light
industrial building constructed in 1953, and has lost the original integrity of design, materials and
workmanship through substantial alterations that have irreversibly altered its 1953 appearance.
The building does not have any known association with persons or events important to local,
State, or national history. The alterations made to the building no longer sustain the original
integrity of materials, design, workmanship, association and feeling and has been deemed
ineligible for the NRHP by consensus through Section 106 process and was not evaluated for the
CRHR or Local Listing. The Project’s Historic Resources Assessment, provided as Appendix B
(McGee 2020), assesses this property against the City’s local criteria, and confirms that this
structure is not historically significant and is not eligible for listing.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-26 Environmental Checklist Form
REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
In addition to adherence to the City’s Development Code including the requirements associated
with obtaining a Certificate of Demolition, RR CUL-1 will be implemented during project
excavations. This RR will be included in the MMRP for the proposed project.
Regulatory Requirements
RR CUL-1 If human remains are encountered during excavation activities, all work shall halt
in the immediate vicinity of the discovery and the Los Angeles County Coroner
shall be notified (California Public Resources Code §5097.98). The Coroner shall
determine whether the remains are of forensic interest. If the Coroner determines
that the remains are prehistoric, s/he will contact the Native American Heritage
Commission (NAHC). The NAHC shall be responsible for designating the most
likely descendant (MLD), who will be responsible for the ultimate disposition of the
remains, as required by Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code.
The MLD shall make his/her recommendation within 48 hours of being granted
access to the site. The MLD’s recommendation shall be followed if feasible and
may include scientific removal and non-destructive analysis of the human remains
and any items associated with Native American burials (California Health and
Safety Code §7050.5). If the landowner rejects the MLD’s recommendations, the
landowner shall rebury the remains with appropriate dignity on the property in a
location that will not be subject to further subsurface disturbance (California Public
Resources Code §5097.98).
4.5.2 IMPACT ANALYSIS
a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a
historical resource pursuant to Section 15064.5?
No Impact. In April 2019, the Arcadia City Council adopted a Historic Preservation Ordinance,
Ordinance No. 2359, with the goal of identifying and preserving historic buildings throughout the
City and establishing policies for how to evaluate and consider approval of projects that proposed
alterations to historic resources. A literature review and record searches were conducted for the
Project through the SCCIC failed to identify significant historic resources within the Project site.
Two historic-era buildings (Resource P-19-189197 and Resource P-19-189198) were identified in
a past study within the Project site by David Greenwood in 2003. These resources, as well as the
additional three structures on the site that would be demolished are all over fifty years old, were
assessed in the Historic Resource Assessment (Appendix B) prepared for the Project by Kathryn
McGee (2020). Based on McGee’s assessment, none of these structures have any historical
significance and none are eligible for listing in the CRHR, NRHP, or as City-designated historic
landmarks. The Historic Resource Assessment evaluated each building, including histories of
construction and alterations as well as property owners and tenants, to develop historic contexts
for each building and to determine potential significance under the appropriate local, state, and
federal criteria for evaluation. Furthermore, the literature review and records search did not
identify any resources designated on the CRHR or NRHP immediately adjacent to the Project
site. The Project would not involve any direct or indirect impacts to historic resources pursuant to
CEQA, and no mitigation is required.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-27 Environmental Checklist Form
b) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an
archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5?
Less than Significant with Mitigation. The literature review and record searches conducted
through the SCCIC and NAHC failed to identify significant archaeological resources within the
Project site. There were no archaeological resources recorded within the Project site or within a
half-mile of the Project site. However, the Project’s Geotechnical Report (Geocon West, Inc. 2018,
Appendix D) identified that the Project site contains approximately 4 feet of artificial fill and
Holocene age young alluvial deposits beneath the artificial fill. Although the Project site is
considered low sensitivity for prehistoric archaeological resources, there is the possibility that
undiscovered intact cultural resources, including archaeological resources may be present below
the surface in native sediments. Therefore, MM CUL-1 has been incorporated for the Project,
which requires that any inadvertently uncovered during grading be evaluated by a qualified
archaeologist to determine their significance and the need to protect in place; salvage and
preserve; or other measure(s) to reduce impacts to important cultural resources, potential impacts
to archaeological resources would be reduced to less than significant.
c) Would the project disturb any human remains, including those interred outsides of
formal cemeteries?
Less than Significant Impact. There is no indication that human remains are present within the
Project site, including those interred outside formal cemeteries. The records search indicates no
evidence of human remains on or near the Project site. In the unlikely event of an unanticipated
encounter with human remains in Project site, the California Health and Safety Code and the
California Public Resources Code require that any activity in the area of a potential find be halted
and the Los Angeles County Coroner be notified, as described in RR CUL-1. Compliance with
RR CUL-1 would ensure that impacts would be less than significant.
4.5.3 MITIGATION PROGRAM
MM CUL-1 Prior to the issuance of a demolition permit, the Applicant shall submit the name
and qualifications of a qualified archaeologist to the City of Arcadia Development
Services Department for review and approval. Once approved, the qualified
archaeologist shall be retained by the Applicant. In the event that suspected
cultural (archaeological) resources or tribal cultural resources are inadvertently
unearthed during excavation activities, the contractor shall immediately cease all
earth-disturbing activities within a 100-foot radius of the area of discovery. The
Project contractor or Applicant shall contact the qualified archaeologist to request
an evaluation of the significance of the find and determine an appropriate course
of action. If avoidance of the resource(s) is not feasible, salvage operation
requirements pursuant to Section 15064.5 of the State California Environmental
Quality Act Guidelines shall be followed. After the find has been appropriately
avoided or mitigated, work in the area may resume.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-28 Environmental Checklist Form
4.6 ENERGY Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact
due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary
consumption of energy resources, during project
construction or operation?
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for
renewable energy or energy efficiency?
4.6.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Southern California Edison (SCE) and the Southern California Gas Company (SCGC) are utility
companies that currently provide and would continue to provide electrical and natural gas services,
respectively, to the Project site. Compliance with energy efficiency and conservation policies and
regulations is discussed in this section.
The Resource Sustainability Element of the General Plan provides for the following policies relative
to Project-related energy use in the City of Arcadia.
g) Policy RS-5.3: Require that all new development meets or exceeds the State and local energy
conservation requirements.
h) Policy RS-5.9: Facilitate the provision of energy-efficient modes of transportation and fixed
facilities which establish transit, bicycle, and pedestrian modes as viable alternatives.
The State of California has also adopted efficiency design standards within the Title 24 Building
Standards and CALGreen requirements. Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR,
specifically, Part 6) is California’s Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Non-residential
Buildings. Title 24 was established by the California Energy Commission (CEC) in 1978 in response
to a legislative mandate to create uniform building codes to reduce California’s energy consumption
and to provide energy efficiency standards for residential and non-residential buildings. The 2016
California Green Building Standards Code (24 CCR, Part 11), also known as the CALGreen Code,
contains mandatory requirements for new residential and nonresidential buildings throughout
California. The development of the CALGreen Code is intended to (1) cause a reduction in GHG
emissions from buildings; (2) promote environmentally responsible, cost-effective, healthier places
to live and work; (3) reduce energy and water consumption; and (4) respond to the directives by the
Governor. In short, the Code is established to reduce construction waste; make buildings more
efficient in the use of materials and energy; and reduce environmental impact during and
after construction. The regulation of energy efficiency for residential and non-residential structures
is established by the CEC and its California Energy Code.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-29 Environmental Checklist Form
4.6.2 PROJECT IMPACTS
Regulatory Requirements
RR ENR-1 The Project shall be consistent with the Title 24 energy efficiency standards and
the mandatory requirements of the CALGreen code. Construction activities shall
comply with idling requirements and maintenance requirements for on- and off-
road vehicles.
Impact Discussion
a) Would the project result in potentially significant environmental impact due to
wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during
project construction or operation?
Less than Significant Impact. The Project would consume energy during the construction and
operations phases of the Project. Energy consumption of the different fuels from each of these
phases have been calculated and is discussed below.
Construction
Project construction would require the use of construction equipment for grading and building
activities. All off-road construction equipment is assumed to use diesel fuel. Construction also
includes the vehicles of construction workers and vendors traveling to and from the Project site.
Off-road construction equipment use was calculated from the equipment data (mix, hours per day,
horsepower, load factor, and days per phase) provided in the CalEEMod construction output files
which informed the air quality and greenhouse gas emissions analyses and is included in
Appendix A (Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Calculations including CalEEmod
Output, Psomas 2019a). The total horsepower hours for the Project was then multiplied by fuel
usage estimates per hours of construction activities included in the OFFROAD2017 Model (see
Appendix C, Energy Calculations, Psomas 2019b).
Fuel consumption from construction worker, vendor, and delivery/haul trucks was calculated using
the trip rates and distances provided in the CalEEMod construction output files. Total vehicle
miles traveled (VMT) was then calculated for each type of construction-related trip and divided by
the corresponding miles per gallon factor using CARB’s EMissions FACtor (EMFAC) 2014 model.
EMFAC provides the total annual VMT and fuel consumed for each vehicle type. Construction
vendor and delivery/haul trucks were assumed to be heavy-duty diesel trucks.
As shown in Table 14, Energy Use During Construction, a total of 65,858 gallons of diesel fuel
and 65,592 gallons of gasoline is estimated to be consumed during Project construction.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-30 Environmental Checklist Form
TABLE 14
ENERGY USE DURING CONSTRUCTION
Source
Gasoline -
gallons
Diesel Fuel -
gallons
Off-road construction equipment 0 42,170
Worker commute trips 56,982 80
Vendor trips 8,343 107
On-road haul trips 266 23,502
Total 65,592 65,858
Sources: Based on data from CalEEMod, OFFROAD2007 and EMFAC2014. See
Appendix A for CalEEMod data and Appendix C for energy calculations (Psomas 2019a and
2019b).
Fuel energy consumed during construction would be temporary in nature and would not represent
a significant demand on energy resources. The Project would also implement best management
practices such as requiring equipment to be properly maintained and minimize idling and where
feasible, use electric or clean alternative fuel equipment. Furthermore, there are no unusual Project
characteristics that would necessitate the use of construction equipment that would be less energy-
efficient than at comparable construction sites in other parts of the State. Energy used in the
construction of the Project would enable the development of buildings that meet the latest energy
efficiency standards as detailed in California’s Title 24 building standards. Therefore, the proposed
construction activities would not result in inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary fuel consumption.
Operations
The proposed Project would consume energy from transportation fuels, electricity for residential
and retail uses, and natural gas for heating needs. The Project would result in energy consumption
shown in Table 15, Energy Use During Operations, below.
TABLE 15
ENERGY USE DURING OPERATIONS
Land Use
Gasoline
(Gallons/yr)
Diesel
(Gallons/yr)
Natural Gas
(kBtu/yr)
Electricity
(kWh/yr)
Project Land Uses 40,507 3,049 825,757 256,593
yr: year; kBtu: kilo-British thermal unit; kWh: kilowatt hour.
Sources: Psomas 2019b
The Project would be required to comply with the latest Title 24 energy efficiency standards. The
CEC anticipates the 2019 Building Energy Efficiency Standards would result in a reduction of
energy use by more than 30 percent as compared to previous energy standards (CEC 2018).
Therefore, the new buildings would be more energy efficient than the existing buildings to be
demolished due to the incorporation of the latest energy efficiency standards. In terms of whether
the operations phase would result in a wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy
resources during Project operation, the Project would add residential units and commercial uses
proximate to mass transit, contribute to pedestrian-oriented development in downtown Arcadia,
and incorporate the latest adopted Title 24 energy efficiency standards. As detailed in
Section 2.3.2, Development Characteristics, the Project would provide short-term and long-term
parking with 30 long-term and 2 short-term bicycle parking stalls. Promoting pedestrian- and
transit-oriented development would result in less energy consumption by reducing traffic
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-31 Environmental Checklist Form
congestion and single-occupancy vehicle ridership. As such, the Project is not considered a
wasteful, inefficient or unnecessary consumption of energy resources and would result in less
than significant energy impacts relative to the consumption of energy for Project construction and
operation. There would be a less than significant impact and no mitigation is required.
b) Would the project conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy
or energy efficiency?
Less than Significant Impact. The Project would be required to comply with the State of
California’s Title 24 Building Standards. As discussed previously, the latest building standards will
incorporate the CEC’s building energy efficiency standards which would reduce energy
consumption by over 30 percent compared to the existing Title 24 Building Standards. The Project
would also be consistent with the Policies RS-5.3 (meets or exceeds the State conservation
requirements) and RS-5.9 (provision of energy-efficient modes of transportation and fixed facilities
which establish transit, bicycle, and pedestrian modes) of the City of Arcadia’s Resource
Sustainability Element. Because the Project would comply with the latest State of California energy
efficiency standards, provides infill development close to mass transit, and promotes pedestrian-
oriented development, the Project would not conflict with or obstruct a State or the City of
Arcadia’s Resource Sustainability Element for renewable energy or energy efficiency. There
would be a less than significant impact and no mitigation is required.
4.6.3 MITIGATION MEASURES
Project implementation would not result in significant impacts related to energy; therefore, no
mitigation measures are required.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-32 Environmental Checklist Form
4.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or
death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State
Geologist for the area or based on other
substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to
Division of Mines and Geology Special
Publication 42.
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction?
iv) Landslides?
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or
that would become unstable as a result of the Project,
and potentially result in onsite or offsite landslide,
lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or
collapse?
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-
1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating
substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use
of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal
systems where sewers are not available for the
disposal of waste water?
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological
resource or site or unique geologic feature?
Information in this section is derived from the Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Mixed Use
Development, 117 and 129 E. Huntington Drive, 124, 126, and 134 Wheeler Avenue, Arcadia,
California (e.g. Geotechnical Report) dated August 2018 and prepared by Geocon West, Inc., as
well as information from the City of Arcadia General Plan and EIR (Arcadia 2010a and 2010b)
and other sources where noted. The Geotechnical Report is provided in its entirety as Appendix D
(Geocon West, Inc. 2018).
4.7.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The Project area is located in the City of Arcadia, which lies at the boundary between the
Peninsular Ranges geomorphic province (on the south) and the Transverse Ranges geomorphic
province (on the north). The east-west trending San Gabriel Mountains, which underlie the
northern part of the City, are part of the Transverse Ranges. The San Gabriel Valley is located in
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-33 Environmental Checklist Form
the north-central portion of the San Gabriel Valley, which is bound on the north by the San Gabriel
Mountains; on the west by the Raymond Basin; on the south by the Puente Hills; and on the east
by the Covina and Indian Hills. The San Gabriel Mountains are the result of uplift along a
predominant fault line at the base of this steep mountain front. This fault line is a part of the Sierra
Madre Fault system that extends from the western San Fernando Valley to the City of Claremont
on the east, where it joins the Cucamonga Fault.
Due to its location along and just south of the southern slope of the San Gabriel Mountains, the
City of Arcadia is situated within a very seismically active area of Southern California. Numerous
faults capable of producing significant ground motion are located near the Project site.
The two active and potentially active faults that pass beneath Arcadia and are evident at the
ground surface (or just below it) are the Sierra Madre and Raymond Faults. Deep beneath the
City are two blind thrust faults: the shallower Elysian Park Fault and the deeper Puente Hills Fault.
They are called blind-thrust faults due to their depth and the fact that fault movement consists of
upward or thrusting action. The Eaton Wash Groundwater Barrier shows no surface geologic
evidence of existence, and the nature of this possible buried fault is not known. In addition to
these local faults, there are several regional faults that could produce significant ground shaking
at the Project site, including the San Gabriel Fault and the San Andreas Fault.
The Project site is underlain by artificial fill and Holocene age young alluvial fan deposits,
consisting of varying amounts of sand, silt, clay, and gravel. The near surface soil conditions
encountered at the site generally consist of artificial fill extending to a maximum depth of
approximately 4 feet below existing ground surface and alluvium (Geocon West, Inc. 2018). The
artificial fill generally consists of light brown to brown silty sand and is characterized as moist and
medium dense. The alluvium encountered beneath the artificial fill consists primarily of light gray
to gray and light brown to brown interbedded silty sand and well-graded sand with varying
amounts of fine to coarse gravel. One boring contained clayey sand between depths of 15.5 and
18 feet beneath the existing ground surface. The soil is characterized as moist and loose to very
dense.
Based on an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone Map, the Project site is not located in an
earthquake fault zone (Arcadia 2010a). Additionally, the Project site occurs within an area
classified as Zone X as mapped by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), which
is described as areas of minimal flood hazard and determined to be outside the 0.2 percent annual
chance floodplain (FEMA 2019).
4.7.2 PROJECT IMPACTS
Project Design Features
PDF GEO-1 The Project building design specifications shall include recommendations from the
Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Mixed Use Development, 117 and 129 E.
Huntington Drive, 124, 126, and 134 Wheeler Avenue, Arcadia, California (Geocon
West, Inc. 2018). These recommendations include, but are not limited to,
specifications for the following:
Demolition and site preparation
Fill placement
Remedial grading and over excavation
Foundation recommendations
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-34 Environmental Checklist Form
Building Floor Slabs and reinforcement
The Project building design specifications shall be verified by the City of Arcadia
Building Official prior to issuance of a demolition permit.
Regulatory Requirements
RR GEO-1 Geotechnical design considerations for Project implementation are governed by
the Arcadia Building Code, as set forth in Article VIII of the Municipal Code, which
incorporates by reference the California Building Code (CBC), including the
California Building, Plumbing, Mechanical, Electrical and Existing Building Codes
(CBSC 2019). Future buildings and structures shall be designed in accordance
with applicable requirements of the CBC, the Arcadia Municipal Code, and any
applicable building and seismic codes in effect at the time the grading plans are
approved.
Impact Discussion
a) Would the project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects,
including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent
Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for
the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault?
Less than Significant Impact. The Project site is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake
Fault Zone or a City-designated Fault Hazard Management Zone for surface fault rupture hazards
and is not expected to be impacted directly by ground rupture from a known fault due to the
distances between the Project site and mapped faults in the area (Geocon West, Inc. 2018). There
would be less than significant impacts, and no mitigation is required.
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
Less than Significant Impact. The Project site, as with the entire Southern California region, is
subject to secondary effects from earthquakes. The nearest known faults in the vicinity of the
Project site include the Raymond Fault (0.6 mile from the Project site); the Duarte Fault (1.9 miles
from the Project site), the Sierra Madre Fault (2.0 miles from the Project site); Clamshell-Sawpit
Fault (2.3 miles from the Project site), and the Puente Hills Blind Thrust Fault (2.9 miles from the
Project site).
Implementation of the Project would not change the intensity of ground shaking that would occur
on the Project site during a seismic event, but it would increase exposure to additional people.
The proposed buildings would be designed in accordance with the most recent California
Building Code (CBC) (see RR GEO-1) (CBSC 2019). The CBC contains minimum standards
regulating the design and construction of excavations, foundations, retaining walls, and other
building elements to control the effects of seismic ground shaking and adverse soil conditions.
The CBC includes provisions for earthquake safety based on factors such as occupancy type, the
types of sol and rock on-site, and the strength of ground motion that may occur at the Project site.
Project implementation would also occur consistent with the recommendations outlined in the
Geotechnical Report prepared for the Project, as set forth in PDF GEO-1 (Geocon West, Inc.
2018). Based on the Geotechnical Report, the Project is geotechnically feasible provided that the
recommendations in the geotechnical report are reviewed in the context of the final Project design
and are incorporated during the Project’s construction phase. Seismic design parameters have
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-35 Environmental Checklist Form
been included in the Geotechnical Report (refer to Appendix D, Geocon West, Inc. 2018). based
on the seismic zone, soil profile, and proximity of known faults to the Project site, which provide
the minimum design procedures to avoid significant cosmetic damage to the structure.
Compliance with the applicable regulations, as identified in RR GEO-1, and proper grading,
design, and building construction methods required in PDF GEO-1, would ensure that impacts
that may result from strong seismic ground shaking at the Project site to less than significant.
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction?
No Impact. Liquefaction describes a phenomenon in which earthquake-induced cyclic stresses
create excess pore pressure in cohesionless soils. As a result, the soils may acquire a high degree
of mobility, which can lead to lateral spreading; consolidation and settlement of loose sediments;
ground oscillation; flow failure; loss of bearing strength; ground fissuring; and sand boils. After
liquefaction has developed, it can propagate into overlying, non-saturated soils as excess pore
water escapes. Saturated, loose sands with a silt content less than 25 percent are most
susceptible to liquefaction. The primary factors that influence the potential for liquefaction include
groundwater table elevation; soil type and grain size characteristics; relative density of the soil;
initial confining pressure; and intensity and duration of ground shaking. The depth within which
the occurrence of liquefaction must be analyzed is generally identified as the upper 50 feet below
the lowest portion of the proposed structure (Geocon West, Inc. 2018).
The Seismic Hazards Map for the Mt. Wilson Quadrangle, published by the California Geological
Survey (CGS) indicates that the Project site, is not located within a zone of required investigation
for liquefaction. The City of Arcadia General Plan (City of Arcadia 2010a) and the County of Los
Angeles Safety Element (County of Los Angeles 2015) indicate that the Project is not located
within an area designated as having potential for liquefaction. A review of the Seismic Hazards
Program Liquefaction Zones shows that there are no such zones in the Project vicinity
(DOC 2019c). In addition, the subsurface conditions encountered at the boring locations analyzed
as part of the Project’s Geotechnical Report are not considered to be conducive to liquefaction
(Geocon West, Inc. 2018). These conditions consist of medium dense to very dense granular
soils, and there is no evidence of a static groundwater table within the upper 50 feet. The historic
high groundwater level in the area is reported to be approximately 150 feet beneath the existing
ground surface (Geocon West, Inc. 2018). Based on the encountered conditions and the research
conducted, liquefaction is not considered to be a significant design concern for the Project. No
impacts would result, and no mitigation is required.
iv) Landslides?
No Impact. Earthquake-induced land sliding often occurs in areas where previous landslides
have moved and in areas where the topographic, geologic, geotechnical, and subsurface
groundwater conditions are conducive to permanent ground displacements. No slopes are
present on or near the site, which was previously graded and developed. The City of Arcadia
General Plan (Arcadia 2010a) and Los Angeles County Seismic Safety Element indicate that the
site is not located in a “hillside area” or an area identified as having a potential for slope stability
hazards. The Project site is not located within a designated earthquake-induced landslide zone
(DOC 2019a and 2019c). Also, there are no occurrences of landslides in the Project vicinity
according to the California Landslide Inventory maintained by the Department of Conservation,
which provides record of landslides mapped by the California Geological Survey over the past
50 years (DOC 2019b). Therefore, no impact would result, and no mitigation is required.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-36 Environmental Checklist Form
b) Would the project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?
Less Than Significant Impact. The Project would demolish the existing buildings and surface
parking lots on the Project site and would develop the site with new impervious surfaces and new
pervious landscaped areas. The Project would not result in a substantial change in the amount of
pervious/impervious area during operation of the Project. Project construction would expose soils
on the site and would require the hauling of soil and demolition materials off-site, which could
result in soil erosion and the loss of topsoil if not implemented consistent with regulatory
requirements. The Project’s potential construction and operational stormwater impacts, and
applicable regulatory requirements are addressed in Section 4.10, Hydrology and Water Quality.
Less than significant impacts would result, and no mitigation is required.
c) Would the project be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would
become unstable as a result of the project and potentially result in on- or off-site
landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
Less Than Significant Impact. As discussed in Threshold 4.6(a)(iv) above, the Project site is
not located in an area subject to on- or off-site landslides. Lateral spreading, a phenomenon
associated with liquefaction, is a function of ground shaking and may occur during an earthquake.
The potential for earthquake-induced lateral spreading of confined, discontinuous interbedded
zones of liquefiable sandy soils underlying a relatively level surface is low. As discussed under
the analysis of Threshold 4.6(a)(iii) above, impacts from seismic-related ground failure related to
liquefaction for the Project are considered to be less than significant.
Land subsidence and collapse can occur due to the loss of surface elevation from the removal of
subsurface support, usually due to the withdrawal of groundwater, oil, or natural gas. As stated in
the Geotechnical Report (Appendix D, Geocon West, Inc. 2018), the near surface fill and native
alluvial soils on the Project site generally possess unfavorable consolidation and collapse
characteristics. The near surface soil conditions generally consist of alluvium and/or fill soils
extending to depths of approximately four feet. These soils are not considered suitable to support
the anticipated foundation or slab loads.
Based on the depth of the proposed excavations, the proximity to adjacent property lines, and the
granular nature of the soils, sloping and/or shoring measures would be required for excavation of
the subterranean level of the Project. Excavation recommendations are provided in Section 7.16
of the Geotechnical Report (Appendix D, Geocon West, Inc. 2018)., which would be implemented
to maintain lateral support of existing off-site improvements.
Regarding shrinkage and subsidence, based on the results of the laboratory testing and the
geotechnical engineer’s previous experience with the type of soils found on this site, removal
and/or recompaction of the near surface native soils and/or the existing fill soils may be required.
The native Project site soils below the proposed excavations are susceptible to approximately
0.12 inches of total seismic settlement as a result of the Design Earthquake peak ground
acceleration, and differential settlement at the foundation level is anticipated to be less than
0.06 inches over a distance of 20 feet. Recommendations have been provided in the Geotechnical
Report (Appendix D, Geocon West, Inc. 2018), which once implemented would result in the post-
construction settlements being within tolerable limits (refer to PDF GEO-1); impacts related to
potential subsidence would be less than significant.
As stated in RR GEO-1, the proposed Project would be designed and constructed in compliance
with current CBC standards (CBSC 2019). Additionally, the near surface fill soils, as well as a
portion of the native alluvial materials, would be removed and exported off-site through
excavations for the subterranean structures, and other surface soils would be removed and
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-37 Environmental Checklist Form
recompacted as part of the remedial grading recommended by the Geotechnical Report (Geocon
West, Inc. 2018) (as described in PDF GEO-1). Compliance with RR GEO-1 and incorporation of
PDF GEO-1 would ensure that impacts related to landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence,
liquefaction, and collapse would be less than significant.
In December 2019, the Project’s consulting geotechnical engineer Scott Waterson, P.E. of Cefali
& Associates, Inc. was consulted related to the Project and the potential for Project impacts to the
nearby Metro Gold Line and/or nearby structures. Related to the potential for impacts to the Metro
Gold Line, Mr. Watterson stated that the Project is located across a street from the Metro line and
that the street width is greater than 1:1 from the bottom of the project’s excavation. The shoring
system that will be used, because of the relatively shallow excavation depth, will be cantilevered
and would not have any tiebacks that encroach into Metro right-of-way. Based on his professional
judgement and review of the Project plans, Mr. Waterson did not identify any other impacts related
to Project excavation related to the LA Metro right-of-way.
Related to potential concerns from adjacent properties, Mr. Waterson reiterated that the
excavation would be cantilevered, or braced internally within the Project site. Consistent with
standard industry construction practices, the shoring system would be designed to account for
the weights of existing adjacent buildings, the proposed buildings, as well as other earth loading
factors. The piles would be designed to control and restrict settlement of existing structures. The
construction contractor will be required to document the adjacent walls, taking note of any cracks.
If any are identified, then the construction contractor would apply crack gauges to verify that
cracks are not exacerbated by the excavation, and will monitor the piles weekly (until Project
excavation and shoring reaches bottom) for their movement. If movement thresholds are
exceeded, remedial shoring would be required. Furthermore, installation of shoring would be
restricted to use of drilled methods to reduce vibrations and potential disruption to adjacent
properties.
d) Would the project be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the
Uniform Building Code (1004), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or
property?
No Impact. Expansive soils are materials that, when subject to a constant load, are prone to
expand when exposed to water. The hazard associated with expansive soils is that they can
overstress and cause damage to the foundation of buildings set on top of them. The Geotechnical
Report (Appendix D, Geocon West, Inc. 2018) states that the near surface fill soils generally
consist of sands and silty sands and have been visually classified as very low to non-expansive
(Geocon West, Inc. 2018). Since the foundations and slabs for the Project would be in an area
that is already developed and since all construction would be required to comply applicable
building codes (as required by RR GEO-1), there would be no impacts related to expansive soils.
e) Would the project have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic
tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available
for the disposal of waste water?
No Impact. Project development would be connected to the municipal sewer system for
wastewater disposal. The Project does not require the development of either septic tanks or
alternative wastewater systems. No related impacts would result, and no mitigation is required.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-38 Environmental Checklist Form
f) Would the project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource
or site or unique geologic feature?
Less than Significant with Mitigation. The Project would require excavations that would likely
penetrate the paleontologically sensitive older Quaternary Alluvium, and the Natural History
Museum of Los Angeles (LACM) has recommended monitoring of all substantial excavations
(McLeod 2019, Appendix E). Impacts to paleontological resources, if encountered, would be
significant without mitigation. Incorporation of MM GEO-1 which requires that a qualified
paleontologist be retained to observe grading activities in the older Quaternary Alluvium on the
Project site and to salvage and catalogue fossils as necessary, will ensure that impacts to fossil
resources are reduced to below a level of significance.
4.7.3 MITIGATION MEASURES
MM GEO-1 Prior to the issuance of a demolition permit, the Applicant shall submit the name
and qualifications of a qualified paleontologist to the City of Arcadia Development
Services Department for review and approval. Once approved, the qualified
paleontologist shall be retained by the Applicant on an on-call basis to observe
grading activities in the older Quaternary Alluvium on the Project site and to
salvage and catalogue fossils as necessary. At the Project’s Pre-Grade Meeting,
the paleontologist shall discuss the sensitivity of the sediment being graded and
shall establish procedures for monitoring. Protocols must be developed and
explained for temporarily halting or redirecting work to permit sampling,
identification, and evaluation of any fossils discovered. If the fossils are deemed
significant, the paleontologist shall determine appropriate actions, in cooperation
with the City of Arcadia, to recover and treat the fossils and to prepare them to the
point of identification. A final Paleontological Resources Monitoring Report shall
include a catalogue and analysis of the fossils found; a summary of their
significance; and the repository that will curate the fossils in perpetuity.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-39 Environmental Checklist Form
4.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or
indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the
environment?
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation
adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of
greenhouse gases?
4.8.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Climate change refers to any significant change in measures of climate (e.g., average
temperature, precipitation, or wind patterns) over a period of time. Climate change may result
from natural factors, natural processes, and human activities that change the composition of the
atmosphere and alter the surface and features of the land. Significant changes in global climate
patterns have recently been associated with global warming, which is an average increase in the
temperature of the atmosphere near the Earth’s surface; this is attributed to an accumulation of
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in the atmosphere. GHGs trap heat in the atmosphere which,
in turn, increases the Earth’s surface temperature. Some GHGs occur naturally and are emitted
to the atmosphere through natural processes, while others are created and emitted solely through
human activities. The emission of GHGs through fossil fuel combustion in conjunction with other
human activities appears to be closely associated with global warming.
GHGs, as defined under California’s Assembly Bill (AB) 32, include carbon dioxide (CO2),
methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and
sulfur hexafluoride (SF6). General discussions on climate change often include water vapor,
atmospheric ozone, and aerosols in the GHG category. Water vapor and atmospheric ozone are
not gases that are formed directly in the construction or operation of development Projects, nor
can they be controlled in these Projects. Aerosols are not gases. While these elements have a
role in climate change, they are not considered by either regulatory bodies, such as CARB, or
climate change groups, such as the California Climate Action Registry, as gases to be reported
or analyzed for control. Therefore, no further discussion of water vapor, atmospheric ozone, or
aerosols is provided.
