OSHA Regulatory
Status
WHMIS Regulatory
Status
Adverce
Physiochemical,
Human Health
And Environmental
Hazards
This product is considered an article as per OSHA 29 CFR 191A1200. 29 CFR 191A.1200 (c) defines an article as follows: "Article" means a manufactured item other than a fluid or particle: (i) which is {ormed to a specific shape or design during manufacture; (ii) which has end use function{s) dependent in whole or in part upon its shape or design during end use; and (iii) which under normal co,nditions of use does not re[ease more than very small quantities, e.g., rninute or trace amounts af a hazardous chemical (as determined under paragraph (d) abovementioned section). and does not pose a physical hazard or health risk to employees" Articles meeting the above de{inition are not regulated by OSHA 29 CFR 1910.120A and are exempt {rom SDS and [abe[ requiremenG.
This product is considered an article per the Canadian Hazardous Products Regulation 5OR/2015-i7. Manufactured articles that meet the definition of the Canadian Hazardous Products Act (any article that is formed to a specific shape or design during manufacture, the intended use of which when in that form is dependent in whole or in part on its shape or design, and that, when being installed, if the intended use of the article requires it to be instaltred, and under normal conditions of use, will not release or otherwise cause an individual to be exposed to a hazardous product) are not regulated by the Canadian Hazardous Froducts Regulation SOR/2015-17 and are exempt from SDS and label requirements.
This product may cause temporary irritation to the eyes and skin, and to the upper respiratory tract (scratchy throat, coughing, congestion), resulting from exposure to dusts and fibers in excess of appf icable exposure limits, or from release of binder components and binder decomposition products in high concentrations, when heated to approximately 150-200 "C for the first time.
Pre-existing chronic eye, skin and respiratory conditions may temporarily worsen due to exposure. See section B for safe handling instructions. vl.
vil.
9B-99"/"
g6-gqa/"
92-97"/"
g4-960/"
87-957"
96-q9"/"
a-7 0/-
<3o/"
<2o/"
<5o/"
<4o/o
<5"4
<3"/"
<1"r{q
<1o/o
<1Ye
<1o/o
<1Ya
<1o/"
8024 Esquesing Line, Milton, Ontario, L9T 6W3
1 -87 7 -823-97 90 | techservi ce@rockwool. com I www. rockwool. com
Exhibit J
Joanbridge ST. No Parking
ii
xt:
s
,:*
$
',,L
FIT 7 SPORTS LAB DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Initial Study and Draft
Mitigated Negative Declaration
The following Initial Study has been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act.
Prepared For:
City of Baldwin Park Planning Division
14403 Pacific Avenue
Baldwin Park, CA, 91706
Prepared By:
Impact Sciences, Inc.
811 W. 7th Street, Suite 200
Los Angeles, California 90017
November 2023
Impact Sciences, Inc. i Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page
Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................. 1 I. Project Information....................................................................................................................................... 3 II. Project Location & Description ................................................................................................................... 4 III. Environmental Checklist ........................................................................................................................... 12 IV. Supporting Information Sources ............................................................................................................ 104 V. Initial Study Preparers ............................................................................................................................. 108 Appendices
A Air Quality and GHG Data
B Noise and Vibration Data
C Traffic Data
D Cultural Resources Evaluation (pending SCCIC and Tribal Consultation)
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
1 Regional Location ......................................................................................................................................... 7 2 Conceptual Site Plan-Floor 1 ....................................................................................................................... 8 3 Conceptual Site Plan-Floor 2 ....................................................................................................................... 9 4 Noise Monitoring and Sensitive Receptor Location Map ..................................................................... 77
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
1 South Coast AQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds .................................................................... 23 2 Construction-Related Criteria Pollutant and Precursor Emissions – Maximum Pounds per Day ............................................................................................................................................................... 28 3 28Long-Term Operational Emissions – Maximum Pounds per Day .................................................. 28 4 Localized Significance of Construction Emissions – Maximum Pounds per Day ............................. 31 5 Localized Significance of On-Site Operational Emissions – Maximum Pounds per Day ................ 32 6 Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions .......................................................................................................... 51 7 Project Consistency with Applicable General Plan Land Use Element Policies ................................ 68 8 City of Baldwin Park Interior and Exterior Noise Standards ............................................................... 73 9 City of Baldwin Park Noise Standards .................................................................................................... 74 10 Existing Noise Levels in the Vicinity of the Project Site ........................................................................ 75 11 Estimated Exterior Construction Noise at Sensitive Receptors ........................................................... 78 12 Exterior Soccer Noise Levels ..................................................................................................................... 80 13 Vibration Levels at Off-Site Sensitive Uses from Project Construction .............................................. 82
Impact Sciences, Inc. 1 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
INTRODUCTION
A. INITIAL STUDY
Pursuant to Section 15063 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines (Title 14, California Code of Regulations, Sections 15000 et seq.), an initial study is a preliminary environmental analysis that is used by the lead agency (the public agency principally responsible for approving or carrying out the proposed project) as a basis for determining whether an environmental impact report, a mitigated negative declaration, or a negative declaration is required for a project. The State CEQA Guidelines require that an Initial Study contain a project description, description of existing setting, identification of environmental effects by checklist or other similar form, explanation of environmental effects, discussion of mitigation for significant enviro nmental effects, evaluation of the Project’s consistency with existing, applicable land use controls, and the name of persons who prepared the study.
The purpose of this Initial Study is to evaluate the potential environmental impacts of the proposed Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project (herein referenced as the “Project”). The Project would repurpose the existing building located at 14412 Joanbridge Street into a two -story soccer training facility. The Project would also demolish the building at 14424 Joanbridge Street and construct associated ground floor parking with rooftop soccer fields.
B. PUBLIC AND AGENCY REVIEW
This Initial Study / Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration will be circulated for public and agency review from November 1, 2023, to November 30, 2023. Copies of this document are available for review at 14403 E ast Pacific Avenue, Baldwin Park, California, and on the City of Baldwin Park’s website at https://www.baldwinpark.com/online-doc
uments/community-development/planning/environmental-
documents. Comments on this Initial Study / Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration must be received no later than 5:00 PM on November 30, 2023, and can be mailed or emailed to:
City of Baldwin Park, Plann ing Division
Melanie Chipres, Associate Planner
14403 E. Pacific Avenue
Baldwin Park, California 91706
[email protected]
Introduction
Impact Sciences, Inc. 2 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
C. ORGANIZATION OF THE INITIAL STUDY
This Initial Study is organized into the following sections:
• Section I – Project Information: provides summary background information about the Project , including Project location, lead agency, and contact information. • Section II – Project Location and Description: includes a description of the Project, including the need for the Project, the Project objectives, and the elements included in the Project. • Section III – Environmental Factors Potentially Affected: identifies what environmental resources, if any, would involve at least one significant or potentially significant impact that cannot be reduced to a less than significant level.
• Section IV – Determination: indicates whether impacts associated with the Project would be significant, and what, if any, additional environmental documentation is required. • Section V – Evaluation of Environmental Impacts: contains the Environmental Checklist form for each resource and presen ts an explanation of all checklist answers. The checklist is used to assist in evaluating the potential environmental impacts of the Project and determining which impacts , if any, need to be further evaluated in an EIR.
• Section V I – Supporting Information Sources: lists references used in the preparation of this document.
• Section VII – Initial Study Preparers: lists the names of individuals involved in the preparation of this document.
• Appendices: present the technical studies used in the preparation of this Initial Study.
Impact Sciences, Inc. 3 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
I. PROJECT INFORMATION
A. PROJECT TITLE
Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project
B. LEAD AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
City of Baldwin Park Planning Division
14403 Pacific Avenue
Baldwin Park, CA 91706
C. CONTACT PERSON AND PHONE NUMBER
Fabiola Zelaya-Melicher
City Planner
(626) 960-4011 ext. 475
D. PROJECT LOCATION
14412 Joanbridge Street and 14424 Joanbridge Street
Baldwin Park, CA 91706
E. PROJECT APPLICANT’S NAME AND ADDRESS
Trinidad Campbell
Trinidad Campbell Design & Building
3829 Ronda Vista Pl.
Los Angeles, CA. 90027
F. CITY GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION
General Industrial (GI)
G. CITY ZONING
Industrial
Impact Sciences, Inc. 4 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
II. PROJECT LOCATION & DESCRIPTION
A. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT
Location
The proposed Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project (Project) would involve improvements to two adjacent lots located at 14412 Joanbridge Street (Assessment Parcel Number [APN] 8414- 023-011) and 14424 Joanbridge Street (APN 8414-023-010) in the City of Baldwin Park (City). The Project would merge the two adjacent lots as one property (Project Site). The Project S ite is located within the northern perimeter of Baldwin Park’s jurisdiction limits, located approximately 1.30 miles east of Interstate 605 (I -605) and 1.96 miles south of Interstate 210 (I -210) (see Figure 1 , Regional Location). The Project Site is primarily accessible by East Joanbridge Street, located north of the Project Site.
Background
The existing Baldwin Park community lacks recreational spaces within close proximities to residential areas. Although the Santa Fe Dam Recreation Area is accessible for hiking and biking activities, the City currently lacks small-scale recreational facilities that are more accessible for local neighborhoods. Further, residential neighborhoods within the immediate vicinity of the Project Site are surrounded by mixture of industrial and commercial and residential uses. T he Project would provide recreational space to the se residences and the area overall.
Existing Conditions
The Project Site is developed and located within a heavily urbanized area of the City. According to the City of Baldwin Park General Plan (dated 2020), the Project Site is currently designated for General Industrial land uses. Concurrently, the Project Site is zoned Industrial by the City of Baldwin Park Zoning Map . 14412 Joanbridge Street
The building located at 14412 Joanbridge Street was previously occupied by SLW Apparel, a clothing manufacturing company. 1 However, SLW Apparel is currently closed and no longer operational. The existing building is approximately 6,782 square feet in size, and approximately 22 feet in height. Vehicular access to 14412 Joanbridge Street is provided via one gated driveway along Joanbridge Street, which serves
1 Google Earth, 2023.
II. Project Location & Description
Impact Sciences, Inc. 5 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
as the site’s ingress/egress. 2 A vehicle driving aisle is provided along the eastern perimeter that leads vehicles to the existing surface parking on-site.
Approximately three surface parking spaces and one American Disabilities Act (ADA) compliant surface parking space is provided within the western portion of the property . Additionally, an existing trash enclosure and approximately three existing trees are located along the southern perimeter of the property. 14424 Joanbridge Street
The existing building located at 14424 Joanbridge Street is currently vacant. The existing building is approximately 5,000 square feet and approximately 16 feet in height. Vehicular access to the property is provided via one gated driveway along Joanbridge Street .3 Surface parking is provided along the eastern perimeter of the site and ADA-compliant parking spaces are provided along the southern perimeter.
Project Features and Operations
The Project would merge the properties located at 14412 and 14424 Joanbridge Street into one property totaling approximately 26,244 square feet. The Project would repurpose the 14412 Joanbridge Street building into a two- story soccer training facility. The Project would also demolish the 14424 Joanbridge Street building and construct ground floor parking with rooftop soccer fields . Hours of operation would occur between the hours of 4:00 P.M. and 10:00 P.M. on weekdays, 9:00 A.M. and 6:00 P.M. on Saturdays, and 8:00 A.M. to 2:00 P.M. on Sundays. The following details the specific improvements proposed for each property.
Ground Floor
14412 Joanbridge Street
The Project would repurpose the existing building and demolish the existing trash enclosure at 14412 Joanbridge Street into a two- story soccer training facility. The first floor of the facility would include a meeting room, a gymnasium room, ADA-compliant restrooms, and a 6,625 square foot indoor soccer field equipped with two nets and one bench, and one water fountain (see Figure 2, Conceptual Site Plan-Floor 1). The property’s existing driveway would serve as the main exit for vehicles from the Project Site. A 2,446 square foot driving lane would be provided for visiting vehicles as an egress route and utilized as an
2 Google Earth, 2023.
3 Google Earth, 2023.
II. Project Location & Description
Impact Sciences, Inc. 6 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
emergency fire truck lane for the Los Angeles County Fire Department (LACFD). Additionally, approximately seven ground-level parking spaces would be provided within this property. 14424 Joanbridge Street
The Project would demolish the existing 5,000 square foot building at 14424 Joanbridge Street and construct ground floor parking with rooftop soccer fields. As shown in Figure 2, the Project would provide approximately 32 ground-level parking spaces including two ADA-compliant parking spaces within this property. Parking would be covered with a cement slab supported by columns and beams. The Project would utilize the property’s existing driveway as the main vehicular entrance to the Project Site, and a one- way driving lane would be included to guide vehicular circulation. Additionally, an ou tdoor trash enclosure would be provided within this property.
Second Floor
14412 Joanbridge Street
At this property, the second-floor level would include the mezzanine consisting of four office spaces, a kitchen, and a restroom (see Figure 3, Conceptual Site Plan-Floor 2). On the southern side of the second - floor level, the Project would also include a 2,314 square foot outdoor soccer field, equipped with two soccer nets, one bench, and a fountain. Nets would be installed to divide soccer field locations and shield visitors from any soccer balls that leave the soccer field. Additionally, an overhead net would be installed above the outdoor soccer field to prevent soccer balls from leaving the facility. Access to the second floor of the proposed facility would be provided via stairs, and access to the proposed outdoor soccer field would be provided via an elevator and stairs.
14424 Joanbridge Street
At this property, the second-floor level includes three outdoor soccer fields (that total approximately 10,618 square feet) above the proposed ground- level parking. As shown in Figure 3, each soccer field would be equipped with two soccer nets and benches. Nets would be installed between e ach soccer field to shield facility users from any soccer balls that leave the soccer field. Further, a net would be installed above all three outdoor soccer fields to prevent soccer balls from leaving the facility. Access to the second level would be provided via staircases and the proposed elevator located on the 14412 Joanbridge Street property.
¯
0 100 20050 Miles
Esri, NASA, NGA, USGS, County of Los Angeles, California State Parks, Esri, HERE, Garmin, SafeGraph, METI/NASA, USGS, Bureau of Land Management, EPA, NPS, USDA City of Baldwin Park
Project Site
Regional Location Map
FIGURE 1
1489.001•01/23
SOURCE: Esri, 2023
PL PL
PLPL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
175'-0"
PL
93'-2"
53'-5"
MEN WOMEN
MEETING
ROOM
GYM
ROOM
4'-0"12'-4"
15'-0"
4'-0"18'-0"
28'-7"
5'-0"
9'-4" 10'-6" 7'-11"93'-2"
124'-3"
40'-6"5'-0"
42'-9"
4'-0"
4'-0"
4'-0"
4'-0"
7'-2"
EXISTING BUILDING
55'-9"
8'-1"
EXISTING
ROLL UP
DOOR
PL PL
FIRE TRUCK PATH
26' BY 99'-4"
END OF
FIRE TRUCK
26'-0"
01 02
03 04
05 13
14 15
16 38
21 22
27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35
32'-6"
3'-0"
24'-0"
24'-0"
26'-0"
3'-3"
24'-0"
ADA
9'-0"5'-0"
18'-0"26
14412 JOANBRIDGE St.
INPATH OF TRAVEL
PATH OF TRAVEL OUT
8'-6"
18'-0"
8'-2"
12'-11"
10'-6"
11'-8"
9'-4"
5'-0"
18'-0"
24'-0"
18'-0"
14424 JOANBRIDGE St.
75'-0"
FIRE
HOSE
PATH
75'-0"75'-0"
150' MAX. TO
FIRE TRUCK
75'+75'=150'
150' MAX. TO
FIRE TRUCK
75'+75'=150'
SOCCER COURT 1
8'-6"
75'-0"75'-0"
11 3
3 2
2 12'-0"15'-2"
75'-0"75'-0"
150'-0"
39 8'-6"
18'-0"
06 07
08 19 20
09 10
11 12
36 37
ADA
9'-0"
18'-0"
7 Parking Spaces
32 Parking Spaces25
ELEVATOR
3'-0"
8'-6"
5'-0"
3'-0"
DECK EDGE ABOVE
M.RRW.RR
HALL
12'-6"
4'-0"7'-1"12'-6"
11'-6"
17 18
6'-0"
16'-0"
5'-0"
23 24
5'-0"
44 Lot Size: 13,122 sq.ft.
14412 + 14424 JOANBRIDGE St.
Parking = 39 Spaces
Lot Size: 13,122 sq.ft.
25'-3"
26'-6"
5'-0"5'-0" to PL
1. VENDING MACHINE
EPEX BEVERAGE
COMBO 32d x 35w x 77 h
1 TRASH ENCLOSURE
Trinidad Campbell
Design & Building
3829 Ronda Vista Pl. Los Angeles, CA. 90027
(323)497-9969
[email protected]
Project Number
Date
Drawn By
Scale
FIT 7 LAB
14412 & 14424 JOANBRIDGE St.
BALDWIN PARK
LOS ANGELES, CA 91706
Architect
Alejandro Resendiz
52 Carrige Way. Pomona, CA. 91766
(909)456-4506
[email protected]
MAY 25/2023
A-1.1
GLRS
2210 BAL
FIRST FLOOR
PLAN
1/8" = 1'-0" 1/8" = 1'-0"1 GROUND FLOOR PLAN
N
12/19/2022
Conceptual Site Plan - Floor 1
FIGURE 2
1489.001•10/23
SOURCE: Trinidad Campbell, 2022
175'-0"
175'-0"
75'-0"
75'-0"
PL
PLPL
75'-0"
PL PL
PL
7'-6"
8'-4"7'-7"
7'-6"
6'-0"
3'-6" 7'-11"30'-93
4"
13'-4"
13'-2"
10'-83
4"
11'-6"
10'-83
4" 22'-103
4"
10'-33
4"
10'-33
4"
OFFICE 3 OFFICE 4
OFFICE 1 OFFICE 2
RR KITCHEN
PL PL
3'-0"
4'-0"
3'-0"
3'-0"
53'-7"
31'-73
4"
4'-0" 4'-0"
8'-0"
6'-0"48'-7" 48'-7" 6'-0" 48'-7"
55'-10"4'-0"
26'-8"
5'-0"
SOCCER FIELD 2
SOCCER FIELD 3 SOCCER FIELD 4 SOCCER FIELD 5
NET
NET
NET
31'-7"
26'-0"
53'-5"
94'-1"
55'-10" 4'-0"
4'-0"
150'-0"
75'-0"
14412 JOANBRIDGE St.
LOT SIZE = 13,222 sq.ft
14424 JOANBRIDGE St.
LOT SIZE = 13,222 sq.ft
UPPER FLOOR +12'-6" @ +12'6"
4 SOCCER FIELDS
WITH NET ABOVE @ +25'
11 3
3 2
2 4'-0"
3'-0"
28'-7"
54'-10"
55'-10"4'-0"
4'-0"
55'-73
4"
46'-101
2"15'-0"47'-11"
14'-8"
1 2 Diagonal =
Steps to be no more than
93'-4" separate
ELEVATOR
8'-6"
3'-0" 10'-0" 52'-0"
5'-0"
108'-7"
218'-2" 44
TOTAL 1st floor plan = 6,625 sq ft
TOTAL MEZZANINE = 1,650 sq ft
2,314 sq ft
1,586 sq ft
3,410 sq ft 3,438 sq ft 3,770 sq ft
6,625 sq ft
TOTAL CONCRETE UPPER
SLAB ON 14412; 14424=
14,518 sq.ft.
5'-0"
MEETING
ROOM
5'-0" to PL
5'-0" to PL
Trinidad Campbell
Design & Building
3829 Ronda Vista Pl. Los Angeles, CA. 90027
(323)497-9969
[email protected]
Project Number
Date
Drawn By
Scale
FIT 7 LAB
14412 & 14424 JOANBRIDGE St.
BALDWIN PARK
LOS ANGELES, CA 91706
Architect
Alejandro Resendiz
52 Carrige Way. Pomona, CA. 91766
(909)456-4506
[email protected]
MAY 25/2023
A-1.2
GLRS
2210 BAL
SECOND FLOOR
PLAN
1/8" = 1'-0"
N
1/8" = 1'-0"1 SECOND FLOOR PLAN
N
12/19/2022
Conceptual Site Plan - Floor 2
FIGURE 3
1489.001•10/23
SOURCE: Trinidad Campbell, 2022
II. Project Location & Description
Impact Sciences, Inc. 10 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
Landscaping
The Project would preserve the existing palm tree (Arecacea palmae) and shrubs located along the Project Site frontage. The Project will remove the existing on-site trees located along the southern perimeter of the Project Site. However, new trees would be planted along the same border of the Project Site, and new shrubs would be planted along the proposed surface parking area.The Project would also plant additional palm trees and shrubs along the Joansbridge Street frontage.
Architectural and Building Material Elements
Building elevations for the proposed soccer training facility would be at a maximum height of 25 feet. The proposed overhead outdoor net would not exceed this building height. Architectural features for both t he proposed soccer training facility and its associated parking would include perforated metal panels, metal mesh, and wire mesh to prevent any soccer balls from escaping the site. A protective wall and wire mesh would be installed on the second-floor level of the 14244 Joanbridge Street property to protect facility users and soccer players. Building materials for the first floor of the facility would include royal playwood benchmark ash wood. Additionally, signage of the facility name would be installed on the facility, facing Joanbridge Street.
General Plan Amendment and Zone Change
The Project Applicant is seeking a General Plan amendment to change the Project Site’s existing General Industrial land use designation to a Commercial/Industrial land use designation. The Project Applicant is also seeking a zone change for the Project Site from Industrial to Industrial Commercial. This would allow for the development of a sports facility with office uses on-site.
B. SURROUNDING LAND USES
The Project Site is bound by industrial uses to the west and east (i.e., James Auto Repair and B & C Auto Body, respectively). Single-family residential uses are located immediately south of the Project Site and are designated and zoned as Single Family Residential by the General Plan and the City Zoning Code, respectively. Immediately north of the Project Site is East Joanbridge Street, and industrial uses are approximately 60 feet north of the Project Site (i.e., Spartan Fleet Service). These properties are designated and zoned as Industrial by the General Plan and the City Zoning Code, respectively.
II. Project Location & Description
Impact Sciences, Inc. 11 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
C. DISCRETIONARY APPROVAL AUTHORITY
The Project would require permits and approvals from the City of Baldwin Park prior to construction.
These permits and approvals are identified below and may be subject to change as the project entitlement process proceeds.
• CEQA Clearance; City of Baldwin Park Planning Commission and City Council • Site Plan Review; City of Baldwin Park Planning Division and LACFD • Grading Permit; City of Baldwin Park Building and Safety Division • General Plan Amendment; City of Baldwin Park Planning Division and City Council • Zone Change; City of Baldwin Park Planning Division and City Council and • Lot Merger; City of Baldwin Park Planning Division.
D. PROJECT CONSTRUCTION
Construction activities associated with the Project would occur over an approximate 11-month duration.
Building demolition is anticipated to take approximately two weeks and site grading is anticipated to take approximately one month. Upon completion of site grading activities, proposed building construction, foundation preparation, installation/connections for utilities, and finishing would take approximately 10 months.
Impact Sciences, Inc. 12 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
III. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
A. 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 Energy
Geology and Soils Greenhouse Gas Emissions Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Hydrology and Water
Quality Land Use and Planning Mineral Resources
Noise Population and Housing Public Services
Recreation Transportation Tribal Cultural Resources
Utilities and Service
Systems Wildfire Mandatory Findings of
Significance
B. 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 the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the Project. A MITIGATED NE GATIVE 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 effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal s tandards, 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.
III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 13 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
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 EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGA TIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the Proposed Project, nothing further is required.
I find that the Project is a qualified “transit priority project” that satisfies the requirements of Sections 21155 and 21155.2 of the Public Resources Code (PRC), and a qualified “residential or mixed use residential project” that satisfies the requiremen ts of Section 21159.28(d) of the PRC, and although the Project could have a potentially significant effect on the environment as identified in the Initial Study contained herein, there will not be a significant effect in this case, because this Sustainable Communities Environmental Assessment (SCEA) contains measures that either avoid or mitigate to a level of insignificance all potentially significant or significant effects of the Project.
Printed Name Title
Signature Date
III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 14 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
C. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
1. Aesthetics
Except as provided in Public Resources Code section 21099:
a. Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Less Than Significant Impact. A scenic vista is generally defined as a view of undisturbed natural characteristics exhibiting a unique feature that comprises an important or dominant portion of the viewshed. Although scenic vistas are identified at the discretion of its jurisdiction, common examples of scenic vistas include open hillsides, mountain ranges, rivers/streambeds, and large bodies of water.
The City of Baldwin Park General Plan does not identify any scenic vistas or other scenic resources.
Portions of the City do contain distant public views of the San Gabriel and San Bernardino Mountains ranges. However, due to distance and the intervening trees and structures, there are no public viewsheds that contain the Project Site and the San Gabriel Mountains and San Bernardino Mountains.
The Project Site is currently developed with two buildings and associated parking. The Project Site is generally su rrounded by existing urban development that includes residential and industrial uses.
Further, the Project would construct a new structure with a maximum height of 25 feet. When compared to the existing on -site structure’s height of 22 feet, the three foot increase is nominal and would not have the potential to substantively alter existing private or public viewsheds. Therefore, the Project would not have a substantial adverse impact on a scenic vista, and impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 15 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
b. Would the project substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
No Impact. There are no designated or eligible State scenic highways located near the Project Site or within its immediate vicinity. The nearest designated, or eligible for designation, State scenic highway is State Route 39 (SR -39), located approximately 3.20 miles northeast of the Project Site. 4 Due to this distance, as well as the topography and intervening objects (i.e., trees, buildings), the SR-39 is not visible from the Project Site. Therefore, no impact would occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required. c. Would the project, in non -urbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from a publicly accessible vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Less than Significant Impact. The Project Site is located in a highly urbanized area of the City that has been highly disturbed. Thus, for the purpose of this threshold, the Project’s potential to conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality is evaluat ed.
The Project Site is located in a developed and urban area that has been highly disturbed. Although the construction activities associated with the Project would result in changes to the visual quality of the Project Area, these activities would be temporary and would cease upon completion of the Project. The Project would be constructed in accordance with the City’s design regulations for commercial land
4 California Department of Transportation , “California State Scenic Highway System Map ,” Available online at:
https://caltrans.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=465dfd3d807c46cc8e8057116f1aacaa, accessed January 26, 2023.
III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 16 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
uses. Project plans will be subject to City review and approval prior to construction. As such, the Project would not substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site or its surrounding, and the Project would not conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality. Project impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required. d. Would the project create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation. Light emanating from building interiors that pass - through windows and light from exterior sources (i.e., street lighting, parking lot lighting, field lighting, building illumination, security lighting, and landscape lighting) serve as primary sources of light.
The Project Site is located within an urban and developed area and is surrounded by industrial and residential uses. Existing on-site light sources are limited to multiple lighting fixtures that are mounted to both of existing buildings on- site. Existing off-site light sources include streetlights, light emitted from adjacent properties, and vehicle headlights travelling along Joanbridge Street.
Construction activities associated with the Project would adhere to Section 130.37 ( Special Noise Sources) of the Baldwin Park Municipal Code, which limits the hours of construction for a development between 7:00 A.M. to 7:00 P.M. While some construction activities could result in moments of light or glare impacts (e.g., sun reflecting on equipment or evening construction activities during the winter season), sources of light and glare are present in the urbanized Project Area during day and nighttime hours, particularly from existing uses and vehicular traffic along Joanbridge Street. Therefore, construction activities associated with the Project would not create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area .
The Project would result in a new-two story structure that would allow ground level parking of up to 39 spaces, as well as four new outdoor soccer field s that would be located on the structure. O peration of the proposed soccer training facility would occur between the hours of 4:00 P.M. and 10: 00 P.M. on weekdays, 9:00 A.M and 6:00 P.M. on Saturdays, and 8:00 A.M. to 2:00 P.M. on Sundays. Given the III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 17 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
nature of the proposed operation of the soccer training facility and its proposed hours, the Project would have the potential to increase on-site lighting compared to existing conditions. Primary light sources associated with the Project would include : vehicle headlights emitted from the ground floor, soccer field lighting, and general lighting for common areas, pedestrian access, parking, and security.
The Project would install a masonry concrete wall between the proposed facility and adjacent residential uses south of the site that would stand six feet in height. The proposed masonry wall would shield the adjacent residential uses from direct exposure to vehicle headlights. However, due to the height of the proposed masonry wall and its location on the ground floor, exterior light emitted from the second floor of the soccer training facility could spillover and affect existing sensitive receptors (i.e., residential uses) that are adjacent to the Project Site. The Project would comply with Section 153.140.040 (Light and Glare) (a) of the City’s Municipal Code, which limits the height of all lighting support structure to the maximum permitted building height for the zone in which they are located.
