HomeMy WebLinkAbout5. PLN-16-00175 9066 Firestone-STAFF REPORT
PLANNING DIVISION
DATE: FEBRUARY 15, 2017
TO: PLANNING COMMISSION
SUBMITTED BY: ALDO E. SCHINDLER, DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
REVIEWED BY: WILLIAM E. DAVIS, CITY PLANNER
PREPARED BY: GUILLERMO ARREOLA, SENIOR PLANNER
SUBJECT: PLN-16-00175 (MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION, SPECIFIC
PLAN AMENDMENT, LOT MERGER, SITE PLAN REVIEW,
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT), AND A GENERAL PLAN
CONSISTENCY FINDING – A REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT AN 88,550
SQUARE FOOT, 60-FOOT HIGH, 140-ROOM MARRIOT SPRINGHILL
SUITES HOTEL, WITH ANCILLARY SALE OF ALCOHOL
LOCATION: 9066 FIRESTONE BLVD
ZONING: LAKEWOOD/FIRESTONE SPECIFIC PLAN (SP 91-2)
REPORT SUMMARY
Marriot Springhill Suites is proposing to construct a new four-story, 88,550 square foot, 140-unit
hotel on a vacant 2.58-acre parcel located on the south side of Firestone Boulevard, between
Lakewood Boulevard and Woodruff Avenue, across from the Stonewood Shopping Center. The
hotel includes a fitness center, rooftop pool and bar, a 3,000 square foot conference room, 161
off-street parking spaces, and landscaping.
The request includes a proposal to combine two existing parcels into a single parcel; an
amendment to the Lakewood/Firestone Specific Plan to allow a building to exceed the maximum
allowed height of three stories and thirty-eight feet, create hotel parking standards, to reduce the
street landscape standard from ten feet to two feet; construction of the hotel, landscaping and
off-street parking; and the ancillary sale of alcohol in conjunction with a hotel. In addition to the
entitlements, staff has reviewed the project for compliance with the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) and believes adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration is warranted for
this request. Based on the analysis contained in this report, staff is recommending the Planning
Commission adopt the following titled resolutions:
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
DOWNEY RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO THE
LAKEWOOD/FIRESTONE SPECIFIC PLAN (91-2).
PC Agenda Page 1
9066 Firestone Blvd. – PLN-16-00175
February 15, 2017 - Page 2
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
DOWNEY APPROVING A LOT MERGER, SITE PLAN REVIEW,
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (PLN-16-00175) TO ALLOW THE
CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A 140-ROOM HOTEL, AND A
GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY FINDING, ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT
9066 FIRESTONE BOULEVARD, ZONED LAKEWOOD/FIRESTONE
SPECIFIC PLAN (91-2)
BACKGROUND
On November 24, 2015, the City Council approved a purchase and sale agreement between
Downey Hospitality, LLC and the City of Downey to construct a recognized major hotel on
property located at 9066 Firestone Boulevard. The subject site is a 2.58-acre irregular-shaped
parcel located on the south side of Firestone Blvd., between Lakewood Boulevard and Woodruff
Avenue. The project site is vacant, with asphalt concrete pavement in the northern portion of
the site and patches of grass, and numerous dirt mounds, a result of the site being used as a
staging area by the City of Downey. Chain-link fencing exists along all borders of the site, with
two trees located along the western edge. The site was previously improved with a Montessori
School and a tire shop, both since demolished. The uniquely shaped property has a buildable
area located 215-feet from the front property line, which creates unique development
challenges.
View of Site from Firestone Blvd.
The site has a General Plan Land Use Designation of General Commercial and is within the
Lakewood/Firestone Specific Plan (SP 91-2). Specifically, the property comprises Site 17,
Subarea 5, Sector A of the Specific Plan. The Specific Plan provides the zoning regulations and
standards for all properties within the boundaries of the plan.
PC Agenda Page 2
9066 Firestone Blvd. – PLN-16-00175
February 15, 2017 - Page 3
The surrounding General Plan land use designations, zoning, and uses are as follows:
General Plan, Zoning and Existing Land Use
General Plan/Specific
Plan
Zoning Existing Use
Subject
Site
General Commercial Lakewood/Firestone
Specific Plan 91-2
Vacant
North General Commercial Stonewood Specific Plan
89-1
Stonewood Shopping Center
South General
Commercial/Low
Medium Density
Residential
C-2
R-2/R-3
Union Pacific Railroad Tracks,
Single Family
Residential/Multi-Family
Residential Uses
East General Commercial Lakewood/Firestone
Specific Plan 91-2
Retail and Automotive
Establishments
(Big 5 Sporting Goods,
Automotive Repair)
West General Commercial Lakewood/Firestone
Specific Plan 91-2
Retail Establishments
(Fallas Paredes, Big Lots)
On June 27, 2016, the applicant submitted the applications for the project described above.
This application was deemed incomplete due to missing information on the project plans on July
28, 2016. The applicant submitted revised plans, but the application was deemed incomplete on
September 29, 2016. The remaining information needed to complete the application was
submitted to the City on October 31, 2016. Accordingly, staff deemed the application complete
on October 31, 2016.
With the application deemed complete, staff initiated the environmental analysis of the proposed
project. As a result of this process, the details of which are discussed later in this report, a
Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impacts (MND) has been prepared. A Notice
of Intent to adopt the MND was posted at the Los Angeles County Clerk on January 26, 2017.
In addition to the Notice of Intent, a notice of the pending public hearing was published in the
Downey Patriot as a 1/8 th page ad and mailed to all property owners within 500’ of the subject
site on January 26, 2017.
DISCUSSION
Marriot Springhill Suites is proposing to construct a new four-story, 88,550 square foot, 140-unit
hotel on a vacant 2.58-acre parcel located on the south side of Firestone Boulevard, between
Lakewood Boulevard and Woodruff Avenue, across from the Stonewood Shopping Center. The
hotel includes a fitness center, rooftop pool and bar, a 3,000 square foot conference room, 161
off-street parking spaces, and over 17,000 square feet of landscaping.
There are four aspects to the request: 1) amending the Lakewood/Firestone Specific Plan to
allow the four-story, 60-foot high hotel, to allow the ancillary sale of alcohol in conjunction with a
hotel, create hotel parking standards, to reduce the street landscape standard from ten feet to
PC Agenda Page 3
9066 Firestone Blvd. – PLN-16-00175
February 15, 2017 - Page 4
two feet; 2) a lot merger to consolidate two parcels into one 2.58 acre parcel 3) a Site Plan
Review for the architectural design and site improvements; 4) a conditional use permit for the
hotel use, and the ancillary sale of alcohol in conjunction with a hotel.
Specific Plan Amendments
As stated above, the Lakewood/Firestone Specific Plan lists hotels as conditional uses. The
sale of alcohol is conditionally permitted, but only in conjunction with the operation of a
restaurant. Therefore, to conditionally permit the sale of alcohol as an ancillary use to a hotel,
the specific plan must be amended.
1. Conditional Uses
Permitted uses and conditionally permitted uses allowed in the Lakewood/Firestone Specific
Plan area are listed in Sections III-A (C)(1) and III-A (C)(2), respectively. In addition to the
standard permitted and conditionally permitted uses, each subarea in the specific plan contains
permitted and conditionally permitted uses allowed within the specified subarea. For Subarea
5A, these uses are listed in Sections III-F (C)(1) and III-F (C)(2). On January 25, 2000, the City
Council adopted Ordinance No. 1075, which amended the Lakewood/Firestone Specific Plan
91-2 to add motels and hotels as conditionally permitted uses in Subarea 5A, Section III-F
(C)(2). The applicant is proposing to amend Section III-F (C)(2) to read as follows:
2. Conditional Uses
a. Standard Conditional Uses, as listed in Section III-A of this Specific Plan
b. Hotels, including the ancillary sale of liquor and/or beer and wine in
conjunction with the hotel
c. Motels
Bars, banquet rooms, restaurants, and small, accessory stores are commonly found in relatively
large hotels as ancillary uses, and are primarily frequented by hotel guests. The applicant has
indicated the proposed hotel will include the ancillary sale of alcohol and/or beer and wine for
the following uses:
• Bar – open to the public
• Conference/Banquet Room – Invited guests only (not limited to hotel guests)
• Buffet – Breakfast, Lunch and Dinner
• Market – Off-site consumption
The Lakewood/Firestone Specific Plan allows for a wide variety of retail and commercial uses,
including restaurants and cafes, movie theaters, etc. In addition, the General Plan vision for
Downey is to enhance Downey’s role as the premiere quality city in the southeast area of Los
Angeles. As such, it is staff’s opinion that the addition of a hotel will complement the existing
permitted uses in the specific plan, and further the vision of the General Plan. Furthermore,
staff believes that the ancillary sale of alcohol in conjunction with a hotel is consistent with a
hotel use.
2. Height
The general development standards for the Specific Plan are listed in Section III-A – Standards
Applicable to all Sites. The maximum height in the Specific Plan is three stories or 38-feet,
whichever is less, unless a specific area provides a specific height requirement. Subarea 5A
PC Agenda Page 4
9066 Firestone Blvd. – PLN-16-00175
February 15, 2017 - Page 5
does not include specific height requirements, thus the site falls under Section III-A and the 38-
foot high, three-story height requirement.
The development standards were implemented with the adoption of the Firestone/Lakewood
Specific Plan in 1992, however, at the time, the Specific Plan did not list hotels as a permitted
use. On January 25, 2000, the City Council amended the Lakewood/Firestone Specific Plan to
allow hotels and motels as conditionally permitted uses on Site 17, Subarea 5A. However, the
Specific Plan was never amended to increase the allowable height commensurate to the type
and size of hotel that would complement the surrounding commercial uses.
Development of the site is a challenge due to the unique shape of the lot, as well as
development of surrounding sites. The primary building pad is located approximately 255-feet
from the front property line. The view to any potential development of this building pad is
somewhat obscured by a 47-foot tall building along the west property line, and located only 75
feet from the front property line. Due to the combination of the location of the adjacent 47-foot
high building and the 255-foot setback of the subject site, the applicant has requested to amend
Section III-F(F) by adding the following:
F. Site-Specific Development Standards
1. Additional Standards for Site 14
a. Any parcel map concerning Site 14 must show an irrevocable Offer of
Dedication along Lakewood Boulevard and Firestone Boulevard for future
roadway expansion to identified standards for right-of-way widths, as
described in Section V of this specific plan.
b. Maximum height on Site 14 shall be one (1) story
2. Additional Standard for Site 15
a. Any parcel map concerning Site 15 must an irrevocable Offer of Dedication
along Lakewood Boulevard and Firestone Boulevard for future roadway
expansion to identified standards for right-of-way widths, as described in
Section V of this specific plan.
3. Additional Standard for Site 16
a. Maximum height within the building envelope closest to Firestone Boulevard
shall be one story
4. Additional Standard for Sites 18 and 19
a. Maximum height on Site 18 and Site 19 shall be one (1) story.
5. Additional Standard for Site 17
a. Maximum building height on Site 17 shall be 60-feet.
Staff is supportive of the specific plan amendment because the existing maximum height
standard of 38-feet and three-stories would not provide the needed visibility along Firestone
Boulevard to create a successful development on a site with a building pad located
approximately 255-feet from the front property line, and with a view from Firestone Boulevard
partially blocked by an existing 47-foot high commercial building. The requested height is also
appropriate for the type of hotel the City desires at this location.
PC Agenda Page 5
9066 Firestone Blvd. – PLN-16-00175
February 15, 2017 - Page 6
3. Street Landscape Requirement
The site provides shared access between the properties to the east (Dunkin Donuts) and to the
west (Fallas Paredes). Due to the unique shape of the lot, and to accommodate and maintain
the existing shared access between the properties, the applicant is requesting that the ten-foot
landscape requirement be reduced to two feet. As shown on the site plan, the applicant is
proposing a two-foot, seven-inch landscape planter along the northwest corner of the property,
adjacent to the Fallas Paredes property. The planter widens to five-feet heading towards the
driveway entrance. This two-foot landscape setback would allow sufficient space between the
ends of the parking spaces fronting Firestone Boulevard and the proposed landscape planter
that protects the existing parking spaces located in front of the Fallas Parades building.
Installing a landscape planter deeper than two-feet, seven inches would disrupt the traffic flow
between the two properties. A secondary benefit of protecting the shared access between
properties is that it limits the number of driveway access points on streets, and limits the amount
of roadway traffic by keeping vehicles off the streets.
The proposed amendment to Section IV(D)(1) would read as follows:
1. Landscape Requirements
a. Landscaped planters shall be provided adjacent to street property lines in the
following widths. These areas shall be planted with trees, except adjacent to Nash
Avenue. Developments on separate parcels shall use consistent species in their
landscaped street setback planters. The widths indicated exclude vehicle overhand
areas.
Cecilia Street: fifteen (15) feet
Firestone Blvd
Subarea 5: ten (10) feet
Subarea 5A, Site 17 two (2) feet
Other Subareas: five (5) feet
Lakewood Boulevard: None
Subarea 3: None
Other Subareas: five (5) feet
Nash Avenue: three (3) feet
Woodruff Avenue: five (5) feet
4. Hotel Parking Requirements
While Section III-A (F) of the Lakewood/Firestone Specific Plan states that the parking
provisions of the Specific Plan supersede those listed in the Downey Municipal Code, the
Specific Plan does not provide specific parking standards for hotels. Section III-A (F) does state
that parking requirements and development standards not addressed by the specific plan, shall
comply with the parking requirements in the Downey Municipal Code; however staff has decided
to provide new parking standards for hotel, because the current Downey parking standards are
too restrictive.
Based on the City’s hotel parking standards, the site would be short seven parking spaces.
Therefore, staff researched the City of Anaheim’s hotel parking standards to use as a guide to
create new parking standards for hotels. The City of Anaheim is a destination city with
numerous hotels throughout, not just in the entertainment sector of the City. Staff believed that
PC Agenda Page 6
9066 Firestone Blvd. – PLN-16-00175
February 15, 2017 - Page 7
using the City of Anaheim’s parking standards would bring the hotel parking standards up to-
date with more current parking standards.
The proposed 140-room hotel includes a 1,770 square foot bar/lounge, and a 3,000 square foot
conference/banquet room. As mentioned above, using Anaheim’s parking standards for hotels,
staff proposed an amendment to Section III-A(F)(1) as follows:
• 0.8 space per guest room;
• Eight (8) spaces for 1,000 square feet of banquet/conference room;
• Ten (10) spaces per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area for full service, outdoor dining,
walk -up and fast food restaurants, and bars;
• One (1) parking space for 1,000 square feet of retail space
• Plus 0.25 space for each employee working in the guest room areas.
Rooms/Units
Parking Ratio
Parking
Spaces
Required
Rooms 140 .8 spaces per room 112
Conference room 3,000 sq.ft. 8 spaces per 1,000 sq.ft. 24
Bar/Lounge 1,770 sq.ft. 10 spaces per 1,000 sq.ft. 18
Retail store/market 93 sq.ft. 1 space per 1,000 sq.ft. 1
Employees 16 .25 per employee 4
Total 159
Provided 161
The hotel is providing 161 total parking spaces, which would be in compliance with the 159
required parking spaces listed in the proposed amendment. The parking requirement for these
ancillary uses is lower than stand-alone bars/lounges or retail markets, as these facilities will
primarily be used by hotel guests; however, the bar/lounge, conference/banquet room and small
retail store/market and will be open to the public.
Lot Merger
Two vacant contiguous properties make up the lot merger application and they encompass the
front and rear lots that make up the subject site. They include 9062 and 9066 Firestone
Boulevard.
Section 66499.20-3/4 of the Subdivision Map Act permits the merger of parcels when
contiguous properties are held in common, which is evident in this case. The proposed merger
is also aligned with the City’s purpose in permitting mergers: create larger lots that further good
planning practices (Zoning Ordinance Section 9960.01). Merging the front 24,730 square foot lot
and the rear 87,555.6 square foot parcel would result in a 112,285.6 square foot (2.58 acre)
parcel. Section III (D) states that:
“Properties within the specific plan may not be subdivided into parcels less than three
acres. Existing parcels smaller than these minimums may be developed according to the
standards of this specific plan”.
While both lots are presently developable, merging the two lots would bring the subject site
closer into compliance with Section III (D), and create a site with more development
opportunities.
PC Agenda Page 7
9066 Firestone Blvd. – PLN-16-00175
February 15, 2017 - Page 8
Site Plan Review
The Site Plan Review is to evaluate the architectural design of the proposed hotel and all of the
site improvements. The applicant proposes to construct a four-story, 88,550 square foot Marriot
Springhill Suites hotel on the site. The hotel will include 140-rooms and 161 parking spaces.
The applicant estimates that they will have 30 employees with a peak of 16 employees during
the busiest shift. According to the applicant:
“Downey Hospitality LLC is proud to bring one of Marriott International’s most
exciting brands, SpringHill Suites to the City of Downey. This will be an upper-
moderate, all-suites hotel, which delivers the space, and stylish, inspiring design
that enriches the guests’ travels at a great value. With over 300 SpringHill Suites
hotels throughout the United States and Canada, over 58% of guests make
reservations by taking full advantage of the globally recognized and honored
Marriott Rewards reservation system. This proposed all-suite hotel will features a
roof top lounge, a 3,000 square foot meeting/banquet space, fitness center, pool
and spa, and complimentary hot breakfast. All of these amenities, along with the
architectural fenestrations unique to Downey, will provide a sense of place
reflective of the City’s vision in revitalizing Firestone Boulevard”.
The proposed hotel will measure 88,550 square feet, four-stories, and include 140 suites.
There will be 109 suites with king-sized beds, and 31 suites with two, queen-sized beds, 80% of
the rooms will have showers only, and 20% will include tubs. Each suite will include:
• Dedicated workspaces
• Separate areas to sleep, work, and relax
• In-suite microwave and a mini-fridge
The hotel will be located at the south portion of the lot, 52-feet from the 100-foot wide railroad
right-of-way located adjacent to the site. This location of the building is within the approved
building envelope, as listed in the specific plan. Access to the site is from Firestone Blvd,
through a shared access driveway with Dunkin Donuts. Staff has added a condition of approval
that the applicant provide enhanced decorative, colored concrete at the driveway entrance, to
match the proposed decorative concrete located under the porte-cochere. Two-way traffic will
be provided within the front two driveways, with one-way circulation around the hotel building.
A total of 161 parking stalls are provided and distributed throughout the site, including six (6)
handicapped accessible parking stalls located adjacent to the hotel entrance. The loading area,
made up of two (2) 40-foot long spaces, is located along the mid-west portion of the site. The
loading area will allow for the quick unloading of supplies, merchandise, etc. from trucks
delivering and picking up to and from the hotel.
The trash enclosure area will be located at the southwest corner of the lot. Staff has added a
condition of approval that requires the trash enclosure match the color and materials used on
the hotel.
The site will include a combination of block walls and wrought iron fencing along the perimeter
property lines. Some property lines areas already include a six-foot high block wall. As part of
the mitigation requirements and conditions of approval, the applicant will be required to install a
seven-foot high masonry block wall along the south property. A six-foot high masonry block wall
is proposed adjacent to the rear property line of the Fallas Paredes property, the southern 97-
PC Agenda Page 8
9066 Firestone Blvd. – PLN-16-00175
February 15, 2017 - Page 9
feet of the west property line. The southern 258-feet of the east property line will be improved
with a three-foot high retaining wall and wrought iron fencing
Staff has reviewed the proposed hotel and has found that the development complies with all of
the standards set forth in the amended specific plan. A summary of the development standards
follows:
Standard Requirement Proposed
Lot Size 3-acres 2.58-acres
FAR n/a
Height* 3 stories/38’ 4 story/60’
Lot Coverage 25% 19.7%
Landscaping 11,239 s.f. (10%) 17,300 s.f. (15.4%)
Building Setbacks
Firestone Blvd. (north)
Side (west)
Side (east)
South (Railroad)
10’ ~255’
n/a 52.25’’
n/a 49’
n/a 52.5’
Landscape Setback*
Front
Side
Rear (Abutting a
Railroad right-of-way)
10’
5’
3’
2’
5’
5’
Loading Spaces 2 2
Parking* 156 spaces 161 spaces *Per proposed specific plan amendment
Nighttime site illumination will be through a combination of decorative parking lot lighting
standards and low, bollard lights along the walkways. Staff is recommending a condition of
approval that requires all exterior lights be LED. To ensure that the lights do not illuminate the
adjoining properties or the right-of-way, the applicant has submitted a photometric plan, which
indicates that no light spillage will occur.
The applicant is proposing a modern architectural style for the building. The building design
includes linear elements, and horizontal and vertical features, pop-outs, all helping to create a
linear inspired design common in Modern architecture. The building façades will include varying
wall planes, heights, and rooflines, as well as contrasting colors and materials.
The building will incorporate some of the following colors and materials:
• Combination of White/Gray Exterior Plaster;
• Dark Wood Finish Cladding
• Mint Green Panels
• Aluminum Framed windows with a Dark Bronze Finish
• Metal Louvers
• Metal Fins between Windows
• Decorative Brown perforated metal with backlighting
The building’s primary finish is a white and gray plaster finish, with a dark brown plaster finish
along the first floor. The front elevation includes additional architectural features, such as the
dark wood cladding, centrally located along the upper edge of the building, mint-green panels
accentuate the central portion of the hotel building, as well as a decorative porte-cochere that
serves both a pedestrian protection during inclement weather, and to support a pool, bar and
PC Agenda Page 9
9066 Firestone Blvd. – PLN-16-00175
February 15, 2017 - Page 10
lounge located above it. The upper portions of the porte-cochere will be comprised of
decorative composite panels, while the stairwell that leads to the second floor pool will be
wrapped with brown, decorative, backlit metal. The vertical brown elements located at the east
and west ends of the front façade, will also include backlit, decorative brown metal between
brown, plaster columns.
The east and south elevations will include varying building heights and wall planes, decorative
metal fins separating the windows, and a the three-colored, scored plaster finish: brown, white
and gray.
PC Agenda Page 10
9066 Firestone Blvd. – PLN-16-00175
February 15, 2017 - Page 11
The Lakewood/Firestone Specific Plan requires that a least 10% of the site be landscaped.
Based on the 2.85-acre lot area, a minimum 11,239 square feet of landscaping must be
provided. The applicant is providing over 17,300 square feet of landscape area, which is
located along the property lines, within the parking areas, along the central walkway, and
adjacent to the hotel. The proposed landscape palette includes four types of trees, a variety of
shrubs, and ground cover, all of which are considered drought tolerant plants.
The proposed landscape palette is as follows:
Name Size Number
Tree
Weeping Bottlebrush (callistemon viminalis) 15 gal 9
St. Mary (magnolia grandiflora) 15-gal 12
Indian Hawthorn (tree form) (rhaphiolepsis indica ‘majestic beauty’) 24” box 10
Mexican Fan Palm (washingtonia robusta) 12’ BTH 18
Shrubs
Kaleidescope Abelia (ablia grandiflora) 1-gal 168
Bear’s Breech (acanthus mollis) 5-gal 43
Agapantha (agapanthus orientalis)) 5-gal 109
Ooh La La Bougainvillea (bougainvillea ‘monka’) 1-gal 7
Fortnight Lily (dietes iridioides) 1-gal 18
Flax Lily (phormium “gold sword” 5-gal 10
Daylily (hemerocallis hybrid) 1-gal 40
Jack Spratt New Zealand Flax (phormium jack spratt) 1-gal 119
Amazing Red New Zealand Flax (phormium monrovia red) 5-gal 43
Cream de Mint (pittosporum tobira ‘cream de mint’) 1-gal 96
Shrubby Yew Pine (podocarpus macrophyllus ‘maki’ 5-gal 22
Indian Hawthorne (rhaphiolepsis indica) 1-gal 87
Vines
Star Jasmine (trachelospermum jasminoides) 5-gal 72
Ground Cover
Blue Fescue (festuca glauca) 12” o.c. 1,320 sf
Wood chips as mulch in all planter areas, 3” thick in shrub areas, 2’
thick in ground cover areas
17,300 sf
Conditional Use Permit
The Lakewood/Firestone Specific Plan allows hotels with the approval of a conditional use
permit. In addition, the applicant is also requesting the ancillary sale of alcohol in conjunction
with the proposed hotel. As previously stated, the applicant is requesting to amend the specific
PC Agenda Page 11
9066 Firestone Blvd. – PLN-16-00175
February 15, 2017 - Page 12
plan to allow ancillary sales of alcohol in conjunction with a conditional use permit on Site 17,
Subarea 5A of the Specific Plan.
The proposed hotel will be four-stories tall, and include 140 rooms. The first floor includes the
front desk/check in area, a communal lounge area, front desk and buffet area. The first floor
also includes a 3,000 square foot conference/banquet room, a bar and lounge area offices, and
a small market (less than 100 square feet in area). Eighteen guest suites will be located on the
first floor.
The second floor includes thirty-eight suites, a fitness center, a bar and lounge, and a pool and
spa. The third and fourth floors will include 42 suites each.
In reviewing the use compatibility to the surrounding properties, staff believes that the proposed
hotel would have minimal impacts. The hotel is located on a major arterial, with commercial
properties to the east and west of the site, and a one-hundred foot wide railroad right-away to
the south. The properties located south of the railroad right-of-way are residentially zoned and
developed with single-family homes. The hotel, at its nearest point will be located approximately
fifty-two feet from the south property line and 152-feet from the residentially zoned properties
across the railroad- right-of -way. One of the mitigation measures, as well as a condition of
approval, requires that the applicant construct a seven-foot high masonry block wall along the
southwest property line to limit any potential noise issues associated with the operation of the
hotel. With the requirement for a seven-foot high masonry block wall, the hotel use should not
negatively impact the residential neighborhood across the railroad right-of-way, and any future
development.
The applicant has indicated that they will be applying for a Type 47 license with the State of
California Department of Alcohol Beverage Control (ABC). A Type 47 license authorizes the
sale of beer, wine and distilled spirits for consumption on the licenses premises, and also
authorizes the sale of beer and wine for consumption off the licensed premises. The hotel must
operate and maintain the licensed premises as a bona fide eating establishment, must maintain
suitable kitchen facilities, and must make actual and substantial sales of meals for consumption
on the premises. Minors are allowed on the premises.
The applicant has indicated that the banquet/conference room and a bar area will be open to
the general public, and not limited to hotel guests. The kitchen facility will provide appetizers for
bar patrons and provide food service to the banquet room (during special events). The hours of
operation for the sale and consumption of alcohol would be daily from 11:00 a.m. to 2:00 a.m.
The service of alcohol would be sold from both first and second floor bars only and would end at
1:30 am. Staff has added a condition of approval limiting the service of alcohol to 1:30 am. The
second floor bar and lounge area will include a decorative safety fence between the pool &
lounge, and a key would be required to enter the pool area. Non-guests cannot leave the
bar/lounge area with food or drink.
The hotel will provide a small, 93 square foot retail market, where patrons may buy snacks,
toiletries, beverages, including beer and wine, for off-site consumption. A Type 47 license
prohibits the sale of distilled spirits from the market for off-site consumption. The market will be
open 24 hours a day, however, the hours for the sale of beer and wine will be subject to ABC
requirements. ABC prohibits the sale of beer and wine between the hours of 2:00 a.m. and 6:00
a.m.
PC Agenda Page 12
9066 Firestone Blvd. – PLN-16-00175
February 15, 2017 - Page 13
The applicant has indicated that there will be no live entertainment in the bar/lounge areas,
however, live entertainment may be provided in the banquet/conference room during private
special events, such as a wedding, anniversary, etc. Staff has added a condition of approval
that limits that live entertainment solely be provided in conjunction with the rental of the
banquet/conference room during private special events, and will not be used for weekly night
club purposes. A condition of approval has been included that requires the applicant to submit
an Entertainment Permit to the City of Downey Police Department for review and approval.
Staff is recommending approval for the ancillary sales of alcohol in conjunction with a hotel
because the sale and consumption of alcoholic beverages is considered ancillary to the hotel
use, and is considered a convenience to hotel guests. Conditions of approval have been
included that would ensure that the safety and general welfare of the surrounding area will be
maintained.
General Plan Consistency Finding
As previously noted in this report, the applicant has entered into an agreement to purchase a
2.58 acre parcel from the City of Downey. Pursuant to Government Code 65402, prior to the
City being able to sell the property, the Planning Commission must find that the sale of the
property is consistent with the General Plan. The analysis of this finding is contained below in
the findings section of this report.
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE
On May 5, 2016, the proposed project was reviewed by the City’s Development Review
Committee. During the meeting, the site layout and architectural style was discussed. The
Public Works Department further requested a traffic study to analyze the project for any
potential impacts. The Fire Department required a minimum 20-foot driveway width around the
hotel. All other departments incorporated standard conditions of approval.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
In accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an Initial
Study for Environmental Impacts was prepared for the proposed project. To complete the
environmental analysis, the City of Downey contracted with Dudek, an environmental and
engineering firm. Dudek was selected because they have over 35 years of experience in
preparing environmental documents. This includes working with in-fill projects, such as the
project site. During this analysis, potential impacts from air quality, traffic, noise, and geology
among others were reviewed. Upon completion of the initial study, it was found that the project
could have a potential significant impact on cultural resources, hazards and hazardous material,
noise, and traffic, unless these impacts are mitigated.
A copy of the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) is attached to this report. There is a 21-day
public comment period on the proposed MND, which started on January 26, 2016. The final day
to comment will be at the public hearing on February 15, 2016.
As of the date this report was printed, staff received comments on the MND from the following:
• Andrew Salas – Chairman, Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation
• Johntommy Rosas – Tribal Administrator, Tongva Ancestral Territorial Tribal Nation
PC Agenda Page 13
9066 Firestone Blvd. – PLN-16-00175
February 15, 2017 - Page 14
Their comments have been included as Exhibit “D” of this staff report.
Cultural Resources
Although the site was previously improved with a school and commercial uses, the cultural
resource study could not rule out the potential for finding archaeological resources during
grading operations on the site. This is primarily due to the proximity of the railroad to the site,
which once served as both passenger and freight. The railroad was instrumental in the
founding and initial building of Downey. Accordingly, the following mitigation measures are
proposed:
MM-CR-1: A Qualified Archaeologist, meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s
Professional Qualification Standards, shall be present for all initial ground disturbing
activities associated with the proposed project. This archaeological monitor shall be
responsible for the identification of cultural resources that may be impacted by project
activities. The monitor may stop ground-disturbing activities in order to assess any
discoveries in the field. Archaeological monitoring may be discontinued when the depth
of grading and soil conditions no longer retain the potential to contain cultural deposits.
The Qualified Archaeologist shall be responsible for determining the duration and
frequency of monitoring.
MM-CR-2: In the event that archaeological resources (sites, features, or artifacts) are
exposed during construction activities for the proposed project, all construction work
occurring within 100 feet of the find shall immediately stop until a qualified archaeologist,
meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards, can
evaluate the significance of the find and determine whether additional study is
warranted. Depending upon the significance of the find under the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (14 CCR 15064.5(f); California Public Resources
Code Section 21082), the archaeologist may exhaust the data potential of the find
through the process of field-level recordation and allow work to continue. If the discovery
proves significant under CEQA, additional work such as preparation of an archaeological
treatment plan, testing, or data recovery may be warranted.
MM-CR-3: A qualified Native American monitor shall be present for all initial ground-
disturbing activities associated with the project. The Native American monitor shall be
responsible for the identification of tribal cultural resources that may be impacted by
project activities. The Native American monitor may stop ground-disturbing activities in
order to assess any discoveries in the field. Tribal monitoring may be discontinued when
the depth of grading and soil conditions no longer retain the potential to contain cultural
deposits. A qualified archaeologist will be retained to evaluate and appropriately treat
any potentially significant discoveries.
MM-CR-4: In the event that paleontological resources (fossil remains) are exposed
during construction activities for the proposed project, all construction work occurring
within 50 feet of the find shall immediately stop until a qualified paleontologist, as defined
by the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology’s 2010 guidelines, can assess the nature and
importance of the find. Depending on the significance of the find, the paleontologist may
record the find and allow work to continue or recommend salvage and recovery of the
resource. All recommendations will be made in accordance with the Society of
Vertebrate Paleontology’s 2010 guidelines, and shall be subject to review and approval
by the City of Downey. Work in the area of the find may only resume upon approval of a
qualified paleontologist
PC Agenda Page 14
9066 Firestone Blvd. – PLN-16-00175
February 15, 2017 - Page 15
Hazards and Hazardous Material
The primary concern is the oils, cleaning materials, and fuels used during construction.
Although these materials are typically found at construction sites and the use and storage of
said materials is required to comply with existing regulations, staff felt that incorporating an
additional mitigation measure would be prudent.
MM-HAZ-1: A Site Mitigation Plan (SMP) shall be developed and implemented during
all construction activities. The SMP would also include a hazardous substance
management, handling, storage, disposal, and emergency response plan that
establishes procedures for managing any hazardous substance releases on the project
site. Hazardous materials spill kits would be maintained on site to effectively manage
and clean any small accidental spills. In addition, the SMP would include strategies for
identification and management of contaminated soil, if encountered during project
development, and would outline mitigation measures if development activities result in
an accidental release of contaminants. A project-specific Health and Safety Plan shall be
prepared in accordance with the Occupational Safety and Health Administration
standards, included in the SMP, and implemented during all construction-related
activities. Copies of the SMP and Health and Safety Plan shall be maintained on site
during demolition, excavation, and construction of the proposed project. All workers on
the project site should be familiar with these documents.
MM-HAZ-2: Prior to construction of the proposed hotel, the applicant would be
required to contact the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works (LACDPW)
Environmental Programs Division to inform them of the reuse of the project site. The
applicant would be required to implement mitigation required by LACDPW.
Noise
Noise impacts were identified during the construction phase of the project and as a result of the
operation of the loading space. As a result, the following mitigation measures are proposed:
MM-NOISE-1: In order to reduce impacts related to heavy construction equipment
moving and operating on site during project construction, grading, demolition, and
paving prior to issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall ensure that the following
procedures are followed:
• All construction equipment, fixed or mobile, shall be equipped with properly
operating and maintained mufflers.
• Construction noise reduction methods, such as shutting off idling equipment,
maximizing the distance between construction equipment staging areas and
occupied sensitive receptor areas, and using electric air compressors and similar
power tools rather than diesel equipment, shall be used where feasible.
• During construction, stationary construction equipment shall be placed so noise
is directed away from or shielded from sensitive noise receptors where feasible.
• During construction, stockpiling and vehicle staging areas shall be located as far
as practicable from noise-sensitive receptors.
• Construction shall be restricted to weekdays between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and
7:00 p.m. and Saturdays between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. No
construction shall occur on Sunday. 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. In the event the City receives a complaint,
PC Agenda Page 15
9066 Firestone Blvd. – PLN-16-00175
February 15, 2017 - Page 16
appropriate corrective actions shall be implemented, and a report of the action
shall be provided to the reporting party.
MM-NOISE-2: In order to reduce impacts related to deliveries, the applicant shall
ensure that the following procedures are followed:
• The applicant would be required to build and maintain a seven-foot masonry wall
above finished grade on the southwest side of the project site.
• Signage shall be posted in the delivery loading area requiring that delivery trucks
limit idling to 5 minutes or less; requesting that back up alarms be turned off, if
possible; and requesting that truck drivers be courteous to neighbors.
MM-NOISE-3: The hotel guest room units along the southwest-facing wall will require
sound-rated windows to reduce noise associated with the Union Pacific
Railroad tracks. An interior noise analysis will be required for these
hotel guest rooms prior to issuance of building permits.
Traffic and Transportation
According to the traffic study prepared for the project, the baseline traffic growth with the
anticipated traffic generated by the project creates a negative impact on the intersection of
Lakewood Blvd. and Firestone Blvd. It is anticipated that the Level of Service (LOS) at this
intersection (with baseline and project) will drop from a LOS D to a LOS E in 2019.
Notwithstanding this, the City of Downey will be conducting an intersection improvement project
that will allow the project plus ambient growth to maintain the LOS D at the intersection.
Accordingly, the following mitigation measure is proposed:
MM-TR-1: The project applicant shall contribute its fair share (estimated at 13.33%) or
appropriate share toward the improvement of the intersection of Lakewood Boulevard at
Firestone Boulevard. The identified improvement is to add second left-turn lanes on the
northbound and southbound approaches of Lakewood Boulevard.
FINDINGS
General Plan Consistency
A. The sale of City owned property is consistent with the General Plan.
The City of Downey has entered into an agreement with Downey Hospitality, LLC to sell 2.58
acres of City-owned property located at 9062-9066 Firestone Boulevard, to develop a Marriott
Springhill Suites hotel. General Plan Policy No. 8.1.1 states, states “Promote architectural
design of the highest quality”. This approval will provide a well-designed hotel, that incorporates
a Modern architectural style, a number of different finishes, colors, and materials, and will help
improve the appearance of the commercial area. It is staff’s opinion that the hotel will be
complementary to the other retail/commercial uses that are located in the vicinity of the project
site. It is also a policy of the General Plan (Policy 8.2.2) to “Promote the upgrading of
properties”. Allowing the proposed project to be constructed will result in a well-designed, up-
scale hotel that will eliminate a vacant lot, and improve the immediate site was well as upgrade
the values of all of the surrounding properties. Based on these reasons, staff feels that the sale
of the City owned property to accommodate a hotel is consistent with the General Plan.
PC Agenda Page 16
9066 Firestone Blvd. – PLN-16-00175
February 15, 2017 - Page 17
Specific Plan Amendment
A. The proposed location of the development and proposed conditions under which
it will be operated or maintained is consistent with the goals and polices
embodied in the General Plan and other applicable plans and policies adopted by
the Council.
The boundaries of the Specific Plan are within the General Plan Land Use Designation
of General Commercial. The intent of the land use designation is to provide commercial
and service uses in the City that serve the broadest community and regional needs.
This amendment will allow the construction of a hotel with ancillary alcohol sales, enable
the hotel to be 60-feet in height and four-stories, reduce the street frontage-landscaping
requirement from ten-feet to two-feet, and create new hotel parking standards. It is
staff’s opinion that the proposed hotel meets the intent of the General Plan by providing
additional regional lodging opportunities for those who live and work in the City of
Downey, and those who visit the City of Downey. Furthermore, General Plan Policy 1.1.1
states “Provide a balance of land uses”. This approval will provide additional lodging
opportunities for those who live and work, and visit the City of Downey. The hotel will
complement the other retail/commercial uses that are located in the vicinity of the project
site. Another policy of the General Plan (Policy 8.2.2) seeks to “Promote the upgrading
of properties.” Staff is also of the opinion the proposed improvements will upgrade the
subject site by eliminating the unsightly overgrown vegetation, and serve to upgrade all
of the surrounding properties, by enhancing the streetscape. For these reasons, staff
believes the approval of this project is consistent with the goals, policies, programs, and
land uses of all applicable elements of the General Plan.
B. The proposed development is in accordance with the purposes and objectives of
this article and the zone in which the site is located.
The proposed amendments to the Lakewood/Firestone Specific Plan, which is the
underlying zoning for the area, will permit hotels with ancillary sale of alcohol. An
objective of the specific plan is to provide a balance of land uses, and provided sufficient
lands areas for uses that serve the needs of the residents, visitors, and business. The
specific plan is further intended to guide the growth in the area in a manner that
aesthetically enhances the streetscape. It is staff’s opinion that additional upscale
lodging opportunities in the area can only serve as a benefit and encourage people to
visit Downey. Furthermore, the proposed improvements will upgrade the subject site by
eliminating the unsightly overgrown vegetation, and upgrade all of the surrounding
properties by enhancing the streetscape and developing a vacant lot.
C. The development will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare of
persons residing or working in or adjacent to such a development, nor detrimental
to properties or improvements in the vicinity or the general welfare of the City.
The amendment to the Lakewood/Firestone Specific Plan is necessary and desirable for
the continual development of the community. There is a need for hotel lodging
opportunities within the City of Downey. The Embassy Suites is the only other major
hotel brand located in the City. Furthermore, conditions of approval have been
incorporated that will limit any impacts the construction and operation of a hotel may
have on public health and welfare of the surrounding areas. Moreover, staff is of the
opinion that site has been properly arranged such that it will not create a detriment to the
public health, safety, or welfare.
PC Agenda Page 17
9066 Firestone Blvd. – PLN-16-00175
February 15, 2017 - Page 18
D. The Specific Plan and resulting development will be consistent with the
provisions of Article 8 of Chapter 3 of the California Government Code,
commencing with Section 65450 as may be subsequently amended by the State.