City of Arcadia General Plan
For the purposes of the Project, the City’s existing General Plan is the applicable planning
document. The City does not have an adopted Climate Action Plan. GHG reduction is a cross-
cutting issue relevant to various policy arenas, including policies that address land use,
transportation, buildings, energy, waste, and ecology. The Land Use and Community Design
Element includes policies that focus on encouraging compact, mixed-use development in the
City’s downtown around the Arcadia Gold Line Station; along Live Oak Avenue and N. 1st Avenue;
and in other focus areas through the City. Trip reduction strategies are addressed in the
Circulation and Infrastructure Element (Arcadia 2010a). The Resource Sustainability Element of
the General Plan also includes GHG-reducing goals and policies to reduce the City’s carbon
footprint.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-40 Environmental Checklist Form
The Project site has a General Plan land use designation of Commercial and DMU, is zoned as
CBD and DMU, and is developed with commercial land uses and surface parking lots (Arcadia
2010a). Existing GHG emissions result from the existing onsite commercial uses and associated
mobile emissions.
4.8.2 PROJECT IMPACTS
Regulatory Requirements
None required.
Impact Discussion
a) Would the project generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly,
that may have a significant impact on the environment?
Less than Significant Impact. In developing methods for GHG impact analysis, there have been
suggestions of quantitative thresholds, often referred to as screening levels, which define an
emissions level below which it may be presumed that climate change impacts would be less than
significant. Neither the SCAQMD, the City of Arcadia nor the County of Los Angeles have adopted
a significance threshold for the GHG emissions from non-industrial development projects.
Beginning in April 2008, the SCAQMD convened a Working Group to provide guidance to local
lead agencies on determining significance for GHG emissions in their CEQA documents. On
December 5, 2008, the SCAQMD Governing Board adopted its staff proposal for an interim CEQA
GHG significance threshold of 10,000 metric tons of CO2 equivalent per year (MTCO2e/yr) for
projects where the SCAQMD is the lead agency (SCAQMD 2008). In September 2010, the
Working Group presented a revised tiered approach to determining GHG significance for
residential and commercial projects wherein Tier 1 determines if a project qualifies for an
applicable CEQA exemption; Tier 2 determines consistency with GHG reduction plans; and Tier
3 proposes a numerical screening value as a threshold. At their September 28, 2010 meeting, the
Working Group suggested a Tier 3 threshold of 3,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent
(MTCO2e) per year for all land use types (SCAQMD 2010).
It is noted that the use of the Tier 3 threshold is selected for the Project because it is in the SoCAB
and these thresholds are based on the best available information and data at the time of
preparation of this document. The development of CEQA project-level thresholds is an ongoing
effort at State, regional, and County levels, and significance thresholds may differ for future
projects based on new or additional data and information that may be available for consideration
at that time.
Construction
Construction GHG emissions are generated by vehicle engine exhaust from construction
equipment, on-road hauling trucks, vendor trips, and worker commuting trips. Construction
GHG emissions were calculated by using CalEEMod Version 2016.3.2 (the model is described in
Section 4.3, Air Quality). Input details are provided in Appendix A (Air Quality and Greenhouse
Gas Emissions Calculations including CalEEmod Output, Psomas 2019a). The results are output
in MTCO2e for each year of construction. The estimated construction GHG emissions for the
Project are shown in Table 16, Estimated Annual Greenhouse Gas Emissions From Construction.
GHG emissions generated from construction activities are finite and would occur for a relatively
short-term time period. Unlike the numerous opportunities available to reduce a project’s long-
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-41 Environmental Checklist Form
term GHG emissions through design features, operational restrictions, use of green-building
materials, and other methods, GHG emissions-reduction measures for construction equipment
are relatively limited. Therefore, SCAQMD staff recommended that construction emissions be
amortized over a 30-year project lifetime, so that GHG reduction measures will address
construction GHG emissions as part of the operational GHG reduction strategies (SCAQMD
2008). As shown in Table 16, Estimated Annual Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Construction,
the 30-year amortized construction emissions would be 53 MTCO2e/yr.
TABLE 16
ESTIMATED ANNUAL GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
FROM CONSTRUCTION
Year
Emissions
(MTCO2e)
2020 535
2021 576
2022 485
Total 1596
Annual Emissions* 53
MTCO2e: metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent
* Combined total amortized over 30 years
Operations
As stated previously, the Project site is developed with existing uses, which include Dan’s
Autocare and Arcadia Party Rentals. Table 17, Estimated Annual Greenhouse Gas Emissions
From Existing Use, shows the estimated annual GHG emissions from existing uses at the Project
site.
TABLE 17
ESTIMATED ANNUAL GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS FROM EXISTING USE
Source
Emissions
(MTCO2e/yr)
Area <1
Energy 92
Mobile 144
Waste 15
Water 25
Total 277
MTCO2e/yr: metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent per year
Notes:
• Totals may not add due to rounding variances.
• Detailed calculations in Appendix A.
Operational GHG emissions would come primarily from vehicle trips; other sources include
electricity and water consumption; natural gas for space and water heating; and gasoline-powered
landscaping and maintenance equipment. Estimated Project operational GHG emissions are
shown in Table 18, Estimated Annual Greenhouse Gas Emissions From Project Operation.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-42 Environmental Checklist Form
TABLE 18
ESTIMATED ANNUAL GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS FROM PROJECT OPERATION
Source
Emissions
(MTCO2e/yr.)
Area 36
Energy 591
Mobile 1,017
Waste 38
Water 77
Total 1,759
MTCO2e/yr.: metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent per year
Notes:
• Totals may not add due to rounding variances.
• Detailed calculations in Appendix A.
As described above, construction and operational GHG emissions are combined by amortizing
the construction operations over a 30-year period. As shown in Table 19, Estimated Annual
Greenhouse Gas Emissions, with consideration of amortized construction emissions, the total
annual estimated GHG emissions for the proposed Project is 1,482 MTCO2e/yr, with the reduction
of emissions associated with the existing uses. This value is less than the proposed SCAQMD
Tier 3 screening threshold (e.g., 3,000 MTCO2e/yr for all land use types) that is being applied in
this analysis. It is accepted as very unlikely that any individual development project would have
GHG emissions of a magnitude to directly impact global climate change; therefore, there would
be no direct project GHG emissions impact and any impact would be considered on a cumulative
basis. Because the proposed Project’s GHG emissions would be less than 3,000 MTCO2e/yr, the
emissions would not be cumulatively considerable. Therefore, the proposed Project would result
in less than significant GHG emissions.
TABLE 19
ESTIMATED TOTAL ANNUAL GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Source
Emissions
MTCO2e/yr
Construction (amortized) (from Table 16) 53
Operations (from Table 18) 1,759
Net Reduction: Existing Emissions (from Table 17) 277
Total 1,482
MTCO2e/yr: metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent per year.
b) Would the project conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for
the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
No Impact. The SCAQMD and the City of Arcadia have not adopted standards for the purpose
of reducing GHG emissions. As discussed previously, the State policy and standards adopted for
the purpose of reducing GHG emissions that are applicable to the proposed Project are Executive
Order S-3-05, Assembly Bill (AB) 32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, and
Senate Bill (SB) 32. The quantitative goal of these regulations is to reduce GHG emissions to
1990 levels by 2020 to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050, and for SB 32, to 40 percent below
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-43 Environmental Checklist Form
1990 levels by 2030. Statewide plans and regulations (such as GHG emissions standards for
vehicles, the Low Carbon Fuel Standard, Cap-and-Trade, and renewable energy) are being
implemented at the Statewide level, and compliance at a project level is not addressed.
The proposed Project is an infill and mixed-use development project. The Project’s mixed-use
nature would result in trip reductions internally as well as due to the Project site’s proximity to
nearby commercial uses. Public transit availability would also reduce vehicle trips and associated
GHG emissions when compared with similar projects located on sites that do not have similar
transit accessibility. Additionally, the Project would provide bicycle parking and storage areas to
encourage the reduction of fossil-fueled vehicle use by employees and residents and the
associated GHG emissions, and it would provide new facilities for charging of electric vehicles.
The provision of infill development near high-quality transit service supports the goals and policies
of the SCAG RTP/SCS as described above, thereby also supporting SB 375 and AB 32 goals.
The regulations, plans, and polices adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions that are
directly applicable to the Project include the Title 24 Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential
and Nonresidential Buildings and the Title 24 California Green Building Standards Code. These
codes are enforced by the City, and adherence to standard requirements for construction and
operations would ensure that the proposed Project would comply with both of these regulations.
Furthermore, the Project consists of mixed-use development near the Arcadia Gold Line Station,
as encouraged in the City’s General Plan. The Project site is located on parcels zoned by the City
as DMU and CBD and would advance the goals of the City’s General Plan Land Use and
Community Design Element by providing for more intense, mixed-use development surrounding
the Arcadia Gold Line Station to create a complete, compact, walkable neighborhood that
encourages transit use and reduces GHG emissions.
As previously discussed, the increase in GHG emissions would be less than SCAQMD’s
recommended significance threshold for all land use projects. Implementation of the Project would
not conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG
emissions. There would be no impact.
4.8.3 MITIGATION MEASURES
There would be no significant adverse impacts related to GHG emissions; therefore, no mitigation
measures are required.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-44 Environmental Checklist Form
4.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS
MATERIALS
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset
and accident conditions involving the release of
hazardous materials into the environment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste
within one-quarter-mile of an existing or proposed
school?
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result,
would it create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment?
e) For a Project located within an airport land use plan or,
where such a plan has not been adopted, within two
miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the
Project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for
people residing or working in the Project area?
f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an
adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
g) Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly,
to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving
wildland fires?
Information in this section is partially derived from the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
Report dated October 2017 and prepared by Robin Environmental Management. This report is
provided in its entirety in Appendix F.
4.9.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
On-Site Hazardous Materials
All five buildings on the Project site were constructed prior to the year of 1978 when friable
asbestos-containing materials (ACM’s) for commercial use and lead-based paint (LBP) in exterior
and interior coating for commercial use were banned by the federal government. Therefore, it is
likely that ACM’s and LBP may occur on the site. The auto repair use that occurs on the Project
site contains an oil storage tank and two 55-gallon drums for storing new and used antifreeze
(Robin Environmental 2017).
Nearby Hazardous Material Users
Review of government databases as well as field reconnaissance conducted as part of the
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Report indicates that there are no adjacent users of
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-45 Environmental Checklist Form
hazardous materials or generators of hazardous wastes in the vicinity of the Project site
(Appendix F). The nearest cleanup site reported on the Department of Toxic Substances Control
(DTSC) Envirostor web mapper is a site contaminated with lead associated with the past disposal
of batteries on that site beginning in the 1930s (DTSC 2019). That site is located 0.6-mile
northeast of the Project.
Nearby Airports
The nearest airport to the site is San Gabriel Airport in El Monte, a public use airport owned by
the County of Los Angeles, which is located approximately 3.1 miles south of the Project site.
4.9.2 PROJECT IMPACTS
Regulatory Requirements
RR HAZ-1 Activities at the Project site shall comply with existing federal, State, and local
regulations regarding hazardous material use, storage, disposal, and transport to
prevent Project-related risks to public health and safety. All on-site generated
waste that meets hazardous waste criteria shall be stored, manifested,
transported, and disposed of in accordance with the California Code of Regulations
(Title 22) and in a manner to the satisfaction of the local Certified Unified Program
Agency (CUPA), as applicable. Any hazardous materials removed from the Project
site shall be transported only by a Licensed Hazardous Waste Hauler, who shall
be in compliance with all applicable State and federal requirements, including
U.S. Department of Transportation regulations under Title 49 (Hazardous
Materials Transportation Act) and Title 40, Section 263 (Subtitle C of the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act) of the Code of Federal Regulations; California
Department of Transportation (Caltrans) standards; and Division of Occupational
Safety and Health (Cal/OSHA) standards.
Impact Discussion
a) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment
through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
Less Than Significant Impact. The Project would not involve the routine use, transport,
handling, or storage of hazardous materials on-site. The proposed land uses are limited to
residential and retail, and no industrial or manufacturing land uses would be developed. The
Project would result in the on-site handling of materials that are common in similar urban
developments, such as commercial cleansers, solvents and other janitorial or industrial-use
materials; paints; and landscape fertilizers/pesticides. While many such common materials are
technically labeled “hazardous”, the presence of such materials is common in a mixed-use urban
environment and their transport and use is considered a less than significant impact. The
proposed land uses would not generate hazardous emissions, nor would they involve hazardous
materials that would create a substantive hazard to the public or environment.
b) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment
through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the
release of hazardous materials into the environment?
Less Than Significant With Mitigation. Project construction activities routinely involve the use
and handling of limited volumes of commonly used hazardous materials, such as petroleum (fuel),
paints, adhesives, and solvents. During construction, there is a limited risk of spills and/or
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-46 Environmental Checklist Form
accidental release of hazardous materials that are used for the operation and maintenance of
construction equipment. The on-site temporary handling, storage, and usage of these materials
would be subject to applicable local, State, and/or federal regulations, including Best Management
Practices (BMPs) required by the City (see RR HWQ-1). As required by RR HAZ-1, any hazardous
materials used during construction would also be transported, used, stored, and disposed of
according to any applicable local, State, and/or federal regulations. Specifically, compliance with
standard State and local construction requirements would reduce the risk of any damage or injury
from any potential spill hazards to a less than significant level.
Given the age of the buildings on the Project site, asbestos-containing materials (ACMs) and lead-
based paint (LBP) may be present within interior and/or exterior materials and surfaces.
Demolition of the buildings could expose construction personnel to ACMs and LBP unless proper
precautions are taken to minimize risk of exposure. The potential for the release of asbestos and
lead during demolition would be considered a significant impact. Because exposure to such
materials can result in adverse health effects in uncontrolled situations, several regulations and
guidelines pertaining to abatement of and protection from exposure to asbestos have been
developed for demolition activities (Robin Environmental 2017).
As required in MM HAZ-1, a comprehensive pre-demolition survey for ACMs and LBP in on-site
structures would be conducted. Prior to or during demolition of the on-site structures, ACMs and
LBP would be removed and disposed of by qualified Contractors in accordance with State
regulations regarding the handling, transport, and disposal of these materials. With incorporation
of MM HAZ-1, potential impacts related to the potential presence of ACMs and LBP on the Project
site would be mitigated to a less than significant level.
c) Would the project emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely
hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or
proposed school?
Less Than Significant With Mitigation. Two schools are located within one-quarter mile of the
Project site. First Avenue Middle School (301 S. 1st Avenue) is located approximately 0.25 mile
southwest of the Project site and the Rancho Learning Center Alternative High School (150 S.
Third Avenue) is located approximately 0.21 mile southeast of the Project site. However, as
discussed above under Threshold 4.8(a), the Project would not develop land uses that involve
the use, storage, or transport of hazardous materials that represent a significant hazard to the
public or the environment. No industrial or manufacturing land uses would be developed as part
of the Project. However, during Project operations the Project would result in the routine on-site
handling of materials that are common in similar urban developments, such as commercial
cleansers, solvents and other janitorial or industrial-use materials; paints; and landscape
fertilizers/pesticides. In addition, as discussed under Threshold 4.8(b), during Project construction
there is potential for ACMs and LBP to be removed and disposed of off-site. This work would be
conducted in accordance with State regulations regarding the handling, transport, and disposal
of these materials. With implementation of RR HAZ-1 and MM HAZ-1, less than significant
impacts would result.
d) Would the project be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous
materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a
result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?
No Impact. Section 65962.5 requires the development of a hazardous waste and substances site
list, also known as the Cortese List, which provides the location of known hazardous materials
release sites. The Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Report (Appendix F) prepared for the
Project included a search of selected government databases for potential environmental concerns
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-47 Environmental Checklist Form
in the vicinity of the Project site (e.g., “listed sites”) and a review of records, aerial photographs,
and other documentation that illustrates the history of site use and site reconnaissance. The
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Report was prepared based on national record review
requirements in accordance with the USEPA Standards and Practices for All Appropriate Inquiries
(40 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] Part 312), as described in the American Society for
Testing and Materials (ASTM) E 1527-05 Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments:
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process. Details of the databases searched, along with
descriptions of each database researched, are provided in Appendix F. The Phase I
Environmental Site Assessment Report revealed no evidence of any recognized environmental
conditions (RECs) that could affect site development (Robin Environmental Management 2017).
The nearest cleanup site reported on the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC)
Envirostor web mapper is a site contaminated with lead associated with the disposal of batteries
on that site beginning in the 1930s (DTSC 2019). That site is located 0.6-mile northeast of the
Project site.
The Project site and adjacent sites were not identified on any databases reviewed. Given that the
Project does not occur on a Cortese List property or contain other hazardous materials of concern
that would create a significant hazard to the public or environment, no impact would result from
implementation of the proposed Project, and no mitigation is required.
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not
been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the
project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working
in the project area?
No Impact. The nearest airport to the site is the El Monte Airport, a public use airport, which is
owned by the County of Los Angeles and located approximately 3.1 miles south of the Project
site. The Project site is located outside the airport Area of Influence of El Monte Airport
(LA County 1991). There are no other private airstrips in the vicinity of the Project. Therefore, the
Project does not pose an adverse aeronautical effect. No impacts are anticipated, and no
mitigation is required.
f) Would the project impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted
emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Less Than Significant With Mitigation. The City has adopted an Emergency Preparedness
Program that addresses Arcadia’s response to extraordinary emergency situations associated
with natural disasters, technological incidents, and threats to national security. It provides
operational concepts related to various emergency situations; identifies components of the City
of Arcadia Emergency Management Program; and describes the overall responsibilities of the
organization for protecting life and property and assuring the overall well-being of the population.
The plan also identifies the sources of outside support that might be provided (through mutual aid
and specific statutory authorities) by other jurisdictions, State and federal agencies, and the
private sector.
Project construction activities would be constrained due to the fully developed nature of the
surrounding land uses and location near heavily traveled roadways. As such, construction
activities have the potential to disrupt traffic and emergency access through temporary lane
closures or traffic diversions. As required by MM TRANS-1, a Construction Management Plan
shall be prepared in compliance with the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD).
Compliance with MM TRANS-1 would ensure that potential short-term impacts to emergency
response plans or evacuation routes would be less than significant. Once construction activities
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-48 Environmental Checklist Form
that could impact surrounding roadways are completed, the roads would be returned to the
previous condition and there would be no impact. As required by MM TRANS-1, the Developer
would be responsible for repairing any damage to City roadways that may occur during construction
or through transport of heavy trucks or equipment related to construction.
The long-term operation of the Project involves residential, retail, and parking land uses that would
not result in a significant impact to existing roadways and would neither interfere with nor impact the
implementation of the City’s Emergency Preparedness Program. Additionally, emergency access
to the site and surrounding areas would be maintained in compliance with applicable
City requirements during and after construction.
g) Would the project expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a
significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires?
No Impact. As discussed above, the Project site is located in neither State nor Local
Responsibility areas designated as Very High or High Fire Hazard Severity Zones, as mapped by
the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (Calfire 2019). The nearest high-risk
zone closest to the Project site is located approximately 0.8 mile to the north, at the base of the
San Gabriel Mountains. The Project site is located in an urban area of the City and is not adjacent
to wildlands. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in a significant risk of loss,
injury, or death involving wildland fires. No mitigation is required.
4.9.3 MITIGATION MEASURES
MM HAZ-1 Prior to the issuance of a demolition permit, pre-demolition surveys for asbestos-
containing materials (ACMs) and lead-based paint (LBP) shall be performed for
the structures proposed for demolition. All surveys, inspections, and analyses shall
be performed by fully licensed and qualified individuals in accordance with all
applicable federal, State, and local regulations. If the pre-demolition
surveys/inspections do not identify ACMs or LBP, the Developer shall provide
documentation to the City of the survey/inspection showing that no further
abatement actions are required. If the pre-demolition surveys/inspections identify
ACMs or LBP, all such materials shall be handled in accordance with applicable
regulations, including, but not limited to 15 United States Code (USC) Chapter 53
Toxic Substances Control; Division of Occupational Safety and Health (Cal/OSHA)
regulations (8 CCR Section 1529 [Asbestos] and Section 1532.1 [Lead]); and
SCAQMD Rule 1403 (Asbestos Emissions from Demolition/Renovation Activities).
After demolition, the Developer shall provide documentation to the City illustrating
that abatement of any ACMs or LBP identified in the demolished structure has
been completed in full compliance with applicable regulations.
Implementation of this mitigation measure would reduce impacts to hazards and hazardous
materials to a less than significant level.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-49 Environmental Checklist Form
4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge
requirements or otherwise substantially degrade
surface or groundwater quality?
b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such
that the project may impede sustainable groundwater
management of the basin?
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the
site or area, including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river or through the addition of
impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
i) result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or
offsite;
ii) substantially increase the rate or amount of
surface runoff in a manner which would result in
flooding on- or offsite;
iii) 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; or
iv) impede or redirect flows?
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release
of pollutants due to project inundation?
e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water
quality control plan or sustainable groundwater
management plan?
4.10.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Surface Drainage
The Project site is located within the 824 square-mile Los Angeles River Watershed. The
Watershed is highly modified; the northern 324 square-mile portion is covered by forest or open
space, while the remaining 500 square miles is intensely urbanized (California Water Board
2014). The Watershed encompasses and is shaped by the path of the Los Angeles River. The
Project site is located within the intensely urbanized portion of the Watershed, and is currently
developed with existing buildings and paved surface parking lots.
Storm drainage in the City of Arcadia is provided by curbs and gutters along streets, which direct
storm water into the catch basins, pipes, and washes that run in a southerly direction in or near
the City. Over four miles of City-maintained storm water management facilities are present in
Arcadia, which connect to regional flood control and runoff conveyance facilities (Arcadia 2010b).
Most storm water from the City flows in a southerly direction predominately through Arcadia Wash
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-50 Environmental Checklist Form
and Santa Anita Wash, as well as through Sawpit Wash, which all ultimately flow to the Rio Hondo,
which runs southwest to join the Los Angeles River in Downey.
Flooding
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Map indicates that
the Project site is located in Flood Zone X, which designates areas that are determined to be
outside the 0.2-percent annual chance floodplain (Arcadia 2010b, FEMA 2019). However,
inundation can also occur as a result of significant structural damage to a dam or other water
retention facility upstream of the Project site. Dam or reservoir failure could occur as a result of
an earthquake, erosion, design flaw, or water overflow during storms (for a dam). Arcadia’s
location along the San Gabriel Mountain foothills and below extensive regional flood control
facilities places it within the potential inundation area of six water retention facilities. The Project
area is located within the inundation hazard area of the Santa Anita Dam (Arcadia 2010b).
Groundwater
The Project site overlies the Main San Gabriel Groundwater Basin (Main Basin), which has a 255
square mile surface area and is located in eastern Los Angeles County. The Main Basin is located
underneath the majority of the valley floor of the San Gabriel Valley and is bounded by the
Raymond Basin on the northwest, the base of the San Gabriel Mountains on the north, the Puente
Basin on the east, and Whittier Narrows to the south. The basin is replenished by stream runoff,
rainfall, and inflow from the surrounding Raymond and Puente Basins, and is also replenished
with imported water through the upper San Gabriel Valley Municipal Water District (Arcadia
2010a). The Raymond Basin’s main water-bearing materials are unconsolidated to semi-
consolidated Quaternary alluvial sediments deposited by streams originating in the San Gabriel
Mountains (DWR 2004).
During the drilling of soil borings for the Geotechnical Report (Appendix D, (Geocon West, Inc.
2018), no free water was encountered. Also, a review of available data indicates that the
historically highest groundwater level in the immediate area is approximately 150 feet beneath
ground surface.
4.10.2 PROJECT IMPACTS
Regulatory Requirements
RR HWQ-1 Prior to the City’s issuance of a demolition permit, the Developer shall obtain
coverage under the General Permit for Discharges of Storm Water Associated with
Construction Activity, which will require the development and implementation of a
project-specific Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP).
Impact Discussion
a) Would the project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge
requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality?
Less Than Significant Impact. This section discusses the Project’s potential construction- and
operational-related water quality impacts.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-51 Environmental Checklist Form
Construction-Related Water Quality Impacts
The Project could result in short-term construction impacts to surface water quality from demolition,
grading, and other construction-related activities. Storm water runoff from the Project site during
construction could contain soils and sediments from these activities. Spills or leaks from heavy
equipment and machinery, construction staging areas, and/or building sites can also enter runoff and
typically include petroleum products such as fuel, oil and grease, and heavy metals.
The State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) has issued the Statewide National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated
with the Construction and Land Disturbance Activities (Order No 2012-0006-DWQ, NPDES No.
CAS000002, adopted by the SWRCB on July 17, 2012). Under this Construction General Permit,
individual NPDES permits or Construction General Permit coverage must be obtained for
discharges of storm water from construction sites with a disturbed area of one or more acres.
Since the Project site is 1.74-acre, coverage under the General Permit for Discharges of Storm
Water Associated with Construction Activity is required. To obtain coverage, the Developer must
retain the services of a certified Qualified SWPPP Developer (QSD) to prepare a SWPPP for the
Project. The Developer, or the contractor if specifically delegated, would electronically submit
permit registration documents prior to beginning construction activities in the Storm Water Multi-
Application Report Tracking System (SMARTS), which would consist of a Notice of Initiation, Risk
Assessment, Post-Construction Calculations, a site map, the SWPPP, a signed certification
statement, and the first annual fee. Project construction would also adhere to the South Coast Air
Quality Management District’s Rule 402 (Nuisance) and Rule 403 (Fugitive Dust) to avoid and
minimize dust from leaving the site.
Also, as required by the City’s Municipal Code (Chapter 8, Stormwater Management and
Discharge Control) for projects with a disturbed area of one acre or more, the Project’s grading
permit would only be issued after the Developer submits proof that an NOI was filed and a SWPPP
prepared to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director (Arcadia 2019). Construction activities
are not anticipated to encounter groundwater, as levels are anticipated to be more than 150 feet
below ground surface at the Project site (Geocon West, Inc. 2018), which is well below the depth
of proposed excavation.
With implementation of RR HWQ-1 and adherence to applicable regulatory requirements in the
City of Arcadia LID Ordinance and MS4 Permit, Project short-term impacts to surface water quality
during construction would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
Operational Water Quality Impacts
The Project is subject to requirements of the 1972 Federal Water Pollution Control Act,
subsequently known as the Clean Water Act (CWA). In 1972, the CWA was amended to require
NPDES permits for the discharge of pollutants to “waters of the U.S.” from any point source. In
1987, the CWA was amended to require that the USEPA establish regulations for municipal and
industrial storm water discharges for permitting under the NPDES permit program. The
regulations require that municipal separate storm sewer system (MS4) discharges to surface
waters be regulated by an NPDES permit. The MS4s are designated or used for collecting or
conveying storm water.
The City of Arcadia is located in both the Rio Hondo and San Gabriel River Watersheds, and
occurs within the jurisdiction of the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board
(LARWQCB) and is therefore subject to the Waste Discharge Requirements MS4 Permit (Order
No. R4-2012-0175, NPDES Permit No. CAS004001), which became effective on December 28,
2012. As a Permittee under the General MS4 permit, the City has the authority to enforce the
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-52 Environmental Checklist Form
terms of the permit for the Project. The MS4 Permit governs storm water and urban runoff
discharges to public storm drain systems owned and operated by “the Permittees”. Permittees
that have land use authority are responsible for implementing a storm water management
program to inspect and control pollutants from industrial and commercial facilities, new
development and re-development projects, and development construction sites within their
jurisdictional boundaries. The MS4 Permit also provides the option to develop integrated planning
and monitoring plans to address many of the Permit’s water quality and program requirements.
Since that time, the technique of Low Impact Development (LID) has become the preferred
stormwater management approach across the region, which emphasizes conservation and the
use of existing natural site features integrated with stormwater controls to more closely mimic
natural hydrology patterns in residential, commercial, and industrial settings. As part of this
process, in February 2014 the County adopted the County of Los Angeles Department of Public
Works LID Standards Manual (LID Standards Manual), which all development and redevelopment
projects in unincorporated portions of the County as well as within the City of Arcadia must comply
with. The LID Standards Manual was prepared to comply with the requirements of the NPDES
MS4 Permit for discharges within the coastal watersheds of Los Angeles County. The LID
Standards Manual updated and compiled prior County guidance, including the Development
Planning for Storm Water Management: A Manual for the Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation
Plan (SUSMP Manual, September 2002), which are no longer applicable.
To fulfill the requirements of the MS4 Permit, the City of Arcadia is a participant along with other
local Permittees in the Rio Hondo/San Gabriel River Water Quality Group (RH/SGRWQG). In
June 2013, the RH/SGRWQG submitted a Notice of Intent to proceed with the development of an
Enhanced Watershed Management Plan (EWMP) and Coordinated Integrated Monitoring Plan
(CIMP) for NPDES Permit No. R4-2012-0175. Other partner agencies includes the Cities of
Azusa, Bradbury, Duarte, Monrovia, Sierra Madre, and local portions of the County of Los
Angeles, and the Los Angeles County Flood Control District. As a requirement of this process,
the City of Arcadia adopted a LID Ordinance. In January 29, 2016, the RH/SGRWQG submitted
a revised EWMP to the LARWQCB, which was approved on April 21, 2016. In March 2019, a
Revised Watershed Management Program was approved the LARWQCB to take place of the
approved EWMP.
The City’s LID Ordinance, Ordinance No. 2325, was passed, approved, and adopted by the
Arcadia City Council on April 7, 2015, which amended the Arcadia Municipal Code by adding
Article VII, Chapter 8 to the City’s Municipal Code, entitled Stormwater Management and
Discharge Control. The intent of Ordinance No. 2325 is to protect and enhance the water quality
of the City’s watercourses, water bodies, and receiving waters of the United States in a manner
pursuant to and consistent with the Clean Water Act.
Section 7827 of the Municipal Code covers control of runoff for construction activities. In
accordance with these regulations, the Project would be required to implement an erosion and
sediment control plan, or SWPPP, and BMPs required by the City’s Director of Public Works to
ensure that discharges of pollutants are effectively prohibited and will not cause or contribute to
an exceedance of water quality standards. Also, consistent with Municipal Code Section 7827
and Ordinance No 2325, since the Project would disturb more than one-acre, best management
practices for new development and redevelopments would apply including the requirement to file
a Notice of Intent to comply with the State Construction Activity Stormwater Permit and a
SWPPPP has been prepared. The SWPPP would include BMPs to control erosion and
sedimentation, and to manage waste and non-stormwater in accordance with the Permit. The
Project Applicant may also be required by the City to develop an Erosion and Sediment Control
Plan including structural BMPs, which would need to be certified by a qualified SWPPP
Developer.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-53 Environmental Checklist Form
The proposed Project meets the definition of a Planning Priority Project as defined in Ordinance
No. 2325 given it is a redevelopment project that would disturb more than 5,000 square feet of
impervious surface area on an already developed site. Therefore, the Project must be designed
to control pollutants, pollutant loads, and runoff volume to the maximum extent feasible by
minimizing impervious surface area and controlling runoff from impervious surfaces through
infiltration, evapotranspiration, bioretention, and/or rainfall harvest and use. Prior to issuance of a
Demolition or Grading Permit for the Project, the City Public Works Director will ensure that the
Project Applicant has had a LID Plan prepared. The LID Plan must include measures to retain
stormwater runoff onsite for the Stormwater Quality Design Volume (SWQDv), as defined further
in the Municipal Code. This LID Plan will be reviewed by the City to ensure the Project minimizes
hydromodification impacts to natural drainage systems. When, as determined by the City, 100
percent onsite retention of the SWQDv is not technically feasible, partially or fully, the infeasibility
shall be demonstrated in the LID Plan.