Additionally, Section 153.140.040(f) requires all outdoor lighting to be directed, oriented and shielded to prevent light from spilling over into adjacent properties. The Project Applicant would also adhere to City to Baldwin Park Design Guidelines Manual (April 2012) and submit a Schematic Lighting Plan of the Project Site as part of the Applicant’s Design Review Submittal package to the City of Baldwin Park Planning Division for review and approval . As required, the schematic lighting plan would indicate the location of all proposed exterior light fixtures (i.e., lighting poles and mounted lighting fixtures).
Per the City’s Guidelines, all exterior lighting fixtures would be energy- efficient ENERGY STAR and have photosensitive off/on switches. Furthermore, Mitigation Measure AES -1 would require the Project Applicant to demonstrate that the proposed lighting conditions would not result in excessive spillage into the adjacent residential uses. Thus, adherence to local lighting regulations, implementation of the City’s Design Guidelines, and implementation of Mitigation Measure AES -1 would reduce the Project’s impacts involving substantial light and glare to less than significant levels.
Mitigation Measures
AES 1 Prior to the initiation of construction activities, the Project Applicant shall submit additional documentation as part of the required Schematic L ighting Plan and the Applicant’s Design Review Submittal package to the City of Baldwin Park Design Review Committee for review and approval. Additional documentation shall demonstrate that the proposed lighting conditions under the Project shall not result in excessive spillage. Additional documentation may include, but is not limited to, photometric site plans and/or written statements of approval from the City Engineer.
III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 18 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
2. Agricultural Resources
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?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
No Impact. According to the California Department of Conservation’s California Important Farmland Finder, the Project Site is not classified as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance.5 Further, the Project Site is designated and zoned Industrial. Thus , the Project would not convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance to non -agricultural use. No impact would occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required. b. Would the project conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
No Impact. As stated above, the Project Site is zoned Industrial. The existing zoning does not include any agricultural- related zoning designations, nor is the site part of a Williamson Act contract. 6 Additionally, the land uses surrounding the Project Site are not zoned for agricultural uses or in a Williamson Act contract. Therefore, Project implementation would not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract. No impact would occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
5 California Department of Conservation, “California Important Farmland Finder,” Available online at:
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/ciff/, Accessed January 26, 2023. 6 California Department of Conservation Division of Land Resource Protection, “ Los Angeles County Williamson Act FY 2015/2016,” November 21, 2018.
III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 19 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
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))?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
No Impact. The Project Site is not zoned or used for forest land or timberland purposes and is not zoned Timberland Production. Further, Project implementation would not result in the rezoning of forest land, timberland, or timberland zoned Timberland Production. Therefore, no impact would occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required. d. Would the project result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to a non -forest use?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
No Impact. As stated above, the Project Site is not occupied by or used for forest land. Therefore, no impacts would occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required. 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?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 20 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
No Impact. As the Project would occur within a highly developed and urban area, Project implementation would not result in the conversion of farmland or forest land to non-agricultural/non- forest land use. No impacts would occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
3. Air Quality
a. Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Less than significant impact.
Air Quality Setting
South Coast Air Basin
The Project Site is located within the Los Angeles County portion of the South Coast Air Basin (Basin).
The Basin includes all of Orange County and the non- desert portions of Los Angeles, San Bernardino, and Riverside Counties. The regional climate within the Basin is considered semi- arid and is characterized by warm summers, mild winters, infrequent seasonal rainfall, moderate daytime onshore breezes, and moderate humidity. The air quality within the Basin is primarily influenced by meteorological conditions and a wide range of emissions sources – such as dense population centers, heavy vehicular traffic, and industry. The South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) divides the Basin into source receptor areas (SRAs) in which monitoring stations op erate to monitor the various concentrations of air pollutants in the region. The Project Site is located within SRA 9, which covers the East San Gabriel Valley area.
The SCAQMD is the air pollution control district for Orange County and the non- desert portions of Los Angeles, Riverside, and San Bernardino Counties. The agency’s primary responsibility is ensuring that the Basin region meets attainment for the federal and state standards. The SCAQMD is responsible for preparing an air quality management plan in order to meet federal attainment status. The SCAQMD is also responsible for adopting and enforcing rules and regulations concerning air pollutant sources, issuing permits for stationary sources of air pollutants, inspecting stationary sources of air pollutants, III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 21 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
responding to citizen complaints, monitoring ambient air quality and meteorological conditions, awarding grants to reduce motor vehicle emissions, and conducting public education campaigns, as well as many other activities. All projects are subject to SCAQMD rules and regulations in effect at the time of construction.
SCAQMD Rules and Regulations
The following is a list of noteworthy SCAQMD rules that are required of construction activities associated with the Project:
• Rule 402 (Nuisance) – This rule prohibits the discharge from any source whatsoever such quantities of air contaminants or other material which cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to any considerable number of persons or to the public, or which endanger the comfort, repose, health, or safety of any such persons or the public, or which cause, or have a natural tendency to cause, injury or damage to business or property. This rule does not apply to odors emanating from agricultural operations necessary for the growing of crops or the raising of fowl or animals.
• Rule 403 (Fugitive Dust) – This rule requires fugitive dust sources to implement best available control measures for all sources, and all forms of visible particulate matter are prohibited from crossing any property line. This rule is intended to reduce PM10 emissions (particulate matter with a diameter of 10 micromet ers or smaller ) from any transportation, handling, construction, or storage activity that has the potential to generate fugitive dust. PM10 suppression techniques are summarized below.
− Portions of a construction site to remain inactive longer than a period of three months will be seeded and watered until grass cover is grown or otherwise stabilized. − All on -site roads will be paved as soon as feasible or watered periodically or chemically stabilized.
− All material transported off -site will be either sufficiently watered or securely covered to prevent excessive amounts of dust.
− The area disturbed by clearing, grading, earthmoving, or excavation operations will be minimized at all times.
III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 22 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
− Where vehicles leave a construction site and enter adjacent public streets, the streets will be swept daily or washed down at the end of the work day to remove soil tracked onto the paved surface.
• Rule 1113 (Architectural Coatings) – This rule requires manufacturers, distributors, and end-uses of architectural and industrial maintenance coatings to reduce reactive organic gas ( ROG) emissions from the use of these coatings, primarily by placing limits on the ROG content of various coating categories.
Local
City of Baldwin Park General Plan
Applicable goals and policies related to air quality from the City of Baldwin Park General Plan (General Plan) Air Quality Element are listed below:
Goal 1.0 Improve air quality by reducing the amount of air pollution through proper land use planning.
Policy 1.2 Locate multiple family developments close to commercial areas to encourage pedestrian rather than vehicular travel.
Policy 1.4 Provide for the enhancement of neighborhood commercial centers to provide services within walking distance of residential neighborhoods.
Policy 1.5 Encourage the design of new residential and commercial areas to foster pedestrian circulation.
Thresholds of Significance
Consistency with the Applicable Air Quality Management Plan The SCAQMD has adopted criteria for consistency with regional plans and the regional Air Quality Management Plan ( AQMP) in its CEQA Air Quality Handbook. Specifically, the indicators of consistency are: 1) whether the Project would increase the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations or cause or contribute to new air quality violations; and 2) whether the Project would exceed the assumptions utilized in preparing the AQMP.
III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 23 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
Violation of Standards or Substantial Contribution to Air Quality Violations As the agency principally responsible for comprehensive air pollution control in the Basin, the SCAQMD recommends that projects should be evaluated in terms of air pollution control thresholds established by the SCAQMD and published in the CEQA Air Quality Handbook. These thresholds were developed by the SCAQMD to provide quantifiable levels to which Projects can be compared. The most current significance thresholds, shown in Table 1, South Coast AQMD Regional Significance Thresholds, are used in this analysis.
Table 1
South Coast AQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds
Mass Daily Thresholds a
Pollutant Construction b Operation c
NOx 100 lbs/day 55 lbs/day
VOC 75 lbs/day 55 lbs/day
PM10 150 lbs/day 150 lbs/day
PM2.5 55 lbs/day 55 lbs/day
SOx 150 lbs/day 150 lbs/day
CO 550 lbs/day 550 lbs/day
Lead 3 lbs/day 3 lbs/day
Toxic Air Contaminants (TACs), Odor, and GHG Thresholds TACs
(including carcinogens and non-
carcinogens)
Maximum Incremental Cancer Risk ≥ 10 in 1 million
Cancer Burden > 0.5 excess cancer cases (in areas ≥ 1 in 1 million) Chronic & Acute Hazard Index ≥ 1.0 (Project increment)
Odor Project creates an odor nuisance pursuant to South Coast AQMD Rule 402 GHG 10,000 MT/yr CO2eq for industrial facilities
Ambient Air Quality Standards for Criteria Pollutants d NO2
1-hour average
annual arithmetic mean
South coast AQMD is in attainment; Project is significant if it causes or contributes to an exceedance of the following attainment standards:
0.18 ppm (state)
0.03 ppm (state) and 0.0534 ppm (federal)
PM10
24-hour average
annual average
10.4 µg/m3 (construction) e & 2.5 µg/m3 (operation)
1.0 µg/m3
PM2.5
24-hour average 10.4 µg/m3 (construction) e & 2.5 µg/m3 (operation) SO2
1-hour average
24-hour average
0.25 ppm (state) & 0.075 ppm (federal - 99th percentile)
0.04 ppm (state)
Sulfate
24-hour average 25 µg/m3 (state)
CO
1-hour average
8-hour average
South Coast AQMD 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)
III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 24 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
Ambient Air Quality Standards for Criteria Pollutants d (continued) Lead
30-day Average
Rolling 3-month average
1.5 µg/m3 (state)
0.15 µg/m3 (federal)
a Source: South Coast AQMD CEQA Handbook (South Coast AQMD, 1993) b Construction thresholds apply to both the South Coast Air Basin and Coachella Valley (Salton Sea and Mojave Desert Air Basins). c For Coachella Valley, the mass daily thresholds for operation are the same as the construction thresholds. d Ambient air quality thresholds for criteria pollutants based on South Coast AQMD Rule 1303, Table A-2 unless otherwise stated. e Ambient air quality threshold based on South Coast AQMD Rule 403.
Exposure of Sensitive Receptors to Substantial Pollutant Concentrations The SCAQMD currently recommends that impacts to sensitive receptors be considered significant when a project generates localized pollutant concentrations of nitrogen dioxide ( NO2), carbon monoxide (CO), PM10, or PM2.5 (particulate matter with a diameter of 2.5 micrometers or smaller) at sensitive receptors near a project site that exceed the localized pollutant concentration thresholds listed above or when a project’s traffic causes CO concentrations at sensitive receptors located near congested intersections to exceed the national or state ambient air quality standards. The roadway CO thresholds would also apply to the contribution of emissions associated with cumulative development.
Additionally, the SCAQMD recommends impacts to sensitive receptors be considered significant if a project exceeds the TAC thresholds detailed in Table 1 above.
In addition, the SCAQMD has established localized significance criteria in the form of ambient air quality standards for criteria pollutants. To minimize the need for detailed air quality modeling to assess localized impacts, SCAQMD developed mass-based localized significance thresholds (LSTs) that are the number of pounds of emissions per day that can be generated by a project that would cause or contribute to adverse localized air quality impacts. These localized thresholds, are found in the mass rate look-up tables in the “Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology” document prepared by the SCAQMD.7 LSTs represent the maximum emissions from a project that are not expected to cause or contribute to an exceedance of the most stringent applicable federal or state ambient air quality standards, and are developed based on the ambient concentrations of that pollutant for each SRA.
7 SCAQMD, Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology , June 2003, Revised July 2008. Available online at:
http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/localized-sign ificance-thresholds/final-lst- methodology-document.pdf, Accessed March 6, 2023.
III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 25 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
Exposure to Objectionable Odors
A significant impact may occur if objectionable odors occur that would adversely impact sensitive receptors. Odors are typically associated with industrial projects involving the use of chemicals, solvents, petroleum products, and other strong-smelling elements used in manufacturing processes, as well as sewage treatment facilities and landfills.
Project Impacts
As part of its enforcement responsibilities, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S.
EPA) requires each state with nonattainment areas to prepare and submit a State Implementation Plan (SIP) that demonstrates the means to attain the federal standards. The SIP must integrate federal, state, and local plan components and regulations to identify specific measures to reduce pollution in nonattainment areas, using a combination of performance standards and market -based programs.
Similarly, under state law, the California Clean Air Act (CCAA) requires an air quality attainment plan to be prepared for areas designated as nonattainment with regard to the federal and state ambient air quality standards. Air quality attainment plans outline emissions limits and control measures to achieve and maintain these standards by the earliest practical date.
Drafted by the SCAQMD, the 2022 AQMP
8 was developed in effort with the California Air Resources Board (CARB ), the Southern California Association of Governments ( SCAG), and the U.S. EPA to establish a program of rules and regulations to reduce air pollutant emissions to achieves California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) and National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). The plan’s pollutant control strategies are based on SCAG’s 2020- 2045 Regional Transportation Plan / Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS).
Criteria for determining consistency with the AQMP are defined in Chapter 12, Section 12.2 and Section
12.3 of the SCAQMD’s 1993 CEQA Air Quality Handbook, and include the following:
• Consistency Criterion No. 1 : The proposed Project will not result in an increase in the frequency or severity of an existing air quality violation, or cause or contribute to new violations, or delay the timely attainment of air quality standards or the interim emissions reductions specified in the AQMP.
8 South Coast Air Quality Management District , 2022 Air Quality Management Plan. 2022 . Available online at:
http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/clean-air-p lans/air-quality-management-plans/2022-air-quality- management-plan/final-2022-aqmp/final-2022-aqmp.pdf?sfvrsn=16, accessed March 6, 2023.
III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 26 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
• Consistency Criterion No. 2: The proposed Project will not exceed the assumptions in the AQMP or increments based on the years of the Project build-out phase.
With respect to the first criterion, area air quality planning, including the AQMP, assumes that there will be emissions from new growth, but that such emissions may not impede the attainment and may actually contribute to the attainment of applicable air quality standards within the Basin. As discussed herein, the Project would not result in construction air quality emissions that exceed the SCAQMD thresholds of significance. Construction-related emissions would be temporary in nature, lasting only for the duration of the construction period, and would not have a long -term impact on the region’s ability to meet state and federal air quality standards. Furthermore, the Project will be required to comply with applicable SCAQMD rules and regulations for new or modified sources. For example, the Project must comply with SCAQMD Rule 403 for the control of fugitive dust during construction. By meeting SCAQMD rules and regulations, Project construction activities will be consistent with the goals and objectives of the AQMP to improve air quality in the Basin. Also discussed herein, the Project would not result in operational air quality emissions that exceed the SCAQMD thresholds of significance. Thus, the Project would be consistent with first criterion.
With respect to the second criterion, the AQMP was prepared to achieve national and state air pollution standards within the region. A project that is considered to be consistent with the AQMP would not interfere with attainment of AQMP goals because the growth from the Project is included in the regional projections used to formulate the AQMP. Therefore, projects, land uses, and activities that are consistent with the applicable assumptions used in the development of the AQMP (i.e., the RTP/SCS) would not jeopardize attainment of the air quality levels identified in the AQMP, even if they exceed the SCAQMD’s project-level daily emissions thresholds. The Project does not include the addition or removal of housing and thus would have no direct impact on population and housing forecasts for the area. Although the Project could increase employment in the area, such increases would be consistent with the planned growth assumptions utilized in preparing the AQMP. It is anticipated that employees of the Project wou ld primarily consist of existing residents in the Baldwin Park area and would not result in a high number of employees relocating to the region. As such, the Project would not have the potential to conflict with regional growth projections identified in SCAG’s RTP/SCS and the AQMP.
Thus, the Project is also consistent with the second criterion. As the Project is consistent with Criterion Nos. 1 and 2, the Project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of any applicable air quality plan, and this impact is less than significant.
Mitigation Measure: No mitigation measures are required.
III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 27 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
b. Would the project result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
A Project may have a significant impact if Project -related emissions would result in a cumulatively considerable net increase for a criteria pollutant for which the region is in nonattainment under applicable federal or state ambient air quality standards. The cumulative analysis of air quality impacts follows the SCAQMD’s guidance such that construction or operational Project emissions will be considered cumulatively considerable if Project -specific emissions exceed an applicable SCAQMD recommended daily threshold.
Regional Construction Significance Analysis
For purposes of this analysis, it is estimated that the Project would be constructed in approximately 11 months with construction beginning in 202 3 and Project operations commencing by mid -2024. While construction may begin at a later date and/or take place over a longer period, these assumptions represent the earliest and fastest build-out potential resulting in a worst-case daily impact scenario for purposes of this analysis. This analysis assumes construction would be undertaken with the following primary construction phases: (1) Demolition, (2) Grading, and (3) Building Construction.
The analysis of regional daily construction emissions has been prepared utilizing the California Emissions Estimator Model ( CalEEMod) recommended by the SCAQMD. Predicted maximum daily construction-generated emissions for the Project are summarized in Table 2, Construction- Related Criteria Pollutant and Precursor Emissions – Maximum Pounds per Day. These calculations assume that appropriate dust control measures would be implemented as part of the Project during each phase of development, as specified by SC AQMD Rule 403 (Fugitive Dust). Rule 403 control requirements include but are not limited to: applying water in sufficient quantities to prevent the generation of visible dust plumes; applying soil binders to uncovered areas; reestablishing ground cover as quickly as possible; utilizing a wheel washing system to remove bulk material from tires and vehicle undercarriages before vehicles exit the Project Site; and maintaining effective cover over exposed areas.
As shown in Table 2, the peak daily emissions generated during the construction of the Project would not exceed any of the regional emission thresholds recommended by the SCAQMD. Therefore, Project III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 28 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
construction would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria air pollutant for which the Project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard.
Table 2
Construction-Related Criteria Pollutant and Precursor Emissions – Maximum Pounds per Day
Construction Year ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
2023 1.32 12.60 12.00 0.02 2.77 1.58
2024 0.60 5.80 7.75 0.01 0.41 0.27
Regional Threshold 75 100 550 150 150 55
Exceed? No No No No No No
Source: Impact Sciences, 2023. See Appendix A to this IS/MND for CalEEMod data.
Note: Project emissions account for the reductions from SCAQMD Rule 403 (Fugitive Dust).
Regional Operational Significance Analysis
Project-generated emissions would be associated with motor vehicle use, energy use, and area sources, such as the use of landscape maintenance equipment and consumer cleaning products, associated with the operation of the Project. The operational emissions from the Project were calculated with CalEEMod and the operational emissions were compared against SCAQMD regional thresholds to determine Project significance. Long-term operational emissions attributable to the Project are summarized in Table 3, Long-Term Operational Emissions – Maximum Pounds per Day. As shown, the operational emissions generated by the Project would not exceed the regional thresholds of significance set by the SCAQMD.
Table 3
Long-Term Operational Emissions – Maximum Pounds per Day
Source ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
Area Source 0.34 0.01 1.03 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01
Energy Use < 0.005 0.05 0.04 <0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01
Mobile Source 0.40 0.37 3.74 0.01 0.30 0.06
Total 0.74 0.43 4.81 0.01 0.30 0.06
Regional Threshold 55 55 550 150 150 55
Exceed? No No No No No No
Source: Impact Sciences, 2023. See Appendix A to this IS/MND for CalEEMod data.
III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 29 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
As shown in Table 2 and Table 3, the Project’s construction and operational emissions would not exceed the SCAQMD’s thresholds for any criteria air pollutants. Thus, the Project would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria air pollutant for which the Project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard. These impacts are less than significant.
Air Quality Health Impacts
On December 24, 2018, the California Supreme Court published its opinion on the Sierra Club et al. v.
County of Fresno et. Al. (Case No. S219783) which determined that an environmental review must adequately analyze a Project’s potential impacts and inform the public how its bare numbers translate to a potential adverse health impact or explain how existing scientific constraints cannot translate the emissions numbers to the potential health impacts.
Criteria air pollutants are defined as those pollutants for which the federal and state governments have established air quality standards for outdoor or ambient concentrations to protect public health. The national and state ambient air quality standards have been set at levels to protect human health with a determined margin of safety.
9 The Basin is in state non -attainment for PM2.5, PM10, and Ozone (O 3) and federal non-attainment for PM2.5 and O3. Therefore, an increase in emissions of particulate matter or ozone precursors (ROG and nitrogen oxide [NOx]) has the potential to push the region further from reaching attainment status and, as a result, are the pollutants of greatest concern in the region. As noted in Table 2 and Table 3 above, the Project will emit criteria air pollutants during construction and operation. However, the Project will not exceed SCAQMD thresholds for ozone precursors (ROG and NOx), PM2.5, PM10, or any other criteria air pollutants, and will not result in a cumulatively significant impact for which the region is in non-attainment. Thus, with respect to the Project’s increase in criteria pollutant emissions, the Project would not have the potential cause significant air quality health impacts. With respect to the Project’s potential TAC and diesel particulate matter (DPM) impacts upon sensitive receptors, please refer to the discussion under AQ Impact C below.
Mitigation Measure: No mitigation measures are required.
9 SCAQMD, Guidance Document for Addressing Air Quality Issues in General Plans and Local Planning, May 6, 2005.
III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 30 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
c. Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Localized Construction Significance Analysis
The SCAQMD has developed localized significance thresholds (LST) for construction areas that are one, two, and five acres in size to simplify the evaluation of localized emissions. LSTs represent the maximum emissions from a Project that are not expected to cause or contribute to an exceedance of the applicable federal or State ambient air quality standard. LSTs are provided for each source receptor area (SRA) and various distances from the source of emissions. The nearest air quality sensitive receptors to the Project Site are residences approximately 15 feet south of the Project Site.
In the case of this analysis, the Project Site is located within SRA 9 – East San Gabriel Valley with receptors located within 25 meters. 10 The closest receptor distance in the SCAQMD’s mass rate look - up tables is 25 meters. Projects that are located closer than 25 meters to the nearest receptor are directed to use the LSTs for receptors located within 25 meters. As the Project Site is less than one acre, LSTs for a one-acre site in SRA 9 with sensitive receptors located within 25 meters were utilized to address the potential localized NOx, CO, PM10, and PM2.5 impacts. As shown in Table 4, Localized Significance of Construction Emissions – Maximum Pounds per Day , the Project would not exceed any of the identified localized thresholds of significance during construction. Therefore, the Project’s construction would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial air pollutant concentrations and these impacts would be less than significant.
10 LSTs based on shorter averaging periods, such as the NO2 and CO LSTs, are applied to receptors such as industrial or commercial facilities since it is reasonable to assume that workers at these sites could be present for periods of one to eight hours. Therefore, this analysis evaluates localized air quality impacts from construction activities associated with the Project on sensitive receptors for NO2, CO, PM10, and PM2.5, and on “non-sensitive” receptors (e.g., industrial or commercial facilities) for NO2 and CO.
III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 31 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
Table 4
Localized Significance of Construction Emissions – Maximum Pounds per Day
Construction Phase NOx CO PM10 PM2.5
Demolition 4..99 5.91 0.52 0.25
SCAQMD Localized Thresholds 89 623 5 3.00
Grading 12.60 11.40 2.67 1.55
SCAQMD Localized Thresholds 89 623 5 3
Building Construction 5.93 7.00 0.28 0.26
SCAQMD Localized Thresholds 89 623 5 3
Exceed? No No No No
Source: Impact Sciences, 2023. See Appendix A to this IS/MND for CalEEMod data.
Notes: Calculations assume compliance with SCAQMD Rule 403 – Fugitive Dust. The localized thresholds for each phase are based on a 1-acre site with a receptor distance of 25 meters (82 feet) in SCAQMD’s SRA 9.
Localized Operational Significance Analysis
Because LST methodology is applicable to Project s where emission sources occupy a fixed location, LST methodology would typically not apply to the operational phase of a commercial use Project because emissions for these Project s are primarily generated by mobile sources traveling on local roadways over generally large distances or areas. LSTs would apply to the operational phase of a Project if the Project includes stationary sources or attracts mobile sources that may spend long periods queuing and idling at the site. For example, the LST methodology applies to operational Projects such as warehouse/transfer facilities.11 As the Project would not include warehouse or transfer facilities, an operational analysis against the LST methodology is not directly applicable to the Project. Nevertheless, Table 5, Localized Significance of On-Site Operational Emissions – Maximum Pounds per Day, has been included to illustrate the potential on-site emissions during Project operation. As shown in Table 5, the Project would not exceed any of the identified localized thresholds of significance. Therefore, the Project’s operation would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial air pollutant concentrations and these impacts would be less than significant.
11 SCAQMD, Sample Construction Scenarios for Projects Less than Five Acres in Size, February 2005, page 1-3.
III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 32 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
Table 5
Localized Significance of On-Site Operational Emissions – Maximum Pounds per Day
Emissions Source NOx CO PM10 PM2.5
Area Sources 0.01 1.03 < 0.01 < 0.01
Energy Demand 0.05 0.04 < 0.01 < 0.01
Total On-Site Emissions 0.06 1.07 0 0
SCAQMD Localized Thresholds 89 623 2.00 1
Exceed? No No No No
Source: Impact Science, 2023. See Appendix A to this IS/MND for CalEEMod data.
The Project would not result in potentially significant CO “hot spots” and a Project -specific CO hotspots analysis is not required to reach this conclusion. It has long been recognized that CO exceedances (“hot spots”) are caused by vehicular emissions, primarily when idling at intersections.
Vehicle emissions standards have become increasingly more stringent in the last twenty years. With the turnover of older vehicles, introduction of cleaner fuels and implementation of control technology on industrial facilities, CO concentrations for the Project vicinity have historically met state and federal attainment status for the air quality standards. CO concentrations in SRA 9 are substantially below the California one -hour or eight -hour CO standards of 20 or 9.0 parts per million ( ppm), respectively.
Accordingly, with the steadily decreasing CO emissions from vehicles, even very busy intersections do not result in exceedances of the CO standard. Therefore, the Project would not have the potential to cause or contribute to an exceedance of the California one-hour or eight-hour CO standards of 20 or 9.0 ppm, respectively. Impacts with respect to localized CO concentrations would be less than significant.
Diesel Particulate Matter
Construction would result in the generation of DPM emissions from the use of off -road diesel equipment required for demolition, grading, building construction, and other construction activities.
The amount to which the receptors are exposed (a function of concentration and duration of exposure) is the primary factor used to determine health risk (i.e., potential exposure to TAC emission levels that exceed applicable standards). Health -related risks associated with diesel- exhaust emissions are primarily linked to long-term exposure and the associated risk of contracting cancer.
In March 2015, the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) adopted revised guidelines that update previous guidance by incorporating advances in risk assessment with consideration of infants and children using Age Sensitivity Factors (ASF) . The intent of the OEHHA 2015 guidance is to provide Health Risk Assessment ( HRA) procedures for use in the Air Toxics Hot Spots Program or for the permitting of existing, new, or modified stationary sources. As the Project is III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 33 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
not part of the Air Toxics Hot Spots Program and is considered an urban infill mixed-use development consisting primarily of mobile and area sources (i.e., non -stationary sources), the OEHHA 2015 guidance is not directly applicable. OEHHA 2015 offers limit ed information on conducting a short - term HRA, but the guidance acknowledges the many inherent uncertainties that may occur, and it does not identify the types of short -term Project s or non- stationary Projects subject thereto. Further, the SCAQMD has not opined on the application of OEHHA 2015 guidance to development Project s such as the Project.
The use of diesel-powered construction equipment would be temporary and episodic. The duration of exposure would be short and exhaust from construction equipment dissipates rapidly. Current methodology for conducting health risk assessments is associated with long term exposure periods (9, 30, and 70 years). Therefore, short -term construction activities (such as the Project’s 11 -month construction process) would not be expected to generate a significant health risk. Furthermore, the Project Site is approximately 0.60 acres. Generally, construction for Projects contained in a site of such size represent less than significant health risks due to limitations in how many pieces of diesel equipment are able to operate on the site. Project construction would also be subject to California regulations limiting the idling of heavy-duty construction equipment to no more than five (5) minutes, which would further reduce nearby sensitive receptors’ exposure to temporary and variable DPM emissions.
12 For these reasons, DPM generated by construction activities would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial amounts of air toxics and these impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measure: No mitigation measures are required. d. Would the result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
The SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook (1993) identifies certain land uses as sources of odors.