Article 8 of Chapter 3 of the California Government Code sets forth specific requirements
and standards for the content and adoption of Specific Plans. This includes that the
Specific Plan is consistent with the City’s General Plan. As noted in the first finding of
this section, it is staff’s opinion that the proposed amendment to the Lakewood/Firestone
Specific Plan is consistent with the General Plan.
Lot Merger
A. The merged parcel conforms with the general plan, zoning ordinance and
applicable specific plan.
The merged parcel will comply with Program 1.3.2.7 of the General Plan, which
encourages the grouping of adjoining small or odd shaped parcels in order to create
more viable developments. The newly-merged lot will total 124,146 square feet (2.85
acres), and development of the site will comply with the Lakewood/Firestone Specific
Plan.
B. Development of the merged parcel creates no public health, safety or welfare
hazards.
Developing the merged parcel will not create any public health, safety or welfare
hazards. The property is zoned Lakewood/Firestone Specific Plan and the intent and
purpose of this zoning district is to accommodate a wide range of commercial
developments. Merging the two parcels will result in a 124,146 square foot parcel; and a
lot of this size will offer more development potential and site planning options than the
unmerged lots can offer. The applicant filed the lot merger petition to enable the
development of a 140-room hotel. Developing the hotel will not result in hazards to
public health, safety or welfare.
C. The merged parcel has adequate access and is served by all necessary utilities.
The merged parcel has adequate access and is served by all necessary utilities. The
merged parcel maintains frontage on Firestone Boulevard. According to the approved
development plan for the hotel, vehicles will access the project's onsite parking area
from Lakewood Boulevard through a shared driveway, and this arrangement will be
adequate. Similarly, all of the necessary utilities currently serve the unmerged parcels
and merging the two will not alter utility service.
D. The merged parcel is comprised of legally created standard parcels, owned in
common by the same person(s).
The merged parcel consists of two legally-created parcels that are owned in common.
E. The merged parcel does not require right-of-way or utility easement dedications.
The merged parcel does not require parking or access agreements.
Merging the parcel will not require any right-of-way or utility easement dedications. The
site is already improved with shared access.
PC Agenda Page 18
9066 Firestone Blvd. – PLN-16-00175
February 15, 2017 - Page 19
Site Plan Review
A. The site plan is consistent with the goals and policies embodied in the General
Plan and other applicable plans and policies adopted by the Council.
The project has a General Plan Land Use Designation of General Commercial. The
intent of the land use designation is to provide commercial and service uses in the City
that serve the broadest community and regional needs. This amendment will allow the
construction of a hotel with ancillary alcohol sales. It is staff’s opinion that the proposed
hotel will meet the intent of the land use designation by encouraging a land use that will
generate jobs, and encourage the grouping of adjoining small or odd shaped parcels in
order to create more viable developments. Furthermore, General Plan Policy 8.1.1
states “Promote architectural design of the highest quality”. This approval will provide a
well-designed hotel, that incorporates a Modern architectural style, a number of different
finishes, colors, and materials, and will help improve the appearance of the commercial
area. It is staff’s opinion that the hotel will be complementary to the other
retail/commercial uses that are located in the vicinity of the project site. It is also a policy
of the General Plan (Policy 8.2.2) to “Promote the upgrading of properties”. Staff is also
of the opinion the proposed improvements will not only upgrade the subject site by
eliminating the unsightly overgrown vegetation, but will serve to upgrade and add value
to all of the surrounding properties, by enhancing the streetscape. For these reasons,
staff believes the approval of this project is consistent with the goals, policies, programs,
and land uses of all applicable elements of the General Plan.
B. The proposed development is in accordance with the purposes and objectives of
Article IX and the zone in which the site is located.
The proposed project is within the Lakewood/Firestone Specific Plan, which is the
underlying zoning for the area. An objective of the specific plan is to permit and
encourage land uses that would benefit from the study area’s location near a regional
shopping center. It is further intended to guide growth in the area in a manner that
aesthetically enhances the streetscape, as well as to encourage assembly of parcels to
facilitate development. It is staff’s opinion that the hotel will provide additional lodging
opportunities in the area and can only serve as a benefit and encourage people to visit
and shop in Downey. Furthermore, the proposed improvements will upgrade the subject
site by eliminating the unsightly overgrown vegetation, and will serve to upgrade all of
the surrounding properties by enhancing the streetscape and by developing a vacant lot.
C. The proposed development's site plan and its design features, including
architecture and landscaping, will integrate harmoniously and enhance the
character and design of the site, the immediate neighborhood, and the
surrounding areas of the City.
The proposed architectural style is modern, which places an emphasis on the use of
rectangular forms and utilizes horizontal and vertical lines. The site is currently vacant,
with only a overgrown vegetation and large dirt mounds, as the site was previously used
as a staging area for the City. It is staff’s opinion that the proposed modern architecture
and development of the site as a hotel is a vast improvement over the existing vacant
lot. Furthermore, the applicant is proposing to utilize a variety of landscaping that will
give the site a pleasant visual appearance. It is staff’s opinion that the combination of
the landscaping and architectural style will serve to enhance the site and the entire area.
PC Agenda Page 19
9066 Firestone Blvd. – PLN-16-00175
February 15, 2017 - Page 20
Staff further feels that the proposed architecture will integrate with the existing
architecture of other buildings in the area.
D. The site plan and location of the buildings, parking areas, signs, landscaping,
luminaries, and other site features indicate that proper consideration has been
given to both the functional aspects of the site development, such as automobile
and pedestrian circulation, and the visual effects of the development from the
view of the public streets.
Vehicular access to the site is from Firestone Boulevard, through a shared driveway
entrance with the adjacent site (Dunkin Donuts). The design of the parking lot allows
vehicles to progress through the site, with two-way traffic along the front portion of the
lot, and one-way traffic around the hotel building (counter-clockwise). It is staff’s opinion
that the parking lot has been designed to reduce the areas where vehicles traverse the
parking lot without creating a hazard to pedestrians.
The proposed hotel building will be located approximately 250-feet from Firestone
Boulevard, and 50-feet from the rail right-of-way to the south. The hotel will also be
located 152 feet from the nearest residentially zoned and developed lot, south of the
railroad right-of-way. It is not anticipated that the proposed height of the hotel (60-feet)
will negatively impact the surrounding commercial properties, or the residential
properties located south of the railroad right-of-way.
E. The proposed development will improve the community appearance by preventing
extremes of dissimilarity or monotony in new construction or in alterations of
facilities.
In the City of Downey, there are a number of architectural styles used throughout the
commercial areas. The proposed architectural style is modern, which places
an emphasis on the use of rectangular forms and utilizes horizontal and vertical lines.
Additionally, the applicant has proposed an extensive landscape palette that will further
enhance the project’s appearance. In staff’s opinion, the proposed hotel blends nicely
with other architectural styles. Staff is of the further opinion that the proposed
architectural style is neither dissimilar nor monotonous from other buildings in the area
and that this project will upgrade the overall appearance of the site and, in turn, improve
the community appearance.
F. The site plan and design considerations shall tend to upgrade property in the
immediate neighborhood and surrounding areas with an accompanying
betterment of conditions affecting the public health, safety, comfort, and welfare.
The site is currently vacant, and a portion of the lot is surrounded by chain link fencing .
The rear portion of the subject site contains overgrown vegetation and mounds of dirt
and debris, as it was most recently used as a staging area for the City of Downey. The
project improvement can only serve to upgrade the property appearance since it will
eliminate the vacant lot, which is an eyesore and a negative impact on the adjoining
residents. This project will result in an aesthetically pleasing streetscape (in lieu of the
vacant lot) by creating a well-designed building with a complementary landscape palette.
This development, in staff’s opinion, will promote the public health, safety, and welf are of
those who work or reside in the area.
PC Agenda Page 20
9066 Firestone Blvd. – PLN-16-00175
February 15, 2017 - Page 21
G. The proposed development's site plan and its design features will include graffiti
resistant features and materials in accordance with the requirements of Section
4960 of Chapter 10 of Article IV of this Code.
As part of this project, staff is recommending several conditions of approval, which
include the use of graffiti resistant materials in the construction of the building. Should
any graffiti appear on the site, staff has recommended an additional condition of
approval that the applicant have it removed within 48 hours of application. With these
conditions, staff feels that the design features included will be in accordance with
Section 4960 of the Municipal Code.
Conditional Use Permit
A. That the requested Conditional Use Permit will not adversely affect the intent and
purpose of this article or the City’s General Plan or the public convenience or
general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood thereof;
The proposed conditional use permit for a hotel with ancillary sales of alcohol is
permitted, pending approval of the Specific Plan Amendment conditionally permitting
hotels with ancillary sales of alcohol, is consistent with the goals, objectives and policies
of the Lakewood/Firestone Specific Plan and the City of Downey General Plan. An
objective of the specific plan is to provide a balance of land uses, and provided sufficient
lands areas for uses that serve the needs of the residents, visitors, and business. The
specific plan is further intended to guide the growth in the area in a manner that
aesthetically enhances the streetscape. It is staff’s opinion that additional upscale
lodging opportunities in the area can only serve as a benefit and encourage people to
visit Downey. Operational, construction, and alcohol specific conditions have been
added to mitigate any potential adverse impacts on the public convenience or general
welfare of persons residing or working in the surrounding neighborhoods.
B. That the requested use will not adversely affect the adjoining land uses and the
growth and development of the area in which it is proposed to be located;
The proposed hotel will include conditions of approval that will eliminate any negative
impacts on surrounding properties. The hotel development will include a seven-foot high
masonry block wall along the rear property line of the site to reduce any possible noise
impacts the project may have on the residential neighborhood located on Margaret
Street across the railroad right-of-way. The hotel complies with all development
standards required of sites within the Specific Plan, and specifically with Subarea 5A,
which are meant to limit any adverse effects on adjoining land uses, and to promote
growth or development adjoining land uses by serving as a development catalyst for the
area.
C. That the size and shape of the site proposed for the use is adequate to allow the
full development of the proposed use in a manner not detrimental to the particular
area; and
The subject site is adequate in size and shape to adequately allow full development of
the proposed hotel. The requested lot merger will provided additional area for
landscaping and parking. The proposed specific plan amendments regarding the
increase height, new hotel parking standards, reduced street landscaping requirement
will allow full development, maintain smooth traffic flow between properties, while
simultaneously developing a vacant site, which presently includes unsightly, overgrown
PC Agenda Page 21
9066 Firestone Blvd. – PLN-16-00175
February 15, 2017 - Page 22
vegetation, and a number of dirt and debris mounds from previous staging activities on
the site.
D. That the traffic generated by the proposed use will not impose an undue burden
upon the streets and highways in the area.
According to the traffic study prepared for the project, the baseline traffic growth with the
anticipated traffic generated by the project creates a negative impact on the intersection
of Lakewood Blvd. and Firestone Blvd. It is anticipated that the Level of Service (LOS) at
this intersection (with baseline and project) will drop from a LOS D to a LOS E in 2019.
However, in order to reduce the impact and maintain a LOS D, the applicant is required
to contribute its fair share (estimated at 13.33%) toward the improvement of the
intersection of Lakewood Boulevard and Firestone Boulevard. The identified
improvement is to add second left-turn lanes on northbound and southbound
approaches on Lakewood Boulevard.
CORRESPONDENCE
As of the date this report was printed, staff received comments on the MND from the following:
• Andrew Salas – Chairman, Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation
• Johntommy Rosas – Tribal Administrator, Tongva Ancestral Territorial Tribal Nation
Their comments have been included as Exhibit “D” of this staff report.
CONCLUSION
Based on the analysis contained within this report and the attached Mitigated Negative
Declaration, staff is concluding that the proposed hotel will enhance the streetscape and
contribute to the growth of the City. Furthermore, staff believes that the hotel will provide a
needed resource to those who live, work, and visit the City of Downey. In reviewing the findings
to approve the request, staff believes that they can all be made in a positive manner. As such,
staff is recommending that the Planning Commission adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration;
and, approve the amendments to the Lakewood/Firestone Specific Plan, Lot Merger, Site Plan
Review, and Conditional Use Permit (PLN-16-00175), subject to the recommended conditions of
approval.
EXHIBITS
A. Maps
B. Draft Resolution Recommending Approval to City Council – Specific Plan Amendment
and Mitigated Negative Declaration
C. Draft Resolution Approving – Lot Merger, Site Plan Review, and Conditional Use Permit
D. Comment Letters
E. Mitigated Negative Declaration
F. Project Plans
PC Agenda Page 22
9066 Firestone Blvd. – PLN-16-00175
February 15, 2017 - Page 23
EXHIBIT – A
PC Agenda Page 23
9066 Firestone Blvd. – PLN-16-00175
February 15, 2017 - Page 24
Aerial Photograph
PC Agenda Page 24
9066 Firestone Blvd. – PLN-16-00175
February 15, 2017 - Page 25
Subareas of the Lakewood/Firestone Specific Plan
PC Agenda Page 25
9066 Firestone Blvd. – PLN-16-00175
February 15, 2017 - Page 26
Zoning
Subject Site
PC Agenda Page 26
EXHIBIT – B
RESOLUTION NO. 17-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
DOWNEY RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO THE
LAKEWOOD/FIRESTONE SPECIFIC PLAN (91-2).
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DOWNEY DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The Planning Commission of the City of Downey does hereby find,
determine and declare that:
A. On June 27, 2016, the applicant submitted a request for a Lot Merger, Site Plan Review,
and Conditional Use Permit to allow the construction of a four-story, 140-room Marriot
Springhill Suites hotel on the site. Due to missing information on the project plans, staff
deemed the application incomplete; and,
B. On October 31, 2016 the applicant submitted the remaining necessary information for
the Specific Plan Amendment application and the application was deemed complete;
and,
C. In accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act, a notice
of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration was posted at the Los Angeles
County Recorder’s Office on January 26, 2017; and,
D. On January 26, 2017, notice of the pending application was published in the Downey
Patriot and an 1/8th page ad and mailed to all property owners within 500' of the subject
site; and,
E. The Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on February 15, 2017, and
after fully considering all oral and written testimony and facts and opinions offered at the
aforesaid public hearing adopted this resolution.
SECTION 2. The Planning Commission further finds, determines and declares that after
preparing an Initial Study in compliance with the requirements of the California Environmental
Quality Act, which found that unless mitigated the project could have a significant environmental
impact. As such the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration was circulated for public review
from January 26, 2017 to February 15, 2017. Based on its own independent judgment that the
facts stated in the initial study are true, the Planning Commission hereby recommends that the
City Council of the City of Downey adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental
Impacts. The Mitigation Monitoring Program has been included as Exhibit A of this resolution.
SECTION 3. Having considered all of the oral and written evidence presented to it at
said public hearings regarding the Specific Plan Amendments, the Planning Commission further
finds, determines and declares that:
1. The boundaries of the Specific Plan are within the General Plan Land Use Designation
of General Commercial. The intent of the land use designation is to provide commercial
and service uses in the City that serve the broadest community and regional needs.
This amendment will allow the construction of a hotel with ancillary alcohol sales, enable
to the hotel to be 60-feet in height, and four-stories, reduce the street frontage
landscaping requirement from ten-feet to two-feet, and create new hotel parking
standards. It is staff’s opinion that the proposed hotel meets the intent of the General
PC Agenda Page 27
Resolution No. 17-
Downey Planning Commission
9062-66 Firestone Boulevard – PLN-16-00175
February 15, 2017 - Page 2
Plan by providing additional regional lodging opportunities for those who live and work in
the City of Downey, and those who visit the City of Downey. Furthermore, General Plan
Policy 1.1.1 states: “Provide a balance of land uses”. This approval will provide
additional lodging opportunities for those who live and work, and visit the City of
Downey. The hotel will complement the other retail/commercial uses that are located in
the vicinity of the project site. Another policy of the General Plan (Policy 8.2.2) seeks to
“Promote the upgrading of properties”. The proposed improvements will upgrade the
subject site by eliminating the unsightly overgrown vegetation, and serve to upgrade all
of the surrounding properties, by enhancing the streetscape. For these reasons, the
approval of this project is consistent with the goals, policies, programs, and land uses of
all applicable elements of the General Plan.
2. The proposed amendments to the Lakewood/Firestone Specific Plan, which is the
underlying zoning for the area, will permit hotels with ancillary sale of alcohol. An
objective of the specific plan is to provide a balance of land uses, and provided sufficient
lands areas for uses that serve the needs of the residents, visitors, and business. The
specific plan is further intended to guide the growth in the area in a manner that
aesthetically enhances the streetscape. Additional upscale lodging opportunities in the
area can only serve as a benefit and encourage people to visit Downey. Furthermore,
the proposed improvements will upgrade the subject site by eliminating the unsightly
overgrown vegetation, and upgrade all of the surrounding properties by enhancing the
streetscape and developing a vacant lot.
3. The amendment to the Lakewood/Firestone Specific Plan is necessary and desirable for
the continual development of the community. There is a need for hotel lodging
opportunities within the City of Downey. The Embassy Suites is the only other major
hotel brand located in the City. Furthermore, conditions of approval have been
incorporated that will limit any impacts the construction and operation of a hotel may
have on public health and welfare of the surrounding areas. Moreover the site has been
properly arranged and designed such that it will not create a detriment to the public
health, safety, or welfare.
4. Article 8 of Chapter 3 of the California Government Code sets forth specific requirements
and standards for the content and adoption of Specific Plans. This includes that the
Specific Plan is consistent with the City’s General Plan. As noted in the first finding of
this section, the proposed amendment to the Lakewood/Firestone Specific Plan is
consistent with the General Plan.
SECTION 4. Based upon the findings set forth in Sections 1 through 3 of this resolution,
the Planning Commission of the City of Downey hereby recommends that the City Council of the
City of Downey amend the following sections of the Lakewood/Firestone Specific Plan (SP 91-2)
to read as follows:
Section III-F (C)(2)
The following uses may be permitted subject to the approval of a conditional use permit
as provided in Section 9824 of the Downey Municipal Code
2. Conditional Uses
a. Standard Conditional Uses, as listed in Section III-A of this Specific Plan
PC Agenda Page 28
Resolution No. 17-
Downey Planning Commission
9062-66 Firestone Boulevard – PLN-16-00175
February 15, 2017 - Page 3
b. Hotels, including the ancillary sale of liquor and/or beer and wine in conjunction
with the hotel (Site 17 only)
Section III-F(F)
F. Site-Specific Development Standards
1. Additional Standards for Site 14
a. Any parcel map concerning Site 14 must show an irrevocable Offer of
Dedication along Lakewood Boulevard and Firestone Boulevard for future
roadway expansion to identified standards for right-of-way widths, as
described in Section V of this specific plan.
b. Maximum height on Site 14 shall be one (1) story
2. Additional Standard for Site 15
a. Any parcel map concerning Site 15 must an irrevocable Offer of Dedication
along Lakewood Boulevard and Firestone Boulevard for future roadway
expansion to identified standards for right-of-way widths, as described in
Section V of this specific plan.
3. Additional Standard for Site 16
a. Maximum height within the building envelope closest to Firestone Boulevard
shall be one story
4. Additional Standard for Site 17
a. Maximum building height on Site 17 shall be 60-feet.
5. Additional Standard for Sites 18 and 19
a. Maximum height on Site 18 and Site 19 shall be one (1) story.
Section IV(D)(1)
1. Landscape Requirements
a. Landscaped planters shall be provided adjacent to street property lines in the
following widths. These areas shall be planted with trees, except adjacent to
Nash Avenue. Developments on separate parcels shall use consistent
species in their landscaped street setback planters. The widths indicated
exclude vehicle overhand areas.
Cecilia Street: fifteen (15) feet
Firestone Blvd
Subarea 5: ten (10) feet
Subarea 5A, Site 17 two (2) feet
Other Subareas: five (5) feet
Lakewood Boulevard: None
Subarea 3: None
Other Subareas: five (5) feet
Nash Avenue: three (3) feet
Woodruff Avenue: five (5) feet
PC Agenda Page 29
Resolution No. 17-
Downey Planning Commission
9062-66 Firestone Boulevard – PLN-16-00175
February 15, 2017 - Page 4
Section III-A(F)(1)
1. The number of off-street parking spaces required for each use shall be as follows.
Where more than one use occupies a development, the standards for each use
shall be computed separately:
Use 1 space for every (or fraction thereof)
a. Retail Commercial two hundred fifty (250) square feet
b. Office Uses three hundred fifty (350) square feet
c. Restaurants, Drive Through fifty (50) square feet
d. Restaurants one hundred (100) square feet
e. Auto Dealers: Six (6) spaces minimum reserved exclusively for customers, plus
• One space for every 1,000 feet of floor area used for vehicle display and
storage; plus
• One space for every 400 square feet of floor area used for repair, service,
parts, and supplies; and
• One space for every 250 square feet of floor area used for offices and
administration
f. Other uses As provided in Section 9150 of the Downey
Municipal Code
g. Hotels
• 0.8 space per guest room
• Eight (8) spaces for 1,000 square feet of banquet/conference room square
footage
• Ten (10) spaces per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area for full service,
outdoor dining, walk-up and fast food restaurants, and bars;
• One (1) parking space for 1,000 square feet of retail space
• Plus 0.25 space for each employee working in the guest room areas.
SECTION 5. Based upon the findings set forth in Sections 1 through 3 of this resolution,
the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council of the City of Downey approve the
Specific Plan Amendment (PLN-16-00175) subject to Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program attached hereto as Exhibit A, which is necessary to preserve the health, safety and
general welfare of the community and enable the Planning Commission to make the findings set
forth in the previous sections.
SECTION 6. The Secretary shall certify the adoption of this Resolution.
[signatures on next page]
PC Agenda Page 30
Resolution No. 17-
Downey Planning Commission
9062-66 Firestone Boulevard – PLN-16-00175
February 15, 2017 - Page 5
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 15th day of February, 2017.
Jim Rodriguez, Chairman
City Planning Commission
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a true copy of a Resolution adopted by the Planning
Commission of the City of Downey at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 15th day of
February, 2017, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS:
Mary Cavanagh, Secretary
City Planning Commission
PC Agenda Page 31
Resolution No. 17-
Downey Planning Commission
9062-66 Firestone Boulevard – PLN-16-00175
February 15, 2017 - Page 6
EXHIBIT - A
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Checklist
Mitigation Measure No. Mitigation Measure
Method of Verification
Timing of Verification
Responsible Party
Completed
Comments
Pre
Const.
During
Const.
Post
Const. Initials Date
Cultural Resources
MM-CR-1 A Qualified Archaeologist, meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s
Professional Qualification Standards, shall be present for all initial
ground-disturbing activities associated with the proposed project. This
archaeological monitor shall be responsible for the identification of
cultural resources that may be impacted by project activities. The
monitor may stop ground-disturbing activities in order to assess any
discoveries in the field. Archaeological monitoring may be
discontinued when the depth of grading and soil conditions no longer
retain the potential to contain cultural deposits. The Qualified
Archaeologist shall be responsible for determining the duration and
frequency of monitoring.
Monitor report
or log
X City of
Downey
Planning
Department
MM-CR-2 In the event that archaeological resources (sites, features, or
artifacts) are exposed during construction activities for the proposed
project, all construction work occurring within 50 feet of the find
shall immediately stop until a Qualified Archaeologist, can evaluate
the significance of the find and determine whether additional study
is warranted. Depending on the significance of the find under the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the CEQA
Guidelines (California Public Resources Code, Section 21082; 14
CCR 15064.5(f)), the Qualified Archaeologist may exhaust the data
potential of the find through the process of field-level recordation
and then allow work to continue. If the discovery proves significant
under CEQA, additional work such as preparation of an
archaeological treatment plan, testing, or data recovery may be
warranted.
Review report
of finding
X City of
Downey
Planning
Department
MM-CR-3 A qualified Native American monitor shall be present for all initial
ground-disturbing activities associated with the project. The Native
Monitor report
or log
X City of
Downey
PC Agenda Page 32
Resolution No. 17-
Downey Planning Commission
9062-66 Firestone Boulevard – PLN-16-00175
February 15, 2017 - Page 7
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Checklist
Mitigation
Measure No. Mitigation Measure
Method of
Verification
Timing of Verification
Responsible
Party
Completed
Comments
Pre
Const.
During
Const.
Post
Const. Initials Date
American monitor shall be responsible for the identification of tribal
cultural resources that may be impacted by project activities. The
Native American monitor may stop ground-disturbing activities in
order to assess any discoveries in the field. Tribal monitoring may
be discontinued when the depth of grading and soil conditions no
longer retain the potential to contain cultural deposits. A Qualified
Archaeologist will be retained to evaluate and appropriately treat
any potentially significant discoveries.
Planning
Department
MM-CR-4 In the event that paleontological resources (fossil remains) are
exposed during construction activities for the proposed project, all
construction work occurring within 50 feet of the find shall
immediately stop until a Qualified Paleontologist, as defined by the
Society of Vertebrate Paleontology’s 2010 guidelines, can assess
the nature and importance of the find. Depending on the
significance of the find, the Qualified Paleontologist may record the
find and allow work to continue or recommend salvage and
recovery of the resource. All recommendations will be made in
accordance with the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology’s 2010
guidelines, and shall be subject to review and approval by the City
of Downey. Work in the area of the find may only resume upon
approval of a Qualified Paleontologist.
Review report
of finding
X City of
Downey
Planning
Department
MM-CR-5 In accordance with Section 7050.5 of the California Health and
Safety Code, if human remains are found, the County Coroner shall
be immediately notified of the discovery. No further excavation or
disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to
overlie adjacent remains shall occur until the County Coroner has
determined, within two working days of notification of the discovery,
the appropriate treatment and disposition of the human remains. If
the County Coroner determines that the remains are, or are
believed to be, Native American, he or she shall notify the Native
American Heritage Commission in Sacramento within 24 hours. In
accordance with California Public Resources Code, Section
5097.98, the Native American Heritage Commission must
immediately notify those persons it believes to be the most likely
Review report
of finding
X City of
Downey
Planning
Department
PC Agenda Page 33
Resolution No. 17-
Downey Planning Commission
9062-66 Firestone Boulevard – PLN-16-00175
February 15, 2017 - Page 8
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Checklist
Mitigation
Measure No. Mitigation Measure
Method of
Verification
Timing of Verification
Responsible
Party
Completed
Comments
Pre
Const.
During
Const.
Post
Const. Initials Date
descendant of the deceased Native American. The most likely
descendant shall complete their inspection within 48 hours of being
granted access to the site. The designated Native American
representative would then determine, in consultation with the
property owner, the disposition of the human remains.
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
MM-HAZ-1 A site mitigation plan (SMP) shall be developed and implemented
during all construction activities. The SMP would also include a
hazardous substance management, handling, storage, disposal,
and emergency response plan that establishes procedures for
managing any hazardous substance releases on the project site.
Hazardous materials spill kits would be maintained on site to
effectively manage and clean any small accidental spills. In
addition, the SMP would include strategies for identification and
management of contaminated soil, if encountered during project
development, and would outline mitigation measures if development
activities result in an accidental release of contaminants. A project-
specific health and safety plan shall be prepared in accordance with
the Occupational Safety and Health Administration standards,
included in the SMP, and implemented during all construction-
related activities. Copies of the SMP and health and safety plan
shall be maintained on site during demolition, excavation, and
construction of the proposed project. All workers on the project site
should be familiar with these documents.
Review SMP X X City of
Downey Fire
Department
MM-HAZ-2 Prior to construction of the proposed hotel, the applicant would be
required to contact the Los Angeles County Department of Public
Works (LACDPW) Environmental Programs Division to inform them
of the reuse of the project site. The applicant would be required to
implement mitigation required by LACDPW.
City to confirm
applicant and
contractor
compliance
X X City of
Downey Fire
Department
PC Agenda Page 34
Resolution No. 17-
Downey Planning Commission
9062-66 Firestone Boulevard – PLN-16-00175
February 15, 2017 - Page 9
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Checklist
Mitigation
Measure No. Mitigation Measure
Method of
Verification
Timing of Verification
Responsible
Party
Completed
Comments
Pre
Const.
During
Const.
Post
Const. Initials Date
Noise
MM-NOISE-1 In order to reduce impacts related to heavy construction
equipment moving and operating on site during project
construction, grading, demolition, and paving prior to issuance of
grading permits, the applicant shall ensure that the following
procedures are followed:
• All construction equipment, fixed or mobile, shall be
equipped with properly operating and maintained mufflers.
• Construction noise reduction methods, such as shutting off
idling equipment, maximizing the distance between
construction equipment staging areas and occupied
sensitive receptor areas, and using electric air
compressors and similar power tools rather than diesel
equipment, shall be used where feasible.
• During construction, stationary construction equipment
shall be placed so noise is directed away from or shielded
from sensitive noise receptors where feasible.
• During construction, stockpiling and vehicle staging areas
shall be located as far as practicable from noise-sensitive
receptors.
• Construction shall be restricted to weekdays between the
hours of 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. and Saturdays between
the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. No construction shall
occur on Sunday. 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. In the event the City of Downey
receives a complaint, appropriate corrective actions shall
be implemented, and a report of the action shall be
provided to the reporting party.
City to confirm
contractor
compliance
X City of
Downey
Planning
Department
PC Agenda Page 35
Resolution No. 17-
Downey Planning Commission
9062-66 Firestone Boulevard – PLN-16-00175
February 15, 2017 - Page 10
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Checklist
Mitigation
Measure No. Mitigation Measure
Method of
Verification
Timing of Verification
Responsible
Party
Completed
Comments
Pre
Const.
During
Const.
Post
Const. Initials Date
MM-NOISE-2 In order to reduce impacts related to deliveries and trash dumping,
the applicant shall ensure that the following procedures are
followed:
• The applicant shall build and maintain a 7-foot-high
masonry wall above finished grade on the southwest side
of the project site.
• Signage shall be posted in the delivery dock area requiring
that delivery trucks limit idling to 5 minutes or less;
requesting that back up alarms be turned off, if possible;
and requesting that truck drivers be courteous to
neighbors.
City to confirm
construction of
wall and
installation of
signage
X X City of
Downey
Planning
Department
MM-NOISE-3 The hotel guest room units along the southwest-facing wall will
require sound-rated windows to reduce noise associated with the
Union Pacific Railroad tracks. An interior noise analysis will be
required for these hotel guest rooms prior to issuance of building
permits.
City to review
interior noise
analysis
X City of
Downey
Planning
Department
Traffic
MM-TR-1 The project applicant shall contribute its fair share (estimated at
13.33%) or appropriate share toward the improvement of the
intersection of Lakewood Boulevard and Firestone Boulevard. The
identified improvement is to add second left-turn lanes on the
northbound and southbound approaches of Lakewood Boulevard.
Payment of fair
share
X City of
Downey
Traffic
Engineering
PC Agenda Page 36
EXHIBIT – C
RESOLUTION NO. 17-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
DOWNEY APPROVING A LOT MERGER, SITE PLAN REVIEW,
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (PLN-16-00175) TO ALLOW THE
CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A 140-ROOM HOTEL, AND A
GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY FINDING, ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT
9066 FIRESTONE BOULEVARD, ZONED LAKEWOOD/FIRESTONE
SPECIFIC PLAN (91-2)
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DOWNEY DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The Planning Commission of the City of Downey does hereby find,
determine and declare that:
A. On June 27, 2016, the applicant submitted a request for a Lot Merger, Site Plan Review,
and Conditional Use Permit to allow the construction of a four-story, 140-room Marriot
Springhill Suites hotel on the site. Due to missing information on the project plans, staff
deemed the application incomplete; and,
B. On October 31, 2016 the applicant submitted the remaining necessary information for
the Specific Plan Amendment application and the application was deemed complete;
and,
C. In accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act, a notice
of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration was posted at the Los Angeles
County Recorder’s Office on January 26, 2017; and,
D. On January 26, 2017, notice of the pending application published in the Downey Patriot
and an 1/8th page ad and mailed to all property owners within 500' of the subject site;
and,
E. The Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on February 15, 2017, and
after fully considering all oral and written testimony and facts and opinions offered at the
aforesaid public hearing adopted this resolution.
SECTION 2. The Planning Commission further finds, determines and declares that after
preparing an Initial Study in compliance with the requirements of the California Environmental
Quality Act, which found that unless mitigated the project could have a significant environmental
impact. As such the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration was circulated for public review
from January 26, 2017 to February 15, 2017. Based on its own independent judgment that the
facts stated in the initial study are true, the Planning Commission hereby recommends that the
City Council of the City of Downey adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental
Impacts. Mitigation measures have been included in the conditions of approval of this
resolution.
SECTION 3. Having considered all of the oral and written evidence presented to it at
said public hearings, pursuant to Government Code Section 65402, the Planning Commission
hereby finds that the sale of the city owned property is consistent with the General Plan.
General Plan Policy No. 8.1.1 states, states “Promote architectural design of the highest
quality”. This approval will provide a well-designed hotel, that incorporates a Modern
architectural style, a number of different finishes, colors, and materials, and will help improve
the appearance of the commercial area. It is staff’s opinion that the hotel will be complementary
PC Agenda Page 37
Resolution No. 17-
Downey Planning Commission
9062-66 Firestone Boulevard – PLN-16-00175
February 15, 2017 - Page 2
to the other retail/commercial uses that are located in the vicinity of the project site. It is also a
policy of the General Plan (Policy 8.2.2) to “Promote the upgrading of properties”. Allowing the
proposed project to be constructed will result in a well-designed, up-scale hotel that will
eliminate a vacant lot, and improve the immediate site was well as upgrade the values of all of
the surrounding properties. Based on these reasons, staff feels that the sale of the City owned
property to accommodate a hotel is consistent with the General Plan.
SECTION 4. Having considered all of the oral and written evidence presented to it at
said public hearings regarding the Lot Merger, the Planning Commission further finds,
determines and declares that:
1. The merged parcel will comply with Program 1.3.2.7 of the General Plan, which
encourages the grouping of adjoining small or odd shaped parcels in order to create
more viable developments. The newly-merged lot will total 124,146 square feet (2.85
acres), and development of the site will comply with the Lakewood/Firestone Specific
Plan.
2. Developing the merged parcel will not create any public health, safety or welfare
hazards. The property is zoned Lakewood/Firestone Specific Plan and the intent and
purpose of this zoning district is to accommodate a wide range of commercial
developments. Merging the two parcels will result in a 124,146 square foot parcel; and a
lot of this size will offer more development potential and site planning options than the
unmerged lots can offer. The applicant filed the lot merger petition to enable the
development of a 140-room hotel. Developing the hotel will not result in hazards to
public health, safety or welfare.
3. The merged parcel has adequate access and is served by all necessary utilities. The
merged parcel maintains frontage on Firestone Boulevard. According to the approved
development plan for the hotel, vehicles will access the project's onsite parking area
from Lakewood Boulevard through a shared driveway, and this arrangement will be
adequate. Similarly, all of the necessary utilities currently serve the unmerged parcels
and merging the two will not alter utility service.
4. The merged parcel consists of two legally-created parcels that are owned in common.
5. Merging the parcel will not require any right-of-way or utility easement dedications. The
site is already improved with shared access.
SECTION 5. Having considered all of the oral and written evidence presented to it at
said public hearings regarding the Site Plan Review, the Planning Commission further finds,
determines and declares that:
1. The project has a General Plan Land Use Designation of General Commercial. The
intent of the land use designation is to provide commercial and service uses in the City
that serve the broadest community and regional needs. This amendment will allow the
construction of a hotel with ancillary alcohol sales. The proposed hotel will meet the
intent of the land use designation by encouraging a land use that will generate jobs, and
encourage the grouping of adjoining small or odd shaped parcels in order to create more
viable developments. Furthermore, General Plan Policy 8.1.1 states “Promote
architectural design of the highest quality”. This approval will provide a well-designed
hotel, that incorporates a Modern architectural style, a number of different finishes,
colors, and materials, and will help improve the appearance of the commercial area. It is
staff’s opinion that the hotel will be complementary to the other retail/commercial uses
PC Agenda Page 38
Resolution No. 17-
Downey Planning Commission
9062-66 Firestone Boulevard – PLN-16-00175
February 15, 2017 - Page 3
that are located in the vicinity of the project site. It is also a policy of the General Plan
(Policy 8.2.2) to “Promote the upgrading of properties”. Staff is also of the opinion the
proposed improvements will not only upgrade the subject site by eliminating the
unsightly overgrown vegetation, but will serve to upgrade and add value to all of the
surrounding properties, by enhancing the streetscape. For these reasons, approval of
this project is consistent with the goals, policies, programs, and land uses of all
applicable elements of the General Plan.
2. The proposed project is within the Lakewood/Firestone Specific Plan, which is the
underlying zoning for the area. An objective of the specific plan is to permit and
encourage land uses that would benefit from the study area’s location near a regional
shopping center. It is further intended to guide growth in the area in a manner that
aesthetically enhances the streetscape, as well as to encourage assembly of parcels to
facilitate development. The hotel will provide additional lodging opportunities in the area
and can only serve as a benefit and encourage people to visit and shop in Downey.
Furthermore, the proposed improvements will upgrade the subject site by eliminating the
unsightly overgrown vegetation, and will serve to upgrade all of the surrounding
properties by enhancing the streetscape and by developing a vacant lot.
3. The proposed architectural style is modern, which places an emphasis on the use of
rectangular forms and utilizes horizontal and vertical lines. The site is currently vacant,
with only a overgrown vegetation and large dirt mounds, as the site was previously used
as a staging area for the City. The proposed modern architecture and development of
the site as a hotel is a vast improvement over the existing vacant lot. Furthermore, the
applicant is proposing to use a variety of landscaping that will give the site a pleasant
visual appearance. The combination of the landscaping and the hotel’s architectural
style will serve to enhance the site and the surrounding area. Furthermore, the
proposed architecture will integrate with the existing architecture of other buildings in the
area.
4. Vehicular access to the site is from Firestone Boulevard, through a shared driveway
entrance with the adjacent site (Dunkin Donuts). The design of the parking lot allows
vehicles to progress through the site, with two-way traffic along the front portion of the
lot, and one-way traffic around the hotel building (counter-clockwise). The parking lot has
been designed to reduce the areas where vehicles traverse the parking lot without
creating a hazard to pedestrians. The proposed hotel building will be located
approximately 250-feet from Firestone Boulevard, and 50-feet from the 100-foot wide
railroad right-of-way to the south. The hotel will also be located 152 feet from the nearest
residentially zoned and developed lots, south of the railroad right-of-way. It is not
anticipated that the proposed height of the hotel (60-feet) will negatively impact the
surrounding commercial properties, or the residential properties located south of the
railroad right-of-way.
5. In the City of Downey, there are a number of architectural styles used throughout the
commercial areas. The proposed architectural style is modern, which places an
emphasis on the use of rectangular forms and utilizes horizontal and vertical lines.
Additionally, the applicant has proposed an extensive landscape palette that will further
enhance the project’s appearance. The proposed hotel blends nicely with other
architectural styles and the proposed architectural style is neither dissimilar nor
monotonous from other buildings in the area. This project will upgrade the overall
appearance of the site and, in turn, improve the community appearance.
PC Agenda Page 39
Resolution No. 17-
Downey Planning Commission
9062-66 Firestone Boulevard – PLN-16-00175
February 15, 2017 - Page 4
6. The site is currently vacant, and a portion of the lot is surrounded by chain link fencing.
The rear portion of the subject site contains overgrown vegetation and mounds of dirt
and debris, as it was most recently used as a staging area for the City of Downey. The
project improvement can only serve to upgrade the property appearance since it will
eliminate the vacant lot, which is an eyesore and a negative impact on the adjoining
residents. This project will result in an aesthetically pleasing streetscape (in lieu of the
vacant lot) by creating a well-designed building with a complementary landscape palette.
The hotel development will promote the public health, safety, and welfare of those who
work or reside in the area by removing the existing vacant lot with overgrown vegetation.
7. As part of this project, staff is recommending several conditions of approval, which
include the use of graffiti resistant materials in the construction of the building. Should
any graffiti appear on the site, staff has recommended an additional condition of
approval that the applicant have it removed within 48 hours of application. With these
conditions, the design features included will be in accordance with Section 4960 of the
Municipal Code.