If partial or complete onsite retention is determined by the City to be technically infeasible as
documented in the LID Plan, the Project may instead biofiltrate 1.5 times the portion of the
remaining SWQDv that is not reliably retained onsite. Biofiltration BMPs must adhere to the design
specifications provided in the Permit. Additional alternative compliance options such as offsite
infiltration will be analyzed, although much of the area surrounding the Project site is developed
with impervious surfaces and unlikely to be able to be used for infiltration . Alternative compliance
options are further specified in the County of Los Angeles Department of Public Works
Stormwater Best Management Practices Design and Maintenance Manual. The Project Applicant
should contact the City Public Works Director to determine eligibility and obtain approval. In all
cases, the Project would comply with all relevant provisions of the Permit.
The remaining SWQDv that cannot be retained or biofiltered onsite must be treated onsite to
reduce pollutant loading. BMPs must be selected and designed to meet pollutant specific
benchmarks as required per the Permit. Flow through BMPs may be used to treat the remaining
SWQDv and must be sized based on a rainfall intensity of:0.2 inches per hour, or the one year,
one hour rainfall intensity as determined from the most recent Los Angeles County isohyetal map,
whichever is greater.
Preliminary drainage design complies with City requirements for stormwater management and
discharge control contained in Article VII, Chapter 8 of the Municipal Code to reduce pollutants in
stormwater discharges to the maximum extent practicable. The Project’s drainage design has
incorporated storm water conveyance and treatment infrastructure to ensure that operational
water quality impacts are minimized. Runoff from the proposed buildings would be conveyed via
downspouts to a proposed pipeline that would convey the water to a pre-treatment device (Aqua-
Swirl or City-approved similar device) to remove sediments, debris, and free oil. Low flows would
then be diverted to drywells where the water would be allowed to percolate into the ground. The
pre-treatment device would allow high flows to bypass the drywell system. As described in
Section 2.2 of this IS/MND, for the drainage area north of the alley, flows would be pumped into
the existing storm drain catch basin located on N. 1st Avenue via the existing Alley. For the
drainage area south of the alley, flows would be pumped to an existing catch basin located in E.
Huntington Drive approximately 250 feet east of N. 1st Avenue. Runoff from the project’s
Building 2 rooftops would be conveyed south towards the alley, and into a new 12-inch storm
drain pipe that would be installed along the same general alignment of the existing ribbon gutters
that run east to west towards N. 1st Avenue. A sump pump would be installed in the southwest
portion of the building to pump storm water off-site. Runoff from the proposed southern building
rooftops would be conveyed via downspouts to a proposed pipeline that would flow south off-site
into an existing catch basin on the north side of E. Huntington Drive. The water would be piped to
the existing 36-inch storm drain within N. 1st Avenue. A sump pump would be installed in the
southwest portion of the building to pump storm water off-site (Willrodt 2019). Compliance with
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-54 Environmental Checklist Form
applicable regulatory requirements, including the City’s LID Ordinance and requirements
contained in the County’s LID Standards Manual, would ensure that long-term water quality
impacts would be less than significant, and that no mitigation would be required.
b) Would the project substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere
substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede
sustainable groundwater management of the basin?
Less Than Significant Impact. The Project would not involve direct or indirect withdrawals of
groundwater. Domestic water service would be provided by the City, as described in Section 4.17,
Utilities and Service Systems. Also, the Project would not deplete groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater recharge. Most of the Project site is currently covered in
impervious surfaces and Project implementation would also result in full coverage with impervious
surfaces, with the exception of some limited landscaping as described in Section 2.2. Therefore,
there would be minimal change in groundwater recharge and no mitigation is required.
c) Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area,
including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the
addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
i) Result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or offsite?
No Impact. Most of the Project site is covered with impervious surfaces and is relatively flat.
Implementation of the Project would not result in a substantial increase in the amount of
impervious surface. The Project site is in an urban setting and there are no natural streams or
rivers within or near to the Project site. The Project would convey storm water to existing storm
drains that connect to regional flood control and runoff conveyance facilities (Arcadia 2010b),
which run southwest into the Whittier Narrows and continues southwest to join the Los Angeles
River in Downey. Therefore, Project implementation would not result in an increase in erosion or
sedimentation on- or off-site and no mitigation is required.
ii) Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which
would result in flooding on- or offsite?
iii) 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?
No Impact. The rate of storm water runoff from the Project site would generally remain unchanged
with Project implementation because the impervious cover on the Project site would not be
substantively changed. Therefore, no net increase in storm flows is anticipated as a result of the
Project, and no additional incremental flows would be contributed to the City’s storm drain system.
As such, the runoff from the site would not result in flooding on- or off-site and would not exceed
the capacity of the storm drain system. Additionally, as described under the analysis of Thresholds
4.9(a) above, the Project would not result in substantial additional sources of polluted runoff.
iv) Impede or redirect flood flows?
No Impact. The Project site is not located in an area identified as a 100-year flood area
(Arcadia 2010a). Therefore, the Project would not impede or redirect flood flows and no mitigation
is required.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-55 Environmental Checklist Form
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, would the project risk release of
pollutants due to project inundation?
Less Than Significant Impact. The Project is not located in a flood zone or near the ocean or
other water body with the potential to be at risk of seismically-induced tidal phenomena.
Furthermore, the Project would not utilize, store, or otherwise contain pollutants that would be at
risk of release if inundated. Therefore, hazards related to the potential release of pollutants due
to inundation caused by a flood, tsunami, and/or seiche are considered to be negligible.
However, the Project site and surrounding area are located within the inundation hazard area of
the Santa Anita Dam (Arcadia 2010a). The potential for inundation as a result of significant
structural damage to the Santa Anita Dam as a result of an earthquake, erosion, a design flaw,
or water overflow during storms is an existing inundation hazard that affects the Project site. As
such, implementation of the Project would not exacerbate these hazards, and impacts would be
less than significant.
e) Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control
plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
No Impact. The Project would develop two buildings which would contain a mix of residential and
retail uses. The Project proposes similar uses to what exists on the Project site currently and
would not introduce sources of water pollutants that would have the potential to interfere with a
water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan. Moreover, the Project
would mitigate runoff in a manner that removes storm water pollutants prior to the water being
discharged into the municipal storm water system. No impacts would occur, and no mitigation
measures are necessary.
4.10.3 MITIGATION MEASURES
Project implementation would not result in significant impacts related to hydrology and water
quality; therefore, no mitigation measures are required.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-56 Environmental Checklist Form
4.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community?
b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to a
conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation
adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect?
4.11.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The Project site is located in the downtown area of the City of Arcadia. Current zoning for the
Project site is split with the southern parcels fronting E. Huntington Drive zoned as CBD and the
northern parcels fronting Wheeler zoned as DMU as shown in Exhibit 13, Zoning Map. As shown
in Exhibit 13, the public alley that traverse the Project parcels from east-to west is not currently
assigned a zoning classification given its status as public right-of-way. The Project site is within
an area covered by the City Center Design Plan and General Plan Amendment No. 18-01, Zone
Change No. 18-01, and Text Amendment No. TA 18-01, which were approved by the City Council
in 2018 through adoption of Resolution No. 2017. Among other updates, this City Council action
removed the Downtown Overlay Zone from CBD-zoned parcels, increased residential density in
the DMU and CBD zones to 80 units per acre, increased building height limits to 60 feet, and
established additional design guidelines for new development in the City’s downtown (Arcadia
2018).
As shown on the aerial photograph presented in Exhibit 2, Aerial Map, the Project site is
immediately surrounded by existing urban development including commercial retail, office, and
associated parking. Existing office uses are located to the north of the Project site across Wheeler
Avenue. To the east and west of the Project site (along E. Huntington Drive) are retail/office
buildings and associated parking. To the south of the Project site (across E. Huntington Drive)
are retail/office uses and associated surface parking. Northwest of the Project site, approximately
0.15-mile away, is the Arcadia Gold Line Station. Table 20, Land Use and Zoning Designations
Near the Project Site, summarizes the surrounding land uses and zoning for parcels near the
Project site.
Exhibit 13
(Rev: 6-13-2019 MMD) R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\Graphics\ex_Zoning.pdf
Los
A
n
g
e
l
e
s
M
e
t
r
o
G
o
l
d
L
i
n
e
Huntington Dr
S 1st AveIndi
a
n
a
S
t
Wheeler Ave
N 1st Ave5773010007
577301000857730100185773010019577301002057730100215773010901
D:\Projects\3NWI\010100\MXD\ex_Zoning_20190611.mxd100 0 10050Feet²
Aerial Source: LAR-IAC 2014
Project Site
Zoning
Downtown Mixed Use
Commercial Business District
Zoning Map
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-57 Environmental Checklist Form
TABLE 20
LAND USE AND ZONING DESIGNATIONS NEAR THE PROJECT SITE
Area/Direction
General Plan Land Use
Designation Zoning Designation
Project Site
Downtown Mixed Use (DMU)
and
Commercial
Downtown Mixed Use (DMU)
and
Commercial Business District
(CBD)
North of Project Site
(across Wheeler Avenue) Downtown Mixed Use (DMU) Downtown Mixed Use (DMU)
East of Project Site
(along Huntington Dr) Commercial Commercial Business District
(CBD)
South of Project Site
(across Huntington Dr) Commercial Commercial Business District
(CBD)
West of Project Site
(along Huntington Dr) Commercial Commercial Business District
(CBD)
Source: Arcadia 2010a.
4.11.2 PROJECT IMPACTS
Impact Discussion
a) Would the project physically divide an established community?
No Impact. As shown in the aerial photograph provided in Exhibit 2, Aerial Map, and described
in Section 2.1, Project Location, the Project site is currently developed, and is surrounded by other
urban development including commercial land uses. The Project involves redevelopment of the
Project site and would not disrupt the physical arrangement of an established community. No
impact would occur, and no mitigation is required.
b) Would the project cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with
any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental effect?
Less Than Significant Impact. There are several land use-related planning programs, policies,
and ordinances that are relevant to the Project, which are discussed below including the City of
Arcadia General Plan and Zoning Code.
City of Arcadia General Plan
The City’s General Plan was adopted in 2010 (Arcadia 2010a). Each Element of the General Plan
contains goals, policies, and implementation programs designed to guide the various aspects of
the future land use, development, and revitalization decisions of the City. The State’s general rule
for a General Plan consistency determination is “an action, program, or Project is consistent with
the General Plan if, considering all aspects, it will further the objectives and policies of the General
Plan and will not inhibit or obstructer their attainment” (OPR 2017).
The Land Use and Community Design Element of the General Plan includes goals and policies
that apply citywide. The Project would be consistent and help achieve the following goals and
policies.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-58 Environmental Checklist Form
Goal LU-1: A balance of land uses that preserves Arcadia’s status as a Community of
Homes and a Community of Opportunity.
o Policy LU-1.1: Promote new infill and redevelopment projects that are consistent
with the City’s land use and compatible with surrounding existing uses.
o Policy LU-1.2: Promote new uses of land that provide diverse economic, social,
and cultural opportunities, and that reinforce the characteristics that make Arcadia
a desirable place to live.
o Policy LU-1.3: Encourage community involvement in the development review
process.
o Policy LU-1.4: Encourage the gradual redevelopment of incompatible, ineffective,
and/or undesirable land uses.
o Policy LU-1.6: Establish consistency between the Land Use Plan and the Zoning
Code.
o Policy LU-1.7: Encourage developments to be placed in areas that reduce or
better distribute travel demand.
o Policy LU-1.8: Encourage development types that support transit and other
alternative forms of transportation, including bicycling and walking.
o Policy LU-1.9: Establish incentives and development standards to encourage
development of land uses that provide public amenities and/or desirable facilities
or features, as well as private open space and recreation areas.
o Policy LU-1.10: Require that new development projects provide their full fair share
of the improvements necessary to mitigate project generated impacts on the
circulation and infrastructure systems.
Goal LU-2: A City with a distinctive and attractive public realm, with pedestrian-friendly
amenities in commercial and mixed-use districts and single-family neighborhoods that
continue to maintain Arcadia’s standard of architectural and aesthetic quality.
o Policy LU-2.1: Ensure that trees planted in the public right-of-way continue to be
well maintained where they exist, are planted in areas where they are currently
lacking, and encourage replacement of undesirable tree species in public rights-
of-way.
o Policy LU-2.2: Emphasize the use of public spaces and design that are oriented
toward the pedestrian and use of transit throughout the community.
o Policy LU-2.6: Ensure the aesthetic quality and pedestrian orientation of the City’s
commercial corridors by implementing the recommendations of this Community
Design section, as well as the Architectural Design Guidelines for commercial and
industrial properties.
o Policy LU-2.7: Through a combination of incentives to business owners and
enforcement measures, attain compliance with signage standards and guidelines
throughout the City, with a priority placed on high-traffic commercial corridors and
gateway areas.
Also, the Land Use and Community Design Element of the General Plan includes various goals
and policies specific to development within the City’s downtown. The Project would be consistent
with and help achieve the following goal and policies:
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-59 Environmental Checklist Form
Goal LU-10: A thriving downtown, with healthy commercial areas supported by high-
quality, residential uses and supportive of the Metro Gold Line transit station (e.g., Arcadia
Gold Line Station).
o Policy LU-10.1: Provide diverse housing, employment, and cultural opportunities
in downtown, with an emphasis on compact, mixed-use, transit- and pedestrian-
oriented development patterns that are appropriate to the core of the City.
o Policy LU-10.2: Promote the Metro Gold Line Extension and establishment of a
transit station in downtown Arcadia and take full advantage of the opportunities the
Gold Line station (e.g., Arcadia Gold Line Station) will bring to downtown and the
City as a whole.
o Policy LU-10.3: Work toward the establishment of public gathering areas in
downtown to bring public activities and civic events into downtown.
o Policy LU-10.4: Establish commercial uses that complement the vision of the
downtown core with opportunities for more intense, quality development at key
intersections that are unique from the regional offerings at the regional mall.
o Policy LU-10.6: Encourage high standards for property maintenance, renovation
and redevelopment.
o Policy LU-10.7: Provide accessible plazas and public spaces throughout
downtown that provide both intimate, outdoor rooms and larger spaces that could
accommodate public gatherings and celebrations.
o Policy LU-10.9: Connect various activity areas and plazas via sidewalks, paseos,
and pedestrian alleys to create a comprehensive pedestrian network.
o Policy LU-10.10: Establish a “park once” system in downtown with a collection of
shared surface and parking structures.
o Policy LU-10.11: Buildings should be oriented to the pedestrian and the street.
o Policy LU-10.12: Encourage architecture that uses quality, lasting building
materials; provides building scale that relates to intimate nature of downtown; and
applies a unified theme.
o Policy LU-10.13: Recognize that well-designed public open spaces are vital to the
success of downtown. Work with private developers and landowners to facilitate
the construction of such spaces.
o Policy LU-10.14: Create a high-quality pedestrian experience in downtown
through the use of street trees, public art, street furniture, and public gathering
spaces. Using signage, art, and unique uses, entice and encourage people to walk
and explore the commercial core of downtown.
The Land Use and Community Design Element of the City’s General Plan identifies the ¼-mile
radius surrounding the Arcadia Gold Line Station as an “activity node”, which is defined as “places
of pedestrian activity and excitement. These are places where people congregate, socialize, and
shop. Activity nodes are places where residents can leisurely stroll, participate in a recreational
activity, or relax and experience the outdoors” (Arcadia 2010a). The Project is designed to
implement the City’s goals for the City’s downtown by enhancing the street frontage, orienting the
retail and publicly-accessible components of the Project towards E. Huntington Drive through the
provision of an outdoor public gathering space along E. Huntington Drive, which would generate
more pedestrian activity downtown.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-60 Environmental Checklist Form
City of Arcadia Zoning Ordinance and Development Code
The Arcadia Zoning Ordinance is the primary tool for implementing the City’s General Plan. It
provides development standards (e.g., setbacks, building height, site coverage, parking, and sign
requirements). Also, the Zoning Ordinance provides detailed guidance for development based on
and consistent with the land use policies established in the General Plan. Current zoning for the
Project site is split between CBD and DMU zones, as shown in Exhibit 13, Zoning Map.
The Project’s parcels fronting E. Huntington Drive are zoned CBD. The CBD zone is intended to
promote a strong pedestrian-oriented environment and to serve community and regional needs
for retail and service uses, professional offices, restaurants, public uses, and other similar and
compatible uses. Within the CBD zone, the project proposes multifamily residential units and retail
uses. Retail uses are permitted by right in the CBD zone. Multifamily residential, as part of a
mixed-use development, is permitted with a conditional use permit according to Sections
9102.05.020 and 9102.05.030 of the City’s Development Code (Arcadia 2019). As specified in
Section 9102.05.030 of the Development Code, all of the Project’s multifamily units would occur
either above ground floor commercial or adjacent to a commercial use and would be located on
the project site as the commercial proposed commercial uses.
Development standards for the CBD zone are defined in Table 21, Project Consistency with the
Commercial Business District Zone Development Standards, which includes an analysis of project
consistency.
TABLE 21
PROJECT CONSISTENCY WITH THE COMMERCIAL BUSINESS DISTRICT ZONE
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Standard
Development Standard for
Commercial Business District Project Consistency
Minimum Lot Area 5,000 sf 75,530 sf
Maximum Density 80 units per acre 79.9 units per acre
Maximum Height (excluding mechanical
equipment) 60 feet 58 feet, 6 inches to the top of the
parapet
Maximum Floor Area Ratio for Non-
Residential Uses 1.0 0.14
Minimum Ground Floor Height for Structures
with Commercial Uses on the Ground Floor 12 feet, 6 inches 13 feet
Minimum Open Space for Residential Uses 100 sf per unit 177 sf per unit
Minimum Setbacks
Front (or adjacent to a street) 0 feet minimum; 10 feet
maximum +/-31.72-foot average minimum
Side Interior Abutting Nonresidential or
Mixed-Use Zone 0 feet minimum +/-1-2 feet minimum
Side (Street Side) 0 feet minimum; 10 feet
maximum N/A
Rear Abutting Nonresidential or Downtown
Zone 0 feet minimum +/-11 feet, 10 feet 3 inches
minimum for areas abutting alley
Roof Deck Standards
Roof decks are permitted, subject to Site Plan and Design Review, provided
that roof decks meet the following development standards:
See below for an analysis of
Project consistency.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-61 Environmental Checklist Form
TABLE 21
PROJECT CONSISTENCY WITH THE COMMERCIAL BUSINESS DISTRICT ZONE
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Standard
Development Standard for
Commercial Business District Project Consistency
Location. Roof decks shall be set back five feet from all building lines of the
structure. The building line shall be measured from the roof edge of the story
directly below the deck.
The proposed roof decks are set
back from the building lines of
the structure consistent with this
standard.
Height Limits. The guardrail and other objects, whether permanent or
temporary, which rest upon the roof deck such as patio furniture, landscaping,
swimming pool features, and storage, shall be allowed to exceed the maximum
height limit specified in Subsection 9102.05.030(Development Standards in
Downtown Zones) by up to five feet. Exterior stairways and other access
features such as stairwells or elevators for access to roof decks shall not
exceed the residential zoning district's height limit by more than 10 feet and
shall be architecturally integrated into the design of the structure.
The sky decks have been
designed to comply with
maximum height requirements
as described in this standard.
Screening. The roof deck area shall be appropriately designed so as not to be
visible from all sides of the structure or from the grade below. Appropriate
screening shall be architecturally compatible with and integrated into the
existing structure as determined by the Director. The solid screening may
include roofing, solid parapet walls, or other methods architecturally compatible
with the design of the structure.
The Developer would coordinate
appropriate screening of the roof
decks with the City during final
design to ensure consistency
with this requirement.
Architecturally Compatible. The roof deck shall be architecturally compatible
with the existing exterior materials and colors of the existing structure and
appear as an integral part of the roof system.
The materials and finishes
specified for the roof decks are
consistent with the exterior
finishes proposed for the rest of
the Project.
Furniture. All furniture and accessories located on a roof deck shall be secured
as necessary to prevent wind damage or dislocation.
As required by the City, furniture
installed at the roof decks would
be secured to prevent wind
damage and dislocation.
Source: Arcadia 2019; Humphreys & Partners Architects, L.P. July 2019
The Project’s parcels fronting Wheeler Avenue are zoned DMU. The DMU zone is intended to
provide opportunities for complementary service and retail commercial businesses, professional
offices, and residential uses located within the City's downtown. A wide range of commercial and
residential uses are appropriate, oriented towards pedestrians to encourage shared use of
parking, public open space, and interaction of uses within the zone. Residential uses are
permitted above ground floor commercial or adjacent to a commercial development. Both uses
must be located on the same lot or on the same project site, and exclusive residential structures
are not allowed. Development standards for the DMU zone include a density restriction of 80 units
per acre, a maximum height of 60 feet, and a maximum FAR for non-residential uses of 1.0. There
are no front, side, or rear minimum setback requirements for buildings within the DMU zone. The
maximum setback permitted for any street side is ten feet, which may be used for landscaping,
pedestrian circulation, entry court, outdoor dining, and similar uses related to a downtown
pedestrian environment.
Development standards for the DMU zone are defined in Table 22, Project Consistency with the
Downtown Mixed-Use Zone Development Standards, which includes an analysis of project
consistency.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-62 Environmental Checklist Form
TABLE 22
PROJECT CONSISTENCY WITH THE DOWNTOWN MIXED-USE
ZONE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Standard
Development Standard for
Commercial Business District Project Consistency
Minimum Lot Area 10,000 sf 75,530 sf
Maximum Density 80 units per acre 79.9 units per acre
Maximum Height (excluding mechanical
equipment) 60 feet 55 feet
Maximum Floor Area Ratio for Non-
Residential Uses 1.0
Not applicable. The Project does
not propose any non-residential
uses in the DMU zone. FAR
requirements are not applicable
to residential uses.
Minimum Open Space for Residential Uses 100 sf per unit 177 sf per unit
Minimum Setbacks
Front (or adjacent to a street) 0 feet minimum; 10 feet
maximum +/-31.72-foot average minimum
Side Interior Abutting Nonresidential or
Mixed-Use Zone 0 feet minimum +/-1-2 feet minimum
Side (Street Side) 0 feet minimum; 10 feet
maximum N/A
Rear Abutting Nonresidential or Downtown
Zone 0 feet minimum +/-11 feet, 10 feet 3 inches
minimum for areas abutting alley
Source: Arcadia 2019; Humphreys & Partners Architects, L.P. July 2019
The Project’s maximum proposed building height of 55 feet would comply with the
maximum height limit in the DMU and CBD zones, which is 60 feet (Arcadia 20919). As described
in Section 9103.01.050 of the City’s Development Code (Arcadia, 2019), in any commercial,
industrial, or mixed-use zone, mechanical equipment required for the operation of or maintenance
of structures including elevators and stairways may exceed the maximum height limit by up to 10
feet. For the Project site, the Project’s maximum height of 63 feet, including mechanical
equipment, would comply with the maximum height limit of 70 feet.
As noted in Table 21, Project Consistency with the Commercial Business District Zone
Development Standards, and Table 22, Project Consistency with the Downtown Mixed-Use Zone
Development Standards, the Project’s average front setback would exceed the maximum front
setback allowed for the CBD and DMU zones. However, it should be noted that this average
setback calculation accounts for the space provided by the Project as a public plaza, leading to a
much greater setback average than would be the case if the open space were excluded from the
calculation. For Building 1, the two retail spaces closest to the parcel line would be set back five
feet from the property line with E. Huntington Drive and 11-feet from the alley. Building 2 is set
back 1-foot from the property line with Wheeler Avenue and 11 inches- to 9-feet 11 inches from
the alley. As noted in the City Center Design Plan (Onyx Architects 2018), some flexibility related
to setbacks is necessary for individual projects, including where projects are interfacing with
existing buildings.
Also, as part of the City’s design review, City staff will ensure that the Project complies with all
other applicable City regulations, including those contained in:
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-63 Environmental Checklist Form
Division 2 of the Development Code – Zones, Allowable Uses, and Development
Standards;
Division 3 of the Development Code – Regulations Applicable to All Zones – Site Planning
and General Development Standards; and
Division 4 of the Development Code – Regulations for Specific Land uses and Activities.
As mentioned above, in both CBD and DMU zones in the City’s downtown, multifamily dwellings
require the issuance of a Conditional Use Permit. Therefore, prior to commencement of any
construction activities, the Developer shall obtain approval of a Conditional Use Permit from the
City. Therefore, impacts related to applicable land use plans, policies, or regulations would be
less than significant.
City Center Design Plan
In addition to consistency with the development standards for the CBD and DMU zones and other
elements of the City Development Code, the Project has been designed to comply with the City
Center Design Plan (Onyx Architects 2018). The City Center Design Plan was approved by the
City Council in August 2018 and provides additional design guidelines for new development in
the City’s downtown. The Plan was developed to balance the goals of increasing density and
improving walkability and mobility while at the same time embracing the scale and architecture of
the existing downtown buildings that give the area its identity and character by improving design
quality for all future projects.
One goal of the City Center Design Plan is to make the downtown more walkable and to improve
mobility. The Project would promote this goal by providing mixed uses in the downtown near
transit. Also, the Project would include ground-floor public spaces and an urban paseo, and would
increase the attractiveness of the public alley through the middle of the site which would
collectively serve to improve the desirability of walking through the site. The Project would provide
residential uses and commercial space in close walking distance to the Gold Line Station, and
would not result in any substantial degradation of vehicular Levels of Service near the Project
site. Also, in furtherance of the City Center Design Plan goal of increasing density, the Project
would increase density on the site through construction of Buildings 1 and 2.
The Project has been designed to be consistent with the urban design principles and all of the
relevant design concepts provided in the City Center Design Plan. The Project would not result in
any conflicts with the Plan while at the same time implementing many of its goals. A few of the
most notable features incorporated from the City Center Design Plan include: a mid-block
between Huntington Drive and the public alley, paseo; an open plaza area off of Huntington Drive.
Also, the Project massing is developed to gradually increase in height from Huntington Drive
toward Wheeler Avenue, which is consistent with the recommendations in the Plan. The Plan’s
proposed massing diagram allows 5-story structures on Wheeler Avenue and maximum 3-story
structures along Huntington Drive, but a note is included in the Plan stating that some flexibility is
necessary for individual projects fronting Huntington Drive.
Finally, the Project implements the Plan’s goal of having centralized, shared parking below 4 to 5
story developments to allow for a “park-once” approach so that every parking stall can serve
several uses within the area (Onyx Architects 2018).
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-64 Environmental Checklist Form
Ministerial actions related to the Public Alley
The proposed subterranean parking layout proposed by the Applicant requires the approval of a
number of ministerial actions relating to the Project’s zoning. Other Project ministerial actions are
more fully described in Section 2.4 of this document. The following related ministerial actions will
be analyzed to determine consistency with local plans and policies:
Relinquishment of Existing City Easement over the Public Alley. An existing
easement for a public alley currently exists within the Project site and would need to be
relinquished by the City to allow for the Project’s construction of a subterranean parking
structure and other Project improvements within the existing easement area.
New Access Easement. A new surface access easement conveying public access rights
through the public alley would be dedicated to the City by the Applicant as a condition of
approval.
4.11.3 MITIGATION MEASURES
Project implementation would not result in significant impacts related to land use and planning;
therefore, no mitigation measures are required.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-65 Environmental Checklist Form
4.12 MINERAL RESOURCES Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
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?
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?
4.12.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Mineral resources are naturally occurring chemicals, elements, or compounds formed by
inorganic processes or organic substances. These resources include bituminous rock, gold, sand,
gravel, clay, crushed stone, limestone, diatomite, salt, borate, potash, geothermal, petroleum, and
natural gas resources. Construction aggregate refers to sand and gravel (natural aggregates) and
crushed stone (rock) that are used as Portland-cement-concrete aggregate, asphaltic-concrete
aggregate, road base, railroad ballast, riprap, fill, and the production of other construction
materials.
The State Mining and Geology Board classifies lands in California based on the availability of
mineral resources. The Project site is located within an MRZ-4 zone, meaning there is insufficient
data to assign any other MRZ designation. However, as discussed in the Resource Sustainability
Element of the Arcadia General Plan, the only area available for future mining activity is the
Livingston-Graham sand and gravel extraction site, which is located approximately 2.5 miles
south of the Project site and most of which occurs in the adjacent City of Irwindale (Arcadia
2010a). Review of maps prepared by the California Department of Conservation, Division of Oil,
Gas, and Geothermal Resources shows that there are no gas, geothermal fields, or active wells
in or near the Project site (Arcadia 2010b).
4.12.2 PROJECT IMPACTS
Regulatory Requirements
None required.
Impact Discussion
a) Would the project result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that
would be of value to the region and the residents of the state?
b) Would the project 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?
No Impact. Based on review of the Resource Sustainability Element of the City of Arcadia
General Plan, the Project site does not contain known State or locally designated mineral
resources or locally important mineral resource recovery sites (Arcadia 2010a). Project
implementation would not result in adverse impacts to any significant mineral resource.
No mitigation is required.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-66 Environmental Checklist Form
4.12.3 MITIGATION MEASURES
Project implementation would not result in significant impacts related to mineral resources;
therefore, no mitigation measures are required.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-67 Environmental Checklist Form
4.13 NOISE Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project result in:
a) Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent
increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the
project in excess of standards established in the local
general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable
standards of other agencies?
b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or
groundborne noise levels?
c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private
airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan
has not been adopted, within two miles of a public
airport or public use airport, would the project expose
people residing or working in the project area to
excessive noise levels?
4.13.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Overview of Noise and Vibration
Several rating scales (or noise “metrics”) are used to analyze the effects of noise on a community.
These scales include the equivalent noise level (Leq) and the community noise equivalent level
(CNEL). Average noise levels over a period of minutes or hours are usually expressed as
A-weighted decibels (dBA) Leq, which is the equivalent noise level for that period of time. The
period of time averaging may be specified; where Leq(3) would be a 3-hour average. When no
period is specified, a 1-hour average is assumed. Noise of short duration (e.g., substantially less
than the averaging period) is averaged into ambient noise during the period of interest. Thus, a
loud noise lasting several seconds or a few minutes may have minimal effect on the measured
sound level averaged over a one-hour period.
To evaluate community noise impacts, CNEL was developed to account for human sensitivity to
evening and nighttime noise. CNEL separates a 24-hour day into three periods: daytime (7:00 AM
to 7:00 PM), evening (7:00 PM to 10:00 PM), and nighttime (10:00 PM to 7:00 AM). The evening
sound levels are assigned a 5-dBA penalty, and the nighttime sound levels are assigned a 10-
dBA penalty prior to averaging them with daytime hourly sound levels. Several statistical
descriptors are also often used to describe noise, including Lmax and Lmin, which are the highest
and lowest A-weighted sound levels that occur during a noise event, respectively.
Vibration amplitudes are commonly expressed in peak particle velocity (PPV) or root-mean
square (RMS) vibration velocity. PPV is defined as the maximum instantaneous positive or
negative peak of a vibration signal. PPV and RMS vibration velocity are normally described in
inches per second. Similar to airborne sound, vibration velocity can be expressed in decibel
notation as vibration decibels (VdB).
Existing Conditions
To evaluate the existing noise environment, noise level measurements were collected at three
locations on June 3 and 4, 2019. A total of three noise measurements were collected for the
Project. Two 20-minute noise measurements were recorded at the eastern and southern Project
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-68 Environmental Checklist Form
boundaries. The short-term measurement results are provided in Table 23, Summary of Short-
term Ambient Noise Level Measurements, and include the energy average (Leq), maximum noise
level (Lmax), and minimum noise level (Lmin) values. The complete noise monitoring results are
included in Appendix G (Noise Calculations, Psomas 2019c).