These land uses include agriculture (farming and livestock), wastewater treatment plants, food processing plants, chemical plants, composting facilities, refineries, landfills, dairies, and fiberglass
12 California Air Resources Board, Frequently Asked Questions Regulation for In -Use Off-Road Diesel-Fueled (Off-Road Regulation), 2015. Available online at: https://ww3.arb.ca.gov/msprog/ordiesel/faq/idlepolicyfaq.pdf.
III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 34 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
molding. The Project would not include any of the land uses that have been identified by the SCAQMD as odor sources.
Construction activities associated with the Project may generate detectable odors from heavy -duty equipment exhaust and architectural coatings. However, construction -related odors would be short - term in nature and cease upon Project completion. In addition, the Project would be required to comply with the California Code of Regulations, Title 13, sections 2449(d)(3) and 2485, which minimizes the idling time of construction equipment either by shutting it off when not in use or by reducing the time of idling to no more than five minutes. This would reduce the detectable odors from heavy -duty equipment exhaust. The Project would also be required to comply with the SCAQMD Rule 1113 – Architectural Coating, which would minimize odor impacts from ROG emissions during architectural coating. Any odor impacts to existing adjacent land uses would be short -term and not substantial. As such, the Project would not result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people. Impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measure: No mitigation measures are required.
4. Biological Resources
a. Would the project have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
No Impact. The Project Site is located in a developed and urban area of the City that has been highly disturbed. According to the City’s General Plan, there is limited to no natural habitat for special status species within the City . The existing Project Site is fully developed with two buildings , associated surface parking, and minimal ornamental landscaping along the southeastern and northeastern perimeters. Surrounding uses include industrial and residential uses. Because of these conditions, the Project Site does not provide any suitable habitat for special- status mammal, plant, and fish species.
Thus, construction activities would not adversely impact candidate, sensitive, or special status species.
Furthermore, Project operation would not adversely affect any candidate, sensitive, or special status III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 35 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
species. Based on the site’s urban condition, no endangered, rare, threatened, or special status plant species (or associated habitats) or wildlife species designated by the U nited States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), or California Native Plant Society have the potential to occur on-site. Thus, no impacts would occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required. b. Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
No Impact. The existing Project Site is fully developed with two buildings, associated surface parking, and minimal ornamental landscaping along the southeastern and northeastern perimeter s. According to the Open Space and Conservation Element of the City’s General Plan, the City is completely urbanized with no river, riparian, or similar resources. As such, there are no local plans or policies related to riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communi ties. Therefore, the Project would not adversely affect riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities, and no impacts would occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required. c. Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 36 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
No Impacts. A ccording to the USFWS National Wetlands Inventory Mapper, there are no mapped wetlands within the Project Site. 13 As such, no impacts would result pertaining to state or federally protected wetlands.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required. d. Would the project interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
No Impact. The Project Site is located in a developed and urban area that has been highly disturbed .
Surfaces on-site are mostly paved with concrete and asphalt. The Project Site functions as two industrial buildings with associated concrete surface parking and nominal landscaping and thus does not function as a wildlife corridor or nursery site. Further, implementation of the Project would not remove the existing trees or vegetation on-site. Therefore, the Project would not substantially interfere 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, and no impacts would occur.
Mitigation Measure. No mitigation measures are required. e. Would the project conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
13 United States Fish and Wildlife, “National Wetlands Inventory.” Available online at:
https://fwsprimary.wim.usgs.gov/wetlands/apps/wetlands-mapper/. Accessed January 23, 2023.
III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 37 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
Less than Significant Impact. The City of Baldwin Park Municipal Code, Section 153.165 (Tree Preservation) of the City’s Municipal Code, prohibits the removal of mature trees on private property without first obtaining a permit from the Tree Officer. The Project would remove multiple on-site trees along the southern perimeter of the Project Site. However, the Project Applicant would plant replacement trees along the same border of the Project Site. Pursuant to Section 153.165 of the City’s Municipal Code, the Project Applicant would be required to apply for a tree removal permit with the City. This application would list the species name and size of the trees to be removed and replaced for the City’s Tree Officer to review and approval. Upon approval from the City’s Tree Officer and issuance of the City’s tree permit, the Project’s impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required. f. Would the project conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
No Impact. The City has not adopted a Habitat Conservation Plan or Community Conservation Plan.
Further, according to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife’s California Natural Community Conservation Map, the City is not located within a regional Natural Community Conservation Plans or Habitat Conservation Plan. 14 Thus, the Project would not conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan, and no impacts would occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
14 California Department of Fish and Wildlife, California Natural Community Conservation Plans. Available online at:
https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=68626&inline. Accessed January 23, 2023.
III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 38 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
5. Cultural Resources
a. Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Less than Significant Impact. The existing Project Site includes two buildings located on parcels that are currently zoned by the City as Industrial. An initial consultation letter was sent to the South-Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC) on March 7, 2023, to inquire if any state or federally designated historical resources identified either on -site or within the immediate vicinity of the Project Site. No responses from the SCCIC have been received as of the publication of this MND. The existing buildings do not exhibit the historical architectural themes or styles that are commonly provided in other historically preserved buildings and communities throughout the state ( e.g., buildings that have mid- century modern architectural style). Further, according to the Office of Historic Preservation, the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) and the National Register of Historical Places (NRHP) do not identify historical resources on-site.
15 As such, the Project would not cause a substantial
adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5, and impacts would be less than significant.
b. Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated . The existing Project Site is located in a developed and urban area that has been highly disturbed. Surfaces on -site are mostly paved with concrete and asphalt. As such, it is unlikely that accidental discovery of archeological resources would occur. However, construction activities associated with the Project would involve grading. In the event
15 Office of Historic Preservation, “Built Environment Resource Directory (BERD).” Available online:
https://ohp.parks.ca.gov/?page_id=30338, accessed February 7, 2023.
III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 39 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
that previously unidentified archaeological resources are encountered during these activities, the Project would be required to comply with Mitigation Measure CUL -1. Mitigation Measure CUL -1 would ensure that work in the immediate area of a potential archaeological find is halted until an archaeologist evaluates the find and determines appropriate subsequent procedures. With implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-1, impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures:
CUL-1 If previously unidentified cultural resources are encountered during ground disturbing activities, work in the immediate area must halt and a qualified archaeologist approved by the City and retained by the Project Applicant must be contacted immediately to evaluate the find. If the discovery proves to be significant under CEQA, the qualified archaeologist shall expeditiously prepare and implement a research design and archaeological data recovery plan that captures those categories of data for which the site is significant in accordance with Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines.
c. Would the project disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal ceremonies?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Less than Significant. No dedicated cemetery exists on the Project Site or in the vicinity of the Project.
As the Project Site has been subject to past subsurface disturbance associated with grading and foundations; it is not anticipated that intact human remains would be encountered during construction activities. However, in the event that human remains are encountered, those remains would require proper treatment, in accordance with the with State of California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5. As r equired by State law, the requirements and procedures set forth in Section 5097.98 of the California Public Resources Code would also be implemented. Adherence to existing State laws would reduce impacts to less than significant levels.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 40 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
6. Energy
a. Would the project result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Less than Significant Impact. Southern California Edison (SCE) provides electrical services to Baldwin Park through State-regulated public utility contracts. 16 The Southern California Gas Company (SoCal Gas) provides natural gas services to the Project Area.17 Construction
Construction activities associated with the Project would consume electricity on a limited basis to power lighting, electrical equipment, and supply and convey water for dust control. Electricity would be supplied to the Project Site from existing electrical lines that connect to the Project Site. The electricity demand at any given time would vary throughout the construction period based on the construction activities being performed a nd would cease upon completion of construction. Electricity use from construction would be short -term, limited to working hours, used for necessary construction -related activities, and represent a small fraction of the Project’s annual operational electricity.
Typically, construction activities do not involve the consumption of natural gas. As such, natural gas would not be supplied to support Project construction activities and there would be no expected demand generated by construction of the Project. If natural gas is used during construction, it would be in limited amounts and on a temporary basis and would specifically be used to replace or offset diesel-fueled equipment and as such would not result in substantial on-going demand.
Construction activities associated with the Project would u se gasoline and/or diesel -powered equipment and/or vehicles for demolition and hauling activities. However, the Project A pplicant
16 Southern California Edison, "Our Service Territory.” Available online at https://www.sce.com/about-us/who-we- are/leadership/our-service-territory. Accessed January 27, 2023. 17 Southern California Gas Company , “Map Showing Local Service Zones of Southern California Gas Company. ” Available online at: https://www.socalgas.com/1443739946153/Detailed-description-of-Local-Service-Zones.pdf.
Accessed February 6, 2023.
III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 41 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
would use fuel-efficient equipment consistent with State and federal regulations, such as the fuel efficiency regulations outlined in Title 24, Assembly Bill 32 (AB 32), which regulates energy resources and fuel consumption and California Code of Regulations, Title 13, sections 2449(d)(3) and 2485, which minimizes the idling time of construction equipment either by shutting it off when not in use or by reducing the time of idling to no more than five minutes.
Construction equipment would be maintained to applicable standards, and construction activities and associated fuel consumption and energy use would be temporary and typical of construction sites. It is also reasonable to assume contractors would avoid wasteful, inefficient, and unnecessary fuel consumption during construction to reduce construction costs. Therefore, construction activities associated with the Project would not involve the inefficient, wasteful, and unnecessary use of energy during construction, and the construction- phase impact related to energy consumption would be less than significant.
Operation
The proposed soccer training facility would include an indoor soccer field, a gym room, meeting room, kitchen, and office. These features would result in energy consumption. The Project would also include a total of three water fountains and two restrooms on- site. Accordingly, energy would also be consumed during Project operations related to water usage and solid waste disposal. The Project must comply with the mandatory requirements set forth in the California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen Green Code) related to energy efficiency, water efficiency and conservation, and material conservation and resource efficiency for new non-residential buildings.
Energy would also be consumed as a result of vehicle trips. Thus, Project operations would result in an increase in the consumption of petroleum- based fuels related to vehicular travel to and from the Project Site . The majority of the vehicle fleet that would be used by employees and visitor s of the proposed soccer training facility and would consist of light -duty automobiles and light -duty trucks, which are subject to state fuel efficiency standards, such as the Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) and Low-Emission Vehicle Program Standards. The Low Carbon Fuel Standard, in part, aims to reduce fuel consumption and providers of transportation fuels must demonstrate that the mix of fuels they supply for use in California meets the LCFS carbon intensity standards for each annual compliance period.
In conclusion, the Project would result in an increase in energy consumption in the form of electricity, water usage, waste disposal, and vehicle trips. C ompliance with state-mandated regulations and standards would ensure the Project would not result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 42 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
consumption of energy resources during construction or operation and impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required. b. Would the project conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Less than Significant Impact. The Project would be designed in a manner that is consistent with relevant energy conservation plans designed to encourage development that results in the efficient use of energy resources. Per Chapter Four of City to Baldwin Park Design Guidelines Manual (April 2012), the Project would utilize photo sensitive off/on switches for exterior light fixtures and use energy -effic
ient
Energy Star lighting fixture with low-voltage lighting.
The Hea
lth and Sustainability Element of the City’s General Plan includes relevant energy -specific conservation plans specific to Baldwin Park. Specifically, Goal HS-7 of the Health and Sustainability Element aims to “ reduce greenhouse gas emissions citywide by reducing energy use and reliance on fossil fuels.”18 As discussed above, the Project would comply with the CALGreen Code (2022) which ensures the use of energy efficient features for the proposed facility. As such, the Project would not conflict or obstruct any local or state plans for renewable energy or energy efficiency. For these reasons, this impact would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required. 18 City of Baldwin Park, Health and Sustainability Element, April 1, 2015.
III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 43 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
7. Geology and Soils
a. Would the project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology S pecial Publication 42.
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
No Impact. The Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act was passed following the 1971 San Fernando earthquake. The Act regulates development in California near known active faults due to hazards associated with surface fault ruptures. Alquist -Priolo maps are distributed to affected cities, counties, and state agencies for their use in planning and controlling new construction. Areas within an Alquist -Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone require special studies to evaluate the potential for surface rupture to ensure that no structures intended for human occupancy are constructed across an active fault.
The Project Site is not located within a Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. 19 The nearest active
fault is the Sierra Madre fault, located approximately 3.1 miles north of the Project Site. 20 Considering the distance to the nearest known active faults, the potential for surface fault rupture due to a known active fault is considered low. As such, impacts pertaining to potential fault rupture of a known earthquake fault would not occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
19 California Department of Conservation, “Earthquake Zones of Required Investigation.” Available online at:
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/EQZApp/app/. Accessed on January 23, 2023. 20 United States Geological Survey, “Quaternary Fault and Fold Database of the United States.” Available online at:
https://www.usgs.gov/programs/earthquake-hazards/faults. Accessed on January 23, 2023.
III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 44 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
ii. Strong seismic ground shaking?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Less than Significant Impact. The Project Site is located in Southern California, which has several active seismic faults that subject people and structures to potential earthquake and seismic-related hazards. As such, the Project would be constructed in accordance with the 2022 California Building Code (CBC), which specifies the regulatory requirements for commercial, recreational, and industrial buildings related to resiliency to strong seismic ground shaking. Additionally, the Project would comply with the structural safety requirements outlined in Chapter 150 (Building Codes) of the City’s Municipal Code. By complying with state and local regulations regarding structural safety, impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required. iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
No Impact. Liquefaction is a seismic phenomenon in which loose, saturated, fine-grained granular soils behave similarly to a fluid when subjected to high -intensity ground shaking. Liquefaction occurs when three general conditions exist: (1) shallow groundwater; (2) low -density, fine, clean sandy soils; and (3) high intensity ground motion.
According to the California State Geoportal , the Project Site is not located within a liquefaction zone.21 Additionally, no features of the Project would result in increased liquefaction potential .
Thus, the Project would not directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects,
21 California State Geoportal, “CGS Seismic Hazards Program: Liquefaction Zones.” Available online at:
https://gis.data.ca.gov/datasets/b70a766a60ad4c0688babdd47497dbad_0/explore?location=34.097009%2C- 117.992164%2C12.94, accessed January 22,2023.
III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 45 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving liquefaction or other seismic -related ground failure, and no impacts would occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required. iv. Landslides?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
No Impact. Landslides and other types of slope failures, such as lateral spreading, can result in areas with varying topography in the event of an earthquake. The topography of the Project Site is relatively flat with no significant slopes existing within its vicinity. Furthermore, the Project Site is not located within a designated landslide zone. 22 As such, landslide hazard is anticipated to be negligible, and impacts related to landslides would not occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required. b. Would the project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Less than Significant Impact. Construction activities associated with the Project would result in ground surface disruption during site clearance, which would temporarily expose soils, allowing for possible erosion. The Project would be required to comply with federal, regional, and local regulations pertaining to soil erosion related -construction activity. As discussed in Section 4.10 , Hydrology and Water Quality, the Project must comply with all applicable requirements contained therein to the City’s Storm Water Quality Management Program per Section 52.12 (Control of Pollutants from Other Construction Activities) of the City’s Municipal Code. Additionally, the Project Applicant must adhere to Section 52.13 (Control of Pollutants from New Development/Redevelopment Projects) of the City’s
22 California Department of Conservation, “Landslide Inventory (Beta).” Available online at:
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/lsi/. Accessed January 2,2023.
III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 46 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
Municipal Code and prepare a low impact development (LID) plan that outlines the appropriate Best Management Practices (BMPs) to be installed during construction that would reduce sediment transport via stormwater runoff during operation. Compliance with these local regulations would ensure that the Project would not result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil, and impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required. c. Would the project be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on - or off -site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Less Than Significant Impact. Lateral spreading is a phenomenon in which surficial soil displaces along a shear zone that has formed within an underlying liquefied layer. The surficial blocks are transported downslope or in the direction of a free face, by earthquake and gravitational forces. The Project Site is relatively flat and does not include a free-facing slope in proximity of the site. Therefore, the potential for lateral spreading is considered very low.
Subsidence occurs when large amounts of groundwater have been withdrawn from certain types of rocks, such as fine -grained sediments. In California, large areas of land subsidence were first documented by United States Geological Survey (USGS) scientists in the first half of the 20th century.
Most of this subsidence was a result of excessive groundwater pumping. The Project Site is not within a subsidence area according to the USGS.
23 As stated, the Project Site is not located within a liquefaction zone , nor would the Project be prone to landslides. The Project would be subject to Chapter 150 of the City’s Municipal Code and the CBC in order to minimize geologic hazards during a seismic event. Per Chapter 150 of the City’s Municipal Code, the Project would prepare a geotechnical report to ensure slope stability on-site. The geotechnical report would be submitted the City’s Building and Safety Division for review and approval. Thus, adherence to local and state regulations would ensure that the Project would not be located on a
23 U.S. Geological Survey, “Areas of Land Subsidence in California.” Available online at:
https://ca.water.usgs.gov/land_subsidence/california-subsidence-areas.html, accessed November 22, 2022.
III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 47 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
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 impacts would occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required. d. Would the project be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18 -1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Less than Significant Impact. Expansive soils are defined as soils possessing clay particles that react to moisture changes by shrinking (when dry) or swelling (when wet). According to the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), soils on -site are classified as “Urban land, commercial- Soboba complex,” which generally consist of medium dense to dense sands and gravels. These materials have a low potential for soil expansion. 24 As such, impacts from soil expansion would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required. 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?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
No Impact. No septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems would be constructed as part of the Project. Therefore, impacts related to soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems would not occur.
24 United States Department of Agriculture, “Web Soil Survey.” Available online at:
https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx. Accessed February 6, 2023.
III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 48 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required. f. Would the project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. Paleontological resources include fossil remains or traces of past life forms, including both vertebrate and invertebrate species, as well as plants.
Paleontological resources are generally found within sedimentary rock formations.
As discussed above, the Project Site is located in a developed and urban area that has been highly disturbed. Surfaces on-site are mostly paved with concrete and asphalt. However, ground disturbing activities during construction could potentially impact undiscovered paleontological resources, which could be considered a significant impact . Mitigation Measure GEO -1 would require all construction activities to halt in the event that a paleontological resource is encountered and require a qualified paleontologist to monitor construction activities and prepare a Paleontological Resource Mitigation Plan to address assessment and recovery of the resource. With the implementation of Mitigation Measure GEO-1, impacts related to the paleontological resources would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures:
GEO-1 Ground disturbing activities associated with the Project shall be monitored by a qualified paleontologist. In the event paleontological resources are discovered all work shall be halted within 50 feet of the discovery and a Paleontological Resource Mitigat ion Plan shall be prepared by a qualified paleontologist to address assessment and recovery of the resource. A final report documenting any found resources, their recovery, and disposition shall be prepared in consultation with the Project Applicant, and a copy of the report shall be provided to the City of Baldwin Park Planning Division.
III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 49 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
8. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
a. Would the project generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Less than Significant Impact.
Thresholds of Significance
The SCAQMD released draft guidance regarding interim CEQA GHG significance thresholds. In December 2008, the SCAQMD adopted an interim 10,000 metric tons CO 2e (MTCO 2e) per year screening level threshold for stationary source/industrial Projects for which the SCAQMD is the lead agency. The SCAQMD continues to consider adoption of significance thresholds for non- industrial development Projects. The most recent proposal issued in September 2010 uses the following tiered approach to evaluate potential GHG impacts from various uses:
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 (i.e., a Climate Action Plan) that has gone through public hearings 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 MTCO
2e/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 MTCO
2e/year), commercial projects (1,400
MTCO2e/year), and mixed- use projects (3,000 MTCO 2e/year). Under option 2 a single numerical screening threshold of 3,000 MTCO 2e/year would be used for all non -industrial projects. If the Proj ect 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 III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 50 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
targets were established based on the goal of AB 32 to reduce statewide GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. The 2020 efficiency targets are 4.8 MTCO 2e per service population for Project level analyses and 6.6 MTCO 2e 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.
The thresholds identified above are not adopted by the SCAQMD or distributed for widespread public review and comment, and the working group tasked with developing the thresholds has not met since September 2010. The future schedule and likelihood of thres hold adoption is uncertain. However, for the purposes of illustrating the scope of the Project’s increase of GHG emissions, this analysis utilizes the proposed 1,4 00 MTCO
2e/year draft threshold for commercial Projects (Tier 3). These draft thresholds have been utilized for illustrative purposes for numerous Projects in the City and throughout the Basin.
Project Impacts
GHG emissions were calculated in the same CalEEMod run used to determine the Project’s criteria air pollutant emissions. Consistent with SCAQMD recommendations, construction emissions were amortized over a thirty -year period and added to the annual operational emissions to determine the Project’s annual GHG emissions. Consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064(h)(3), Project significance was determined based on the Project’s consistency with an approved plan or mitigation program that provides specific requirements that will avoid or substantially lessen the cumulative problem within the geographic area of the Project. The relevant adopted regulatory plans include CARB’s 2022 Scoping Plan, CALGreen, California Energy Code, SCAG’s Connect SoCal Plan, and the City’s General Plan.
Construction Emissions
For purposes of this analysis, it is estimated that the Project would be constructed in approximately 11 months with construction beginning in 202 3 and Project operations commencing by mid -2024. This analysis assumes construction would be undertaken with the following primary construction phases:
(1) Demolition (2) Grading, and (3) Building Construction.
With the use of CalEEMod, GHG emissions throughout Project construction were calculated from off - road equipment usage, hauling vehicles, delivery trips, and worker trips to and from the site. The total GHG construction emissions during 2023 and 2024 would be approximately 182 metric tons of carbon III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 51 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
dioxide equivalent (MT CO 2e). As GHG emissions impact from construction activities would occur over a relatively short time span, it would contribute a relatively small portion of the lifetime GHG emission impact of the Project. The total construction GHG emissions were divided by 30 years to determine an annual construction emission rate to be amortized over the Project’s first 30 years of operations, consistent with SCAQMD recommendations. Amortized over a 30 -year period, the Project is anticipated to emit approximately 6.07 metric tons of carbon dioxide per year (MT CO2e/year).
Operational Emissions
The operations of the Project would generate GHG emissions from the usage of electricity, natural gas, water, and generation of solid waste and wastewater. Emissions of operational GHGs are shown in Table 6, Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions. As shown, the GHG emissions generated by the Project would be approximately 206.06 CO
2e MTY.
As discussed previously, the SCAQD Draft Threshold (Tier 3) identified a screening threshold of 1,400 MTCO
2e/year for commercial -use projects. As the Project would generate approximately 206.06 MT CO2e/year, the Project would be below the SCAQMD’s draft threshold. This quantified illustration of the Project’s scope of GHG emissions is provided for informational purposes, and significance under CEQA is based on the Project’s consistency with statewide and regional policies and plans to meet the state reducti on goals set in AB 32 and SB 32, including CARB’s 2022 Scoping Plan , SCAG’s 2020 Connect SoCal RTP/SCS, and the City’s General Plan.
Table 6
Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Emissions Source Metric Tons of Carbon Dioxide
Equivalent (per year)
Amortized Construction 6.07
Area Sources 0.48
Energy Sources 53.80
Mobile Sources 140.00
Waste Sources 2.00
Water Sources 3.71
Refrigerants <0.01
Total GHG Emissions 206.06
Source: Impact Sciences, 2023. See Appendix A to this IS/MND for CalEEMod data.
III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 52 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
Mitigation Measure: No mitigation measures are required. b. Would the project conflict with any applicable plan, policy or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Less than Significant Impact. A Project would have a significant impact with respect to GHG emissions and global climate change if it would substantially conflict with the provisions of Section 15064.4(b) of the State CEQA Guidelines.
Pursuant to Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines , a significant GHG impact is identified if a Project could conflict with applicable GHG reduction plans, policies, or regulations. The relevant adopted regulatory plans and regulations include AB 32, SB 32, CARB’s 2022 Scoping Plan, CALGreen Code, SCAG’s 2020 Connect SoCal Plan, and the City’s General Plan.
Consistency with Assembly Bill 32 & Senate Bill 32
The Project would be consistent with applicable statewide regulatory programs designed to reduce GHG emissions consistent with Assembly Bill 32 ( AB 32 ) and Senate Bill 32 ( SB 32 ). During construction, the Project will utilize equipment in compliance with CARB. Mobile sources during construction and operation would be subject to the requirements of California Assembly Bill 1493 (Pavley Standards), the Advanced Clean Cars Program, and the Low Carbon Fuel Standard Regulation.
Additionally, the Project would be designed, constructed, and operated consistent with California Title 24 and CALGreen (2022). These regulations require Projects to comply with specific standards related to building energy efficiency and green building.
Consistency with the 2022 Scoping Plan for Achieving Carbon Neutrality The Project would be consistent with CARB's 2022 Scoping Plan. In response to the passage of AB 1279 and the identification of the 2045 GHG reduction target, CARB published the 2022 Scoping Plan for Achieving Carbon Neutrality on November 16, 2022 and it was approved on December 15, 2022. 25 The
25 California Air Resources Board, 2022 Scoping Plan Documents, Notice of Decision. Available online at:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2022-12/2022-sp-appendix-b-notice-of-decision.pdf; accessed January 26, 2023.
III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 53 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
2022 Scoping Plan lays out the sector -by-sector roadmap for California, the world’s fifth largest economy, to achieve carbon neutrality by 2045 or earlier, outlining a technologically feasible, cost - effective, and equity-focused path to achieve the state’s climate target. The 2022 Scoping Plan includes policies to achieve a significant reduction in fossil fuel combustion, further reductions in short -lived climate pollutants, support for sustainable development, increased action on natural and working lands (NWL) to reduce emissions and sequester carbon, and the capture and storage of carbon.
The 2022 Scoping Plan discusses the role of local governments in meeting the State’s GHG reductions goals because local governments have jurisdiction and land use authority related to: community- scale planning and permitting processes, local codes and actions, outreach and education programs, and municipal operations. Furthermore, local governments may have the ability to incentivize renewable energy, energy efficiency, and water efficiency measures. As discussed in detail in Appendix D (Local Actions) of the 2022 Scoping Plan, local jurisdictions can do much to enable statewide priorities, such as taking local action to help the state develop the housing, transport systems, and other tools we all need. Indeed, state tools —such as the Cap -and-Trade Program or zero -emission vehicle programs— do not substitute for these local efforts. Multiple legal tools are open to local jurisdictions to support this approach, including development of a climate action plan (CAP), sustainability p lan, or inclusion of a plan for reduction of GHG emissions and climate actions within a jurisdiction’s general plan. Any of these can help to align zoning, permitting, and other local tools with climate action.
The Project would comply with all regulations adopted in furtherance of the Scoping Plan to the extent required by law and to the extent that they are applicable to the Project. Furthermore, the Project would be consistent with the Health and Sustainability Element of the City of Baldwin Park General Plan which supports local, regional, and statewide efforts to reduce emissions of GHGs. As a part of that policy, the General Plan describes Action HS-11.3 to analyze and mitigate increases in GHG emissions during development Project review, pursuant to CEQA. The Project would achieve the Health and Sustainability Element’s goal by meeting the SCAQMD threshold for GHGs and achieving GH G reductions through Project design features, such as the Project’s urban in -fill location and compliance with the California Green Building Standards Code (2022).
Consistency with SCAG RTP/SCS (2020 Connect SoCal Plan) The State of California has adopted plans and policies designed to reduce regional and local GHG emissions. SB 375 requires that each MPO prepare an SCS in the RTP that demonstrates how the region will meet greenhouse gas emissions targets. SB 375 establishes a collaborative relationship between MPOs and CARB to establish GHG emissions targets for each region in the state . Under the guidance of the goals and objectives adopted by SCAG’s Regional Council, the RTP/SCS was developed to III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 54 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
provide a blueprint to integrate land use and transportation strategies to help achieve a coordinated and balanced regional transportation system. The RTP/SCS represents the culmination of several years of work involving dozens of public agencies, 191 cities, hundreds of local, county, regional and state officials, the business community, environmental groups, as well as various nonprofit organizatio ns.
Adoption of the 2020 RTP/SCS substantiated that the growth forecasts for the SCAG region, taking into account efforts to reduce climate change impacts from GHG emissions, were consistent with the goals of SB 375.
The primary goal of the SCS is to provide a vision for future growth in southern California that will decrease per capita GHG emissions from passenger vehicles . However, the strategies contained in the SCS will produce benefits for the region far beyond simply reducing GHG emissions. The SCS integrates the transportation network and related strategies with an overall land use pattern that responds to projected growth, housing needs, changing demographics, and transportation demands .
The regional vision of the SCS maximizes current voluntary local efforts that support the goals of SB 375. The SCS focuses the majority of new housing and job growth in high- quality transit areas and other opportunity areas on existing main streets, in downtowns, and on commercial corridors, resulting in an improved jobs-housing balance and more opportunity for transit-oriented development.