SECTION 6. Having considered all of the oral and written evidence presented to it at
said public hearings regarding the Conditional Use Permit, the Planning Commission further
finds, determines and declares that:
1. The proposed conditional use permit for a hotel with ancillary sales of alcohol is
permitted, pending approval of the Specific Plan Amendment conditionally permitting
hotels with ancillary sales of alcohol, is consistent with the goals, objectives and policies
of the Lakewood/Firestone Specific Plan and the City of Downey General Plan. An
objective of the specific plan is to provide a balance of land uses, and provided sufficient
lands areas for uses that serve the needs of the residents, visitors, and business. The
specific plan is further intended to guide the growth in the area in a manner that
aesthetically enhances the streetscape. Additional upscale lodging opportunities in the
area can only serve as a benefit and encourage people to visit and shop Downey.
Operational, construction, and alcohol specific conditions have been added to mitigate
any potential adverse impacts on the public convenience or general welfare of persons
residing or working in the surrounding neighborhoods.
2. The proposed hotel will include conditions of approval that will eliminate any negative
impacts on surrounding properties. The hotel development will include a seven-foot high
masonry block wall along the rear property line of the site to reduce any possible noise
impacts the project may have on the residential neighborhood located on Margaret
Street across the railroad right-of-way. The hotel complies with the amended
development standards required of sites within the Specific Plan, and specifically with
Subarea 5A, Site 17, which are meant to limit any adverse effects on adjoining land
uses, and to promote growth or development adjoining land uses by serving as a
development catalyst for the area.
3. The subject site is adequate in size and shape to adequately allow full development of
the proposed hotel. The requested lot merger will provided additional area for
landscaping and parking. The proposed specific plan amendments regarding the
increased height, new hotel parking standards, reduced street landscaping requirement
will allow full development, maintain smooth traffic flow between properties, while
simultaneously developing a vacant site, which presently includes unsightly, overgrown
vegetation, and a number of dirt and debris mounds from previous staging activities on
the site.
PC Agenda Page 40
Resolution No. 17-
Downey Planning Commission
9062-66 Firestone Boulevard – PLN-16-00175
February 15, 2017 - Page 5
4. According to the traffic study prepared for the project, the baseline traffic growth with the
anticipated traffic generated by the project creates a negative impact on the intersection
of Lakewood Blvd. and Firestone Blvd. It is anticipated that the Level of Service (LOS) at
this intersection (with baseline and project) will drop from a LOS D to a LOS E in 2019.
However, in order to reduce the impact and maintain a LOS D, the applicant is required
to contribute its fair share (estimated at 13.33%) toward the improvement of the
intersection of Lakewood Boulevard and Firestone Boulevard. The identified
improvement is to add second left-turn lanes on northbound and southbound
approaches on Lakewood Boulevard.
SECTION 7. Based upon the findings set forth in Sections 1 through 6 of this resolution,
the Planning Commission of the City of Downey hereby find that the disposal of City owned
property is consistent with the General Plan, and approves the Lot Merger, Site Plan Review,
Conditional Use Permit (PLN-16-00175), subject to the conditions of approval attached hereto
as Exhibit A, which are necessary to preserve the health, safety and general welfare of the
community and enable the Planning Commission to make the findings set forth in the previous
sections. The conditions are fair and reasonable for the accomplishment of these purposes.
SECTION 8. The Secretary shall certify the adoption of this Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 15th day of February, 2017.
Jim Rodriguez, Chairman
City Planning Commission
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a true copy of a Resolution adopted by the Planning
Commission of the City of Downey at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 15th day of
February, 2017, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS:
Mary Cavanagh, Secretary
City Planning Commission
PC Agenda Page 41
Resolution No. 17-
Downey Planning Commission
9062-66 Firestone Boulevard – PLN-16-00175
February 15, 2017 - Page 6
LOT MERGER, SITE PLAN REVIEW, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
(PLN-16-00175)
EXHIBIT A - CONDITIONS
PLANNING
1. The approval of the Lot Merger, Site Plan Review, and Conditional Use Permit (PLN-16-
00175) allows for the merger of two lots into one lot, and construction of a four-story,
140-room, 88,550 square foot hotel inclusive of all parking and landscaping as shown in
the plans dated February 2, 2017.
2. This Site Plan Review (PLN-16-00175) shall not be construed to mean any waiver of
applicable and appropriate zoning regulations, or any Federal, State, County, and City
laws and regulations. Unless otherwise expressly specified, all other requirements of
the City of Downey Municipal Code shall apply.
3. The Owner/Applicant agrees, as a condition of approval of this resolution, to indemnify,
defend and hold harmless, at Applicant's expense, City and City's agents, officers and
employees from and against any claim, action or proceeding commenced within the time
period provided in Government Code Section 66499.37 to attack, review, set aside, void
or annul the approval of this resolution, to challenge the determination made by City
under the California Environmental Quality Act or to challenge the reasonableness,
legality or validity of any condition attached hereto. City shall promptly notify Applicant of
any such claim, action or proceeding to which City receives notice, and City will
cooperate fully with Applicant in the defense thereof. Applicant shall reimburse the City
for any court costs and attorney's fees that the City may be required to pay as a result of
any such claim, action or proceeding. City may, in its sole discretion, participate in the
defense of any such claim, action or proceeding, but such participation shall not relieve
Applicant of the obligations of this condition.
4. The City Planner is authorized to make minor modifications to the approved preliminary
plans or any of the conditions if such modifications shall achieve substantially the same
results as would strict compliance with said plans and conditions.
5. Construction hours shall be limited to 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., Monday through Friday and
8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Saturdays. There shall be no construction on the site outside of
these hours.
6. All exterior lights on the property shall be LED and shall be directed, positioned, and/or
shielded such that they do not illuminate surrounding properties and the public right-of-
way.
7. The approved architectural style shall be as noted in the approved plans. Changes to
the facades and/or colors shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Planner.
8. All buildings and walls shall be finished with graffiti resistant materials. Prior to the
issuance of building permits, the applicant shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the
City Planner, that the finished materials will comply with this requirement.
9. Any graffiti applied to the site shall be removed within 48 hours.
PC Agenda Page 42
Resolution No. 17-
Downey Planning Commission
9062-66 Firestone Boulevard – PLN-16-00175
February 15, 2017 - Page 7
10. The applicant shall comply with the art in public places requirements set forth in Downey
Municipal Code 8950 et seq. This shall include payment of all required fees prior to the
issuance of building permits. Should the applicant exercise their right to install public art
on site, the public art application (including payment of all deposits) shall be submitted
prior to the issuance of building permits.
11. Drought tolerant landscaping shall be used in all landscape areas of the site. All
landscape shall be installed and permanently maintained as approved by the Planning
Commission.
12. All above grade back-flow preventers, check valves, and transformers shall be painted
green and screened from view from the public right-of-way.
13. All project entries shall have an enhanced paving (pavers or stamped color concrete).
The City Planner shall review and approve final enhanced paving prior to installation.
14. All bollards on the site shall be decorative and match the architectural style of the
building. The City Planner shall review and approve the final wall design prior to
installation.
15. Bike racks or bike lockers shall be installed on the subject site, and shall not block any
required pedestrian or vehicular paths of travel.
16. The Firestone Boulevard driveway approach shall be modified to have radius returns.
17. The applicant shall record the Notice of Merger within thirty (30) days of the conclusion
of hearing this matter. The Notice of Merger shall contain the name of the recorded
owner, exhibits and legal descriptions of the existing unmerged parcels and newly-
merged parcel.
18. The applicant shall construct a seven-foot high masonry wall along the south property
line. The City Planner shall review and approve all wall/fencing design prior to
installation.
19. The trash enclosure design shall incorporate some of the colors and finishes proposed
on the hotel building. The City Planner shall review and approve the final trash
enclosure design prior to installation.
20. Live entertainment shall be limited to the conference/banquet room solely in conjunction
with the rental of the banquet/conference room during private special events, and will not
be used for weekly night club purposes.
21. The permitted alcohol service for the bar lounge area areas shall be from 11:00 AM to
1:30 AM. Complete closure of the restaurant and all employees exiting of the restaurant
must occur within one hour after closing hours. No “after hours” operations shall be
permitted.
22. Payment for alcohol shall be made after the conclusion of the service.
23. The bar(s) shall be operated by the hotel operator.
PC Agenda Page 43
Resolution No. 17-
Downey Planning Commission
9062-66 Firestone Boulevard – PLN-16-00175
February 15, 2017 - Page 8
24. All doors except for main entrance doors shall have hotel key card access only between
the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 5:00 a.m.
25. The front desk shall be staffed twenty-four hours a day.
26. Rooms shall be booked for a minimum one night, overnight stay with the ability of
extended multi-night stays.
27. The bar/hotel shall not organize or participate in organized “pub-crawl” events where
participants or customers pre-purchase tickets or tokens to be exchanged for alcoholic
beverages at the restaurant.
28. No exterior activity such as trash disposal, disposal of bottles or noise generating trash,
deliveries or other maintenance activity generating noise audible from the exterior of the
building shall occur during the hours of 11:00pm to 7:00am daily. In addition, there shall
be no outdoor cleaning of the property with pressurized or mechanical equipment during
the hours of 9:00 pm to 7:00 am daily. Trash containers shall be secured with locks.
29. The applicant shall remove the two (2) end parking spaces along Firestone Boulevard
and replace with landscaping and an additional palm tree shall be provided within the
planters.
30. All trees along the central walkway and the planter along Firestone Boulevard shall be
up-lit.
31. The applicant shall paint the east and south facades of the Fallas Paredes, provided
they obtain permission from the Fallas Paredes owner to conduct this work. Should the
owner not grant permission, this condition shall not be applicable.
32. The applicant shall comply with all mitigation measures, as established by the Mitigated
Negative Declaration, shall be complied with at all times. This shall include:
MM-CR-1: A Qualified Archaeologist, meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s
Professional Qualification Standards, shall be present for all initial ground disturbing
activities associated with the proposed project. This archaeological monitor shall be
responsible for the identification of cultural resources that may be impacted by
project activities. The monitor may stop ground-disturbing activities in order to
assess any discoveries in the field. Archaeological monitoring may be discontinued
when the depth of grading and soil conditions no longer retain the potential to
contain cultural deposits. The Qualified Archaeologist shall be responsible for
determining the duration and frequency of monitoring.
MM-CR-2: In the event that archaeological resources (sites, features, or artifacts) are
exposed during construction activities for the proposed project, all construction work
occurring within 100 feet of the find shall immediately stop until a qualified
archaeologist, meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification
Standards, can evaluate the significance of the find and determine whether
additional study is warranted. Depending upon the significance of the find under the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (14 CCR 15064.5(f); California Public
Resources Code Section 21082), the archaeologist may exhaust the data potential of
the find through the process of field-level recordation and allow work to continue. If
the discovery proves significant under CEQA, additional work such as preparation of
PC Agenda Page 44
Resolution No. 17-
Downey Planning Commission
9062-66 Firestone Boulevard – PLN-16-00175
February 15, 2017 - Page 9
an archaeological treatment plan, testing, or data recovery may be warranted.
MM-CR-3: A qualified Native American monitor shall be present for all initial ground-
disturbing activities associated with the project. The Native American monitor shall
be responsible for the identification of tribal cultural resources that may be impacted
by project activities. The Native American monitor may stop ground-disturbing
activities in order to assess any discoveries in the field. Tribal monitoring may be
discontinued when the depth of grading and soil conditions no longer retain the
potential to contain cultural deposits. A qualified archaeologist will be retained to
evaluate and appropriately treat any potentially significant discoveries.
MM-CR-4: In the event that paleontological resources (fossil remains) are exposed
during construction activities for the proposed project, all construction work occurring
within 50 feet of the find shall immediately stop until a qualified paleontologist, as
defined by the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology’s 2010 guidelines, can assess the
nature and importance of the find. Depending on the significance of the find, the
paleontologist may record the find and allow work to continue or recommend salvage
and recovery of the resource. All recommendations will be made in accordance with
the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology’s 2010 guidelines, and shall be subject to
review and approval by the City of Downey. Work in the area of the find may only
resume upon approval of a qualified paleontologist.
MM-HAZ-1: A Site Mitigation Plan (SMP) shall be developed and implemented
during all construction activities. The SMP would also include a hazardous substance
management, handling, storage, disposal, and emergency response plan that
establishes procedures for managing any hazardous substance releases on the
project site. Hazardous materials spill kits would be maintained on site to effectively
manage and clean any small accidental spills. In addition, the SMP would include
strategies for identification and management of contaminated soil, if encountered
during project development, and would outline mitigation measures if development
activities result in an accidental release of contaminants. A project-specific Health
and Safety Plan shall be prepared in accordance with the Occupational Safety and
Health Administration standards, included in the SMP, and implemented during all
construction-related activities. Copies of the SMP and Health and Safety Plan shall
be maintained on site during demolition, excavation, and construction of the
proposed project. All workers on the project site should be familiar with these
documents.
MM-HAZ-2: Prior to construction of the proposed hotel, the applicant would be
required to contact the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works (LACDPW)
Environmental Programs Division to inform them of the reuse of the project site. The
applicant would be required to implement mitigation required by LACDPW.
MM-NOISE-1: In order to reduce impacts related to heavy construction
equipment moving and operating on site during project construction, grading,
demolition, and paving prior to issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall
ensure that the following procedures are followed:
• All construction equipment, fixed or mobile, shall be equipped with properly
operating and maintained mufflers.
PC Agenda Page 45
Resolution No. 17-
Downey Planning Commission
9062-66 Firestone Boulevard – PLN-16-00175
February 15, 2017 - Page 10
• Construction noise reduction methods, such as shutting off idling equipment,
maximizing the distance between construction equipment staging areas and
occupied sensitive receptor areas, and using electric air compressors and
similar power tools rather than diesel equipment, shall be used where
feasible.
• During construction, stationary construction equipment shall be placed so
noise is directed away from or shielded from sensitive noise receptors where
feasible.
• During construction, stockpiling and vehicle staging areas shall be located as
far as practicable from noise-sensitive receptors.
• Construction shall be restricted to weekdays between the hours of 7:00 a.m.
and 7:00 p.m. and Saturdays between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m.
No construction shall occur on Sunday. 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. In the event the City receives a
complaint, appropriate corrective actions shall be implemented, and a report
of the action shall be provided to the reporting party.
MM-NOISE-2: In order to reduce impacts related to deliveries, the applicant shall
ensure that the following procedures are followed:
• The applicant would be required to build and maintain a seven-foot masonry
wall above finished grade on the southwest side of the project site.
• Signage shall be posted in the delivery area requiring that delivery trucks limit
idling to 5 minutes or less; requesting that back up alarms be turned off, if
possible; and requesting that truck drivers be courteous to neighbors.
MM-NOISE-3: The hotel guest room units along the southwest-facing wall will require
sound-rated windows to reduce noise associated with the Union Pacific Railroad
tracks. An interior noise analysis will be required for these hotel guest rooms prior to
issuance of building permits.
MM-TR-1: The project applicant shall contribute its fair share (estimated at 13.33%)
or appropriate share toward the improvement of the intersection of Lakewood
Boulevard at Firestone Boulevard. The identified improvement is to add second left-
turn lanes on the northbound and southbound approaches of Lakewood Boulevard.
BUILDING
33. All construction shall comply with the most recent version of the California Building
Code, as adopted by the City of Downey.
34. Prior to the commencement of construction, the applicant shall obtain all required
permits. Additionally, the applicant shall obtain all necessary inspections and permit
final prior to occupancy of the units.
PC Agenda Page 46
Resolution No. 17-
Downey Planning Commission
9062-66 Firestone Boulevard – PLN-16-00175
February 15, 2017 - Page 11
POLICE
35. The Applicant shall obtain the required Alcohol Beverage Control permit and shall
comply with all Alcohol Beverage License requirements.
36. Pursuant to Article VI, Chapters 4 and 5 of the Downey Municipal Code, the
owner/applicant shall obtain an “entertainment permit" from the Downey Police Chief
prior to providing any entertainment at the subject property/premises, and shall adhere
to all conditions imposed thereon. The conditions of the owner/applicant’s entertainment
permit shall constitute conditions of this conditional use permit.
37. The owner shall prohibit loitering in the parking area and outside the restaurant frontage,
and shall control noisy guests and visitors leaving the hotel.
38. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, or a business license, or
commencement of alcohol service as applicable, the operator shall submit a plan for the
approval by the Downey Police Chief regarding employee alcohol awareness training
programs and policies. The plan shall outline a mandatory alcohol awareness training
program for all employees having contact with the public and shall state management’s
policies addressing alcohol consumption and inebriation. The program shall require all
employees having contact with the public to complete a California Department of
Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) sponsored alcohol awareness training program. In the
event the ABC no longer sponsors an alcohol awareness training program, all
employees having contact with the public shall complete an alternative program
approved by the City Planner. The operator shall provide the City with an annual report
regarding compliance with this condition.
39. The applicant shall submit a security to plan to the Chief of Police for review and
approval prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.
FIRE
40. The Applicant shall provide automatic fire sprinkler system in accordance with DMC
3317, CFD 2013, and NFPA 13.
1a. Fire department stand pipe connections shall be provided at each floor level
within stairwell #1 and #2.
1b. Fire department stand pipe connection(s) shall be provided at roof access near
stairwell #1 & #2.
41. The applicant shall provide a full fire alarm system in accordance with DMC 3316, CFC
2013, and NFPA 72. A Total Smoke detection shall be installed below all finished
ceilings and in accordance with recognized standards and manufacturers specifications.
42. Private "on-site" fire hydrants shall be provided and maintained in accordance with DMC
3610, CFC 2013, and NFPA 24.
43. An additional public and private fire hydrant shall be provided on-site and at Firestone
Boulevard frontage.
44. EMS compliant elevators shall be provided in accordance with DMC 3326.
PC Agenda Page 47
Resolution No. 17-
Downey Planning Commission
9062-66 Firestone Boulevard – PLN-16-00175
February 15, 2017 - Page 12
45. The applicant shall install approved Fire Department premises (address) identification (if
not already in place and meeting current code) [CA Fire Code 505]
46. The applicant shall install addressing-address numbers shall be visible from the street
and a minimum of 6 inches in height.
47. Portable fire extinguishers shall be provided in accordance with (CFC 2013-Section
3104.12)
48. The applicant shall install approved Fire Department access – Knox Box [CA Fire Code
506].
49. Fire lanes shall be posted in accordance with the CFC and the California Vehicle Code
(C.V.C.), Section 22500.1 which requires: A sign, citing C.V.C. 22500.1, posted
immediately adjacent to, and visible form, the designated place clearly stating that the
place is a fire lane; Outlining or painting the place in red and, in contrasting color,
marking the place with the words “FIRE LANE” which are visible from the vehicle, OR by
a red curb or red paint the edge of the roadway which is clearly marked by the words
“FIRE LANE”. The required width of a fire lane shall not be obstructed in any manner,
including stopping or parking of vehicles. Entrances to fire lanes which have been close
with gates or barriers, approved by the Fire Department shall not be obstructed.
50. Additional required fire code requirements may be required at time of plan review and/or
field inspection.
51. Food preparation that creates grease vapors shall provide with a fixed extinguishing
system. The installed fixed extinguishing system shall be connected to the fire alarm
system.
52. All construction shall comply with the most recent version of the California Fire Code, as
adopted by the City of Downey.
PUBLIC WORKS
53. The owner/applicant hereby consents to the annexation of the property into the Downey
City Lighting Maintenance District in accordance with Division 15 of the Streets and
Highways Code, and to incorporation or annexation into a new or existing Benefit
Assessment or Municipal Improvement District in accordance with Division 10 and
Division 12 of the Streets and Highways Code and/or Division 2 of the Government
Code of the State of California.
54. The owner / applicant shall be responsible for any improvements required to mitigate
traffic impacts created by the project as identified by the Traffic study and /or financially
contribute the cost of capital improvement(s), not considered part of the frontage of the
project site, necessary to offset all or a portion of the project traffic impacts. Property
owner shall reimburse City for the cost associated with fire and potable service laterals,
gas service and recycled water service meter and lateral stub- out.
55. Construct the following roadway improvements:
a) Upgrading traffic signals/provide fair share contribution
PC Agenda Page 48
Resolution No. 17-
Downey Planning Commission
9062-66 Firestone Boulevard – PLN-16-00175
February 15, 2017 - Page 13
56. All on-site public utilities shall be installed underground.
57. The owner/applicant shall provide and use recycled water for all landscape irrigation.
58. The facility must provide for recycling facilities, i.e., storage and handling areas for
recycling facilities. Trash enclosure shall include floor drain connection to grease
interceptor and water hose bib connection for maintenance.
59. Complete a construction & demolition (C&D) waste management plan per Article V,
Chapter 8 of the Downey Municipal Code.
60. Proposed public improvements shall comply with the latest edition of Standard Plans
and Specifications for Public Works Construction and City of Downey standards.
61. The applicant shall obtain permits from Public Works Department for all public
improvements within the public right of way.
62. The applicant shall remove and replace damaged, uneven or sub-standard curb, gutter,
sidewalk, driveway, disabled ramps, and pavement to the satisfaction of the Public
Works Department. Contact Public Works Inspector at (562) 904-7110 to identify
construction areas to be removed and replaced.
63. The applicant shall submit public improvement plan(s) for review and approval by Public
Works Department.
64. Submit an engineered grading plan and/or hydraulic calculations and site drainage plan
for the site (prepared and sealed by a registered civil engineer in the State of California)
for approval by the Engineering Division and Building and Safety Division. Lot(s) shall
not have less than one (1%) percent gradient on any asphalt or non-paved surface, or
less than one quarter (1/4%) percent gradient on any concrete surface. Provide the
following information on plans: topographic site information, including elevations,
dimensions/location of existing/proposed public improvements adjacent to project (i.e.
street, sidewalk, parkway and driveway widths, catch basins, pedestrian ramps); the
width and location of all existing and proposed easements, the dimensions and location
of proposed dedications; the location, depth and dimensions of potable water, reclaimed
water and sanitary sewer lines.
65. The applicant shall construct onsite pavement, consisting of a minimum section of 4”
thick aggregate base, and a minimum 2-1/2” thick asphalt concrete pavement.
66. The applicant shall comply with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES); Ordinance 1142 of the Downey Municipal Code (DMC); and the Low Impact
Development (LID) Plan. Furthermore, the applicant shall be required to Certify and
append Public Works standard “Attachment A” to all construction and grading plans as
required by the LACoDPW Stormwater Quality Management Plan (SQMP). Storm
Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) shall be required for the site.
67. The applicant shall remove all construction graffiti created as part of this project within
the public-right-of-way in a timely manner.
PC Agenda Page 49
Resolution No. 17-
Downey Planning Commission
9062-66 Firestone Boulevard – PLN-16-00175
February 15, 2017 - Page 14
a. The owner/applicant shall install a sewer main and sewer lateral (to the front property
line) for each lot in the subdivision, and shall provide that the design and
improvements of sewers shall be to the standards of the City Engineering Division.
Septic systems are not acceptable.
b. The owner/applicant shall provide that no easements of any type be granted over
any portion of the subdivision to any agency, utility or organization (private or public),
except to the City of Downey prior to recordation of the Lot Merger. The
owner/applicant shall grant easements in the name of the City shall include:
• Vehicular easements
• Walkway easements
• Drainage easements
• Utility easements
68. The owner/applicant shall furnish and install backflow device(s) in accordance with the
Department of Public Works and the State and County Department of Public Health
requirements.
69. The owner/applicant shall connect to existing lateral and furnish and install new 3-inch
potable water meter and vault.
70. The owner/applicant shall connect to existing lateral and furnish and install new fire
service, backflow devices, fire department connections, and other appurtenances as
required by the Department of Public Works and the Downey Fire Department. Backflow
devices, fire department connections, and associated appurtenances are to be located
on private property and shall be readily accessible for emergency and inspection
purposes. Backflow devices shall be screened from street view by providing sufficient
landscaping to hide it.
71. The owner/applicant shall provide and record utility easement(s) for access to, and
inspection and maintenance of, public water lines, meters and appurtenances, and
backflow devices.
72. The owner/applicant shall furnish and install sanitary sewer lateral(s) and associated
facilities within the public right of way in accordance with the requirements of the
Department of Public Works.
73. The owner/applicant shall identify the point(s) of connection for the sanitary sewer
lateral(s) and confirm that sufficient capacity exists in the publicly owned facilities in
conformance with the requirements of the Department of Public Works and the County
Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County (CSDLAC).
74. The owner/applicant shall furnish and install the public sanitary sewer improvements,
including extension and/or replacement of existing mains and associated facilities,
necessary to provide adequate capacity for the site as approved by the Department of
Public Works and CSDLAC.
75. The owner/applicant is responsible for coordinating with Building & Safety permit fees
and payment(s) to the City and CSDLAC for all sanitary sewer connection and capacity
charges.
PC Agenda Page 50
Resolution No. 17-
Downey Planning Commission
9062-66 Firestone Boulevard – PLN-16-00175
February 15, 2017 - Page 15
76. The owner/applicant shall provide improvement plan mylars, record drawing mylars, and
record drawing digital (AutoCAD – latest edition) files in accordance with the
requirements of the Department of Public Works that have been signed by a civil
engineer licensed in the State of California. Final approval of new utilities shall be
dependent upon submittal and approval of record drawing mylars and scanned,
uncompressed TIFF images of record drawings on a CD/DVD-ROM media per City’s
GIS system data updates and maintenance.
77. Utility plans shall be submitted to and approved by the Department of Public Works prior
to the issuance of the grading plan permit. Submit plans to Building & Safety and
Planning Divisions regarding the following:
a) The use of drought tolerant plants
b) Drip irrigation
c) Latest Green Code standards for water fixtures, etc.
PC Agenda Page 51
Andrew Salas, Chairman Nadine Salas, Vice-Chairman Christina Swindall Martinez, secretary
Albert Perez, treasurer I Martha Gonzalez Lemos, treasurer II Richard Gradias, Chairman of the council of Elders
PO Box 393 Covina, CA 91723 www.gabrielenoindians@yahoo.com gabrielenoindians@yahoo.com
GABRIELENO BAND OF MISSION INDIANS – KIZH NATION
Historically known as The San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians
Recognized by the State of California as the aboriginal tribe of the Los Angeles basin
Dear Mr, Guillermo
Subject: Correction for the history of the project location Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration.
This letter is in regards to the correction of the text regarding my knowledge that was submitted to the EIR report regarding the above project
location.
Incorrect Text:
Pg. 50 – a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5. – No Impact
Pg. 55 – Although Mr. Salas is unable to provide specific information on potential resources on the site, he did note that the Gabrieleno Band
of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation was prevalent in the area.
Corrected Text:
Pg 50 - a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5. – Less than
Significant with Mitigation Incorporated
Pg 55 - “The project locale lies in an area where the ancestral & traditional territories of the Kizh (Kitc) Gabrieleño villages adjoined and
overlapped with each other, at least during the Late Prehistoric and Protohistoric Periods. The project site lies within The homeland of the
Kizh (Kitc) Gabrieleños, known as the most influential Native American group in aboriginal southern California (Bean and Smith 1978a:538
https://nrmsecure.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=9497), and was centered in the Los Angeles Basin reaching as far east as the
San Bernardino-Riverside area and west to the Channel Islands. The main village site of the area was known as Nacuanga and surrounded by
adjacent villages named Sehutgna, Chokishgna, Huutngna, Tajauta, Abahugna, Amupungna, and Wenotgna. The village of Nacuanga
utilized the San Gabriel, Rio Hondo, and Los Angeles Rivers for travel, trade, and resources and was bisected with multiple trade routes going
east/west and connecting with north/south trade routes leading from the ocean to Yagna (Los Angeles). Villages were based on clan or
lineage groups. Their home/ base sites are marked by midden deposits, often with bedrock mortars. During their seasonal trips to exploit
plant resources, small groups would travel within their traditional territory in search of specific plants and animals. Their gathering
strategies often left behind signs of special use sites, usually grinding slicks on bedrock boulders, cupules in rock, and mortars on granite.
Therefore, in order to protect our cultural resources, we're requesting one of our experienced & certified Native American monitors to be on
site during any & all ground disturbances (this includes but is not limited to pavement removal, pot-holing, test pits, grubbing of vegetation,
auguring, boring, grading, excavation, trenching and weed abatement).
In all cases, when the NAHC states there are “No" records of sacred sites” in the subject area; they always refer the contractors back to the
Native American Tribes whose tribal territory the project area is in. This is due to the fact, that the NAHC is only aware of general
information on each California NA Tribe they are "NOT " the “experts” on our Tribe. Our Elder Committee & Tribal Historians are the experts
and is the reason why the NAHC will always refer contractors to the local tribes.
In addition, we are also often told that an area has been previously developed or disturbed and there are no concerns for cultural resources
and thus minimal to no impacts would be expected. I have two major recent examples of how similar statements on other projects were
proven very inadequate. An archaeological study claimed there would be no impacts to an area adjacent to the Plaza Church at Olvera
Street, the original Spanish settlement of Los Angeles, now in downtown Los Angeles. In fact, this site was the Gabrieleno village of Yangna
long before it became what it is now today. The new development wrongfully began their construction and in their grading process, dug up
Exhibit - D PC Agenda Page 52
Andrew Salas, Chairman Nadine Salas, Vice-Chairman Christina Swindall Martinez, secretary
Albert Perez, treasurer I Martha Gonzalez Lemos, treasurer II Richard Gradias, Chairman of the council of Elders
PO Box 393 Covina, CA 91723 www.gabrielenoindians@yahoo.com gabrielenoindians@yahoo.com
and desecrated 118 burials. The area that was dismissed as culturally sensitive was in fact the First Cemetery of Los Angeles where it had
been well documented at the Huntington Library that 400 of our Tribe's ancestors were buried there along with the founding families of Los
Angeles (Pico’s, Sepulveda’s, and Alvarado’s to name a few). In addition, there was another inappropriate study for the development of a
new sports complex at Fedde Middle School in the City of Hawaiian Gardens. Again, a village and burial site were uncovered and desecrated
because their mitigation measures dismissed the possibility. Thankfully, our Tribe was able to work alongside the school district to quickly
and respectfully mitigate a mutually beneficial resolution.
Given all the above, the proper action for your project would be for our Tribe to monitor ground disturbing construction work. Native
American monitors and/or consultants are able to observe and verify that cultural resources are not present or if present are treated
appropriately from the Native American point of view. Since we are the lineal descendants of the vast area of Los Angeles and Orange
Counties, we hold sacred the ability to protect what little of our culture remains. We thank you for taking seriously your role and
responsibility in assisting us in preserving our culture.
With respect,
Please contact our office regarding this project to coordinate a Native American Monitor to be present. Thank You
Andrew Salas, Chairman
Cell (626) 926-4131
Addendum: clarification regarding some confusions regarding consultation under AB52:
CC: NAHC
AB52 clearly states that consultation must occur with tribes that claim traditional and
cultural affiliation with a project site. Unfortunately, this statement has been left open
to interpretation so much that neighboring tribes are claiming affiliation with projects
well outside their traditional tribal territory. The territories of our surrounding Native
American tribes such as the Luiseno, Chumash, and Cahuilla tribal entities. Each of our
tribal territories has been well defined by historians, ethnographers, archaeologists,
and ethnographers – a list of resources we can provide upon request. Often, each
Tribe as well educates the public on their very own website as to the definition of their
tribal boundaries. You may have received a consultation request from another Tribe.
However we are responding because your project site lies within our Ancestral tribal
territory, which, again, has been well documented. What does Ancestrally or Ancestral
mean? The people who were in your family in past times, Of, belonging to, inherited
from, or denoting an ancestor or ancestors
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/ancestral. . If you have questions regarding the
validity of the “traditional and cultural affiliation” of another Tribe, we urge you to
contact the Native American Heritage Commission directly. Section 5 section
21080.3.1 (c) states “…the Native American Heritage Commission shall assist the lead
agency in identifying the California Native American tribes that are traditionally and
culturally affiliated with the project area.” In addition, please see the adjacent map.
PC Agenda Page 53
TONGVA ANCESTRAL TERRITORIAL TRIBAL NATION
A TRIBAL SOVEREIGN NATION UNDER THE UNDRIP AND AS A CALIFORNIA NATIVE AMERICAN TRIBE –VERIFIED BY
ACHP AND NAHC - SB18-AB 52-AJR 42
DNA AUTHENICATED FOR OUR DOCUMENTED COASTAL VILLAGES AND ISLANDS RECOGNIZED BY THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA AS THE ABORIGINAL TRIBE OF THE LOS ANGELES BASIN AND ISLANDS
JOHN TOMMY ROSAS
TRIBAL ADMINISTRATOR /LITIGATOR
578 WASHINGTON BLVD #384 MARINA DEL REY,CA 90292
310-570-6567
TATTNLAW@GMAIL.COM JTR@TONGVANATION.ORG
TO: MR. ARREOLA ,SENIOR PLANNER , JAN. 09-2017
CITY OF DOWNEY
RE:AB 52 TRIBAL CONSULTATION RESPONSE AND CONDITIONS
For Proposed Specific Plan Amendment Application
(Application No. PLN-16-00175)
Thank You For Contacting And Consulting With Us On This Proposed Project.
The General Area/Vicinity Is Considered Medium To Highly Sensitive For Our Tongva
Tribal Prehistoric Archaeological Resources With Traditional Religious And Cultural
Significance. Tongva Prehistoric Settlements Were Concentrated In The Area
Tattn Strongly Recommends, If Any Tongva Archaeological Or Human Remains Are
Encountered, The Project Will Cease Operations Archaeologist On Record Will Be
Notified, We Should Also Be Notified, Immediately . All Tongva/Tattn Tribal Ancestor
Human Remains. And Any Burial Items Or Other Artifacts Will Be Treated And
Evaluated In Accordance With The Regulations Set Forth In 36 Code Of Federal
Regulations (Cfr) 800. 13(B)(3) Regarding Post Review Discoveries. Including Our
Direct Tribal Consultation With CITY OF DOWNEY.
If Any Tongva Tribal Human Remains Are Encountered, Consultation Will Be
Conducted With TATTN/JTR Pursuant To Native American Graves Protection And
Repatriation Act And I Am A Direct DNA Documented Descendant As Listed Under
NAGPRA .
In The Proposed Area Of Potential Effect Or The Potential Effects That Issuing The
Project Approval Tattn Requests, We Be Considered To Be There As NA Monitors On
All Ground-Disturbing Actions/Excavations,
PC Agenda Page 54
TONGVA ANCESTRAL TERRITORIAL TRIBAL NATION
A TRIBAL SOVEREIGN NATION UNDER THE UNDRIP AND AS A CALIFORNIA NATIVE AMERICAN TRIBE –VERIFIED BY
ACHP AND NAHC - SB18-AB 52-AJR 42
DNA AUTHENICATED FOR OUR DOCUMENTED COASTAL VILLAGES AND ISLANDS RECOGNIZED BY THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA AS THE ABORIGINAL TRIBE OF THE LOS ANGELES BASIN AND ISLANDS
JOHN TOMMY ROSAS
TRIBAL ADMINISTRATOR /LITIGATOR
578 WASHINGTON BLVD #384 MARINA DEL REY,CA 90292
310-570-6567
TATTNLAW@GMAIL.COM JTR@TONGVANATION.ORG
Including Geo Tech Testing Which Can Be Done Concurrently If Planned Properly As It
Will Be Very Similar And Will Be Using The Same Contractor And Equipment .
TATTN Also Requests The Proposed Work Be Documented By Video/Photographs.
TATTN Charges for the TATTN DATABASE SEARCH AND REVIEW IS $400-Paid to
TATTN TRIBAL CONSULTING INC. For Investigation Of The Proposed Project Scope
Of Work And Review Any Possible Negative/Adverse Impacts And That CITY OF
DOWNEY /DEVELOPER Will Agree To Comply To All Our Conditions And Will Comply
To All State And Federal Laws And Applicable Codes.
Thank You , Johntommy Rosas
/S/ JOHNTOMMY ROSAS
[SIGNATURE ON FILE]
PC Agenda Page 55
Downey 140-Unit Hotel
Mitigated Negative Declaration
PLN-16-00175
Prepared for:
City of Downey
11111 Brookshire Avenue
Downey, California 90241
Contact: Guillermo Arreola, Senior Planner
Prepared by:
27372 Calle Arroyo
San Juan Capistrano, California 92675
Contact: Caitlin Munson, Project Manager
JANUARY 2017
Exhibit - EPC Agenda Page 56
Printed on 30% post-consumer recycled material.
PC Agenda Page 57
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
i January 2017
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page No.
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ..................................................................................... V
1 INTRODUCTION..............................................................................................................1
1.1 Background ............................................................................................................. 1
1.2 Project Objectives ................................................................................................... 1
1.3 California Environmental Quality Act Compliance ............................................... 1
1.4 Public Review Process ............................................................................................ 1
2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ..............................................................................................3
2.1 Project Location ...................................................................................................... 3
2.2 Environmental Setting ............................................................................................ 3
2.3 Project Characteristics ............................................................................................ 3
2.3.1 Project Description...................................................................................... 4
2.3.2 Project Construction and Schedule ........................................................... 19
3 INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST ....................................................................................21
3.1 Aesthetics .............................................................................................................. 25
3.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources...................................................................... 32
3.3 Air Quality ............................................................................................................ 34
3.4 Biological Resources ............................................................................................ 47
3.5 Cultural Resources ................................................................................................ 50
3.6 Geology and Soils ................................................................................................. 57
3.7 Greenhouse Gas Emissions ................................................................................... 62
3.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials ........................................................................ 68
3.9 Hydrology and Water Quality ............................................................................... 74
3.10 Land Use and Planning ......................................................................................... 82
3.11 Mineral Resources ................................................................................................ 85
3.12 Noise ..................................................................................................................... 86
3.13 Population and Housing ........................................................................................ 97
3.14 Public Services ...................................................................................................... 99
3.15 Recreation ........................................................................................................... 101
3.16 Transportation and Traffic .................................................................................. 102
3.17 Utilities and Service Systems.............................................................................. 112
3.18 Mandatory Findings of Significance ................................................................... 120
4 REFERENCES AND PREPARERS ............................................................................123
4.1 References Cited ................................................................................................. 123
4.2 List of Preparers .................................................................................................. 128
PC Agenda Page 58
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED)
Page No.
10065
ii January 2017
APPENDICES
A Air Quality and GHG Calculations
B Cultural Report
C Geotechnical Engineering Exploration
D Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
E Noise Measurement Data
F Traffic Impact Analysis
FIGURES
1 Regional Map .......................................................................................................................5
2 Vicinity Map ........................................................................................................................7
3 Proposed Site Plan ...............................................................................................................9
4 Existing Land Use Designation .........................................................................................11
5 Existing Zoning Designation .............................................................................................13
6 Proposed Landscape Plan ..................................................................................................15
7 Proposed Elevations ...........................................................................................................17
8 Existing Conditions Photographs .......................................................................................27
9 Existing Conditions Photographs .......................................................................................29
TABLES
2.3-1 Anticipated Construction Scenario ....................................................................................20
3.3-1 Projected Employment Growth for the City of Downey ...................................................37
3.3-2 SCAQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds ...............................................................39
3.3-3 Estimated Maximum Daily Construction Emissions .........................................................41
3.3-4 Estimated Maximum Daily Operational Emissions (2019) ...............................................43
3.3-5 LST Analysis for Construction Emissions .........................................................................45
3.7-1 Estimated Annual Construction GHG Emissions ..............................................................66
3.7-2 Estimated Annual Operational GHG Emissions (Unmitigated) ........................................67
3.9-1 Supply and Demand Comparison – Multiple-Dry-Year Events ........................................78
3.10-1 Proposed Project Consistency with Lakewood/Firestone Specific Plan Goals .................84
3.12-1 Exterior Noise Limits .........................................................................................................88
3.12-2 Ambient Measured Noise Levels .......................................................................................89
3.12-3 Construction Equipment Noise Emission Levels ..............................................................91
3.12-4 Short-Term (Construction) Noise Levels...........................................................................91
PC Agenda Page 59
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED)
Page No.