TABLE 23
SUMMARY OF SHORT-TERM AMBIENT NOISE LEVEL MEASUREMENTS
Measurement
Number Location Time
Noise Levels (dBA) Primary
Noise Source Leq Lmax Lmin
1 Southern Project Boundary 12:00 pm 68 78 52 Roadway traffic noise
2 Eastern Project Boundary 12:43 pm 61 81 45
Roadway traffic,
parking lot activity and
Metro train noise
dBA: A-weighted decibels; Leq: equivalent noise level; Lmax: maximum noise level; Lmin: minimum noise level.
As shown in Table 23, the average measured noise level at the Project’s southern boundary was
68 dBA Leq. Traffic along Huntington Drive is the primary noise source in the Project area. On the
eastern boundary of the Project site, the average measured noise level was 61 dBA Leq. In
addition to traffic noise on surrounding streets, intermittent noise is also generated by Metro trains
50 feet east of the Project site and parking lot activities.
A third measurement was collected for a 24-hour duration along the Project’s northern boundary
(adjacent to Wheeler Avenue) to record noise levels at the location of the northern proposed
residential building, Building 2. Extended monitoring was conducted at this location to assess
noise exposure at the proposed residential uses adjacent to Wheeler Avenue, which is also in
close proximity to the Gold Line alignment. As shown in Exhibit 14, Hourly Noise Levels at
Northern Project Boundary, average daytime noise levels in the study area range from 48 to
74 dBA Leq. The 24-hour weighted noise level at this location is 66 dBA CNEL.
Sensitive Receptors
Noise-sensitive receptors are generally considered to be humans who are engaged in activities
that may be subject to the stress of significant interference from noise. These would include future
residents within the Project site that may be sleeping, resting, or involved in other activities that
are not conducive to loud noise.
City of Arcadia Noise Element and Municipal Code
The City of Arcadia has established guidelines and standards in the General Plan and the
Municipal Code.
General Plan Noise Element
The City of Arcadia is affected by several different sources of noise, including automobile traffic,
Santa Anita Race Track events and other sports events, commercial activity, periodic nuisances
such as construction, and other sources typical of urban and suburban areas. The Noise Element
of the General Plan is intended to identify these sources and provide objectives and policies that
ensure that noise from these sources does not create an unacceptable noise environment
(Arcadia 2010).
(06/26/2019 SAK) R:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\Ex_Hourly Noise Levels.pdfD:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\MND\ex_Hourly_Nopise_Levels_20190626.aiExhibit 14Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use ProjectHourly Noise LevelsDIAGRAM-1HOURLY NOISE LEVELS AT NORTHERN PROJECT BOUNDARY ALONG WHEELER AVENUEϬϮϬϰϬϲϬϴϬϭϬϬϭϮϬEŽŝƐĞ>ĞǀĞů;ĚͿDŝŶŝŵƵŵ>ĞƋDĂdžŝŵƵŵ
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-69 Environmental Checklist Form
The Noise Element of the General Plan acknowledges that noise from major roadways may affect
sensitive receptors and identifies roadways proximate to the Project site such as Santa Anita
Avenue and Huntington Drive. The following policy measures are applicable to the Project:
Policy N-1: Effective incorporation of noise considerations into land use
planning decisions.
Policy N-1.1 Consider noise impacts as part of the development review
process relative to residential and other noise-sensitive land
uses.
Policy N-1.2 Ensure that acceptable noise levels are maintained near
schools, hospitals, and other sensitive areas in accordance with
the Noise/Land Use Compatibility Guidelines in Figure N-4,
Table N-2 Interior/Exterior Noise Standards (of the Noise
Element), and the City’s noise ordinance.
Policy N-1.3 New commercial and industrial developments located adjacent
to residential areas and identified noise-sensitive uses shall
demonstrate reduction of potential noise impacts on
neighboring sensitive uses to acceptable levels.
Policy N-1.4 Discourage new development of residential or other noise-
sensitive uses in noise-impacted areas unless effective
mitigation measures are incorporated into the project design to
reduce noise levels that comply with Noise/Land Use
Compatibility Guidelines in Figure N-4 and Table N-2
Interior/Exterior Noise Standards (in the Noise Element).
Policy N-1.5 Require that proposed projects that have the potential to result
in noise impacts include an acoustical analysis and appropriate
mitigation to achieve the interior and exterior noise standards
indicated in Table N-2 Interior/Exterior Noise Standards. (in the
Noise Element)
Policy N-3: Limited intrusion of point-source noise within residential
neighborhoods and on noise-sensitive uses.
Policy N-3.1 Enforce the noise ordinance to protect residents and noise-
sensitive uses from excessive noise levels associated with
stationary sources.
Policy N-3.3 Explore requiring the use of noise suppression devices and
techniques on all exterior noise sources (construction
operations, pumps, fans, leaf blowers) to lower exterior noise to
levels that are compatible with adjacent land uses.
Policy N-3.4 Require any new mixed-use structures to be designed to
minimize the transfer of noise and vibration from commercial or
industrial to residential and other noise-sensitive uses.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-70 Environmental Checklist Form
Policy N-3.5 Require noise created by new non-transportation noise sources
to be mitigated so as not to exceed acceptable interior and
exterior noise level standards identified in this Noise Element.
The Noise Element contains guidelines for noise-compatible land use for long-term
operations, as shown in Table 24, City of Arcadia Guidelines for Noise Compatible Land
Uses.
TABLE 24
CITY OF ARCADIA GUIDELINES FOR NOISE COMPATIBLE LAND USES
Land Use Category
Community Noise Exposure
Ldn or CNEL, DBA
55 60 65 70 75 80 85
Estate Residential, Very Low Density
Residential, Low Density Residential (1)
Medium Density Residential
High Density Residential, Mixed Use,
Downtown Mixed Use
Commercial, Regional Commercial,
Horse Racing
Commercial/Light Industrial
Public/Institutional
Open Space – Outdoor Recreation
Open Space - Resource Protection
NORMALLY ACCEPTABLE
Specified land use is satisfactory, based upon the assumption
that any buildings involved are of normal conventional
construction, without any special noise insulation requirement.
NORMALLY UNACCEPTABLE
New construction or development generally is
discouraged. If new construction or development does
proceed, a detailed analysis of noise reduction requirements
must be made and incorporated into project design.
CONDITIONALLY ACCEPTABLE
New construction or development should be undertaken after an
analysis of the noise reduction requirements is made and
needed noise insulation features included in the design.
CLEARLY UNACCEPTABLE
New construction or development should generally not be
undertaken, unless it can be demonstrated that an interior level
of 45 dBA can be achieved.
Source: Arcadia 2010.
While the compatibility guidelines in Table 24 above show the degree of noise exposure that is
considered acceptable, the Noise Element also provides interior and exterior noise standards for
different land uses as shown in Table 25, City of Arcadia Interior/Exterior Noise Standards.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-71 Environmental Checklist Form
TABLE 25
CITY OF ARCADIA INTERIOR/EXTERIOR NOISE STANDARDS
Land Use Maximum Exterior Noise Level Maximum Interior Noise Level
Residential: Rural, Single-Family, and
Multifamily
65 dBA CNEL 45 dBA CNEL
Schools
Classroom
Playground
70 dBA CNEL
70 dBA CNEL
45 dBA Leq
-
Libraries - 45 dBA Leq
Hospitals/Convalescent Facilities
Sleeping Areas
Living Areas
Reception, Office
65 dBA CNEL
-
-
45 dBA CNEL
50 dBA CNEL
50 dBA CNEL
Hotels/Motels
Sleeping Areas
Reception, Office
-
-
45 dBA CNEL
50 dBA Leq
Places of Worship 65 dBA CNEL 45 dBA Leq
Open Space/Recreation
Wildlife Habitat
Passive Recreation Areas
Active Recreation Areas
60 dBA CNEL
65 dBA CNEL
70 dBA CNEL
-
-
-
Commercial and Business Park
Office
Restaurant, Retail, Service
Warehousing/Industrial
-
-
-
55 dBA Leq
65 dBA Leq
70 dBA Leq
dBA: A-weighted decibels; Leq: equivalent noise level; CNEL: Community Noise Equivalent Level.
Source: Arcadia Noise Element of the General Plan, Table N-2 (Arcadia2010).
Municipal Code
The City’s Municipal Code (Article IV, Chapter 6, Noise Regulations) is the City’s Noise
Ordinance. As stated in the Municipal Code, “It is hereby declared to be the policy of the City to
prohibit unnecessary, excessive, and annoying noises from all sources subject to its police power.
At certain levels, noises are detrimental to the health and welfare of the citizenry, and, in the public
interests, such noise levels shall be systematically proscribed.” The following sections of the
Noise Ordinance are applicable to the proposed Project:
Article IV, Chapter 6 – Noise Regulations, Part 1.
4610.3. – Noise Limits.
(a) It shall be unlawful for any person within the City of Arcadia to produce or cause
or allow to be produced sound or noise which is amplified by the use of sound
amplifying equipment and which amplified noise or sound is received on property
occupied by another person within the designated region, in excess of the following
levels (shown in Table 26), except as expressly provided otherwise or exempted
hereinafter:
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-72 Environmental Checklist Form
TABLE 26
STATIONARY SOURCE NOISE LIMITS
Region
Day 7:00 AM
to 10:00 PM
Night 10:00 PM
to 7:00 AM
Residential Zone 55 dBA 50 dBA
Commercial Zone 65 dBA 60 dBA
Industrial Zone 70 dBA 70 dBA
dBA: A-weighted decibels.
Source: Arcadia Municipal Code, Chapter 6.
Article IV, Part 6. – Nighttime Construction
4261. – Prohibited Hours Defined
The term "prohibited hours" as used in this Part shall mean any time after the hour
of 6:00 PM of any weekday; any time before the hour of 7:00 AM of any weekday;
any time after the hour of 5:00 PM of any Saturday; any time before the hour of
8:00 AM of any Saturday; any time on any Sunday; and any time on any of the
following holidays: New Year's Day; Memorial Day; Independence Day; Labor Day;
Veteran's Day; Thanksgiving Day; and Christmas Day, provided that if in any
calendar year any such holiday falls on a Sunday, the following Monday shall
constitute the holiday.
4262. – Construction Limited
Unless a permit to do so has first been obtained as provided in Section 4263, no
person shall during prohibited hours engage in any earth excavation, land fill or
earth moving operation or in the construction of any portion of a building or
structure, nor shall any person during prohibited hours use or operate any truck,
tractor, crane, rig or any mechanical equipment of any kind in connection with, in
the performance of or in furtherance of any of the foregoing.
4630.2. – Noise. Gardening and Landscaping
No person shall operate any mechanical equipment related to the gardening and/or
landscaping of any property within a residential zone other than from seven (7) AM
to seven (7) PM, Monday through Saturday, and from nine (9) AM to five (5) PM
on Sundays within all residential zones; provided, however, that use of mechanical
equipment for tree trimming on Sundays shall be prohibited. (Added by Ord. 2246
adopted 10-7-08)
4.13.2 PROJECT IMPACTS
Regulatory Requirements
RR NOI-1 Prior to issuance of grading permits, the project shall submit a noise control plan
that demonstrates, to the satisfaction of the City of Arcadia, that project
construction would comply with the following and reduce noise levels to levels
consistent with the City’s Noise Ordinance:
All internal combustion–driven equipment would be equipped with mufflers
that are in good condition and appropriate for the equipment.
Construction noise reduction methods such as shutting off idling
equipment, maximizing the distance between construction equipment
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-73 Environmental Checklist Form
staging areas and occupied residential areas, and use of electric air
compressors and similar power tools, rather than diesel equipment, shall
be used where feasible. Unattended construction vehicles shall not idle for
more than 5 minutes when located within 300 feet of any residential
properties.
Noise attenuation measures, which may include, but are not limited to,
temporary noise barriers or noise blankets around stationary construction
noise sources, would be implemented for neighboring properties when
requested and directed to do so by the City. Temporary sound barriers can
be effective for noise mitigation, sound barriers must have a density of at
least 4 pounds per square foot [i.e., ¾ inch plywood] or a Sound
Transmission Class rating of 25 or greater with no holes, gaps, or cracks
such as plywood or construction-grade sound blankets or curtains.
Temporary sound barriers shall be located along the perimeter of the
Project site boundary where there are no masonry buildings and are shown
in Exhibit 15. These sound barriers shall have a minimum height of 10 feet.
Site access shall consist of a movable barrier.
During construction, stockpiling and vehicle staging areas shall be located
as far as practical from noise sensitive receptors.
Construction hours, allowable workdays, and the phone number of the job
superintendent shall be clearly posted at all construction entrances to allow
surrounding property owners and residents to contact the job
superintendent if necessary. In the event the City receives a complaint,
appropriate corrective actions shall be implemented.
Two weeks prior to the beginning of demolition, notification must be
provided to properties within 150 feet of the project site disclosing the
construction schedule, including the various types of activities that would
be occurring throughout the duration of the construction period.
The notification provided to neighboring properties shall give a contact
phone number for a “construction liaison” contact person to direct any
questions or complaints during project construction. All complaints shall be
responded to in a method deemed satisfactory by the City of Arcadia. The
construction liaison would determine the cause of the noise complaints;
and institute reasonable measures to correct the problem in consultation
with the City of Arcadia. The phone number of the construction liaison
should be conspicuously posted at the construction site.
Methods for simultaneously implementing MM NOI-1.
Impact Discussion
a) Would the project result in generation of a substantial temporary or permanent
increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards
established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of
other agencies?
Project-Related Temporary Noise Increases
Less than Significant Impact. Temporary noise increases associated with the Project would
occur during the construction phase. Article IV, Chapter 6, Noise Regulations of the Municipal
Code is the City’s Noise Ordinance, as described above. Construction activities are anticipated
Exhibit 15
(Rev: 11-13-2019 RMB) R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\Graphics\ex_TempConstructionNoiseBarrierMap.pdf
Los
A
n
g
e
l
e
s
M
e
t
r
o
G
o
l
d
L
i
n
e
Text
Huntington Dr
S 1st AveIndi
a
n
a
S
t
Wheeler Ave
N 1st Ave5773010007
577301000857730100185773010019577301002057730100215773010901
D:\Projects\3NWI\010100\MXD\ex_TempNoiseBarrierMap_20191113.mxd100 0 10050Feet²
Aerial Source: LAR-IAC 2014
Temporary Construction Noise Barrier Map
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Project Site
Potential Construction Site Access Points
Temporary Sound Barrier
The City of Arccada Development Services Department may appprove minor deviations from these locations, if requested by the Applicant, to allow for construction access areas and to account for other site-specific requirements during construction.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-74 Environmental Checklist Form
to involve demolition of existing structures and pavement, grading and excavation for parking,
utilities and building foundations, and building construction. Construction activities are anticipated
to start in 2020 and finish in 2022. All construction activities would occur within the hours specified
by the Noise Ordinance.
It is estimated that a total of approximately 6,000 tons of debris would be exported off site during
demolition activities. It is also anticipated that 44,420 cubic yards of soil would be removed from
the site. During the demolition and grading activities, trucks are expected to enter and leave the
Project site on a regular basis during working hours. The number of truck trips traveling along the
City-designated truck routes would vary daily depending on the nature of the construction activity
at the site. Demolition debris removal from the Project site would generate an estimated 680 trips
over a 2-month demolition phase. On average it is anticipated that 15 truck hauls per day or
approximately 2 trips per hour would occur during that phase. Excavation is anticipated to
generate a total of 6,346 total truck trips over an 8-month excavation period with an average of
36 truck trips per day or 4 trips per work hour. The addition of 2 to 4 haul truck trips per hour would
not result in a substantial change in noise levels along local truck routes. Thus, this impact would
be less than significant.
In typical construction projects (such as the proposed Project), demolition and grading activities
generate the highest noise levels since these phases involve use of the largest equipment. During
demolition and grading, persons in the immediate vicinity of the construction site would
experience short-term noise impacts related to the operation of heavy construction equipment
such as bulldozers, hoe-rams, excavators, and dump trucks. Noise levels would fluctuate
depending on equipment type, duration of use, and distance between noise source and receiver.
The operation of heavy equipment may occur adjacent to existing commercial buildings.
Local commercial uses would be subject to elevated noise levels due to the operation of Project-
related construction equipment. Construction activities are carried out in discrete steps, each of
which has its own mix of equipment and, consequently, its own noise characteristics. These
various sequential phases would change the character of the noise levels surrounding the
construction site as work progresses. Construction noise levels reported in the USEPA’s Noise
from Construction Equipment and Operations, Building Equipment, and Home Appliances were
used to estimate future construction noise levels for the Project (USEPA 1971). Typically, the
estimated construction noise levels are governed primarily by equipment that produces the
highest noise levels. Construction noise levels for each generalized construction phase (ground-
clearing/demolition, excavation, foundation construction, building construction, paving, and site
cleanup) are based on a typical construction equipment mix for an industrial project and do not
include use of atypical, very loud, and vibration-intensive equipment (e.g., pile drivers).
The degree to which noise-sensitive receptors are affected by construction activities depends
heavily on their proximity. Estimated noise levels attributable to the development of the proposed
Project are shown in Table 27, Construction Noise Levels at Noise Sensitive Uses, and
calculations are included in Appendix G, Noise Calculations (Psomas 2019c).
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-75 Environmental Checklist Form
TABLE 27
CONSTRUCTION NOISE LEVELS AT NOISE-SENSITIVE USES
Construction Phase
Noise Levels (Leq dBA)
Office Uses to the
North of the Project
Site
Commercial Uses to
the West of the
Project Site
Commercial Uses to
the South of the
Project Site
Retail Use to the East
of the Project Site
Max
(60 ft)
Avg
(200 ft)
Max
(10 ft)
Avg
(160 ft)
Max
(90 ft)
Avg
(270 ft)
Max
(10 ft)
Avg
(160 ft)
Ground Clearing/Demolition 81 71 97 73 78 68 97 73
Excavation 86 76 102 78 83 73 102 78
Foundation Construction 79 69 95 71 76 66 95 71
Building Construction 79 69 95 71 76 66 95 71
Paving and Site Cleanup 86 76 102 78 83 73 102 78
Leq dBA: Average noise energy level; Max: maximum; avg: average; ft: feet
Note: Noise levels from construction activities do not take into account attenuation provided by intervening structures.
Source: USEPA 1971.
Table 27 shows both the maximum and average noise levels for construction equipment.
Maximum noise levels represent the noise levels from construction equipment occurring nearest
to the noise sensitive use/receptor. Average noise levels represent the noise exposure to
sensitive uses based on the distance to the center of the Project site. Noise levels from general
Project-related construction activities would range from 76 to 102 dBA Leq for the maximum noise
levels and 66 to 78 dBA Leq for the average noise levels. Noise level reductions from existing
masonry walls were not included. Although no sensitive receptors occur near the Project
construction site, some construction activities would result in an increase in the ambient noise
levels for nearby properties including adjacent commercial and office properties.
Construction of the proposed Project would be implemented to comply with Municipal Code
Section 4261, which establishes restrictions related to construction activities. With the
incorporation of these restrictions on construction noise generation to the least noise sensitive
portions of the day per Municipal Code Section 4261 and with implementation of RR NOI-1
requiring the development and implementation of a noise control plan to attenuate noise levels to
levels consistent with the City’s Municipal Code and Noise Element, the Project would result in
less than significant noise impacts.
Permanent Project-Related Noise Increases
Permanent sources of noise associated with the Project involves vehicle trips traveling to and
from the Project site, property maintenance activities (landscaping) and mechanical sources of
noise.
Noise Generated by Project Traffic
Less than Significant Impact. In community noise assessments, a 3-dBA increase is considered
“barely perceptible,” and increases over 5 dBA are generally considered “readily perceptible”
(Caltrans 2009). Operation of the proposed Project would displace traffic generated by existing
uses. The net difference between vehicle trips generated by existing and Project uses is an
increase of 856 trips per day and 35 trips during the AM peak hour and 65 additional trips in the
PM peak hour. The corresponding increase in off-site traffic noise would range from 0.0 to 2.5
dBA for the analyzed roadway segments proximate to the Project site. Table 28, Existing and
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-76 Environmental Checklist Form
Projected Traffic Noise Levels, depict the noise increase from the proposed Project. Thus, the
traffic noise increases are below the 5 dBA noise increase threshold and would also not be
perceptible or substantial. The impact on traffic noise levels would be less than significant and no
mitigation is required.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-77 Discussion of Environmental Checklist TABLE 28 EXISTING AND PROJECTED TRAFFIC NOISE LEVELS Roadways Existing Traffic Future No Project Future No Project Project Noise Increase Cumulative Plus Project Noise Increase ADT dBA CNEL ADT dBA CNEL ADT dBA CNEL dBA CNEL dBA CNEL Wheeler Ave. Santa Anita Ave. to 1st Ave. 1,950 61.1 2,200 61.6 2,380 62.0 0.3 0.9 1st Ave. to Indiana St. 910 57.8 910 57.8 1,600 60.3 2.5 2.5 Huntington Dr. Santa Anita Ave. to 1st Ave. 21,960 72.7 23,140 72.9 23,360 73.0 0.0 0.3 1st Ave. to 2nd Ave. 22,980 72.9 24,090 73.1 24,260 73.1 0.0 0.2 Santa Anita Ave. Santa Clara St to Wheeler Ave. 16,480 71.5 17,210 71.7 17,350 71.7 0.0 0.2 Wheeler Ave. to Huntington Dr. 16,170 71.4 16,630 71.6 16,640 71.6 0.0 0.1 1st Ave. Santa Clara St to Wheeler Ave. 2,560 63.4 2,590 63.5 2,620 63.5 0.1 0.1 Wheeler Ave. to Huntington Dr. 4,580 66.0 4,920 66.3 5,400 66.7 0.4 0.7 ADT: average daily traffic volume. CNEL: Community Noise Equivalent Level Note: Noise levels calculated from the FHWA’s RD-77-108 Traffic Noise Prediction Model (Calculations can be found in Attachment B of this report). Source: Psomas 2019e.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-78 Discussion of Environmental Checklist
Noise Generated by On-Site Sources
Less than Significant Impact. The primary on-site noise sources generated by operation of the
proposed Project would be heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) equipment,
landscape maintenance, and trash collection. Noise generated by HVAC equipment is regulated
by the Municipal Code, Section 4610.3.c which requires that noise exposure at offsite residential
uses not exceed 55 dBA.
For maintenance and landscaping activities, Section 4630.2 of the Municipal Code limits activities
to the hours of 7:00 AM and 7:00 PM Monday through Saturday, and from nine (9) AM to five (5)
PM on Sundays within all residential zones; provided, however, that use of mechanical equipment
for tree trimming on Sundays shall be prohibited. Activities associated with maintenance of
property would comply with Section 4630.2 of the City’s Municipal Code.
Noise and Land Use Compatibility
Exterior Noise
Less than Significant Impact. The City of Arcadia noise and land use compatibility standards
are presented in the General Plan Noise Element. These noise standards provide a basis to
control and abate environmental noise and protect citizens from excessive exposure. The Noise
Element includes the noise compatibility guidelines from the State General Plan Guidelines, as
shown in Table 24 above. These guidelines are used to evaluate the proposed Project’s
compatibility with the ambient noise level.
Noise exposure at the Project site is primarily from vehicle traffic along Santa Anita Avenue and
Huntington Drive. The existing noise level on the Project site is 66 dBA CNEL at the Project’s
northern property line (along Wheeler Avenue) near where one of the proposed residential
buildings would be located. A noise level of 66 dBA CNEL would be in the Conditionally
Acceptable range (65 dBA CNEL - 70 dBA CNEL) for land use compatibility of medium density
residential land uses (Table 24). Modern buildings provide at least 25 dBA exterior to interior noise
attenuation. Interior noise levels would be 41 dBA CNEL which would comply with the State of
California’s Title 24 interior noise standard of 45 dBA CNEL.
The southern facade of the proposed retail Project structures would receive noise exposure from
traffic along Huntington Drive. The future noise level at the western facade of the proposed
buildings is estimated at 66 dBA CNEL. A noise level of 66 dBA CNEL would be in the Generally
Acceptable range (55 dBA CNEL - 70 dBA CNEL) for land use compatibility of downtown mixed
uses (Table 3). The western boundary of the Project site is adjacent or shielded from noise along
Santa Anita Boulevard by existing buildings. The eastern boundary of the Project site is adjacent
to a small parking lot and the Gold Line alignment. Noise generated by the Gold Line was found
to comply with the noise exposure standards of 65 dBA or less for residential uses (Los Angeles
to Pasadena Metro Blue Line Construction Authority/ Metro Gold Line Foothill Extension
Construction Authority 2007).
The Project would also develop rooftop exterior uses. The rooftop uses are located on the
southern side of the Project site of the proposed retail building. The rooftop uses would be
shielded by an existing perimeter wall and the approximate distance of 60 feet from the traffic
along Huntington Drive would reduce noise levels to within the normally acceptable exterior noise
standards (less than 70 dBA CNEL) for the proposed rooftop uses. As such, a less than significant
impact would be associated with noise compatibility for the proposed exterior uses; and no
mitigation is required.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-79 Discussion of Environmental Checklist
Interior Noise
Less than Significant Impact. Interior noise levels for Project structures are also assessed to
determine whether the Project would comply with the State of California’s interior noise standard
for residential uses. Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations, also known as the California
Building Standards Code, establishes building standards applicable to all occupancies throughout
the State. As shown previously in Table 25, the Noise Element of the General Plan establishes a
maximum interior noise level for residential uses of 45 dBA Leq. Exterior noise levels were
calculated at 66 dBA CNEL on the northern property line. Noise levels are generally attenuated
by a minimum of 25 dBA from exterior to interior conditions with windows closed based on
standard building construction. A 25 dBA reduction from the 66 dBA CNEL exterior noise levels
would result in a maximum of 41 dBA CNEL interior noise level, which is below the City’s interior
noise limit of 45 dBA CNEL for residential uses. A less than significant impact would occur.
b) Would the project result in generation of excessive groundborne vibration or
groundborne noise levels?
Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation. There are no applicable City standards for
structural damage from vibration. The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) vibration
damage potential guideline thresholds are shown in Table 29, Vibration Damage Threshold
Criteria.
TABLE 29
VIBRATION DAMAGE THRESHOLD CRITERIA
Structure and Condition
Maximum ppv (in/sec)
Transient Sources
Continuous/Frequent
Intermittent Sources
Extremely fragile historic buildings, ruins, ancient monuments 0.12 0.08
Fragile buildings 0.20 0.10
Historic and some old buildings 0.50 0.25
Older residential structures 0.50 0.30
New residential structures 1.00 0.50
Modern industrial/commercial buildings 2.00 0.50
ppv: peak particle velocity; in/sec: inch(es) per second.
Note: Transient sources create a single isolated vibration event, such as blasting or drop balls. Continuous/frequent intermittent
sources include impact pile drivers, pogo-stick compactors, crack-and-seat equipment, vibratory pile drivers, and vibratory
compaction equipment.
Source: Caltrans 2013.
The nearest structures to the Project site are the commercial uses located approximately adjacent
to the Project’s eastern and western property lines. In terms of classifications in Table 29, the
structures to the east and west are conservatively considered “Modern industrial/commercial
buildings” for purposes of this analysis. Therefore, the criterion for a significant impact for
continuous/frequency intermittent sources is 0.5 peak particle velocity (ppv) inches per second
for commercial buildings. Similar to structural damage from vibration, there are no applicable
standards in the City’s Municipal Code for human annoyance from construction vibration. The
Caltrans vibration annoyance potential guideline thresholds are shown in Table 30, Vibration
Annoyance Criteria. Based on the guidance in Table 30, the “strongly perceptible” vibration level
of 0.9 ppv in/sec is used in this analysis as the threshold for a potentially significant vibration
impact for human annoyance.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-80 Discussion of Environmental Checklist
TABLE 30
VIBRATION ANNOYANCE CRITERIA
Average Human Response ppv (in/sec)
Severe 2.000
Strongly perceptible 0.900
Distinctly perceptible 0.240
Barely perceptible 0.035
ppv: peak particle velocity; in/sec: inch(es) per second.
Source: Caltrans 2013.
Conventional construction equipment would be used for demolition and grading activities, with no
pile driving or blasting equipment. Table 31, Vibration Levels for Construction Equipment
summarizes typical vibration levels measured during construction activities for various vibration-
inducing equipment at a distance of 25 feet.
TABLE 31
VIBRATION LEVELS FOR CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT
Equipment ppv at 25 ft (in/sec)
Vibratory roller 0.210
Large bulldozer 0.089
Caisson drilling 0.089
Loaded trucks 0.076
Jackhammer 0.035
Small bulldozer 0.003
ppv: peak particle velocity; ft: feet; in/sec: inches per second.
Source: Caltrans 2013; Federal Transit Administration 2006.
Demolition, grading, and construction would occur up to the property lines and, as noted above,
off-site land uses are relatively close to the property lines. Table 32, Vibration Annoyance Criteria
at Sensitive Uses, shows the vibration annoyance criteria from construction-generated vibration
activities proposed at the Project site. Table 32, Vibration Annoyance Criteria at Sensitive Uses,
shows the ppv relative to uses proximate to the Project site.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-81 Discussion of Environmental Checklist
TABLE 32
VIBRATION ANNOYANCE CRITERIA AT SENSITIVE USES
Equipment
Vibration Levels (ppv)
Office Uses to the
North of the
Project Site
Commercial Uses
to the West of the
Project Site
Commercial Uses
to the South of the
Project Site
Retail Use to the
East of the
Project Site
(ppv @ 60 ft) (ppv @ 10 ft) (ppv @ 90 ft) (ppv @ 10 ft)
Small bulldozer 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01
Jackhammer 0.01 0.14 0.01 0.14
Loaded trucks 0.02 0.30 0.01 0.30
Criteria 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9
Exceeds Criteria? No No No No
ppv: peak particle velocity; Max: maximum; avg: average; ft: feet
Note: Calculations can be found in Appendix G).
Source: USEPA 1971
As shown in Table 32, ppv would not exceed the criteria threshold when construction activities
occur under maximum (e.g., closest to the receptor) exposure conditions. These vibration levels
represent conditions when construction activities occur closest to receptor locations.
Construction-related vibration would be substantially less under average conditions when
construction activities are located further away. Because vibration levels would be below the
significance thresholds, vibration generated by the Project’s construction equipment would not be
expected to generate strongly perceptible levels of vibration at the nearest uses and would result
in less than significant vibration impacts related to vibration annoyance.
Table 33, Structural Damage Criteria at Sensitive Uses, shows the peak particle velocity levels
(ppv) relative to structural damage to sensitive uses from vibration activities.
TABLE 33
STRUCTURAL DAMAGE CRITERIA AT SENSITIVE USES
Equipment
Vibration Levels (ppv)
Office Uses to the
North of the
Project Site
Commercial Uses
to the West of the
Project Site
Commercial Uses
to the South of the
Project Site
Commercial Use to
the East of the
Project Site
(ppv @ 60 ft) (ppv @ 5 ft) (ppv @ 90 ft) (ppv @ 5 ft)
Small bulldozer 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.03
Jackhammer 0.01 0.39 0.01 0.39
Loaded trucks 0.02 0.85 0.01 0.85
Criteria 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.25
Exceeds Criteria? No Yes No Yes
ppv: peak particle velocity; Max: maximum; avg: average; ft: feet
Source: USEPA 1971 (Calculations can be found in Attachment B).2 Jackhammering assumed to maintain a clearance of at least
5 feet from adjacent offsite buildings.
