Loading...
5. 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