10065
iii January 2017
3.12-5 Project-Related Traffic Noise ............................................................................................93
3.13-1 Employment Growth for the City of Downey ...................................................................98
3.16-1 Hotel – Trip Generation Summary ..................................................................................107
3.16-2 Existing 2016/2017 LOS at Study Area Intersections (Signalized).................................107
3.16-3 Baseline 2019 LOS at Study Area Intersections (Signalized) .........................................108
3.16-4 Existing and Existing With Project 2016/2017 LOS at Study Area
Intersections (Signalized) .................................................................................................109
3.16-5 Baseline and Baseline With Project 2019 LOS at Study Area
Intersections (Signalized) .................................................................................................110
PC Agenda Page 60
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
iv January 2017
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
PC Agenda Page 61
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
v January 2017
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
Acronym/Abbreviation Definition
AFY acre-feet per year
APA allowed pumping allocation
AQMP Air Quality Management Plan
bgs below ground surface
BMP best management practice
CAAQS California Ambient Air Quality Standards
CalEEMod California Emissions Estimator Model
Caltrans California Department of Transportation
CBMWD Central Basin Municipal Water District
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
City City of Downey
CMP Congestion Management Program
CO carbon monoxide
CO2 carbon dioxide
dBA A-weighted decibel (adjusted for human frequencies)
DFD Downey Fire Department
DPD Downey Police Department
DWR California Department of Water Resources
EDR Environmental Data Resources Inc.
EIR Environmental Impact Report
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
FY fiscal year
GHG greenhouse gas
GPD gallons per day
GWP global warming potential
HVAC heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning
ICU Intersection Capacity Utilization
LACSD Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County
Leq time-averaged equivalent noise level
LID low-impact design
Lmax maximum measured noise level
LOS level of service
LST localized significance threshold
MGD million gallons per day
MND Mitigated Negative Declaration
NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards
N2 O nitrous oxide
NO2 nitrogen dioxide
NOx oxides of nitrogen
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
PC Agenda Page 62
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
vi January 2017
Acronym/Abbreviation Definition
NRHP National Register of Historic Places
O3 ozone
PM2.5 particulate matter with a diameter less than or equal to 2.5 microns
PM10 particulate matter with a diameter less than or equal to 10 microns
PPV IPS peak particle velocity in inches per second
RTP/SCS Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy
SCAB South Coast Air Basin
SCAG Southern California Association of Governments
SCAQMD South Coast Air Quality Management District
SCCIC South Central Coastal Information Center
SMP site mitigation plan
SO2 sulfur dioxide
SOx sulfur oxides
SR- State Route
SU-30 single-unit, 30-foot
UST underground storage tank
UWMP Urban Water Management Plan
VOC volatile organic compound
WRD Water Replenishment District of Southern California
WRP water reclamation plant
PC Agenda Page 63
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
1 January 2017
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
The applicant, Kamla Hotels, proposes to construct a four-story, 88,850-square-foot hotel on a
2.58-acre vacant site at 9062–9066 Firestone Boulevard, southwest of Firestone Boulevard, west
of Woodruff Avenue, and southeast of Lakewood Boulevard (PLN-16-00175) in the City of
Downey (City). The proposed 140-unit hotel (proposed project) requires a specific plan
amendment, conditional use permit, a lot merger to consolidate two lots into one, and a site plan
review, which are all described further in Section 2.3, Project Characteristics.
1.2 Project Objectives
Convert a currently vacant site at 9062–9066 Firestone Boulevard to a revenue-
generating use within the City of Downey.
Operate a hotel within the Lakewood/Firestone Specific Plan (Specific Plan) area to meet the
additional need for a business traveler hotel in the area.
Provide a project within the Specific Plan area that has a unifying and cohesive design
theme that complements existing uses along Firestone Boulevard.
1.3 California Environmental Quality Act Compliance
The City of Downey is the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) lead agency
responsible for the review and approval of the proposed project. Based on the findings of the
Initial Study for the project, the City has determined that a mitigated negative declaration (MND)
is the appropriate environmental document to prepare in compliance with CEQA (California
Public Resources Code, Section 21000 et seq.). As stated in CEQA, Section 21064.5, an MND
may be prepared for a project subject to CEQA when an initial study has identified no potentially
significant effects on the environment.
This MND has been prepared for the City and complies with Section 15070(a) of the CEQA
Guidelines (14 CCR 15000 et seq.). The purpose of the MND and the Initial Study Checklist (see
Chapter 3 of this MND) is to determine any potentially significant impacts associated with the
proposed project and to incorporate mitigation measures into the project design as necessary to
reduce or eliminate the significant or potentially significant effects of the project.
1.4 Public Review Process
In accordance with CEQA, a good-faith effort has been made during the preparation of this MND
to contact affected agencies, organizations, and persons who may have an interest in this project.
PC Agenda Page 64
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
2 January 2017
In reviewing the MND, public agencies and the interested public should focus on the sufficiency of
the document in identifying and analyzing the project’s possible impacts on the environment. A copy
of the Draft MND and related documents are available for review at the City of Downey (see address
below) between the hours of 7:30 a.m. and 5:30 p.m., Monday through Friday.
City of Downey
11111 Brookshire Avenue
Downey, California 90241
The document is also available on the City’s website at www.downeyca.org.
Comments on the MND may be made in writing before the end of the public review period. Pe r
the City’s CEQA Guidelines and Section 15072(a) of the CEQA Guidelines, a 21-day review
and comment period from January 26, 2017, to February 15, 2017, has been established.
Following the close of the public comment period, the City will consider this MND and
comments in determining whether to approve the proposed project.
Written comments on the MND should be received at the following address by 5:30 p.m.,
February 15, 2017.
City of Downey
Planning Division
11111 Brookshire Avenue
Downey, California 90241
Contact: Mr. Guillermo Arreola, Senior Planner
Telephone: 562.904.7154
Email: garreola@downeyca.org
PC Agenda Page 65
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
3 January 2017
2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
2.1 Project Location
The proposed project site is located at 9062–9066 Firestone Boulevard, southwest of Firestone
Boulevard, west of Woodruff Avenue, and southeast of Lakewood Boulevard. The 2.58-acre
project site is currently vacant. Figures 1 and 2 show the regional location and local vicinity,
respectively. Figure 3 shows the proposed site plan. According to the City of Downey General
Plan Land Use Map, the project site is designated General Commercial (GC) (City of Downey
2012a). The project site is zoned Lakewood/Firestone Specific Plan area (SP 91-2) (City of
Downey 2012b). The existing land use designations and zoning designations are shown on
Figures 4 and 5, respectively.
2.2 Environmental Setting
The proposed project site is vacant, with dirt covering the majority of the site and asphalt
concrete pavement throughout the remaining portions of the site. Fallas Parades, a retail store
that fronts Firestone Boulevard; a Big Lots discount store; and a Walgreens drugstore are located
immediately northwest of the project site. Immediately southeast of the project site is a Dunkin’
Donuts and a Big 5 Sporting Goods store, which also front Firestone Boulevard. An auto center
and several commercial properties are also located southeast of the project site. Firestone
Boulevard borders the northeastern edge of the site, and farther northeast is the Stonewood
Center shopping mall. Immediately southwest of the site are the Union Pacific Railroad tracks
(historically, the Southern Pacific Railroad), and farther southwest are multifamily homes.
2.3 Project Characteristics
To develop the hotel, the applicant has filed the following planning applications:
Specific Plan Amendment: The project site is located in the Lakewood/Firestone Specific Plan
(SP 91-2), specifically, Subarea 5, Sector A, Site 17 of the Specific Plan, which limits the
maximum building height to 38 feet, or three stories, and does not list the sale of alcohol in
conjunction with the operation of a hotel as a conditionally permitted use. The Specific Plan
would be amended to allow for the development of a four-story, 60-foot-high hotel, and to allow
for ancillary alcohol sales in conjunction with the operation of a hotel. The Specific Plan would
also be amended to reduce the street landscaping standard from 10 feet to 2 feet, and to create
hotel parking requirements, specifically for Site 17, Subarea 5, Sector A of the Specific Plan.
Conditional Use Permit: A conditional use permit would be required to review the proposed
hotel and the ancillary sales of alcohol in conjunction with a hotel.
PC Agenda Page 66
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
4 January 2017
Site Plan Review: The site plan review considers new, permitted structures and on-site
improvements and verifies a project’s development and use standards, as well as evaluating its
architectural style.
Lot Merger: The lot merger is necessary to consolidate the number of lots from two lots to one.
2.3.1 Project Description
The applicant proposes to construct a four-story, 88,850-square-foot hotel on a 2.58-acre site at
9062–9066 Firestone Boulevard, southwest of Firestone Boulevard and southeast of Lakewood
Boulevard. Figure 1 shows the regional location, Figure 2 shows the project vicinity, and Figure 3
shows the proposed site plan.
The first floor would include a lobby area, guest rooms, meeting rooms, a bar and lounge,
network zone and lounge, buffet area, public restroom, kitchen, offices, laundry room, storage
space, and a mechanical/electrical room. The second floor would include several guest rooms; a
rooftop pool, fire pit, and bar; a fitness room; and a pool equipment and storage room and other
service space. The third and fourth floors would include guest rooms and storage areas. The roof
would include a mechanical equipment enclosure.
The maximum building height to the top of the mechanical equipment enclosure would be 60
feet. The entry façade would be 58 feet high, with the majority of the building at 50 feet in height
and some design elements between 52 and 58 feet to give the façade variation and interest. The
proposed building style is modern with accent wood finish cladding, composite panels,
aluminum and metal elements, glass windows, and exterior plaster.
Site access would be from Firestone Boulevard. The loading zone would be parallel to an
existing loading zone, southwest of Fallas Parades. The site would provide 161 parking spaces
and bicycle parking.
Landscaping would be provided throughout the parking areas and surrounding the proposed
hotel, totaling 17,300 square feet. Figure 6 shows the proposed landscaping plan. Ten percent of
the roof area is designed for a future solar panel array configuration, although solar panels would
not be installed immediately upon buildout. The proposed project would incorporate a newly
engineered underground stormwater retention basin in compliance with City Ordinance No. 13-
1320. The modular wetland system would be constructed with an underground storage tank at
the northern end of the site. A monument sign would face Firestone Boulevard. Figure 7 shows
the proposed elevations.
PC Agenda Page 67
!^
L
o
s
A
n
g
e
l
e
s
C
o
u
n
t
y
Orange County
S
a
n
B
e
r
n
a
r
d
i
n
o
C
o
u
n
t
y
L
o
s
A
n
g
e
l
e
s
C
o
u
n
t
y
V
e
n
t
u
r
a
C
o
u
n
t
y
Los Angeles County
Oran
g
e
C
o
u
n
t
y
San Diego
County
Pacific
Ocean
?47
?118
?55 ?241
?142
?187
?107
?126
?170
?134
?213
?133
?18
?71
?57
?22
?72
?90
?74
?73
?83
?66?27
?91
?39
?19
?1
?14
?60
?138
?2
£¤101
§¨¦710
§¨¦10
§¨¦105
§¨¦5
§¨¦110 §¨¦605
§¨¦15
§¨¦210
§¨¦5
§¨¦405
Project Location
Regional Map
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
SOURCE: ArcGIS Online Basemap
Da
t
e
:
1
2
/
1
6
/
2
0
1
6
-
L
a
s
t
s
a
v
e
d
b
y
:
s
l
u
c
a
r
e
l
l
i
-
P
a
t
h
:
Z
:
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
j
1
0
0
6
5
0
0
\
M
A
P
D
O
C
\
D
o
w
n
e
y
1
4
0
-
U
n
i
t
H
o
t
e
l
M
i
t
i
g
a
t
e
d
N
e
g
a
t
i
v
e
D
e
c
l
a
r
a
t
i
o
n
\
F
i
g
u
r
e
1
-
R
e
g
i
o
n
a
l
M
a
p
.
m
x
d
0 105Milesn
FIGURE 1
PC Agenda Page 68
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
6 January 2017
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
PC Agenda Page 69
Vicinity Map
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
SOURCE: ArcGIS Online Basemap (Bing)
Da
t
e
:
1
2
/
1
6
/
2
0
1
6
-
L
a
s
t
s
a
v
e
d
b
y
:
s
l
u
c
a
r
e
l
l
i
-
P
a
t
h
:
Z
:
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
j
1
0
0
6
5
0
0
\
M
A
P
D
O
C
\
D
o
w
n
e
y
1
4
0
-
U
n
i
t
H
o
t
e
l
M
i
t
i
g
a
t
e
d
N
e
g
a
t
i
v
e
D
e
c
l
a
r
a
t
i
o
n
\
F
i
g
u
r
e
2
-
V
i
c
i
n
i
t
y
M
a
p
.
m
x
d
0 2,0001,000 Feetn
FIGURE 2
PC Agenda Page 70
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
8 January 2017
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
PC Agenda Page 71
Proposed Site Plan
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
SOURCE: Architects Orange
Da
t
e
:
1
/
1
3
/
2
0
1
7
-
L
a
s
t
s
a
v
e
d
b
y
:
r
d
e
o
d
a
t
-
P
a
t
h
:
Z
:
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
j
1
0
0
6
5
0
0
\
M
A
P
D
O
C
\
D
o
w
n
e
y
1
4
0
-
U
n
i
t
H
o
t
e
l
M
i
t
i
g
a
t
e
d
N
e
g
a
t
i
v
e
D
e
c
l
a
ra
t
i
o
n
\
F
i
g
u
r
e
3
-
P
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
S
i
t
e
P
l
a
n
.
m
x
d
FIGURE 3
PC Agenda Page 72
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
10 January 2017
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
PC Agenda Page 73
Existing Land Use Designation
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
SOURCE: City of Downey
Da
t
e
:
1
/
1
3
/
2
0
1
7
-
L
a
s
t
s
a
v
e
d
b
y
:
r
d
e
o
d
a
t
-
P
a
t
h
:
Z
:
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
j
1
0
0
6
5
0
0
\
M
A
P
D
O
C
\
D
o
w
n
e
y
1
4
0
-
U
n
i
t
H
o
t
e
l
M
i
t
i
g
a
t
e
d
N
e
g
a
t
i
v
e
D
e
c
l
a
ra
t
i
o
n
\
F
i
g
u
r
e
4
-
E
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
L
a
n
d
U
s
e
D
e
s
i
g
n
a
t
i
o
n
.
m
x
d
0 300150Feet
Project Boundary
General Plan
GC (General Commercial)
FIGURE 4
PC Agenda Page 74
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
12 January 2017
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
PC Agenda Page 75
Existing Zoning Designation
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
SOURCE: City of Downey
Da
t
e
:
1
/
1
3
/
2
0
1
7
-
L
a
s
t
s
a
v
e
d
b
y
:
r
d
e
o
d
a
t
-
P
a
t
h
:
Z
:
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
j
1
0
0
6
5
0
0
\
M
A
P
D
O
C
\
D
o
w
n
e
y
1
4
0
-
U
n
i
t
H
o
t
e
l
M
i
t
i
g
a
t
e
d
N
e
g
a
t
i
v
e
D
e
c
l
a
ra
t
i
o
n
\
F
i
g
u
r
e
5
-
E
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
Z
o
n
i
n
g
D
e
s
i
g
n
a
t
i
o
n
.
m
x
d
0 310155Feet
Project Boundary
Specific Plan
SP 91-2 (Lakewood/Firestone)
FIGURE 5
PC Agenda Page 76
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
14 January 2017
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
PC Agenda Page 77
Proposed Landscape Plan
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
SOURCE: Thatcher Engineering & Associates, Inc.
Da
t
e
:
1
/
1
3
/
2
0
1
7
-
L
a
s
t
s
a
v
e
d
b
y
:
r
d
e
o
d
a
t
-
P
a
t
h
:
Z
:
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
j
1
0
0
6
5
0
0
\
M
A
P
D
O
C
\
D
o
w
n
e
y
1
4
0
-
U
n
i
t
H
o
t
e
l
M
i
t
i
g
a
t
e
d
N
e
g
a
t
i
v
e
D
e
c
l
a
ra
t
i
o
n
\
F
i
g
u
r
e
6
-
P
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
L
a
n
d
s
c
a
p
e
P
l
a
n
.
m
x
d
FIGURE 6
PC Agenda Page 78
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
16 January 2017
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
PC Agenda Page 79
Proposed Elevations
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
SOURCE: Architects Orange
Da
t
e
:
1
2
/
1
6
/
2
0
1
6
-
L
a
s
t
s
a
v
e
d
b
y
:
s
l
u
c
a
r
e
l
l
i
-
P
a
t
h
:
Z
:
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
j
1
0
0
6
5
0
0
\
M
A
P
D
O
C
\
D
o
w
n
e
y
1
4
0
-
U
n
i
t
H
o
t
e
l
M
i
t
i
g
a
t
e
d
N
e
g
a
t
i
v
e
D
e
c
l
a
r
a
t
i
o
n
\
F
i
g
u
r
e
7
-
P
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
E
l
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
s
.
m
x
d
FIGURE 7
PC Agenda Page 80
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
18 January 2017
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
PC Agenda Page 81
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
19 January 2017
An existing 3-foot-high retaining wall with 5-foot-high chain-link fence would be replaced with
a tubular steel fence over the existing 3-foot-high retaining wall along the southeastern boundary
of the project site. A 6-foot-high block wall would be constructed along part of the northwestern
portion of the project site. A 4-foot-high retaining wall with a 6-foot-high tubular steel fence on
top would be constructed along the southwestern boundary of the project site (see Figure 6).
Buildout of the proposed hotel would occur in 2019. The hotel would operate 24 hours a day
every day and would employ 35 to 40 employees.
2.3.2 Project Construction and Schedule
Construction of the proposed project is anticipated to commence in the summer of 2017 and would
last approximately 20 months, ending in February 2019.1 Construction phasing is anticipated as
follows (Bergerson, pers. comm. 2016):
Demolition (July 2017 to August 2017)
Site preparation (August 2017 to September 2017)
Grading (September 2017 to November 2017)
Trenching (November 2017 to December 2017)
Building construction (December 2017 to February 2019)
Paving (June 2018 to September 2018)
Architectural coating (August 2018 to October 2018)
Demolition would involve the removal of existing foundation with I-beams located on the
northeastern portion of the site, cement concrete pad located on the southwestern portion of the
site, four palm trees located along the southwestern portion of the site, ribbon gutter located
throughout the site, existing metal poles located throughout the site, existing 6-foot-high chain-
link fence located throughout the site, 6-foot-high tubular steel fence located on the southwestern
boundary of the site; 3-foot-high retaining wall with 5-foot-high chain-link fence along the
southeastern boundary, and 3-foot-high retaining wall with 7-foot fence on top along the
northeastern boundary. Additional site clearing and rough grading would occur during the site
preparation phase. Grading would require 2,400 cubic yards of cut, 2,500 cubic yards of fill, and
the hauling of 100 cubic yards of soil on site. The following phase would involve the trenching
1 It should be noted that timing estimates of the proposed project buildout were based on a preliminary project
phasing schedule. Because the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) uses real dates (e.g., January
15, 2024) to calculate construction emissions, assumptions were made as to key dates for each phase. Although
all dates reflected in this MND are estimates and actual dates may differ depending on weather and other
factors, this analysis represents a conservative assessment of likely air quality impacts.
PC Agenda Page 82
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
20 January 2017
of soil for the placement of underground utilities. Building construction would involve the
construction of the hotel. The paving phase would involve the pavement of asphalt surfaces for
parking. The architectural coating phase would involve the application of interior and exterior
paints and coatings. A summary of the anticipated construction equipment, quantity of
equipment, hours of operation of the equipment, and worker, vendor, and haul trips per phase is
included in Table 2.3-1.
Table 2.3-1
Anticipated Construction Scenario
Construction
Phase
Worker
Round-Trips
per Day
Vendor Truck
Round-Trips
per Day
Total Haul Truck
Tripsa Equipment Quantity
Hours/
Day
Demolition 14 2 1,180 Rubber-tired dozers 1 8
Concrete/industrial saws 1 8
Tractors/loaders/backhoes 3 8
Site
preparation
8 2 0 Graders 1 8
Tractors/loaders/backhoes 1 7
Scrapers 1 8
Grading 10 2 12 Rubber-tired dozers 1 8
Tractors/loaders/backhoes 2 7
Graders 1 68
Trenching 8 2 0 Plate compactors 1 8
Tractors/loaders/backhoes 1 8
Trenchers 1 8
Building
construction
38 16 0 Cranes 1 8
Forklifts 2 7
Tractors/loaders/backhoes 1 6
Welders 3 8
Generator sets 1 8
Paving 16 0 0 Pavers 1 8
Cement and mortar mixers 1 8
Rollers 2 8
Tractors/loaders/backhoes 1 8
Paving equipment 1 8
Architectural
coating
8 0 0 Air compressors 1 6
Source: See Appendix A
Note: Water trucks were not modeled as equipment in the construction models; instead, they were modeled as vendor trips in the site
preparation, grading, and trenching phases.
a Over entire construction phase.
PC Agenda Page 83
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
21 January 2017
3 INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
1. Project title:
Downey 140-Unit Hotel
2. Lead agency name and address:
City of Downey
Planning Division
11111 Brookshire Avenue
Downey, California 90241
3. Contact person and phone number:
Mr. Guillermo Arreola, Senior Planner
562.904.7154
4. Project location:
9062–9066 Firestone Boulevard
Downey, California 90241
5. Project sponsor’s name and address:
Kamla Hotels
12800 Center Court Drive, Suite 525
Cerritos, California 90703
6. General plan designation:
General Commercial (GC)
7. Zoning:
Lakewood/Firestone Specific Plan (SP 91-2)
8. Description of project (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited
to later phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off-site features
necessary for its implementation. Attach additional sheets if necessary):
See Chapter 2, Project Description.
PC Agenda Page 84
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
22 January 2017
9. Surrounding land uses and setting (Briefly describe the project’s surroundings):
Fallas Parades, a retail store that fronts Firestone Boulevard; a Big Lots discount store; and
a Walgreens drugstore are located immediately northwest of the project site. Immediately
southeast of the project site is a Dunkin’ Donuts and a Big 5 Sporting Goods store, which
also front Firestone Boulevard. An auto center and several commercial properties are also
located southeast of the project site. Firestone Boulevard borders the northeastern edge of
the site, and farther northeast is the Stonewood Center shopping mall. Immediately
southwest of the site are the Union Pacific Railroad tracks (historically, the Southern
Pacific Railroad), and farther southwest are multifamily homes.
10. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval,
or participation agreement):
None.
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project,
involving at least one impact that is a “Potentially Significant Impact,” as indicated by the
checklist on the following pages.
Aesthetics Agriculture and
Forestry Resources Air Quality
Biological Resources Cultural Resources 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 and Traffic Utilities and Service
Systems Mandatory Findings of
Significance
PC Agenda Page 85
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
23 January 2017
DETERMINATION: (To be completed by the Lead Agency)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the
environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the
environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the
project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a “potentially significant impact” or
“potentially significant unless mitigated” impact on the environment, but at least one
effect (1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable
legal standards, and (2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier
analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is
required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the
environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately
in an earlier ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT or NEGATIVE DECLARATION
pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that
earlier ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT or NEGATIVE DECLARATION,
including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project,
nothing further is required.
January 25, 2017
Guillermo Arreola Date
Senior Planner, City of Downey
PC Agenda Page 86
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
24 January 2017
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
1. A brief explanation is required for all answers except “No Impact” answers that are
adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses
following each question. A “No Impact” answer is adequately supported if the referenced
information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one
involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A “No Impact” answer
should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general
standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a
project-specific screening analysis).
2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as
on-site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as
well as operational impacts.
3. Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then
the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than
significant with mitigation, or less than significant. “Potentially Significant Impact” is
appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are
one or more “Potentially Significant Impact” entries when the determination is made, an
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is required.
4. “Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated” applies
where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from “Potentially
Significant Impact” to a “Less Than Significant Impact.” The lead agency must describe
the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than
significant level (mitigation measures from “Earlier Analyses,” as described in (5), may
be cross-referenced).
5. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA
process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration.
Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following:
a. Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review.
b. Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the checklist were within
the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable
legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures
based on the earlier analysis.
c. Mitigation Measures. For effects that are “Less than Significant with Mitigation
Measures Incorporated,” describe the mitigation measures that were incorporated or
refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific
conditions for the project.
PC Agenda Page 87
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
25 January 2017
6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information
sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a
previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference
to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated.
7. Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used
or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion.
8. This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats;
however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are
relevant to a project’s environmental effects in whatever format is selected.
9. The explanation of each issue should identify:
a. The significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and
b. The mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance.
3.1 Aesthetics
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
I. AESTHETICS – 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 the site and its surroundings?
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare
which would adversely affect day or nighttime
views in the area?
a) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
No Impact. The project site is located in an urban setting along the primarily commercial
Lakewood Boulevard/Firestone Boulevard area (see Figure 8, Photo 1). Although the
proposed hotel (approximately 60 feet above ground level at the top of the tallest portion of
the mechanical equipment enclosure) would be located on a vacant site (see Figure 8, Photo
2), the area is primarily commercial. The presence of multistory commercial developments
adjacent to the project site and along the Firestone Boulevard corridor limits opportunities for
particularly scenic vista points in the surrounding area. Furthermore, similar urban and
developed communities and cities containing limited natural scenic resources surround the
PC Agenda Page 88
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
26 January 2017
City of Downey. Lastly, the Downey Vision 2025 General Plan (City of Downey 2005) does
not identify any scenic vistas in the City. Given these factors, implementation of the proposed
project would not have an impact on scenic vistas.
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. None of the highways and freeways passing through the City have been
designated state scenic highways by the California Department of Transportation
(Caltrans). Within Los Angeles County, only State Route 2 (SR-2; also known as the
Angeles Crest Highway) from La Cañada Flintridge north to the San Bernardino County
line is an officially designated state scenic highway (SR-2 is located more than 20 miles
north of the project site) (Caltrans 2016). South of SR-2 and through the Seal Beach area,
SR-1 is an eligible state scenic highway; however, this segment of the highway is more
than 10 miles south of the project site. Due to the presence of intervening development
and landscaping, views to the project site are not available from the eligible state scenic
highway segment of SR-1. Therefore, because views of the project site are not available
from a designated state scenic highway, implementation of the proposed project would
have no effect on scenic resources within a state scenic highway.
c) Would the project substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the
site and its surroundings?
No Impact. The project site is currently vacant, with weeds, piles of dirt, and trash
surrounded by a chain-link fence (see Figure 9, Photos 1 and 2).
As proposed, the applicant would construct a four-story, 88,850-square-foot hotel with a
porte cochere; on-site parking; trees, shrubs, and groundcover landscaping, including an
8,000-cubic-foot underground area for stormwater retention on the north side of the property
(see Figure 3). The hotel would also reserve 10% of the roof space for a future rooftop
photovoltaic solar array; however, these features would not be visible to the public. The
maximum building height to the top of the mechanical equipment enclosure would be 60
feet. The new hotel building would be four stories, with the majority of the building at 50
feet in height and some design elements between 52 and 58 feet to give the façade variation
and interest. The proposed building style is modern with accent wood finish cladding,
composite panels, aluminum and metal elements, glass windows, and exterior plaster (see
Figure 7). Paint colors proposed are neutral (white, beige, brown, pale green, and grey).
The project site is located in an urban setting with a variety of commercial uses along
Firestone Boulevard and the regional Stonewood Center shopping mall across Firestone
Boulevard. Thus, a hotel use would be a visually compatible use in this area.
PC Agenda Page 89
Existing Conditions Photographs
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
SOURCE: Dudek
Da
t
e
:
1
/
5
/
2
0
1
7
-
L
a
s
t
s
a
v
e
d
b
y
:
s
l
u
c
a
r
e
l
l
i
-
P
a
t
h
:
Z
:
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
j
1
0
0
6
5
0
0
\
M
A
P
D
O
C
\
D
o
w
n
e
y
1
4
0
-
U
n
i
t
H
o
t
e
l
M
i
t
i
g
a
t
e
d
N
e
g
a
t
i
v
e
D
e
c
la
r
a
t
i
o
n
\
F
i
g
u
r
e
8
-
E
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
C
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
P
h
o
t
o
g
r
a
p
h
s
.
m
x
d
FIGURE 8
Photo 1: View of Firestone Boulevard corridor, looking north. Photo 2: View of Project Site, looking southwest.
PC Agenda Page 90
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
28 January 2017
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
PC Agenda Page 91
FIGURE 9
Existing Conditions Photographs
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
SOURCE: Dudek
Da
t
e
:
1
/
5
/
2
0
1
7
-
L
a
s
t
s
a
v
e
d
b
y
:
s
l
u
c
a
r
e
l
l
i
-
P
a
t
h
:
Z
:
\
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
j
1
0
0
6
5
0
0
\
M
A
P
D
O
C
\
D
o
w
n
e
y
1
4
0
-
U
n
i
t
H
o
t
e
l
M
i
t
i
g
a
t
e
d
N
e
g
a
t
i
v
e
D
e
c
la
r
a
t
i
o
n
\
F
i
g
u
r
e
9
-
E
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
C
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
P
h
o
t
o
g
r
a
p
h
s
.
m
x
d
Photo 1: Piles of dirt onsite, looking south. Photo 2: Trash onsite, looking east.
PC Agenda Page 92
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
30 January 2017
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
PC Agenda Page 93
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
31 January 2017
Because the project site is vacant and does not appear to be maintained, as evidenced by the
piles of dirt, trash, and weeds, the redevelopment of the site would be an improvement on
the existing visual character and quality of the site. Therefore, implementation of the
proposed project would not have an impact on the existing visual character and quality of the
site and surroundings.
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 proposed hotel would feature interior and exterior
lighting for general illumination, security, and safety purposes. Interior spaces would be
illuminated with a variety of lighting options, which would operate during regular
business hours. Exterior lighting would include building-façade-mounted fixtures,
illuminated signage, and pole lighting in parking areas. Due to the existing commercial
retail uses in the surrounding area, implementation of the proposed project and operation
of new nighttime lighting would potentially create increased lighting levels generated on
site and projected onto adjacent properties. However, a photometric plan has been
prepared for the proposed project, and it was determined that the project would not create
light spillage off the site. In addition, lighting for the proposed project would be required
to comply with applicable City regulations, including standards established for outdoor
lighting. More specifically, the proposed project would be required to comply with the
City’s Municipal Code, Section 9520.06, Outdoor Lighting, which requires the
installation of low-level parking-lot lighting designed to eliminate spillover to the street
and adjacent areas (City of Downey 1978, Section 9520.06(b)). Furthermore, existing
City standards require all outdoor lighting to be directed, positioned, and shielded so as to
not direct lighting on any street or abutting property and state that the type, location, and
intensity of lighting is subject to review and approval by the City Planner (City of
Downey 1978, Sections 9520.06(c), 9520.06(e)). Therefore, compliance with existing
City standards regulating outdoor lighting would ensure that impacts from new lighting
associated with the proposed hotel would be less than significant.
PC Agenda Page 94
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
32 January 2017
3.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
II. AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES – In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant
environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model
(1997) prepared by the California Department 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 a dopted 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?
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?
No Impact. The proposed project site is located in the urban setting of the City of
Downey. The site is currently vacant, but is not used for agricultural uses . Although
the California Department of Conservation’s Farmland Mapping and Monitoring
Program has not mapped the project site or the City, the developed, urban character of
the surrounding area suggests that the appropriate Farmland Mapping and Monitoring
Program mapping designation would be “Urban and Built-Up Land.” Therefore,
PC Agenda Page 95
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
33 January 2017
development of the project site as proposed would not convert Prime Farmland,
Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance to non-agricultural use; there
would be no impacts .
b) Would the project conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson
Act contract?
No Impact. The project site is currently zoned Lakewood/Firestone Specific Plan, is
zoned for commercial uses, and does not support agricultural uses. As such, development
of the proposed project would not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a
Williamson Act contract. No impacts would occur.
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))?
No Impact. The project site is currently vacant. The current zoning for the project site is
Lakewood/Firestone Specific Plan. The project site does not support agriculture or
timberland use, and does not support forest land. Therefore, development of the project
site as proposed would not conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest
land, timberland, or timberland zoned Timberland Production. No impact would occur.
d) Would the project result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-
forest use?
No Impact. The project site is currently vacant and does not support agriculture or
timberland use, and does not support forest land. Therefore, development of the project
site as proposed would not result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to
non-forest use. No impact would occur.
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 proposed project site is located within the urban setting of the City and is
vacant. The site does not currently support farmland or forest land. Therefore, development
of the project site as proposed would not result in conversion of Farmland to non-
agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use. No impact would occur.
PC Agenda Page 96
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
34 January 2017
3.3 Air Quality
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
III. AIR QUALITY – Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air
pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan?
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute
substantially to an existing or projected air quality
violation?
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of
any criteria pollutant for which the project region is
nonattainment under an applicable federal or state
ambient air quality standard (including releasing
emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for
ozone precursors)?
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial
number of people?
a) Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air
quality plan?
Less Than Significant Impact . The proposed project is located within the South Coast
Air Basin (SCAB), which is a 6,745-square-mile area bounded by the Pacific Ocean to
the west and the San Gabriel, San Bernardino, and San Jacinto Mountains to the north
and east. It includes all of Orange County and the nondesert portions of Los Angeles,
Riverside, and San Bernardino Counties. The project is within the jurisdictional
boundaries of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD).
The SCAQMD administers the Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) for the SCAB,
which is a comprehensive document outlining an air pollution control program for
attaining all National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and California
Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS). The SCAQMD implements control
measures included in the AQMP as regulations to control or reduce criteria pollutant
emissions from stationary sources or equipment. The current adopted version of the
SCAQMD’s AQMP is the Final 2012 AQMP (SCAQMD 2013), which was adopted by
SCAQMD in December 2012 and finalized in February 2013. The 2012 AQMP
incorporates scientific data and updated emission inventory methodologies and
planning assumptions, including the Southern California Association of Governments
PC Agenda Page 97
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
35 January 2017
(SCAG) 2012 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/
SCS; SCAQMD 2013).
On June 30, 2016, the SCAQMD released the Draft 2016 AQMP for public review. The
Draft Final 2016 AQMP was released for public review in December 2016 and is
scheduled to be presented for possible adoption at the February 3, 2017, public meeting.
The Draft Final 2016 AQMP is a regional blueprint for achieving air quality standards
and healthful air. The Draft Final 2016 AQMP represents a new approach, focusing on
available, proven, and cost-effective alternatives to traditional strategies while seeking to
achieve multiple goals in partnership with other entities promoting reductions in
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and toxic risk, as well as efficiencies in energy use,
transportation, and goods movement (SCAQMD 2016). Because mobile sources are the
principal contributor to the SCAB’s air quality challenges, SCAQMD has been and will
continue to be closely engaged with the California Air Resources Board and the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, who have primary responsibility for these sources.
The Draft Final 2016 AQMP recognizes the critical importance of working with other
agencies to develop funding and other incentives that encourage the accelerated transition
of vehicles, buildings, and industrial facilities to cleaner technologies in a manner that
benefits not only air quality but also local businesses and the regional economy. Because
the Draft Final 2016 AQMP has not yet been adopted, the current approved SCAQMD
AQMP is the Final 2012 AQMP.
On April 7, 2016, SCAG’s Regional Council adopted the 2016–2040 RTP/SCS (2016
RTP/SCS). The 2016 RTP/SCS is a long-range visioning plan that balances future
mobility and housing needs with economic, environmental, and public health goals
(SCAG 2016a). The SCAQMD’s Draft Final 2016 AQMP applies the updated SCAG
growth forecasts assumed in the 2016 RTP/SCS; however, as explained previously, the
current applicable air quality plan is the SCAQMD Final 2012 AQMP, which is based
on the SCAG 2012 RTP/SCS.
The SCAQMD has established criteria for determining consistency with the Final 2012
AQMP in Chapter 12, Sections 12.2 and 12.3, of the SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality
Handbook (CEQA Handbook). The criteria are as follows:
Consistency Criterion No. 1: The proposed project will not result in an
increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations or
cause or contribute to new violations, or delay the timely attainment of
air quality standards of the interim emissions reductions specified in
the AQMP.
PC Agenda Page 98
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
36 January 2017
Consistency Criterion No. 2: The proposed project will not exceed the
assumptions in the AQMP or increments based on the year of project
buildout and phase (SCAQMD 1993).
Consistency Criterion No. 1
Section 3.3(b) evaluates the project’s potential impacts in regard to CEQA Guidelines,
Appendix G, Threshold 2 (the project’s potential to violate any air quality standard or
contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation impact analysis).
As discussed in the following text, the project would not result in a significant and
unavoidable impact associated with the violation of an air quality standard. Because the
project would not result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality
violations or cause or contribute to new violations, the project would not conflict with
Consistency Criterion No. 1 of the CEQA Handbook (SCAQMD 1993).
Consistency Criterion No. 2
While striving to achieve the NAAQS for ozone (O3) and particulate matter with an
aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to 2.5 microns (PM2.5; fine particulate matter)
and the CAAQS for O3, particulate matter with a diameter less than or equal to 10
microns (PM10; coarse particulate matter), and PM2.5 through a variety of air quality
control measures, the Final 2012 AQMP also accommodates planned growth in the
SCAB. Projects are considered consistent with, and would not conflict with or obstruct
implementation of, the AQMP if the growth in socioeconomic factors (e.g., population,
employment) is consistent with the underlying regional plans used to develop the AQMP
(per Consistency Criterion No. 2 of the CEQA Handbook (SCAQMD 1993)).
If a project proposes development that is greater than that anticipated in the General Plan
and SCAG’s growth projections, the project might conflict with the AQMP and may
contribute to a potentially significant cumulative impact on air quality.
In 2019, upon buildout of the proposed project, it is anticipated that 35–40 employees
would be required to operate the proposed hotel.
SCAG, a metropolitan planning organization that represents the Counties of Ventura, Los
Angeles, San Bernardino, Orange, Riverside, and Imperial, has prepared population,
household, and employee projections for the region as part of the 2012 RTP/SCS and the
PC Agenda Page 99
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
37 January 2017
2016 RTP/SCS (SCAQMD 1993, 2016). Table 3.3-1 shows the employee projections
from the 2012 and 2016 RTP/SCS for the City of Downey.2
Although employees are expected to come from multiple cities throughout Los Angeles
County, it was conservatively assumed that all future employees would come from the
City of Downey.
Table 3.3-1
Projected Employment Growth for the City of Downey
SCAG 2012 RTP/SCS Employee Projections
2008 2020 2035
Employment 40,200 42,200 44,200
SCAG 2016 RTP/SCS Employee Projections
2012 2040
Employment 47,500 53,000
Source: SCAG 2012, 2016b.
The proposed project would introduce a maximum of 40 new employees to the City of
Downey. This increase is only 0.72% of SCAG’s 2016 RTP/SCS overall projected
growth of 5,500 employees for the City from 2012 to 2040. This growth would be 2.0%
of SCAG’s 2012 RTP/SCS overall projected growth of 2,000 employees for the City
from 2008 to 2020.
Therefore, the project would be consistent at a regional level with the underlying growth
forecasts in the AQMP. Based on these considerations, the project would result in a less
than significant impact with regard to conflict with or obstruction of an applicable air
quality plan.
b) Would the project violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an
existing or projected air quality violation?
Less Than Significant Impact. A quantitative analysis was conducted to determine
whether construction and operation of the proposed project may result in emissions of
criteria air pollutants from mobile, area, and energy sources that may cause exceedances
of the NAAQS or CAAQS or contribute to existing nonattainment of the NAAQS or
CAAQS. The following discussion identifies potential short- and long-term impacts that
would result from implementation of the proposed project.
2 Although the current applicable air quality plan is the SCAQMD Final 2012 AQMP, which is based on the
SCAG 2012 RTP/SCS, the SCAG 2016 RTP/SCS growth projections are shown in Table 3.3-1 for purposes
of disclosure.
PC Agenda Page 100
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
38 January 2017
South Coast Air Basin Attainment Designation
An area is designated as in attainment when it is in compliance with the NAAQS and/or
the CAAQS. These standards are set by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency or
the California Air Resources Board, respectively, for the maximum level of a given air
pollutant that can exist in the outdoor air without unacceptable effects on human health
or the public welfare. The criteria pollutants of primary concern that are considered in
this air quality assessment include O 3, nitrogen dioxide (NO2), carbon monoxide (CO),
sulfur dioxide (SO2), PM10, and PM2.5. Although there are no ambient standards for
volatile organic compounds (VOCs) or oxides of nitrogen (NO x), they are important as
precursors to O3.
The SCAB is designated as a nonattainment area for federal and state O3 standards and
federal and state PM2.5 standards. The SCAB is designated as a nonattainment area for
state PM10 standards; however, it is designated as an attainment area for federal PM10
standards. The SCAB is designated as an attainment area for federal and state CO
standards, federal and state NO2 standards, and federal and state SO2 standards. Although
the SCAB has been designated as nonattainment for the federal rolling 3-month average
lead standard, it is designated as in attainment for the state lead standard (EPA 2016;
CARB 2015).