Note: Calculations can be found in Appendix G).
Source: USEPA 1971
As shown in Table 33, all ppv levels would be below the structural damage threshold at adjacent
off-site structures with the exception of loaded trucks. At this point in the planning process, the
types of construction equipment that would be used are not well known. MM NOI-1 would reduce
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-82 Discussion of Environmental Checklist
vibration generated by construction equipment, including loaded trucks, to levels that would avoid
cosmetic structural damage to off-site buildings. As such, with implementation of MM NOI-1,
potential impacts associated with cosmetic structural damage would be less than significant.
c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan
or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or
public use airport, would the Project expose people residing or working in the project
area to excessive noise levels?
No Impact. The Project site is not located within 2.0 miles of an airport. There are no private
airstrips in the Project area or in the City. The nearest public airport is the San Gabriel Valley
Airport, which is located 3.5 miles south of the Project site. The Project site is not located within
the planning areas (including the Runway Protection Zones, Safety Compatibility Zones, and
Airport Impact Zones) for these airports. Therefore, the Project would not expose people residing
or working in the Project area to excessive noise levels from airport operations. No impact related
to excessive airport noise levels would occur and no mitigation is required.
4.13.3 MITIGATION MEASURES
MM NOI-1 The Developer shall require that all construction contractors restrict the operation
of the following construction equipment to beyond the following distances from off-
site buildings: (1) vibratory rollers and large bulldozers – 25 feet, and (2) loaded
trucks and other large equipment (vehicle weight greater than 25,000 lbs.) – 15
feet. Any activities occurring within 5 feet of existing property line shall use non-
vibration intensive methods such as use of concrete saws, universal processors,
and/or expansive agents for demolition.
Implementation of MM NOI-1 would reduce impacts related to vibration to a less than significant
level during Project construction.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-83 Discussion of Environmental Checklist
4.14 POPULATION AND HOUSING Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an
area, either directly (for example, by proposing new
homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example,
through the extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or
housing, necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
4.14.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
As of January 2018, the City of Arcadia had a population of 57,704 persons and a housing stock
consisting of 21,070 dwelling units (DOF 2018). The California Employment Development
Department estimates the February 2019 labor force for the City of Arcadia at 30,100 persons, of
which 1,000 persons (3.4 percent) are unemployed (EDD 2019). The Project site includes five
structures, which contain an automobile repair facility (Dan’s Auto Care), a party supply business
(Arcadia Party Rentals), one office (Moregain Capital Group), and one vacant building.
4.14.2 PROJECT IMPACTS
Regulatory Requirements
None required.
Impact Discussion
a) Would the project induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area,
either directly (for example, by proposing new units and businesses) or indirectly
(for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
Less Than Significant Impact. The Project is not anticipated to generate substantial unplanned
population growth. Using an estimate of 2.89 persons per dwelling unit for residential development
(DOF 2018), the 139-unit Project could generate approximately 402 residents. It is unlikely that
all the Project residents would be new residents to the City as some current City residents would
likely relocate to the Project site. However, for purposes of providing a conservative analysis, it is
assumed that the Project would result in a net increase of 402 residents to the City. This additional
population would represent approximately 0.70 percent of the current City of Arcadia population
estimate of 57,704 persons for the year 2018, and approximately 0.61 percent of the projected
population of 65,900 persons by 2040 (SCAG 2016). A population increase of approximately 0.61
percent would not be considered substantial unplanned population growth and would be
consistent with the zoning and planned use of the Project site.
The proposed ground floor retail space would consist of up to 10,200 sf4 of retail space. Because
the specific tenants are not yet identified, the exact number of employees anticipated for the
Project’s retail uses at full occupancy is not known. Based on an employee generation factor for
Los Angeles County from the Employment Density Study Summary Report prepared for the
Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) of 1 employee per 424 sf of retail/service
4 A maximum of 15015010,200 sf is proposed for retail in total of which 950 sf is dedicated to loading.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-84 Discussion of Environmental Checklist
land uses, a total of approximately 27 jobs may be generated by the proposed Project (SCAG
2001).
This is a negligible increase in new jobs when compared to the total existing and projected jobs
in the County or the City of Arcadia. Specifically, this additional employment would represent
approximately 0.09 percent of the current City of Arcadia population estimate of 29,000 positions
as of February 2019 (EDD 2019), and approximately 0.08 percent of the projected employment
of 34,400 positions by 2040 (SCAG 2016). Also, the unemployment rate in Los Angeles County
is 4.2 percent and in the City of Arcadia is 3.4 percent, or 1,000 positions as of February 2019
(EDD 2019). Also, additional jobs would be created associated with the proposed residential units
in addition to the retail jobs, which would include a limited number of leasing and maintenance
employees.
It is expected that the positions generated by the Project would involve opportunities that would
be found in the large and diverse Southern California demographic and would not offer an
opportunity unique enough to encourage relocation from outside the region. Further, the majority
of new employment positions generated by the Project are the type that may be filled by the local
labor force in the City of Arcadia and surrounding municipalities based on the type of positions
and the existing unemployment rate in the region. There would not be substantial indirect
population growth as a result of the employment generated by the Project. No mitigation is
required.
b) Would the project displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing,
necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
No Impact. The Project would result in a mixed-use development, including accommodations for
approximately 402 residents and would not require the demolition of any existing residential
structures. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not displace existing housing or people
and would not require the construction of replacement housing.
4.14.3 MITIGATION MEASURES
Project implementation would not result in significant impacts related to population or housing;
therefore, no mitigation measures are required.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-85 Discussion of Environmental Checklist
4.15 PUBLIC SERVICES Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Would the Project result in substantial adverse physical
impacts associated with the provision of new or
physically altered government facilities, need for new
or physically altered government 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?
ii) Police protection?
ii) Schools?
iv) Parks?
v) Other public facilities?
4.15.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Fire protection for the Project area is provided by the City of Arcadia Fire Department. As of 2019,
the Arcadia Fire Department has 58 full-time employees and 2 permanent, part-time employees
(not including reserve firefighters, temporary employees, and volunteers). The Arcadia Fire
Station that would respond to calls in the area of the Project site is Station 105, which is located
at 710 South Santa Anita Avenue. Station 105 has daily staffing of nine personnel, including one
battalion chief, two fire captains, two engineers, two firefighter paramedics, and two firefighters.
If units from Station 105 are committed to an incident, resources from neighboring stations and/or
jurisdictions may be required to response to the Project site. As of 2018, the average response
time for Fire Station 105 for 5.48 minutes (Spriggs 2019).
Police protection for the Project site is currently provided by the Arcadia Police Department, which
is located at 250 West Huntington Drive. Additionally, the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s
Department serves the Arcadia area from the Temple Station located at 8838 Las Tunas Drive in
Temple City. The Arcadia Police Department currently has 98 full time police employees and 10
permanent part-time employees. The department’s response time was 2 minutes and 54 seconds
as of the last study conducted in 2015 (Torrico 2019a).
The Project site is located in the Arcadia Unified School District (AUSD), and residents of the
Project would be served by Holly Avenue Elementary School, First Avenue Middle School, and
Arcadia High School.
The Project site is currently developed with five structures that are used for commercial, office,
and auto repair services, which may generate a limited demand for libraries and parks. The
nearest library is the City of Arcadia Public Library located at 20 West Duarte Road, approximately
0.8 mile to the south of the Project site. The nearest parks are Bonita Park located at 207 Bonita
Street, approximately 0.3 mile southeast of the Project site and the Arcadia Community Regional
Park is also nearby, located at 405 S. Santa Anita Avenue, approximately 0.2 mile southwest of
the Project site.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-86 Discussion of Environmental Checklist
4.15.2 PROJECT IMPACTS
Regulatory Requirements
RR PUB-1 The Developer shall comply with all applicable codes, ordinances and regulations,
including the most current edition of the California Fire Code and the City of
Arcadia Municipal Code and Development Code, regarding fire prevention and
suppression measures; fire hydrants; fire access; water availability; and other,
similar requirements. Prior to issuance of building permits, the City of Arcadia
Development Services Department and the Arcadia Fire Department shall verify
compliance with applicable codes and that appropriate fire safety measures are
included in the Project design. All such codes and measures shall be implemented
prior to occupancy.
RR PUB-2 Prior to issuance of the building permit, the Developer shall pay new development
fees to the AUSD pursuant to Section 65995 of the California Government Code.
As an option to the payment of developer fees, the AUSD and the Developer can
enter into a facility and funding agreement, if approved by both parties. Evidence
that agreements have been executed shall be submitted to the Development
Services Department, or fees shall be paid with each building permit.
RR PUB-3 In accordance with the City’s Ordinance 2237 and Section 9105.15 of the City’s
Development Code, prior to the issuance of the building permit, the Developer shall
remit the most current park facilities impact fee and/or other negotiated park fees
to the City. All money collected as fees imposed shall be deposited in the Park
Facilities Impact Fee Program and shall be used for the acquisition, development,
and improvement of public parks and recreational facilities in the City, as proposed
by the City’s Parks and Recreation Master Plan. The Development Services
Department shall confirm compliance with this requirement prior to issuance of a
building permit.
Impact Discussion
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?
Less Than Significant Impact. As discussed above, fire protection services for the Project site
would be provided by the City of Arcadia Fire Department, and Station 105 is the nearest station
to the Project site. Construction of the proposed 139 residential units would result in approximately
402 new residents. The construction of 10,200 sf5 of retail proposed for the Project site, would
increase the demand for fire protection services in the City. The Project would require fire protection
services, including administrative tasks associated with approval and construction of the Project
(e.g., building plan check) and response to fire service calls once the Project is occupied. Based on
coordination with the City’s Fire Department, the increase in demand for fire protection services is
not expected to independently require the construction of new or alteration of existing fire protection
facilities to maintain an adequate level of fire protection service to the Project area. However, to
5 A maximum of 15015010,200 sf is proposed for retail in total of which 950 sf is dedicated to loading.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-87 Discussion of Environmental Checklist
maintain current levels of response times the Fire Department may need to add to their existing
staffing to accommodate the proposed Project as well as other cumulative projects in the vicinity
(Spriggs 2019). Based on correspondence with the Fire Department, no physical impacts
associated with the provision of fire protection services would occur and no mitigation is required.
Compliance with fire protection design standards during Project-specific site planning and
construction design processes (as described in RR PUB-1) would ensure that the Project would
not inhibit the ability of fire protection or paramedic crews to respond at optimum levels.
ii) Police protection?
Less Than Significant Impact. Police protection services for the Project site are provided by the
Arcadia Police Department, located less than 0.75 mile from the Project site. The City participates
in a mutual aid program with Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department at various levels, which
provides back-up support to member departments as needed.
Construction of the proposed 139 residential units would result in approximately 402 new residents
and the proposed 10,200 sf6 of proposed retail on the Project site would collectively increase the
demand for police protection services in the City. As population and commercial activity increases,
the demand for police services in the City also increases. Although the relatively small number of
new residents and commercial activity is not anticipated to generate the need for new sworn
officers, the Project would require police protection services, including administrative tasks
associated with approval and construction of the Project (e.g., building plan check) and response
to police service calls once the Project is occupied. This increase in demand for police protection
services would not require the construction of new or alteration of existing police department
facilities to maintain an adequate level of service to the Project area (Torrico 2019b). Therefore,
no physical impacts associated with the provision of police protection services would occur and
no mitigation is required.
iii) Schools?
Less Than Significant Impact. The Project site is within the AUSD, which offers an open
enrollment policy to City residents. The proposed 139 residential units are estimated to generate
approximately 25 students in grades K-5, 15 students in grades 6-8, and 20 students in grades
9-12.7 Based on coordination with AUSD, the Project would not require construction of new school
facilities and would not, therefore, result in physical impacts associated with the provision of new
or physically altered school facilities (Chu 2019). However, payment of development fees as
required by State law would be required as discussed below (RR PUB-2).
Senate Bill (SB) 50 (Leroy Green School Facilities Act), enacted in 1998, established a
comprehensive program for funding school facilities based on 50 percent funding from the State
and 50 percent funding from local districts, while limiting the obligation of developers to mitigate
the impact of projects on school facilities. Except in very limited circumstances prescribed by
statute, Section 65995 of the California Government Code establishes the statutory criteria for
assessing construction fees for school facilities. The legislation recognizes the need for the fees
to be adjusted periodically to keep pace with inflation; therefore, the State of California
Department of General Services State Allocation Board increases the maximum fees according
6 A maximum of 15015010,200 sf is proposed for retail in total of which 950 sf is dedicated to loading.
7 Student generation rates were provided during a phone conversation with Connie Chu of the Arcadia Unified
School District on 4/8/2019. Student generation rates are currently calculated by the District to be 0.181 students
per occupied dwelling unit for Grades K-5, 0.108 students per occupied dwelling unit for Grades 6-8, and 0.141
students per occupied dwelling unit for Grades 9-12.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-88 Discussion of Environmental Checklist
to the adjustment for inflation in the Statewide cost index for Class B8 construction. The AUSD
has adopted impact fees for new residential uses pursuant to SB 50.
The payment of school mitigation impact fees authorized by SB 50 is deemed to provide “full and
complete mitigation of impacts” on school facilities from the development of real property (California
Government Code §65995). SB 50 provides that a State or local agency may not deny or refuse to
approve the planning, use, or development of real property based on a developer’s refusal to
provide mitigation in amounts in excess of that established by SB 50.
With payment of school fees, or execution of a facility and funding agreement between the
developer and the school district(s) as required by RR PUB-2, potential impacts to schools would
be less than significant and no mitigation is required.
iv) Parks?
Less Than Significant Impact. As specified in Article II, Chapter 5, Part 3, Division I of the
Arcadia Municipal Code, the City has established a Park Facilities Impact Fee Program and
authorized the collection of development impact fees to provide a funding source from new
development for parks to serve new development. Pursuant to Council Resolution 6602 as
codified in Article IX, Chapter 1, Division 5, Section 9105.15.040 of the Development Code,
effective March 14, 2008, the City’s park facilities impact fee is $3.73 per square foot for
multifamily projects, which would apply to the Project’s 139 residential units. Also, the City
requires 100 sf per unit minimum open space for residential uses in the DMU and CBD zones,
totaling a requirement for a minimum of 13,900 sf of open space for the proposed 139 residential
units. Open space may be in the form of private or common open space via balconies, courtyards,
at-grade patios, rooftop gardens, and/or terraces. The Project proposes 24,626 sf of open space,
which is in excess of the open space required per City requirements. This would include 7,732 sf
of open space at ground level, 5,556 sf at the Level 2, 8,306 sf of private open space, and 3,032
sf at the skydecks on Level 4.
The increase in Project residents and employees would increase the demand on public parks and
recreational facilities in the nearby vicinity. However, because the Project results in a relatively
small number of new residents and employees to the City’s existing population and provides on-
site recreational amenities, the increased use of existing public park facilities would not be at a
level that would result in a substantial deterioration of existing facilities or require the need for
new or physically altered facilities.
The Developer would be required to pay the park facilities impact fee applicable at the time
building permits are issued. Although the Project’s impacts to City park facilities would be less
than significant, payment of required park facilities impact fees would further reduce any potential
impacts on City parks and recreational facilities associated with the increased demand and use
of the facilities (RR PUB-2). Therefore, based on this analysis, less than significant impacts would
result from the Project, and no mitigation is required.
v) Other public facilities?
Less than Significant Impact. Implementation of the Project would increase the demand for
library services; however, the Project would not result in the need for the construction of new or
expanded facilities. No physical environmental impacts would result, and no mitigation is required.
8 The Office of Public School Construction defines Class B construction as buildings constructed primarily
of reinforced concrete, steel frames, concrete floors, and roofs.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-89 Discussion of Environmental Checklist
4.15.3 MITIGATION MEASURES
Project implementation would not result in significant impacts related to public services; therefore,
no mitigation measures are required.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-90 Discussion of Environmental Checklist
4.16 RECREATION Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would/does the project:
a) Would the project increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational
facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of
the facility would occur or be accelerated?
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or
require the construction or expansion of recreational
facilities which might have an adverse physical effect
on the environment?
4.16.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
There are various county and City parks and recreational facilities in the Project area. The park
and recreational facilities presented in Table 34, Parks and Recreational Facilities Within a Half-
Mile of the Project, are located within approximately a half-mile of the Project (Arcadia 2010a).
TABLE 34
PARKS AND RECREATIONAL FACILITIES WITHIN A HALF-MILE
OF THE PROJECT
Name (Location) Size (acres) Type Facilities
Forest Avenue Park
132 Forest Ave 0.26 Mini Park Picnic sites
Eisenhower Park and Dog
Park
(Second Ave and Colorado
Blvd)
5.39 Neighborhood Park
Baseball field, bleachers, batting
cage, game courts and fields,
picnic shelter, play area, dog park
Newcastle Park
(143 Colorado Blvd) 2.64 Neighborhood Park
Tennis courts, handball courts,
sand volleyball courts, play area,
picnic sites
Bonita Park and Skate Park
(Second Ave and Bonita St) 3.38 Special Park
Baseball diamond, bleachers,
batting cage, picnic sites, play
area, skate park
Civic Center Athletic Field
(240 W Huntington Dr) 2.24 Special Park Open field for soccer, bleachers
Arcadia High School
(180 Campus Dr) 20.47 Joint-Use Park and Facility
20.47 acres of game courts and
athletic fields, swimming pools,
track, stadium
First Avenue Middle School
(301 S. 1st Ave) 3.30 Joint-Use Park and Facility 3.3 acres of basketball courts and
open field
Foothills Middle School
(171 Sycamore Ave) 6.72 Joint-Use Park and Facility 6.72 acres of track, open field,
baseball field and basketball courts
Arcadia Community Regional
Park
(405 S Santa Anita Ave)
52 County Park and Facility
Baseball diamonds, bowling
greens, play areas, community
room, open field, swimming pool,
tennis courts
Santa Anita Golf Course
(405 S Santa Anita Ave) 147 County Park and Facility 18-hole golf course
Source: Arcadia 2010a.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-91 Discussion of Environmental Checklist
In addition to the parklands discussed above, the following open space and park areas also serve
the residents of the City: the Los Angeles County Arboretum and Botanical Gardens (127 acres);
the Arcadia Wilderness Park (120 acres); the Arcadia Par-3 Golf Course (25.8 acres); and the
Peck Road Water Conservation Park (120 acres).
The Angeles National Forest is located in the San Gabriel Mountains just north of the City. This
National Forest has a natural environment, offering scenic views, with developed campgrounds,
picnic areas, and opportunities for swimming, fishing, and skiing. Walking and hiking trails wind
throughout the forest for use by hikers, equestrians, mountain bikers, and off-highway vehicle
enthusiasts.
4.16.2 PROJECT IMPACTS
Regulatory Requirements
Refer to RR PUB-3.
Impact Discussion
a) Would the Project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or
other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the
facility would occur or be accelerated?
Less than Significant Impact. Project implementation would lead to an increase in the
population within the City by approximately 402 residents. These residents would increase
demand for parks and recreational facilities and are likely to use proposed recreational amenities
on the Project site, existing parks, and other recreational facilities in the City, especially those that
are located in the area immediately surrounding the Project including Bonita Park and Arcadia
Community Regional Park. The City’s Parks and Recreation Master Plan would continue to be
implemented for the improvement of existing parks and recreational facilities, as well as the
development of new facilities to meet City needs. As stated in RR PUB-3, the Developer would be
responsible for paying park facilities impact fees for the development of new or expanded park
facilities in the City.
Improvement and expansion of existing parks and facilities would be made through
implementation of the Parks and Recreation Master Plan, supported through payment of park
facilities impact fees by new residential development, including the subject Project. These
improvements would reduce the use and accompanying deterioration that may occur on existing
park facilities due to the increase in the City’s resident population. With implementation of RR
PUB-3, impacts from the increased use of parks and recreational facilities by implementation of
the Project would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or
expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on
the environment?
Less than Significant Impact. As described in Section 2.2, Project Description, the Project would
include two courtyard areas and two rooftop decks that would be available for use by residents.
The Project would also include a public outdoor plaza area with seating and landscaping. These
areas would be on the Project site and the physical impacts resulting from the construction of these
facilities have been addressed through the impact analysis presented throughout this document. No
additional impacts would occur, and no additional mitigation is required.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-92 Discussion of Environmental Checklist
4.16.3 MITIGATION MEASURES
Project implementation would not result in significant impacts related to recreation; therefore, no
mitigation measures are required.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-93 Discussion of Environmental Checklist
4.17 TRANSPORTATION Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy
addressing the circulation system, including transit,
roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities?
b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines
section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric
design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)?
d) Result in inadequate emergency access?
Unless otherwise noted, the information presented in this section is based on the Traffic Impact Study
for Huntington Plaza (Traffic Study) prepared by Psomas and dated September 2019 (Appendix H).
The Traffic Study was prepared in accordance with the City of Arcadia traffic study procedures and is
based on the Los Angeles County Traffic Impact Analysis Preparation Guide.
4.17.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Interstate (I) 210 (Foothill Freeway) provides regional access to the Project site via the on- and
off-ramps at both Santa Anita Avenue and E. Huntington Drive. The Project site is bounded by
Wheeler Avenue to the north, N. 1st Avenue to the west, E. Huntington Drive to the south, and
Indiana Street to the east. Local access to the Project site is provided by E. Huntington Drive,
Wheeler Avenue, and N. 1st Avenue via an existing alley that bisects the site.
Level of Service
Level of Service (LOS) is the typical measure used to characterize the quality of traffic operations
at an intersection or roadway segment. At intersections, LOS A represents relatively free
operating conditions, whereas LOS F has unstable flow and congestion with volumes at or near
the capacity of the intersection. Excessive delays and queues can occur when LOS is not
acceptable. The City considers LOS D to be acceptable, but LOS E is permitted for intersections
and roadways at or adjacent to the downtown are per the Circulation and Infrastructure Element
of the 2010 General Plan (Arcadia 2010a). The City has confirmed that LOS E is permitted for the
intersections and roadways which are under evaluation for this Project.
Intersection Capacity Utilization for Signalized Intersections
The AM and PM peak hour operating conditions for the three study intersections were evaluated
using the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) method for the seven signalized intersections.
The ICU method of analysis determines volume-to-capacity (V/C) ratios on a critical lane basis,
which is the summation of critical lane group flow ratios with a yellow clearance adjustment. The
overall intersection V/C ratio is subsequently assigned a LOS value to describe intersection
operations. LOS varies from LOS A (free flow) to LOS F (jammed condition). Per the LA County
guidelines, a maximum of 2,880 vehicles per hour per lane should be used in the ICU method for
dual left-turn lanes, and a maximum of 1,600 vehicles per hour per lane should be used for the
remaining lane configurations. A ten percent yellow clearance time (e.g. lost time) should be
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-94 Discussion of Environmental Checklist
included in the calculations. The impact related to the project is considered significant if the
increase in the V/C ratio equals or exceeds the values shown in Table 35, Significant Impact
Thresholds – ICU Methodology. To account for the rail at the Santa Clara Street and 1st Avenue
intersection, the ICU was determined using the software Synchro.
TABLE 35
SIGNIFICANT IMPACT THRESHOLDS – ICU METHODOLOGY
Intersection Conditions Pre-Project
Project V/C Increase LOS V/C
C 0.71 to 0.80 0.04 or more
D 0.81 to 0.90 0.02 or more
E/F 0.91 or more 0.01 or more
Source: Psomas 2019e.
Highway Capacity Manual for Unsignalized Intersections
The Traffic Study used the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) methodology for the one
unsignalized intersection. The LA County guidelines do not refer to significant impacts at
unsignalized intersections. However, the Traffic Study applied the HCM methodology to evaluate
unsignalized intersections, which defines LOS based on delay. The analyses for the one
unsignalized intersection of Wheeler Avenue and Santa Anita Avenue was conducted using the
software Synchro (Psomas 2019e).
Although no thresholds are available for significant impacts at unsignalized intersections, several
jurisdictions recommend evaluation methodologies. For example, the Los Angeles Department of
Transportation (LADOT) guidelines recommend that if an unsignalized intersection has a LOS E
or F in the “future with project” scenario, a signal warrant analysis should be conducted.
Existing Level of Service
The study area for the Traffic Study is comprised of those locations that have the greatest potential to
experience traffic impacts resulting from implementation of the proposed Project (Psomas 2019e).
The study area has been developed based on traffic engineering practice and consultation with City
of Arcadia Development Services Department Engineering Division staff. The Traffic Study evaluates
the impact of Project-related traffic at the following eight intersections in the site vicinity, which are
shown in Exhibit 16, Study Intersections (Psomas 2019e):
1. Colorado Boulevard and Santa Anita Avenue (signalized)
2. Santa Clara Street and Santa Anita Avenue (signalized)
3. Wheeler Avenue and Santa Anita Avenue (unsignalized)
4. E. Huntington Drive and Santa Anita Avenue (signalized)
5. E. Huntington Drive and 1st Avenue (signalized)
6. Wheeler Avenue and 1st Avenue (signalized)
7. Santa Clara Street and 1st Avenue (signalized)
8. E. Huntington Drive and 2nd Avenue (signalized)
Exhibit 16
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Study Intersections
(11/13/2019 RMB) R:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\Ex_Study Intersections.pdfD:\Projects\3NWI\010100\GRAPHICS\MND\ex_Study Intersections_20190612.aiSource: Psomas
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-95 Discussion of Environmental Checklist
Traffic volumes were collected at the eight study intersections on Thursday, July 19, 2018 by
National Data & Surveying Services (NDS). Traffic counts occurred between 7:00 AM to 9:00 AM
and 4:00 PM to 6:00 PM. Traffic volumes were collected for vehicular traffic, pedestrians, and
cyclists entering each of the intersections. The peak hours were found to be from 8:00 to 9:00 AM
and from 5:00 to 6:00 PM, with the PM peak hour volumes being generally higher than the AM
volumes. Although the volumes were collected when most schools were not in session, school
traffic does not generally contribute much to the overall PM peak hour of a facility; therefore, it is
not anticipated that the timing would measurably affect the results of this analysis. All collected
traffic volume data is included in Appendix A of the Traffic Study (Appendix H, Psomas 2019e).
Table 36, Existing (2018) Intersection Level of Service, indicates that the study intersections
currently operate at LOS D or better during the AM and PM peak hours. The City of Arcadia
considers LOS D to be acceptable, but LOS E is permitted for intersections and roadways at or
adjacent to the downtown are per the Circulation and Infrastructure Element of the 2010 General
Plan. Overall, the volumes are higher in the PM peak hours than in the AM peak hour.
TABLE 36
EXISTING (2018) INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE
Study Intersection
Peak
Period
ICU or
Delay LOS
1. Colorado Blvd/Santa Anita Ave AM
PM
0.60
0.73
A
C
2. Santa Clara St/Santa Anita Ave AM
PM
0.47
0.60
A
A
3. Wheeler Ave/Santa Anita Ave* AM
PM
18.6
22.8
C
C
4. Huntington Dr/Santa Anita Ave AM
PM
0.82
0.87
D
D
5. Huntington Dr/1st Ave AM
PM
0.60
0.76
A
C
6. Wheeler Ave/1st Ave AM
PM
0.29
0.42
A
A
7. Santa Clara St/1st Ave AM
PM
0.32
0.46
A
A
8. Huntington Dr/2nd Ave AM
PM
0.66
0.81
B
D
ICU: Intersection Capacity Utilization; LOS: level of service
Source: Psomas 2019e.
Existing Bicycle and Pedestrian Traffic
Pedestrian traffic is high within the study area because there are several pedestrian generators
near the study intersections including restaurants, stores, fitness centers, hair salons, a post
office, bus stops, and a rail station. Cyclist traffic volumes are not particularly high within the study
area; volumes do not exceed eight bicycles per hour for any movement. Bicycle and pedestrian
peak hour traffic volumes are shown in Figure 4 of the Traffic Study (Appendix H, Psomas 2019e).
The Santa Clara Street and 1st Avenue intersection and the Wheeler Avenue and 1st Avenue
intersection have the highest pedestrian traffic in both AM and PM peak hours, which can be
explained by their proximity to the Arcadia Gold Line Station. Similar to the vehicular traffic,
volumes are higher in the PM peak hour.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-96 Discussion of Environmental Checklist
4.17.2 PROJECT IMPACTS
Regulatory Requirements
None required.
Impact Discussion
a) Would the project conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the
circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities?
Less than Significant Impact. The following section provides an assessment of potential
impacts to the roadway intersections analyzed in the Traffic Study (Psomas 2019e, Appendix H)
as well as other components of the circulation system including transit, bicycle and pedestrian
facilities.
Roadway
Intersection Impact Criteria and Thresholds
Project Trip Generation
The proposed Project would include 139 residential units and 10,200 sf9 of retail use. The
Project’s trip generation was calculated using the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip
Generation Manual (Institute of Transportation Engineers 2017a). ITE trip generation rates for
land use code 221 (Multifamily Housing Mid-Rise) were applied to estimate trip generation for the
residential units. For the retail portion of the Project, land use code 820 (Shopping Center) was
applied to this study.
Based on information in the ITE Trip Generation Handbooks (Institute of Transportation Engineers
2017b), it was estimated that approximately 10 percent of the residential trips would be internal
to the Project (e.g. to/from the retail areas). In addition, 34 percent of the retail trips are assumed
to be pass-by trips. A pass-by (or diverted link) trip is one which is already on the network but
would divert to the retail uses before continuing to their original destination. Therefore, pass-by
trips do not add to the total traffic on the adjacent roadway network but do influence the turning
movements into and out of the site.
There are several existing buildings on the Project site which are currently occupied, including
Dan’s Auto Care (134 East Wheeler Avenue) and Arcadia Party Rentals (124/126/128 East
Wheeler Avenue). There are also two vacant buildings fronting Huntington Drive. The trip
generation for the existing sites was estimated using the ITE trip generation rates for land use
codes 942 (Automobile Care Center) and 110 (General Light Industrial), respectively. Trips from
the existing uses that would be replaced by the Project were then discounted from the total trips
expected to be generated by the Project to estimate the total new external Project trips.
Table 37, Project Trip Generation, shows the summary of the net trips generated by the Project
relative to the trips generated by existing uses on the site. The Project is expected to generate
approximately 856 net daily trips on a typical weekday, of which 35 net trips (2 inbound, 33
outbound) are expected to occur during the AM peak hour, and 65 net trips (42 inbound, 23
outbound) would be generated during the PM peak hour. Information on the methodology used
9 A maximum of 11,150 sf is proposed for retail in total of which 950 sf is dedicated to loading.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-97 Discussion of Environmental Checklist
for trip distribution and traffic volumes for the proposed Project are provided in Sections 4.1.3
and 4.1.4 of the Traffic Study (Appendix H, Psomas 2019e).
TABLE 37
PROJECT TRIP GENERATION
Development Type Units
Number
of Units
AM PM
Daily In Out In Out
New Land Uses
Mid-Rise Apartments Dwelling Units 139 13 37 37 24 756
Internal Capture -1 -4 -4 -2 -76
Retail 1,000 SF 11,150 6 4 20 22 421
Pass-By Trips -2 -1 -7 -8 -143
Total Trips - New Land Uses 16 36 47 36 958
Existing Trips to be Replaced
Dan's Auto Care 1,000 SF 2,100 -3 -2 -3 -3 -11
Arcadia Party Rentals 1,000 SF 18,300 -11 -2 -1 -10 -91
Total Trips to be Replaced -14 -3 -5 -13 -102
Total New Trips 2 33 42 23 856
Source: Psomas 2019e.