As discussed herein, the Project does not include the addition or removal of any housing and would not have the potential to alter the growth forecasts for the region. Furthermore, also discussed herein, the Project would generate fewer than 110 daily vehicle trips and would not result in potentially significant impacts with respect to vehicle miles traveled (VMT). Thus, the Project would not have the potential to substantively increase GHG emissions associated with motor vehicles beyond the forecasts identified in SCAG’s RTP/SCS. Accordingly, the Project would be generally consistent with the objectives identified SCAG’s 2020 RTP/SCS.
Conclusion
Given the Project’s relatively small increase in GHG emissions (i.e., below the SCAQMD draft threshold), and the Project’s consistency with all relevant adopted regulatory plans, the Project would not generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment. Moreover, the Project would not conflict with any applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases and these impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 55 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
9. Hazards and Hazardous Materials
a. Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Less than Significant Impact. Exposure of the public or the environment to hazardous materials could potentially occur through improper handling or use of hazardous materials or hazardous wastes during routine use, disposal, and/or transport of hazardous materials. The severity of these potential effects varies with the activity conducted, the concentration and type of hazardous materials or wastes present, and the proximity of sensitive receptors.
Operating as a soccer facility, the Project would not involve the handling, use or transport of hazardous materials or hazardous wastes. However, limited amounts of some hazardous materials could be used in the short -term construction phase of the P roject and could expose construction workers and the general public, including standard construction materials (e.g., paints and solvents), vehicle fuel, and other hazardous materials. In the event of a release of hazardous material the Project would be required to notify the following State agencies under the following State statutes, respectively:
• Department of the California Highway Patrol: California Vehicle Code Section 23112.5; • Office of Emergency Services and the California Public Utilities Commission: Public Utilities Code Section 7673, (PUC General Orders #22-B, 161);
• State Fire Marshal: Government Code Sections 51018
• Office Emergency Services: Water Codes Sections 13271, 13272; and • Division of Occupational Safety and Health (Cal/OSHA): California Labor Code Section 6409.1 (b)10.
Furthermore, the Project Applicant would adhere to the requirements set forth in Section 153.140.030 (Hazardous Materials and Wastes) of the City’s Municipal Code for discharging hazardous materials.
With compliance to state and local regulations, impacts related to the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 56 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
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?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. The Project involves the demolition of an existing industrial building located at 14424 Joanbridge Street, the merge of two adjacent properties, and repurposing an existing building on one property into a sports facility that would span over both properties.
Project operations would not contribute to conditions that could cause a reasonably foreseeable release in hazardous materials. Construction equipment utilized during construction activities associated with the Project could result in accidental release of hazardous substances such as petroleum-based fuels or hydraulic fluid used for construction equipment . However, the level of risk associated with this type of accidental release of hazardous substances is not considered significant due to the small volume and low concentration of hazardous materials utilized during construction.
According to the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), there are no reported cases of soil, soil vapor, or groundwater contamination on- site.
26,27 However, the existing building located at 14424 Joanbridge Street was constructed prior to the year 1965. 28 Given its approximate age, there is potential for asbestos- containing materials (ACMs) and lead -based paint (LBP), as well as other potential hazardous materials to be present in association with the building materials of this structure. As such, demolition of this structure could potentially expose construction personne l to ACMs or LBPs. Demolition activities that could potentially result in the release of ACMs or LBPs would be required to be conducted in accordance with the U.S. EPA’s National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
26 State Water Resources Control Board, “Geotracker.” Available online at: https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/.
Accessed January 24, 2023.
27 Dep artment of Toxic Substances Control. “Envirostor.” Available online at:
https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/search.asp?cmd=search&reporttype=CORTESE&site_type=CSITES,O PEN,FUDS,CLOSE&status=ACT,BKLG,COM&reporttitle=HAZARDOUS+WASTE+AND+SUBSTANCES+SITE+L IST. Accessed January 24, 2023.
28 Historic Aerials. 14424 Joansbridge Street Aerials-1965. Available online at:
https://www.historicaerials.com/viewer. Accessed January 24, 2023.
III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 57 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
Pollutants. These standards mandate that building owners conduct an asbestos survey to determine the presence of ACMs prior to the commencement of any remedial work, including demolition. Thus, Mitigation Measure HAZ -1 would require abatement of any ACMs found on- site. Additionally, as required under Mitigation Measure HAZ -2, if paint is separated from building materials (chemically or physically) during demolition of the structure, the paint waste would be required to be evaluated independently from the building material by a qualified Environmental Professional. If LBP is found, abatement by a qualified Lead Specialist is required prior to any activities that would create lead dust or fume hazard. Compliance with Mitigation Measures HAZ -1 and HAZ-2 would reduce potential impacts to less than significant levels.
Mitigation Measures:
HAZ-1 Prior to issuance of a demolition permit , the Project Applicant shall retain a qualified specialist to conduct surveys and determine the presence or absence of asbestos containing-materials (ACMs) within the existing build located at 14424 Joa nbridge Street. Surveys shall be submitted to the City of Baldwin Park Building and Safety for approval. In the event that ACMs are identified, abatement of asbestos shall be completed prior to any activities that would disturb ACMs or create an airborne asbestos hazard. A batement activities shall include the removal and disposal of all asbestos within the structure to be demolished. Asbestos removal shall be performed by a certified contractor in accordance with South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rule 1403. Per SCAQMD Rule 1403, asbestos and ACMs removed from the Project Site shall be disposed of at an appropriate facility, such as the Azusa Land Reclamation Company Landfill, located 1211 West Gladstone Street in the City of Azusa.
HAZ-2 In the event that paint is separated from building materials (chemically or physically) during demolition of the on- site structure, the paint waste shall be evaluated independently from the building material by a qualified Environmental Professional retained by the Project Applicant . Evaluation materials shall be submitted to the City of Baldwin Park Building and Safety for approval. If lead-based paint (LBP) is discovered, LBP abatement shall be completed by a qualified Lead Specialist prior to any activities that would create lead dust or fume hazard. Abatement activities shall include the removal and disposal of the existing LBPs on -site. LBP removal and disposal shall be performed in accordance with California Code of Regulation Title 8, Section 1532.1, which identifies the exposure limits, exposure m onitoring and respiratory protection for workers exposed to lead. Contractors performing lead-based III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 58 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
paint removal and disposal shall provide evidence of abatement activities to the City of Baldwin Park Building and Safety Division.
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?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Less than Significant Impact. T he nearest existing school to the Project Site is Margaret Heath Elementary School, located approximately 0.18 miles southwest of the Project Site at 14321 School Street. Given the number of industrial uses within the Project Area, it is unlikely that a new school would be sited within the immediate vicinity of the Project Site. As discussed above , handling and disposal of hazardous materials is anticipated to be minimal and would be conducted in compliance with existing federal and state regulations. The proposed demolition of the existing building located at 14424 Joanbridge Street may result in the accidental release of ACMs and LBPs. However, due to distance and the number of intervening structures between the school and the Project Site, accidental exposure to the school is not anticipated. Project compliance with federal and state regulations would ensure these impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required. d. Would the project be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
No Impact. Government Code §65962.5 requires the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), the State Department of Health Services, the SWRCB, and the California Integrated Waste Management Board to compile and annually update lists of hazardous waste sites and land designated as hazardous III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 59 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
waste property throughout the state. The Project Site is not listed pursuant to Government Code §65962.5.29 As such, no impacts would occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required. e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project are a?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
No Impact. The nearest airport to the Project Site is the San Gabriel Valley Airport (formerly known as the El Monte Airport), located approximately 4.28 miles southwest of the Project Site. The Project Site is not located within the San Gabriel Valley Airport’s safety zone area including the runway protection zone.
30 Further, the proposed redevelopment would meet the City’s design standards for maximum building height (see Section 11, Land Use and Planning) and would not cause a hazard to flights. As such, the Project would not result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the Project area and no impacts would occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required. f. Would the project impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Less than Significant Impact. Project operations would increase the potential need for emergency access to and from the Project Site . However, the Project would not impair implementation or
29 California Environmental Protection Agency, “Cortese List Data Resources.” Available online at:
https://calepa.ca.gov/sitecleanup/corteselist/, accessed January 24, 2023. 30 San Gabriel Valley Airport, “Airport Layout Plan Drawing Set.” Available online at:
https://planning.lacounty.gov/assets/upl/project/aluc_elmonte-plan.pdf. Accessed January 24, 2023.
III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 60 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
physically interfere with any adopted emergency response or evacuation plans. The City of Baldwin Park has an emergency response plan called the Baldwin Park Multi-Hazard Functional Plan (2002), which identifies City planning responses to emergency situations, such as fire, earthquake, flooding and more. The emergency response plan also designated evacuation routes for various types of hazards.
The Project would provide a code-compliant fire truck lane for the Los Angeles County Fire Department (LACFD). Additionally, no off -site roadway improvements are proposed that would interfere with emergency access, response times, or impede circulation of emergency vehicles on surrounding roadways. Further, the City of Baldwin Park and the LACFD would review Project site plans to ensure that adequate access for the proposed buildings is provided for emergency vehicles.
Upon approval of these site plans, impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required. g. Would the project expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
No Impact. The Project Site is not located within a High Fire Hazard Severity Zone or Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone as identified by the California Office of Emergency Services. 31 As such, implementation of the Project is not likely to expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires; therefore, no impacts would occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
31 Cal Fire, “Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in LRA.” Available online at:
https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/media/7280/losangelescounty.pdf. Adopted September, 2011.
III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 61 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
10. Hydrology and Water Quality
a. Would the project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Less than Significant Impact. Section 402 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) includes regulations established by the U.S. EPA under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program to control direct stormwater discharges. In the State of California, the SWRCB administers the NPDES permitting program and is responsible for developing NPDES permitting requirements. The NPDES program regulates industrial pollutant discharges, which include construction activities. The SWRCB works in coordination with the Regional Water Quality Control Boards (RWQCB) to preserve, protect, enhance, and restore water quality. The City of Baldwin Park is located within the jurisdiction of the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Boards (LA RWQCB). Under the NPDES program, construction activities that disturb more than one acre of land would be required to obtain a Construction General Permit. The City owns and/or operates a large municipal separate storm sewer system (MS4) that conveys and ultimately discharges into surface waters under the jurisdiction of the LARWQCB. These discharges originate as surface runoff from the various land uses within the City.
Construction activities associated with the Project would involve demolition and grading disturbances that would disturb less than one acre of land. As a result, waste discharge would occur and may consist of oil and grease, trash, heavy metals and pathogens as well as other pollutants. Further, construction activities associated with the Project have the potential to degrade water quality through the exposure of surface runoff (primarily rainfall) to exposed soils, dust, and other debris, as well as from runoff from construction equipment. Because Project construction activities would disturb less than one acre, the Project would not be required to obtain coverage under the NPDES Construction General Permit .
The Project would be required to comply with Section 52.12 (Control of Pollutants from Other Construction Activities) of the Municipal Code and comply with all applicable requirements contained in the City’s Storm Water Quality Management Program . Furthermore, construction activities associated with the Project would be subject to the requirements of LARWQCB Order No. R4 -2012- 0175, NPDES No. CAS004001, effective December 28, 2012, Waste Discharge Requirements for Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Discharges within the Coastal Watersheds of Los Angeles County (the Los Angeles County MS4 Permit), which controls the quality of runoff entering III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 62 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
municipal storm drains in Los Angeles County. Section VI.D.8 of the Los Angeles County MS4 Permit, Development Construction Program, requires permittees (which include the City) to enforce implementation of Best Management Practices (BMPs), including, but not limited to, approval of an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (ESCP) for all construction activities within their jurisdiction . 32 SCPs are required to include the elements of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP).
Accordingly, the construction contractor for the Project would be required to implement BMPs that would meet or exceed local, State, and federal mandated guidelines for stormwater treatment to control erosion and to protect the quality of surface water runoff during the construction period. BMPs utilized could include, without limitation: disposing of waste in accordance with all applicable laws and regulations; cleaning up leaks, drips, and spills immediately; conducting street sweeping during construction activities; limiting the amount of soil exposed at any given time; covering trucks; keeping construction equipment in good working order; and installing sediment filters during construction activities. Therefore, potential water quality impacts during construction of the Project would be less than significant. With respect to water quality during operation of the Project, Los Angeles County and all incorporated cities within Los Angeles County (except the City of Long Beach) are permittees under the Los Angeles County MS4 Permit. Section VI.D.7 of the Los Angeles County MS4 Permit, Planning and Land Development Program, is applicable to, among others, land -disturbing activities that result in the creation or addition or replacement of 5,000 square feet or more of impervious surface area on an already developed site, which would apply to the Project. This Program requires, among other things, that the Project runoff volume from the following be retained on- site: (a) the 0.75 inch, 24-hour rain event; or (b) the 85th percentile, 24 -hour rain event, as determined from the Los Angeles County 85th percentile precipitation isohyetal map, whichever is greater. The Project wo uld also be subject to the BMP requirements of the Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plan (SUSMP) adopted by LARWQCB. As a permittee, the City is responsible for implementing the requirements of the County - wide SUSMP within its boundaries. A Project- specific SUSMP would be implemented during the operation of the Project. In compliance with the Los Angeles County MS4 Permit and SUSMP requirements, the Project would be required to retain, treat and/or filter stormwater runoff through biofiltration before it enters the City stormwater drain system. The system incorporated into the Project must follow design requirements set forth in the MS4 permit and must be approved by the City.
Adherence to the requirements of the MS4 Permit and SUSMP would ensure that p otential impacts associated with water quality would be less than significant. With appropriate Project design and
32 California Regional Water Quality Control Board – Los Angeles Region, MS4 Discharges within the Coastal Watersheds of Los Angeles County Except those Discharges Originating from the City of Long Beach MS4, Order No. R4-2012-0175, as amended by Order WQ 2015-0075, NPDES No. CAS004001, page 116 et seq.
III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 63 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
compliance with the applicable federal, State, local regulations, and permit provisions, impacts of the Project related to stormwater runoff quality would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required. b. Would the project substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Less than Significant Impact. Currently, the Project Site is mostly paved with concrete and asphalt. As such, the Project Site is mostly impervious, and the site’s impervious area under the Project would be similar to existing conditions. Thus, Project implementation would not result in new impervious surfaces that could increase stormwater runoff and lead to a decrease in the amount of water recharged to the groundwater system within the confines of the 0.6-acre Project Site. Furthermore, the Project Site is relatively small in size, and the Project Design would include pervious landscaped areas along the perimeters of the site. Thus, Project is not anticipated to substantially deplete groundwater supplies or impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin. Impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required. c. Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner, which would:
i. R esult in substantial erosion or siltation on-or off-site?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Less than Significant Impact. The Project Site is located in a developed and urban area that has been highly disturbed. Soil disturbance would temporarily occur during Project construction due III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 64 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
to trenching for soil compaction and minimal excavation and grading activities. As such, disturbed soils would be susceptible to high rates of erosion from wind and rain, resulting in sediment transport via stormwater runoff from the Project Site. However, as stated above, the Project would be required to comply with Section 52.12 of the City’s Municipal Code and woul d adhere to the City’s Storm Water Quality Management Program. Per Section 52.13 of the City’s Municipal Code, the Project Applicant would be required to prepare a LID plan that outlines the appropriate BMPs to be installed during construction that would reduce sediment transport via stormwater runoff during operations. Compliance with these local regulations would reduce impacts related to erosion and siltation on-or-off site to less than significant levels.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required. ii. R esult in flooding on-or off-site?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Less than Significant Impact. According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s Flood Map Service Center, the Project Site is not located within a 100 -year flood hazard area. 33 The Project would collect on-site stormwater runoff on the Project Site in accordance with LARWQCB’s SUSMP. Further, the Project would be required to comply with Section 52.12 of the City’s Municipal Code and would adhere to the City’s Storm Water Quality Management Program to meet local design standards and discharge requirements. It is not anticipated that the Project would increase surface runoff in a manner that would result in on- or off-site flooding. Thus, impacts are anticipated to be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
33 Federal Emergency Management Agency, Flood Rate Insurance Map # 06037C1700F. Available online at:
https://msc.fema.gov/portal/home. Accessed January 27, 2023.
III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 65 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
iii. C reate or contribute runoff water, which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Less than Significant Impact. As stated, Project implementation would not result in an increase in impervious area. The stormwater system under the Project would discharge on-site stormwater in accordance with the City’s Municipal code and the SUSMP. Therefore, the development is not expected to exceed the capacity of the existing/planned stormwater drainage systems, and less than significant impacts would occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required. iv. I mpede or redirect flood flows?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
No Impact. As stated, the Project Site is located outside of a 100 -year flood hazard area and is located within an area identified as having little chance of flooding. Moreover, the Project is not of a size or scale that would have the potential to impede or redirect flood flows. Therefore, no impacts would occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required. d. In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, would the project risk release of pollutants due to project inundation?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 66 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
No Impact. As stated above, the Project Site is not located within a 100 -year flood hazard area. 34 The Project Site is located approximately 27.20 miles east of the Pacific Ocean, and, according to the California Department of Conservation, is located at a sufficient distance so as not to be subject to potential tsunami hazards.
35 The Project Site is located approximately 0.57 miles southeast of the Santa Fe Dam and reservoir.
According to the Safety Element of the General Plan, the Project Site is located in an area that could potentially experience up to 12 inches of flooding in the event of dam failure. However, as discussed above, the Project would not increase the existing impervious surfaces on -site, nor would it introduce any new components that would result in the release of stormwater pollutants. Additionally, according to the California Department of Water Resources, the Project Site is not located within a designated dam inundation area.
36 Therefore, the Project would not result in the release of pollutants in a flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones due to inundation, and no impacts would occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required. e. Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
No Impact. The Basin Plan for the Coastal Watersheds of Los Angeles and Ventura Counties (Basin Plan) establishes the water quality regulations and programs to implement the regulations for the Los Angeles and Ventura counties. The Basin Plan identifies beneficial uses for surface and ground waters, identifies narrative and numerical water quality objectives for regional attainment, and describes implementation programs and other necessary actions to achieve water quali ty objectives. The Project would implement a SUSMP that would adhere to the Basin Plan’s requirements for BMPs. As such, the
34 Federal Emergency Management Agency, “Flood Rate Insurance Map # 06037C1700F.” Available online at:
https://msc.fema.gov/portal/home. Accessed January 27, 2023. 35 California Department of Conservation, “Los Angeles County Tsunami Hazard Areas.” Available online at:
https://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/tsunami/maps/los-angeles. Accessed January 27, 2023. 36 California Department of Water Resources, “California Dam Breach Inundation Maps.” Available online at:
https://fmds.water.ca.gov/maps/damim/. Accessed January 24, 2023.
III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 67 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
Project would not conflict or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan, and no impacts would occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
11. Land Use and Planning
a. Would the project physically divide an established community?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
No Impact. The Project would merge two existing properties zoned as Industrial as one property/lot for Industrial -Commercial uses. The Project would serve the community overall by providing local recreational facilities for nearby neighborhoods. The Project would not introduce any new factors that could physically divide an established community, such as constructing a major highways/roadway , storm channel, bridge, or utility transmissions. Therefore, no impacts would occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required. b. Would the project cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Less than Significant.
City of Baldwin Park General Plan
The Project proposes an amendment to the City’s General Plan that would re -designate both lot s on 14412 and 14424 Joanbridge Street from General Industrial to a Commercial/Industrial land use designation. According to the City’s General Plan, the Commercial/Industrial land use designation permits commercial, light manufacturing, and office uses in both business park settings and as individually developed lots. The maximum permitted floor -to-area ratio (FAR) under this land use III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 68 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
designation is 1.0. The Project would include a total of 7,032 square feet of building area on a 26,244 - square foot site and thus, would have a 0.268 FAR.37 Thus, the Project would not exceed the City’s maximum FAR requirement.
Table 7, Project Consistency with Applicable General Plan Land Use Element Policies, analyzes the Project’s consistency with applicable goals and policies in the General Plan Land Use Elements. As shown, the Project would be consistent with all applicable General Plan policies.
Table 7
Project Consistency with Applicable General Plan Land Use Element Policies
Relevant Policy Project Consistency Analysis
Goal 2.0: Accommodate new development that is compatible with and complements existing conforming land uses.
Policy 2.5: Require that multi-family, commercial
and industrial development provide adequate
buffers (such as decorative walls and landscaped
setbacks) at the designated boundaries with
adjacent uses to prevent impacts on residences
due to noise, traffic, parking, light and glare, and
differences in scale; to ensure privacy; and to
provide visual compatibility.
Consistent. The Project would include a six-foot-high concrete masonry wall along the southern perimeter of the Project Site as a buffer between the soccer facility/associated parking and the adjacent residential uses.
Policy 2.6 : Require that the external lighting of
commercial and industrial properties be
confined to the site to avoid adverse impacts on
adjacent land uses due to light spillover or glare.
Consistent. The Project would comply with the City’s Design Guidelines and submit a lighting plan that outlines the location of each proposed lighting fixture on-site. The Project would comply with City standards and orient outdoor lighting to face downwards. Furthermore, implementation of Mitigation
Measure AES-1 would ensure the Project would not result in light spillover onto adjacent land uses.
Policy 2.7: Require that automobile and truck
access to commercial and industrial properties
adjacent to residential parcels be located the
maximum practical distance from the residential
parcel.
Consistent. The Project would utilize the two existing
driveways on -site. These driveways are located along
Joanbridge Street, the farthest location from the residences to the south.
Goal 7.0: Apply new Commercial/Industrial designation to allow a broader range of non-industrial uses and utilize redevelopment authority to provide necessary infrastructure improvements to facilitate industrial transition to office park environment. Also, increase code enforcement efforts to create a better eastern "gateway" image into the City off Ramona Boulevard.
Policy 7.4: Require adequate on-site parking and
circulation of developments so that roadways
serving these projects can better serve traffic
demands. Site review requirements should
discourage on-street parking.
Consistent. The Project would not introduce new on -street parking spaces in the area . Further the Project designs would provide an adequate number of parking spaces upon issuance of a CUP.
Goal 17.0: Encourage development of low -scale,
low-intensity commercial and industrial uses
that do not require easy freeway access and that
are oriented primarily toward serving the local
resident and business populations.
Consistent. The Project involves the development of a soccer facility and would be located approximately 1.30 miles east of the nearest highway (I-605). It is anticipated that many of the patrons of the Project would be located in the Baldwin Park area and the Project would not attract a high number of long- distance trips requiring easy freeway access.
37 Section 153.220.070 of the City of Baldwin Municipal Code defines floor area as “The total horizontal floor area of all the floors of a building included within the surrounding walls, exclusive of vents, shafts, courts, elevators, stairways, porches, patios, terraces and similar facilities.” III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 69 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
Relevant Policy Project Consistency Analysis
Goal 18.0: Minimize the impact of new development on regional water quality.
Policy 18.1 : Evaluate development pro jects for
compliance with NPDES requirements, aiming
toward reducing pollutant loads in stormwater
runoff, minimizing impervious surface areas,
and minimizing peak flows.
Consistent. As discussed in Section 10, Hydrology and Water Quality, the Project would comply with NPDES requirements and implement a SUSMP. The SUSMP would outline the BMPs that the Project would implement as a method if reducing stormwater runoff and pollutants on-site.
Source: City of Baldwin Park General Plan, Land Use Element. Dated 2002.
City of Baldwin Park Municipal Code
Under the Project, a zone change would be requested that would convert the Project Site’s current Industrial zone to an Industrial Commercial zone. Under Section 153.050.020 (Use Regulations) of the City’s Municipal Code, office spaces (for business) are an acceptable use for an Industrial Commercial zone. According to Section 153.050.020, i ndoor and outdoor recreational facilities would be an acceptable use, upon the issuance of a CUP. Prior to this issuance, the Project site plan of design would be reviewed and considered by the City as part of the Project Application submitted by the proponent.
In accordance with the City to Baldwin Park Design Guidelines Manual (April 2012), the Project’s site plan, as well as its associated landscape plan and architectural plan would be submitted to the City’s Planning Division for approval and review. Furthermore, the Project would be required to comply with development standards outlined in Section 153.130 ( Site Planning And General Development Standards) of the City’s Municipal Code for all structures within the City.
Thus, the Project would be consistent with the City’s Municipal Code and impacts would be less than significant impact.
In conclusion, the Project would be consistent with the relevant policies and standards under the City’s General Plan and Municipal Code for development in Industrial -Commercial zones. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with any local land use plan, policy, or regulation, and impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
12. Mineral Resources
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?
III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 70 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
No Impact. According to the California Department of Conservation, Division of Mine Reclamation, there are no active mines within the City. 38 Although there are regional known mineral resources in San Gabriel Valley (including Portland Cement Concrete -Grade Aggregate and sand and gravel resource areas), the Project Site is not located within an area that is known to contain regionally significant mineral resources.39 Thus, no impacts would occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required. 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?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
No Impact . The Project would not 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 impacts would occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
38 California Department of Conservation, “Mines Online.” Available online at:
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/mol/index.html, accessed on January 16, 2022. 39 California Department of Conservation, “Updated Aggregate Resource Sector Map for Portland Cement Concrete-Grade Aggregate in the San Gabriel Valley Production District, Los Angeles California.” 2010.
III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 71 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
13. Noise
a. Will the project result in generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Less Than Significant Impact.
Applicable Plans and Policies
Title 24, California Code of Regulations
The California Noise Insulation Standards of 1988 (California Code of Regulations Title 24, Section 3501 et seq.) require that interior noise levels from the exterior sources not exceed 45 dBA Ldn/community noise equivalent level (CNEL) in any habitable ro om of a multi -residential use facility (e.g., hotels, motels, dormitories, long -term care facilities, and apartment houses and other dwellings, except detached single-family dwellings) with doors and windows closed. Where exterior noise levels exceed 60 dBA CNEL/Ldn, an acoustical analysis is required to show that the building construction achieves an interior noise level of 45 dBA CNEL/Ldn or less.
City of Baldwin Park General Plan Noise Element
The Noise Element of the General Plan is a comprehensive program for including noise management in the planning process, providing a tool for planners to use in achieving and maintaining land uses that are compatible with existing and future environmental noise levels. The Noise Element follows guidelines in the State Government Code Section 65301 (f) and Section 46050.1 of the Health and Safety Code. It quantifies the community noise environment by establishing noise exposure contours for both near-and long- term levels of growth and noise -generating activity. This information guides development of goals and policies to achieve noise compatible land uses and identifies baseline noise levels and sources to help local noise ordinance enforcement. 40 As development proposals are
40 City of Baldwin Park, General Plan Noise Element, 2020. Available online at:
https://www.baldwinpark.com/docssidemenu/community-dev elopment/planning/general-plan-individual- elements/1945-noise/file, accessed October 30, 2023.
III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 72 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
reviewed in the future, the City and County will evaluate each proposal with respect to the Noise Element to ensure that noise impacts are reduced through planning and project design. Through implementation of the policies and programs of the Noise Element , current and future adverse noise impacts will be reduced or avoided to protect the general health, safety, and welfare of the community.
The most basic planning strategy to minimize adverse impacts on new land uses due to noise is to avoid designating sensitive land uses in areas that are subject to high levels of noise. Uses such as schools, hospitals, childcare, senior care, congregate ca re, churches, and all types of residential use should be located outside of any area anticipated to exceed acceptable noise levels as defined by the Noise and Land Use Compatibility Guidelines or should be protected from noise through sound attenuation mea sures such as site and architectural design and sound walls. Noise and land use incompatibilities can be avoided for new developments when noise is properly considered in the planning, design, and permitting of a project. The City aims to prevent future land use/ noise conflicts through the planning and approval process.
Applicable goals and policies from the General Plan Noise Element are listed below.
Goal 1.0 Incorporate noise considerations into land use planning decisions.
Policy 1.1 Use the noise/land use compatibility standards as a guide for future planning and development decisions.
Policy 1.2 Require noise-reduction techniques in site planning, architectural design, and construction where noise reduction is necessary. Provide noise control measures such as berms, walls, and sound attenuating construction in areas of new construction.
Policy 1.3 Promote acceptable noise levels near schools, hospitals, convalescent homes, and other noise-sensitive areas.
Policy 1.4 Establish targeted limits of noise for various land uses throughout the community.
Goal 2.0 Minimize noise spillover from commercial and industrial uses into nearby residential neighborhoods.
Policy 2.1 Enforce the 65db(A) State standard for exterior noise levels for all commercial uses.
III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 73 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
Policy 2.2 Require that automobile and truck access to commercial properties located adjacent to residential parcels be located at the maximum practical distance from the residential parcel.
Policy 2.3 Require that landscaped buffers be created between a commercial or mixed- use structure and an adjoining residential parcel.