SCAQMD Thresholds
Construction and operation of the proposed project would result in emissions of criteria
air pollutants for which the California Air Resources Board and the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency have adopted ambient air quality standards (i.e., the NAAQS and
CAAQS). Projects that emit these pollutants have the potential to cause or contribute to
violations of these standards. The SCAQMD has adopted significance thresholds, which,
if exceeded, would indicate the potential to contribute to violations of the NAAQS or the
CAAQS. The relevant SCAQMD thresholds are shown in Table 3.3-2.
A project would result in a substantial contribution to an existing air quality violation of
the federal or state standards for O3, which is a nonattainment pollutant, if the project’s
construction or operational emissions would exceed the SCAQMD VOC or NO x
thresholds shown in Table 3.3-2. These emission-based thresholds for O3 precursors
are intended to serve as a surrogate for an O3 significance threshold (i.e., the potential
for adverse O3 impacts to occur) because O 3 itself is not emitted directly, and the
effects of an individual project’s emissions of O3 precursors (VOC and NO x) on O3
levels in ambient air cannot be determined through air quality models or other
quantitative methods.
PC Agenda Page 101
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
39 January 2017
Table 3.3-2
SCAQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds
Criteria Pollutants Mass Daily Thresholds
Pollutant
Construction Operation
Pounds per Day
VOCs 75 55
NOx 100 55
CO 550 550
SOx 150 150
PM10 150 150
PM2.5 55 55
Leada 3 3
Toxic Air Contaminants and Odor Thresholds
Toxic Air Contaminantsb Maximum incremental cancer risk 10 in 1 million
Chronic and acute hazard index 1.0 (project increment)
Odor Project creates an odor nuisance pursuant to SCAQMD Rule 402
Ambient Air Quality Standards for Criteria Pollutantsc
NO2 1-hour average
NO2 annual arithmetic mean
SCAQMD is in attainment; project is significant if it causes or contributes to an
exceedance of the following attainment standards:
0.18 ppm (state)
0.030 ppm (state) and 0.0534 ppm (federal)
CO 1-hour average
CO 8-hour average
SCAQMD is in attainment; project is significant if it causes or contributes to an
exceedance of the following attainment standards:
20 ppm (state) and 35 ppm (federal)
9.0 ppm (state/federal)
PM10 24-hour average
PM10 annual average
10.4 g/m3 (construction)d
2.5 g/m3 (operation)
1.0 g/m3
PM2.5 24-hour average 10.4 g/m3 (construction)d
2.5 g/m3 (operation)
Source: SCAQMD 2015.
Notes: VOC = volatile organic compound; NOx = oxides of nitrogen; CO = carbon monoxide; SOx = sulfur oxides; PM10 = coarse particulate
matter; PM2.5 = fine particulate matter; NO2 = nitrogen dioxide; ppm = parts per million; g/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter.
GHG thresholds for industrial projects, as added in the March 2015 revision to the SCAQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds, were not
included in this table, because they are addressed in Section 3.7, Greenhouse Gas Emissions.
a The phaseout of leaded gasoline started in 1976. Since gasoline no longer contains lead, the proposed project is not anticipated to result
in impacts related to lead; therefore, it is not discussed in this analysis.
b Toxic air contaminants include carcinogens and noncarcinogens.
c Ambient air quality standards for criteria pollutants based on SCAQMD Rule 1303, Table A-2, unless otherwise stated.
d Ambient air quality threshold based on SCAQMD Rule 403.
Construction Emissions
Construction of the project would result in the temporary addition of pollutants to the
local airshed caused by on-site sources (i.e., off-road construction equipment, soil
disturbance, and VOC off-gassing) and off-site sources (i.e., on-road haul trucks, vendor
PC Agenda Page 102
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
40 January 2017
trucks, and worker vehicle trips). Construction emissions can vary substantially from day
to day, depending on the level of activity; the specific type of operation; and for dust, the
prevailing weather conditions. Therefore, such emission levels can only be approximately
estimated, with a corresponding uncertainty in precise ambient air quality impacts.
Emissions from the construction phase of the project were estimated through the use of
the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod), Version 2016.3.1. Construction
activity was assumed to occur over 20 months, starting in July 2017 and ending in
February 2019. The estimated construction emissions are based on the following
assumptions (duration of phases is approximate):
Demolition (July 2017 to August 2017)
Site preparation (August 2017 to September 2017)
Grading (September 2017 to November 2017)
Trenching (November 2017 to December 2017)
Building construction (December 2017 to February 2019)
Paving (June 2018 to September 2018)
Architectural coating (August 2018 to October 2018)
The construction equipment mix and estimated hours of equipment operation per day
used for the criteria air pollutant emissions modeling of the project are shown in Table
2.3-1 (see Section 2.3.2, Project Construction and Schedule). For this analysis, it was
assumed that heavy construction equipment would operate 5 days a week (22 days per
month) during project construction. Table 2.3-1 also presents the estimated number of
workers anticipated for each construction sequence. To estimate motor vehicle emissions
generated by worker vehicles (i.e., light-duty trucks and automobiles), it was assumed
that each worker would generate two one-way trips (or one round-trip) per day. In
addition to construction equipment operation and worker trips, emissions from hauling
trucks and vendor trucks were estimated. Pavement covers a portion of the site, which
would need to be removed prior to construction. Additionally, there are piles of dirt that
would require removal. Removal of existing pavement would require the hauling of
approximately 3,683 tons of pavement from the project site, for a total of 364 haul trips.
Removal of existing dirt would require the hauling of approximately 6,520 cubic yards of
dirt from the project site, for a total of 816 haul trips. Grading would require 2,400 cubic
yards of cut and 2,500 cubic yards of fill, which would balance with a resulting import of
100 cubic yards of soil on site. This would require 12 haul trips. The number of daily
worker trips and haul trips is based on CalEEMod default values. For the demolition, site
PC Agenda Page 103
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
41 January 2017
preparation, grading, and trenching phases, water trucks were not modeled as equipment;
instead, they were modeled as vendor trips. Therefore, two vendor round-trips were
assumed in the demolition, site preparation, grading, and trenching phases. However, for
all other phases, vendor trips were based on CalEEMod default values. All trip distances
are based on CalEEMod default values.
Implementation of the project would generate construction-related air pollutant emissions
from entrained dust, equipment and vehicle exhaust emissions, and architectural coatings.
Entrained dust results from the exposure of earth surfaces to wind from the direct
disturbance and movement of soil, resulting in PM10 and PM2.5 emissions. The proposed
project would be required to comply with SCAQMD Rule 403 to control dust emissions
generated during construction activities. Standard construction practices required under
Rule 403 would be employed to reduce fugitive dust emissions, including watering of the
active sites approximately three times daily, depending on weather conditions. Internal
combustion engines used by construction equipment and on-road vehicles would result in
emissions of VOCs, NOx, CO, PM10, PM2.5, and minimal emissions of sulfur oxides (SOx).
The application of architectural coatings, such as exterior application/interior paint and
other finishes, would also produce VOC emissions, and the project would comply with
SCAQMD Rule 1113, which proscribes the sale or application of high-VOC-content
architectural coatings. Details of the construction emission assumptions and calculations,
including the estimated daily worker and vendor trips and total estimated haul truck trips,
are included in Appendix A.
Table 3.3-3 shows the estimated maximum daily construction emissions associated with the
construction of the proposed project.
Table 3.3-3
Estimated Maximum Daily Construction Emissions
Year
VOCs NOx CO SOx PM10 PM2.5
Pounds per Day
2017 3.69 47.90 20.92 0.07 4.46 2.55
2018 23.79 39.22 33.44 0.06 3.07 2.37
2019 2.84 20.92 17.58 0.03 1.63 1.20
Threshold 75 100 550 150 150 55
Threshold exceeded? No No No No No No
Source: See Appendix A for complete results.
Notes: VOCs = volatile organic compounds; NOx = oxides of nitrogen; CO = carbon monoxide; SOx = sulfur oxides; PM10 = coarse particulate
matter; PM2.5 = fine particulate matter.
These emissions reflect CalEEMod “mitigated” output, which accounts for compliance with SCAQMD Rule 403 (Fugitive Dust)
PC Agenda Page 104
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
42 January 2017
As shown in Table 3.3-3, maximum daily construction emissions would not exceed the
thresholds for VOC, NOx, CO, SOx, PM10, or PM2.5. Furthermore, construction-generated
emissions would be temporary and would not represent a long-term source of criteria air
pollutant emissions. In addition, the project would be required to comply with SCAQMD
Rule 403 to control dust emissions generated during the site preparation, grading, and
trenching activities (SCAQMD 2005). As such, the proposed project would result in a
less than significant impact during construction relating to violation of an air quality
standard or contribution to an existing or projected air quality violation.
Operational Emissions
Operation of the project would produce VOC, NOx, CO, SOx, PM10, and PM2.5 emissions
from area sources, including natural gas combustion and use of consumer products, and
mobile sources (motor vehicle trips to and from the project). The project would affect air
quality primarily through vehicular traffic generated by hotel customers and workers. The
emissions of criteria air pollutants were estimated using CalEEMod.
Emissions associated with daily traffic were modeled using trip generation rates provided
in the Traffic Impact Analysis prepared for the project (Appendix F). The project site was
categorized as the “hotel” land use in CalEEMod. The project was assumed to generate
8.92, 8.94, and 6.50 trips per hotel room on weekdays, Saturdays, and Sundays,
respectively. The project would therefore generate 1,249, 1,252, and 910 trips on
weekdays, Saturdays, and Sundays, respectively. CalEEMod default data for temperature,
variable start information, and emission factors were conservatively assumed for the model
inputs. Project-related traffic was assumed to consist of a mixture of vehicles in accordance
with the model outputs for traffic. Emission factors representing the vehicle mix and
emissions for 2019 were used to represent the first year of operation under the project.
CalEEMod was also used to estimate emissions from the area sources, which include
natural gas appliances, space and water heating, gasoline-powered landscape
maintenance equipment, use of consumer products, and architectural coatings for
maintenance of buildings. The estimated operational area source emissions were based on
land use defaults of the project. Default values for solid waste generation were changed
from 77 tons per year to 100.98 tons per year for a more conservative estimate, as
described in Section 3.17(f)).
Table 3.3-4 presents the maximum daily area, energy, and mobile source emissions. The
values shown are the maximum summer or winter daily emissions results from CalEEMod.
PC Agenda Page 105
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
43 January 2017
Table 3.3-4
Estimated Maximum Daily Operational Emissions (2019)
Emissions Source
VOCs NOx CO SOx PM10 PM2.5
Pounds per Day
Area 1.99 <0.01 0.01 0.00 <0.01 <0.01
Energy 0.06 0.57 0.48 <0.01 0.04 0.04
Mobile 2.47 10.99 29.35 0.09 6.45 1.79
Combined total emissions 4.52 11.56 29.85 0.09 6.49 1.84
Pollutant threshold 55 55 550 150 150 55
Threshold exceeded? No No No No No No
VOCs = volatile organic compounds; NOx = oxides of nitrogen; CO = carbon monoxide; SOx = sulfur oxides; PM10 = coarse particulate matter;
PM2.5 = fine particulate matter.
As shown in Table 3.3-4, the total daily operational emissions would not exceed the
SCAQMD significance thresholds for VOCs, NOx, CO, SOx, PM10, or PM2.5. As such, the
project would result in a less than significant impact during operation relating to violation
of an air quality standard or contribution to an existing or projected air quality violation.
c) Would the project result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria
pollutant for which the project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or
state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed
quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)?
Less Than Significant Impact. Air pollution is largely a cumulative impact. The
nonattainment status of regional pollutants is a result of past and present development,
and the SCAQMD develops and implements plans for future attainment of ambient air
quality standards. In considering cumulative impacts from the proposed project, the
analysis must specifically evaluate a project’s contribution to the cumulative increase in
pollutants for which the SCAB is designated as nonattainment for the CAAQS and
NAAQS. If a project’s emissions would exceed the SCAQMD significance thresholds, it
would be considered to have a cumulatively considerable contribution to nonattainment
status in the SCAB. Conversely, projects that do not exceed the project-specific
thresholds are generally not considered to be cumulatively significant (SCAQMD 2003).
The SCAB is a nonattainment area for O3 and PM2.5 under the NAAQS and is a
nonattainment area for O3, PM10, and PM2.5 under the CAAQS. The nonattainment status
is the result of cumulative emissions from various sources of air pollutants and their
precursors within the SCAB, including motor vehicles, off-road equipment, and
commercial and industrial facilities. Construction and operation of the project would
generate VOC and NOx emissions (which are precursors to O3) and emissions of
PM10 and PM2.5. However, as indicated in Tables 3.3-3 and 3.3-4, project-generated
PC Agenda Page 106
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
44 January 2017
construction and operational emissions, respectively, would not exceed the SCAQMD
emission-based significance thresholds for VOC, NOx, PM10, or PM2.5; therefore, the
project would not cause a cumulatively significant impact.
Regarding localized impacts, cumulative PM10 and PM2.5 emissions would be reduced
because all future projects would be subject to SCAQMD Rule 403 (Fugitive Dust),
which sets forth general and specific requirements for all construction sites in the
SCAQMD. As discussed in Section 3.3(d), the project would not result in maximum daily
PM10 and PM2.5 concentrations that would exceed SCAQMD localized significance
thresholds (LSTs) during project construction activities. As such, the proposed project
would not make a considerable contribution to the SCAB’s nonattainment designation for
PM10 and PM2.5; therefore, the project would not cause a cumulatively significant impact.
Furthermore, the project would not conflict with growth assumptions in SCAQMD’s
2012 AQMP, which addresses the cumulative emissions in the SCAB.
As discussed in Section 3.13(a), the project would introduce 35–40 new employees to the
City. This increase is 0.72% of SCAG’s overall projected growth of 5,500 employees for
the City from 2012 to 2040. This growth would also be 2.0% of SCAG’s 2012 RTP/SCS
overall projected growth of 2,000 employees for the City from 2008 to 2020. Therefore,
the proposed project would be consistent at a regional level with the underlying growth
forecasts in the AQMP. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in a
cumulatively considerable contribution to the nonattainment pollutants in the SCAB, and
this impact would be less than significant.
d) Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?
Less Than Significant Impact. Sensitive receptors include residential land uses, schools,
open space and parks, recreational facilities, hospitals, resident care facilities, daycare
facilities, and other facilities that may house individuals with health conditions that
would be affected by poor air quality.
LST Analysis
The SCAQMD recommends the evaluation of localized NO2, CO, PM10, and PM2.5
impacts to sensitive receptors in the immediate vicinity of the project site that would
result from construction activities. Residences are located adjacent to the project site.
These residents would be considered sensitive receptors and would potentially be
affected by construction-generated air pollutant emissions.
The project site is located in Source Receptor Area 5 (Southeastern Los Angeles County).
It was assumed that the sensitive receptors would be located within 25 meters (82 feet) of
PC Agenda Page 107
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
45 January 2017
construction activity; this is the smallest distance to receptors evaluated in the SCAQMD
LST Methodology (SCAQMD 2008a). The SCAQMD LST look-up tables are available
for 1-acre, 2-acre, and 5-acre sites. The project site is 2.58 acres; therefore, the 2-acre
scenario was chosen to represent project construction. The SCAQMD LST Methodology
specifies the maximum allowable daily emissions that would satisfy the localized
significance criteria. The maximum daily on-site construction emissions are compared to
the allowable emission rates for Source Receptor Area 5 in Table 3.3-5. Additional
details of the LST analysis are provided in Appendix A.
Table 3.3-5
LST Analysis for Construction Emissions
Pollutant
Maximum Construction Emissions LST Criteria
Exceeds LST? Pounds per Day
NO2 27 114 No
CO 16 861 No
PM10 4 7 No
PM2.5 3 4 No
Source: SCAQMD 2008a.
Notes: LST = localized significance threshold; NO2 = nitrogen dioxide; CO = carbon monoxide; PM10 = coarse particulate matter; PM2.5 = fine
particulate matter.
Construction emissions estimates are rounded to the nearest pound.
As shown, construction activities would not generate substantial emissions of pollutants,
specifically diesel exhaust particulate matter (included in PM10), to sensitive receptors,
and impacts to sensitive receptors in the vicinity of project construction would be less
than significant.
Carbon Monoxide Hotspots
Regional trip generation and an increase in vehicle-miles traveled within the local airshed
and the SCAB would occur with or without the project. Locally, traffic would be added
to the City roadway system near the proposed project. If such traffic occurs during
periods of poor atmospheric ventilation, is composed of a large number of vehicles “cold-
started” and operating at pollution-inefficient speeds, and is operating on roadways
already crowded with non-project traffic, there is a potential for the formation of
microscale CO hotspots in the area immediately around points of congested traffic. High
CO concentrations, associated with roadways or intersections operating at an
unacceptable level of service (LOS), are a concern because CO is toxic to humans in high
concentrations; however, because of continued improvement in vehicular emissions at a
rate faster than the rate of vehicle growth and/or congestion, the potential for CO hotspots
in the SCAB is steadily decreasing.
PC Agenda Page 108
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
46 January 2017
Projects contributing to adverse traffic impacts may result in the formation of CO
hotspots. To verify that the project would not cause or contribute to a violation of the CO
standards, a screening evaluation of the potential for CO hotspots was conducted. The
Traffic Impact Analysis report (Appendix F) evaluated whether there would be a decrease
in the LOS (e.g., congestion) at the intersections affected by the project. The potential for
CO hotspots was evaluated based on the results of the Traffic Impact Analysis. The
Caltrans Transportation Project-Level Carbon Monoxide Protocol (CO Protocol; Caltrans
1997) was followed.
In accordance with the CO Protocol, CO hotspots are typically evaluated when (1)
projects significantly increase traffic volumes (5% or higher) or otherwise worsen traffic
flow, (2) projects involve signalized intersections at LOS E or F, (3) projects result in
worsening of signalized intersection LOS to E or F, and (4) projects are suspected of
resulting in higher CO concentrations than those existing within the region at the time of
attainment demonstration.
In general, the SCAQMD recommends that a quantitative CO hotspots analysis be
performed for any intersections where the LOS worsens from C to D or for intersections
that experience an increase in volume-to-capacity ratio of 2% or more as a result of a
proposed project for intersections rated LOS D or worse.
The Traffic Impact Analysis report evaluated three key intersections in the project vicinity
to assess Existing 2016/2017 conditions, Existing With Project 2016/2017 conditions,
Baseline 2019 conditions, and Baseline With Project 2019 conditions. When comparing the
Existing 2016/2017 and Existing with Project 2016/2017 conditions, both intersections
would not deteriorate from LOS C to D or worse for the AM and PM peak hours. When
comparing the Baseline 2019 to Baseline with Project 2019 conditions for the Lakewood
Boulevard and Firestone Boulevard intersection, the LOS would deteriorate from C to D in
the AM peak hour. However, the City has identified a future planned improvement to this
intersection. This improvement would provide a second left-turn lane on both the
northbound and southbound approaches of Lakewood Boulevard. Implementation of
Mitigation Measure (MM) TR-1 (see Section 3.16, Transportation and Traffic) would
require a fair-share contribution and would mitigate impacts to the Lakewood Boulevard/
Firestone Boulevard intersection. Upon implementation of MM-TR-1, the intersection
would maintain an LOS of C in the AM peak hour for the Baseline with Project 2019
conditions. Therefore, no CO hotspot analysis would be required per the CO Protocol or
SCAQMD recommendations. Accordingly, impacts relating to exposure of sensitive
receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations would be less than significant.
PC Agenda Page 109
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
47 January 2017
e) Would the project create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people?
Less Than Significant Impact. Construction of the project would result in the emission of
diesel equipment, gasoline, and asphalt paving material fumes. Odors from these sources
would be localized and generally confined to the project site. Construction of the proposed
project would use typical construction techniques in compliance with SCAQMD rules. Odors
would be strongest near the source and would quickly dissipate off site. Any odors associated
with construction activities would be temporary and would cease upon completion of
construction. As such, project construction would not cause an odor nuisance, and odor
impacts would be less than significant.
Land uses and industrial operations associated with odor complaints include agricultural
uses, wastewater treatment plants, food-processing plants, chemical plants, composting,
refineries, landfills, dairies, and fiberglass molding operations (SCAQMD 1993). The
proposed project would not result in the implementation of any such land use. Therefore,
project operations would result in a less than significant odor impact.
3.4 Biological Resources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES – Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or
through habitat modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-
status species in local or regional plans, policies,
or regulations, or by the California Department of
Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian
habitat or other sensitive natural community
identified in local or regional plans, policies,
regulations, or by the California Department of Fish
and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally
protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of
the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to,
marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct
removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other
means?
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any
native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species
or with established native resident or migratory
wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native
wildlife nursery sites?
PC Agenda Page 110
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
48 January 2017
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
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?
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 Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
Less Than Significant Impact. The project site is located in a heavily urbanized, mixed-
use area of the City. The project site is vacant and consists of dirt and asphalt. No native
habitat is located on the project site or in the surrounding area.
Based on the developed nature of the surrounding area, wildlife species that would
potentially occur on site include common species typically found in urbanized settings.
Given this existing habitat, wildlife species that can reasonably be expected to occur on the
project site are not identified as candidate, sensitive, or special-status wildlife species.
A few mature ornamental landscape trees are currently located on and adjacent to the
project site. Although it is unlikely because of the disturbed nature of the project area,
these trees would potentially provide nesting opportunities for bird and raptor species
protected under the California Fish and Game Code and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act of
1918. Impacts to nesting bird and raptor species would be considered potentially
significant if implementation of the proposed project would require removal or
substantial trimming of healthy mature trees during the bird nesting season. Thus, the
proposed project would be required to comply with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act in
order to reduce impacts to nesting bird habitat.
Vegetation clearing on the project site should occur outside the nesting season (February
1–September 15). If this is not feasible and vegetation clearance is to take place during
the nesting season, surveys will be necessary to ensure avoidance of impacts to nesting
native bird species, pursuant to the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. A qualified avian biologist
will conduct a nesting bird survey in the proposed impact area within 72 hours prior to
initiation of construction activities. A survey report by the qualified biologist verifying
PC Agenda Page 111
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
49 January 2017
that no active nests are present, or that the young have fledged, shall be submitted to the
City for review and approval prior to initiation of ground-disturbing activities.
If nesting birds are detected in habitat that is to be impacted by construction activities, the
nest location(s) shall be protected with appropriate buffers until nestlings have fledged
and are independent of the nest. Based on compliance with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act
of 1918, impacts would be less than significant.
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,
regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service?
No Impact. The project site is vacant. No native habitat is located on the project site or in
the surrounding area. Additionally, no permanent or ephemeral watercourses or natural
drainage features that are typically associated with riparian habitat are located on or
adjacent to the project site; thus, the proposed project would not have the potential to
adversely affect riparian or other sensitive natural habitat. Therefore, no impacts associated
with riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities would occur.
c) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as
defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh,
vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or
other means?
No Impact. The Federal Clean Water Act, Section 404, defines wetlands as follows:
Those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water
(hydrology) at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under
normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation (hydrophytes)
typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions (hydric soils).
Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas (33
U.S.C. 1251 et seq.).
Based on the existing characteristics of the project site, none of the se indicators for
wetlands are located on or adjacent to the project site. The project site contains no
watercourses or natural drainage features. Therefore, no impacts associated with federally
protected wetlands would occur.
PC Agenda Page 112
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
50 January 2017
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?
No Impact. The project site is located in a heavily urbanized, mixed-use area of the City.
No features of the project site could be used by wildlife species as a wildlife corridor.
Therefore, no impacts associated with wildlife corridors would occur.
e) Would the project conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological
resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
No Impact. The proposed project does not conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, because there are no biological resources present on site.
No impact would occur.
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. No adopted habitat conservation plan, natural community conservation plan,
or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan overlies the City.
Thus, the proposed development on the project site would not be subject to the provisions
of any such conservation plans and no impacts associated with habitat conservation plans
would occur.
3.5 Cultural Resources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES – Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource as defined
in Section 15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource
pursuant to Section 15064.5?
c) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a tribal cultural resource as defined
in Public Resources Code 21074?
PC Agenda Page 113
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
51 January 2017
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
d) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique geologic
feature?
e) Disturb any human remains, including those
interred outside of formal cemeteries?
This analysis is based in part on the Cultural Resources Study for the Kamla Hotels 140-Unit
Hotel Project, City of Downey, Los Angeles County, California (Dudek 2017, provided in
Appendix B of this MND).
a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical
resource as defined in Section 15064.5?
No Impact. As defined by the CEQA Guidelines (14 CCR 15000 et seq.), a “historical
resource” is considered to be a resource that is listed in or eligible for listing in the
National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) or California Register of Historical
Resources, has been identified as significant in a historical resource survey, or is listed on
a local register of historical resources.
A historical resource may be listed in the California Register of Historical Resources if it
meets any of the following criteria:
1. It is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad
patterns of California’s history and cultural heritage.
2. It is associated with the lives of persons important in California’s past.
3. It embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of
construction, represents the work of an important creative individual, or possesses
high artistic value.
4. It has yielded or is likely to yield information important in prehistory or history.
For a building to be considered historic, it typically must be at least 50 years old so
sufficient time has passed to determine whether the events or characteristics of the
building will have a contribution to history.
The project site is vacant; therefore, no historic buildings exist on site and no historic
evaluation was necessary. No impacts would occur.
PC Agenda Page 114
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
52 January 2017
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 Incorporated . As part of the cultural resources
study prepared for the proposed project (Appendix B), Dudek conducted an in-house
records search for this project using the results of a recently completed records search
for the ALDI Food Market project, which Dudek performed in 2016 (Dorrler and Hale
2016). A California Historical Resources Information System records search was
performed at the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC) on February 29,
2016, for the ALDI Food Market project and a 1-mile radius around the project site.
The ALDI Food Market project is located approximately 135 meters (440 feet) west of
the currently proposed project; therefore, it was determined that those records
sufficiently covered the current project site and surrounding area to be used for this
project. The search included the SCCIC’s collection of mapped prehisto ric, historical,
and built-environment resources, Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) Site
Records, technical reports, archival resources, and ethnographic references. Additional
consulted sources included the NRHP, California Register of Historical Resources,
Office of Historic Preservation Archaeological Determinations of Eligibility, California
Points of Historical Interest, California Historical Landmarks, and Caltrans Bridge
Survey information.
The project site is currently vacant, generally flat land. It was most recently used as a
coordinated staging area by the City of Downey and City contractors for stockpiling large
quantities of uncontaminated dirt and debris. The site includes some accumulated trash and
debris. Where dirt and trash are not present, the ground is either covered in gravel or paved
with asphalt and concrete. Review of aerial photographs and topographic maps (NETR
2017) indicate the changing uses of the site. In the 1952 photograph, the site was part of an
orchard, which covered neighboring parcels as well. By 1963, the site was vacant. Other
photographs and topographic maps indicate that three buildings were present at the site
from at least 1972 to the early 2000s; these buildings are no longer extant. In 2015, the City
of Downey began using the site as a coordinated staging area for use by the City of
Downey and City contractors. The buildings observed in the photographs are also present
as far back as the 1975 topographic map, but are not present on the 1967 map. Older
topographic maps confirm the aerial photographs, showing an orchard though the 1950s;
topographic maps from the 1940s and earlier do not identify any features at the site.
Dudek Archaeologist Brad Comeau, MSc, RPA, conducted an intensive pedestrian
survey of the project site on December 14, 2016, using standard archaeological
procedures and techniques for survey, including 10-meter interval transects, aligned
parallel to the project site. Due to the large quantity of dumped sediment, the actual
PC Agenda Page 115
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
53 January 2017
ground surface was only visible in a few areas, particularly along the southeastern end of
the project site. The survey focused on examining all available areas of exposed ground
(i.e., undeveloped areas or areas devoid of asphalt and concrete) for prehistoric artifacts
(e.g., flaked stone tools, tool-making debris, stone milling tools, ceramics, fire-affected
rock), soil discoloration that might indicate the presence of a cultural midden, soil
depressions, features indicative of the current or former presence of historic-era structures
or buildings (e.g., standing exterior walls, post holes, foundations), and historic artifacts
(e.g., metal, glass, ceramics, building materials). SCCIC records indicate that 10 previous
cultural resources studies have been conducted within a 1-mile radius of the proposed
project area. Of these 10 studies, 3 were conducted outside, but adjacent to, the project
site. These investigations were related to fiber-optic cable lines to be constructed along
the railroad right-of-way that forms the southwestern boundary of the project site. The
Union Pacific Railroad (historically, the Southern Pacific Railroad) is eligible for the
NRHP, but the proposed project would not affect this significant historic resource.
Dudek’s review of record search data and intensive pedestrian survey did not identify any
cultural resources on the project site. No prehistoric or historic archaeological resources
were identified within the 1-mile search radius. There are no discernible topographic
features on the project site that indicate a possible water source, bedrock outcrop, or any
other natural element suggestive of possible prehistoric land use. The six resources
identified outside the project site but within the 1-mile search radius are all historic-age
built environment resources. The NRHP-eligible Union Pacific Railroad is adjacent to,
but outside of, the proposed project site’s southwestern border. Project construction
would be contained within the 2.58-acre project footprint and there would be no impacts
to the railway.
Although no archaeological resources were identified as a result of the literature review
and pedestrian survey, there is a possibility of encountering previously undiscovered
archaeological resources at subsurface levels during ground-disturbing activities
associated with the proposed project. Therefore, MM-CR-1 and MM-CR-2 are included
and would be implemented to ensure that potential impacts to archaeological resources
during construction activities are reduced to a less than significant level. Therefore, with
implementation of MM-CR-1 and MM-CR-2, the proposed project would not result in a
substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource and impacts
would be less than significant.
MM-CR-1 A Qualified Archaeologist, meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s
Professional Qualification Standards, shall be present for all initial ground-
disturbing activities associated with the proposed project. This
archaeological monitor shall be responsible for the identification of cultural
PC Agenda Page 116
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
54 January 2017
resources that may be impacted by project activities. The monitor may stop
ground-disturbing activities in order to assess any discoveries in the field.
Archaeological monitoring may be discontinued when the depth of grading
and soil conditions no longer retain the potential to contain cultural deposits.
The Qualified Archaeologist shall be responsible for determining the
duration and frequency of monitoring.
MM-CR-2 In the event that archaeological resources (sites, features, or artifacts) are
exposed during construction activities for the proposed project, all
construction work occurring within 50 feet of the find shall immediately
stop until a Qualified Archaeologist, can evaluate the significance of the
find and determine whether additional study is warranted. Depending on
the significance of the find under the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) and the CEQA Guidelines (California Public Resources
Code, Section 21082; 14 CCR 15064.5(f)), the Qualified Archaeologist
may exhaust the data potential of the find through the process of field-
level recordation and then allow work to continue. If the discovery proves
significant under CEQA, additional work such as preparation of an
archaeological treatment plan, testing, or data recovery may be warranted.
c) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal
cultural resource as defined in Public Resources Code 21074?
Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. The City notified the tribes listed
on the Native American Heritage Commission Sacred Lands File/Senate Bill 18 and
Assembly Bill 52 list on October 8, 2016, to identify whether the proposed project would
impact tribal cultural resources on or in close proximity to the project site. In accordance
with CEQA Section 210803.1(b), the City received two requests for formal Assembly
Bill 52 consultation from California Native American tribes who are traditionally and
culturally affiliated with the geographic area:
Andrew Salas, Chairman, Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation
(notification dated October 27, 2016)
John Tommy Rosas, Tribal Administrator, Tongva Ancestral Territorial Tribal
Nation (notification dated January 9, 2017, but received on January 22, 2017)
Mr. Salas requested Native American monitoring during grading/trenching on site. In
response to Mr. Salas’s letter addressing the potential to encounter Native American
tribal resources on site, Guillermo Arreola (Senior Planner, City of Downey),
participated in a call with Mr. Salas on January 17, 2017, at approximately 9 a.m.
PC Agenda Page 117
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
55 January 2017
Although Mr. Salas is unable to provide specific information on potential resources on
the site, he did note that the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation was
prevalent in the area. Because the City is unable to rule out the presence of potential
resources, MM-CR-3 has been included to reduce any impacts to tribal cultural
resources to a less than significant level.
Mr. Rosas requested that if Tongva archaeological or human remains are encountered
during construction, that construction cease and the Native American monitor and the
Tongva Ancestral Territorial Tribal Nation be notified. He stated that artifacts would be
required to be treated in accordance with 36 CFR 800.13 (B)(3). Mr. Rosas requested that
if any Tongva Tribal human remains are encountered during construction, consultation
would be conducted with the Tongva Ancestral Territorial Tribal Nation pursuant to the
Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act. Mr. Rosas requested that
Tongva Native American monitors be present during ground-disturbing activities,
including geotechnical testing. He also requested that construction be documented by
videos or photographs. In addition, Mr. Rosas requested a fee for consulting with the
City. Because the City is unable to rule out the presence of potential resources, MM-
CR-3 has been included to reduce any impacts to tribal cultural resources to a less than
significant level.
MM-CR-3 A qualified Native American monitor shall be present for all initial
ground-disturbing activities associated with the project. The Native
American monitor shall be responsible for the identification of tribal
cultural resources that may be impacted by project activities. The Native
American monitor may stop ground-disturbing activities in order to assess
any discoveries in the field. Tribal monitoring may be discontinued when
the depth of grading and soil conditions no longer retain the potential to
contain cultural deposits. A Qualified Archaeologist will be retained to
evaluate and appropriately treat any potentially significant discoveries.
d) Would the project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or
site or unique geologic feature?
Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Paleontological resources include
fossil plants and animals and other evidence of past life, such as trace fossils and tracks.
The project site is not known to be associated with any paleontological resources or unique
geologic features due to the presence of Holocene-age (less than 10,000-year-old) alluvium
underlying the site (Dibblee and Ehrenspeck 2001). Due to the previous development on
the site and in the nearby area, there is a low potential for encountering paleontological
PC Agenda Page 118
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
56 January 2017
resources at subsurface levels. However, the possibility of a paleontological discovery
cannot be discounted. Accordingly, destruction of paleontological resources or unique
geologic features during site-disturbing activities associated with construction of the
proposed project is considered a potentially significant impact. Therefore, MM-CR-4 is
provided and would be implemented to ensure that potential impacts to paleontological
resources or unique geologic features during construction activities are reduced to a less
than significant level.
MM-CR-4 In the event that paleontological resources (fossil remains) are exposed
during construction activities for the proposed project, all construction
work occurring within 50 feet of the find shall immediately stop until a
Qualified Paleontologist, as defined by the Society of Vertebrate
Paleontology’s 2010 guidelines, can assess the nature and importance of
the find. Depending on the significance of the find, the Qualified
Paleontologist may record the find and allow work to continue or
recommend salvage and recovery of the resource. All recommendations
will be made in accordance with the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology’s
2010 guidelines, and shall be subject to review and approval by the City of
Downey. Work in the area of the find may only resume upon approval of a
Qualified Paleontologist.
e) Would the project disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of
formal cemeteries?
Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. As stated previously, there are no
previously recorded cultural resources on the project site. Given the fact that the site has
been previously developed, ground-disturbing activities associated with construction of
the proposed project are unlikely to uncover previously unknown archaeological
resources. In addition, all recorded burials within the City of Downey since the 1860s
have occurred in the Downey Cemetery (Blumenthal, pers. comm. 2016b). However, if
Native American skeletal remains are uncovered during construction activities, project
contractors are required by law to stop work and contact the County Coroner. Therefore,
if Native American remains were uncovered during construction activities associated
with the proposed project site, compliance with MM-CR-5 would ensure that the
appropriate authorities are notified and that discovered remains are treated with the
appropriate respect and dignity. As such, impacts would be less than significant with
mitigation incorporated.
MM-CR-5 In accordance with Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety
Code, if human remains are found, the County Coroner shall be
PC Agenda Page 119
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
57 January 2017
immediately notified of the discovery. No further excavation or
disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie
adjacent remains shall occur until the County Coroner has determined,
within two working days of notification of the discovery, the appropriate
treatment and disposition of the human remains. If the County Coroner
determines that the remains are, or are believed to be, Native American, he
or she shall notify the Native American Heritage Commission in
Sacramento within 24 hours. In accordance with California Public
Resources Code, Section 5097.98, the Native American Heritage
Commission must immediately notify those persons it believes to be the
most likely descendant of the deceased Native American. The most likely
descendant shall complete their inspection within 48 hours of being
granted access to the site. The designated Native American representative
would then determine, in consultation with the property owner, the
disposition of the human remains.
3.6 Geology and Soils
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS – Would the project:
a) Expose people or structures to potential
substantial adverse effects, including the risk of
loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the
State Geologist for the area or based on other
substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer
to Division of Mines and Geology Special
Publication 42.
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 on- or
off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence,
liquefaction or collapse?
PC Agenda Page 120
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
58 January 2017
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table
18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994),
creating substantial risks to life or property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the
use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater
disposal systems where sewers are not available
for the disposal of wastewater?
The analysis in this section is based on the Geotechnical Engineering Exploration for the
proposed project prepared by Byer Geotechnical Inc. in October 2016 (see Appendix C) and the
City’s General Plan (City of Downey 2005).
a) Would the project expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects,
including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-
Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area
or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of
Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.
No Impact. According to the City’s General Plan Safety Element, no active faults
have been identified within the City. According to Figure 5.5-1, Regional
Earthquake Fault Lines, in the General Plan Safety Element, the closest faults in
the broader project region include the Norwalk Fault, Whittier Fault, Compton–
Los Alamitos Fault, and Newport–Inglewood Fault. None of these faults underlie
either the City or the project site (City of Downey 2005). Thus, although the
proposed project could experience strong seismic ground shaking (see Section
3.6(a)(ii)), the project site is not susceptible to surface rupture. Therefore, no
impacts associated with fault rupture would occur.
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
Less Than Significant Impact. Similar to other areas located in the seismically
active Southern California region, the City is susceptible to ground shaking during
an earthquake. However, as addressed in Section 3.6(a)(i), the project site is not
located within an active fault zone, and the site would not be affected by ground
shaking more than any other area in the seismically active region. Additionally, as
set forth in Section 8001 of the City’s Municipal Code, the City has adopted the
PC Agenda Page 121
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
59 January 2017
current California Building Code. As such, the proposed project would be
designed in accordance with all applicable design provisions established in the
current California Building Code, which dictates specifications to ensure
structural integrity during a seismic event.
As stated in the General Plan Safety Element’s Program 5.5.1.4, and consistent with
Municipal Code, Section 8730.20, a geotechnical/soils report was prepared to address
potential seismic-related impacts. The report addresses potential seismic-related
impacts based on the particular characteristics of the on-site soils (Appendix C).
Primarily because of the liquefaction potential found throughout the City (see Section
3.6(a)(iii)), preparation of a geotechnical/soils report is required for most
development projects. Therefore, with adherence to these requirements, as set forth in
the General Plan and in the geotechnical/soils report (Appendix C to this MND),
impacts associated with strong seismic ground shaking would be less than significant.
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction?
Less Than Significant Impact. Per the General Plan Safety Element, the City has
the combination of silts and sands soil types and a relatively high water table that
are conducive to liquefaction occurring during intense ground shaking. The
California Division of Mines and Geology has designated all areas in the City a
liquefaction hazard zone (CDOC 1999). As such, consistent with the General Plan
Safety Element’s Program 5.5.1.4 and Municipal Code Section 8730.20, a
geotechnical/soils report would be prepared to address potential seismic-related
impacts based on the particular characteristics of the on-site soils.
In the Geotechnical Engineering Exploration that was prepared for the project site
(Appendix C), near-surface soils were non-hydric soils, and groundwater in the
vicinity of the site was estimated to be at 48 feet below surface. Because of the
depth to groundwater, the potential for seismic-related ground failure is low, but
in order to limit the potential for excessive settlement of building foundations,
compacted fill and firm alluvium are the recommended bearing materials.