Trip Distribution
The distribution of the trips expected to be generated by the proposed Project was estimated in
coordination with the City of Arcadia. Exhibit 17, Project Trip Distribution, shows the assumed trip
distribution for project trips in the study area. To be conservative, it was assumed that all project
traffic would access the site via Wheeler Avenue. However, ingress will also be provided from the
alley located between Wheeler Avenue and Huntington Drive which currently provides access to
parking in the area.
Levels of Service Analysis
The Traffic Study (Psomas 2019e, Appendix H) analyzed the following scenarios, as described in
more detail below:
1. Existing Conditions Without Project.
2. Existing Conditions With Project.
3. Existing With Cumulative Projects Without Project.
4. Existing With Cumulative Projects With Project.
Existing Conditions Without Project
Table 38, Impact Analysis for Existing Without Project and Existing With Project, shows the
existing LOS for each of the study intersections. All the signalized intersections currently operate
with a LOS of D or better in both peak hours, which is acceptable. In addition, the minor street
(stop-controlled) movement at the lone unsignalized study intersection operates at LOS C in both
peak hours.
Exhibit 17
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Project Trip Distribution
(11/13/2019 RMB) R:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\Ex_Project Trip Distribution.pdfD:\Projects\3NWI\010100\GRAPHICS\MND\ex_Project Trip Distribution_20190612.aiSource: Psomas
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-98 Discussion of Environmental Checklist
Existing Conditions With Project
The resulting LOS for each of the study intersections for existing plus Project conditions is shown
in Table 38, Impact Analysis for Existing Without Project and Existing With Project. As shown in
the table, all the signalized intersections would operate at LOS D or better in both peak hours.
Further, the stop-controlled movement at the Wheeler Avenue and Santa Anita Avenue
intersection would operate at LOS C in both peak hours.
The table shows the LOS for existing and existing plus Project conditions as well as the increase
in ICU for the signalized intersections. Although operational information is provided for the
unsignalized intersection, projects are not considered to have a significant impact on any
unsignalized intersections.
None of the intersections are expected to have a significant impact for the existing plus Project
condition. Therefore, no mitigation is required.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-99 Discussion of Environmental Checklist TABLE 38 IMPACT ANALYSIS FOR EXISTING WITHOUT PROJECT AND EXISTING WITH PROJECT Intersection Existing Existing + Project Increase in ICU Significant Impact? AM Peak PM Peak AM Peak PM Peak AM PM AM PM ICU or Delay LOS ICU or Delay LOS ICU or Delay LOS ICU or Delay LOS 1 Colorado Blvd Santa Anita Ave 0.60 A 0.73 C 0.60 A 0.73 C 0.00 0.00 NO NO 2 Santa Clara St Santa Anita Ave 0.47 A 0.60 A 0.47 A 0.60 A 0.00 0.00 NO NO 3* Wheeler Ave Santa Anita Ave 18.6 C 22.8 C 18.7 C 23.9 C N/A N/A N/A N/A 4 Huntington Dr Santa Anita Ave 0.82 D 0.87 D 0.82 D 0.87 D 0.00 0.00 NO NO 5 Huntington Dr 1st Ave 0.60 A 0.76 C 0.60 A 0.76 C 0.00 0.00 NO NO 6 Wheeler Ave 1st Ave 0.29 A 0.42 A 0.32 A 0.45 A 0.03 0.03 NO NO 7 Santa Clara St 1st Ave 0.32 A 0.46 A 0.32 A 0.46 A 0.00 0.00 NO NO 8 Huntington Dr 2nd Ave 0.66 B 0.81 D 0.66 B 0.81 D 0.00 0.00 NO NO *Delay and LOS shown are for stop-controlled movement only Source: Psomas, 2019.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-100 Discussion of Environmental Checklist
Existing Cumulative Projects With and Without Project
Cumulative traffic volumes were estimated based on the seven planned cumulative projects in
the vicinity of the Project. Planned projects within a one-mile radius of the Project site were
provided by the City of Arcadia and were included in this study. There are seven cumulative
projects that could potentially impact traffic in the study intersections, as described in Table 39,
Cumulative Projects, from the Traffic Study (Appendix H, Psomas 2019e), and as shown in
Exhibit 18, Cumulative Projects Map (Psomas 2019e). Additional information on the methodology
used for trip distribution as well as the traffic volumes that would result from the cumulative
projects are provided in Sections 4.2.2 and 4.2.3 of the Traffic Study respectively (Appendix H,
Psomas 2019e).
TABLE 39
CUMULATIVE PROJECTS FROM THE TRAFFIC STUDY
Project Description Size
1 Hotel 175 Hotel Rooms
2,500 SF Restaurant (Part of Hotel)
1,800 SF Coffee Shop
42,700 SF Medical Office
2 Mixed-Use 38 Apartment Units
16,175 SF Commercial
3 Mixed-Use 37 Condo Units
19,360 SF Commercial
4 Residential – Condominium 20 units
5 Residential – Condominium 20 units
6 Hotel and Mixed-Use Development 227 Hotel Rooms
96 Condo Units
38,196 SF Commercial
7 Medical Office, Retail 23,300 SF Medical Office
7,050 SF Retail/Restaurant
Source: Psomas 2019e.
Cumulative traffic volumes were estimated based on trip generation and distribution for the
planned cumulative projects following the ITE Trip Generation Manual guidelines (Institute of
Transportation Engineers 2017a). Table 40, Cumulative Projects Trip Generation, summarizes
trip generation for all cumulative projects. As seen in the table, cumulative projects are expected
to generate 496 new trips during the AM peak hour and 707 new trips during the PM peak hour.
Exhibit 18
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Cumulative Projects Location
(11/13/2019 RMB) R:\Projects\3NWI010100\Graphics\Ex_Cumulative Projects Location.pdfD:\Projects\3NWI\010100\GRAPHICS\MND\ex_Cumulative Projects Location_20190612.aiSource: Psomas
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-101 Discussion of Environmental Checklist
TABLE 40
CUMULATIVE PROJECTS TRIP GENERATION
Project Development Units
Number
of Units
AM PM
In Out In Out
1
Hotel and Restaurant Number of Rooms 175 49 34 54 51
Coffee Shop 1,000 Square Feet 1.8 82 78 39 39
Medical Office 1,000 Square Feet 42.7 93 26 41 106
Pass-By Trips/Internal Capture -78 -75 -40 -40
Total Trips - Related Project 1 145 63 94 157
2
Multifamily Housing (Mid-Rise) Number of Units 38 4 10 10 7
Shopping Center 1,000 Square Feet 16.2 9 6 30 32
Pass-By Trips/Internal Capture -4 -3 -11 -12
Total Trips - Related Project 2 9 13 29 27
3
Multifamily Housing (Mid-Rise) Number of Units 37 3 10 10 6
Shopping Center 1,000 Square Feet 19.4 11 7 35 38
Pass-By Trips/Internal Capture -4 -3 -13 -14
Total Trips - Related Project 3 11 13 32 31
4
Multifamily Housing (Low-Rise) Number of Units 20 2 7 7 4
Pass-By Trips/Internal Capture 0 0 0 0
Total Trips - Related Project 4 2 7 7 4
5
Multifamily Housing (Low-Rise) Number of Units 20 2 7 7 4
Pass-By Trips/Internal Capture 0 0 0 0
Total Trips - Related Project 5 2 7 7 4
6
Hotel Number of Rooms 227 63 44 69 67
Multifamily Housing (Mid-Rise) Number of Units 96 9 26 26 16
Shopping Center 1,000 Square Feet 38.2 22 14 70 76
Pass-By Trips/Internal Capture -9 -6 -48 -50
Total Trips - Related Project 6 86 77 117 109
7
Medical Office 1,000 Square Feet 23.3 51 14 23 58
Shopping Center 1,000 Square Feet 7.1 4 3 13 14
Pass-By Trips/Internal Capture -1 -1 -4 -5
Total Trips - Related Project 7 53 16 31 67
Total New Trips 306 190 311 396
Source: Psomas 2019e.
Table 41, Cumulative Plus Project Impacts Analysis, provides the resulting LOS for each of the
study intersections under cumulative conditions without the Project. As shown in the table, all the
signalized intersections are expected to operate at LOS D or better in both peak hours, which is
acceptable. In addition, the minor street (stop-controlled) movement at the lone unsignalized
study intersection operates at LOS C in both peak hours. There is no defined intersection LOS
for two-way stop-controlled intersections.
Table 41, Cumulative Plus Project Impacts Analysis, also provides the resulting LOS for each of
the study intersections for existing plus cumulative projects with Project conditions. As seen in
the table, all the intersections are expected to continue to operate at LOS D or better in the AM
peak hour with the Project. Most would also continue to operate at LOS D or better in the PM
peak hour except for the E. Huntington Drive and Santa Anita Avenue intersection, which would
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-102 Discussion of Environmental Checklist
deteriorate to LOS E. However, LOS E is acceptable for facilities in the downtown per City
standards.
As shown in Table 41, none of the intersections is expected to have a significant impact for the
hypothetical existing plus Project condition. Therefore, no mitigation is required.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-103 Discussion of Environmental Checklist TABLE 41 CUMULATIVE PLUS PROJECT IMPACTS ANALYSIS Intersection Existing + Cumulative Existing + Cumulative + Project Increase in ICU Significant Impact? AM Peak PM Peak AM Peak PM Peak AM PM AM PM ICU or Delay LOS ICU or Delay LOS ICU or Delay LOS ICU or Delay LOS 1 Colorado Blvd Santa Anita Ave 0.61 B 0.76 C 0.61 B 0.76 C 0.00 0.00 NO NO 2 Santa Clara St Santa Anita Ave 0.49 A 0.62 B 0.49 A 0.62 B 0.00 0.00 NO NO 3 Wheeler Ave Santa Anita Ave 19.2 C 24.1 C 19.5 C 26.4 D N/A N/A N/A N/A 4 Huntington Dr Santa Anita Ave 0.85 D 0.90 D 0.86 D 0.91 E 0.01 0.01 NO NO 5 Huntington Dr 1st Ave 0.62 B 0.77 C 0.63 B 0.77 C 0.01 0.00 NO NO 6 Wheeler Ave 1st Ave 0.29 A 0.44 A 0.32 A 0.47 A 0.03 0.03 NO NO 7 Santa Clara St 1st Ave 0.32 A 0.46 A 0.32 A 0.46 A 0.00 0.00 NO NO 8 Huntington Dr 2nd Ave 0.68 B 0.83 D 0.68 B 0.83 D 0.00 0.00 NO NO *Delay and LOS shown are for stop-controlled movement only Source: Psomas 2019e.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-104 Discussion of Environmental Checklist
Alley Access and Operations
After the initial analysis was completed, the site plan was updated to include additional parking
along the alley which passes through the site as well as access to the parking structure from the
alley. The alley currently operates as a one-way eastbound alley and provides access to various
parking and delivery areas between First Avenue and Indiana Street, some of which will be
replaced with this project. It is expected that the alley would continue to serve eastbound traffic
only; therefore, all project egress is expected to be from Wheeler Avenue at First Avenue.
The project parking along the alley will serve much of the retail uses located to the south, while
the parking structure on the north side of the alley will serve the residential uses. The residential
uses are expected to generate more total traffic trips than the retail uses, and it is expected that
the parking access located on Wheeler Avenue will serve as the main access point for the parking
structure with fewer residents assumed to choose to access from the alley. However, even if 80%
of project traffic were to use the alley, which is assumed to be a conservative estimate, it would
result in approximately 34 peak hour trips and 343 daily trips, both of which can be served by the
existing alley capacity and would be unlikely to have a notable impact on the alley intersections
with First Avenue and Indiana Street.
Contribution to City Transportation Master Plan and Impact Fee Program
Although the Project is not expected to have a significant impact on any of the study intersections,
Los Angeles County guidelines require a measure of the cumulative impact on the roadway
network including the proposed Project. If a location meets the significant impact thresholds when
comparing existing conditions and existing plus cumulative with project conditions, the Project is
then responsible for contributing its fair share of the funding needed to improve the affected
location.
As shown in Table 42, Total Cumulative Impacts Analysis, there is expected to be a cumulative
impact at the intersection of E. Huntington Drive and Santa Anita Avenue due to the increase in
ICU even though the LOS is still considered to be acceptable for the intersection according to City
standards for the downtown.
Typically, a fair share contribution for improvements due to a cumulative impact would be
calculated for the Project due to this cumulative impact. However, after discussions with the City,
it was determined that the typical impact fees to be collected for this Project per the City of Arcadia
Transportation Impact Fee Program (adopted in October 2016) would be sufficient to account for
the Project’s contribution to cumulative future congestion at the Huntington Drive and Santa Anita
Avenue intersection and that no additional fair share percentage contribution would be required.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-105 Discussion of Environmental Checklist TABLE 42 TOTAL CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ANALYSIS Intersection Existing Existing + Cumulative + Project Increase in ICU AM Peak PM Peak AM Peak PM Peak AM PM ICU or Delay LOS ICU or Delay LOS ICU or Delay LOS ICU or Delay LOS 1 Colorado Blvd Santa Anita Ave 0.60 A 0.73 C 0.61 B 0.76 C 0.01 0.03 2 Santa Clara St Santa Anita Ave 0.47 A 0.60 A 0.49 A 0.62 B 0.02 0.02 3 Wheeler Ave Santa Anita Ave 18.6 C 22.8 C 19.5 C 26.4 D N/A N/A 4 Huntington Dr Santa Anita Ave 0.82 D 0.87 D 0.86 D 0.91 E 0.04 0.04 5 Huntington Dr 1st Ave 0.60 A 0.76 C 0.63 B 0.77 C 0.03 0.01 6 Wheeler Ave 1st Ave 0.29 A 0.42 A 0.32 A 0.47 A 0.03 0.05 7 Santa Clara St 1st Ave 0.32 A 0.46 A 0.32 A 0.46 A 0.00 0.00 8 Huntington Dr 2nd Ave 0.66 B 0.81 D 0.68 B 0.83 D 0.02 0.02 *Delay and LOS shown are for stop-controlled movement only Source: Psomas 2019e.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-106 Discussion of Environmental Checklist
Construction-Related Traffic
Project construction would generate traffic from construction worker travel; from the arrival and
departure of trucks delivering construction materials to the site; and from the removal of debris
generated by on-site demolition activities. Both the number of construction workers and trucks
would vary throughout the construction process in order to maintain a reasonable schedule of
completion.
Construction is anticipated to begin in 2020. Demolition of existing buildings would take
approximately 2 months followed by approximately 8 months of site preparation, grading, and
trenching. Building construction would occur thereafter for approximately 23 months, including
paving and application of architectural coatings (e.g., exterior paints).
During construction activities, trucks are expected to enter and leave the site on a regular basis.
In the Arcadia General Plan Circulation and Infrastructure Element, both Santa Anita Avenue and
E. Huntington Drive are designated truck routes. Therefore, based on current plans, haul trucks
and delivery trucks would access the Project site via Santa Anita Avenue and/or E. Huntington
Drive. Full freeway connections to and from I-210 (e.g., eastbound and westbound ramp
connections) are provided at both Santa Anita Avenue and E. Huntington Drive.
Construction Traffic Trip Generation
Peak Construction Worker Demand
Project construction is expected to last approximately 33 months, including demolition of existing
buildings, site preparation, grading, trenching, and building construction. While construction
activity on the Project site would occur between the hours of 7:00 AM and 6:00 PM Monday
through Friday and between 8:00 AM and 5:00 PM on Saturdays, the typical construction activity
is anticipated to begin at 7:00 AM and end at 3:00 PM. In general, the majority of the construction
workers are expected to arrive at the Project site during off-peak hours (e.g., arrive prior to
7:00 AM), thereby avoiding the AM and PM commute peak periods. The peak hour of traffic for
the intersections adjacent to the site primarily occur from 8:00 to 9:00 AM during the morning
commute peak period and from 5:00 to 6:00 PM during the evening commute period (Psomas
2019e). It is anticipated that construction workers would generally remain on-site throughout the
day. At the peak, approximately 60 construction workers are anticipated to be working on the
Project at a time. The number of construction worker vehicles is estimated using an average
vehicle ridership (AVR) of 1.135 persons per vehicle (as provided in the SCAQMD’s 1993 CEQA
Air Quality Handbook). Using these factors, it is estimated that approximately 106 daily trips
(53 inbound trips and 53 outbound trips) would be generated by the construction workers during
the peak construction phase at the site.
The inbound construction worker trips would occur outside the AM commute peak hour; however,
a portion of the outbound construction worker trips may overlap with the PM commute peak hour,
between 5:00 PM and 6:00 PM. Given a construction shift ending at 3:00 PM, it is anticipated that
approximately 50 percent of the construction workers would leave the site between 3:00 and
3:30 PM, approximately 25 percent between 3:30 and 4:00 PM, approximately 15 percent
between 4:00 and 4:30 PM, and the remaining 10 percent would leave the site after 4:30 PM,
which could potentially overlap with the PM commuter peak hour. Therefore, for purposes of this
analysis, it is estimated that approximately 10 percent of the outbound construction worker trips
(e.g., 6 outbound trips) may occur during the PM commuter peak hour.
The construction work force would likely be generated from all parts of the Los Angeles region,
and is thereby assumed to arrive from all directions. This general distribution would result in no
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-107 Discussion of Environmental Checklist
more than a few vehicles at any one study intersection during the PM peak hour. Therefore, traffic
impacts from construction worker trips would be less than significant.
Peak Construction Truck Demand
Heavy construction equipment would be located on-site during demolition and grading activities
and would not travel to and from the Project site on a daily basis. However, truck trips would be
generated in order to import and export materials. Based on information provided by the Project
Developer, up to 32 truck trips per day (16 inbound trips and 16 outbound trips) are anticipated to
be generated to/from the Project site during the site preparation and grading phase to deliver
materials.
In addition, it is estimated that a total of approximately 6,000 tons of debris would be exported off
site during demolition activities. It is also anticipated that 44,420 cubic yards of soil would be
removed from the site. During the demolition and grading activities, trucks are expected to enter
and leave the Project site on a regular basis during working hours. The number of truck trips
traveling along the City-designated truck routes would vary daily depending on the nature of the
construction activity at the site. Demolition debris removal from the Project site would generate
an estimated 680 trips over a 2-month demolition phase. On average it is anticipated that 15 truck
hauls per day or approximately 2 trips per hour would occur during that phase. Excavation is
anticipated to generate a total of 6,346 total truck trips over an 8-month excavation period with an
average of 36 truck trips per day or 4 trips per work hour. The addition of 2 to 4 haul truck trips
per hour would not result in a substantial change in noise levels along local truck routes.
Assuming a material delivery/export period of 8 hours per day (beginning at 7:00 AM, with the last
delivery at 3:00 PM), the 47 truck trips per day corresponds to approximately 6 truck trips per
hour. Since construction truck trips would occur along major roadways with the number of truck
trips during the AM and PM peak hours being relatively limited, traffic impacts from construction
truck trips would be less than significant.
Also, it is anticipated that delivery trucks and construction equipment would be brought onto the
Project site and be stored within the perimeter fence of the construction site, or along the parking
areas adjacent to the Project site. Additionally, temporary lane and sidewalk closures may be
required along the adjacent public streets (e.g., E. Huntington Drive, Wheeler Avenue) to
accommodate truck or equipment staging. Flagpersons would be used to control traffic movement
during the ingress or egress of trucks and heavy equipment from the construction site.
In compliance with MM TRANS-1, prior the start of construction, a Construction Management
Plan, including identification of detour requirements, must be prepared in cooperation with the
City of Arcadia and any other affected jurisdictions in accordance with the Manual on Uniform
Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). Construction activities must comply with the approved plan to
the satisfaction of the City of Arcadia.
Peak Construction Traffic Generation
Taken together, the total peak construction worker vehicles (53 inbound, 53 outbound) and truck
trips (35 inbound, 35 outbound) are forecasted to generate 176 vehicle trips per day (88 inbound,
88 outbound) during the peak construction phase at the site. Also, as discussed above, based on
the arrival and departure volumes and distribution of construction worker trips, only a portion of
the outbound construction worker trips may overlap with the AM and PM commuter peak hour.
When fully occupied, the project is expected to generate 958 vehicle trips per day, including a
total of 52 in the AM peak hour and 83 in the PM peak hour. Because the anticipated construction
traffic is lower than the anticipated traffic to be generated by the project, traffic impacts from
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-108 Discussion of Environmental Checklist
construction will be less than significant. Further, to minimize impacts to circulation and parking
in the area during construction, a staging and constriction parking plan will be developed.
Although less than significant impacts are anticipated relative to this threshold, in order to
minimize Project-related construction traffic impacts to mitigate for potential emergency access
impacts during Project construction, and to ensure adequate parking is maintained in the City’s
downtown for non-Project users during construction, the Project would incorporate MM TRANS-1,
which requires preparation and implementation of a Construction Management Plan.
Transit, Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities
The Project would not conflict with any program, plan, ordinance or policy relating to transit,
bicycle and pedestrian facilities. Both Metro and Foothill Transit provide bus service to and
through Arcadia as part of their regional systems. Three transit routes occur along E. Huntington
Drive. No Project impacts would occur to E. Huntington Drive travel lanes or to bus or other transit
stops. During construction, transit routes may experience minor delays; however, the preparation
and implementation of a Construction Management Plan would ensure that any impacts are less
than significant.
The Project site is not located near any proposed or existing bicycle facilities identified in the City’s
bikeway plan (Arcadia 2010a). No dedicated facilities were observed on E. Huntington Drive,
Wheeler Avenue, or N. 1st Avenue. Therefore, no impacts to bike lanes or paths would result from
the Project.
The Project site is located in an Enhanced Pedestrian Environment as identified in the Circulation
Element of the City’s General Plan (Arcadia 2010a). An Enhanced Pedestrian Environment is
defined by the City as a focus area where the goal is to make streets friendlier to pedestrians and
improve walkability in mixed use areas. Typical improvements that the City envisions in these
zones may include wider sidewalks, ensuring sufficient space and clearance on sidewalks
available for walking, improved lighting, seating, enhanced landscaping, shade trees, distinctive
sidewalk paving, sidewalk bulb-outs or similar treatments at intersections where feasible, wider
crosswalks, and pedestrian signage. Project design has incorporated several of these
components, including sufficient space, improved lighting, seating, enhanced landscaping, shade
trees, and distinctive sidewalk paving. Furthermore, the Project’s orientation towards the
streetscape of E. Huntington Drive and incorporation of a paseo connecting E. Huntington Drive
to the alleyway will maintain and enhance pedestrian conditions in the Project vicinity.
The Project is consistent with transit, bicycle, and pedestrian requirements of the City’s
Development Code. The Project includes bicycle parking facilities consistent with the
requirements of Section 9103.07.150 of the City’s Development Code. The City’s design review
process will ensure that the Project’s design complies with Section 9103.01.070 of the City’s
Development Code, which includes vehicular visibility standards that safeguard vehicular,
bicycle, and pedestrian collisions caused by visual obstructions at street and alley intersections,
and at any point where a driveway intersects a street or alley.
One of the key goals identified in the City’s General Plan Circulation Element is to provide a
connected, balanced, and integrated transportation system of bicycle and pedestrian networks
that enable residents to walk and bike. The Project is consistent with this goal because it would
provide a mix of land uses in the heart of the City’s downtown near existing transit, and because
the Project incorporates pedestrian-oriented features. Less than significant impacts would result
from the Project relative to transit, bicycle, and pedestrian plans and policies, and no mitigation is
required.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-109 Discussion of Environmental Checklist
In October 2019, City of Arcadia staff coordinated with the Los Angeles County Metropolitan
Transportation Authority (Metro) regarding the Project. As part of this process, Metro was
provided with the Project’s Architectural Design Review Set Resubmittal Set dated July 30, 2019.
On October 24, 2019, Metro provided the City with recommendations regarding the Project’s
potential impacts on the Metro Gold Line facilities and services. Metro raised three primary
concerns, including:
1. Metro Gold Line Operations: Due to the Project’s proximity to the Gold Line, Metro
recommended that the City include an analysis of potential effects on light rail operations
and identify mitigation measures or project design features as appropriate. Metro
suggested that impacts that should be analyzed should include impacts of Project
construction and operation on and potential damage to the structural and systems integrity
of tracks and related infrastructure; disruption to light rail service; and noise and vibration.
a. Transportation and traffic are addressed in this Section (Section 4.17). No
significant impacts have been identified related to the proposed Project that would
alter the operations of the Metro Gold Line.
b. Noise and vibration are addressed in Section 4.13 of this document. No significant
impacts related noise and vibration are anticipated to result from the proposed
Project that could affect the Metro Gold Line facilities or operations.
2. Excavation Support System: The Project includes underground excavation and
construction of structures; therefore, Metro expressed concern in their letter stating that
tiebacks supporting Project structures could have the potential to disturb adjoining soils
and jeopardize support of the light rail tracks.
a. Geology and soils are covered in Section 4.7 and discussed in more detail in the
Project’s Geotechnical Report (Geocon West, Inc. 2018, Appendix D). Additional
correspondence with the Project’s shoring expert related to Metro’s questions
and comments is also summarized in Section 4.7.
3. Overhead Catenary System (OCS) Setback: Overhead catenary wires and support
structures adjacent to the Project power Metro trains. Metro stated in their letter that
OCS wires should be treated like any high voltage electrical utility wires and that
construction equipment such as cranes operated in close proximity to the OCS can pose
an electrocution hazard during Project construction and operation.
a. Based on the activities provided in the Project Description (Section 2), there are
no construction activities proposed within or immediately adjacent to the Gold
Line right-of-way. Therefore, there is no potential for impacts to the OCS.
Although minimal potential exists for impacts to the Metro Gold Line facilities and operations, at
the request of Metro the following measures have been incorporated into the Project to minimize
potential impacts.
b) Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with the CEQA Guidelines Section
15064.3, subdivision (b)?
Less Than Significant Impact. State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b)
provides the criteria for analyzing transportation impacts, and a project’s effect on automobile
delay shall not constitute a significant environmental impact (OAL 2019). Generally, vehicle miles
traveled is the most appropriate measure of transportation impacts. Vehicle miles traveled (VMT)
refers to the amount and distance of automobile travel attributable to a project. According to the
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-110 Discussion of Environmental Checklist
State of California’s Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA, “certain
projects (including residential, retail, and office projects, as well as projects that are a mix of these
uses) proposed within ½ mile of an existing major transit stop or an existing stop along a high
quality transit corridor would have a less than significant impact on VMT” (OPR 2018). The
proposed Project is a mixed-use development within ½ mile of the Arcadia Gold Line Station.
Therefore, the Project is presumed to have a less than significant impact on VMT.
c) Would the project substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature
(e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)?
No Impact. Vehicular access to the Project site is currently provided via driveways from E.
Huntington Drive and Wheeler Avenue, as well as driveways and an alley that connect the Project
site to 1st Avenue to the west and Indiana Street to the east. As shown in Exhibits 4a and 4c,
Illustrative Site Plan and Plan Views, primary vehicular access to the Project would be provided
via a new driveway on Wheeler Avenue, as well as from the alley that bisects the site accessible
from 1st Avenue and Indiana Street. The driveways would provide access to both the surface and
underground parking areas. The proposed Project driveways would be constructed to City of
Arcadia standards.
The Project’s circulation system, including parking areas, would be designed to meet the
standards of the City and would not result in uses or design features that would create traffic
hazards. The Project would not interfere with access, circulation, or activities at the surrounding
land uses.
d) Would the project result in inadequate emergency access?
Less than Significant With Mitigation. As discussed under Threshold 4.8(g) in Section 4.8,
Hazards and Hazardous Materials, construction activities on the Project site have the potential to
disrupt traffic and emergency access through temporary lane closures or traffic diversions. As
required by MM TRANS-1, a Construction Management Plan shall be prepared in compliance
with the MUTCD. Compliance with MM TRANS-1 would ensure that potential short-term impacts
to emergency response plans or evacuation routes would be less than significant. Once
construction activities that could impact surrounding roadways are completed, the roads would
be returned to the previous condition and there would be no impacts. As required by
MM TRANS-1, the Developer would be responsible for repairing any damage to City roadways that
may occur during construction or through transport of heavy trucks or equipment related to
construction.
The long-term operation of the Project involves residential, retail, and parking land uses that would
not result in a significant impact to existing roadways and would neither interfere with nor impact the
implementation of the City’s Emergency Management Plan. The City Fire Department will review
the Project’s plans during design review to ensure that emergency access to the site and
surrounding areas would be maintained in compliance with applicable City requirements.
4.17.3 MINIMIZATION AND MITIGATION MEASURES
The following minimization and mitigation measure are incorporated to ensure that Project
impacts are reduced to a less than significant level, as well as to minimize potential impacts in
coordination with Metro.
MM TRANS-1 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a Construction Management Plan shall
be prepared by the Developer for the review and approval of the City of Arcadia
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-111 Discussion of Environmental Checklist
and any other affected jurisdictions in accordance with the Manual on Uniform
Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). Construction activities shall comply with the
approved plan to the satisfaction of the City of Arcadia. The Developer will begin
coordination with the City on the Construction Management Plan as soon as
practicable during the final design process and in advance of construction so that
effective measures can be developed to avoid, minimize, and mitigate construction
impacts to parking and circulation within the City of Arcadia downtown.
At a minimum, the Construction Management Plan shall:
Describe the duration and location of lane closures (if any).
Address traffic control for any partial street closures, detours, or other
disruption to traffic circulation during project construction, including as-
needed use of flagpersons and signage.
Identify the routes that construction vehicles would utilize for the delivery
of construction materials to access the project site. Haul routes would
follow the City’s approved truck routes and avoid residential streets.
Identify the location of parking and materials storage for construction
workers during all phases of construction. Parking for construction workers
would be provided on-site or at additional off-site locations that are not on
public streets.
Identify of emergency access points/routes.
Specify the hours during which transport activities can occur and methods
to mitigate construction-related impacts to adjacent streets.
Require the contractor to keep all haul routes clean and free of debris
including but not limited to gravel and dirt as a result of its operations. The
contractor shall clean adjacent streets, as directed by the City Engineer (or
representative of the City Engineer), of any material, which may have been
spilled, tracked, or blown onto adjacent streets or areas.
All hauling or transport of oversize loads would occur between the hours of
7:00 AM and 5:00 PM only, Monday through Friday, unless approved
otherwise by the City Engineer. No hauling or transport shall be allowed
during nighttime hours, weekends or Federal holidays.
Include details on the maintenance of bicycle and pedestrian facilities and
connectivity through the Project to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
Require that haul trucks entering or exiting public streets shall at all times
yield to public traffic, pedestrians, bicyclists, and other users.
Provisions for the contractor to repair existing pavement, streets, curbs,
sidewalks, and/or gutters that may be altered during project construction.
The repairs shall be completed in consultation with and to the satisfaction
of the City Engineer.
Require that all construction-related parking and staging of vehicles will be
kept out of the adjacent public roadways and will occur either on-site or on
designated off-site parcels that would not adversely affect access to or
parking within the downtown.
Use of temporary fencing around the project site (e.g., temporary fencing
with opaque material)
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-112 Discussion of Environmental Checklist
MM TRANS-2 Technical Review: Prior to the issuance of a demolition permit for the Project, the
Applicant shall submit written proof to the City that engineering drawings and
calculations as well as construction work plans and methods including any crane
placement and radius have been submitted to Metro for review. Approval from
Metro shall not be required to proceed with the Project.
MM TRANS-3 Overhead Catenary System (OCS): The Applicant shall take all necessary
measures to protect the OCS from damage due to Project activities during and
after construction. During construction, the Applicant shall post warning signage
for equipment working around the OCS wires.