Table 8
City of Baldwin Park Interior and Exterior Noise Standards
Land Use Noise Standards1
Interior2,3 Exterior
Residential – Single family, multifamily,
duplex, mobile home CNEL 45 dB CNEL 65 dB4
Residential – Transient lodging, hotels,
motels nursing homes, hospitals CNEL 45 dB CNEL 65 dB4
Private offices, church sanctuaries,
libraries, board rooms, conference
rooms, theaters, auditoriums, concert
halls, meeting halls, etc.
Leq (12) 45 dB(A) -
Schools Leq (12) 45 dB(A) Leq (12) 67 dB(A)5
General offices, reception, clerical, etc. Leq (12) 50 dB(A) - Bank, lobby, retail store, restaurant.
Typing pool, etc. Leq (12) 55 dB(A) -
Manufacturing, kitchen, warehousing
etc. Leq (12) 65 dB(A) -
Parks, playgrounds - CNEL 65 dB5
Golf courses, outdoor spectator sports,
amusement parks - CNEL 70 dB5
Note:
1. CNEL: Community Noise Equivalent Level. Leq (12): The A-weighted equivalent sound level averaged over a 12 -hour period (usually the hours of operations).
2. Indoor standard with windows closed. Mechanical ventilation shall be provided per UBC requirements to provide.
A habitable environment.
3. Indoor environment excluding bathrooms, toilets, closets and corridors.
4. Outdoor environment limited to rear yard of single-family homes, multi-family patios and balconies (with a depth of 6’ or more) and common recreation areas.
5. Outdoor environment limited to playground areas, picnic areas, and other areas of frequent human use Source: City of Baldwin Park Noise Element, 2020; Title 24, California Code of Regulations
City of Baldwin Park Municipal Code
Section 153.140.070 of t he City of Baldwin Park Municipal Code ( BPMC) provides exterior noise standards within the City, which are applicable to the Project:
III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 74 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
Standards applicable to all zones. T he regulations in this section aim to prohibit unnecessary, excessive and annoying noises from all sources, as certain noise levels are detrimental to the health and welfare of individuals. The standards apply to all land uses in all zones unless otherwise specified.
Noise
measurements. Noise shall be measured with a sound level meter that meets the standards of the American National Standards Institute (ANSI Section S1.4 -1979, T ype 1 or Type 2). The unit of
measure shall be designated as a decibel (dBA). Noise levels shall be measured in dBA at the property line of the receptor property, and at least 4 feet above the ground and 5 feet from the nearest structure or wall. Where a boundary or wall exists, the measurement shall be made on the receptor property. A calibration check shall be made of the instrument at the time any noise measurement is made.
Exter
ior noise standard. No person shall create or allow the creation of noise that causes the exterior noise level to exceed the noise standards presented below in Table 9, City of Baldwin Park Noise Standards.
Table 9
City of Baldwin Park Noise Standards
Zone Time Allowable Noise Level
(dbA)
Residential 7 A.M – 7 P.M. (Day) 55
Residential 7 P.M – 10 P.M.(Evening) 50
Residential 10 P.M. – 7 A.M.(Night) 45
Commercial 7 A.M. – 10 P.M. (Day and Evening) 65
Commercial 7 P.M. – 7 A.M. (Night) 55
Industrial Anytime 65
Source: BPMC, 2022.
130.37 Special Noise Sources
Construction of buildings and projects. It is unlawful for any person within a residential zone, or within a radius of 500 feet therefrom, to operate equipment or perform any outside construction or repair work on buildings, structures, or projects or to operate any piledriver, power shovel, pneumatic hammer, derrick, power hoist, or any other construction type device (between the hours of 7:00 p.m. of one day and 7:00 a.m. of the next day) in such a manner that a reasonable person of normal sensitiveness residing in the area is caused discomfort or annoyance unless beforehand a permit III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 75 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
therefor has been duly obtained from the Department of Public Works. No permit shall be required to perform emergency work as defined in § 130.31.
Existing Conditions
Measured Ambient Noise Levels
To establish baseline noise conditions, existing noise levels were monitored at two locations in the vicinity of the Project Site. The locations of where the noise measurements were taken are depicted in Figure 4, Noise Monitoring and Sensitive Receptor Location Map . The noise survey was conducted in January 2023 using the Larson Davis SoundTrack LxT (Type 1) sound level meter, which conforms to industry standards set forth in ANSI S1.4-1983 (R2006) – Specification for Sound Level Meters/Type 1 and is consistent with the sound level meter definition established in the BPMC. This instrument was calibrated and operated according to the manufacturer’s written specifications. At the measurement sites, the microphone was placed at a height of approximately five feet above grade. The results of the measurements are summarized in Table 10, Existing Noise Levels in the Vicinity of the Project Site .
As shown in Table 12, the ambient noise levels ranged fr om 62.4 dBA Leq to 64.3 dBA Leq in the vicinity the Project Site.
Table 10
Existing Noise Levels in the Vicinity of the Project Site
Noise Monitoring Locations Primary Noise
Sources
Noise Levels (dBA)
Leq Lmin Lmax
1. Residences South of the Project Site Vehicle Traffic, Neighborhood Activity 64.3 40.7 83.5
2. Project Site Frequent Vehicle
Traffic 62.4 45.2 77.9
Source: Impact Sciences, Inc., January 2023. See Appendix B to this IS/MND.
Construction Impacts
Construction of the Project would require the use of heavy equipment for demolition, grading/site preparation, installation of utilities, building fabrication, and finishing. Construction activities would also involve the use of smaller power tools, genera tors, and other sources of noise. During each stage of construction, several types of equipment potentially could be operating concurrently, and noise levels would vary based on the amount of equipment in operation and the location of the activity. The III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 76 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA) Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM) has compiled data regarding the noise -generating characteristics of specific types of construction equipment and typical construction activities.
Noise-sensitive land uses are generally considered to include those uses where noise exposure could result in health-related risks to individuals, as well as places where quiet is an essential element of their intended purpose. Residential dwellings are of primary concern because of the potential for increased and prolonged exposure of individuals to both interior and exterior noise levels. Additional land uses such as parks, historic sites, cemeteries, and recreation areas are considered sensitive to increases in exterior noise levels. Schools, churches, hotels, libraries, and other places where low interior noise levels are essential are also considered noise -sensitive land uses. The closest noise -sensitive receptors to the Project Site include adjacent residential uses to the south (see Figure 4, Noise Monitoring and Sensitive Receptor Location Map).
With the use of the RCNM, as detailed in Appendix B to this IS/MND, 41 the construction noise levels
forecasted for the sensitive receptors are presented in Table 11, Estimated Exterior Construction Noise at Sensitive Receptors. Noise levels would diminish notably with distance from the construction site at a rate of 6 dBA per doubling of distance (noise from stationary or point sources is reduced by about 6 dBA for every doubling of distance at acoustically hard locations). For example, a noise level of 86 dBA L
eq measured at 50 feet from the noise source to the receptor would decline to 80 dBA L eq at 100 feet from the source to the receptor and fall by another 6 dBA L eq to 74 dBA L eq at 200 feet from the source to the receptor. These noise attenuation rates assume a flat and unobstructed distance between the noise generator and the receptor. Intervening structures and vegetation would further attenuate (reduce) the noise. Furthermore, it should be noted that increases in noise levels at sensitive receptors during construction would be intermittent and temporary and would not generate continuously high noise levels. In addition, the construction noise experienced at sensitive receptors during the initial periods of construction (i.e., demolition and grading) typically would be reduced in the later construction periods (i.e., interior building construction). As the structure is built, the noise from interior construction work would be reduced at off-site locations because the proposed structure would break the line-of-sight noise transmission from the interior construction areas to the exterior areas of sensitive receptors.
41 Project construction noise levels were calculated based on the Project’s anticipated mix of construction equipment with the FHWA RCNM Version 1.1.
Noise Monitoring and Sensitive Receptor Locations
FIGURE 4
1489.001•01/23
SOURCE: Esri 2023
Joanbr idge St
Maine Ave
California Ave
Maine Ave
Joanbrid ge St
California Ave
¯
0 50 10025 US Feet
Project Site
Sensitive Receptor
Noise Monitoring Locations
#
#
Maxar, Microsoft, Esri Community Maps Contributors, County of Los Angeles, California State Parks, © OpenStreetMap, Microsoft, Esri, HERE, Garmin, SafeGraph, GeoTechnologies, Inc, METI/NASA, USGS, Bureau of Land Management, EPA, NPS, US Census Bureau, USDA III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 78 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
Table 11
Estimated Exterior Construction Noise at Sensitive Receptors
Sensitive Land Uses
Distance to
Project Site
(feet)
Estimated Peak
Construction Noise
Levels (dBA 1-Hour Leq)
Exceed FTA 90 dBA
1-Hour Leq
Criteria?
1. Residential uses to the South Adjacent 86.8 No
a See Figure 4 (Noise Monitoring and Sensitive Receptor Location Map). b See Appendix B to this IS/MND for details associated with equipment and distance assumptions for each phase of construction.
This table summarizes the highest noise level during any of the construction phases.
Source: Impact Sciences, Inc., January 2023. See Appendix B to this IS/MND.
The City does not have specific limitation on construction noise levels. Instead, construction noise is regulated by limiting construction activity to the less noise sensitive daytime hours. Specifically, as stated previously, Section 130.37 of the BPMC states no person within a residential zone, or within a radius of 500 feet therefrom, to operate equipment or perform any outside construction or repair work on buildings, structures, or projects or to operate any piledriver, power shovel, pneumatic hammer, derrick, power hoist, or any other construction type device (between the hours of 7:00 p.m. of one day and 7:00 a.m. of the next day) in such a manner that a reasonable person of normal sensitiveness residing in the area is cau sed discomfort or annoyance unless beforehand a permit therefor has been duly obtained from the Department of Public Works . As the Project would comply with the daytime construction hours established in the BPMC, this analysis also uses the FTA’s general construction noise criteria of 90 dBA Leq (1 -hour)
42 to provide additional context for the Project’s potential to generate daytime construction noise impacts. In addition to the FTA guidance, this approach is also consistent with many jurisdictions within the State including Beverly Hills, Fresno, Pasadena, and Caltrans which use absolute (fixed) construction noise thresholds. 43 While construction activity would increase noise levels in the vicinity of the Project Site (see Table 12), the Project’s construction activities would not exceed the FTA’s general construction noise criteria of 90 dBA Leq (1 -hour) at any sensitive receptors. Furthermore, Project construction would not occur during restricted periods, and thus, the Project would be consistent with the criteria set forth in the
42 FTA, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual , Table 7 -2 (General Assessment Construction Noise Criteria), September 2018.
43 City of Beverly Hills Municipal Code Section 5 -1-205; City of Fresno Municipal Code Section 10 -109; City of Pasadena Municipal Code Chapter 9.36.07; Caltrans Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol Chapter 3.2.
III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 79 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
City’s Municipal Code . As such, construction noise impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
Operational Impacts
Parking Noise
Various noise events would occur periodically from the Project’s parking uses. Such periodic events would include activation of car alarms, sounding of car horns, slamming of car doors, engine revs, and tire squeals. Automobile movements would comprise the most continuous noise source and would generate a noise level of approximately 65 dBA at a distance of 25 feet. Car alarm and horn noise events generate sound levels as high as 75 dBA at a reference distance of 25 feet, however these noise sources would b e sporadic. It should also be noted that the existing urban environment of the Project Site currently generates noise levels associated with parking and vehicular noise sources identified above.
Although the Project would increase the number of vehicles parking in the area, the types of noise would be similar to those currently occurring in the vicinity of the Project Site . While periodic noise levels from car alarms, horns, slamming of doors, etc., would increase as a result of the Project, these events would not occur consistently over a 24 -hour period and thus would not have the potential to increase ambient noise levels at off-site locations by 5 dBA CNEL or more, nor exceed the City’s exterior noise standards at off-site locations. As such, noise impacts from the parking areas would be considered less than significant.
Stationary Noise Sources
As part of the Project, new mechanical equipment, HVAC units, and exhaust fans could be installed on the roof or near the proposed new structures. Although the operation of this equipment would generate noise, the design of these on-site HVAC units and exhaust fans would be required to comply with the regulations of the BPMC. Specifically, Section 153.140.070 of the BPMC states:
E. Encolosed Equipment. Utilization of compressors or other equipment, including, but not limited, to vents, ducts and conduits, but excluding window or wall-mounted air-conditioners, which are located outside of the exterior walls of any building, shall be enclosed within a permanent, noncombustible, view-obscuring enclosure to ensure that the equipment will not emit noise in excess of the ANSI standards.
In addition to these requirements, the Project will screen mechanical equipment as feasible and necessary to meet City noise standards. As such, compliance with Section 153.140.070 of the BP MC would ensure noise from stationary sources would be less than significant.
III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 80 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
Exterior Soccer Noise
The Project includes four outdoor soccer fields on the rooftop of the proposed parking garage (second level). The soccer fields would introduce new sources of noise from people playing soccer, people talking/coaching/cheering, whistles, and other related activities. In order to assess the Project’s noise compatibility with the Project area, noise measurement s at a similar soccer center operation were conducted. Specifically, two 15 -minute noise measurements were conducted at the Lab Five Soccer Facility in Pacoima which includes eight outdoor soccer fields of similar size, type, and operations as proposed under the Project. During the noise measurement s, the following activities were observed:
soccer games/activities on 8 of 8 fields, people talking/coaching/cheering, music, car horns and parking- related activities. One measurement was conducted during daytime hours (7:00 A.M. to 7:00 P.M.) and one measurement was conducted during evening hours (7:00P.M. to 10:00 P.M. ). These hours were selected to reflect the Project’s proposed operational hours of 4:00 P.M. to 10:00 P.M. Monday through Friday, 9:00 A.M. to 6:00 P.M. Saturdays and 8:00 A.M to 2:00 P.M. Sundays. The results of the noise measurements are presented in Table 12, Exterior Soccer Noise Levels, and the noise monitoring data sheets are provided in Appendix B to this IS/MND.
Table 12
Exterior Soccer Noise Levels
Location Time Measured Noise Level (dBA-Leq)
15’ from the Soccer Fields Daytime (7 A.M. – 7 P.M.) 64.2 15’ from the Soccer Fields Evening (7P.M. – 10 P.M.) 60.5
Source: Impact Sciences, January 2023. See Appendix B to this IS/MND.
As demonstrated in Table 14, the proposed exterior soccer noise levels would not exceed the daytime or evening exterior noise standards established in the City’s Noise Element or Section 153.140.070 of the Municipal Code. See Tables 10 and 11 previously which identify a maximum 65 dBA allowable noise level for commercial and industrial zones. Furthermore, with respect to the adjacent residential zone to the south of the Project Site, the proposed exterior soccer noise levels (64.2 dBA-Leq) would not be greater than the ambient noise levels measured. See Table 12 provided previously which demonstrates existing noise levels for the residences to the south of the Project Site are 64.3 dBA-Leq. For these reasons, the Project would not introduce incompatible noise sources to the area and impacts with respect to exterior soccer noise would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 81 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
b. Would the project generate excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Less than Significant Impact.
Section 153.140.090 of the City’s Municipal Code states vibration may disturb the conduct of certain activities and create discomfort for some individuals. To minimize the disturbance and inconvenience from vibrations, no person or use shall create, maintain or cause ground vibration that is discernable without the aid of instruments to a person of normal sensitivity at any point on a property that is adjacent to the property of the vibration source. The ground vibration caused by moving vehicles, trains, aircraft or temporary construction or demolition is exempted. Furthermore, it should be noted the Project would be consistent with Section 130.37 of the BPMC (Special Noise Sources—Construction and Building), which regulates construction activity in the City. While this section of the BP MC is applicable to construction noise, it would also ensure any annoyance impacts related to construction vibration would not occur during sensitive hours. Therefore, the Project would be constructed in accordance with all applicable provisions of the BPMC and vibration impacts with respect to human annoyance would be less than significant. The following analysis provides an assessment regarding the Project’s potential to cause vibration-related damage to nearby structures.
The FTA provides ground -born vibration impact criteria with respect to building damage during construction activities. PPV, expressed in inches per second, is used to measure building vibration damage. Construction vibration damage criteria are assessed based on structural category (e.g., reinforced-concrete, steel, or timber). FTA guidelines consider 0.2 inch/sec PPV to be the significant impact level for non-engineered timber and masonry buildings. Structures or buildings constructed of reinforced concrete, steel, or timber have a vibration damage criterion of 0.5 inch/sec PPV pursuant to FTA guidelines.
44 Using the parameters described previously for the construction noise analysis, construction vibration levels at nearby sensitive receptors were calculated and are shown below in Table 13, Vibration Levels at Off-Site Sensitive Uses from Project Construction.
44 Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual, September 2018.
III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 82 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
Table 13
Vibration Levels at Off-Site Sensitive Uses from Project Construction
Sensitive Uses Off-Sitea Distance to Project
Site (ft.)
Receptor
Significance
Threshold PPV
(in./sec)
Estimated PPV
(in/sec)
1. Adjacent residences to the south Adjacent 0.5 0.191
a See Figure 4 (Noise Monitoring and Sensitive Receptor Location Map). b While the Project includes construction activity up to the property lines of adjacent receptors, this analysis assumes that not all equipment would operate closer than 15 feet from the residential uses during peak activities.
Source: Impact Sciences, Inc., January 2023. See Appendix A to this IS/MND.
The vibration velocities predicted to occur at the nearest sensitive receptors adjacent to the Project Site would be 0.191 in/sec PPV. These nearby structures are constructed of reinforced concrete, steel, or timber which have a vibration damage criterion of 0.5 inch/sec PPV pursuant to FTA guidelines. As shown in Table 12, Project construction vibration levels would not have the potential to exceed this standard and this impact would be less than significant. c. For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
No Impact.
The Project Site is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan and is not located within 2 miles of a public airport or public -use airport. The nearest airport to the Project Site is the San Gabriel Valley Airport (formerly known as the El Monte Airport), located approximately
4.28 miles southwest of the Project Site. Therefore, no impacts with respect to airstrip or airport related noise would occur and no further analysis is required.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 83 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
14. Population and Housing
a. Would the project induce substantial unplanned 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)?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Less than Significant Impact. A Project could induce population growth in an area either directly, through the development of new businesses, or indirectly, through the extension of roads or other infrastructure. The Project does not include the addition or removal of housing and thus would have no direct impact on population and housing forecasts for the area. Although the Project would increase employment in the area, i t is anticipated that employees of the Project would primarily consist of existing residents in the Baldwin Park area and the Project would not result in a high number of employees permanently relocating to the region. Estimating the number of future employees who may choose to relocate to the City would be highly speculative, since many factors influence personal housing location decisions (e.g., family income levels and the cost and availability of suitable housing in the local area). Nevertheless, in an effort to present a worst -case population growth scenario, this analysis assumes the Pr oject would employ 8 full -time employees, all of whom would permanently relocate to the City.
Based on the City’s average household size of 4 persons, the Project could result in a maximum population increase of approximately 32 persons.
45 As of 2022, the City has an estimated population
of 72,057 persons.46 The SCAG growth forecasts estimate the City’s population to reach 81,700 persons by the year 2040, representing a total increase of 9,643 persons.47 The Project’s potential maximum increase of 32 persons would represent less than one percent of the City’s projected increase in population between the years 2022 and 2040. Thus, the potential increase in population resulting from
45 California Department of Finance, Demographic Research Unit, “E-5 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State, January 2021-2022, with 2020 Benchmark.” May 2022. 46 California Department of Finance Demographic Research Unit, “E-5 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State, January 2021-2022, with 2020 Benchmark.” May 2022. 47 Southern California Association of Governments, 2025-2040 RTP/SCS Technical Report, Demographics and Growth Forecast, September 3, 2020. Available online at: https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/file- attachments/0903fconnectsocal_demographics-and-growth-forecast.pdf?1606001579. Accessed January 27, 2023.
III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 84 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
the Project would be nominal . Therefore, the Project would not induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly or indirectly, and impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required. b. Would the project displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
No Impact. The Project Site is currently developed with two industrial/commercial buildings on two adjacent properties, and associated parking and landscaping. No housing exists on-site. Therefore, the Project would not displace existing people or housing, and no impacts would occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
15. Public Services
a. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services:
i. Fire Protection?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Less than Significant Impact. The City of Baldwin Park is contracted with the LACFD for fire protection/emergency services. The East Regional Operations Bureau serves Baldwin Park and reports to the Chief Deputy of Emergency Operations, and includes Division 2, 4, 8, and 9, representing 76 fire stations serving communities within the east side of Los Angeles County.
III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 85 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
Division 2 of the LACFD serves the City of Baldwin Park. The nearest LACFD fire station to the Project Site is Station No. 46, located 0.96 miles east of the Project Site at 15546 Arrow H ighway in the City of Irwindale.
As discussed in Section 14, Population and Housing , the Project would result in an increase in employees within the City. However, this increase would be nominal. q T he Project proposes to designate paths for LACFD fire trucks and hoses, and the Project Applicant would submit all plans to the LACFD for review and approval prior to obtaining any permits. Furthermore, the Project would be subject to Section 150.225 (Adoption) of the City’s Municipal Code, which adopts by reference the 2020 Edition of the Los Angeles County Fire Code and the 20 22 Edition of the California Fire Code, which includes site access requirements and fire safety precautions (e.g., fire alarms, sprinkler systems, hydrants, and fire flow requirements). Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required. ii. Police protection?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Less than Significant Impact. The City of Baldwin Park Police Department (BPD) provides law enforcement services to the City, including the Project Site. The BPD has implemented multiple community outreach programs to provide communication and accessibility between the Police Department and the community.
48 Headquarters for the BPD are located approximately 1.32 miles south of the Project Site at 14403 Pacific Avenue.
The Project is not expected to result in a substantial increase in population compared to existing conditions. The Project would maintain the existing on -site driveways along Joanbridge Street to provide vehicular access to the Project Site. Upon site plan review and approval, the Project Site would meet the LACFD ’s fire access requirements, and thus, would also provide adequate emergency access for the BPD. Further, construction activities associated with the Project would be required to comply with the 2022 California Building Code, specifically Chapter 33 (Safeguards During Construction ), which includes emergency access requirements minimiz ing site safety
48 City of Baldwin Park, City of Baldwin Park General Plan, 2002.
III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 86 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
hazards and potential construction-related impacts to police services. Thus, the Project would not result in the need for new or physically altered police protection facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, and would not adversely impact service ratios, response times of the BPD. A less than significant impact would occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required. iii. Schools?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Less than Significant Impact. The Baldwin Park Unified School District (BPUSD or District ) provides educational services to the City of Baldwin Park. The BPUSD currently has 13 elementary schools, 4 middle/junior high schools, and 3 high schools located within the District boundaries.49 An Adult Transition program and an Adult Community Education program are also offered by BPUSD. The nearest BPUSD school to the Project Site is Margaret Heath Elementary School, located approximately 0.18 miles southwest of the Project Site at 14321 School Street.
As stated, the Project would not induce a substantial increase in population on -site. As a soccer training facility, the Project would not generate new students and would not require the expansion of school facilities. Additionally, the Project would be subject to Government Code Section 65996, which requires new developments to pay school impact fees to mitigate any impacts of the development on school services. Therefore, less than significant impacts would occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required. iv. Parks?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
49 Baldwin Park Unified School District, “Parent Information.” Available online at:
https://www.bpusd.net/apps/pages/parents. Accessed January 25, 2023.
III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 87 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
No Impact. The City of Baldwin Park Recreation Department oversees and facilitates the existing public parks and recreational facilities within the City. The nearest City park to the Project Site is Morgan Park, located approximately 1.30 miles southwest of the Project Site at 4100 Baldwin Park Boulevard. It should also be noted that the Project Site is located approximately 0.65 miles south of the Santa Fe Dam Recreation Area, located in the City of Irwindale at 15501 Arrow Highway .
Further, the Project provides a recreational space for children and would serve to supplement existing recreational spaces. As stated previously, the Project would not induce a substantial increase in population and is not anticipated to generate substantive additional demands for parkland or other recreational facilities. As such, less than significant impacts would occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required. v. Other public facilities?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Less than Significant Impact. The City of Baldwin Park is served by the Baldwin Park Library (BPL). The BPL serves a branch of the Los Angeles County library system and offers a variety of services for children and teens. 50 The BPL is located approximately 1.21 southwest of the Project Site at 4181 Baldwin Park B oulevard. As stated above, the Project is not expected to result in a substantial increase in population compared to existing conditions. Thus, the Project is not expected to result in an additional demand for library services. Therefore, less than significant impacts would occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
50 Los Angeles County Public Library, “Baldwin Park Library.” Available online at:
https://lacountylibrary.org/baldwin-park-library/. Accessed January 25, 2023.
III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 88 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
16. 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?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Less than Significant Impact. As stated in Section 15, Public Services, the nearest recreational facility to the Project Site is the Santa Fe Dam Recreation Area , located approximately 0.65 miles north of the Project Site. Further, as stated above, the Project provides recreational use for children and would supplement existing recreational facilities in the City. The Project would not result in a substantial increase in demand for parks or any recreational facilities . Accordingly, less than significant impacts would occur .
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required. b. Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
No Impact. The Project would involve the redevelopment of an existing industrial structure into a new soccer training facility. The proposed development would not result in adverse physical impacts to the environment. Rather, the Project would alleviate the City’s demand for local recreational facilities.
Therefore, no impacts would occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 89 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
17. Transportation
a. Would the project conflict with a program plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
No Impact.
Bicycle Facilities
Joanbridge Street is the roadway adjacent to the Project Site. As a two-lane roadway, Joanbridge Street is not currently stripe d with designated with bicycle lanes. There are no existing or planned bicycle facilities within the immediate vicinity of the Project Site. According to the Circulation Element of the City’s General Plan, the nearest existing or planned bicycle facility is a planned Class II bicycle lane located along Baldwin Park Boulevard, approximately 0.30 miles west of the Project Site. The Project would not involve any off -site improvements, and construction activities and equipment would be maintained on-site.
Transit Systems
Transit services in the City are provided by Metrolink and Foothill Transit. The Metrolink rails that service the City include the Metrolink San Bernadino line that passes through the Baldwin Park Metrolink station, located approximately 1.32 miles south of the Project Site at 3825 Downing Avenue.
51 The Foothill Transit Routes 172, 190, 272, 488, and 490 service the City, with a Route 490 bus stop located approximately 0.10- miles northwest at the intersection of Arrow Highway and Maine Avenue.52
51 Metrolink, “Regional System Map- Free/ Special Rate/ Pay Transfer.” Available online at:
https://metrolinktrains.com/globalassets/maps/metrolink-map---all-connections.pdf. Accessed January 25, 2023. 52 Foothill Transit, “492: El Monte Station – Arcadia – Montclair Transit Center via Arrow Hwy Map and Schedule.” Available online at: http://foothilltransit.org/line/492/. Accessed January 25, 2023.
III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 90 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
Analysis
Given the distance of existing bus stops, railway stops, and planned bicycle lanes from the Project Site, construction and operations of the Project would not result in impacts to the Project Area’s existing transit and bicycle network. Additionally, the Project would not introduce new walkways or pedestrian facilities on-site, nor would the Project remove any existing pedestrian facilities. Further, construction activities and operations associated with the Project would not result in any off -site improvements or physically alter the existing sidewalk located along the northern perimeter of the Project Site. Lastly, the Project would be consistent with standards including Section 150.140 (Adoption) of the Municipal Code, which adopts the 2022 California Building Code standards and regulations related to access and circulation. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with any program plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the Project Area’s existing transit, pedestrian and bicycle network, and no impacts would occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required. b. Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Less than Significant Impact.
CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3 states:
(a) Purpose. This section describes specific considerations for evaluating a project’s transportation impacts. Generally, vehicle miles traveled is the most appropriate measure of transportation impacts. For the purposes of this section, “vehicle miles traveled” refers to the amount and distance of automobile travel attributable to a project. Other relevant considerations may include the effects of the project on transit and non -motorized travel.
Except as provided in subdivision (b)(2) below (regarding roadway capacity), a project’s effect on automobile delay shall not constitute a significant environmental impact. (b) Criteria for Analyzing Transportation Impacts.
(1) Land Use Projects. Vehicle miles traveled exceeding an applicable threshold of significance may indicate a significant impact. Generally, projects within one -half mile of either an existing major transit stop or a stop along an existing high quality transit corridor should be presumed to cause a less than significant transportation III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 91 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
impact. Projects that decrease vehicle miles traveled in the project area compared to existing conditions should be presumed to have a less than significant transportation impact.
Consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b)(1), the Project’s vehicle miles traveled (VMT) have been evaluated against the thresholds of significance identified in the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA (December 2018).53 OPR’s Technical Advisory suggests that lead agencies may screen out VMT impacts using project size, maps, transit availability, and provision of affordable housing. Page 12 of OPR’s Technical Advisory identifies the following applicable screening threshold for small projects:
Many local agencies have developed screening thresholds to indicate when detailed analysis is needed. Absent substantial evidence indicating that a project would generate a potentially significant level of VMT, or inconsistency with a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) or general plan, projects that generate or attract fewer than 110 trips per day generally may be assumed to cause a less-than-significant transportation impact.
Project Trip Generation
The Project proposes the operation of five small soccer fields to be used for youth training and games.
As the Project proposes a unique operation, the traditional method of estimating trip generation with the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual would not be appropriate.
Instead, empirical data gathered from an existing operating facility similar to the Project was used to estimate trip generation. The existing Lab Five soccer center located at 9740 Telfair Avenue, Pacoima CA 91331 was previously observed by Kittelson & Associates in September 2021 analyzing a proposed soccer center in the City of Gardena.
54 As described therein, the Pacoima Lab Five soccer center has eight existing soccer fields of similar size and use as the proposed Project. According to the daily trips observed in that study, a total of 171 vehicle trips were counted between the hours of 4:00 p.m. and 10:00 p.m. (the proposed weekday hours for the Project). As the Pacoima Lab Five soccer center operates eight fields, this data yields approximately 21.375 trips per field per day. Because the Project proposes the operation of five fields with similar characteristics, the Project would generate approximately 107 trips per day. As the Project would attract fewer than 110 trips per day, the Project
53 Office of Planning and Research, Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA. Available online at: https://opr.ca.gov/docs/20190122-743_Technical_Advisory.pdf, accessed October 30, 2023. 54 City of Gardena, Lab Five Soccer Center Project CEQA Class 32 Categorical Exemption Report, September 2021, see Appendix A (Transportation Analysis). Available online at: https://cityofgardena.org/wp- content/uploads/2021/10/Lab-Five-Soccer-CE-Report-and-Appendices_Final_September-29-2021.pdf. Traffic count data sheet has been extracted from this reference study and is included in Appendix C to this IS/MND.
III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 92 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
would be consistent with OPR’s Technical Advisory screening threshold for small projects.
Transportation impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required. c. Would the project substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. The Project would redevelop an existing structure into a new soccer training facility. As analyzed in Section 11, Land Use and Planning, the Project Applicant would obtain a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to allow for the indoor and outdoor recreational uses that the Project would introduce. Upon issuance of a CUP, the Project would not introduce any incompatible uses.
The existing vehicular site access would remain similar under the Project. As shown in Figure 1, Conceptual Site Plan- Floor 1 , the Project would utilize the two existing on -site driveways located along Joanbridge Street. The existing driveway located at 14424 Joanbridge Street would be utilized as the primary vehicular entry to the Project Site. As illustrated in Figure 1, upon entering 14424 Joanbridge Street, visitors would continue straight into the soccer facility’s ground -level parking and vehicles would turn right to access additional parking spaces. From there, vehicles would have the option of continuing to drive into the southwestern corner of the Project Site (within 14412 Joanbridge Street) or exit using the existing driveway located at 14412 Joanbridge St reet. Implementation of Mitigation Measure TRA -1 would require the Project Applicant to submit a Circulation Plan to the City Engineer that would ensure queuing into the public right -of-way on Joanbridge Street does not occur. With implementation of Mitigation Measure TRA-1 , the P roject would not substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature or incompatible uses , and impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures:
TRA-1 Prior to the issuance of demolition of permits, t he Project Applicant shall prepare a circulation and access plan for review and approval by the City of Baldwin Park Traffic Engineer to ensure that the vehicles do not block vehicular circulation within the III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 93 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
parking lot, and queue in such a way that avoids overflow into Joanbridge Street: The circulation and access plan shall establish preventative measures to be implemented during Project o perations. These measures may include, but are not limited to, the following:
• During operational hours, the Project Applicant shall provide informational flyers to visitors that detail alternative parking locations within the Project Area. • Should vehicle queuing occur beyond available vehicle storage on -site during operational hours, members of the Fit7 Sports Lab staff shall go out to the parking areas of the Project Site and direct queued vehicles on-site to any available parking spaces with flags and directional signs.
• In the event that there are no on -site parking spaces available , primary vehicular access to the Project Site would be closed to the public and members of the Fit7 Sports Lab staff shall direct queued vehicles on-site off-site parking with the same materials.
d. Would the project result in inadequate emergency access?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Less than Significant Impact. The Project would utilize the existing driveways on -site as the primary access and emergency vehicular access. The Project would incorporate all applicable design and safety standards and regulations outlined in Chapter 33 of the 2022 California Building Code, and Chapter 11 (Construction Requirements for Existing Buildings) of the California Fire Code. Further, the Project would submit all Project Plans to the City of Baldwin Park City Engineer and the LACFD to confirm that the Project would provide adequate on -site access to emergency services. Therefore, the Project would not result in inadequate emergency access and impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 94 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
18. Tribal Cultural Resources
a. Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
i. Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k)?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
No Impact. Impacts related to historical resources are evaluated in the Cultural Resources section.
As discussed, there are no buildings or structures within the Project Site that are eligible to be listed on the CRHR or the NRHP . Additionally, the existing buildings on-site are zoned industrial, and do not exhibit common historical architectural themes or styles. As such, no impacts would occur. ii. A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision(c) of Public Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
In compliance with AB 52, the City will distribute letters notifying each tribe that may have knowledge of cultural resources within the Project Area of the Project in coordination with the circulation of this MND.
Ground-disturbing activities associated with the Project could result in the discovery of previously undiscovered cultural resources. This includes potential discovery of tribal cultural resources. In the even that Native American resources are discovered, the City would consult with the Native III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 95 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
American monitor and affected tribe(s). Impacts to resources that are applicable under Public Resources Code Section 5024.1 would be less than significant.
19. Utilities and Service Systems
a. Would the project require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Less than Significant Impact.
Water
Potable water in the City is provided by three water companies: Valley County Water District (VCWD), San Gabriel Valley Water Company (SGVWC), and Valley View Mutual Water Company (VVMWD).
The Project Site is currently serviced by the VCWD, which is an independent, special district that provides water services to a portion of the C ities of Baldwin Park, Irwindale, West Covina, and Azusa.
55,56
The Project does propose the use of three new water fountains, a kitchen, and bathrooms, which typically drive the demand for potable water usage. However, the water demand from these uses would not be substantial and would likely not be greater than the existing uses or the City’s General Plan land use buildout scenario for the site . Thus, the Project would not result in additional demand on water supplies as future development of Commercial/Industrial uses have been previously accounted for and analyzed in the City of Baldwin Park General Plan Environmental Impact Report (2020) and VCWD’s 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (June 2021). Additionally, the Project Applicant would adhere to Section 35.100 (Water User’s Tax) of the City’s Municipal Code and pay an annual tax to the
55 Valley County Water District, “Service Area Map.” Available online at:
https://www.vcwd.org/DocumentCenter/View/126/Valley-County-Water-District-Service-Area-Map-PDF.
Accessed January 26, 2023.
56 Val ley County Water District, “About Us.” Available online at: https://www.vcwd.org/27/About-Us. Accessed January 26, 2023.
III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 96 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
City for using potable water that is delivered through the City’s mains and/or pipes. Therefore, impacts to existing water facilities would be less than significant.
Wastewater
Wastewater produced by the Project would be treated at the San Jose Creek W ater Reclamation Plant (SJCWRP) located adjacent to the City of Industry. The SJCWRP treats approximately 100 million gallons of wastewater per day (mgd), and currently processes an average of 58.5 mgd. 57 The Project proposes the use of three new water fountains, a kitchen, and bathrooms which would generate a demand for wastewater treatment. A s stated in Appendix A to this IS/MND, the Project is anticipated to generate approximately 2,242gallons per day. 58 This would represent less than one percent of the average amount of wastewater that is treated by the SJWCP per day. Nevertheless, it is anticipated that the SJCWR P has adequate capacity to serve the Project’s projected demand for wastewater treatment.
Furthermore, per Section 51.25 (Connection to Sewer) of the City’s Municipal Code, the Project Applicant would be required to obtain a sewer connection permit prior to connecting to the City’s sewer system. Issuance of this permit would ensure that sufficient capacity is available . As such, the Project’s impacts to wastewater treatment would be less than significant.
Stormwater
Compared to existing conditions, the Project would not increase the impervious area on -site. The stormwater system under the Project would adequately discharge on-site stormwater in accordance with the City’s Municipal Code and the SUSMP . Adherence to these local and regional regulation s would ensure that the City’s existing stormwater drainage system would have adequate capacity for the Project stormwater. Thus , new off-site stormwater facilities would not be required, nor are other off-site existing facilities anticipated to be expanded. Impacts would be less than significant.
Dry Utilities
Dry utilities include electricity, natural gas, and telecommunications facilities. The Project would utilize the existing electricity, natural gas, and telecommunication lines and services that already service the
57 Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts, “San Jose Creek Water Reclamation Plant.” Available online at https://www.lacsd.org/services/wastewater-sewage/facilities/san-jose-creek-water-reclamation-plant. Accessed January 26, 2023.
58 Lo s Angeles County Sanitation District, “Table 1, Loadings for Each Class of Land Use.” Available online at:
https://www.lacsd.org/home/showpublisheddocument/8639/637921797286370000. Accessed February 6, 2022.
III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 97 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
Project Site under existing conditions. While the Project does propose the use of bathrooms , office space, a meeting room, a gym room, kitchens and lighting for the fields and parking areas, electricity and energy demand from these uses would not be substantial and would likely not be greater than the existing uses. Due to the proposed indoor and outdoor recreational uses, the Project is not expected to substantially increase the demand for telecommunication services. The Project would adhere to the City’s general design requirements and utilize low-energy LED light bulbs for lighting (See Section 1 , Aesthetics and Section 6, Energy). Furthermore, per Section 35.098 (Electricity User Tax) of the City’s Municipal Code, the Project Applicant would be required to pay a user’s tax to the City for electrical energy usage. Further, the Project would be required to comply with CalGreen Code standards pertaining to energy conservation and efficiency. As such, impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required. b. Would the project have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Less than Significant. The VCWD procures its water supplies primarily through groundwater extracted from the Main San Gabriel Basin (MSGB). While imported water is available from two sources, the Upper San Gabriel Valley Municipal Water District (Upper District) and California Irrigation Company (CIC), VCWD prefers to supply its customers with groundwater. 59 According to
the District’s Urban Water Management Plan, the reliability of VCWD’s supply is expected to be adequate to meet normal year, single dry year and multiple dry year demand conditions between 2025 and 2040. The VCWD would have average surplus of 482 potable water in acre- feet per year (AFY) under a Normal Year Supply, an average surplus of 324 AFY under a Single Dry Year Supply, and averages of 311, 768, 1,876, 1,020, and 2,165 AFY surplus under a Multiple Dry Year scenario.
As discussed in Appendix A of this IS/MND , the Project is estimated to consume approximately 1,249,353 gallons per year, or approximately 3.84 AFY. The Project would represent approximately one percent of the average surplus under a Single Dry Year Supply scenario and less than one percent of the average AFY under a Normal Year Supply and a Multiple Dry Year scenario. Thus, water demand
59 Valley County Water District, 2020 Urban Water Management Plan. June 2021.
III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 98 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
from the proposed development is within the UWMP’s water demand projection for the City, and the City anticipates having sufficient water supplies available to serve the Project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry, and multiple dry years. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required. c. Would the project result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Less than Significant Impact. As discussed above, the Project would not require the relocation or construction of new or expanded wastewater treatment facilities. The Project involve s the redevelopment of an existing industrial structure into a new soccer training facility . As stated, the Project would result in a n increase in wastewater generation compared to existing conditions.
However, the Project is not anticipated to be a substantial source of wastewater. Based on available data, it is anticipated that the SJCWRP has adequate capacity to serve the Project’s projected demand for wastewater treatment. Therefore, the Project’s impacts to wastewater treatment would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required. d. Would the project generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Less than Significant Impact. Approximately 70 percent of solid waste generated with the City is disposed at the El Sobrante Landfill, while approximately 20 percent of the City’s solid waste is III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 99 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
disposed at the Simi Valley Landfill & Recycling Center .60 The El Sobrante Landfill permits a maximum daily throughput of 16,054 tons of solid waste per day and currently has a remaining capacity of 143,977,170 tons of solid waste. 61 The Simi Valley Landfill & Recycling Center permits a maximum daily throughput of 64,750 tons of solid waste per day and currently has a remaining capacity of 82,954,873 tons of solid waste.62
Construction activities associated with the Project would generate solid waste that would be temporary and would cease upon completion of the Project. According to the Project’s Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas modeling , Project operational activities are expected to generate approximately 0.05 tons per year of solid waste (see Appendix A to this IS/MND). The solid waste generated from Project operations would represent less than one percent of the maximum daily throughput of both landfills.
As such, the Project would not generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure. Less than significant impacts would occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required. e. Would the project comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Less than Significant Impact. As concluded above, the Project would not generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure. Furthermore, the Project would demonstrate compliance with the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (Assembly Bill [AB] 939 ), which requires all California cities “reduce, recycle, and re- use solid waste generated in the State to the maximum extent feasible.” AB 939 requires that at least 50 percent of waste produced is recycled, reduced, or composted. The Project would also comply with the 2022 California Green Building Standards (CALGreen) Code, which includes design and construction measures that
60 CalRecycle, “Jurisdiction Disposal and Alternative Daily Cover (ADC) Tons by Facility.” Available online at:
https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/LGCentral/DisposalReporting/Destination/DisposalByFacility. Accessed January 26, 2023.
61 Ca lRecycle, “El Sobrante Landfill (33-AA-0217).” Available online at:
https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/2280?siteID=2402. Access January 26, 2023. 62 CalRecycle, “Simi Valley Landfill & Recycling Center (56-AA-0007).” Available online at:
https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/608?siteID=3954. Accessed January 26, 2023.
III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 100 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
help reduce construction -related waste though material conservation and other construction- related efficiency measures. Thus, less than significant impacts would occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
20. Wildfire
a. Would the project substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
No Impact. The Project Site is not located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones. 63,64 The Project Site and surrounding land uses are developed with urban land uses and do not present a wildland fire hazard. Furthermore, the Project Site is not located along any major evacuation routes that are designated within the Safety Element of the City’s General Plan.
65 Therefore, the Project would not substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan, and no impacts would occur.
b. Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, would the project exacerbate wildfire risks and thereby expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
63 Cal Fire, “Fire Hazard Severity Zones in SRA.” Available online at:
https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/media/6705/fhszs_map19.pdf. Adopted November 7, 2007 64 Cal Fire, “Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in LRA” Available online at:
https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/media/7280/losangelescounty.pdf. Adopted September, 2011. 65 City of Baldwin Park. City of Baldwin Park General Plan, Figure PS-4 Major Evacuation Routes, Public Safety Element. Available online at: https://www.baldwinpark.com/online-documents/community- development/planning/general-plan-individual-elements/1947-public-safety/file. Accessed January 16, 2023 III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 101 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
No Impact. As stated above, the Project Site is not located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as a very high fire hazard severity zone. The Project would be located in a developed and urban environment that would not exacerbate wildfire risks or expose the public to uncontrolled spread. Thus, no impacts would occur.
c. Would the project require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
No Impact. The Project will not require the installation or maintenance of infrastructure, such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines, or other utilities. Therefore, the Project would not exacerbate fire risk, and there would be no impact.
d. Would the project expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post- fire slope instability, or drainage changes?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
No Impact. As stated above, the Project would not be located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as a very high fire hazard severity zone. Additionally, the Project Site is located on relatively flat terrain, and would not subject to landslide. Thus, wildfire impacts involving downslope, downstream flooding, or landslides would not occur, and there would be no impact.
III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 102 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
21. Mandatory Findings of Significance
a. Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. As discussed in Section 4 , Biological Resources, the Project Site is located within an urbanized area of the City. As such, no sensitive plant or animal species would be adversely impacted by the Project. As discussed, Section 5 , Cultural Resources, and Section 7, Geology and Soils, ground-disturbing activities associated with the Project may potentially uncover any cultural, archaeological, or paleontological resources. As such, implementation of Mitigation Measures CUL -1 and GEO-1 would reduce these potential impacts to less than significant levels.
b. Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. The Project generally would not contribute to potentially cumulatively considerable impacts. As indicated in the above analysis, with implementation of the required mitigation measures, the Project would not result in any unmitigated significant adverse impacts and/or cumulatively considerable impacts. Specifically, Mitigation Measures AES-1, CUL-1, GEO-1, HAZ-1, HAZ -2, and TRA-1, would reduce potentially significant impacts to less than significant levels. The Project does not include any unmitigated cumulatively III. Environmental Checklist
Impact Sciences, Inc. 103 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
considerable impacts when considered in connection with the effects of past, present and probable future projects. No further analysis is necessary.
c. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. As indicated in the above analysis, with implementation of the required mitigation measures, the Project would not result in any unmitigated significant adverse impacts. Thus, the Project would not have the potential to result in substantial adverse effects on human beings.
Impact Sciences, Inc. 104 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
IV. SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES
AECOM. San Gabriel Valley Airport- Airport Layout Plan Drawing Set. Available online at:
https://planning.lacounty.gov/assets/upl/project/aluc_elmonte-plan.pdf. Accessed January 24, 2023.
Baldwin Park Unified School District. “Paren t Information,” Available online at:
https://www.bpusd.net/apps/pages/parents. Accessed January 25, 2023.
California Environmental Protection Agency. “Cortese List Data Resources.” Available online at:
https://calepa.ca.gov/sitecleanup/corteselist/, accessed January 24, 2023.
California Department of Conservation. “California Important Farmland Finder.” Available online at:
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/ciff/, Accessed January 26, 2023.
California Department of Conservation. Earthquake Zones of Required Investigation. Available online at:
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/EQZApp/app/. Accessed on January 23, 2023.
California Department of Conservation Division of Land Resource Protection, Los Angeles County Williamson Act FY 2015/2016. November 21, 2018.
California Department of Conservation. “Landslide Inventory (Beta).” Available online at:
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/lsi/. Accessed January 2,2023.
California Department of Conservation. “Los Angeles County Tsunami Hazard Areas.” Available online at: https://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/tsunami/maps/los-angeles. Accessed January 27, 2023.
California Department of Conservation. “Mines Online.” Available online at:
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/mol/index.html. Accessed on January 16, 2022.
California Department of Conservation, Updated Aggregate Resource Sector Map for Portland Cement Concrete-Grade Aggregate in the San Gabriel Valley Production District, Los Angeles California . 2010.
California Department of Finance Demographic Research Unit. E-5 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State, January 2021-2022, with 2020 Benchmark. May 2022.
California Department of Fish and Wildlife. California Natural Community Conservation Plans. Available online at: https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=68626&inline . Accessed January 23, 2023.
California Department of Transportation. “Calif ornia State Scenic Highway System Map.” Available online at: https://caltrans.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=465dfd3d807c46cc 8e8057116f1aacaa, accessed January 26, 2023.
California Department of Water Resources. “California Dam Breach Inundation Maps.” Available online at: https://fmds.water.ca.gov/maps/damim/. Accessed January 24, 2023.
VI. Supporting Information Sources
Impact Sciences, Inc. 105 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
Cal Fire. Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in LRA. Available online at:
https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/media/7280/losangelescounty.pdf. Adopted September 2011.
Cal Fire. Fire Hazard Severity Zones in SRA. Available online at:
https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/media/6705/fhszs_map19.pdf. Adopted November 7, 2007 California State Geoportal. “CGS Seismic Hazards Program: Liquefaction Zones.” Available online at:
https://gis.data.ca.gov/datasets/b70a766a60ad4c0688babdd47497dbad_0/explore?location=34.0970 09%2C-117.992164%2C12.94, accessed January 22,2023City of Baldwin Park. City of Baldwin Park General Plan Open Space and Conservation Element. November 2022.
California Regional Water Quality Control Board-Los A ngeles Region. Staff Report and Record of Decision Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plans and Numerical Design Standards for Best Management Practices. Available online at: https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/losangeles/water_issues/programs /stormwater/susmp/susmp_final_staff_report.pdf. Accessed January 25, 2023.
CalRecycle. El Sobrante Landfill (33-AA-0217). Available online at:
https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/2280?siteID=2402 . Access January 26, 2023.
CalRecycle. “Jur isdiction Disposal and Alternative Daily Cover (ADC) Tons by Facility.” Available online at: https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/LGCentral/DisposalReporting/Destination/DisposalByFacility .
Accessed January 26, 2023.
CalRecycle. “Simi V alley Landfill & Recycling Center (56-AA-0007).” Available online at:
https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/608?siteID=3954 . Accessed January 26, 2023.
City of Baldwin Park. “Redev elopment Projects.” Available online at:
https://www.baldwinpark.com/redevelopment, accessed January 24, 2023.
City of Baldwin Park. Health and Sustainability Element. April 1, 2015.
City of Baldwin Park. City of Baldwin Park General Plan. Figure PS-4 Major Evacuation Routes, Public Safety Element. Available online at: https://www.baldwinpark.com/online- documents/community-development/planning/general-plan-individual-elements/1947-public- safety/file. Accessed January 16, 2023
Department of Toxic Substances Control. “Hazardous Waste and Substances Site List.” Available online at: https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/search.asp?cmd=search&reporttype=CORTESE&sit e_type=CSITES,OPEN,FUDS,CLOSE&status=ACT,BKLG,COM&reporttitle=HAZARDOUS+WAS TE+AND+SUBSTANCES+SITE+LIST. Accessed January 24, 2023.
Federal Emergency Management Agency. “Flood Rate Insurance Map # 06037C1700F.” Available online at: https://msc.fema.gov/portal/home. Accessed January 27, 2023.
Foothill Transit. “492: El Monte Station – Arcadia – Montclair Transit Center via Arrow Hwy Map and Schedule.” Available online at: http://foothilltransit.org/line/492/. Accessed January 25, 2023.
VI. Supporting Information Sources
Impact Sciences, Inc. 106 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
Google Earth. 2023.
Historic Aerials. “14424 Joanbridge Street Aerials‐1965.” Available online at:
https://www.historicaerials.com/viewer. Accessed January 24, 2023.
LA County Public Library. “Baldwin Park Library.” Available online at:
https://lacountylibrary.org/baldwin‐park‐library/. Accessed January 25, 2023.
City of Gardena. Lab Five Soccer Center Project CEQA Class 32 Categorical Exemption Report, September 2021, Appendix A (Transportation Analysis). Available online at: https://cityofgardena.org/wp‐ content/uploads/2021/10/Lab‐Five‐Soccer‐CE‐Report‐and‐Appendices_Final_September‐29‐ 2021.pdf. Accessed October 30, 2023.
Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts. “San Jose Creek Water Reclamation Plant.” Available online at https://www.lacsd.org/services/wastewater‐sewage/facilities/san‐jose‐creek‐water‐reclamation‐ plant. Accessed January 26, 2023.
United States Fish and Wildlife. “National Wetlands Inventory.” Available online at:
https://fwsprimary.wim.usgs.gov/wetlands/apps/wetlands‐mapper/. Accessed January 23, 2023.
Southern California Edison. “Our Service Territory.” Available online at https://www.sce.com/about‐ us/who‐we‐are/leadership/our‐service‐territory. Accessed January 27, 2023.
United States Department of Agriculture. “Web Soil Survey.” Available online at:
https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx. Accessed February 6, 2023.
United States Geological Survey. “Quaternary Fault and Fold Database of the United States.” Available online at: https://www.usgs.gov/programs/earthquake‐hazards/faults. Accessed on January 23, 2023.
U.S. Geological Survey. “Areas of Land Subsidence in California.” Available online at:
https://ca.water.usgs.gov/land_subsidence/california‐subsidence‐areas.html. Accessed November 22, 2022.
Metrolink. “Regional System Map‐ Free/ Special Rate/ Pay Transfer.” Available online at:
https://metrolinktrains.com/globalassets/maps/metrolink‐map‐‐‐all‐connections.pdf. Accessed January 25, 2023.
Office of Planning and Research. Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA.
Available online at: https://opr.ca.gov/docs/20190122‐743_Technical_Advisory.pdf. Accessed October 30, 2023.
Southern California Association of Governments. 2025‐2040 RTP/SCS Technical Report, Demographics and Growth Forecast, September 3, 2020. Available online at: https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/file‐ attachments/0903fconnectsocal_demographics‐and‐growth‐forecast.pdf?1606001579. Accessed January 27, 2023.
State Water Resources Control Board. “Geotracker.” Available online at:
https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/. Accessed January 24, 2023.
VI. Supporting Information Sources
Impact Sciences, Inc. 107 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
United States Army Corps of Engineers, Los Angeles District. “Santa Fe Dam.” Available online at:
https://resreg.spl.usace.army.mil/pages/snfe.php. Accessed January 24, 2023.
Valley County Water District. “Service Area Map.” Available online at:
https://www.vcwd.org/DocumentCenter/View/126/Valley‐County‐Water‐District‐Service‐Area‐ Map‐PDF. Accessed January 26, 2023.
Valley County Water District. 2020 Urban Water Management Plan. June 2021.