Conventional foundations may be used to support the proposed four-story at-
grade building. Footings for the proposed block walls and retaining wall along the
southwest and northwest property lines should be embedded into the natural
alluvium, which is anticipated to be approximately 2.5 feet deep. The bottom of
block wall and retaining wall footing excavations should be firmly compacted to a
minimum of 90% relative compaction to provide a firm bottom for support of the
proposed walls. The existing fill in the area of the proposed trash enclosure should
be removed and reused as future compacted fill for support of the concrete slab-
PC Agenda Page 122
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
60 January 2017
on-grade. Soils to be exposed at finished grade are expected to exhibit a very low
expansion potential. Therefore, with adherence to these requirements as set forth
in the geotechnical report (Appendix C), impacts associated with liquefaction
would be less than significant.
iv) Landslides?
No Impact. The project site and surrounding area are predominantly flat and lack
any substantial topographical variations. No hillsides are located on or adjacent to
the project site. Therefore, no impacts associated with landslides would occur.
b) Would the project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?
Short-Term Construction Impacts
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project would involve earthwork and other
construction activities that would disturb surface soils and temporarily leave exposed soil
on the ground’s surface. Common causes of soil erosion from construction sites include
stormwater, wind, and soil being tracked off site by vehicles. However, construction
activities would comply with all applicable state and local regulations for erosion control
and grading. The proposed project would be required to comply with standard
regulations, including SCAQMD Rules 402 and 403, which would reduce construction
erosion impacts. Rule 403 requires that fugitive dust be controlled with best available
control measures so that it does not remain visible in the atmosphere beyond the property
line of the emissions source (SCAQMD 2005). Rule 402 requires dust suppression
techniques be implemented to prevent dust and soil erosion from creating a nuisance off
site (SCAQMD 1976).
Additionally, the proposed project would comply with the City’s Municipal Code, Section
8024, which states that dust, water, mud, construction materials, or debris shall be
contained on the building site (City of Downey 1978). The project site is larger than 1 acre
and would be subject to National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
Construction General Permit requirements; thus, construction activities would be required
to incorporate various temporary best management practices (BMPs) designed to prevent
erosion and siltation during construction (EPA 2010). Therefore, short-term construction
impacts associated with soil erosion and topsoil loss would be less than significant.
Long-Term Operational Impacts
Less Than Significant Impact. Once operational, the project site would be improved
with a 140-unit hotel, paved parking areas and drive aisles, and landscaped areas.
PC Agenda Page 123
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
61 January 2017
Collectively, these on-site areas would reduce the potential for soil erosion and topsoil
loss. The structural and paved improvements would be impervious areas lacking any
exposed soils. The landscape areas, although pervious, would contain various trees,
shrubs, and groundcover that would help stabilize any surface soils and contain these
soils on the project site. Therefore, long-term operational impacts associated with soil
erosion and topsoil loss would be less than significant.
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 addressed in Section 3.6(a)(iii), all areas in the City
have been identified as being located in a liquefaction hazard zone. As such, consistent
with the General Plan Safety Element’s Program 5.5.1.4 and Municipal Code, Section
8730.20, a geotechnical/soils report was prepared to address potential seismic-related
impacts, based on the particular characteristics of the on-site soils. In general, the report
addresses all potential seismic-related effects and includes design specifications to which
construction of the proposed project would be required to adhere in order to reduce any
potential liquefaction impacts. Therefore, with adherence to this requirement as set forth
in the General Plan, impacts associated with unstable soils, including liquefaction, would
be less than significant.
d) Would the project be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the
Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property?
Less Than Significant Impact. Expansive soils are characterized by their potential
“shrink/swell” behavior. Shrink/swell is the cyclic change in volume (expansion and
contraction) that occurs in certain fine-grained clay sediments from the process of wetting
and drying. Clay minerals such as smectite, bentonite, montmorillonite, beidellite,
vermiculite, and others are known to expand with changes in moisture content. The
higher the percentage of expansive minerals present in near-surface soils, the higher the
potential for substantial expansion.
Consistent with the General Plan Safety Element’s Program 5.5.1.4 and Municipal Code
Section 8730.20, a geotechnical/soils report was prepared to address potential seismic-
related impacts, based on the particular characteristics of the on-site soils. In general, the
report addresses all potential seismic-related effects and includes design specifications to
which construction of the proposed project would be required to adhere in order to reduce
any potential impacts relating to expansive soils. The identification of expansive soils is
standard practice for a geotechnical investigation, and replacement of expansive soils
PC Agenda Page 124
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
62 January 2017
with engineered fill or addition of soil amendments is an effective method of reducing
potential effects related to expansive soils. Therefore, with adherence to this requirement
as set forth in the General Plan, impacts associated with expansive soils would be less
than significant.
e) Would the project have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks
or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the
disposal of wastewater?
No Impact. The proposed project would connect to the existing municipal sewer system
and would not require a septic or alternative wastewater disposal system. Therefore, no
impacts associated with the ability of soils to support septic tanks would occur.
3.7 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
VII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS – Would the project:
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either
directly or indirectly, that may have a significant
impact on the environment?
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or
regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the
emissions of greenhouse gases?
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. Greenhouse gases (GHGs) are gases that absorb infrared
radiation in the atmosphere. The greenhouse effect is a natural process that contributes to
regulating the Earth’s temperature. If the atmospheric concentrations of GHGs rise, the
average temperature of the lower atmosphere will gradually increase. The effect each
GHG has on climate change is measured as a combination of the mass of its emissions
and the potential of a gas or aerosol to trap heat in the atmosphere, known as its globa l
warming potential (GWP), which varies among GHGs. Total GHG emissions are
expressed as a function of how much warming would be caused by the same mass of
PC Agenda Page 125
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
63 January 2017
carbon dioxide (CO2). Thus, GHG emissions are typically measured in terms of pounds
or metric tons (MT) of CO2 equivalent (CO2E).3
Global climate change is a cumulative impact; a project participates in this potential
impact through its incremental contribution combined with the cumulative increase of all
other sources of GHGs. There are currently no established thresholds for assessing
whether the GHG emissions of a project in the SCAQMD are significant. Although the
project would result in GHG emissions during construction and operation, no guidance
exists to indicate what level of GHG emissions would be considered substantial enough
to result in a significant adverse impact on global climate change. However, it is
generally believed that any individual project is of insufficient magnitude by itself to
influence climate change or result in a substantial contribution to the global GHG
inventory, because scientific uncertainty regarding the significance of a project’s
individual and cumulative effects on global climate change remains.
Thus, GHG impacts are recognized as exclusively cumulative impacts; there are no non-
cumulative GHG emission impacts from a climate change perspective (CAPCOA 2008).
This approach is consistent with that recommended by the California Natural Resource
Agency, which noted in its public notice for the proposed CEQA amendments that the
evidence before it indicates that, in most cases, the impact of GHG emissions should be
considered in the context of a cumulative impact, rather than a project-level impact
(CNRA 2009a). Similarly, the California Natural Resources Agency’s Final Statement of
Reasons for Regulatory Action on the CEQA Amendments confirm that an EIR or other
environmental document must analyze the incremental contribution of a project to GHG
levels and determine whether those emissions are cumulatively considerable (CNRA
2009b). Accordingly, further discussion of the project’s GHG emissions and their impact
on global climate are addressed in the following text.
Status of Proposed SCAQMD Thresholds
SCAQMD has not adopted recommended numeric CEQA significance thresholds for
GHG emissions for lead agencies to use in assessing GHG impacts of residential and
commercial development projects. In October 2008, SCAQMD presented to the
Governing Board the Draft Guidance Document – Interim CEQA Greenhouse Gas
(GHG) Significance Threshold (SCAQMD 2008b). This document, which builds on the
previous guidance prepared by the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association,
3 The CO2E for a gas is derived by multiplying the mass of the gas by the associated GWP, such that metric tons
of CO2E = (metric tons of a GHG) × (GWP of the GHG). This analysis assumes the GWP of CH 4 is 25 and the
GWP of nitrous oxide (N2O) is 298, consistent with default values in CalEEMod 2016.
PC Agenda Page 126
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
64 January 2017
explored various approaches for establishing a significance threshold for GHG emissions.
The draft interim CEQA thresholds guidance document was not adopted or approved by
the Governing Board. However, in December 2008, SCAQMD adopted an interim
10,000 MT CO2E per-year screening level threshold for stationary source/industrial
projects for which SCAQMD is the lead agency (see SCAQMD Resolution No. 08-35,
December 5, 2008). The 10,000 MT CO2E per-year threshold was based on the
conclusion that the 10,000 MT CO2E per-year threshold was consistent with achieving an
emission capture rate of 90% of all new or modified stationary source projects, which in
turn uses Executive Order S-3-05 as the basis for deriving the screening level.
SCAQMD formed a GHG CEQA Significance Threshold Working Group to work with
SCAQMD staff on developing GHG CEQA significance thresholds until statewide
significance thresholds or guidelines are established. From December 2008 to September
2010, the SCAQMD hosted working group meetings and revised the draft threshold
proposal several times, although it did not officially provide these proposals in a
subsequent document. The SCAQMD has continued to consider adoption of significance
thresholds for residential and general land use development projects. The most recent
proposal, issued in September 2010, uses the following tiered approach to evaluate
potential GHG impacts from various uses (SCAQMD 2010):
Tier 1 Determine if CEQA categorical exemptions are applicable. If not, move to Tier 2.
Tier 2 Consider whether or not the proposed project is consistent with a locally
adopted GHG reduction plan that has gone through public hearing and CEQA
review, that has an approved inventory, includes monitoring, etc. If not, move
to Tier 3.
Tier 3 Consider whether the project generates GHG emissions in excess of screening
thresholds for individual land uses. The 10,000 MT CO2E per-year threshold for
industrial uses would be recommended for use by all lead agencies. Under option
1, separate screening thresholds are proposed for residential projects (3,500 MT
CO2E per year), commercial projects (1,400 MT CO2E per year), and mixed-use
projects (3,000 MT CO2E per year). Under option 2, a single numerical screening
threshold of 3,000 MT CO2E per year would be used for all non-industrial
projects. If the project generates emissions in excess of the applicable screening
threshold, move to Tier 4.
Tier 4 Consider whether the project generates GHG emissions in excess of applicable
performance standards for the project service population (population plus
employment). The efficiency targets were established based on the goal of
PC Agenda Page 127
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
65 January 2017
Assembly Bill (AB) 32 to reduce statewide GHG emissions to 1990 levels by
2020. The 2020 efficiency targets are 4.8 MT CO2E per-service population for
project-level analyses and 6.6 MT CO2E per-service population for plan-level
analyses. If the project generates emissions in excess of the applicable
efficiency targets, move to Tier 5.
Tier 5 Consider the implementation of CEQA mitigation (including the purchase of
GHG offsets) to reduce the project efficiency target to Tier 4 levels.
From December 2008 to September 2010, the SCAQMD hosted working group meetings
and revised the draft threshold proposal several times, although it did not officially provide
these proposals in a subsequent document. The most recent working group meeting, on
September 28, 2010, proposed two options that lead agencies can select from to screen
thresholds of significance for GHG emissions in residential and commercial projects, and
proposed to expand the industrial threshold to other lead agency industrial projects.
Option 1 proposes a threshold of 3,000 MT CO2E per year for all residential and
commercial projects. Option 2 proposes a threshold value by land use type where the
numeric threshold is 3,500 MT CO2E per year for residential projects, 1,400 MT CO2E per
year for commercial projects, and 3,000 MT CO2E per year for mixed-use projects
(SCAQMD 2010). Although both options are recommended, a lead agency is advised to
use only one option and to use it consistently. The approach used in this analysis is to
disclose the most recent regulatory activity.
Although the proposed project does not fall into a specific land use category mentioned
previously, the lead agency has determined that the project’s GHG emissions will be
compared to the SCAQMD draft threshold for residential and commercial projects of
3,000 MT CO2E per year. Per the SCAQMD guidance (SCAQMD 2008b), construction
emissions should be amortized over the operational life of the project, which is assumed
to be 30 years. This impact analysis, therefore, adds amortized construction emissions to
the estimated annual operational emissions and then compares operational emissions to
the draft SCAQMD threshold of 3,000 MT CO2E per year.
Construction GHG Emissions
Construction of the proposed project would result in GHG emissions primarily associated
with the use of off-road construction equipment, on-road hauling and vendor trucks, and
worker vehicles.
CalEEMod was used to calculate the annual GHG emissions based on the construction
scenario described in Section 3.3, Air Quality. The GHG emissions are expressed in units
PC Agenda Page 128
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
66 January 2017
of MT CO2E. On-site sources of GHG emissions include off-road equipment, and off-site
sources include hauling and vendor trucks and worker vehicles. Table 3.7-1 presents
construction emissions for the project from on-site and off-site emissions sources.
Table 3.7-1
Estimated Annual Construction GHG Emissions
Year MT CO2 MT CH4a MT N2O MT CO2Ea
2017 188.86 0.04 0.00 189.82
2018 448.96 0.08 0.00 451.02
2019 62.31 0.01 0.00 62.56
Total 700.13 0.13 0.00 703.40
Source: See Appendix A for complete results.
Notes: MT = metric tons; CO2 = carbon dioxide; CH4 = methane; N2O = nitrous oxide; CO2E = carbon dioxide equivalent.
a The GWP of CH4 is 25; therefore, MT CH4 has been multiplied by 25 and added to MT CO2 to determine the total MT CO2E values.
As shown in Table 3.7-1, the estimated total GHG emissions during construction of the
project would be approximately 703 MT CO2E. As with project-generated construction
criteria air pollutant emissions, GHG emissions generated during construction of the
project would be short term, lasting only for the duration of the construction period, and
would not represent a long-term source of GHG emissions. Because the project would not
cause a cumulatively considerable contribution, it would result in a cumulative impact in
terms of climate change that would be less than significant.
Operational GHG Emissions
In general, operational GHG emissions are generated through mobile sources (motor
vehicle trips to project land uses); energy use (natural gas and generation of electricity
consumed by the project); area sources (landscape maintenance equipment); water
treatment, distribution, and supply; and solid waste. In addition, the proposed project
would involve the use of operational equipment. GHG emissions associated with mobile,
area, and energy sources and operational equipment were estimated using CalEEMod
(see Appendix A).
Area and energy source emissions were also estimated in a manner consistent with the
analysis in Section 3.3, Air Quality, mentioned previously. Default CalEEMod factors
for water supply and wastewater treatment were used to estimate GHG emissions for
project buildout. Default values for solid waste generation were changed from 77 tons
per year to 100.98 tons per year for a more conservative estimate, as described in
Section 3.17(f)).
PC Agenda Page 129
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
67 January 2017
Mobile source emissions were estimated using the assumptions described in Section 3.3.
CalEEMod default data for temperature, variable start information, and emission factors
representing the vehicle mix and emissions for 2019 were conservatively used for the
model inputs.
Estimated operational GHG emissions from electricity usage, mobile sources, area sources,
water consumption, wastewater treatment, solid waste generation, and operational
equipment associated with implementation of the project are shown in Table 3.7-2.
Table 3.7-2
Estimated Annual Operational GHG Emissions (Unmitigated)
Emission Source MT CO2E
Energy (natural gas and electricity) 336
Area source <0.01
Mobile source 1,337
Solid waste 51
Water supply and wastewater 21
Amortized construction emissions 23
Combined total emissions 1,768
MT CO2E = metric tons carbon dioxide equivalent.
Calculations available in Appendix A.
As shown in Table 3.7-2, the estimated total annual operational GHG emissions would be
1,768 MT CO2E per year. Mobile emissions would be the primary source of GHG
emissions generated under the project. The project would not exceed the SCAQMD draft
threshold for residential and commercial projects of 3,000 MT CO2E per year. Therefore,
impacts would be less than significant.
b) Would the project conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the
purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
Less Than Significant Impact. The Climate Change Scoping Plan, approved by the
California Air Resources Board on December 12, 2008, provides an outline for actions
to reduce California’s GHG emissions. The Climate Change Scoping Plan requires the
California Air Resources Board and other state agencies to adopt regulations and other
initiatives to reduce GHGs. Furthermore, neither the City nor SCAQMD have adopted
any GHG reduction measures that would apply to the GHG emissions associated with
the project. At this time, no mandatory GHG regulations or finalized agency guidelines
would apply to implementation of this project, and no conflict would occur. Therefore,
this cumulative impact would be less than significant.
PC Agenda Page 130
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
68 January 2017
3.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
VIII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS – Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
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 that 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 2 miles of a public airport or public use
airport, would the project result in a safety hazard
for people residing or working in the project area?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,
would the project result in a safety hazard for
people residing or working in the project area?
g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere
with an adopted emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of
loss, injury or death involving wildland fires,
including where wildlands are adjacent to
urbanized areas or where residences are
intermixed with wildlands?
The analysis in this section of the MND is based on a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment for
the proposed project site, included in Appendix D of this MND.
PC Agenda Page 131
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
69 January 2017
a) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through
the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
Construction
Less Than Significant Impact. A variety of hazardous substances and wastes would be
transported to and stored, used, and generated on the project site during construction of
the proposed project. These would include fuels for machinery and vehicles, new and
used motor oils, cleaning solvents, paints, and storage containers and applicators
containing such materials. If not transported, used, or disposed of in a safe manner,
hazardous materials used during construction represent a potential threat to the public and
the environment. However, these materials would be transported, used, and disposed of in
accordance with all federal, state, and local laws regulating the management and use of
hazardous materials. For example, hazardous materials would not be disposed of or
released onto the ground or into the underlying groundwater or any surface water during
construction (or operation) of the proposed project, and completely enclosed containment
would be provided for all refuse generated on the project site. Furthermore, all
construction waste, including trash, litter, garbage, solid waste, petroleum products, and
any other potentially hazardous materials, would be removed and transported to a
permitted waste facility for treatment, storage, or disposal. Use of these materials during
construction for their intended purpose would not pose a significant risk to the public or
the environment. As such, impacts during construction would be less than significant.
Operations
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project would involve very little transport,
storage, use, or disposal of hazardous materials associated with janitorial, maintenance, and
repair activities (i.e., commercial cleaners, lubricants, or paints and household cleaning
supplies). Use of these materials would be limited and transport, storage, use, and
disposal of these materials would be subject to all federal, state, and local laws regulating
the management and use of hazardous materials. For example, in accordance with state
law (California Health and Safety Code, Section 25500 et seq.), every business in the
City that handles or stores hazardous wastes above a specified amount is required to
report their inventories of hazardous materials to the Downey Fire Department (DFD).
Therefore, although it is unlikely, if the proposed hotel should handle or store amounts
equal to or above 55 gallons of hazardous liquid or 200 cubic feet of gas, the
owner/operator of the hotel is required to submit a Hazardous Materials Business
Emergency Plan to the DFD. Because hazardous materials/chemicals used during
operations would be transported, used, and disposed of in accordance with all federal,
PC Agenda Page 132
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
70 January 2017
state, and local laws regulating the management and use of hazardous materials, impacts
would be less than significant.
b) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through
reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of
hazardous materials into the environment?
Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. As discussed in Section 3.8(a), a
variety of hazardous substances and wastes typical to standard construction projects would
be stored and used on the project site during construction of the proposed project.
Accidental spills, leaks, fires, explosions, or pressure releases involving hazardous
materials represent a potential threat to human health and the environment if not properly
treated. Accident prevention and containment would be the responsibility of the
construction contractors, and provisions to properly manage hazardous substances and
wastes are typically included in construction specifications. However, in order to ensure
that reasonably foreseeable and accident conditions are addressed and sufficiently
responded to, Mitigation Measure (MM) HAZ-1 is provided and would be implemented to
ensure that potential impacts during construction are reduced to a less than significant level.
MM-HAZ-1 A site mitigation plan (SMP) shall be developed and implemented during
all construction activities. The SMP would also include a hazardous
substance management, handling, storage, disposal, and emergency
response plan that establishes procedures for managing any hazardous
substance releases on the project site. Hazardous materials spill kits would
be maintained on site to effectively manage and clean any small accidental
spills. In addition, the SMP would include strategies for identification and
management of contaminated soil, if encountered during project
development, and would outline mitigation measures if development
activities result in an accidental release of contaminants. A project-specific
health and safety plan shall be prepared in accordance with the
Occupational Safety and Health Administration standards, included in the
SMP, and implemented during all construction-related activities. Copies of
the SMP and health and safety plan shall be maintained on site during
demolition, excavation, and construction of the proposed project. All
workers on the project site should be familiar with these documents.
PC Agenda Page 133
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
71 January 2017
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?
No Impact. The project site is not located within one-quarter mile of an existing or
proposed school. There are five schools around the project site, all of which are located
more than one-quarter mile away. Two public schools owned and operated by Downey
Unified School District are located within 1 mile of the site. Rio San Gabriel Elementary
School is located 0.6 miles from the project site at 9338 Gotham Street, and Downey
High School is located approximately 0.5 miles from the project site at 11040 Brookshire
Avenue. Kirkwood Christian Schools are private, nonprofit preschool and elementary
schools, and both school campuses are both located 0.5 miles away from the project site
(Kirkwood Christian Schools 2017). Around the World Children’s Center is located 0.7
miles away from the project site. Because there are no existing or proposed schools
within one-quarter mile of the project site, no impact with respect to hazardous emissions
or handling of hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-
quarter mile of a school would occur.
d) Would the project be located on a site that 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?
Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. Partner Engineering and
Science Inc. prepared a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (see Appendix D) for the
proposed project to determine whether there have been any impacts to the project site due
to current or past hazardous materials storage on site. As part of the hazards assessment, a
search of regulatory records was conducted by Environmental Data Resources Inc. (EDR)
according to the ASTM E 1527-13 using standard search radii, which are listed in the
EDR report (Appendix C of the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment). The EDR
report gives a listing of sites within an approximately 2-mile radius of the proposed
project site that are known to be chemical handlers, hazardous waste generators, or
polluters. Information in these listings includes the location of the site relative to the
proposed project site, sources of pollution, and the status of the listed site.
The project site is not currently listed in any of the federal, state, local, or EDR
proprietary databases. A review of historical documentation reveals the site was
previously occupied for agricultural purposes between 1928 and 1947, and by
commercial uses from 1956 to 2003. Since 2003, the site has been undeveloped. Previous
tenants include a private elementary school, offices, and a Goodyear Tire Store and
Service Center. Therefore, there is potential that pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizers
PC Agenda Page 134
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
72 January 2017
may have been used and stored on site. The subject property is either paved over or
covered by building structures that minimize direct contact with any potential remaining
concentrations in the soil. Additionally, during previous site development activities, near-
surface soils (where any residual agricultural chemical concentrations would most likely
have been present, if at all) were generally mixed with fill material or disturbed during
grading. Also, it is common that engineered fill material is placed over underlying soils
as part of the development activities. Furthermore, it is likely that residual agricultural
chemicals (if any) would likely have degraded since the site was last used for agricultural
purposes. According to the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, these additional
variables serve to further reduce the potential for residual agricultural chemicals.
Therefore, possible impacts as a result of former use of agricultural chemicals would be
less than significant.
According to the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, on-site soils and rubble piles
were found on the project site. The City would be required to remove and dispose of all
on-site rubble and piles in accordance with applicable regulations.
The subject property 9066 Firestone Boulevard, part of the project site, was identified
with the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works (LACDPW) Environmental
Programs Division. In 1993, one 500-gallon waste oil underground storage tank (UST)
was removed from a location east of the former Goodyear Tire Store building. Petroleum-
hydrocarbon-impacted soil was detected in the UST excavation during removal. In May
1994, a subsurface investigation was conducted by drilling one soil boring near the
former UST location. The boring was advanced to a terminal depth of approximately 45
feet below ground surface (bgs). Laboratory analytical results of the soil samples
analyzed from the boring detected petroleum hydrocarbons that extended to 45 feet bgs.
Subsequently, excavation of contaminated soils was conducted to a total depth of 10 feet
bgs, and a total of approximately 40 tons of impacted soil was removed from the
excavation. Laboratory data reported that petroleum hydrocarbon concentrations ranged
from 89 to 180 milligrams per kilogram. The report prepared for the investigation
concluded that based on the results of the UST removal/site assessment, the site poses no
significant threat to human health or the environment. On March 7, 1996, LACDPW
issued a case closure, “No Further Action” letter to the Goodyear Tire and Rubber
Company. According to the No Further Action letter, a property reuse restriction is in
place, indicating that changes to the present or proposed use of the site may require
further site characterization and mitigation activity due to the residual concentrations of
petroleum-impacted soils remaining on site, and the property owner is responsible for
contacting LACDPW prior to any reuse of the subject property. Therefore, the applicant
would be required to contact LACDPW prior to construction of the project (MM-HAZ-
PC Agenda Page 135
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
73 January 2017
2). Based on the removal of the UST, review of the analytical results, the regulatory
closure, and the property use restriction currently in place, the former UST is considered
a controlled recognized environmental condition for the subject property. Upon
implementation of MM-HAZ-2, impacts would be less than significant. In addition, MM-
HAZ-1 is provided (see Section 3.8(b)) and would be implemented to ensure that
potential impacts during construction are reduced to a less than significant level.
Therefore, impacts resulting from development of the project site as proposed would be
less than significant upon implementation of MM-HAZ-1 and MM-HAZ-2.
MM-HAZ-2 Prior to construction of the proposed hotel, the applicant would be
required to contact the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works
(LACDPW) Environmental Programs Division to inform them of the
reuse of the project site. The applicant would be required to implement
mitigation required by LACDPW.
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not
been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project
result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area?
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project is not located within 2 miles of a
public airport, nor is it located within an airport land use plan. The nearest airports are
the Compton–Woodley Airport, located approximately 7.3 miles away, and the
Fullerton Municipal Airport, approximately 10 miles away. The project site is not in
any of the airport influence areas for any nearby airports (Orange County ALUC 2004).
Therefore, because the site is not located within an airport land use plan or within 2
miles of a public/public use airport, impacts resulting from the proposed project would
be less than significant.
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety
hazard for people residing or working in the project area?
No Impact. The nearest private airstrip to the project site is the Goodyear Blimp Base
Airport, located approximately 10.3 miles southwest at 19200 South Main Street in
Gardena, California (Airnav.com 2016). As proposed, the project would entail the
construction and operation of a hotel in an urbanized setting. Because the proposed
project is not located in the vicinity of a private airstrip and construction and operations
would not result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the area, no impact
would occur as a result of the proposed project.
PC Agenda Page 136
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
74 January 2017
g) Would the project impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted
emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Less Than Significant Impact. The project would not interfere with the City’s
Emergency Operation Plan. Access to all local roads would be maintained during
construction and operation of the proposed project. Emergency procedures or design
features required by federal, state, or City regulations would be implemented as
appropriate during construction and/or operation. Maintaining access along all local roads
during construction would minimize the potential for traffic conflicts with designated
evacuation routes, and implementation of emergency procedures would minimize the
potential for interference with an adopted emergency response plan. The project would be
constructed over the course of 20 months. Therefore, impacts resulting from the proposed
project would be less than significant.
h) Would the project expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or
death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized
areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands?
No Impact. The proposed project would not expose people or structures to a significant
risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires. According to the City’s General
Plan Land Use Map (City of Downey 2012a), the project site and surrounding area are
completely developed as an urban environment, and no wildlands exist on or adjacent to
the project site. Therefore, no impacts would occur as a result of the project.
3.9 Hydrology and Water Quality
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
IX. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY – Would the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements?
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater recharge
such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer
volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table
level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing
nearby wells would drop to a level which would not
support existing land uses or planned uses for
which permits have been granted)?
PC Agenda Page 137
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
75 January 2017
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of
the site or area, including through the alteration of
the course of a stream or river, in a manner which
would result in substantial erosion or siltation on or
off site?
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the
site or area, including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river, or substantially increase
the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner
which would result in flooding on or off site?
e) Create or contribute runoff water which would
exceed the capacity of existing or planned
stormwater drainage systems or provide
substantial additional sources of polluted runoff?
f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area
as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or
Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard
delineation map?
h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures
which would impede or redirect flood flows?
i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of
loss, injury or death involving flooding, including
flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam?
j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?
a) Would the project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements?
Short-Term Construction Impacts
Less Than Significant Impact. Without the appropriate controls in place, stormwater that
is allowed to flow off site can potentially convey various sediments, pollutants, trash, and
other constituents downstream, which subsequently adversely affects water quality of
receiving waters.
To reduce the potential for downstream water quality impacts, the proposed project would
comply with Municipal Code, Section 8024 (City of Downey 1978), which states that dust,
water, mud, materials of construction, or debris shall be contained on the building site. The
project site is larger than 1 acre and would be subject to NPDES Construction General
Permit requirements, and would be required to incorporate various temporary BMPs
designed to prevent erosion and siltation, as well as the off-site conveyance of various on-
PC Agenda Page 138
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
76 January 2017
site constituents, during construction. Therefore, short-term construction impacts associated
with water quality standards would be less than significant.
Long-Term Operational Impacts
Once operational, the project site would be entirely improved with a 140-unit hotel
building, paved parking spaces and drive aisles, and landscaped areas. Collectively, these
on-site areas would reduce the potential for soils erosion and topsoil loss. The structural
and paved improvements would cover impervious areas lacking any exposed soils. The
landscaped areas, although pervious, would contain various trees, shrubs, and
groundcover that would help to stabilize any surface soils while also helping to contain
these soils on the project site.
The proposed project would comply with Municipal Code Section 5707(b)(11)(ii), which
requires redevelopment projects that alter more than 50% of the impervious surfaces of the
existing development, or those where the existing development was not subject to post-
construction stormwater quality control requirements, to design and implement post-
construction controls to mitigate stormwater pollution throughout the entire project site. As
such, the proposed project would incorporate a newly engineered stormwater drainage
system, various BMPs, and low-impact design (LID) techniques to treat on-site stormwater.
Prior to the operation of the proposed project, the City will review this stormwater drainage
and treatment system to ensure that post-development stormwater flows do not exceed pre-
development flows, consistent with Municipal Code requirements. Additionally, consistent
with Municipal Code Section 5707(a), the proposed project would prepare an urban runoff
mitigation plan as a condition of approval. The urban runoff mitigation plan would
demonstrate that the proposed BMPs, numeric design criteria, and/or design elements meet
the requirements set forth in the Municipal Code. Therefore, long-term operational impacts
associated with water quality standards would be less than significant.
b) Would the project substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially
with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or
a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing
nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or
planned uses for which permits have been granted)?
Groundwater Supplies
Less Than Significant Impact. Groundwater from the Central Basin is pumped from
wells located within the City’s boundaries and provides the City with its principal source
of potable water. The groundwater available to the City is good quality and is currently
PC Agenda Page 139
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
77 January 2017
extracted and pumped directly into the water transmission and distribution systems
without disinfection or treatment of any kind (City of Downey 2012c).
Beginning in fiscal year (FY) 2000–2001, groundwater became the sole source of
drinking water for the City. Due to the high cost of the imported Central Basin Municipal
Water District water, the City intends to rely solely on its groundwater wells to meet the
potable-water demand of its customers in the future (City of Downey 2012c).
In the Central Basin Judgment of 1965 (Central Basin Judgment), the Superior Court
fixed allowable withdrawals from the Central Basin at a level that was greater than the
amount of water returned to the Central Basin through natural replenishment. With a total
allowed pumping limit of 217,000 acre-feet per year (AFY), approximately 80,000 AFY
must be artificially replenished in order to maintain a safe yield of 137,000 AFY in the
Central Basin. The adjudication allocated the portion of the 217,000 AFY each pumper
could extract (City of Downey 2012c).
The limit to the amount of groundwater that each pumper is allowed to extract from the
Central Basin on an annual basis is referred to as the allowed pumping allocation (APA),
which corresponds to 80% of the party’s total water rights. The Central Basin Judgment
contains provisions for exceedance of the APA in the event of an emergency. It also
allows for a carryover of any unused APA, not to exceed 20% of the purveyor’s APA.
A purveyor may also extract an additional 10% of its APA with the understanding that
this additional amount will be deducted from its APA for the upcoming year (City of
Downey 2012c).
The California Department of Water Resources (DWR), Southern Division, was appointed
Watermaster of the Central Basin. As such, DWR has the responsibility for ensuring that
parties adhere to the terms and conditions stipulated by the Central Basin Judgment. In
addition to DWR’s role as Watermaster, the Water Replenishment District of Southern
California (WRD) and LACDPW have some responsibilities for groundwater management
in the Central Basin. WRD is responsible for purchasing groundwater replenishment water
and may address water quality issues in the Central Basin. In order to fund the purchase of
imported and recycled water and associated administrative costs, WRD charges a
replenishment assessment on each acre-foot of water extracted from the Central Basin.
Groundwater replenishment operations are provided by LACDPW, and replenishment
water is paid for through revenues raised by WRD (City of Downey 2012c).
The City was one of the original parties involved in the Central Basin Judgment and has
acquired additional water rights since that time, resulting in an APA of 16,554 AFY (FY
2009–2010). The City has 20 active wells that it uses to pump groundwater from the
PC Agenda Page 140
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
78 January 2017
Central Basin. These wells are located throughout the City and have a combined
production capacity of approximately 53,211 AFY (based on continuous operations)
(City of Downey 2012c).
The City’s 2010 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) provides multiple-dry-year supply
and demand analysis for the City’s domestic water service area. As shown in Table 3.9-1, the
City’s supplies can meet demands during multiple dry years for the next 20 years.
As previously addressed, the flexibility afforded by the Central Basin Judgment through
its 20% carryover and 10% emergency exceedance provisions, coupled with the City’s
corresponding groundwater pumping and leasing practices, enables the City to meet its
water demand under this multiple-dry-year scenario over the next 20 years.
In its UWMP, the City estimated that commercial uses within its water service area
would demand an average of 1.53 AFY per account in 2015, 1.49 AFY per account in
2020, 1.48 AFY per account in 2025, and 1.47 AFY per account in 2030. Thus, it is
expected that, as a commercial use, the proposed project could demand approximately
1.53 AFY of water. As discussed previously, groundwater has become the sole source of
domestic water for the City. Nonetheless, as stated in the UWMP and summarized in
Table 3.9-1, the proposed project’s water demand would represent a nominal percentage
of the City’s current and future supplies, and overall, the City has the water supplies t o
adequately serve the project.
Table 3.9-1
Supply and Demand Comparison – Multiple-Dry-Year Events
Scenarios Supply and Demand 2015 2020 2025 2030
Multiple-dry-year
first-year supply
Supply totals 19,237 19,330 19,675 20,027
Demand totals 19,237 19,330 19,675 20,027
Difference 0 0 0 0
Multiple-dry-year
second-year supply
Supply totals 19,489 19,584 19,934 20,090
Demand totals 19,489 19,584 19,934 20,090
Difference 0 0 0 0
Multiple-dry-year
third-year supply
Supply totals 19,562 19,657 20,008 20,365
Demand totals 19,562 19,657 20,008 20,365
Difference 0 0 0 0
PC Agenda Page 141
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
79 January 2017
Groundwater Recharge
Less Than Significant Impact. The project site is currently vacant, but it is a small site.
As such, the project site does not currently serve as a significant location for dedicated
groundwater recharge.
Once operational, the project site would be predominantly composed of structures and
paved, impervious surfaces, including the 140-unit hotel building, paved parking spaces,
and drive aisles. However, the proposed project would also include an underground
stormwater retention basin to treat on-site stormwater. In addition to treating stormwater
flows, this retention basin would collect and contain water on site and would promote
groundwater recharge by allowing these on-site flows to percolate into subsurface soils.
Therefore, impacts associated with groundwater recharge would be less than significant.
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, in a manner which
would result in substantial erosion or siltation on or off site?
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project would incorporate a newly
engineered stormwater drainage system, various BMPs, and LID techniques. Prior to the
operation of the proposed project, the City will review this stormwater drainage and
treatment system to ensure that post-development stormwater flows do not exceed pre-
development flows, consistent with Municipal Code requirements. Additionally,
consistent with Municipal Code Section 5707(a) (City of Downey 1978), the proposed
project would prepare an Urban Runoff Mitigation Plan as a condition of approval. The
Urban Runoff Mitigation Plan is required to demonstrate that the proposed BMPs,
numeric design criteria, and/or design elements meet the requirements set forth in the
Municipal Code.
Further, the proposed project would comply with Municipal Code Section 5708, which
requires all new development and redevelopment projects within the City to prepare pre-
development and post-development hydrology studies based on current LACDPW design
storm and hydrology methods. Per this section, in the event that post-development
stormwater discharge rates are expected to generate higher peak runoff flows compared
to those that currently exist, the City requires reasonable on-site drainage improvements
to accommodate the potential effect of such additional water flows. Thus, with
construction of the new stormwater drainage system, incorporation of BMPs and LID
techniques, and adherence to all applicable state and local regulations, the project would
neither alter the existing drainage pattern of the project site or the surrounding area nor
affect flow rates or volumes either on or off site. Therefore, impacts associated with
altering existing drainage patterns would be less than significant.
PC Agenda Page 142
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
80 January 2017
d) 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 substantially
increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in
flooding on or off site?
Less Than Significant Impact. Refer to Section 3.9(c).
e) Would the project create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of
existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional
sources of polluted runoff?
Less Than Significant Impact. Consistent with Municipal Code Section 5708, the
proposed project would prepare pre-development and post-development hydrology
studies based on current LACDPW design storm and hydrology methods. Per Section
5708, in the event that post-development stormwater discharge rates are expected to
generate higher peak runoff flows compared to those that currently exist, the City will
require reasonable on-site drainage improvements to accommodate the potential effect of
such additional water flows. As such, the proposed project would incorporate a newly
engineered stormwater drainage system, various BMPs, and LID techniques. Prior to the
operation of the proposed project, the City will review this stormwater drainage and
treatment system to ensure that post-development stormwater flows do not exceed pre-
development flows, consistent with Municipal Code requirements. Therefore, impacts
associated with stormwater drainage system capacity would be less than significant.
f) Would the project otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
Less Than Significant Impact. Listing a water body as impaired in California is governed
by the Water Quality Control Policy for developing California’s Clean Water Act Section
303(d) listing policy. The State Water Resources Control Board and Regional Water
Quality Control Boards assess water quality data for California’s waters every 2 years to
determine whether they contain pollutants at levels that exceed protective water quality
criteria and standards. This biennial assessment is required under Section 303(d) of the
federal Clean Water Act.
In the project area, two water bodies are included on the Section 303(d) list of impaired
water bodies: the Rio Hondo River (Reach 1) and the San Gabriel River (Reach 2). The
Rio Hondo River is identified on the Section 303(d) list because it contains levels of
coliform bacteria, copper, lead, toxicity, trash, zinc, and pH that exceed acceptable
thresholds. The San Gabriel River is listed because it contains unacceptable levels of
coliform bacteria, cyanide, and lead (SWRCB 2011). As such, any development project
PC Agenda Page 143
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
81 January 2017
that would either directly or indirectly result in a discharge of these or any other
constituents into these listed water bodies represents an adverse impact.
However, as previously addressed, the proposed project would incorporate temporary
BMPs during construction activities and a newly engineered stormwater drainage system,
various BMPs, and LID techniques during the operational phase to help ensure that
stormwater, as well as any potential pollutants contained within these flows, is adequately
collected and treated on the project site to avoid conveying stormwater off site and
causing subsequent downstream impacts. Therefore, impacts associated with substantially
degrading water quality would be less than significant.
g) Would the project place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a
federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard
delineation map?
No Impact. The proposed project does not include any residential uses. Nonetheless,
according to the Flood Insurance Rate Map (Panel No. 06037C1840F) published by the
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the project site and surrounding area is
located in Flood Hazard Zone X, which is defined as an area susceptible to 0.2% chance of
flooding (i.e., 500-year floodplain). Therefore, based both on the proposed project’s lack of
residential uses and on the project site’s being located outside the 100-year floodplain, no
impacts associated with placing housing within a 100-year flood hazard area would occur.
h) Would the project place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would
impede or redirect flood flows?
Less Than Significant Impact. As addressed in Section 3.9(g), according to FEMA, the
project site and surrounding area are located outside the 100-year flood hazard area. The
General Plan Safety Element states that since the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
completed work in 2000 related to raising levees adjacent to the Rio Hondo River, the
City is no longer susceptible to flooding from 100-year storm events, although the risk of
flooding from unusual amounts of rainfall is present. Consistent with requirements set by
the City and the Regional Water Quality Control Board, the proposed project would
incorporate a newly engineered stormwater drainage system, various BMPs, and LID
techniques. Prior to the operation of the proposed project, the City will review this
stormwater drainage and treatment system to ensure that post-development stormwater
flows do not exceed pre-development flows, which would help safeguard against on-site
flooding effects during times of atypical amounts of rainfall (e.g., 500-year storm events).