MM TRANS-4 Construction Safety: The construction and operation of the Project shall not disrupt
the operation and maintenance activities of the Metro Gold Line or the structural
and systems integrity of Metro’s light rail infrastructure. Not later than one month
before Project construction, the Applicant shall schedule a pre-construction
meeting to discuss Project construction, communication protocols, and other
related topics. The meeting would include the Applicant, key Project construction
personnel, the City of Arcadia, and Metro staff, which may include staff from Real
Estate, Construction Management, and Construction Safety staff. During Project
construction, the Applicant shall coordinate with Metro as needed to ensure that
Metro infrastructure and operations are not compromised by construction activities
or permanent build conditions. The Applicant shall notify Metro of any changes to
construction activities that may impact the use of the ROW. The Applicant shall
allow Metro staff to monitor demolition and/or construction activities to confirm no
impacts have occurred to the Gold Line right-of-way.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-113 Discussion of Environmental Checklist
4.18 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
e) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance
of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public
Resources Code § 21074 as either a site, feature,
place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined
in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred
place, or object with cultural value to a California Native
American tribe, and that is:
i) Listed or eligible for listing in the California
Register of Historical Resources, or in a local
register of historical resources as defined in Public
Resources Code § 5020.1(k)? or
ii) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its
discretion and supported by substantial evidence,
to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code §
5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code § 5024.1,
the lead agency shall consider the significance of
the resource to a California Native American tribe.
4.18.1 EXISTING CONDITIONS
Section 4.5, Cultural Resources, of this IS/MND addresses other cultural resources, including
historical resources, archaeological resources, and human remains. The impact analysis
concluded that impacts on these resources would be less than significant. As discussed in
Section 4.5, Cultural Resources, for historic resources, the existing structures are not listed in the
CRHR, the NRHP, California Historical Landmarks, or California Points of Historical Interests lists.
Additionally, the Project site is not included in a Local Register of Historical Resources; on a map
of Historical Resources; or on a map of Historic Districts. For archaeological resources, the
cultural resources impact analysis concluded the Project could result in unanticipated discovery
of previously unknown archaeological resources. In order to reduce this impact, the Project will
be required to implement mitigation measure MM-CUL-1, which includes retaining a professional
archaeologist to evaluate the significance of any suspected archaeological resources and to
determine an appropriate course of action as necessary. Also, RR CUL-1 provides guidance in
the event of inadvertent discovery of human remains, the regulatory requirements that address
the handling of human remains if previously unknown human remains are encountered, as well
as if the remains are determined to be Native American. Compliance with the State-required
regulations would ensure such impacts are reduced to a less than significant level. The following
subsections address the potential for the discovery of tribal cultural resources and the
implementation of mitigation measures to reduce impacts to such discoveries to a less than
significant level.
Native American Sacred Lands File Review
Psomas submitted a request to the NAHC on March 27, 2019 to review the Sacred Lands File
database regarding the possibility of Native American cultural resources and/or sacred places in
the project vicinity that are not documented on other databases. The NAHC completed its Sacred
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-114 Discussion of Environmental Checklist
Lands File search on April 30, 2019. The results were negative for known Tribal Cultural
Resources and/or sacred sites.
Regional Ethnography
Ethnography is a cultural anthropologic research method that strives to answer anthropological
questions about different cultures’ ways of life (University of Pennsylvania 2008). The following
describes the ethnographic setting of the Project site and was developed by project archaeologist
Charles Cisneros, RPA (Psomas 2019d). The Los Angeles County region, including the Project
site, was a contact point between two separate ethnolinguistic groups immediately prior to the
arrival of Euro-Americans in California. These groups include the Gabrieliño/Tongva and the
Juaneño/Acjachemen.
Gabrieliño/Tongva
At the time of European contact, this part of Los Angeles County was the home of the Gabrieliño.
The Gabrieliño and their descendants are those people who became associated with Mission San
Gabriel Arcángel, which was established in south-central Los Angeles County on September 8,
1771, in what has ever since been called the San Gabriel Valley. Today, these people are
sometimes referred to as the Tongva, although the term apparently originally (e.g., before the
arrival of Euro-Americans) referred to the inhabitants of the San Gabriel Valley only. In either
case, the inhabitants of Santa Catalina Island and San Clemente Island are often included as
being parts of this tribe, as are the Fernandeño, who inhabited most of the San Fernando Valley.
Note that the Eastern Gabrieliño refers to those who lived south of the San Gabriel Mountains,
mainly in the San Gabriel Valley, while the Western Gabrieliño refers to those who lived along the
western coast of Los Angeles County, from Malibu to Palos Verdes, and includes the people living
in the San Fernando Valley.
The ancestral Gabrieliño arrived in the Los Angeles Basin probably before 500 BCE as part of
the so-called Shoshonean (Takic speaking) Wedge from the Great Basin region and gradually
displaced the indigenous peoples, probably Hokan speakers. Large, permanent villages were
established in the fertile lowlands along rivers and streams and in sheltered areas along the coast.
Eventually, Gabrieliño territory encompassed the watersheds of the Los Angeles, San Gabriel,
Rio Hondo, and Santa Ana Rivers (which includes the greater Los Angeles Basin) to perhaps as
far south as Aliso Creek, as well as portions of the San Fernando, San Gabriel, and San
Bernardino Valleys. Gabrieliño territory also included the islands of San Clemente, San Nicholas,
and Santa Catalina. Recent studies suggest the population may have numbered as many as
10,000 individuals at their peak in the Pre-contact Period.
The subsistence economy of the Gabrieliño was one of hunting and gathering. The surrounding
environment was rich and varied, and the natives were able to exploit mountains, foothills, valleys,
deserts, and coasts. As was the case for most native Californians, acorns were the staple food
(by the Intermediate Horizon), supplemented by the roots, leaves, seeds, and fruit of a wide
variety of flora (e.g., cactus, yucca, sage, and agave). Fresh and saltwater fish, shellfish, birds,
insects, and large and small mammals were exploited.
A wide variety of tools and implements were employed by the Gabrieliño to gather, collect, and
process food resources. The most important hunting tool was the bow and arrow. Traps, nets,
blinds, throwing sticks, and slings were also employed. Fish were an important resource and nets,
traps, spears, harpoons, hooks, and poisons were utilized to catch them. Ocean-going plank
canoes and tule balsa canoes were used for fishing and for travel by those groups residing near
the Pacific Ocean.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-115 Discussion of Environmental Checklist
The processing of food resources was accomplished in a variety of ways: nuts were cracked with
hammer stone and anvil; acorns were ground with mortar and pestle; and seeds and berries were
ground with mano and metate. Yucca, a valuable resource in many areas, was eaten by the
natives and exploited for its fibers.
Strainers, leaching baskets and bowls, knives, bone saws, and wooden drying racks were also
employed. Food was consumed from a variety of vessels. Catalina Island steatite was used to
make ollas and cooking vessels.
Gabrieliño houses were circular domed structures of willow poles thatched with tule. They were
actually quite large and could, in some cases, hold 50 individuals. Other structures served as
sweathouses, menstrual huts, and ceremonial enclosures.
METHODOLOGY
As discussed in Section 4.5 of this IS/MND, the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC)
conducted a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search for the project. The search failed to identify any
sacred places or objects with cultural value to a California Native American tribe on the Project
site. Consistent with requirements of AB 52, the City of Arcadia sent a letter to the one tribe that
has previously expressed interest in being consulted regarding Native American resources for
projects being undertaken in the City of Arcadia. On June 13, 2019, the City sent an invitation to
Andrew Salas, Chairman of the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation, to request any
information or knowledge regarding Native American Sacred Lands or other tribal cultural
resource in or around the Project site, and to ask whether the Tribe would like to consult with the
City pursuant to AB 52. The City requested that the Tribe respond by July 17, 2019. On June 19,
2019, Carolyn Nunez of the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation emailed the City
and requested additional information on the anticipated depth of disturbance. On June 20, 2019,
the City responded to Ms. Nunez that the project would require a maximum excavation depth of
19 feet. On September 4. 2019, an email was received from the Tribe stating that they would like
to consult on the project. On September 9, the City offered meeting times to discuss the Project.
A meeting was set for October 17, 2019 after several calls and messages. On October 15, 2019,
the City received an email from the Tribe asking to reschedule the consultation meeting. On
October 15, 2019, the City responded to the Tribe that the meeting could be scheduled within one
week, otherwise that the project needs to proceed to prevent further delays.
No response has been received from the Tribe to date related to this Project and consultation is
considered complete.
4.18.2 IMPACT ANALYSIS
Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural
resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place,
cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the
landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe,
and that is:
a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in
a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section
5020.1(k), or
b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by
substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision
(c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-116 Discussion of Environmental Checklist
subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall
consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.
Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation. For purposes of impact analysis, a tribal cultural
resource is considered a site, feature, place, cultural landscape, sacred place, or object which is
of cultural value to a California Native American Tribe and is either eligible for the CRHR or a local
register. As indicated in Section 4.5 of this document, based on a SCCIC record search and the
results from the NAHC SLF database results there are no resources within the Project area that
are currently listed on the CRHR. The Project site is generally developed, and only limited work
would occur within native sediments. However, due to the excavation within native sediments that
is required to construct the Project’s subterranean parking garage, there is a potential to
encounter unknown cultural, historic, and/or tribal cultural resources. Therefore, MM CUL-1 will
be implemented during construction requiring the procedures for temporarily stopping work and
obtaining an evaluation of the find by a qualified archaeologist. With implementation of MM CUL-
1, the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact on tribal cultural resources, and
would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource.
Also, based on information available through the record searches at the SCCIC and the NAHC,
and the disturbed and urbanized nature of the Project area, there is no information available that
indicates there are significant tribal resources within the Project area that would be significant
pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code Section 5024.1. However,
as noted above, past consultation with the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation
indicates that the area was traditionally and culturally affiliated with their Tribe. Although no
archaeological resources important to Native Americans have been identified within the Project
area, there is the possibility that undiscovered intact cultural resources, including tribal cultural
resources may be present below the surface in native sediments. With implementation of RR
CUL-1 and MM CUL-1, any inadvertent discoveries of cultural resources or human remains would
be minimized. Impacts relative to this threshold would be less than significant with implementation
of RR CUL-1 and MM CUL-1.
4.18.3 MITIGATION MEASURES
MM CUL-1 Prior to the issuance of a demolition permit, the Applicant shall submit the name
and qualifications of a qualified archaeologist to the City of Arcadia Development
Services Department for review and approval. Once approved, the qualified
archaeologist shall be retained by the Applicant. In the event that suspected
cultural (archaeological) resources or tribal cultural resources are inadvertently
unearthed during excavation activities, the contractor shall immediately cease all
earth-disturbing activities within a 100-foot radius of the area of discovery. The
Project contractor or Applicant shall contact the qualified archaeologist to request
an evaluation of the significance of the find and determine an appropriate course
of action. If avoidance of the resource(s) is not feasible, salvage operation
requirements pursuant to Section 15064.5 of the State California Environmental
Quality Act Guidelines shall be followed. After the find has been appropriately
avoided or mitigated, work in the area may resume.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-117 Discussion of Environmental Checklist
4.19 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of
new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or
storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or
telecommunications facilities, the construction or
relocation of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the
project and reasonably foreseeable future
development during normal, dry and multiple dry
years?
c) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment
provider which serves or may serve the project that it
has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected
demand in addition to the provider’s existing
commitments?
d) Generate solid waste in excess of State or local
standards, or in excess of the capacity of local
infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of
solid waste reduction goals?
e) Comply with federal, state, and local management and
reduction statutes and regulations related to solid
waste?
4.19.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The potable water and sewer services for the Project site are provided by the City of Arcadia
Public Works Services Department. Water pipeline infrastructure and sewer infrastructure is
available in the vicinity. Potable water is available from existing water infrastructure located
adjacent to the Project including an 8-inch main pipeline located in Wheeler Avenue, a 12-inch
main pipeline in Huntington Avenue, an 8-inch pipeline in N. 1st Avenue, and a six-inch pipeline
in Indiana Street. Existing sewer infrastructure includes a 15-inch country trunk link sewer main
located in N. 1st Avenue.
The City’s water supply sources include groundwater production from Main Basin and the
Raymond Basin and direct delivery of treated imported water from the Metropolitan Water District
(MWD). The City currently owns and operates seven active groundwater wells within the Main
Basin (15,200 gallons per minute [gpm] capacity) and 6 active groundwater wells within the
Raymond Basin (4,300 gpm capacity). Additionally, the City has the ability to receive 20 cubic
feet per second (cfs, which is approximately 14,500 acre-feet per year [afy]) of MWD water
(Arcadia 2016).
LACSD is comprised of 24 independent special districts that provide sanitation services, including
wastewater and solid waste management, to 5.6 million people in 78 cities in Los Angeles County.
The Districts’ wastewater management system consists of approximately 1,400 miles of main
trunk sewers, 48 active pumping plants, and 11 wastewater treatment plants (LACSD 2019). The
Districts currently convey and treat approximately 400 million gallons per day (mgd) of
wastewater. Approximately 140 mgd of the treated wastewater is available for reuse, after
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-118 Discussion of Environmental Checklist
receiving a high level of treatment. Wastewater is treated through a regional interconnected
sewerage system called the Joint Outfall System (JOS), which includes the main Joint Water
Pollution Control Plant in Carson and six satellite water reclamation plants (LACSD 2019).
The City contracts with Waste Management Inc. for solid waste collection services. Waste
Management Inc. operates the El Sobrante Landfill located in the City of Corona in Riverside
County, which accepts construction/demolition waste, contaminated soil, mixed municipal waste,
and tires. Waste generated in the City is ultimately disposed of in this landfill or others in the
vicinity. As of April 1, 2018, the latest data available, El Sobrante Landfill had a remaining capacity
of 143,977,170 cubic yards (38,873,835 tons). In January 2019, a total of 289,478 tons was
disposed of at El Sobrante Landfill, for an average of 11,133 tons per operating day. The facility’s
maximum permitted throughput is 16,054 tons per day, so the waste received in January 2019
was well below the facility’s capacity (CalRecycle 2019a).
4.19.2 PROJECT IMPACTS
Regulatory Requirements
RR UTIL-1 The Developer shall comply with all applicable regulations and restrictions set forth
in the City’s Municipal Code, including Section 7472 regarding restrictions on
discharges into the sewer and Section 5130 regarding achievement of annual
waste diversion rates and other applicable requirements in compliance with but not
limited to Assembly Bill 939, Assembly Bill 341, and Assembly Bill 1826.
Impact Discussion
a) Would the project require or result in the relocation or construction of new or
expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power,
natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of
which could cause significant environmental effects?
c) Would the project result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider
which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the
project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?
Less Than Significant With Mitigation. The City of Arcadia provides water and wastewater
service to the Project site; LACSD provides wastewater treatment that the City’s facilities connect
to; and SCE provides electrical service. Required Project infrastructure improvements are
described in Sections 2.2.2 and 2.2.3, and Project off-site improvements are discussed in Section
2.2.4.
Water Facilities
The City of Arcadia Public Works Services Department is responsible for producing, storing, and
distributing potable water to the City and for maintaining the City’s water system infrastructure.
The existing water infrastructure adjacent to the Project includes an 8-inch main pipeline located
in Wheeler Avenue, a 12-inch main pipeline in Huntington Avenue, an 8-inch pipeline in N. 1st
Avenue, and a six-inch pipeline in Indiana Street (Willrodt 2019).
The City obtains water primarily from local groundwater supplies, including from the Main San
Gabriel Basin and the Raymond Basin, as well as treated imported water from the MWD. The City
typically does not utilize its service connection to the MWD sources because the City’s collective
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-119 Discussion of Environmental Checklist
groundwater supplies are sufficient to meet water demands. However, the City has the option to
utilize this as an emergency water supply source if needed (Arcadia 2010a).
For the purposes of assessing existing public water infrastructure capacities, the “average daily
flows” methodology was used. The Project would include 139 residential units with an estimated
402 residents and 10,200 sf of retail space with an estimated 27 on-site employees. Table 43,
Total Domestic Water Demand, provides an estimation of the proposed domestic water demand
for the Project site.
TABLE 43
TOTAL DOMESTIC WATER DEMAND
Water Demand
Number of
Units or
Square
Footage
Total
Occupancy
Indoor Per
Capita Use
Daily
Demand
Annual
Demand
(gallons)
Residential 139 units 402 residents 98 gpd 39,396 gpd 14,379,540
Retail 10,200 sf 27 employees 221 gpd 5,967 gpd 2,177,955
Estimated Total 45,363 gpd 16,557,495
gpd: gallons per day; sf: square feet
Source: Willrodt 2019, DWR 2019, Pacific Institute 2003.
According to the estimated domestic water demand as shown in Table 43, Total Domestic Water
Demand, the average daily water demand would be 45,363 gallons per day (gpd, approximately
16.5 million gallons annually. The City has confirmed that these demands can be accommodated
with the existing potable water infrastructure, and no new pipelines or capacity expansions are
required (Willrodt 2019).
As shown in Exhibit 12, Wet Utility Point of Connection, the Project’s proposed water infrastructure
for the project will include domestic, irrigation, and fire water service lines, meters, and backflow
preventers. Building 2 would connect to the existing water main in Wheeler Avenue via a 6-inch
domestic water service line, meter, and back flow prevention device, and a 6” fire water service
line, meter, and back flow prevention device. Building 1 would connect to the existing water main
in Huntington Drive to the south of the Project site via a 6-inch domestic water service line, meter,
and back flow prevention device, a 6-inch fire water service line, meter, and back flow prevention
device, and a 2-inch irrigation water service line, meter, and back flow prevention device. Any
portions of Wheeler Avenue or Huntington Drive that are disturbed during Project construction
would be repaved in-kind as described in MM TRANS-1.
In addition to the building-specific fire water services, the nearby vicinity block area of the Project
would be designed to maintain a collective simultaneous fire flow of 3,000 gpm for a 3-hour
duration through a combination of site adjacent fire hydrants (Willrodt 2019).
Sanitary Sewer Facilities
As shown in Exhibit 12, Wet Utility Point of Connection, the Project proposes to connect to the
existing 15-inch LACSD trunk line sewer main located in N. 1st Avenue. LACSD has confirmed
that sewage generated by the Project can be accommodated with the existing sewage pipeline
infrastructure, and no capacity driven expansions and/or relocations are required. The Project’s
sewer connection point in N. 1st Avenue would require the new construction of approximately 200
feet of new 8-inch City sewer main (with manholes) beneath the existing public alley corridor,
which would require trenching, demolition/removal of approximately 230 feet of existing 8-inch
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-120 Discussion of Environmental Checklist
sewer. This new sewer main would have two proposed sewer laterals that would connect from
Building 2 to the north and Building 1 to the south. Areas within the public right-of-way disturbed
during construction would be repaved once these activities are completed as required in
MM TRANS-1 (Willrodt 2019).
Based on the information estimated in Table 43, Total Domestic Water Demand, sewage
generation would be approximately 45,363 gpd (approximately 16.5 million gallons annually).
The Joint Water Pollution Control Plant in Carson, which is the primary treatment facility in the
LACSD JOS, provides both primary and secondary treatment for approximately 260 mgd, and
has a total permitted capacity of 400 mgd (LACSD 2019). The estimated 45,363 gpd of residential
and commercial wastewater generated from the Project site constitutes 0.0324 percent of the
remaining 140 mgd plant capacity and would not result in an exceedance of the LACSD treatment
capacity. Additionally, the design capacities of the LACSD’s wastewater treatment facilities are
based on SCAG’s adopted regional growth forecasts. Since the Project complies with the zoning
and General Plan land use designation for the Project site, the full development of the property
was anticipated within SCAG’s growth projections and subsequently, the LACSD’s infrastructure
plans for wastewater facilities. No impacts are anticipated, and no mitigation is required. During
the final design process, the Developer would coordinate with the LACSD to confirm trunk line
adequacy.
Dry Utilities
Dry utility service would be provided by Southern California Edison (SCE) (electricity service),
Southern California Gas Company (gas service), AT&T (telephone service), and Charter
Communications (cable/internet service) from existing facilities near the Project site. The Project
would tie in to existing telephone and cable/internet infrastructure currently providing service to
the site. Also, the Project would require the relocation and partial undergrounding of the existing
dry lines which span the Project site running east-to-west along the northern edge of the existing
public alley as described in more detail above in Sections 2.2.2 and 2.2.3.
b) Would the project have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and
reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry
years?
Less than Significant Impact. As shown in Table 43, Total Domestic Water Demand, the
estimated potable water demand for the Project is anticipated to be approximately 45,363 gallons
per day (gpd, approximately 16.5 million gallons annually). Water supplies would be provided by
the City of Arcadia subject to the requirements set forth in the City’s 2015 Urban Water
Management Plan (UWMP). As set forth in the UWMP, the Baseline Daily Per Capita Water Use
for the City was determined to be 298 gallons per capita per day (gpcd), based on the highest
value calculated for a continuous 10-year period (first baseline period) between 1995–1996 and
2004-2005. Assuming the City’s Urban Water Use Target is 80 percent of the Baseline Daily Per
Capita Water Use, a total of 238 gpcd was estimated (Arcadia 2015). The Project’s anticipated
water use of 106 gpcd10 is well below this goal, due in large part to the mixed-use nature of the
Project, which eliminates the water-intensive landscaping requirements for single-family homes.
Since the Project complies with the zoning and General Plan land use designation for the Project
site, the full development of the property was anticipated within the City’s UWMP growth
projections. Less than significant impacts would occur, and no mitigation is required.
10 45,363 gpd / 429 residents and employees = 105.74 gpcd
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-121 Discussion of Environmental Checklist
d) Would the project generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in
excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of
solid waste reduction goals?
Less than Significant Impact. The Project involves demolition of the existing structures, paved
surfaces, and sewer on the Project site and removal of soil to accommodate the subterranean
parking garage, which would generate debris that would need to be removed from the site. In
order to comply with the State of California Waste Management Act (AB 939), the City of Arcadia
has implemented a recycling program. In accordance with the City’s Municipal Code (§5130.1,
Commercial/Industrial Waste Hauler Requirements), the Developer is required to divert
50 percent of demolition debris generated at the Project site from landfills by recycling, reuse, and
diversion programs. Even without recycling efforts, the solid waste generated from the demolition
Project could be accommodated within the permitted capacity of the El Sobrante Landfill.
No significant impacts would occur, and no mitigation is required.
Project implementation would result in the development of 139 multi-family residential units and
10,200 sf of retail space. Based on a solid waste generation rate of 4.48 pounds per person per
day, assuming a maximum occupancy of 402, the Project’s residential uses would generate
approximately 1,801 pounds of trash per day (USEPA 2019). Based on 5 pounds per 1,000 sf per
day for commercial solid waste generation, the Project’s retail uses would generate approximately
57.5 pounds of solid waste per day (CalRecycle 2019b).
The City of Arcadia is serviced by Waste Management, Inc., which takes trash from Southern
California to the El Sobrante Landfill in the City of Corona in Riverside County. The Project’s
estimated increase in solid waste disposal could be accommodated within the permitted capacity
of the El Sobrante Landfill, which has disposal capacity available for over 50 years. Less than
significant impacts would occur, and no mitigation is required.
e) Would the project comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction
statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
No Impact. The City of Arcadia’s Municipal Code (§5130) sets forth requirements for achieving
annual diversion rates in compliance with AB 939 for all commercial waste as defined in the City’s
Source Reduction and Recycling Element, including varieties of paper, plastic, glass, wood, yard
and greenwaste, and construction/demolition debris (Arcadia 2019). These diversions must be
reported to the City by the recycling company or waste hauler, and each permitted commercial
hauler must provide a recycling container for the customer’s separated recyclables at no
additional charge upon request of the commercial customer. Also, AB 341 requires that
businesses generate over 4 cubic yards of waste per week and multifamily residential properties
with 5 or more units must establish a recycling program. Similarly, AB 1826 requires businesses
and multifamily properties to separate and recycle organic waste if they generate more than 4
cubic yards of each type of waste per week. The City’s Municipal Code Section 5130.1 covers
commercial/industrial waste hauler requirements, including multifamily residential, and outlines
how the City’s contracted waste hauler shall comply with State requirements related to waste
diversion (Arcadia 2019). Compliance with the City’s Municipal Code (RR UTIL-1) will ensure that
the Project has no impact on the ability to satisfy applicable regulations related to solid waste.
4.19.3 MITIGATION MEASURES
Project implementation would not result in significant impacts related to Utilities; therefore, no
mitigation measures are required.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-122 Discussion of Environmental Checklist
4.20 WILDFIRE Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
If located in or near State responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones,
would the project:
a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response
plan or emergency evacuation plan?
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors,
exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project
occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or
the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
c) Require the installation or maintenance of associated
infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency
water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may
exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or
ongoing impacts to the environment?
d) Expose people or structures to significant risks,
including downslope or downstream flooding or
landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope
instability, or drainage changes?
4.20.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The Project is located in a fully developed location within the City of Arcadia with no exposure to
wildfire risk. The nearest very high fire hazard severity zone is located over 0.8 mile to the north
associated with the undeveloped foothills the City.
4.20.2 PROJECT IMPACTS
Regulatory Requirements
None required.
Impact Discussion
a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and
thereby expose project occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the
uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
c) Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads,
fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may
exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the
environment?
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-123 Discussion of Environmental Checklist
d) Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or
downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability,
or drainage changes?
No Impact. As detailed in response to Threshold 4.9(g), given the Project is not located in lands
classified as very high fire hazard severity zones and there is no wildfire risk to the Project during
or site users during its construction or operation, the Project would have no impact and no
mitigation is required.
4.20.3 MITIGATION MEASURES
Project implementation would not result in significant impacts related to wildfire; therefore, no
mitigation measures are required.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-124 Discussion of Environmental Checklist
4.21 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF
SIGNIFICANCE
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Does the project:
a. Does the project have the potential to substantially
degrade the quality of the environment, substantially
reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a
fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining
levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
community, substantially 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?
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)?
c. Does the project have environmental effects which
would cause substantial adverse effects on human
beings, either directly or indirectly?
a) Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a
fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate
a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number or restrict the range
of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the
major periods of California history or prehistory?
Less Than Significant with Mitigation. As discussed in Section 4.4, Biological Resources, there
are no sensitive biological resources, habitat, or species located on the Project site that would be
affected by implementation of the Project. Potential impacts to nesting birds would be less than
significant with implementation of standard regulatory requirements listed in RR BIO-1. Any
Project-related tree removals will be implemented consistent with City policies, including the City’s
Comprehensive Tree Management Program and permitting process as described in RR BIO-2. A
Project landscape plan will be developed as described in RR BIO-3, which will specify the
locations and species of replacement trees. As discussed in Section 4.5, Cultural Resources,
potential impacts to unknown cultural resources and human remains from implementation of the
proposed Project would be less than significant with compliance with RR CUL-1 and with
implementation of MM CUL-1. Therefore, with the incorporation of RR’s and MM’s, the Project
does not have the potential to eliminate important examples of the major periods of California
history or prehistory.
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)?
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-125 Discussion of Environmental Checklist
Less Than Significant with Mitigation. To determine whether cumulatively considerable
impacts could occur, a list of related projects was compiled based on information on file at the
City of Arcadia Development Services Department Planning Division and the City of Monrovia
Department of Community Development Planning Division. The list of related projects in the
Project area is presented in Table 44, Related Projects, and is consistent with the list used for the
Project’s Traffic Study (Appendix H, Psomas 2019e). A total of 7 projects are proposed; are under
construction; or have been recently completed in the vicinity of the Project.
TABLE 44
RELATED PROJECTS
Project Description Size
1 Hotel 175 Hotel Rooms
2,500 SF Restaurant (Part of Hotel)
1,800 SF Coffee Shop
42,700 SF Medical Office
2 Mixed-Use 38 Apartment Units
16,175 SF Commercial
3 Mixed-Use 37 Condo Units
19,360 SF Commercial
4 Residential – Condominium 20 units
5 Residential – Condominium 20 units
6 Hotel and Mixed-Use Development 227 Hotel Rooms
96 Condo Units
38,196 SF Commercial
7 Medical Office, Retail 23,300 SF Medical Office
7,050 SF Retail/Restaurant
Source: Psomas 2019e.
As discussed in Section 4.1, Aesthetics, no mitigation is required for either short-term or long-term
impacts to aesthetics due to Project implementation, and there would be less than significant
impacts. As discussed, the Project site lacks scenic resources. The Project site is located in the
City’s downtown and is immediately surrounded by existing urban development, including
commercial retail, office, and associated parking. With implementation of the Project, the views
of the Project site from off-site locations would be altered but would be compatible with the
intended character of the neighborhood and would not conflict with applicable zoning or other
regulations governing scenic quality. Other related projects in the downtown area would be
required to comply with the land use and development standards of the DMU and/or CBD zones.
Therefore, the Project would not result in cumulatively considerable impacts to aesthetics.
As discussed in Section 4.2, Agriculture and Forestry Resources, no mitigation was required for
either short-term or long-term impacts due to Project implementation. The Project site is located
in an urbanized area and would not convert farmland to non-agricultural use. Therefore, the
Project would not result in cumulatively considerable impacts to agriculture and farming.
As discussed in Section 4.3, Air Quality, no mitigation is required for either short-term or long-term
air quality impacts due to Project implementation. The SCAQMD’s approach for assessing
cumulative impacts is based on the AQMP forecasts of attainment of ambient air quality standards
in accordance with the requirements of the federal and State Clean Air Acts. As discussed earlier
in Threshold 4.3(a), the Project would be consistent with the AQMP (SCAQMD 2017b), which is
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-126 Discussion of Environmental Checklist
intended to bring the SoCAB into attainment for all criteria pollutants.11 The maximum daily
regional construction and operational emissions calculated for the Project, Tables 8 and 11
respectively, would be lower than the applicable SCAQMD daily significance thresholds that are
designed to assist the region in attaining the applicable State and national ambient air quality
standards. The Project would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria
pollutant for which the region is in non-attainment, as described in Threshold 4.3(b). The Project
would be constructed consistent with SCAQMD rules and permitting requirements as further
specified in RR AQ-1. SCAQMD’s policy with respect to cumulative impacts associated with the
above-referenced pollutants and their precursors is that impacts that would be directly less than
significant would also be cumulatively less than significant (SCAQMD 2003). As discussed under
Threshold 4.3(a), short-term construction emissions would occur at less than significant levels.
Therefore, consistent with SCAQMD policy, the cumulative construction impact of criteria
pollutants would also be less than significant. As shown in Table 11, Peak Daily Net Operational
Emissions, operational emissions for all analyzed pollutants would be below the SCAQMD CEQA
significance thresholds. Therefore, the Project would not contribute to a cumulatively considerable
net increase of a pollutant for which the SoCAB is in nonattainment. Emissions of nonattainment
pollutants or their precursors would not be cumulatively considerable and would be less than
significant; no mitigation would be required. Therefore, the Project would not result in cumulatively
considerable impacts to air quality.
As discussed in Section 4.4, Biological Resources, 2 protected trees occur on the Project site
pursuant to the City’s Tree Preservation Ordinance that would need to be removed to
accommodate the project. The Project would require the removal of an additional 2 street trees
protected through the City’s Comprehensive Tree Management Program, as well as an additional
8 trees on the project site. With implementation of RR BIO-2 and RR BIO-3 requiring the
Developer to obtain a permit and submit a landscaping plan for review and approval to the City
Public Works Services Department that includes specifications for replacement street trees, a
less than significant impact would result from the Project, and no mitigation is required. Also,
because tree removal is required, there is the potential for nesting birds subject to the MBTA.