Impact Sciences, Inc. 108 Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project 1489.001 November 2023
V. INITIAL STUDY PREPARERS
1. AGENCY
Fabiola Zelaya-Melicher, City Planner
Melissa Chipres, Associate Planner
2. IMPACT SCIENCES, INC.
Jessica Kirchner, AICP, Managing Principal
Brett Pomeroy, Associate Principal
Eleni Getachew, ENV SP, Planner
Annalie Sarrieddine, Associate Planner
Kara Yates Hines, Director of Operations & Publications Manager
APPENDIX A
Air Quality and GHG Data
Fit 7 Lab Detailed Report, 1/31/2023
1 / 43
Fit 7 Lab Detailed Report
Table of Contents
1. Basic Project Information
1.1. Basic Project Information
1.2. Land Use Types
1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector
2. Emissions Summary
2.1. Construction Emissions Compared Against Thresholds
2.2. Construction Emissions by Y ear, Unmitigated
2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds
2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated
3. Construction Emissions Details
3.1. Demolition (2023) - Unmitigated
3.3. Grading (2023) - Unmitigated
3.5. Building Construction (2023) - Unmitigated
3.7. Building Construction (2024) - Unmitigated
Fit 7 Lab Detailed Report, 1/31/2023
2 / 43
4. Operations Emissions Details
4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use
4.1.1. Unmitigated
4.2. Energy
4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
4.3. Area Emissions by Source
4.3.2. Unmitigated
4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use
4.4.2. Unmitigated
4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use
4.5.2. Unmitigated
4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use
4.6.1. Unmitigated
4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type
4.7.1. Unmitigated
4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type
Fit 7 Lab Detailed Report, 1/31/2023
3 / 43
4.8.1. Unmitigated
4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type
4.9.1. Unmitigated
4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type
4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated
4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated
4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated
5. Activity Data
5.1. Construction Schedule
5.2. Off-Road Equipment
5.2.1. Unmitigated
5.3. Construction Vehicles
5.3.1. Unmitigated
5.4. Vehicles
5.4.1. Construction Vehicle Control Strategies
5.5. Architectural Coatings
5.6. Dust Mitigation
Fit 7 Lab Detailed Report, 1/31/2023
4 / 43
5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities
5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies
5.7. Construction Paving
5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors
5.9. Operational Mobile Sources
5.9.1. Unmitigated
5.10. Operational Area Sources
5.10.1. Hearths
5.10.1.1. Unmitigated
5.10.2. Architectural Coatings
5.10.3. Landscape Equipment
5.11. Operational Energy Consumption
5.11.1. Unmitigated
5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption
5.12.1. Unmitigated
5.13. Operational Waste Generation
5.13.1. Unmitigated
Fit 7 Lab Detailed Report, 1/31/2023
5 / 43
5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment
5.14.1. Unmitigated
5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment
5.15.1. Unmitigated
5.16. Stationary Sources
5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps
5.16.2. Process Boilers
5.17. User Defined
5.18. Vegetation
5.18.1. Land Use Change
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
5.18.2. Sequestration
5.18.2.1. Unmitigated
6. Climate Risk Detailed Report
6.1. Climate Risk Summary
Fit 7 Lab Detailed Report, 1/31/2023
6 / 43
6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores
6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores
6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures
7. Health and Equity Details
7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores
7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores
7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
7.4. Health & Equity Measures
7.5. Evaluation Scorecard
7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures
8. User Changes to Default Data
Fit 7 Lab Detailed Report, 1/31/2023
7 / 43
1. Basic Project Information
1.1. Basic Project Information
Data Field Value
Project Name Fit 7 Lab
Lead Agency Baldwin Park
Land Use Scale Project/site
Analysis Level for Defaults County
Windspeed (m/s) 1.80
Precipitation (days) 22.4
Location 34.105318024646934, -117.95985130496081
County Los Angeles-South Coast
City Baldwin Park
Air District South Coast AQMD
Air Basin South Coast
TAZ 4911
EDFZ 7
Electric Utility Southern California Edison
Gas Utility Southern California Gas
1.2. Land Use Types
Land Use Subtype Size Unit Lot Acreage Building Area (sq ft) Landscape Area (sq ft)
Special Landscape
Area (sq ft)
Population Description
City Park 0.20 Acre 0.20 0.00 1,000 1,000 — —
General Office
Building
6.85 1000sqft 0.10 6,854 0.00 — — —
Fit 7 Lab Detailed Report, 1/31/2023
8 / 43
———0.0016,8000.30Space42.0Enclosed Parking
with Elevator
1.3. User-Selected Emission Reduction Measures by Emissions Sector No measures selected
2. Emissions Summary
2.1. Construction Emissions Compared Against Thresholds Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Un/Mit. TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 1.57 1.32 12.6 12.0 0.02 0.60 2.17 2.77 0.55 1.02 1.58 — 1,821 1,821 0.07 0.08 1.56 1,829 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 0.76 0.63 6.15 7.72 0.01 0.29 0.15 0.44 0.26 0.04 0.30 — 1,558 1,558 0.06 0.03 0.02 1,569 Average
Daily
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 0.36 0.30 2.92 3.44 0.01 0.14 0.20 0.33 0.12 0.08 0.20 — 658 658 0.03 0.01 0.16 663 Annual
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 0.07 0.06 0.53 0.63 < 0.005 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.02 0.01 0.04 — 109 109 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 110
2.2. Construction Emissions by Y ear, Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Y ear TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Fit 7 Lab Detailed Report, 1/31/2023
9 / 43
Daily -
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2023 1.57 1.32 12.6 12.0 0.02 0.60 2.17 2.77 0.55 1.02 1.58 — 1,821 1,821 0.07 0.08 1.56 1,829 2024 0.72 0.60 5.79 7.75 0.01 0.26 0.15 0.41 0.24 0.04 0.27 — 1,560 1,560 0.06 0.03 0.85 1,572 Daily -
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2023 0.76 0.63 6.15 7.72 0.01 0.29 0.15 0.44 0.26 0.04 0.30 — 1,558 1,558 0.06 0.03 0.02 1,569 2024 0.72 0.60 5.80 7.64 0.01 0.26 0.15 0.41 0.24 0.04 0.27 — 1,554 1,554 0.06 0.03 0.02 1,565 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2023 0.36 0.30 2.92 3.44 0.01 0.14 0.20 0.33 0.12 0.08 0.20 — 658 658 0.03 0.01 0.16 663 2024 0.20 0.17 1.60 2.12 < 0.005 0.07 0.04 0.11 0.07 0.01 0.08 — 429 429 0.02 0.01 0.10 432 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2023 0.07 0.06 0.53 0.63 < 0.005 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.02 0.01 0.04 — 109 109 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 110 2024 0.04 0.03 0.29 0.39 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.01 < 0.005 0.01 — 71.1 71.1 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 71.6
2.4. Operations Emissions Compared Against Thresholds
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Un/Mit. TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 0.63 0.74 0.39 4.80 0.01 0.01 0.29 0.30 0.01 0.05 0.06 5.78 1,200 1,206 0.65 0.04 3.41 1,238 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 0.44 0.56 0.41 3.45 0.01 0.01 0.29 0.30 0.01 0.05 0.06 5.78 1,160 1,165 0.65 0.04 0.10 1,194 Fit 7 Lab Detailed Report, 1/31/2023
10 / 43
——————————————————Average
Daily
(Max)
Unmit. 0.56 0.67 0.42 4.25 0.01 0.01 0.29 0.30 0.01 0.05 0.06 5.78 1,172 1,178 0.65 0.04 1.48 1,209 Annual
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Unmit. 0.10 0.12 0.08 0.78 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.05 0.06 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 0.96 194 195 0.11 0.01 0.25 200
2.5. Operations Emissions by Sector, Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Sector TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 0.44 0.40 0.33 3.74 0.01 0.01 0.29 0.30 0.01 0.05 0.06 — 860 860 0.04 0.03 3.40 874 Area 0.18 0.34 0.01 1.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 4.23 4.23 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 4.25 Energy 0.01 < 0.005 0.05 0.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 324 324 0.02 < 0.005 — 325 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 2.33 12.3 14.7 0.24 0.01 — 22.4 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 3.44 0.00 3.44 0.34 0.00 — 12.1 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.02 0.02
Total 0.63 0.74 0.39 4.80 0.01 0.01 0.29 0.30 0.01 0.05 0.06 5.78 1,200 1,206 0.65 0.04 3.41 1,238 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 0.43 0.39 0.36 3.41 0.01 0.01 0.29 0.30 0.01 0.05 0.06 — 823 823 0.04 0.04 0.09 835 Area — 0.17 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Energy 0.01 < 0.005 0.05 0.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 324 324 0.02 < 0.005 — 325 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 2.33 12.3 14.7 0.24 0.01 — 22.4 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 3.44 0.00 3.44 0.34 0.00 — 12.1 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.02 0.02
Fit 7 Lab Detailed Report, 1/31/2023
11 / 43
Total 0.44 0.56 0.41 3.45 0.01 0.01 0.29 0.30 0.01 0.05 0.06 5.78 1,160 1,165 0.65 0.04 0.10 1,194 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 0.43 0.39 0.37 3.51 0.01 0.01 0.29 0.30 0.01 0.05 0.06 — 833 833 0.04 0.04 1.47 846 Area 0.13 0.28 0.01 0.70 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 2.90 2.90 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 2.91 Energy 0.01 < 0.005 0.05 0.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 324 324 0.02 < 0.005 — 325 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 2.33 12.3 14.7 0.24 0.01 — 22.4 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 3.44 0.00 3.44 0.34 0.00 — 12.1 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.02 0.02
Total 0.56 0.67 0.42 4.25 0.01 0.01 0.29 0.30 0.01 0.05 0.06 5.78 1,172 1,178 0.65 0.04 1.48 1,209 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Mobile 0.08 0.07 0.07 0.64 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.05 0.05 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 138 138 0.01 0.01 0.24 140 Area 0.02 0.05 < 0.005 0.13 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 0.48 0.48 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.48 Energy < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 53.7 53.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 53.8 Water — — — — — — — — — — — 0.39 2.04 2.43 0.04 < 0.005 — 3.71 Waste — — — — — — — — — — — 0.57 0.00 0.57 0.06 0.00 — 2.00 Refrig. — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — < 0.005 < 0.005 Total 0.10 0.12 0.08 0.78 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.05 0.06 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 0.96 194 195 0.11 0.01 0.25 200
3. Construction Emissions Details
3.1. Demolition (2023) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Fit 7 Lab Detailed Report, 1/31/2023
12 / 43
Off-Road
Equipment
0.65 0.54 4.99 5.91 0.01 0.21 — 0.21 0.20 — 0.20 — 852 852 0.03 0.01 — 855 Demolitio
n
— — — — — — 0.31 0.31 — 0.05 0.05 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.02 0.01 0.14 0.16 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 23.3 23.3 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 23.4 Demolitio
n
— — — — — — 0.01 0.01 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 3.87 3.87 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 3.88 Demolitio
n
— — — — — — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — — — — — — — Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.82 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.13 0.00 0.03 0.03 — 144 144 0.01 < 0.005 0.61 147 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.03 0.01 0.54 0.20 < 0.005 0.01 0.11 0.12 0.01 0.03 0.03 — 415 415 0.02 0.07 0.94 437 Fit 7 Lab Detailed Report, 1/31/2023
13 / 43
——————————————————Daily,
Winter
(Max)
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 3.80 3.80 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 3.86 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling < 0.005 < 0.005 0.02 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 11.4 11.4 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 11.9 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.63 0.63 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.64 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.88 1.88 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.98
3.3. Grading (2023) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
1.52 1.28 12.6 11.4 0.02 0.60 — 0.60 0.55 — 0.55 — 1,713 1,713 0.07 0.01 — 1,719 Dust
From
Material
Mo
vement
— — — — — — 2.07 2.07 — 1.00 1.00 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Fit 7 Lab Detailed Report, 1/31/2023
14 / 43
——————————————————Average
Daily
Off-Road
Equipment
0.09 0.08 0.76 0.69 < 0.005 0.04 — 0.04 0.03 — 0.03 — 103 103 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 104 Dust
From
Material
Mo
vement
— — — — — — 0.12 0.12 — 0.06 0.06 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.02 0.01 0.14 0.13 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 17.1 17.1 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 17.2 Dust
From
Material
Mo
vement
— — — — — — 0.02 0.02 — 0.01 0.01 — — — — — — —
Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.61 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.02 0.02 — 108 108 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.46 110 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 6.28 6.28 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 6.36 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Fit 7 Lab Detailed Report, 1/31/2023
15 / 43
Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.00 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 1.04 1.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 1.05 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.5. Building Construction (2023) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.69 0.58 5.93 7.00 0.01 0.28 — 0.28 0.26 — 0.26 — 1,305 1,305 0.05 0.01 — 1,309 Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.69 0.58 5.93 7.00 0.01 0.28 — 0.28 0.26 — 0.26 — 1,305 1,305 0.05 0.01 — 1,309 Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.23 0.19 1.94 2.29 < 0.005 0.09 — 0.09 0.09 — 0.09 — 426 426 0.02 < 0.005 — 428 Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Fit 7 Lab Detailed Report, 1/31/2023
16 / 43
Off-Road
Equipment
0.04 0.03 0.35 0.42 < 0.005 0.02 — 0.02 0.02 — 0.02 — 70.6 70.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 70.8 Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.05 0.04 0.05 0.76 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.12 0.00 0.03 0.03 — 134 134 0.01 < 0.005 0.57 136 Vendor 0.01 < 0.005 0.15 0.08 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.03 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 127 127 0.01 0.02 0.34 132 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.05 0.04 0.06 0.64 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.12 0.00 0.03 0.03 — 127 127 0.01 < 0.005 0.01 128 Vendor 0.01 < 0.005 0.16 0.08 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.03 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 127 127 0.01 0.02 0.01 132 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.04 0.00 0.01 0.01 — 42.0 42.0 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.08 42.5 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.05 0.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 41.5 41.5 < 0.005 0.01 0.05 43.2 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 6.95 6.95 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 7.04 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 6.87 6.87 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 7.16 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
3.7. Building Construction (2024) - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Location TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Fit 7 Lab Detailed Report, 1/31/2023
17 / 43
Onsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.67 0.56 5.60 6.98 0.01 0.26 — 0.26 0.23 — 0.23 — 1,305 1,305 0.05 0.01 — 1,309 Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.67 0.56 5.60 6.98 0.01 0.26 — 0.26 0.23 — 0.23 — 1,305 1,305 0.05 0.01 — 1,309 Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.18 0.15 1.54 1.93 < 0.005 0.07 — 0.07 0.06 — 0.06 — 360 360 0.01 < 0.005 — 361 Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Off-Road
Equipment
0.03 0.03 0.28 0.35 < 0.005 0.01 — 0.01 0.01 — 0.01 — 59.6 59.6 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 59.8 Onsite
truck
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Offsite — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.70 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.12 0.00 0.03 0.03 — 131 131 0.01 < 0.005 0.52 133 Vendor 0.01 < 0.005 0.15 0.07 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.03 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 125 125 0.01 0.02 0.34 131 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Fit 7 Lab Detailed Report, 1/31/2023
18 / 43
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.05 0.04 0.05 0.59 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.12 0.00 0.03 0.03 — 124 124 0.01 < 0.005 0.01 125 Vendor 0.01 < 0.005 0.15 0.07 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.03 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 125 125 0.01 0.02 0.01 130 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Daily
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.17 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.01 — 34.7 34.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.06 35.1 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 0.02 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 34.5 34.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.04 36.0 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Worker < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 5.74 5.74 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 5.82 Vendor < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 5.71 5.71 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 5.96 Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
4. Operations Emissions Details
4.1. Mobile Emissions by Land Use
4.1.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
City Park 0.44 0.40 0.33 3.74 0.01 0.01 0.29 0.30 0.01 0.05 0.06 — 860 860 0.04 0.03 3.40 874 Fit 7 Lab Detailed Report, 1/31/2023
19 / 43
0.000.000.000.000.000.00—0.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.000.00General Office
Building
Enclosed
Parking
with
Ele
vator
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 0.44 0.40 0.33 3.74 0.01 0.01 0.29 0.30 0.01 0.05 0.06 — 860 860 0.04 0.03 3.40 874 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
City Park 0.43 0.39 0.36 3.41 0.01 0.01 0.29 0.30 0.01 0.05 0.06 — 823 823 0.04 0.04 0.09 835 General
Office
Building
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Enclosed
Parking
with
Ele
vator
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 0.43 0.39 0.36 3.41 0.01 0.01 0.29 0.30 0.01 0.05 0.06 — 823 823 0.04 0.04 0.09 835 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
City Park 0.08 0.07 0.07 0.64 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.05 0.05 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 138 138 0.01 0.01 0.24 140 General
Office
Building
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Enclosed
Parking
with
Ele
vator
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 0.08 0.07 0.07 0.64 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.05 0.05 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 — 138 138 0.01 0.01 0.24 140
4.2. Energy
4.2.1. Electricity Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Fit 7 Lab Detailed Report, 1/31/2023
20 / 43
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
City Park — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — — — 178 178 0.01 < 0.005 — 179
Enclosed
Parking
with
Ele
vator
— — — — — — — — — — — — 90.4 90.4 0.01 < 0.005 — 90.7
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 268 268 0.02 < 0.005 — 269 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
City Park — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — — — 178 178 0.01 < 0.005 — 179
Enclosed
Parking
with
Ele
vator
— — — — — — — — — — — — 90.4 90.4 0.01 < 0.005 — 90.7
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 268 268 0.02 < 0.005 — 269 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
City Park — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — — — 29.5 29.5 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 29.6 Fit 7 Lab Detailed Report, 1/31/2023
21 / 43
15.0—< 0.005< 0.00515.015.0————————————Enclosed
Parking
with
Ele
vator
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — 44.4 44.4 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 44.6
4.2.3. Natural Gas Emissions By Land Use - Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
City Park 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 General
Office
Building
0.01 < 0.005 0.05 0.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 55.7 55.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 55.8 Enclosed
Parking
with
Ele
vator
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Total 0.01 < 0.005 0.05 0.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 55.7 55.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 55.8 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
City Park 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 General
Office
Building
0.01 < 0.005 0.05 0.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 55.7 55.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 55.8 Enclosed
Parking
with
Ele
vator
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Total 0.01 < 0.005 0.05 0.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 55.7 55.7 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 55.8 Fit 7 Lab Detailed Report, 1/31/2023
22 / 43
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
City Park 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 General
Office
Building
< 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 9.22 9.22 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 9.24 Enclosed
Parking
with
Ele
vator
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00 Total < 0.005 < 0.005 0.01 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 9.22 9.22 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 9.24
4.3. Area Emissions by Source
4.3.2. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Source TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Consum
er
Products
— 0.15 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coatings
— 0.02 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Landsca
pe
Equipme
nt
0.18 0.17 0.01 1.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 4.23 4.23 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 4.25 Total 0.18 0.34 0.01 1.03 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 4.23 4.23 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 4.25 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Fit 7 Lab Detailed Report, 1/31/2023
23 / 43
Consum
Products
— 0.15 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coatings
— 0.02 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — 0.17 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Consum
er
Products
— 0.03 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Architect
ural
Coatings
— < 0.005
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Landsca
pe
Equipme
nt
0.02 0.02 < 0.005 0.13 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 0.48 0.48 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.48 Total 0.02 0.05 < 0.005 0.13 < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 < 0.005 — < 0.005 — 0.48 0.48 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.48
4.4. Water Emissions by Land Use
4.4.2. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
City Park — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.24 0.24 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.24 General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — — 2.33 12.1 14.4 0.24 0.01 — 22.1
Fit 7 Lab Detailed Report, 1/31/2023
24 / 43
0.00—0.000.000.000.000.00———————————Enclosed
Parking
with
Elevator
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 2.33 12.3 14.7 0.24 0.01 — 22.4 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
City Park — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.24 0.24 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.24 General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — — 2.33 12.1 14.4 0.24 0.01 — 22.1
Enclosed
Parking
with
Ele
vator
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 2.33 12.3 14.7 0.24 0.01 — 22.4 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
City Park — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.04 0.04 < 0.005 < 0.005 — 0.04 General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.39 2.00 2.39 0.04 < 0.005 — 3.67 Enclosed
Parking
with
Ele
vator
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 0.39 2.04 2.43 0.04 < 0.005 — 3.71
4.5. Waste Emissions by Land Use
4.5.2. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Fit 7 Lab Detailed Report, 1/31/2023
25 / 43
CO2eRN2OCH4CO2TNBCO2BCO2PM2.5TPM2.5DPM2.5EPM10TPM10DPM10ESO2CONOxROGTOGLand Use
Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
City Park — — — — — — — — — — — 0.01 0.00 0.01 < 0.005 0.00 — 0.03 General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — — 3.44 0.00 3.44 0.34 0.00 — 12.0
Enclosed
Parking
with
Ele
vator
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 3.44 0.00 3.44 0.34 0.00 — 12.1 Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
City Park — — — — — — — — — — — 0.01 0.00 0.01 < 0.005 0.00 — 0.03 General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — — 3.44 0.00 3.44 0.34 0.00 — 12.0
Enclosed
Parking
with
Ele
vator
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 3.44 0.00 3.44 0.34 0.00 — 12.1 Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
City Park — — — — — — — — — — — < 0.005 0.00 < 0.005 < 0.005 0.00 — 0.01 General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.57 0.00 0.57 0.06 0.00 — 1.99
Enclosed
Parking
with
Ele
vator
— — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 — 0.00
Fit 7 Lab Detailed Report, 1/31/2023
26 / 43
Total — — — — — — — — — — — 0.57 0.00 0.57 0.06 0.00 — 2.00
4.6. Refrigerant Emissions by Land Use
4.6.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
City Park — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00
General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.02 0.02
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.02 0.02
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
City Park — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00
General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.02 0.02
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.02 0.02
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
City Park — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0.00 0.00
General
Office
Building
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — < 0.005 < 0.005
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — < 0.005 < 0.005
Fit 7 Lab Detailed Report, 1/31/2023
27 / 43
4.7. Offroad Emissions By Equipment Type
4.7.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipme
nt
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
4.8. Stationary Emissions By Equipment Type
4.8.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipme
nt
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Fit 7 Lab Detailed Report, 1/31/2023
28 / 43
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
4.9. User Defined Emissions By Equipment Type
4.9.1. Unmitigated
Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Equipme
nt
Type
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
4.10. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type
4.10.1. Soil Carbon Accumulation By Vegetation Type - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Vegetatio
n
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Fit 7 Lab Detailed Report, 1/31/2023
29 / 43
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
4.10.2. Above and Belowground Carbon Accumulation by Land Use Type - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Land
Use
TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Total — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
4.10.3. Avoided and Sequestered Emissions by Species - Unmitigated Criteria Pollutants (lb/day for daily, ton/yr for annual) and GHGs (lb/day for daily, MT/yr for annual) Species TOG ROG NOx CO SO2 PM10E PM10D PM10T PM2.5E PM2.5D PM2.5T BCO2 NBCO2 CO2T CH4 N2O R CO2e Daily,
Summer
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Fit 7 Lab Detailed Report, 1/31/2023
30 / 43
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequest
ered
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Remove
d
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Daily,
Winter
(Max)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequest
ered
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Remove
d
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Annual — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Avoided — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Sequest
ered
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Remove
d
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Subtotal — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Fit 7 Lab Detailed Report, 1/31/2023
31 / 43
5. Activity Data
5.1. Construction Schedule
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Days Per Week Work Days per Phase Phase Description Demolition Demolition 6/1/2023 6/15/2023 5.00 10.0 —
Grading Grading 6/16/2023 7/17/2023 5.00 22.0 —
Building Construction Building Construction 7/18/2023 5/20/2024 5.00 220 —
5.2. Off-Road Equipment
5.2.1. Unmitigated
Phase Name Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor Demolition Concrete/Industrial
Saws
Diesel Av erage 1.00 8.00 33.0 0.73
Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 1.00 1.00 367 0.40 Demolition Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Diesel Average 2.00 6.00 84.0 0.37
Grading Graders Diesel Average 1.00 6.00 148 0.41
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers Diesel Average 1.00 6.00 367 0.40 Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Diesel Average 1.00 7.00 84.0 0.37
Building Construction Cranes Diesel Average 1.00 4.00 367 0.29 Building Construction Forklifts Diesel Average 2.00 6.00 82.0 0.20 Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backh
oes
Diesel Average 2.00 8.00 84.0 0.37
5.3. Construction Vehicles
Fit 7 Lab Detailed Report, 1/31/2023
32 / 43
5.3.1. Unmitigated
Phase Name Trip Type One-Way Trips per Day Miles per Trip Vehicle Mix Demolition — — — —
Demolition Worker 10.0 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Demolition Vendor — 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Demolition Hauling 5.80 20.0 HHDT
Demolition Onsite truck — — HHDT
Grading — — — —
Grading Worker 7.50 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Grading Vendor — 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Grading Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Grading Onsite truck — — HHDT
Building Construction — — — —
Building Construction Worker 9.25 18.5 LDA,LDT1,LDT2
Building Construction Vendor 3.88 10.2 HHDT,MHDT
Building Construction Hauling 0.00 20.0 HHDT
Building Construction Onsite truck — — HHDT
5.4. Vehicles
5.4.1. Construction Vehicle Control Strategies
Non-applicable. No control strategies activated by user.
5.5. Architectural Coatings
Phase Name Residential Interior Area Coated
(sq ft)
Residential Exterior Area Coated
(sq ft)
Non-Residential Interior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Non-Residential Exterior Area
Coated (sq ft)
Parking Area Coated (sq ft)
Fit 7 Lab Detailed Report, 1/31/2023
33 / 43
5.6. Dust Mitigation
5.6.1. Construction Earthmoving Activities
Phase Name Material Imported (Ton of
Debris)
Material Exported (Ton of
Debris)
Acres Graded (acres) Material Demolished (Building
Square Footage)
Acres Paved (acres)
Demolition 0.00 0.00 0.00 5,000 —
Grading 0.00 0.00 16.5 0.00 —
5.6.2. Construction Earthmoving Control Strategies
Control Strategies Applied Frequency (per day) PM10 Reduction PM2.5 Reduction Water Exposed Area 2 61% 61%
Water Demolished Area 2 36% 36%
5.7. Construction Paving
Land Use Area Paved (acres) % Asphalt
City Park 0.00 0%
General Office Building 0.00 0%
Enclosed Parking with Elevator 0.30 100%
5.8. Construction Electricity Consumption and Emissions Factors kWh per Y ear and Emission Factor (lb/MWh)
Y ear kWh per Y ear CO2 CH4 N2O
2023 0.00 532 0.03 < 0.005
2024 0.00 532 0.03 < 0.005
5.9. Operational Mobile Sources
Fit 7 Lab Detailed Report, 1/31/2023
34 / 43
5.9.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Type Trips/Weekday Trips/Saturday Trips/Sunday Trips/Y ear VMT/Weekday VMT/Saturday VMT/Sunday VMT/Y ear City Park 107 107 107 39,055 1,051 1,051 1,051 383,762
General Office
Building
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Enclosed Parking
with Elev
ator
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
5.10. Operational Area Sources
5.10.1. Hearths
5.10.1.1. Unmitigated
5.10.2. Architectural Coatings
Residential Interior Area Coated (sq ft) Residential Exterior Area Coated (sq ft) Non-Residential Interior Area Coated (sq ft)
Non-Residential Exterior Area Coated
(sq ft)
Parking Area Coated (sq ft)
0 0.00 10,869 3,492 784
5.10.3. Landscape Equipment
Season Unit Value
Snow Days day/yr 0.00
Summer Days day/yr 250
5.11. Operational Energy Consumption
5.11.1. Unmitigated
Electricity (kWh/yr) and CO2 and CH4 and N2O and Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) Fit 7 Lab Detailed Report, 1/31/2023
35 / 43
Land Use Electricity (kWh/yr) CO2 CH4 N2O Natural Gas (kBTU/yr) City Park 0.00 532 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
General Office Building 122,140 532 0.0330 0.0040 173,725 Enclosed Parking with Elevator 62,016 532 0.0330 0.0040 0.00
5.12. Operational Water and Wastewater Consumption
5.12.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Indoor Water (gal/year) Outdoor Water (gal/year) City Park 0.00 31,166
General Office Building 1,218,187 0.00
Enclosed Parking with Elevator 0.00 0.00
5.13. Operational Waste Generation
5.13.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Waste (ton/year) Cogeneration (kWh/year)
City Park 0.02 0.00
General Office Building 6.37 0.00
Enclosed Parking with Elevator 0.00 0.00
5.14. Operational Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Equipment
5.14.1. Unmitigated
Land Use Type Equipment Type Refrigerant GWP Quantity (kg) Operations Leak Rate Service Leak Rate Times Serviced City Park Other commercial A/C
and heat pumps
R-410A 2,088 < 0.005 4.00 4.00 18.0
Fit 7 Lab Detailed Report, 1/31/2023
36 / 43
City Park Stand-alone retail
refrigerators
and
freezers
R-134a 1,430 0.04 1.00 0.00 1.00
General Office Building Household refrigerators
and/or freezers
R-134a 1,430 0.02 0.60 0.00 1.00
General Office Building Other commercial A/C
and heat pumps
R-410A 2,088 < 0.005 4.00 4.00 18.0
5.15. Operational Off-Road Equipment
5.15.1. Unmitigated
Equipment Type Fuel Type Engine Tier Number per Day Hours Per Day Horsepower Load Factor
5.16. Stationary Sources
5.16.1. Emergency Generators and Fire Pumps
Equipment Type Fuel Type Number per Day Hours per Day Hours per Y ear Horsepower Load Factor
5.16.2. Process Boilers
Equipment Type Fuel Type Number Boiler Rating (MMBtu/hr) Daily Heat Input (MMBtu/day) Annual Heat Input (MMBtu/yr)
5.17. User Defined
Equipment Type Fuel Type
— —
5.18. Vegetation
5.18.1. Land Use Change
Fit 7 Lab Detailed Report, 1/31/2023
37 / 43
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Vegetation Land Use Type Vegetation Soil Type Initial Acres Final Acres
5.18.1. Biomass Cover Type
5.18.1.1. Unmitigated
Biomass Cover Type Initial Acres Final Acres
5.18.2. Sequestration
5.18.2.1. Unmitigated
Tree Type Number Electricity Saved (kWh/year) Natural Gas Saved (btu/year)
6. Climate Risk Detailed Report
6.1. Climate Risk Summary
Cal-Adapt midcentury 2040–2059 average projections for four hazards are reported below for your project location. These are under Representation Concentration Pathway (RCP) 8.5 which assumes GHG emissions will contin
ue to rise strongly through 2050 and then plateau around 2100.
Climate Hazard Result for Project Location Unit
Temperature and Extreme Heat 22.5 annual days of extreme heat Extreme Precipitation 6.00 annual days with precipitation above 20 mm Sea Level Rise 0.00 meters of inundation depth
Wildfire 0.00 annual hectares burned
Temperature and Extreme Heat data are for grid cell in which your project are located. The projection is based on the 98th historical percentile of daily maximum/minimum temperatures from observed historical data
(32 climate model ensemble from Cal-Adapt, 2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.
Extreme Precipitation data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The threshold of 20 mm is equivalent to about ¾ an inch of rain, which would be light to moderate rainfall if received over a full day or
heavy rain if received over a period of 2 to 4 hours. Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.
Fit 7 Lab Detailed Report, 1/31/2023
38 / 43
Sea Level Rise data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from Radke et al. (2017), as reported in Cal-Adapt (2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5), and consider different increments of sea level rise coupled with extreme storm events. Users may select from four model simulations to view the range in potential inundation depth for the grid cell. The four simulations make different assumptions
about expected rainfall and temperature are: Warmer/drier (HadGEM2-ES), Cooler/wetter (CNRM-CM5), Average conditions (CanESM2), Range of different rainfall and temperature possibilities (MIROC5). Each grid cell is 50 meters (m) by 50 m, or about 164 feet (ft) by 164 ft.