Therefore, impacts associated with placing structures within a 100-year flood hazard area
would be less than significant.
PC Agenda Page 144
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
82 January 2017
i) Would the project expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or
death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam?
Less Than Significant Impact. See Section 3.9(h).
j) Would the project result in impacts associated with inundation by seiche, tsunami,
or mudflow?
No Impact. Due to the lack of an adjacent lake or other water body, the project site would
not be susceptible to seiche. Additionally, because of the site’s inland location, the
proposed project would not be subject to tsunami. Further, the lack of nearby
topographical features typically associated with mudflow (e.g., hillsides, riverbanks)
would result in a very low probability for mudflow to affect the project site. Therefore,
no impacts associated with seiche, tsunami, or mudflow would occur.
3.10 Land Use and Planning
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
X. LAND USE AND PLANNING – Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community?
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy,
or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the
project (including, but not limited to the general
plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or
zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of
avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation
plan or natural community conservation plan?
a) Would the project physically divide an established community?
No Impact. The physical division of an established community typically refers to the
construction of a linear feature, such as a major highway or railroad tracks, or removal of
a means of access, such as a local road or bridge, that would impair mobility within an
existing community or between a community and outlying area. Under the existing
conditions, the project site is not used as a connection between established communities.
Instead, connectivity in the surrounding project area is facilitated via local roadways and
pedestrian rights-of-way. Therefore, no impacts associated with physical division of an
established community would occur.
PC Agenda Page 145
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
83 January 2017
b) Would the project conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of
an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general
plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the
purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
Less Than Significant Impact. Under the existing conditions, the project site is vacant.
The project site is located in a heavily urbanized, commercial area of the City.
Surrounding uses in the immediate project area include a Fallas Parades retail store, a Big
Lots discount store, a Walgreens drugstore, a Dunkin’ Donuts, and a Big 5 Sporting
Goods store. The Union Pacific Railroad (historically, the Southern Pacific Railroad)
forms the southwestern border of the project site and the Stonewood Center shopping
mall is to the northeast across Firestone Boulevard.
Currently, the City’s General Plan Land Use Map designates the project site as General
Commercial, while the City’s Zoning Map identifies the site as a Lakewood/Firestone
Specific Plan area. In order to facilitate implementation of the proposed project, the
applicant has filed a request for a specific plan amendment.
Specific Plan Amendment: The proposed project site is located on Site 17 in Subarea 5A
of the Lakewood/Firestone Specific Plan area (City of Downey 1992). The site was
formerly occupied by an auto service and tire sales store, a Montessori school, and vacant
structures for light industry, with a portion of the site vacant. The City purchased this site
in 1990. The Specific Plan limits the maximum building height to 38 feet, or three stories.
The Lakewood/Firestone Specific Plan would be amended to allow for the development
of a four-story, 60-foot-high hotel, and to allow for ancillary alcohol sales in conjunction
with the operation of a hotel. The Specific Plan would also be amended to reduce the
street landscaping standard from 10 feet to 2 feet, and to create hotel parking
requirements, specifically for Site 17, Subarea 5, Sector A of the Specific Plan.
The intent of the City’s Lakewood/Firestone Specific Plan is to encourage retail uses that
would complement and benefit the Stonewood Center shopping mall located at 251
Stonewood Street. Most parcels in the Specific Plan area are developed and occupied
with commercial uses. There are 36 apartment units and 43 motel units in the Specific
Plan area. Although a hotel is not a “Standard Permitted Use,” it would support and
complement the existing retail uses in the area by drawing visitors and overnight patrons
to the southwestern side of Firestone Boulevard who would likely frequent local
restaurants and retail establishments during their hotel stay.
Historical uses on the site were not compatible and did not present a unified or coherent
building design. The Specific Plan indicates that Subarea 5A is large enough for a single
PC Agenda Page 146
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
84 January 2017
major development or a few smaller, individually owned centers that function as one. The
proposed hotel would be compatible with the vision of a few individually owned parcels
that would function together. Table 3.10-1 provides an analysis of the consistency of the
proposed project with the goals of the Specific Plan.
Table 3.10-1
Proposed Project Consistency with Lakewood/Firestone Specific Plan Goals
Lakewood/Firestone Specific Plan Goals Project Consistency with the Specific Plan
Provide standards that ensure attractive, revenue-producing
commercial developments as the properties within the area
recycle.
Consistent. The proposed hotel use would redevelop a vacant
site with an attractive, revenue-producing commercial
development.
Improve vehicular and pedestrian circulation on streets within
and around the specific plan area, and minimize impacts to
nearby streets and intersections from future commercial
development.
Consistent. The proposed hotel use would provide a clearly
marked entryway from Firestone Boulevard with signage and
an improved sidewalk along the project site frontage.
Encourage assembly of parcels to facilitate development of
efficient, master-planned projects.
Consistent. The proposed project would convert a parcel that
historically had a mix of incompatible uses to one use that
would support other commercial uses in the planning subarea.
Provide the specific plan area with a unified character through
design standards and complementary site planning.
Consistent. The proposed project would present a modern
design that would complement surrounding commercial uses.
Permit and encourage land uses that would benefit from the
study area’s location near a regional shopping center.
Consistent. The proposed project would support the regional
shopping center use.
Phase out approvals of zone exception permits. Consistent. The proposed project does not include a zone
exception permit.
Ensure adequate domestic water supply, fire flow, and
drainage.
Consistent. The proposed project would be consistent with
these requirements.
Source: City of Downey 1992.
Given the urban setting of the project site, the mix of uses and architectural styles, and the
presence of existing commercial development, the proposed project would be consistent
with the character of the surrounding area (see Section 3.1(c) of this MND for further
discussion regarding potential aesthetic character effects). Based on these characteristics
and considering that the proposed project is consistent with the purpose, goals, and
objectives outlined in the Lakewood/Firestone Specific Plan, impacts associated with the
specific plan amendment would be less than significant.
c) Would the project conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural
community conservation plan?
No Impact. There is no adopted habitat conservation plan, natural community
conservation plan, or other approved state, regional, or local habitat conservation plan in
the City. Thus, the development on the project site would not be subject to the provisions
PC Agenda Page 147
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
85 January 2017
of any such conservation plans and no impacts associated with conflict with habitat
conservation plans would occur.
3.11 Mineral Resources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
XI. MINERAL RESOURCES – Would the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral
resource that would be of value to the region and
the residents of the state?
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?
a) Would the project result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that
would be of value to the region and the residents of the state?
No Impact. According to the State of California Department of Conservation, Division of
Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources, there are no gas, geothermal, or other known wells
located on or in the vicinity of the project site. However, there is one oil well located
approximately 0.7 miles west of the project site, operated by Downey Syndicate, and
another located 1.1 miles to the east, operated by the Union Oil Company of California
(CDOC 2016). The proposed project would not result in a land use conflict with the
existing oil extraction, nor would it preclude future oil extraction on underlying deposits.
The Downey Vision 2025 Comprehensive General Plan Update EIR (City of Downey
2004, Section 8.5) states that there are no known mineral resource zones present in the
City. According to the Mineral Resources and Oil Field Mapping conducted for the Los
Angeles County Bicycle Master Plan Program EIR (see County of Los Angeles 2012,
Figure 3.8-1), there are no known mineral resources on site or in the project vicinity. As
such, the project site is not mapped as or known to contain an important mineral resource.
Therefore, the proposed project would not result in the loss of availability of a known
mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state. No
impact would occur.
PC Agenda Page 148
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
86 January 2017
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. The Downey Vision 2025 Comprehensive General Plan Update EIR (City
of Downey 2004, Section 8.5) states that there are no known mineral resource zones
present within the City. Further, as discussed in Section 3.11(a), only two active oil
wells exist in the vicinity of the project site, and the proposed project would neither
result in a land use conflict with the existing oil extraction nor preclude future oil
extraction on underlying deposits . Therefore, implementation of the proposed project
would not result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resourc e
recovery site, and no impact would occur.
3.12 Noise
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
XII. NOISE – Would the project result in:
a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise
levels in excess of standards established in the
local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable
standards of other agencies?
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive
groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise
levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
without the project?
d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in
ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above
levels existing without the project?
e) For a project located within an airport la nd use
plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted,
within 2 miles of a public airport or public use
airport, exposure of people residing or working in
the project area to excessive noise levels?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,
exposure of people residing or working in the project
area to excessive noise levels?
PC Agenda Page 149
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
87 January 2017
a) Would the project result in exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in
excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or
applicable standards of other agencies?
Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. During project construction, the
project would result in a temporary increase in noise levels due to the use of construction
equipment. Employees and guests of the hotel would generate additional traffic on local
streets. Traffic noise would be a long-term source of noise from the project. The
operation of the hotel would also result in noise from trucks delivering supplies; guests
using the rooftop pool, bar, and fire pit; and heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning
(HVAC) equipment.
The City’s General Plan Noise Element addresses land use compatibility. The Noise
Element states that an exterior community noise equivalent level greater than 60
A-weighted decibels (adjusted for the frequency response of the human ear; dBA) is
normally unacceptable for residential uses, schools, parks, and other non-residential
noise-sensitive land uses (City of Downey 2005).
Noise levels are regulated by the City’s Municipal Code, Article IV, Chapter 6 (City of
Downey 1978). The sound limits apply to noise generation from one property to an
adjacent property. The sound level limits depend on the time of day, the duration of the
noise, and land use. According to the City’s Municipal Code, the maximum permissible
sound pressure level measured at the property boundary of residential, commercial, or
manufacturing land uses from any noise source not operating on a public right-of-way
shall constitute a public nuisance when such noise level exceeds 5 decibels (dB) above
the ambient noise level at any period during the course of a 24-hour day. However, if a
noise source is of a continuous nature and cannot reasonably be discontinued for a period
wherein the ambient noise level can be determined, the maximum permissible steady
noise level by sound sources across the property boundary of any land use cited in 3.12-1
may be less than, but not greater than, the sound level limits that are depicted in Table
3.12-1 (City of Downey 1978).
The nearest sensitive receptors that would potentially be impacted by noise generated
during construction of the project are residential uses located approximately 100 feet
southwest of the project site. As defined in Table 3.12-1, residential land uses have a
daytime noise standard of 55 dBA from 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. and a nighttime noise
standard of 45 dBA from 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.
PC Agenda Page 150
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
88 January 2017
Table 3.12-1
Exterior Noise Limits
Land Use Category
Noise Level (dBA)
Nighttime
10:00 p.m.–7:00 a.m.
Daytime
7:00 a.m.–10:00 p.m.
Residential 45 55
Commercial 65 65
Manufacturing 70 70
Source: City of Downey 1978.
Note: dBA = A-weighted decibels.
However, according to the City’s noise ordinance, construction, repair, or remodeling
equipment and devices and other related construction noise sources are exempted from
the provisions of the City’s noise ordinance, provided a valid permit for such
construction, repair, or remodeling has been obtained from the City. In any circumstance
other than emergency work, no repair or remodeling is permitted to take place between
9:00 p.m. of one day and 7:00 a.m. of the following day, and no repair or remodeling is
permitted to exceed 85 dBA across any property boundary at any time during the course
of a 24-hour day (City of Downey 1978).
Ambient Noise Monitoring
Noise measurements were conducted recently for the ALDI Food Market project (Dudek
2016), which is near the proposed project (440 feet away). Noise measurements were
conducted at three locations that are adjacent to the ALDI Food Market project site and
are near the proposed project site to determine the approximate ambient daytime noise
level. One additional noise measurement was conducted to approximate the ambient
daytime and nighttime noise levels for the proposed project location.
The three noise measurements (for daytime noise) were conducted on March 17, 2016,
between 3:30 p.m. and 5:45 p.m. (see Appendix E). These three daytime, short-term
(1 hour or less) attended sound level measurements were taken with a Rion NL-32 sound-
level meter. This sound-level meter meets the current American National Standards
Institute standard for a Type 1 precision sound-level meter. The sound-level meter was
positioned at a height of approximately 5 feet above the ground. The measured daytime
average sound levels ranged from 54 to 69 dBA, as depicted in Table 3.12-2. The
measurement results are in terms of the time-averaged equivalent noise level (Leq).
The 24-hour noise measurement was conducted from March 16 to March 17, 2016,
between 5:30 p.m. and 4:45 p.m. The non-attended sound level measurements were taken
with a SoftdB Piccolo sound-level meter. The sound-level meter meets the current
PC Agenda Page 151
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
89 January 2017
American National Standards Institute standard for a Type 2 (general purpose) sound-
level meter. The sound-level meter was placed on a tree located on site at a height of
approximately 5.5 feet above the ground. The measured daytime average sound levels
(7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.) ranged from 52 to 66 dBA, with an overall average of 60 dBA,
as depicted in Table 3.12-2. The measured nighttime average sound levels (10:00 p.m. to
7:00 a.m.) ranged from 49 to 71 dBA, with an overall average of 58 dBA, as depicted in
Table 3.12-2. The 24-hour weighted average noise level at Site M4 was 65 dBA CNEL.
The measurement results are in terms of the time-averaged sound level.
Table 3.12-2
Ambient Measured Noise Levels
Site Location
Sound Level
(dBA Leq) Noise Sources
Daytime Short-Term Noise Measurements
M1 Single-family residential; 8740 McCahill Street 55 Traffic noise, electric handsaw, Coca-
Cola Bottling Company Plant noise,
barking dog, birds
M2 Single-family residential; 8729 McCahill Street 54 Traffic noise, distant aircraft, electric
handsaw, birds
M3 Single-family residential; 11408 Lakewood Boulevard 69 Traffic noise, distant aircraft, radio
noise from passing cars, Coca-Cola
Bottling Company Plant noise
Daytime and Nighttime 24-Hour Noise Measurements
M4 Project site; 11215 Lakewood Boulevard Nighttime Noise
Measurementsa
Range: 49–71
Average: 58
Attendant was not present; however,
based on daytime observations noise
could be attributed to traffic noise,
Coca-Cola Bottling Company Plant
noise, and freight train noise
Daytime Noise
Measurementsb
Range: 52–66
Average: 60
Attendant was not present during entire
duration of measurement; however,
based on initial observations noise
could be attributed to traffic noise,
Coca-Cola Bottling Company Plant
noise, and freight train noise
Source: See Appendix E for complete results.
Notes: dBA = A-weighted decibels; Leq = time-averaged equivalent noise level.
a Nighttime noise measurements were taken from 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.
b Daytime noise measurements were taken from 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.
Construction of the Project
The noise levels generated by construction equipment would vary greatly depending on
factors such as the type and specific model of the equipment, the operation being
performed, and the condition of the equipment. The average sound level of the
construction activity also depends on the amount of time that the equipment operates and
PC Agenda Page 152
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
90 January 2017
the intensity of the construction during the period. Development activities for project
construction would generally involve the following sequence:
Demolition
Site preparation
Grading
Trenching
Building construction
Paving
Architectural coating
As discussed in Section 2.3.2, Project Construction, the following equipment is
anticipated to be used during project construction:
Concrete/industrial saws
Rubber-tired dozers
Tractors/loaders/backhoes
Scrapers
Graders
Plate compactors
Trenchers
Cranes
Forklifts
Welders
Generator sets
Water trucks
Pavers
Rollers
Paving equipment
Cement and mortar mixers
Air compressors
PC Agenda Page 153
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
91 January 2017
The range of maximum noise levels for various types of construction equipment at a
distance of 50 feet is depicted in Table 3.12-3.
Table 3.12-3
Construction Equipment Noise Emission Levels
Equipment Typical Sound Level (dBA) 50 Feet from Source
Air compressor 81
Backhoe 80
Compactor 82
Concrete mixer 85
Concrete pump 82
Crane, mobile 83
Dozer 85
Generator 81
Loader 85
Paver 89
Roller 74
Saw 76
Scraper 89
Truck 88
Source: FTA 2006.
Note: dBA = A-weighted decibels.
As previously mentioned, the nearest sensitive receptors that would potentially be
impacted by noise generated during construction of the project are residential uses
located approximately 100 feet southwest of the project site. Noise levels from
construction activities generally decrease at a rate of 6 dB per doubling of distance
from the activity. The estimated construction noise levels at nearby residential uses are
summarized in Table 3.12-4. Construction noise levels at more distant locations would be
correspondingly lower, and intervening structures would also reduce the noise from
construction activities.
Table 3.12-4
Short-Term (Construction) Noise Levels
Noise-Sensitive Land Use
Approximate Distance from
Nearest Construction
Construction Noise Level
Range (dBA Leq)
City of Downey Noise
Ordinance Construction
Noise Standard (dBA)
Residences on Margaret Street 100 feet 68–83 85
Source: City of Downey 1978.
Notes: dBA = A-weighted decibels; Leq = time-averaged equivalent noise level.
PC Agenda Page 154
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
92 January 2017
The construction noise level range shown in Table 3.12-4 represents the maximum noise
levels that could be experienced by the nearest sensitive receptors; the majority of
construction activities would occur more than 100 feet from the nearest sensitive
receptors. Construction activities associated with construction of the project would not
exceed the City’s construction noise ordinance standards. However, construction noise
would have the potential to adversely affect adjacent noise-sensitive uses (residences)
through annoyance and disruption of conversations. As such, noise from construction
activities would represent a significant impact at nearby residential uses during the louder
stages of construction. It is anticipated that not all construction equipment would be used
simultaneously for long periods during the construction phase. To minimize impacts
associated with construction noise, the project would be required to implement mitigation
to reduce this potential impact, such as limiting construction hours, placing mufflers on
equipment engines, and orienting stationary sources to direct noise away from sensitive
uses (MM-NOISE-1). Additionally, construction noise is temporary in nature and would
cease once construction work is completed (construction is expected to be completed in
20 months). With implementation of MM-NOISE-1, impacts related to short-term
construction would be considered less than significant with mitigation incorporated.
Operation of the Project
Off-Site Receptors
As a result of growth in the area, as well as operation of the project, traffic on local
arterial streets is expected to increase relative to current conditions. Potential noise
effects from vehicular traffic were assessed using the Federal Highway
Administration’s Traffic Noise Model , Version 2.5. Data used to model noise from
vehicular traffic was derived from the project-specific traffic impact analysis report
prepared by Stantec (Appendix F). Information used in the model included the Existing
2016/2017, Existing With Project 2016/2017, Baseline 2019, and Baseline With Project
2019 traffic volumes. Noise levels were modeled at representative noise-sensitive
receptors. The receptors were modeled to be 1.5 meters (5 feet) above the local ground
elevation. The four receptors (M1, M2, M3, and M4) represent existing off-site single
and multifamily residences.
The information provided from this modeling, along with the results from ambient noise
survey measurements, was compared to the noise impact significance criteria to assess
whether project-related traffic noise would cause significant impacts, and if so, where
these impacts would occur. The results of the comparisons are presented in Table 3.12-5.
PC Agenda Page 155
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
93 January 2017
Table 3.12-5
Project-Related Traffic Noise
Modeled
Receptor
Receptor
Address
Roadway
Intersection
Existing
2016/2017
(dBA)
Existing
With
Project
2016/2017
(dBA)
Baseline
2019
(dBA)
Baseline
With
Project
2019
(dBA)
Maximum Project-
Related Noise
Level Increase
(dB)
M1: Single-family
residential
11408
Lakewood
Boulevard
Lakewood
Boulevard and
Firestone
Boulevard
70 70 70 70 0
M2: Single-family
residential
11114
Marbel
Avenue
Lakewood
Boulevard and
Firestone
Boulevard
59 59 59 59 0
M3: Single-family
residential
11115
Marbel
Avenue
Lakewood
Boulevard and
Firestone
Boulevard
61 61 61 61 0
M4: Multifamily
homes
9101
Margaret
Street
Firestone
Boulevard
Driveway
54 54 54 54 0
Source: FHWA 2004.
Notes: dBA = A-weighted decibels; dB = decibels.
Project-related traffic noise levels are rounded to the nearest whole numbers.
As Table 3.12-5 shows, the project would not result in an increase in the noise level
along these roads in the vicinity of the project. Noise levels provided in Table 3.12-5
represent noise associated with traffic only. Traffic noise associated with the project
would not exceed the maximum permissible noise level increase of 5 dB above the
ambient noise level, as outlined in Article IV, Chapter 6, Section 4606.3A of the
City’s municipal code (City of Downey 1978). The proposed project is not anticipated
to result in significant noise increases or cause an exceedance of applicable noise
standards. Therefore, the impact from traffic noise associated with the project would
be less than significant.
Noise associated with the project would include opening and shutting of car doors,
starting engines, and idling vehicles. Noise associated with shutting of car doors,
starting engines, and idling vehicles would be temporary and relatively brief and thus
would not cause a substantial noise impact.
In addition to the noise sources addressed previously, the project would result in noise
from trucks delivering supplies. This could include noise from idling trucks, truck
back-up alarms, and truck loading and unloading . The delivery dock would be located
PC Agenda Page 156
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
94 January 2017
in the northwestern region of the project site, facing the Big Lots. The nearest noise-
sensitive receiver would be located approximately 230 feet southwest of the delivery
dock. The hotel would operate 24 hours a day and deliveries could occur throughout
hotel operation .
Additionally, the trash enclosure, located in the western corner of the site, could
introduce a new source of noise. The nearest noise-sensitive receiver would be located
approximately 100 feet southwest of the trash enclosure. If trash is disposed of during
nighttime hours, the noise could be perceived as disruptive to the nearby receptors.
A rooftop pool, fire pit, and bar would be located on the second story level roof of the
porte cochere (see Figure 6). Guests using these facilities would introduce a new
source of noise to the area. The nearest noise-sensitive receiver would be located
approximately 200 feet southwest of the pool, fire pit, and bar. Because of its
location, this outdoor area would be shielded acoustically and visually from noise-
sensitive receivers to the southwest by the rest of the hotel, which would be four
stories (approximately 60 feet) in height. Noise from these outdoor uses would be
obstructed by the southern portion of the hotel and would be negligible at nearby
noise-sensitive receivers .
HVAC equipment would be located on the roof of the proposed hotel. Without
incorporation of noise control features, operation of the HVAC equipment could
introduce noise to the area. However, the HVAC system would be in a mechanical
enclosure with noise-control features, reducing equipment noise to a less than
significant level .
As shown in Table 3.12-1, the exterior noise limit for residential land uses is 45 dBA
during the nighttime (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.) and 55 dBA during the daytime (7:00 a.m.
to 10:00 p.m.). According to Table 3.12-2, existing nighttime noise measurements
averaged 54 dBA Leq, which exceeds the nighttime exterior noise limit. Existing
nighttime noise measurements ranged from 49 to 71 dBA Leq. The maximum measured
noise level (Lmax) during the entirety of the recording period was 93 dBA, which occurred
at 10:30 p.m. Although no attendant was present during this reading, given the proximity
to the Union Pacific Railroad tracks, it is assumed that this maximum noise reading was a
result of a passing train. Because delivery trucks and trash dumping have the potential to
adversely affect adjacent noise-sensitive uses (residences), the project would be required
to implement mitigation to reduce this potential impact (MM-NOISE-2). Upon
implementation of MM-NOISE-2, impacts related to operation would be considered less
than significant with mitigation incorporated.
PC Agenda Page 157
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
95 January 2017
On-Site Receptors
As discussed previously, the project is located immediately northeast of the Union Pacific
Railroad tracks. Because freight trains travel on this rail line in the nighttime hours,
guests of the hotel could be subjected to train noise, which may be perceived as
disruptive. The closest hotel guest rooms would be located 90 feet from the Union Pacific
Railroad tracks. Because passing trains have the potential to adversely affect hotel guests,
the project would be required to implement mitigation to reduce this potential impact
(MM-NOISE-3). Upon implementation of MM-NOISE-3, impacts related to operation
would be considered less than significant with mitigation incorporated.
Mitigation Measures
MM-NOISE-1 In order to reduce impacts related to heavy construction equipment
moving and operating on site during project construction, grading,
demolition, and paving prior to issuance of grading permits, the
applicant shall ensure that the following procedures are followed:
All construction equipment, fixed or mobile, shall be equipped
with properly operating and maintained mufflers.
Construction noise reduction methods, such as shutting off idling
equipment, maximizing the distance between construction
equipment staging areas and occupied sensitive receptor areas, and
using electric air compressors and similar power tools rather than
diesel equipment, shall be used where feasible.
During construction, stationary construction equipment shall be
placed so noise is directed away from or shielded from sensitive
noise receptors where feasible.
During construction, stockpiling and vehicle staging areas shall be
located as far as practicable from noise-sensitive receptors.
Construction shall be restricted to weekdays between the hours of 7:00
a.m. and 7:00 p.m. and Saturdays between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and
5:00 p.m. No construction shall occur on Sunday. 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. In the event the City of Downey receives a complaint,
appropriate corrective actions shall be implemented, and a report of the
action shall be provided to the reporting party.
PC Agenda Page 158
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
96 January 2017
MM-NOISE-2 In order to reduce impacts related to deliveries and trash dumping, the
applicant shall ensure that the following procedures are followed:
The applicant shall build and maintain a 7-foot-high masonry wall
above finished grade on the southwest side of the project site.
Signage shall be posted in the delivery dock area requiring that
delivery trucks limit idling to 5 minutes or less; requesting that
back up alarms be turned off, if possible; and requesting that truck
drivers be courteous to neighbors.
MM-NOISE-3 The hotel guest room units along the southwest-facing wall will require
sound-rated windows to reduce noise associated with the Union Pacific
Railroad tracks. An interior noise analysis will be required for these
hotel guest rooms prior to issuance of building permits.
b) Would the project result in exposure of persons to or generation of excessive
groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
Less Than Significant Impact. Ground-borne vibration is a small, rapidly fluctuating
motion transmitted through the ground that diminishes (attenuates) fairly rapidly over
distance. Ground-borne vibration from heavy equipment operations during construction
of the proposed project was evaluated and compared with relevant vibration impact
criteria using the Federal Transit Administration’s Transit Noise and Vibration Impact
Assessment, which provides vibration impact criteria and recommended methodologies
and guidance for assessment of vibration effects (FTA 2006).
At a distance of approximately 100 feet, the vibration level from heavy construction
machinery (such as a loaded truck or a drilling rig) would be between approximately
0.010 peak particle velocity in inches per second (PPV IPS) and 0.011 PPV IPS.
Vibration levels of this magnitude would likely be perceptible at nearby residences, but
would be below the Federal Transit Administration threshold of potential damage for
normal structures (0.20 PPV IPS) and would not be considered excessive. Therefore,
short-term construction-related vibration impacts would be less than significant.
c) Would the project result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in
the project vicinity above levels existing without the project?
Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Refer to Section 3.12(a). Operation
of the project would not result in a significant permanent noise impacts; therefore, this
PC Agenda Page 159
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
97 January 2017
impact would be considered less than significant with incorporation of MM-NOISE-2
and MM-NOISE-3.
d) Would the project result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient
noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project?
Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Refer to Section 3.12(a).
Construction of the project would not result in any significant temporary or periodic
noise impacts; therefore, this impact would be considered less than significant with
incorporation of MM-NOISE-1.
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not
been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the
project result in exposure of people residing or working in the project area to
excessive noise levels?
No Impact. The proposed project is located neither within 2 miles of a public airport nor
within an airport land use plan. The nearest airports are the Compton–Woodley Airport,
approximately 8 miles away, and the Fullerton Municipal Airport, approximately 9 miles
away. Therefore, there would be no impact.
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in exposure
of people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
No Impact. The nearest private airstrip to the project site is the Goodyear Blimp Base
Airport, located approximately 10.2 miles southwest at 19200 South Main Street in
Gardena, California (Airnav.com 2016). The proposed project is not located within the
vicinity of a private airstrip; therefore, there would be no impact.
3.13 Population and Housing
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
XIII. POPULATION AND HOUSING – Would the project:
a) Induce substantial population growth in an area,
either directly (for example, by proposing new
homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example,
through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing,
necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
PC Agenda Page 160
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
98 January 2017
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
c) Displace substantial numbers of people,
necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
a) Would the project induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for
example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through
extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
No Impact. The proposed project involves the construction of a hotel and associated
improvements. No residential uses or other land uses typically associated with directly
inducing population growth are included as part of the proposed project. Additionally, the
number of employees hired to construct and operate the proposed hotel would be
minimal. The project would employ approximately 40 employees during construction and
35–40 employees during operation.
The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) is a metropolitan planning
organization that represents the Counties of Ventura, Los Angeles, San Bernardino,
Orange, Riverside, and Imperial. As part of the 2016–2040 Regional Transportation
Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS), SCAG has prepared population,
household, and employee projections for the region. Table 3.13-1 shows the employee
projections from 2012 to 2040 for the City of Downey.
Table 3.13-1
Employment Growth for the City of Downey
2012 2040
Employment 47,500 53,000
Source: SCAG 2016b.
The project would introduce 40 new employees to the City of Downey. This increase is
0.72% of SCAG’s overall projected growth of 5,500 employees for the City from 2012 to
2040. Therefore, employee growth is consistent with SCAG’s overall growth projections
and would not result in a substantial increase in population growth.
Further, the proposed project would generally connect to existing utilities and infrastructure
located adjacent to the project site. The proposed project would not construct new or extend
existing utilities or infrastructure into areas not currently served by such improvements.
PC Agenda Page 161
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
99 January 2017
Thus, the proposed project would not indirectly induce population growth and no impacts
associated with population growth inducement would occur.
b) Would the project displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
No Impact. The proposed project would neither displace existing housing nor necessitate
the construction of replacement housing. Therefore, no impact would occur.
c) Would the project displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
No Impact. There is currently no housing on the project site. As such, the site does not
support a residential population. Therefore, no impacts would occur.
3.14 Public Services
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES
a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered
governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance
objectives for any of the public services:
Fire protection?
Police protection?
Schools?
Parks?
Other public facilities?
a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the
provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or
physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios,
response times, or other performance objectives for any of the public services:
Fire protection?
Less Than Significant Impact. Fire protection and emergency medical response services
in the City are provided by the City of Downey Fire Department (DFD). DFD operates
out of four fire stations that house four engine companies, one truck company, two
PC Agenda Page 162
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
100 January 2017
paramedic squads, two Basic Life Support ambulances, one urban search and rescue unit,
and one command vehicle (City of Downey 2015). The City is divided into four districts,
with each district served primarily by one of the four stations. The project site is located
in District 2, which is served by Fire Station No. 2 (9556 Imperial Highway), located
approximately 1.2 miles northeast of the site.
The project site is already within the DFD service area. Once operational, the proposed
project would continue to be served by DFD. Additionally, as discussed in Section
3.13(a), the proposed project would not result in substantial population growth in the
City. Although the proposed project would potentially result in a slight increase in calls
for service to the project site in comparison to the existing conditions, this increase is
expected to be nominal and not to result in the need for new DFD facilities. Overall, it is
anticipated that the proposed project would be adequately served by existing DFD
facilities, equipment, and personnel. Therefore, impacts associated with the construction
or expansion of DFD facilities would be less than significant.
Police protection?
Less Than Significant Impact. In the City, police protection services are provided by the
Downey Police Department (DPD) (City of Downey 2005). The DPD operates out of its
headquarters located at 10911 Brookshire Avenue, roughly 0.7 miles northwest of the
project site.
The project site is already within the DPD service area, and once operational, the
proposed project would continue to be served by DPD. Additionally, the proposed project
would not result in substantial population growth in the City. Although the proposed
project would potentially result in a slight increase in calls for service to the project site
in comparison to the existing conditions, this increase is expected to be nominal and not
to result in the need for new DPD facilities. Overall, it is anticipated that the proposed
project would be adequately served by existing DPD facilities, equipment, and personnel.
Therefore, impacts associated with the construction or expansion of DPD facilities would
be less than significant.
Schools?
No Impact. Public kindergarten through high school education in the City is provided by
the Downey Unified School District. As previously discussed in Section 3.13(a), the
proposed project would not result in substantial population growth in the City. The
number of employees hired to construct and operate the proposed hotel would be
minimal. As such, a significant increase in school-age children requiring public education
PC Agenda Page 163
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
101 January 2017
is not expected to occur as a result of the proposed project. Therefore, no impacts
associated with the construction or expansion of Downey Unified School District
facilities would occur.
Parks?
No Impact. As further discussed in Section 3.15, Recreation, the proposed project would
not result in substantial population growth in the City. The number of employees hired to
construct and operate the proposed hotel would be minimal. As such, an increase in
patronage at park facilities is not expected. In addition, the number of hotel guests
visiting existing parks would be minimal. The proposed project also incorporates a pool.
Therefore, hotel members would be more inclined to use hotel facilities rather than
community parks. No impacts associated with the construction or expansion of park
facilities would occur.
Other public facilities?
No Impact. The proposed project would not result in substantial population growth in the
City. The number of employees hired to construct and operate the proposed hotel would
be minimal. As such, a substantial increase in patronage at libraries, community centers,
and other public facilities is not expected. Therefore, no impacts associated with the
construction or expansion of public facilities would occur.
3.15 Recreation
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
XV. RECREATION
a) Would the project increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or other
recreational facilities such that substantial physical
deterioration of the facility would occur or be
accelerated?
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?
PC Agenda Page 164
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
102 January 2017
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?
No Impact. The proposed project would not result in substantial population growth in the
City that would increase the use of existing parks and recreational facilities such that
substantial physical deterioration of recreational facilities would occur or be accelerated.
Additionally, due to the anticipated limited number of construction personnel, short-term
impacts to local recreational facilities would not occur. Therefore, substantial physical
deterioration of these facilities would not occur or be accelerated with implementation of
the proposed project; no impact would occur.
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?
No Impact. The proposed project would not result in substantial population growth in the
City. Further, the proposed project would not promote or indirectly induce new
development that would require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities.
Because the proposed project would not result in substantial population growth in the
City, it would not increase the demand for recreational facilities. As such, no impacts
would occur as a result of implementation of the proposed project.
3.16 Transportation and Traffic
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
XVI. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC – Would the project:
a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or
policy establishing measures of effectiveness for
the performance of the circulation system, taking
into account all modes of transportation including
mass transit and non-motorized travel and relevant
components of the circulation system, including
but not limited to intersections, streets, highways
and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and
mass transit?
b) Conflict with an applicable congestion
management program, including, but not limited to
level of service standards and travel demand
measures, or other standards established by the
county congestion management agency for
designated roads or highways?
PC Agenda Page 165
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
103 January 2017
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including
either an increase in traffic levels or a change in
location that results in substantial safety risks?
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design
feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g.,
farm equipment)?
e) Result in inadequate emergency access?
f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs
regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian
facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance
or safety of such facilities?
This analysis is based on the Marriott Springhill Suites 140-Unit Hotel Traffic Impact Analysis
prepared by Stantec (January 2017; included as Appendix F to this MND).
a) Would the project conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing
measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into
account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non-motorized
travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited
to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and
mass transit?
Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. The Traffic Impact Analysis
prepared for the proposed project analyzed Existing 2016/2017 year traffic operation in
the project area to provide a baseline for 2019 level of service (LOS). The project is
anticipated to be constructed in one phase to be completed by 2019. Baseline 2019 traffic
volumes have been developed by factoring Existing 2016/2017 volumes by an ambient
growth rate of 1% per year (for 2 years) and then adding traffic from identified future
development projects. Ten cumulative development projects were identified for the
project area.
To provide a detailed analysis of existing peak hour and Baseline 2019 year traffic
operation within the project area and to provide a baseline 2019 LOS, signalized
intersection LOS was determined using the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) method.
PC Agenda Page 166
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
104 January 2017
City of Downey Criteria
The City’s target minimum LOS is LOS D, which should be maintained during the peak
commute hours. Hence, any intersection operating at LOS E or F is considered deficient/
unsatisfactory. Based on projected traffic volumes in the City, many intersections are
expected to reach unacceptable LOS, defined as E or F. Therefore, the General Plan
advances programs to reduce congestion to provide acceptable LOS, defined as A, B, C,
or D (City of Downey 2005).
Los Angeles County Congestion Management Program Criteria
In addition to the General Plan, the standards and requirements of the Los Angeles
County Congestion Management Program (CMP) provide the basis for evaluating the
potential for project traffic impacts within the City. The CMP is a state-mandated
program that was enacted by the California Legislature with the passing of Proposition
111 in 1990. The program is intended to address the impact of local growth on the
regional transportation system. The CMP impact criteria apply for analysis of both
freeway and intersection monitoring locations. For the purposes of the CMP, a significant
impact would occur if the proposed project were to increase traffic demand on a CMP
facility by 2% of capacity causing LOS F; if the facility was already at LOS F, a
significant impact would occur if the proposed project were to increase traffic demand on
a CMP facility by 2% of capacity. The Lakewood Boulevard/Firestone Boulevard
intersection included in this analysis is currently identified in the Los Angeles County
CMP but does not meet this criterion for either Existing or Future No Project or With
Project conditions.
Study Area
Firestone Boulevard
The project site fronts Firestone Boulevard on the southeast. Firestone Boulevard is
designated a Major Arterial roadway per the City General Plan. Firestone Boulevard is a
six-lane divided roadway with a center raised median and provides three travel lanes in
the eastbound and westbound directions. On-street parking is prohibited on both sides of
the roadway and the posted speed limit is 35 mph. The intersection of Firestone
Boulevard and Lakewood Boulevard is a CMP intersection. Firestone Boulevard
currently provides full access to the vacant project site, which shares an access driveway
with the existing Dunkin’ Donuts shop to the northeast/southeast of the project site. There
is also an existing easement that provides access from this driveway to Fallas Parades,
Big Lots, and a Walgreens drugstore. The existing access driveway will be maintained
with development of the project.
PC Agenda Page 167
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
105 January 2017
Lakewood Boulevard
Lakewood Boulevard is designated a Major Arterial roadway per the City’s General
Plan. Lakewood Boulevard is a six-lane divided roadway with a center raised
landscaped median and provides three travel lanes in the northbound and southbound
directions. On-street parking is prohibited on both sides of the roadway, and the posted
speed limit is 40 mph.
Woodruff Avenue
Woodruff Avenue is located in the project area east of Lakewood Boulevard and
intersects with Firestone Boulevard. Woodruff Avenue is a designated Primary Arterial
roadway south of Firestone Boulevard and a collector road north of Firestone. The
alignment of Woodruff Avenue is discontinuous at Firestone Boulevard and creates two
offset intersections approximately 400 feet apart. Both intersections are included in this
analysis. South Woodruff Avenue provides two through lanes in each direction with a
continuous striped center two-way left-turn lane and separate left-turn lanes at
intersections. On-street parking is allowed only on the northbound side of the street and
the posted speed limit is 35 mph. North Woodruff Avenue provides one through lane in
each direction, with parking allowed on the east (northbound) side of the roadway only;
the posted speed limit is 30 mph.
Study Intersections
The key intersections selected for evaluation provide local and regional access to the
project area. The following intersections are included in the project area for analysis:
1. Lakewood Boulevard and Firestone Boulevard (signalized – CMP intersection)
2. North Woodruff Avenue and Firestone Boulevard (signalized)
3. South Woodruff Avenue and Firestone Boulevard (signalized)
The following on-site project access location is also included:
4. Firestone Boulevard and Project Access Driveway
Project access is provided to/from Firestone Boulevard via an existing right-in/right-out
access driveway with an opening in the raised median that provides a 90-foot-long two-
way left-turn lane. The driveway and drive aisle width at this location is 30 feet and it
would remain that width with implementation of the proposed project. The planned on-
site circulation for delivery trucks and vans is to use this driveway and the two-way aisle
PC Agenda Page 168
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
106 January 2017
to access a minimum 20-foot-wide one-way drive aisle to a loading zone. Trucks and
vans would depart the site via this same one-way aisle, looping around the hotel building
and returning to the Firestone Boulevard driveway.
Existing Traffic Volumes
For Existing 2016/2017 conditions, the Lakewood Boulevard/Firestone Boulevard
intersection is operating at LOS C during both the AM and PM peak hours. Both the North
Woodruff Avenue/Firestone Boulevard and South Woodruff Avenue/Firestone Boulevard
intersections are operating at LOS B and/or better during both AM/PM peak hours with
Existing (2016/2017) traffic volumes and improvements. The Existing weekday 24-hour
traffic volumes on Firestone Boulevard are approximately 38,300 and 46,300 vehicles per
day to the east and west of Lakewood Boulevard, respectively, and approximately 38,300
vehicles per day to the east of South Woodruff Avenue. These volumes are below the
capacity of this roadway (which is approximately 54,000 vehicles per day). The Existing
weekday 24-hour volumes along Lakewood Boulevard south of Firestone Boulevard are
approximately 45,000, which is also below the capacity of this roadway (approximately
54,000 vehicles per day).