Compliance with the provisions of the MBTA, including implementation of RR BIO-1, would result
in a less than significant impact and no mitigation would be required. Other cumulative projects
would also be subject to compliance with the City’s tree ordinance and the MTBA. Therefore, the
Project would not result in cumulatively considerable impacts to biological resources.
As discussed in Section 4.5, Cultural Resources, two historic-era buildings would be removed,
which have been determined to be ineligible for the National Register of Historic Places. The
records searches conducted for the Project did not identify any previously-identified
archaeological resources recorded within the Project limits. The NAHC Sacred Lands File search
also did not have any known sites in the Project limits. However; in the unlikely event that unknown
historic, archaeological, and paleontological resources, and human remains are discovered on
the site, RR CUL-1, MM CUL-1, and MM GEO-1 would ensure the Project has less than significant
impacts to these resources. Other cumulative projects are located in similar geographic contexts,
generally on developed sites, where historic buildings and unknown/unanticipated archaeological,
tribal cultural resources, and paleontological resources are the primary cultural resource issues
of concern. It is expected that the cumulative projects would adhere to the same or similar
regulatory requirements and mitigation measures as those specified for the Project given their
11 Section 15064(h)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines states “A lead agency may determine that a project’s
incremental contribution to a cumulative effect is not cumulatively considerable if the project will comply with the
requirements in a previously approved plan or mitigation program which provides specific requirements that will
avoid or substantially lessen the cumulative problem (e.g., water quality control plan, air quality plan, integrated
waste management plan) within the geographic area in which the project is located. Such plans or programs must
be specified in law or adopted by the public agency with jurisdiction over the affected resources through a public
review process to implement, interpret, or make specific the law enforced or administered by the public agency”.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-127 Discussion of Environmental Checklist
similar contexts, which would help to avoid and minimize the potential for cumulative impacts.
Therefore, the Project would not result in cumulatively considerable cultural resource impacts.
As discussed in Section 4.6, Energy, the Project would consume energy during the construction
and operations phases of the Project. Energy consumption of the different fuels from each of these
phases have been calculated for the Project and are included above in response to
Threshold 4.6(a). The Project would not involve the wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary
consumption of energy resources during project construction or operation. Fuel energy consumed
during construction would be temporary in nature and would not represent a significant demand on
energy resources. Project implementation would be consistent with the City’s Resource
Sustainability Element of the General Plan, as well as according to adopted efficiency design
standards such as Title 24 energy efficiency standards and the mandatory requirements of the
CALGreen code. Also, the Project’s mixed-use nature and proximity to transit are consistent with
local land use and zoning requirements and may help to further alleviate dependence on
automobiles for some trips Therefore, the Project would not conflict with any State or local plan
for renewable energy or energy efficiency or result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary
consumption of energy resources during project construction or operation.
As discussed in Section 4.7, Geology and Soils, Project implementation would require
implementation of PDF GEO-1 and RR GEO-1. Geology and soils impacts are generally site
specific and there is typically little, if any, cumulative relationship between the development of a
proposed Project and development within a larger cumulative area. For example, development at
the Project site would not alter geologic events or soil features/characteristics (such as ground
shaking, seismic intensity, or soil expansion) at other locations; therefore, the Project would not
result in cumulatively considerable impacts.
As discussed in Section 4.8, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, no mitigation is required for either short-
term or long-term impacts due to Project implementation. Construction-related emissions would
be negligible (53 MTCO2e/yr) and the total operational GHG emissions at buildout of the Project
are estimated at 277 MTCO2e/yr, considerably less than the proposed SCAQMD Tier 3 screening
threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e/yr for all land use types were applied in this analysis. Therefore, the
Project would not result in cumulatively considerable GHG emissions impacts.
As discussed in Section 4.9, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, potential impacts related to the
handling of ACMs and LBP would be mitigated through MM HAZ-1. Adherence to RR HAZ-1
would ensure that the routine use, storage, and handling of hazardous materials on the Project
site during construction and operation of the Project would not result in any risks to public health
and safety. Emergency access and roadway hazards would be mitigated through MM TRANS-1.
Although the cumulative projects listed may have potential impacts associated with hazardous
materials, the environmental concerns associated with hazardous materials are site specific. Each
project is required to address any issues related to hazardous materials or wastes. Federal, State,
and local regulations require mitigation to protect against site contamination by hazardous
materials. Therefore, there would be no cumulative hazards and hazardous materials impacts.
As discussed in Section 4.10, Hydrology and Water Quality, no mitigation is required for either
short-term or long-term impacts due to Project implementation. With implementation of
appropriate BMP’s as described in RR HWQ-1 including the development and implementation of
a project-specific SWPPP as well as compliance with the County’s MS4 Permit and City’s LID
Ordinance, the Project’s surface runoff water quality during construction would comply with
adopted regulatory requirements to ensure that construction activity does not adversely affect
water quality in receiving streams. Implementation of the Project would not result in an increase
in the amount of impervious surfaces on site and would not affect flooding or erosion. Project
design will adhere to the requirements contained in the MS4 Permit and City’s LID Ordinance that
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-128 Discussion of Environmental Checklist
will identify the need and feasibility for long-term site-design, source-control, and treatment-
control BMPs that will be used to control pollutant runoff and to reduce impacts to water quality.
Cumulative projects would also be subject to the regulatory requirements to address storm water
quality and quantities. The Project would not result in cumulatively considerable hydrology and
water quality impacts.
As discussed in Section 4.11, Land Use and Planning, no mitigation was required for either
short-term or long-term impacts due to Project implementation. The Project is consistent with the
City’s General Plan, Development Code, and City Center Design Plan. As with the proposed
Project, previously approved and future development within the City is required to comply with
the adopted land use plans, policies, and ordinances set forth in the General Plan and the Zoning
Ordinance, as well as any other applicable planning documents, and be compatible with
surrounding land uses. Therefore, the Project would not result in cumulatively considerable land
use impacts.
As discussed in Section 4.12, Mineral Resources, no mitigation was required for either short-term
or long-term impacts due to Project implementation. The Project site does not contain known
State- or locally-designated mineral resources. Therefore, there would be no cumulative mineral
resource impacts.
As discussed in Section 4.13, Noise, mitigation is required to minimize the Project’s generation of
excessive groundborne vibration and noise levels during construction. Demolition, grading, and
construction would occur up to the property lines and off-site within the public alley and other
right-of-way areas. The vibration levels for Project construction are provided in Table 32, Vibration
Annoyance Criteria at Sensitive Uses, showing that Project construction would be “distinctly
perceptible” but not exceed existing criteria. The potential for structural damage to adjacent
buildings is provided in Table 33, Structural Damage Criteria at Sensitive Uses, which shows that
the commercial uses immediately west and east of the Project site would be affected in excess of
established criteria, which would result in a significant impact if no mitigation were incorporated.
MM NOI-1 has been incorporated into the Project, which would reduce the Project’s impacts
related to vibration-induced structural damage by limiting use of heavy construction equipment
within 25 feet of off-site buildings. Increases to the ambient noise levels near the Project would
be consistent with applicable standards. Also. the Project would result in temporary noise
increases during construction, such as demolition of existing structures, grading, excavation, and
building construction as described in response to Threshold 4.13(a). The Project would be
constructed consistent with the City’s Noise Ordinance and RR NOI-1 would be implemented,
which requires a plan to be developed and implemented to reduce Project noise impacts during
construction. Permanent noise increases resulting from the Project would include noise generated
by Project traffic and on-site sources such as HVAC systems and trash collection. During Project
operations, exterior noise would be compatible with existing nearby uses according to the CNEL
scale. Interior noise levels were analyzed and the Project would comply with the State of
California’s interior noise standard for residential uses as well as the City’s maximum interior noise
level for residential uses as described in the Noise Element of the General Plan. Therefore, there
would be no cumulative impacts related to noise or vibration.
As discussed in Section 4.14, Population and Housing, no mitigation is required for either
short-term or long-term impacts due to Project implementation. An increase of 402 residents is
considered minimal compared to the current City of Arcadia population estimate of 57,704
persons for the year 2018, and the projected City population of 65,900 persons by 2040 (SCAG
2016). As with the proposed Project, previously approved and future residential development in
the City will be required to comply with the adopted housing plans and growth policies set forth in
the General Plan, as well as any other applicable planning documents. Therefore, there would be
no cumulative impacts related to population or housing.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-129 Discussion of Environmental Checklist
As discussed in Section 4.15, Public Services, no mitigation is required for short-term and
long-term impacts due to Project implementation. In general, cumulative impacts on public
services occur with increasing demands for services from the Project and from related projects in
the respective service areas of affected services. As with the proposed Project, previously
approved and future development in the City will be required to coordinate with the appropriate
public service departments to ensure that adequate levels of service are maintained. The AFD,
APD, AUSD, and Recreation and Community Services Department regularly review their services
and the needed increases in facilities, staffing, and equipment, as necessary, to adequately serve
their service areas and keep response times acceptable. Therefore, Project implementation would
not result in cumulatively considerable impacts to public services.
As discussed in Section 4.16, Recreation, no mitigation was required for short-term and long-term
impacts due to Project implementation. The Project incorporates private patios/balconies, private
courtyard and Skydeck recreational areas, and a public outdoor plaza. As required by the City,
the Developer would be required to pay City park facilities impact fees applicable at the time
building permits are issued. Previously approved and future development in the City would be
required to pay any applicable park fees as well. Therefore, Project implementation would not
result in cumulatively considerable impacts to recreation.
As discussed in Section 4.17, Transportation, the Project would be required to pay a fair share
contribution to cumulative traffic impacts that would result from the project and other cumulative
projects at the E. Huntington Drive/Santa Anita Avenue intersection, as required in MM TRANS-1.
The Project would be implemented before, after, or concurrently with the seven projects identified
in Table 44 and shown in Exhibit 18, Cumulative Projects Map. These Projects are likely to
generate trips that would use the same transportation corridors (e.g., E. Huntington Drive, N. 1st
Avenue, and Santa Anita Avenue) for operational and construction-related traffic. Based on the
analysis presented in the Project’s Traffic Study (Appendix H, Psomas 2019e) and summarized
in the Section 4.17, it is anticipated that the local roadway network would have adequate capacity
to handle the traffic volume increases, with implementation of MM TRANS-1, and impacts would
not be cumulatively considerable.
As discussed in Section 4.18, Tribal Cultural Resources, consultation with the Gabrieleno Band
of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation occurred from June through October of 2019 consistent with the
requirements of AB 52. The Project site is developed and only limited work would occur within
native sediments including the excavation associated with the Project’s proposed subterranean
parking garage. Due to this work in native sediments, there is potential to encounter unknown
cultural, historic, and/or tribal cultural resources. Therefore, MM CUL-1 will be implemented during
construction requiring the procedures for temporarily stopping work and obtaining an evaluation
of the find by a qualified archaeologist. With implementation of MM CUL-1, the proposed Project
would have a less than significant impact on tribal cultural resources, and would not cause a
substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource.
As discussed in Section 4.19, Utilities and Service Systems, the Project would result in
incremental demands for water, wastewater, storm water drainage, solid waste, and other utilities
and service systems. As indicated by the City and other service providers, there is adequate
capacity available in the existing water, wastewater, and storm water drainage system to serve
the Project. Also, there is ample capacity available in the El Sobrante Landfill to dispose of both
construction and operational solid waste. Therefore, the Project’s demand for utilities and service
systems during construction and operation would not result in cumulatively considerable impacts.
As discussed in Section 4.20, Wildfire, no mitigation is required for short-term and long-term
impacts due to Project implementation. The Project is not located in a very high fire hazard
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 4-130 Discussion of Environmental Checklist
severity zone and no potential impacts related to wildfire would result from Project construction
or implementation.
c) Does the project have environmental effects which would cause substantial
adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
Less Than Significant With Mitigation. Project construction and operation would not have the
potential to generate significant adverse impacts on human beings for the resource topics that
relate to human health, including air quality, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and
water quality, noise, public services, and transportation. RR AQ-1 specifies that the Project will
be constructed consistent with applicable rule sand permitting requirements of the SCAQMD. The
Project would be consistent with the requirements contained in the AQMP during construction
and operations and would not exceed localized significance thresholds during construction or lead
to significant toxic air contaminant emissions. The Project would not otherwise expose sensitive
receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations as further discussed above under Threshold
4.3(c). RR-HAZ 1 would be implemented to avoid and minimize potential Project-related risks to
public health and safety that might result from the use, storage, disposal, and transport of
hazardous materials during construction and operation of the Project. Pre-demolition surveys for
ACMs and LBP, as outlined in MM HAZ-1 would be implemented to mitigate the risk of exposure
of construction workers and the nearby public. Design and construction of the Project consistent
with requirements contained in RR HWQ-1, the City of Arcadia LID Ordinance, and the County’s
LID Standards Manual would ensure that potential short-term and long-term impacts surface
water quality are less than significant. Project implementation would result in temporary noise
increases during construction, including demolition, excavation, hauling, and building construction
activities. Table 27, Construction Noise Levels at Noise Sensitive Uses, shows that noise levels
would be increased from existing ambient levels, with the highest temporary noise impacts
occurring for commercial uses on the parcels immediately to the west and east of the Project site.
MM NOI-1 would be implemented to ensure that the City requires the construction contractor to
implement best practices related to construction noise abatement to avoid potential noise impacts
during construction. Also, Project construction would comply with Municipal Code Section 4261,
which establishes restrictions for which construction activities can occur. Project exterior noise
levels would be below the City’s noise and land use compatibility standards, and Project interior
noise levels would be below the City’s interior noise limit for residential uses as described in
4.3(a). Based on coordination with the Arcadia Fire Department and Arcadia Police Department,
these critical public services would be maintained during construction and operation of the Project
as described in Section 4.15 without interruption. RR PUB-1 requires design of the Project
consistent with the applicable codes, ordinances, and regulations, which will be reviewed and
approved by the City during the design review process. Access for emergency service providers
during construction would be maintained as detailed in MM TRANS-1. As described in Section
4.17, Transportation, the Project would not increase transportation hazards due to a geometric
design feature, incompatible use, or result in inadequate emergency access resulting in direct or
indirect substantial adverse effects on human beings.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 5-1 References
SECTION 5.0 REPORT PREPARERS AND CONTRIBUTORS
City of Arcadia
Community Development Department
Assistant City Manager/ Development Services Director ....................... Jason Kruckeberg
Planning and Community Development Administrator ...................................... Lisa Flores
Senior Planner ................................................................................................. Luis Torrico
Fire Department
Deputy Fire Chief ...................................................................................... Barry R. Spriggs
Consultants
Psomas
Principal in Charge/Senior Project Manager ............................................... Jennifer Marks
Lead Preparer/Project Manager .......................................................... Sean Noonan, AICP
Air Quality/Energy/Greenhouse Gas/Noise ...................................................... Tin Cheung
Air Quality/Greenhouse Gas ............................................................................ Daria Sarraf
Biological Resources ...................................................................................... Steve Norton
Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources ................................. Charles Cisneros
Cultural Resources and Noise Monitoring ................................................ Kassie Sugimoto
GIS/Graphics ............................................................................................... Michael Deseo
Paleontology/GIS/Graphics ........................................................................ Melissa Macias
Technical Editing ................................................................................................ Scott Graff
Transportation ........................................................................................... Darlene Danehy
Word Processing/Graphics ............................................................................ Sheryl Kristal
Fuscoe Engineering, Inc.
Project Engineer ................................................................................ Andrew Willrodt, P.E.
Geocon West, Inc.
Civil Engineer .................................................................................. Rene S. Morales, P.E.
Geotechnical Engineer ..................................................................... Neal D. Berliner, G.E.
Geologist ................................................................................... Susan F. Kirkgard, C.E.G.
Humphreys & Partners Architects, L.P.
Project Architect ............................................................................................ Vince Chupka
Kathryn McGee
Architectural Historian ................................................................................ Kathryn McGee
Robin Environmental Management
Project Manager ......................................................................... Robin Chang, Ph.D., P.G.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 5-2 References
This page intentionally left blank
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 6-1 References
SECTION 6.0 REFERENCES
Arcadia, City of. 2019 (April 23, current through). Arcadia, California Municipal Code. Tallahassee,
FL: Municipal Code Corporation.
https://library.municode.com/ca/arcadia/codes/code_of_ordinances
——— 2018. (June). Ordinance No. 2356 Approving General Plan Amendment No. 18-01, Zone
Change No. 18-01, and Text Amendment No. 18-01 of the General Plan Land Use and
Community Design Element and Development Code. Arcadia, CA: Arcadia.
——— 2016 (June). City of Arcadia 2015 Urban Water Management Plan. Arcadia, CA: Arcadia.
https://www.arcadiaca.gov/home/showdocument?id=6860
———2010a (November). Arcadia General Plan. Arcadia, CA: Arcadia.
https://www.arcadiaca.gov/government/City-departments/development-services/general-
plan
——— 2010b (September). Final Program Environmental Impact Report, City of Arcadia 2010
General Plan Update. Arcadia, CA: Arcadia. https://www.arcadiaca.gov/government/City-
departments/development-services/general-plan/general-plan-eir
Bean, L.J. and C.R. Smith. 1978. Gabrieliño. In Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 8,
California, pp. 538–549. Robert F. Heizer, volume editor. Smithsonian Institution.
Washington, D.C.
Berliner, N. 2019 (April 4). Email correspondence between N. Berliner, President, Geocon West,
Inc. and S. Noonan, Project Manager at Psomas.
Blackburn, T. 1963. Ethnohistoric Descriptions of Gabrieliño Material Culture. University of
California Archaeological Survey Annual Report 1962–1963:1–50. Los Angeles.
California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). 2017. California Emission
Estimator Model (CalEEMod)TM Version 2016.3.2, Developed by Trinity Consultants in
Collaboration with SCAQMD and other California Air Districts. Sacramento, CA: CAPCOA.
California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2016 (May 4). Ambient Air Quality Standards.
Sacramento, CA: CARB. http://www.arb.ca.gov/research/aaqs/aaqs2.pdf.
———. 2014 (February). Proposed First Update to the Climate Change Scoping Plan: Building
on the Framework. Sacramento, CA: CARB.
http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/2013_update/ draft_proposed_first_update.pdf.
———. 2008 (December). Climate Change Scoping Plan: A Framework for Change. Sacramento,
CA: CARB. http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/document/ adopted_scoping_plan.pdf.
———. 2005 (April). Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective.
Sacramento, CA: CARB. http://www.arb.ca.gov/ch/handbook.pdf.
California Department of Conservation. 2019a (June 10, access date). California Landslide
Inventory. Sacramento, CA: DOC. https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/lsi/app/
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 6-2 References
——— 2019b (June 10, access date). EQ Zapp Mapper, Earthquake Zones of Required
Investigation. Sacramento, CA: DOC.
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/EQZApp/app/
——— 2019c (June 11, access date). Seismic Hazards Program, Map of Alquist-Priolo Fault
Traces and Hazard Zones, Landslide Zones, and Liquefaction Zones. Sacramento, CA:
DOC. https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/geologichazards/#dataviewer
——— 2016a. Los Angeles County Important Farmland 2016 (Map). Sacramento, CA: DOC.
https://www.conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/fmmp/Pages/LosAngeles.aspx
——— 2016b. Los Angeles County Williamson Act FY 2015/2016 (Map). Sacramento, CA: DOC.
ftp://ftp.consrv.ca.gov/pub/dlrp/wa/
California Department of Finance. 2018. E-5: Population and Housing Estimates for Cities,
Counties, and the State, January 2011-2018, with 2010 Benchmark. Sacramento, CA:
DOF. http://www.dof.ca.gov/Forecasting/Demographics/Estimates/E-5/
California Department of General Services, California Building Standards Commission. 2019 (as
amended). California Building Standards Code (Cal. Code Regs., Title 24). Sacramento,
CA: CBSC.
California Department of Toxic Substances Control. 2019 (April 1, access date). EnviroStor (Data
Management System and Web Mapper). Sacramento, CA: DTSC.
https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/map/
California Department of Transportation. 2011. California Scenic Highway Mapping System.
Sacramento, CA: Caltrans.
http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LandArch/16_livability/scenic_highways/index.htm
California Department of Water Resources. 2004. California’s Groundwater Bulletin 118: South
Coast Hydrology Region, San Gabriel Valley Groundwater Basin. Sacramento, CA: DWR.
https://water.ca.gov/LegacyFiles/groundwater/bulletin118/basindescriptions/4-13.pdf
California Employment Development Department. 2019 (March 22). Monthly Labor Force Data
for Cities and Census Designated Places (CDP), February 2019-Preliminary. Sacramento,
CA: EDD. https://www.labormarketinfo.edd.ca.gov/data/labor-force-and-unemployment-
for-cities-and-census-areas.html
California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR). 2017. State of California General
Plan Guidelines. Sacramento, CA: OPR.
http://opr.ca.gov/docs/OPR_COMPLETE_7.31.17.pdf
California Office of Administrative Law. 2019 (June 10, access date). California Code of
Regulations. Sacramento, CA: OAL. http://ccr.oal.ca.gov/
California Office of Legislative Counsel. 2019 (June 10, access date). Public Resources Code.
Sacramento, CA: OLC.
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displayText.xhtml?lawCode=PRC&division
=13.&title=&part=&chapter=1.&article=
California Water Boards. 2014 (September). Basin Plan for the Coastal Watersheds of Los
Angeles and Ventura Counties.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 6-3 References
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/losangeles/water_issues/programs/basin_plan/basin_pl
an_documentation.html
CalRecycle. 2019a (April 8, access date). SWIS Facility Detail for the El Sobrante Landfill (33-
AA-0217). Sacramento, CA: CalRecycle.
https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/swfacilities/Directory/33-AA-0217
——— 2019b (April 8, access date). Estimated Solid Waste Generation Rates. Sacramento, CA:
CalRecycle. https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/wastecharacterization/general/rates
Cameron, C. 1999. Determining Tribal Boundaries through Potsherds: An Archaeological
Perspective. Pacific Coast Archaeological Society Quarterly, Vol. 35, Numbers 2 and 3,
Spring/Summer.
Chu, C. 2019. (April 8). Telephone correspondence with C. Chu, Senior Administrative Assistant,
Business Services for the Arcadia Unified School District to S. Noonan, Project Manager
at Psomas.
California Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2019 (May 31, access date). California Natural
Diversity Database. CDFW.
California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CalFire). 2019 (June 11, access date). Fire
Hazard Severity Zones (FHSZ) Viewer. Sacramento, CA: CalFire
https://egis.fire.ca.gov/FHSZ/
Englehardt, Z. 1922. San Juan Capistrano Mission. The Standard Printing Co., Los Angeles.
Federal Emergency Management Agency. 2019 (April 1, access date). National Flood Insurance
Rate Map (FIRM). Alexandria, Virginia: FEMA.
https://msc.fema.gov/portal/search#searchresultsanchor
Geocon West, Inc. 2018 (August). Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Mixed Use Development,
117 and 129 East Huntington Drive, 124, 126, and 134 Wheeler Avenue, Arcadia,
California. Burbank, CA: Geocon West, Inc. (Appendix D).
Governor’s Office of Planning and Research. 2018 (December). Technical Advisory on Evaluation
Transportation Impacts in CEQA. Sacramento, CA: OPR.
http://opr.ca.gov/docs/20190122-743_Technical_Advisory.pdf
Harrington, J. P. 1933. Annotations. In: Chinigchinich: A Revised and Annotated Version of
Alfred Robinson’s Translation of Father Geronimo Boscana’s Historical Account of the
Belief, Usages, Customs and Extravagancies of the Indians of this Mission of San Juan
Capistrano Called the Acagchemem Tribe (pp. 91–228), Phil Townsend Hanna, (Ed.).
Fine Arts Press, Santa Ana, California.
Heizer, R. F. (Ed.) 1968. The Indians of Los Angeles County: Hugo Reid’s Letters of 1852.
Southwest Museum Papers 21. Los Angeles.
Humphreys & Partners Architects, L.P. 2019 (July). Architectural Design Review Plan Set.
Newport Beach, CA.
Institute of Transportation Engineers. 2017a. Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition. Washington
D.C.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 6-4 References
———. 2017b. Trip Generation Handbook, 3rd Edition. Washington, D.C.
Jefferson, George T. 1991. A Catalogue of Late Quaternary Vertebrates from California. Natural
History Museum of Los Angeles County, Technical Reports 7: 1–129, updated 2006.
Johnson, John R. and David D. Earle. 1990. Tataviam Geography and Ethnohistory. Journal of
California and Great Basin Anthropology 12(2):191-214.
Johnston, B. E. 1962. California’s Gabrieliño Indians. Southwest Museum, Los Angeles.
Kroeber, A. 1925. Handbook of the Indians of California. Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin
78. Washington, D.C.
Los Angeles to Pasadena Metro Blue Line Construction Authority/ Metro Gold Line Foothill
Extension Construction Authority. 2007. Gold Line Foothill Extension Pasadena To
Montclair Final Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 200361157) Los Angeles and San
Bernardino Counties, California
http://libraryarchives.metro.net/DPGTL/eirs/GoldLine_Foothill/2007_final_eir.htm
McCawley, W. 1996. The First Angelenos: The Gabrieliño Indians of Los Angeles. Malki Museum
Press/Ballena Press Cooperative Publication, Banning and Novato, California.
McGee, K. 2020 (January). Historic Resources Assessment for 124-134 E. Wheeler Avenue and
117-129 E. Huntington Drive, Arcadia, CA 91006. West Hollywood, CA: McGee.
(Appendix B).
McIntyre, Michael J. 1990. Cultural Resources of the Upper Santa Clara River Valley, Los Angeles
and Ventura Counties, California. In: Archaeology and Ethnohistory of the Antelope Valley
and Vicinity, Bruce Love and Walter H. DeWitt (eds.), pp. 1-20. Antelope Valley
Archaeological Society Occasional Papers 2.
McLeod, S. 2019 (May 15). Paleontological Resources for the proposed Huntington Plaza Mixed-
Use Project, Psomas Project #3NWI010100, in the City of Arcadia, Los Angeles County,
project area. Los Angeles, CA: McLeod. (Appendix E).
Los Angeles, County. 2015 (October). Los Angeles County General Plan. Los Angeles County,
CA: Los Angeles County. http://planning.lacounty.gov/assets/upl/project/gp_final-general-
plan.pdf
———. 1991 (December, as amended). Los Angeles County Airport Land Use Commission
Comprehensive Land Use Plan. Los Angeles, CA: LA County.
http://planning.lacounty.gov/assets/upl/data/pd_alup.pdf
Onyx Architects. 2018 (April). City Center Design Plan. Pasadena, CA.
Psomas. 2019a (June). Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Calculations including
CalEEmod Output. (Appendix A).
———. 2019b (June). Energy Calculations. (Appendix C).
———. 2019c (June). Noise Calculations. (Appendix G).
———. 2019c (June). Noise Calculations.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 6-5 References
———. 2019d (June). Cultural Resources Records Search Results.
———. 2019e (August). Traffic Impact Study for Huntington Plaza. Santa Ana, CA: Psomas.
(Appendix H).
Robin Environmental Management. 2017 (October). Phase I Environmental Site Assessment.
San Dimas, CA: Robin Environmental. (Appendix F).
Sanitation District of Los Angeles County. 2019 (April 1, access date). Wastewater treatment
facilities overview and Joint Outfall System Water Reclamation Plant webpage.
https://lacsd.org/aboutus/default.asp
South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). 2017a (April 6, last accessed). Air
Quality Management Plan (AQMP). Diamond Bar, CA: SCAQMD.
http://www.aqmd.gov/home/library/clean-air-plans/air-quality-mgt-plan.
———. 2017b (March). Final 2016 Air Quality Management Plan. Diamond Bar, CA: SCAQMD.
http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/clean-air-plans/air-quality-management-
plans/2016-air-quality-management-plan/final-2016-aqmp/final2016aqmp.pdf?sfvrsn=15.
———. 2016 (February). National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and California
Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) Attainment Status for South Coast Air Basin.
Diamond Bar, CA: SCAQMD. http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/clean-air-
plans/air-quality-management-plans/naaqs-caaqs-feb2016.pdf?sfvrsn=2.
———. 2015 (March). SCAQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds. Diamond Bar, CA:
SCAQMD. http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/scaqmd-air-quality-
significance-thresholds.pdf?sfvrsn=2.
———. 2013 (February). Final 2012 Air Quality Management Plan (February 2013). Diamond
Bar, CA: SCAQMD. http://www.aqmd.gov/home/library/clean-air-plans/air-quality-mgt-
plan/final-2012-air-quality-management-plan.
———. 2010 (September 28). Greenhouse Gas CEQA Significance Threshold Stakeholder
Working Group #15 (slide presentation). Diamond Bar, CA. SCAQMD.
https://planning.lacity.org/eir/8150Sunset/References/4.E.%20Greenhouse%20Gas%20
Emissions/GHG.39_SCAQMD%20GHG%20Meeting%2015.pdf.
———.2009 (March). SCAQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds. Diamond Bar, CA:
SCAQMD. http://www.aqmd.gov/ceqa/handbook/signthres.pdf.
———. 2008 (October). Draft Guidance Document – Interim CEQA Greenhouse Gas (GHG)
Significance Thresholds. Diamond Bar, CA: SCAQMD.
———. 1993. CEQA Air Quality Handbook. Diamond Bar, CA: SCAQMD.
Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). 2016. 2016-2040 RTP/SCS Final
Growth Forecast by Jurisdiction. Los Angeles, CA: SCAG.
http://www.scag.ca.gov/Documents/2016_2040RTPSCS_FinalGrowthForecastbyJurisdic
tion.pdf
———. 2001 (October 31). Employment Density Study Summary Report. Los Angeles, CA:
SCAG.
Huntington Plaza Mixed-Use Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
R:\Projects\NWI\3NWI010100\ISMND\ISMND_Huntington Plaza-041320.docx 6-6 References
http://www.mwcog.org/file.aspx?A=QTTlTR24POOOUIw5mPNzK8F4d8djdJe4LF9Exj6lX
OU%3D
Spriggs, B. 2019 (April 23). Email correspondence between B. Spriggs, Deputy Fire Chief,
Arcadia Fire Department and L. Torrico, Senior Planner, City of Arcadia.
Torrico, L. 2019a. (April 23). Email correspondence between L. Torrico, Senior Planner, City of
Arcadia and S. Noonan, Project Manager at Psomas.
Torrico, L. 2019b. (April 24). Email correspondence between L. Torrico, Senior Planner, City of
Arcadia and S. Noonan, Project Manager at Psomas.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2019a (May 29, last accessed). Nonattainment
Areas for Criteria Pollutants (Green Book). Washington, D.C: USEPA.
https://www.epa.gov/green-book.
———. 2019b (April 8, access date). National Overview: Facts and Figures on Materials, Wastes
and Recycling. Washington, DC: USEPA. Retrieved from https://www.epa.gov/facts-and-
figures-about-materials-waste-and-recycling/national-overview-facts-and-figures-
materials
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Environmental Conservation Online System (ECOS). 2019 (May
31, access date). Critical Habitat Portal. Washington, DC: USFWS.
https://fws.maps.arcgis.com/home/webmap/viewer.html?webmap=9d8de5e265ad4fe098
93cf75b8dbfb77
Willrodt, A. 2019 (April 19). Email correspondence between A. Willrodt, Principal/Senior Project
Manager at Fuscoe and S. Noonan, Project Manager at Psomas.
APPENDICES ARE PROVIDED FOR DOWNLOAD
IN A SEPARATE PDF FILE