Cumulative Project Traffic Volumes
The City has identified 10 cumulative development projects within the project area.
Cumulative development projects, as defined by CEQA Guidelines Section 15355, are
“closely related past, present and reasonably foreseeable probable future projects.” The
Traffic Impact Analysis assumes that these cumulative development projects will be
developed and operational when the proposed project is operational.
Project Traffic Characteristics
The upper part of Table 3.16-1 summarizes the trip generation rates (ITE 2012) used in
forecasting the vehicular trips generated by the proposed project, and the lower part
presents the forecast daily and peak hour project traffic volumes. The trip generation
potential for the proposed project was forecast using the Institute of Transportation
Engineers’ Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition.
As shown in Table 3.16-1, project buildout is expected to generate 94 total trips (55
inbound, 39 outbound) during the AM peak hour, while generating 98 total trips (48
inbound, 50 outbound) during the PM peak hour. Additionally, the project is expected to
generate 1,249 average daily trips upon buildout.
PC Agenda Page 169
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
107 January 2017
Table 3.16-1
Hotel – Trip Generation Summary
Trip Generation Rates
Land Use Unit
ITE
Land
Code Quantity
Daily
Rate
AM Peak Hour Split PM Peak Hour Split
Rate In Out Rate In Out
Hotel Rooms 310 140 8.92 0.67 58% 42% 0.70 49% 51%
Project Trip Generation
Land Use Quantity ADT
AM Peak Hour Volume PM Peak Hour Volume
Total In Out Total In Out
Hotel 140 1,249 94 55 39 98 48 50
Source: ITE 2012.
Notes: ITE = Institute of Transportation Engineers; ADT = average daily trips.
Project Trip Distribution and Assignment
Thirty percent of project traffic is assigned to/from the southeast and 25% to/from the
northwest via Firestone Boulevard. Fifteen percent is assigned to/from the southwest and
20% to/from the northeast via Lakewood Boulevard. Five percent is assigned to/from
both the northeast and south via North Woodruff Avenue and South Woodruff Avenue,
respectively. One hundred percent of trips are assumed to use the single driveway that
provides direct access to the project site.
Intersection Capacity Analysis
Existing 2016/2017 Conditions
Table 3.16-2 shows that the Lakewood Boulevard/Firestone Boulevard intersection is
currently operating at LOS C during the AM peak hour and D during the PM peak hour.
The North Woodruff Avenue/Firestone Boulevard intersection is operating at LOS B
during both peak hours with Existing 2016/2017 traffic volumes and improvements. The
South Woodruff Avenue/Firestone Boulevard intersection is operating at LOS A during
the AM peak hour and LOS B during the PM peak hour.
Table 3.16-2
Existing 2016/2017 LOS at Study Area Intersections (Signalized)
Intersections
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
ICU LOS ICU LOS
1. Lakewood Boulevard/Firestone Boulevard 0.75 C 0.89 D
2. N. Woodruff Avenue/Firestone Boulevard 0.62 B 0.67 B
3. S. Woodruff Avenue/Firestone Boulevard 0.54 A 0.67 B
LOS = level of service; ICU = Intersection Capacity Utilization.
PC Agenda Page 170
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
108 January 2017
Baseline 2019 Conditions
To analyze Baseline 2019 (no project) conditions on the existing circulation network, an
ambient growth factor of 1% per year has been applied to 2016/2017 volumes, and
cumulative traffic from other known development projects that passes through the study
area intersections has been added to the forecasts. The results of this analysis are shown
in Table 3.16-3.
Table 3.16-3 shows that study area intersection LOS for Baseline 2019 conditions is the
same as Existing (2016/2017) conditions with one exception. At the Firestone Boulevard/
Lakewood Boulevard intersection, the forecast LOS is expected to decline from Existing
LOS D to LOS E in the PM peak hour. This is due to the traffic volume generated by the
relatively large number (10) of cumulative development projects that were identified and
have been included in this study. AM peak hour LOS at Firestone Boulevard/Lakewood
Boulevard remains the same as for Existing (2016/2017) conditions (LOS C). The
Baseline 2019 study area intersection and roadway configurations are considered to be
the same as the Existing (2016/2017) network.
Table 3.16-3
Baseline 2019 LOS at Study Area Intersections (Signalized)
Intersections
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
ICU LOS ICU LOS
1. Lakewood Boulevard/Firestone Boulevard 0.80 C 0.97 E
2. N. Woodruff Avenue/Firestone Boulevard 0.64 B 0.70 B
3. S. Woodruff Avenue/Firestone Boulevard 0.55 A 0.70 B
LOS = level of service; ICU = Intersection Capacity Utilization.
Bold indicates unacceptable ICU/LOS.
Existing 2016/2017 With Project Conditions
Table 3.16-4 summarizes the peak hour LOS results at the key study intersections for
Existing 2016/2017 traffic conditions with and without the project. Table 3.16-4 shows
that with the forecasted Existing (2016/2017) With Project peak hour volumes, all the
intersections will continue to operate at the same LOS as existing conditions during both
peak hours. All intersections in the study area will continue to operate at LOS C or better
with the exception of the Lakewood Boulevard/Firestone Boulevard intersection, which
operates at LOS D in the PM peak hour both with and without the project. Therefore,
impacts would be less than significant.
PC Agenda Page 171
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
109 January 2017
Table 3.16-4
Existing and Existing With Project 2016/2017 LOS at Study Area Intersections (Signalized)
Intersections
Existing 2016/2017 Existing 2016/2017 With Project
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS
1. Lakewood Boulevard/Firestone Boulevard 0.75 C 0.89 D 0.75 C 0.89 D
2. N. Woodruff Avenue/Firestone Boulevard 0.62 B 0.67 B 0.62 B 0.67 B
3. S. Woodruff Avenue/Firestone Boulevard 0.54 A 0.67 B 0.54 A 0.68 B
LOS = level of service; ICU = Intersection Capacity Utilization.
Baseline With Project 2019 Conditions
Table 3.16-5 shows the results of intersection LOS analysis for Baseline With Project
2019 peak hour traffic conditions. Table 3.16-5 shows that with forecast Baseline With
Project 2019 peak hour volumes, the study intersections will continue to operate at
acceptable LOS C or higher, with Lakewood Boulevard/Firestone Boulevard being an
exception. The LOS at Lakewood Boulevard/Firestone Boulevard is predicted to decline
by one service level from LOS C to LOS D in the AM peak hour, and remain unchanged
at LOS E in the PM peak hour.
The forecast project PM peak hour ICU/LOS of 0.97/E at the Lakewood Boulevard/
Firestone Boulevard intersection does not meet City’s target LOS criterion of LOS D or
better. LOS D would be exceeded during the PM peak hour because of project traffic
volumes and the volumes generated by the 10 cumulative development projects included
in this study. Therefore, mitigation is required to meet minimum LOS criterion at this
intersection for Baseline With Project 2019 PM peak hour traffic conditions.
The City has identified a future planned improvement to this intersection. This
improvement would provide a second left-turn lane on both the northbound and
southbound approaches of Lakewood Boulevard. Table 3.16-5 shows that with this planned
improvement, the impact of the proposed project and cumulative development project
traffic volumes would be mitigated and PM peak hour ICU/LOS would improve to 0.86/D.
PC Agenda Page 172
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
110 January 2017
Table 3.16-5
Baseline and Baseline With Project 2019 LOS at Study Area Intersections (Signalized)
Signalized Intersections
Baseline 2019 Baseline With Project 2019
AM Peak
Hour
PM Peak
Hour
AM Peak
Hour
PM Peak
Hour
ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS ICU LOS
1. Lakewood Boulevard/Firestone Boulevard 0.80 C 0.97 E 0.81 D 0.97 E
1. Lakewood Boulevard/Firestone Boulevard with improvement
(second left-turn lanes on NB/SB Lakewood Boulevard
approaches)
— — — — 0.75 C 0.86 D
2. N. Woodruff Avenue/Firestone Boulevard 0.64 B 0.70 B 0.64 B 0.71 C
3. S. Woodruff Avenue/Firestone Boulevard 0.55 A 0.70 B 0.56 A 0.70 B
LOS = level of service; ICU = Intersection Capacity Utilization.
Bold indicates unacceptable ICU/LOS.
A fair-share contribution would mitigate impacts to the Lakewood Boulevard/Firestone
Boulevard intersection, contributing to the implementation of dual left-turn lanes on the
Lakewood Boulevard north–south approaches (MM-TR-1). This fair-share contribution is
based on the percentage of the proposed project’s PM peak hour traffic generation at the
intersection to the total PM peak hour traffic at the intersection generated by the project
and cumulative projects. Based on the total forecast PM peak hour development volumes
at the intersection, the project’s fair-share contribution is estimated at 13.33%.
MM-TR-1 The project applicant shall contribute its fair share (estimated at 13.33%)
or appropriate share toward the improvement of the intersection of
Lakewood Boulevard and Firestone Boulevard. The identified
improvement is to add second left-turn lanes on the northbound and
southbound approaches of Lakewood Boulevard.
With implementation of MM-TR-1, the project’s impact relating to conflict with an
applicable plan, ordinance, or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the
performance of the circulation system would be less than significant.
b) Would the project conflict with an applicable congestion management program,
including, but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or
other standards established by the county congestion management agency for
designated roads or highways?
Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. As discussed in Section 3.16(a), the
CMP intersection of Lakewood Boulevard/Firestone Boulevard would operate at an
PC Agenda Page 173
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
111 January 2017
unacceptable LOS E during the PM peak hour in the Future With Project condition;
however, with implementation of MM-TR-1, impacts would be less than significant.
c) Would the project result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase
in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks?
No Impact. The proposed project consists of constructing a hotel on a vacant site. The
nearest airports to the proposed project are Compton–Woodley Airport, approximately
8 miles away, and Fullerton Municipal Airport, approximately 9 miles away. Due to the
distance of the project site from these airports, most planes would be at a high enough
altitude to not be impacted by the proposed project. The proposed project does not project
lights into the sky or have any other feature that could disrupt existing air traffic patterns.
The project would have no impact on air traffic patterns.
d) Would the project substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp
curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project consists of constructing a hotel on a
vacant site. Vehicular access to the site would be provided by an existing driveway from
Firestone Boulevard. The project would not generate incompatible uses with the
surrounding commercial area. The access point has been designed consistently with the
City’s circulation standards and does not create a hazard for vehicles, bicycles, or
pedestrians entering or exiting the site. An analysis using AutoTurn software confirmed
that a single-unit, 30-foot (SU-30) vehicle can be accommodated within the 11.5-foot
outside lane on Firestone Boulevard and can negotiate the intended on-site truck/van
circulation route. SU-30 or other large vehicles may also require that outgoing vehicles
yield to trucks at the driveway entrance. The two-way drive aisles for access to hotel
parking on the north of the site are 25 feet in width, which is desirable for two-way
access to 90° parking. For these reasons, the project would have a less than significant
impact related to design hazards or incompatible uses.
e) Would the project result in inadequate emergency access?
Less Than Significant Impact. The site is located in an established, developed area with
ample access for emergency service providers. Project access to/from Firestone
Boulevard is provided via an existing right-in/right-out access driveway with an opening
in the raised median that provides a 90-foot-long two-way left-turn lane. The driveway
and drive aisle width at this location is 30 feet, and it would remain that width with
implementation of the proposed project. The planned on-site circulation for delivery
trucks and vans is to use this driveway and the two-way aisle to access a minimum 20-
PC Agenda Page 174
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
112 January 2017
foot-wide one-way drive aisle to a loading zone. Trucks and vans will depart the site via
this same one-way aisle, looping around the hotel building and returning to the Firestone
Boulevard driveway. Thus, there is sufficient room for vans, trucks, and emergency
vehicles to access the site and maneuver around the site. For these reasons, the project
would have a less than significant impact related to emergency access.
f) Would the project conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public
transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety
of such facilities?
Less Than Significant Impact. The project’s access point has been designed consistently
with the City’s circulation standards and would not conflict with any adopted policies,
plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities. There is
currently no plan to shut down the sidewalk in front of the project site during
construction. However, in accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act
requirements for accessibility in temporary traffic control zones, if sidewalks are
removed from public circulation as a result of construction activities, then the project
contractor would be required to clearly delineate an alternative circulation route location
and provide any instruction required for its use. There are no striped bike lanes on
Firestone Boulevard along the project frontage. Once constructed, the proposed project
would not impact public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities. Therefore, the project
would not conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit,
bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, and impacts would be less than significant.
3.17 Utilities and Service Systems
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
XVII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS – Would the project:
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the
applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?
b) Require or result in the construction of new water
or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of
existing facilities, the construction of which could
cause significant environmental effects?
c) Require or result in the construction of new storm
water drainage facilities or expansion of existing
facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the
project from existing entitlements and resources, or
are new or expanded entitlements needed?
PC Agenda Page 175
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
113 January 2017
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
e) Result in a determination by the wastewater
treatment provider, which serves or may serve the
project that it has adequate capacity to serve the
project’s projected demand in addition to the
provider’s existing commitments?
f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted
capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste
disposal needs?
g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and
regulations related to solid waste?
a) Would the project exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable
Regional Water Quality Control Board?
Less Than Significant Impact. Wastewater produced within the City is composed
primarily of effluent water generated from the City’s various customers (i.e., residential,
commercial, industrial). The quantity of wastewater generated is related to the population
and the water use within the corresponding service area. Upon generation, wastewater is
transferred by way of service connections (i.e., laterals) and collection mains to trunk
sewers and interceptors. Sewer connections (laterals) are privately owned, operated, and
maintained, while collection mains and trunk sewers are owned, operated, and maintained
by the City and the Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County (LACSD), respectively
(City of Downey 2012c).
The City’s sanitary sewer system is composed of approximately 200 miles of sewer
collection mains, 4,300 manholes, two lift stations, and other associated facilities. The
piping is primarily composed of vitrified clay, and ranges in diameter from 6 inches to 21
inches, with the majority (90%) of the piping at 8 inches wide. LACSD owns, operates,
and maintains a network of approximately 27 miles of trunk sewers that range from 10
inches to 78 inches in diameter within the City (City of Downey 2012c).
In addition to providing sewage conveyance via trunk sewers and interceptors, LACSD
provides treatment services for the City. LACSD owns and operates a total of 10 water
reclamation plants (WRPs) and a main processing plant, which form an interconnected
network known as the Joint Outfall System. Sewer systems within the Joint Outfall
System convey wastewater to WRPs for water reclamation and hydraulic relief, or flow
directly to the main processing facility, the Joint Water Pollution Control Plant, for
secondary treatment and solids processing. Wastewater generated within the City is
PC Agenda Page 176
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
114 January 2017
ultimately sent to either Los Coyotes WRP or the Joint Water Pollution Control Plant,
depending on the location of the site producing the waste (City of Downey 2012c).
Los Coyotes WRP, which began operation in 1970, has a treatment capacity of
approximately 37.5 million gallons per day (MGD) and provides disinfected tertiary-
treated effluent. The Los Coyotes WRP serves a regional population of approximately
370,000 people and produced an average of 24.16 MGD (27,059 AFY) of disinfected
tertiary-treated recycled water during FY 2009–2010. An average of 5.23 MGD (5,855
AFY), or 21.6% of the recycled water produced during FY 2009–2010 at the Los Coyotes
WRP, was reused for landscape irrigation, industrial applications, and groundwater
replenishment. The level of treatment necessary for wastewater to be reused as recycled
water requires approval by the California Department of Public Health. These
requirements are contained in California Code of Regulations Title 22, along with a list
of approved recycled water uses. LACSD conducts extensive monitoring to ensure
compliance with all applicable federal, state, and local water quality regulations. Any
recycled water generated from the Los Coyotes WRP that is not reused is dechlorinated
and discharged to the ocean via the San Gabriel River. Discharge water meets all
applicable federal, state, and local water quality standards for discharge water, including
NPDES requirements. Waste solids generated from the treatment processes at the Los
Coyotes WRP are transferred via trunk sewers to the Joint Water Pollution Control Plant
for solids processing (City of Downey 2012c).
According to LACSD (2016), hotel uses generate approximately 125 gallons per day
(GPD) of wastewater per 1,000 square feet. As such, the proposed project would produce
roughly 11,106.3 GPD of wastewater. As previously discussed, wastewater generated
within the City is treated at Los Coyotes WRP, which has a treatment capacity of 37.5
MGD. Thus, the proposed project’s wastewater generation would represent a nominal
percentage of Los Coyotes WRP’s permitted treatment capacity. Operation of Los
Coyotes WRP is monitored continuously to ensure adherence with all applicable federal,
state, and local water quality regulations, and all discharge is permitted in accordance
with all relevant NPDES requirements. Therefore, impacts associated with wastewater
treatment requirements would be less than significant.
PC Agenda Page 177
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
115 January 2017
b) Would the project require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater
treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could
cause significant environmental effects?
Water Treatment
Less Than Significant Impact. Groundwater from the Central Basin is pumped from
wells located within the City’s boundaries and provides the City with its principal source
of potable water. The groundwater available to the City is good quality and is currently
extracted and pumped directly into the water transmission and distribution systems
without disinfection or treatment of any kind.
Beginning in FY 2000–2001, groundwater became the sole source of drinking water for
the City. Due to the high cost of the imported CBMWD water, the City intends to rely
solely on its groundwater wells to meet the potable-water demand of its customers in the
future. Considering the high quality of the groundwater that would serve the proposed
project, no additional water treatment facilities would be required as a result of project
water demand. Therefore, impacts associated with domestic water treatment facilities
would be less than significant.
In the event the proposed project uses treated recycled water to meet landscape irrigation
demands, recycled water would be provided by Los Coyotes WRP. Los Coyotes WRP
produced an average of 24.16 MGD (27,059 AFY) of disinfected tertiary-treated recycled
water during FY 2009–2010. An average of 5.23 MGD (5,855 AFY), or 21.6% of the
recycled water produced during FY 2009–2010 at Los Coyotes WRP, was reused for
landscape irrigation, industrial applications, and groundwater replenishment. Thus, the
proposed project’s recycled water demands would represent a nominal percentage of the
total amount of treated recycled water produced by Los Coyotes WRP, and no additional
recycled water treatment facilities would be required as a result of the project. Therefore,
impacts associated with recycled water treatment facilities would be less than significant.
Wastewater Treatment
As previously addressed in Section 3.17(a), according to LACSD (2016), the proposed
project would produce approximately 11,106.3 GPD of wastewater. Wastewater
generated within the City is treated at Los Coyotes WRP, which has a treatment capacity
of 37.5 MGD. Thus, the proposed project’s wastewater generation would represent a
nominal percentage of Los Coyotes WRP’s permitted treatment capacity, and no
additional wastewater treatment facilities would be required as a result of the project’s
PC Agenda Page 178
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
116 January 2017
wastewater generation. Therefore, impacts associated with wastewater treatment facilities
would be less than significant.
c) Would the project require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage
facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project would incorporate a newly
engineered stormwater drainage system, various BMPs, and LID techniques. Prior to the
operation of the proposed project, the City will review this stormwater drainage and
treatment system to ensure that post-development stormwater flows do not exceed pre-
development flows, consistent with Municipal Code requirements. This new stormwater
drainage system is an ancillary component of the overall proposed project, and all
associated improvements would be contained on the project site. As such, any potential
environmental effects as a result of construction and operation of this new stormwater
drainage system are discussed and evaluated in this MND, and no new or additional
impacts, outside of those already addressed and analyzed in this document, would occur.
Therefore, impacts associated with construction or expansion of stormwater drainage
facilities would be less than significant.
d) Would the project have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from
existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed?
Less Than Significant Impact. Groundwater from the Central Basin is pumped from
wells located within the City’s boundaries and provides the City with its principal source
of potable water. The groundwater available to the City is good quality and is currently
extracted and pumped directly into the water transmission and distribution systems
without disinfection or treatment of any kind (City of Downey 2012c).
Beginning in FY 2000–2001, groundwater became the sole source of drinking water for
the City. Due to the high cost of imported CBMWD water, the City intends to rely solely
on its groundwater wells to meet the potable-water demand of its customers in the future.
However, the City will continue to maintain its imported water connections with
CBMWD by paying readiness-to-serve and capacity charges to CBMWD in case this
water is needed for emergency purposes. Emergency interconnections with adjacent
water agencies are also maintained and serve as supplemental sources of water in the
event of an emergency (City of Downey 2012c).
The City also purchases recycled water from CBMWD and resells the recycled water to
its customers at a 15% discount from the current rate for domestic water to help promote
PC Agenda Page 179
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
117 January 2017
this potable-water conservation measure. Recycled water is currently used for irrigation
of landscaping and in several park ponds within the City and makes up approximately 4%
of the City’s overall water demand (City of Downey 2012c).
In the Central Basin Judgment, the Superior Court fixed allowable withdrawals from the
Central Basin at a level that was greater than the amount of water returned to the Central
Basin through natural replenishment. With a total allowed pumping limit of 217,000
AFY, approximately 80,000 AFY must be artificially replenished in order to maintain a
safe yield of 137,000 AFY in the Central Basin. The adjudication allocated the portion of
the 217,000 AFY each pumper could extract (City of Downey 2012c).
The limit to the amount of groundwater that each pumper is allowed to extract from the
Central Basin on an annual basis is referred to as the allowed pumping allocation (APA),
which corresponds to 80% of the party’s total water rights. The Central Basin Judgment
contains provisions for exceedance of the APA in the event of an emergency. It also
allows for a carryover of any unused APA, which is not to exceed 20% of the purveyor’s
APA. A purveyor may also extract an additional 10% of its APA with the understanding
that this additional amount will be deducted from its APA for the upcoming year (City of
Downey 2012c).
The California Department of Water Resources (DWR), Southern Division, was appointed
Watermaster of the Central Basin. As such, DWR has the responsibility for ensuring that
parties adhere to the terms and conditions stipulated by the Central Basin Judgment. In
addition to DWR’s role as Watermaster, the Water Replenishment District of Southern
California (WRD) and Los Angeles County Department of Public Works (LACDPW) have
some responsibilities for groundwater management in the Central Basin. WRD is
responsible for purchasing groundwater replenishment water and may address water quality
issues in the Central Basin. In order to fund the expense of purchasing imported and
recycled water and associated administrative costs, WRD charges a replenishment
assessment on each acre-foot of water extracted from the Central Basin. Groundwater
replenishment operations are provided by LACDPW, and replenishment water is paid for
through revenues raised by the WRD (City of Downey 2012c).
The City of Downey was one of the original parties to the Central Basin Judgment and
has acquired additional water rights since then, resulting in an APA of 16,554 AFY (FY
2009–2010). The City has 20 active wells, which it uses to pump groundwater from the
Central Basin. These wells are located throughout the City and have a combined
production capacity of approximately 53,211 AFY (based on continuous operations)
(City of Downey 2012c).
PC Agenda Page 180
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
118 January 2017
The City’s 2010 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) provided multiple-dry-year
supply-and-demand analysis for the City’s domestic water service area. As shown in
Table 3.9-1 (see Section 3.9, Hydrology and Water Quality), the City’s supplies can meet
demand during multiple dry years for the next 20 years.
As previously addressed, the flexibility afforded by the Central Basin Judgment through
its 20% carryover and 10% emergency exceedance provisions, coupled with the City’s
corresponding groundwater pumping and leasing practices, enables the City to meet its
water demand under this multiple-dry-year scenario over the next 20 years.
In its UWMP, the City estimated that commercial uses within its water service area
would demand an average of 1.53 AFY per account in 2015, 1.49 AFY per account in
2020, 1.48 AFY per account in 2025, and 1.47 AFY per account in 2030. Thus, as a
commercial use, it is expected that the proposed project could demand approximately
1.53 AFY of water. As discussed previously, groundwater is the sole source of domestic
water for the City. Nonetheless, as stated in the UWMP and summarized in Table 3.9-1,
the proposed project’s water demand would represent a nominal percentage of the City’s
current and future supplies, and overall, the City has the water supplies to adequately
serve the project. Therefore, impacts associated with the City’s water supplies would be
less than significant.
e) Would the project result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider,
which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the
project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project would produce approximately
11,106.3 GPD of wastewater. Wastewater generated within the City is treated at Los
Coyotes WRP, which has a treatment capacity of 37.5 MGD. Thus, the proposed
project’s wastewater generation represents a nominal percentage of Los Coyotes WRP’s
permitted treatment capacity, and no additional wastewater treatment facilities would be
required as a result of project wastewater generation. Therefore, impacts associated with
wastewater treatment capacity would be less than significant.
f) Would the project be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to
accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs?
Less Than Significant Impact. The closest landfill facility to the proposed project is
the Savage Canyon Landfill in the City of Whittier. This 132-acre landfill facility is
permitted to accept municipal solid waste, and based on proximity could serve the
PC Agenda Page 181
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
119 January 2017
proposed project. Savage Canyon Landfill has a permitted throughput of 3,350 tons per
day and approximately 9,500,000 cubic yards of remaining capacity (CalRecycle 2015).
Large hotels on average generate 5,049 pounds of waste material per employee per year. Of
the total waste generation, approximately 23%, or 1,145 pounds, is diverted per employee
per year (CIWMB 2006). Assuming that the proposed project will employ a maximum of
40 employees, the project could produce approximately 201,960 pounds (100.98 tons) of
solid waste per year, or 553 pounds (0.28 tons) per day. Note that these estimates represent
a conservative, worst-case scenario and do not include credit for the diversion requirements
set forth by Assembly Bill 939 (see Section 3.17(g)). Nonetheless, the proposed project’s
estimated waste generation (without diversion) equates to a nominal percentage of Savage
Canyon Landfill’s 3,350 tons per day of permitted throughput. Therefore, impacts
associated with landfill capacity would be less than significant.
g) Would the project comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related
to solid waste?
No Impact. All collection, transportation, and disposal of solid waste generated by the
proposed project would comply with all applicable federal, state, and local statutes and
regulations. In particular, Assembly Bill 939 requires that at least 50% of solid waste
generated by a jurisdiction be diverted from landfill disposal through source reduction,
recycling, or composting. Regional agencies, counties, and cities are required to develop
a waste management plan that would achieve a 50% diversion from landfills (California
Public Resources Code, Section 40000 et seq.).
Solid waste generated in the City is collected and transported by the City’s solid waste
removal franchisee, which is permitted and licensed to collect and transport solid waste.
Once collected, solid waste is transported to sorting/disposal facilities permitted to accept
residential and commercial solid waste, with each facility’s operations routinely
inspected by regional and state regulatory agencies for compliance with all applicable
statutes and regulations. Therefore, no impacts associated with solid waste statutes and
regulations would occur.
PC Agenda Page 182
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
120 January 2017
3.18 Mandatory Findings of Significance
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
XVIII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the
quality of the environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or
wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining
levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
community, reduce the number or restrict the
range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or
eliminate important examples of the major periods
of California history or prehistory?
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
will cause substantial adverse effects on human
beings, either directly or indirectly?
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment,
substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or
animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history
or prehistory?
Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. As discussed in this MND,
biological and cultural (historic) impacts are less than significant. Archaeological impacts
would be less than significant with the incorporation of mitigation (see Section 3.5).
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.)
Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. As determined in the analysis
presented in this MND, after incorporation of mitigation, the proposed project would not
PC Agenda Page 183
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
121 January 2017
result in significant impacts in any resource areas; therefore, there would be no
cumulatively considerable effects.
c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse
effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Based on the analysis in this
MND, for all resource topics the proposed project would have no impact, less than
significant impacts, or less than significant impacts with incorporation of mitigation
measures. Therefore, substantial adverse impacts on human beings would not occur as a
result of the proposed project.
PC Agenda Page 184
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
122 January 2017
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
PC Agenda Page 185
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
123 January 2017
4 REFERENCES AND PREPARERS
4.1 References Cited
Bergerson, pers. comm. 2016. Email from Tom Bergerson (Principal Architects Orange) and
Guillermo Arreola (Senior Planner, City of Downey) to Caitlin Munson (Project
Manager, Dudek) re: Construction Scenario. December 19, 2016.
14 CCR 15000–15387 and Appendices A–L. Guidelines for Implementation of the California
Environmental Quality Act, as amended.
33 U.S.C. 1251–1387. Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended (commonly referred to
as the Clean Water Act).
Airnav.com. 2016. “Goodyear Blimp Base Airport (FAA Identifier 64CL).” Accessed January
2017. http://www.airnav.com/airport/64cl.
Blumenthal, D. 2016b. “Downey Burials.” Email from D. Blumenthal (City of Downey) to
R. Struglia and C. Munson (Dudek). May 1, 2016.
California Health and Safety Code, Section 7050.5–7055. Division 7: Dead Bodies; Part 1:
General Provisions; Chapter 2: General Provisions.
California Health and Safety Code, Section, 25500–25520. Chapter 6.95: Hazardous Materials
Release Response Plans and Inventory; Article 1: Business and Area Plans.
California Public Resources Code, Sections 21000–21177. California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA), as amended.
California Public Resources Code, Sections 40000–40004. Part 1: Integrated Waste
Management; Chapter 1: General Provisions. Article 1: Findings and Declarations.
CalRecycle (California Resources Recycling and Recovery Program). 2015. “Facility/Site
Summary Details: Savage Canyon Landfill (19-AH-0001).” Accessed August 2015.
http://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/SWFacilities/Directory/19-AH-0001/Detail/.
Caltrans (California Department of Transportation). 1997. Transportation Project-Level Carbon
Monoxide Protocol. Prepared by the Institute of Transportation Studies, University of
California, Davis. Davis, California: Institute of Transportation Studies. Revised
December 1997.
PC Agenda Page 186
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
124 January 2017
Caltrans. 2016. “Officially Designated State Scenic Highways.” California Scenic Highways
Mapping System. Accessed March 2016. http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LandArch/
16_livability/scenic_highways/.
CAPCOA (California Air Pollution Control Officers Association). 2008. CEQA & Climate
Change: Evaluating and Addressing Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Projects Subject to
the California Environmental Quality Act. January 2008.
CARB (California Air Resources Board). 2008. Climate Change Scoping Plan: A Framework
for Change. December 12, 2008. http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/document/
scopingplandocument.htm.
CARB. 2015. “Area Designation Maps/State and National.” Maps dated December 2015. Last
reviewed May 5, 2016. http://www.arb.ca.gov/desig/adm/adm.htm.
CDOC (California Department of Conservation). 1999. “State of California Seismic Zones:
South Gate Quadrangle.” March 25, 1999. http://gmw.consrv.ca.gov/shmp/download/
quad/SOUTH_GATE/maps/ozn_sgate.pdf.
CDOC. 2016. “Division of Oil, Gas & Geothermal Resources Well Finder.” CDOC, Division of
Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources. Accessed January 2017.
http://maps.conservation.ca.gov/doggr.
City of Downey. 1978. Downey Municipal Code. Adopted July 25, 1978. http://qcode.us/
codes/downey/.
City of Downey. 1992. City of Downey Lakewood/Firestone Specific Plan 91-2. March 1992.
City of Downey. 2004. Downey Vision 2025 Comprehensive General Plan Update
Environmental Impact Report. SCH No. 2004031159. Prepared by The Planning Center.
Costa Mesa, California: The Planning Center. July 28, 2014. Accessed August 2015.
http://www.downeyca.org/_blobcache/0000/0005/4877.pdf.
City of Downey. 2005. Downey Vision 2025 General Plan. Adopted January 25, 2005. Accessed
August 2015. http://www.downeyca.org/gov/cd/planning/general_plan_n_map/.
City of Downey. 2012a. “General Plan Land Use Map.” Community Development Department –
Planning Division. Updated October 5, 2012. http://www.downeyca.org/_blobcache/
0000/0005/5150.pdf.
PC Agenda Page 187
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
125 January 2017
City of Downey. 2012b. “Zoning Map.” Community Development Department – Planning
Division. Updated October 3, 2012. http://www.downeyca.org/_blobcache/
0000/0005/5149.pdf.
City of Downey. 2012c. City of Downey 2010 Urban Water Management Plan. January 2012.
Accessed August 2015. http://www.water.ca.gov/urbanwatermanagement/2010uwmps/
Downey,%20City%20of/DowneyUWMP(Final).pdf.
City of Downey. 2015. “Downey Fire Department.” Accessed February 10, 2016.
http://www.downeyca.org/gov/fire/about/default.asp.
CIWMB (California Integrated Waste Management Board). 2006. Targeted Statewide Waste
Characterization Study: Waste Disposal and Diversion Findings for Selected Industry
Groups. June 2006. Accessed August 2015. http://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/Publications/
Documents/Disposal/34106006.pdf.
CNRA (California Natural Resources Agency). 2009a. “Notice of Public Hearings and Notice of
Proposed Amendment of Regulations Implementing the California Environmental
Quality Act.” Sacramento, California: CNRA. Accessed August 2015.
http://resources.ca.gov/ceqa/docs/Notice_of_Proposed_Action.pdf.
CNRA. 2009b. “Final Statement of Reasons for Regulatory Action: Amendments to the State
CEQA Guidelines Addressing Analysis and Mitigation of Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Pursuant to SB97.” Sacramento, California: CNRA. December 2009. Accessed August
2015. http://resources.ca.gov/ceqa/docs/Final_Statement_of_Reasons.pdf.
County of Los Angeles. 2012. County of Los Angeles Bicycle Master Plan Program
Environmental Impact Report. January 2012. Accessed January 4, 2017.
http://file.lacounty.gov/bos/supdocs/66518.pdf.
Dibblee, T.W., and H.E. Ehrenspeck. 2001 “Geologic Map of the Whittier and La Habra
Quadrangles (Western Puente Hills)” [map]. Los Angeles and Orange Counties,
California: Dibblee Geological Foundation. Dibblee Foundation Map DF-74. 1:24,000.
Dorrler, A., and M. Hale. 2016. Cultural Resources Study for the Aldi Food Market Project, City
of Downey, Los Angeles County, California. On file at Dudek, Encinitas, California.
Dudek. 2016. ALDI Food Market Mitigated Negative Declaration PLN-15-00182. Prepared by
Dudek for the City of Downey. May 2016.
PC Agenda Page 188
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
126 January 2017
EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 2010. “NPDES Permit Writers’ Manual.”
Accessed January 3, 2016. https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-
09/documents/pwm_2010.pdf.
EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 2016. “Region 9: Air Quality Analysis, Air
Quality Maps.” Last updated April 27, 2016. http://www.epa.gov/region9/air/maps/.
FHWA (Federal Highway Administration). 2004. FHWA Traffic Noise Model, Version 2.5.
Washington DC: FHWA Office of Environment and Planning. February 2004.
FTA (Federal Transit Administration). 2006. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment.
FTA-VA-90-1003-06. May 2006. Accessed January 2017. http://www.fta.dot.gov/
documents/FTA_Noise_and_Vibration_Manual.pdf.
ITE (Institute of Transportation Engineers). 2012. Trip Generation Manual. 9th ed.
Washington DC: ITE.
Kirkwood Christian Schools. 2017. Website. http://kirkwoodchristianschools.org/.
LACSD ( Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County). 2016. “County Sanitation District No. 3
Service Charge Report for Fiscal Year 2015–2016.” Accessed February 2016.
http://www.lacsd.org/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?blobid=8968.
NETR (National Environmental Title Research, LLC). 2017 Historic Aerials. Accessed January
7, 2017. http://www.historicaerials.com/.
Orange County ALUC (Orange County Airport Land Use Commission). 2004. Airport Environs
Land Use Plan for Fullerton Municipal Airport. Amended November 18, 2004.
SCAG (Southern California Association of Governments). 2012. “Adopted 2012 RTP Growth
Forecast Appendix.” Adopted April 2012. http://rtpscs.scag.ca.gov/Documents/2012/
final/SR/2012fRTP_GrowthForecast.pdf.
SCAG. 2016a. 2016–2040 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy: A
Plan for Mobility, Accessibility, Sustainability, and High Quality of Life. Adopted April
2016. http://scagrtpscs.net/Documents/2016/final/f2016RTPSCS.pdf.
SCAG. 2016b. “Current Context – Demographics & Growth Forecast 2016 RTP/SCS
Appendix.” Adopted April 2016. http://scagrtpscs.net/Documents/2016/final/
f2016RTPSCS_DemographicsGrowthForecast.pdf
PC Agenda Page 189
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
127 January 2017
SCAQMD (South Coast Air Quality Management District). 1976. Rule 402: Nuisance.
Adopted May 7, 1976. Accessed December 30, 2016. https://www.arb.ca.gov/
DRDB/SC/CURHTML/R402.HTM.
SCAQMD. 1993. “SCAQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds.” Originally published in
CEQA Air Quality Handbook, Table A9-11-A. Revised March 2015.
http://www.aqmd.gov/ceqa/handbook/signthres.pdf.
SCAQMD. 2003. White Paper on Potential Control Strategies to Address Cumulative Impacts
from Air Pollution. August 2003. http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/Agendas/
Environmental-Justice/cumulative-impacts-working-group/cumulative-impacts-white-
paper.pdf?sfvrsn=2
SCAQMD. 2005. Rule 403: Fugitive Dust. Adopted May 7, 1976. Amended June 3, 2005.
SCAQMD. 2008a. Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology . June 2003; revised
July 2008. Accessed August 2015. http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-
source/ceqa/handbook/localized-significance-thresholds/final-lst-methodology-
document.pdf?sfvrsn=2.
SCAQMD. 2008b. “Draft Guidance Document – Interim CEQA Greenhouse Gas (GHG)
Significance Threshold .” Attachment E in Board Letter Proposal: Interim CEQA GHG
Significance Threshold for Stationary Sources, Rules and Plans , Agenda No. 31
(December 5, 2008). October 2008. http://www.aqmd.gov/home/regulations/ceqa/air-
quality-analysis-handbook/ghg-significance-thresholds.
SCAQMD. 2008c. “Resolution No. 08-35.” Attachment C in Board Letter Proposal: Interim
CEQA GHG Significance Threshold for Stationary Sources, Rules and Plans , Agenda
No. 31 (December 5, 2008). http://www.aqmd.gov/home/regulations/ceqa/air-quality-
analysis-handbook/ghg-significance-thresholds.
SCAQMD. 2010. Greenhouse Gas CEQA Significance Threshold Stakeholder Working Group
Meeting #15. September 28, 2010. http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/
handbook/greenhouse-gases-(ghg)-ceqa-significance-thresholds/year-2008-2009/
ghg-meeting-15/ghg-meeting-15-main-presentation.pdf?sfvrsn=2.
SCAQMD. 2013. Final Air Quality Management Plan. February 2013. Accessed August 2015.
http://www.aqmd.gov/home/library/clean-air-plans/air-quality-mgt-plan/final-2012-air-
quality-management-plan.
PC Agenda Page 190
Downey 140-Unit Hotel Mitigated Negative Declaration
10065
128 January 2017
SCAQMD. 2015. “SCAQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds.” Originally published in
CEQA Air Quality Handbook, Table A9-11-A. Revised March 2015. Accessed August
2015. http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/scaqmd-air-quality-
significance-thresholds.pdf?sfvrsn=2.
SCAQMD. 2016. Draft Final 2016 Air Quality Management Plan. December 2016.
http://www.aqmd.gov/home/library/clean-air-plans/air-quality-mgt-plan/
final-draft-2016-aqmp.
Society of Vertebrate Paleontology. 2010. “Standard Procedures for the Assessment and
Mitigation of Adverse Impacts to Paleontological Resources.” Prepared by the Society of
Vertebrate Paleontology, Impact Mitigation Guidelines Revision Committee. Accessed
August 2015. http://vertpaleo.org/PDFS/68/68c554bb-86f1-442f-a0dc-
25299762d36c.pdf.
SWRCB (State Water Resources Control Board). 2011. “2010 California 303(D) List of Water
Quality Limited Segments.” Approved October 11, 2011. Accessed January 2017.
http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/tmdl/2010state_ir_reports/
category5_report.shtml.
4.2 List of Preparers
Dudek
Rachel Struglia, Principal in Charge
Caitlin Munson, Project Manager
Iulia Roman, Environmental Analyst
Brad Comeau, Archaeologist
Mike Greene, Senior Acoustician
Randy Deodat, GIS
Spenser Lucarelli, GIS
Laurel Porter, Technical Editor
PC Agenda Page 191