Wildfire data are for the grid cell in which your project are located. The projections are from UC Davis, as reported in Cal-Adapt (2040–2059 average under RCP 8.5), and consider historical data of climate, vegetation, population
density, and large (> 400 ha) fire history. Users may select from four model simulations to view the range in potential wildfire probabilities for the grid cell. The four simulations make different assumptions about expected rainfall and temperature are: Warmer/drier (HadGEM2-ES), Cooler/wetter (CNRM-CM5), Average conditions (CanESM2), Range of different rainfall and temperature possibilities (MIROC5). Each grid cell is 6 kilometers (km) by 6 km, or 3.7 miles (mi) by 3.7 mi.
6.2. Initial Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score Temperature and Extreme Heat 2 0 0 N/A
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sea Level Rise 1 0 0 N/A
Wildfire 1 0 0 N/A
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
Drought N/A N/A N/A N/A
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation 0 0 0 N/A
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest exposure.
The
adaptive capacity of a project refers to its ability to manage and reduce vulnerabilities from projected climate hazards. Adaptive capacity is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest ability
to adapt.
The overall vulnerability scores are calculated based on the potential impacts and adaptive capacity assessments for each hazard. Scores do not include implementation of climate risk reduction measures.
6.3. Adjusted Climate Risk Scores
Climate Hazard Exposure Score Sensitivity Score Adaptive Capacity Score Vulnerability Score Temperature and Extreme Heat 2 1 1 3
Extreme Precipitation N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sea Level Rise 1 1 1 2
Wildfire 1 1 1 2
Flooding N/A N/A N/A N/A
Fit 7 Lab Detailed Report, 1/31/2023
39 / 43
Drought N/A N/A N/A N/A
Snowpack Reduction N/A N/A N/A N/A
Air Quality Degradation 1 1 1 2
The sensitivity score reflects the extent to which a project would be adversely affected by exposure to a climate hazard. Exposure is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest exposure.
The
adaptive capacity of a project refers to its ability to manage and reduce vulnerabilities from projected climate hazards. Adaptive capacity is rated on a scale of 1 to 5, with a score of 5 representing the greatest ability
to adapt.
The overall vulnerability scores are calculated based on the potential impacts and adaptive capacity assessments for each hazard. Scores include implementation of climate risk reduction measures.
6.4. Climate Risk Reduction Measures
7. Health and Equity Details
7.1. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores
The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state.
Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Exposure Indicators —
AQ-Ozone 82.5
AQ-PM 70.8
AQ-DPM 29.7
Drinking Water 84.9
Lead Risk Housing 90.1
Pesticides 10.9
Toxic Releases 76.3
Traffic 25.1
Effect Indicators —
CleanUp Sites 73.4
Groundwater 75.7
Haz Waste Facilities/Generators 27.1
Fit 7 Lab Detailed Report, 1/31/2023
40 / 43
Impaired Water Bodies 23.9
Solid Waste 89.3
Sensitive Population —
Asthma 76.1
Cardio-vascular 65.1
Low Birth Weights 68.9
Socioeconomic Factor Indicators —
Education 84.2
Housing 51.8
Linguistic 81.2
Poverty 57.6
Unemployment 53.9
7.2. Healthy Places Index Scores
The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.
Indicator Result for Project Census Tract
Economic —
Above Poverty 37.93147697
Employed 58.03926601
Median HI 42.82047992
Education —
Bachelor's or higher 4.606698319
High school enrollment 100
Preschool enrollment 49.04401386
Transportation —
Auto Access 82.44578468
Active commuting 46.41344797
Fit 7 Lab Detailed Report, 1/31/2023
41 / 43
Social —
2-parent households 36.2504812
Voting 0.949570127
Neighborhood —
Alcohol availability 40.92133966
Park access 81.35506224
Retail density 55.85782112
Supermarket access 2.399589375
Tree canopy 19.97946875
Housing —
Homeownership 81.12408572
Housing habitability 34.08186834
Low-inc homeowner severe housing cost burden 19.31220326 Low-inc renter severe housing cost burden 46.40061594
Uncrowded housing 11.35634544
Health Outcomes —
Insured adults 19.196715
Arthritis 80.8
Asthma ER Admissions 28.4
High Blood Pressure 81.4
Cancer (excluding skin) 80.0
Asthma 69.3
Coronary Heart Disease 57.7
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease 76.7
Diagnosed Diabetes 26.4
Life Expectancy at Birth 33.1
Cognitively Disabled 35.0
Fit 7 Lab Detailed Report, 1/31/2023
42 / 43
Physically Disabled 65.4
Heart Attack ER Admissions 21.0
Mental Health Not Good 39.0
Chronic Kidney Disease 35.4
Obesity 32.0
Pedestrian Injuries 19.6
Physical Health Not Good 33.1
Stroke 64.5
Health Risk Behaviors —
Binge Drinking 36.9
Current Smoker 51.2
No Leisure Time for Physical Activity 32.2
Climate Change Exposures —
Wildfire Risk 0.0
SLR Inundation Area 0.0
Children 61.0
Elderly 66.3
English Speaking 25.0
Foreign-born 81.5
Outdoor Workers 37.5
Climate Change Adaptive Capacity —
Impervious Surface Cover 26.8
Traffic Density 27.5
Traffic Access 23.0
Other Indices —
Hardship 75.6
Other Decision Support —
Fit 7 Lab Detailed Report, 1/31/2023
43 / 43
2016 Voting 25.7
7.3. Overall Health & Equity Scores
Metric Result for Project Census Tract
CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Score for Project Location (a) 88.0 Healthy Places Index Score for Project Location (b) 30.0 Project Located in a Designated Disadvantaged Community (Senate Bill 535) Y es Project Located in a Low-Income Community (Assembly Bill 1550) Y es Project Located in a Community Air Protection Program Community (Assembly Bill 617) No a: The maximum CalEnviroScreen score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects a higher pollution burden compared to other census tracts in the state. b: The maximum Health Places Index score is 100. A high score (i.e., greater than 50) reflects healthier community conditions compared to other census tracts in the state.
7.4. Health & Equity Measures
No Health & Equity Measures selected.
7.5. Evaluation Scorecard
Health & Equity Evaluation Scorecard not completed.
7.6. Health & Equity Custom Measures
No Health & Equity Custom Measures created.
8. User Changes to Default Data
Screen Justification
Construction: Construction Phases Construction schedule per applicant Operations: Vehicle Data Per trip generation calculated in initial study Land Use Project Site is approximately 0.6 acres. Office building selected to account for sf associated with the indoor soccer field,
gym, office spaces, meeting space, kitchen and bathrooms.
APPENDIX B
Noise and Vibration Data
NOISE MONITORING FIELD REPORT
Project Name: Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project
Monitoring Location: R. e-S: J<-A .._e � S'....A-L
0 'C- \-� "? t'Oy �c.,lr 'i;. � �<..
Date: I /'2-S- lzo'l- � Site Number: I
Measured By: Annalie Sarrieddine
Measurement Start Time: 4-: o 9 ly M
Measurement End Time: Y ·. 2.. 4 \' r'i
Total Measurement Time: 15 min.
Noise Meter Model: Larson Davis Soundtrack LxT
Meter Setting: A-Weighted Sound Level (SLOW)
Session File Name: L i<- +- _ "u c..\.c... -z.o C:,
Site Map
Calibration: 94.0 (dBA)
Data Summary Other Noise Sources During Monitoring
Noise Noise Level
Scale (dBA)
¼ (, 4. 3
Lmax <i 3.)
Lmin L/o.7-
Additional Notes:
1. __________________ Time: ___ _
2. __________________ Time: ___ _
3. __________________ Time: ___ _
4. __________________ Time: ___ _
5. __________________ Time: ___ _
Measurement Report
Report Summary
Meter's File Name LxT_Data.206.s Computer's File Name LxT_0005667-20230125 160925-LxT_Data.206.ldbin Meter LxT1 0005667 Firmware 2.302
User Location
Job Description
Note
Start Time 2023-01-25 16:09:25 Duration 0:15:00.0
End Time 2023-01-25 16:24:25 Run Time 0:15:00.0 Pause Time 0:00:00.0 Pre-Calibration 2023-01-25 14:33:25 Post-Calibration None Calibration Deviation --- Results
Overall Metrics
LAeq 64.3 dB
LAE 93.8 dB SEA --- dB
EA 269.2 µPa²h
EA8 8.6 mPa²h
EA40 43.1 mPa²h
LApeak 109.8 dB 2023-01-25 16:12:35
LASmax 83.5 dB 2023-01-25 16:16:23
LASmin 40.7 dB 2023-01-25 16:21:20
LAeq 64.3 dB
LCeq 74.1 dB LCeq - LAeq 9.8 dB
LAIeq 68.6 dB LAIeq - LAeq 4.3 dB
Exceedances Count Duration
LAS > 85.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0
LAS > 115.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0
LApeak > 135.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0
LApeak > 137.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0
LApeak > 140.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0
Community Noise LDN LDay LNight
--- dB --- dB 0.0 dB
LDEN LDay LEve LNight
--- dB --- dB --- dB --- dB
Any Data A C Z
Level Time Stamp Level Time Stamp Level Time Stamp
Leq 64.3 dB 74.1 dB --- dB
Ls(max) 83.5 dB 2023-01-25 16:16:23 --- dB None --- dB None LS(min) 40.7 dB 2023-01-25 16:21:20 --- dB None --- dB None LPeak(max) 109.8 dB 2023-01-25 16:12:35 --- dB None --- dB None Overloads Count Duration OBA Count OBA Duration
0 0:00:00.0 0 0:00:00.0
Statistics
LAS 0.0 --- dB
LAS 0.0 --- dB
LAS 10.0 66.2 dB
LAS 33.3 60.4 dB
LAS 66.7 54.0 dB
LAS 90.0 48.5 dB
NOISE MONITORING FIELD REPORT
Project Name: Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project
Monitoring Location: ?.o)e..c..\- �: \--<...
Date: I h.) /Zo-z. s Site Number: .2_
Measured By: Annalie Sarrieddine
Measurement Start Time: '-I : s o �ff\
Measurement End Time: l--\ : 4 S- (,' M
Total Measurement Time: 15 min.
Noise Meter Model: Larson Davis Soundtrack LxT
Meter Setting: A-Weighted Sound Level (SLOW)
Session File Name: L "'- +- - '2)c..fa;c... 7-.o'1-
Primary Noise Sources:
Site Map
Calibration: 94.0 (dBA)
Data Summary Other Noise Sources During Monitoring
Noise Noise Level
Scale (dBA)
�q r;z.t-/
Lmax 7--:;-. cr
Lmin Lj(.).
Additional Notes:
1. _________________ Time: ___ _
2. _________________ Time: ___ _
3. _________________ Time: ___ _
4. _________________ Time: ___ _
5. _________________ Time: ___ _
Measurement Report
Report Summary
Meter's File Name LxT_Data.207.s Computer's File Name LxT_0005667-20230125 163032-LxT_Data.207.ldbin Meter LxT1 0005667 Firmware 2.302
User Location
Job Description
Note
Start Time 2023-01-25 16:30:32 Duration 0:15:00.0
End Time 2023-01-25 16:45:32 Run Time 0:15:00.0 Pause Time 0:00:00.0 Pre-Calibration 2023-01-25 14:33:25 Post-Calibration None Calibration Deviation --- Results
Overall Metrics
LAeq 62.4 dB
LAE 91.9 dB SEA --- dB
EA 173.8 µPa²h
EA8 5.6 mPa²h
EA40 27.8 mPa²h
LApeak 97.7 dB 2023-01-25 16:36:17
LASmax 77.9 dB 2023-01-25 16:33:52
LASmin 45.2 dB 2023-01-25 16:37:37
LAeq 62.4 dB
LCeq 70.8 dB LCeq - LAeq 8.4 dB
LAIeq 64.4 dB LAIeq - LAeq 2.0 dB
Exceedances Count Duration
LAS > 85.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0
LAS > 115.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0
LApeak > 135.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0
LApeak > 137.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0
LApeak > 140.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0
Community Noise LDN LDay LNight
--- dB --- dB 0.0 dB
LDEN LDay LEve LNight
--- dB --- dB --- dB --- dB
Any Data A C Z
Level Time Stamp Level Time Stamp Level Time Stamp
Leq 62.4 dB 70.8 dB --- dB
Ls(max) 77.9 dB 2023-01-25 16:33:52 --- dB None --- dB None LS(min) 45.2 dB 2023-01-25 16:37:37 --- dB None --- dB None LPeak(max) 97.7 dB 2023-01-25 16:36:17 --- dB None --- dB None Overloads Count Duration OBA Count OBA Duration
0 0:00:00.0 0 0:00:00.0
Statistics
LAS 0.0 --- dB
LAS 0.0 --- dB
LAS 10.0 66.1 dB
LAS 33.3 58.8 dB
LAS 66.7 54.2 dB
LAS 90.0 50.0 dB
NOISE MONITORING FIELD REPORT
Site Map (Lab Five Soccer Facility - Pacoima)
Project Name: Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project
Monitoring location: S'ac:c....;- �<-: ,_ l.:,j
Date: l l'l.S- / '?.o-i. 3 Site Number: 3 ( c"'j": ,..� Measured By: Annalie Sarrieddine
Measurement Start Time: c,·: t o ? n
. -
Measurement End Time: C. · L S f M
Total Measurement Time: 15 min.
Noise Meter Model: Larson Davis Soundtrack LxT
Meter Setting: A-Weighted Sound Level (SLOW)
Session File Name: (_� � - D cu\-... '2 o 8-
Calibration: 94.0 (dBA)
Primary Noise Sources:
Data Summary
Noise Noise Level
Scale (dBA)
L.,q C,LJ.7..
Lm•• q1. g
Lm,n 4 I. o/
Additional Notes:
(J',:.,.. «$
1. c ... ✓ µc,,,..S' rf,.,s;(., I Sou..u i=: ... \,A
;+cJ--'.,; 1-) /
Other Noise Sources During Monitoring
/1°" k,.,.J Time: C: 1r
2. _________________ Time: ___ _
3. _________________ Time: ___ _
4. _________________ Time: ___ _
5. _________________ Time: ___ _
Measurement Report
Report Summary
Meter's File Name LxT_Data.208.s Computer's File Name LxT_0005667-20230125 181037-LxT_Data.208.ldbin Meter LxT1 0005667 Firmware 2.302
User Location
Job Description
Note
Start Time 2023-01-25 18:10:37 Duration 0:15:00.0
End Time 2023-01-25 18:25:37 Run Time 0:15:00.0 Pause Time 0:00:00.0 Pre-Calibration 2023-01-25 14:33:25 Post-Calibration None Calibration Deviation --- Results
Overall Metrics
LAeq 64.2 dB
LAE 93.7 dB SEA --- dB
EA 263.0 µPa²h
EA8 8.4 mPa²h
EA40 42.1 mPa²h
LApeak 112.7 dB 2023-01-25 18:14:57
LASmax 91.8 dB 2023-01-25 18:14:57
LASmin 41.9 dB 2023-01-25 18:25:37
LAeq 64.2 dB
LCeq 72.3 dB LCeq - LAeq 8.1 dB
LAIeq 75.1 dB LAIeq - LAeq 10.9 dB
Exceedances Count Duration
LAS > 85.0 dB 1 0:00:02.2
LAS > 115.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0
LApeak > 135.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0
LApeak > 137.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0
LApeak > 140.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0
Community Noise LDN LDay LNight
--- dB --- dB 0.0 dB
LDEN LDay LEve LNight
--- dB --- dB --- dB --- dB
Any Data A C Z
Level Time Stamp Level Time Stamp Level Time Stamp
Leq 64.2 dB 72.3 dB --- dB
Ls(max) 91.8 dB 2023-01-25 18:14:57 --- dB None --- dB None LS(min) 41.9 dB 2023-01-25 18:25:37 --- dB None --- dB None LPeak(max) 112.7 dB 2023-01-25 18:14:57 --- dB None --- dB None Overloads Count Duration OBA Count OBA Duration
0 0:00:00.0 0 0:00:00.0
Statistics
LAS 0.0 --- dB
LAS 0.0 --- dB
LAS 10.0 61.4 dB
LAS 33.3 56.9 dB
LAS 66.7 52.8 dB
LAS 90.0 51.1 dB
NOISE MONITORING FIELD REPORT
Project Name: Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project
Monitoring Location: S'oc."- 4....,. �c...- \: �
Date: \ I 1. s / "t.o i.. '1 Site Number: 3 l ,--:':J ...._"r J Measured By: Annalie Sarrieddine
Measurement Start Time: 1: 0 o -;:,M
Measurement End Time: 7-: 1 S � f-'\
Total Measurement Time: 15 min.
Noise Meter Model: Larson Davis Soundtrack LxT
Meter Setting: A-Weighted Sound Level (SLOW)
Session File Name: l,d- _ � ,J,,o.. "2. o 4
Primary Noise Sources:
Site Map (Lab Five Soccer Facility - Pacoima)
Calibration: 94.0 (dBA)
Data Summary Other Noise Sources During Monitoring
Noise Noise Level
Scale (dBA)
�q Co. s-
Lmax 1' i.)
Lmln 4 �. 4
1. tfl;r17f ... .,,<., Time: 1-:o t./
2. (r,-r C"�1"c.. �-,_.� Time: +-; 0 lf-
3. _________________ Time: ___ _
4. _________________ Time: ___ _
5. _________________ Time: ___ _
Measurement Report
Report Summary
Meter's File Name LxT_Data.209.s Computer's File Name LxT_0005667-20230125 190045-LxT_Data.209.ldbin Meter LxT1 0005667 Firmware 2.302
User Location
Job Description
Note
Start Time 2023-01-25 19:00:45 Duration 0:15:00.0
End Time 2023-01-25 19:15:45 Run Time 0:15:00.0 Pause Time 0:00:00.0 Pre-Calibration 2023-01-25 14:33:25 Post-Calibration None Calibration Deviation --- Results
Overall Metrics
LAeq 60.5 dB
LAE 90.0 dB SEA --- dB
EA 112.2 µPa²h
EA8 3.6 mPa²h
EA40 18.0 mPa²h
LApeak 94.5 dB 2023-01-25 19:04:51
LASmax 78.3 dB 2023-01-25 19:04:50
LASmin 46.4 dB 2023-01-25 19:06:27
LAeq 60.5 dB
LCeq 74.9 dB LCeq - LAeq 14.4 dB
LAIeq 64.0 dB LAIeq - LAeq 3.5 dB
Exceedances Count Duration
LAS > 85.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0
LAS > 115.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0
LApeak > 135.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0
LApeak > 137.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0
LApeak > 140.0 dB 0 0:00:00.0
Community Noise LDN LDay LNight
--- dB --- dB 0.0 dB
LDEN LDay LEve LNight
--- dB --- dB --- dB --- dB
Any Data A C Z
Level Time Stamp Level Time Stamp Level Time Stamp
Leq 60.5 dB 74.9 dB --- dB
Ls(max) 78.3 dB 2023-01-25 19:04:50 --- dB None --- dB None LS(min) 46.4 dB 2023-01-25 19:06:27 --- dB None --- dB None LPeak(max) 94.5 dB 2023-01-25 19:04:51 --- dB None --- dB None Overloads Count Duration OBA Count OBA Duration
0 0:00:00.0 0 0:00:00.0
Statistics
LAS 0.0 --- dB
LAS 0.0 --- dB
LAS 10.0 63.3 dB
LAS 33.3 57.8 dB
LAS 66.7 54.4 dB
LAS 90.0 51.4 dB
Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM),Version 1.1
Report date: 1/24/2023
Case Description: Fit 7 Lab Building Construction
‐‐‐‐ Receptor #1 ‐‐‐‐
Baselines (dBA)
Description Land Use Daytime Evening Night
Residences to the South Residential 60 60 60
Equipment
Spec Actual Receptor Estimated
Impact Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding
Description Device Usage(%) (dBA) (dBA) (feet) (dBA)
Crane No 16 80.6 25 0
Tractor No 40 84 25 0
Results
Calculated (dBA) Noise Limits (dBA) Noise Limit Exceedance (dBA) Day Evening Night Day Evening Night
Equipment *Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Crane 86.6 78.6 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Tractor 90 86 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Total 90 86.8 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A *Calculated Lmax is the Loudest value.
NOTE: Given the dynamic nature of building construction equipment, distance estimate assumes equipment would not operate closer than an average of 25 feet during a one‐hour period.
Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM),Version 1.1
Report date: 1/24/2023
Case Description: Fit 7 Lab Demolition
‐‐‐‐ Receptor #1 ‐‐‐‐
Baselines (dBA)
Description Land Use Daytime Evening Night
Residences to the South Residential 60 60 60
Equipment
Spec Actual Receptor Estimated
Impact Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding
Description Device Usage(%) (dBA) (dBA) (feet) (dBA)
Backhoe No 40 77.6 100 0
Tractor No 40 84 100 0
Concrete Saw No 20 89.6 100 0
Dozer No 40 81.7 100 0
NOTE: Distance estimated from building demolition to nearest residential property line Results
Calculated (dBA) Noise Limits (dBA) Noise Limit Exceedance (dBA) Day Evening Night Day Evening Night
Equipment *Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Backhoe 71.5 67.6 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Tractor 78 74 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Concrete Saw 83.6 76.6 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Dozer 75.6 71.7 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Total 83.6 79.6 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A *Calculated Lmax is the Loudest value.
Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM),Version 1.1
Report date: 1/24/2023
Case Description: Fit 7 Lab Grading
‐‐‐‐ Receptor #1 ‐‐‐‐
Baselines (dBA)
Description Land Use Daytime Evening Night
Residences to the South Residential 60 60 60
Equipment
Spec Actual Receptor Estimated
Impact Lmax Lmax Distance Shielding
Description Device Usage(%) (dBA) (dBA) (feet) (dBA)
Grader No 40 85 25 0
Dozer No 40 81.7 25 0
Results
Calculated (dBA) Noise Limits (dBA) Noise Limit Exceedance (dBA) Day Evening Night Day Evening Night
Equipment *Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Lmax Leq Grader 91 87 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Dozer 87.7 83.7 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Total 91 88.7 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A *Calculated Lmax is the Loudest value.
NOTE: Given the dynamic nature of mobile grading equipment, distance estimate assumes grading equipment would not operate closer than an average of 25 feet during a one‐hour period. Said another way, it is assumed equipment could operate within 25 feet for some part of 1 hour, but would also operate farther than 25 feet during a 1‐hour period.
Fit 7 Lab Residences to the South
Ref= Reference vibration level (PPV )
RefD= Reference distance for Reference vibration level (Feet ) Vibration PPV
Ref= 0.089 Based on type of equipmen t
RefD= 25
D= 15 Distance from equipment to sensitive recepto r
Equip= 0.191
Annoyance VdB
Ref= 87 Based on type of equipmen t
RefD= 25
D= 15 Distance from equipment to sensitive recepto r
Equip= 94
Peak demolition vibration based on utilizing a large bulldozer.
Source: FTA Tranist Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment, 2006.
APPENDIXȱ
ȱ
>ŽĐĂƚŝŽŶ͗ >Ăď&ŝǀĞ^ŽĐĐĞƌǁLJ͕ϵϳϰϬdĞůĨĂŝƌǀĞ ĂƚĞ͗
ŝƚLJ͗ WĂĐŽŝŵĂ͕ ĂLJ͗
EZ ^> t> tZ EZ ^>
d t> td tZ EZ ^>
d t> td tZ &ŽƌWĞĚƐĂŶĚŝŬĞƐ ƐŝĚĞǁĂůŬŵŽǀĞŵĞŶƚ
ϳ͗ϬϬD Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
ϳ͗ϭϱD Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
ϳ͗ϯϬD Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
ϳ͗ϰϱD Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
ϴ͗ϬϬD Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
ϴ͗ϭϱD Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
ϴ͗ϯϬD Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
ϴ͗ϰϱD Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
ϵ͗ϬϬD Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
ϵ͗ϭϱD Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
ϵ͗ϯϬD Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
ϵ͗ϰϱD Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
ϭϬ͗ϬϬD Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
ϭϬ͗ϭϱD Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
ϭϬ͗ϯϬD Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
ϭϬ͗ϰϱD Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
ϭϭ͗ϬϬD Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
ϭϭ͗ϭϱD Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
ϭϭ͗ϯϬD Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
ϭϭ͗ϰϱD Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
ϭϮ͗ϬϬWD Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
ϭϮ͗ϭϱWD Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
ϭϮ͗ϯϬWD Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
ϭϮ͗ϰϱWD Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
ϭ͗ϬϬWD Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
ϭ͗ϭϱWD Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
ϭ͗ϯϬWD Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
ϭ͗ϰϱWD Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
Ϯ͗ϬϬWD Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
Ϯ͗ϭϱWD Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
Ϯ͗ϯϬWD Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
Ϯ͗ϰϱWD Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
ϯ͗ϬϬWD Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
ϯ͗ϭϱWD Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
ϯ͗ϯϬWD Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
ϯ͗ϰϱWD Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
ϰ͗ϬϬWD ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ ϭ Ϭ ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
ϰ͗ϭϱWD Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
ϰ͗ϯϬWD Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
ϰ͗ϰϱWD Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
ϱ͗ϬϬWD ϭ ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
ϱ͗ϭϱWD Ϭ Ϭ ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
ϱ͗ϯϬWD Ϭ ϭ Ϭ ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
ϱ͗ϰϱWD ϭ ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
ϲ͗ϬϬWD Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
ϲ͗ϭϱWD ϭ ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
ϲ͗ϯϬWD Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
ϲ͗ϰϱWD ϳ ϰ ϭ Ϭ Ϯ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϯ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
ϳ͗ϬϬWD ϯ ϵ ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
ϳ͗ϭϱWD ϴ ϯ Ϭ ϭ ϭ ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
ϳ͗ϯϬWD ϲ ϲ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϯ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
ϳ͗ϰϱWD ϲ ϳ Ϯ Ϭ ϭ Ϯ ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
ϴ͗ϬϬWD ϭϭ ϭ ϲ Ϯ Ϭ ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
ϴ͗ϭϱWD ϭ ϭ Ϯ ϭ ϯ Ϯ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
ϴ͗ϯϬWD Ϭ Ϯ ϯ ϭ Ϭ ϯ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
ϴ͗ϰϱWD ϭ Ϯ ϭ Ϯ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
ϵ͗ϬϬWD Ϭ ϭ ϲ ϰ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ ϯ Ϭ ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
ϵ͗ϭϱWD ϭ Ϭ ϭϭ ϭϬ ϭ Ϭ Ϭ ϭ Ϭ ϰ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
ϵ͗ϯϬWD Ϭ Ϭ ϳ ϯ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ ϰ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
ϵ͗ϰϱWD Ϭ Ϭ ϭ ϱ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
ϭϬ͗ϬϬWD Ϭ ϭ ϱ ϰ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϯ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
ϭϬ͗ϭϱWD Ϭ Ϭ ϰ ϯ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
ϭϬ͗ϯϬWD Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
ϭϬ͗ϰϱWD Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
ϭϭ͗ϬϬWD Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϯ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϯ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
ϭϭ͗ϭϱWD Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
ϭϭ͗ϯϬWD Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
ϭϭ͗ϰϱWD Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
dŽƚĂůƐ ϰϴ ϰϭ ϱϭ ϯϴ ϴ ϭϱ ϭ ϱ Ϭ ϭϲ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ Ϭ
sĞŚŝĐůĞ W
^
Khd/E Khd /E
WƌĞƉĂƌĞĚďLJEĂƚŝŽŶĂůĂƚĂΘ^ƵƌǀĞLJŝŶŐ^ĞƌǀŝĐĞƐ
dƌŝƉ'ĞŶĞƌĂƚŝŽŶ^ƚƵĚLJ
/E
ϴͬϮϱͬϮϬϮϭ
tĞĚŶĞƐĚĂLJ
d/D
Khd
/<
^
NOTE:ȱȱŚȬȱŗŖȱȱȱȱ¢ȱĜȱȱ
ȱ ȱŗŝŗȱǯȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ
ȱŞȱęȱȱȱȱśȱ¢ȱȱ ȱ¢ȱ
ȱȱŘŗǯřŝśȱȱȱęǯ
Lab Five Soccer Center Project, CEQA Class 32 Categorical Exemption Report, City of Gardena, September 2021, see Appendix A (Transportation Analysis). Available Online at:
https://cityofgardena.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/Lab-Five-Soccer-CE-Report-and-Appendices_Final_September-29-2021.pdf.
The traffic count data sheet above has been extracted from this reference study.
APPENDIX D
Cultural Resources Evaluation
(Pending SCCIC and Tribal Consultation)
South Central Coastal Information Center
California State University, Fullerton
Department of Anthropology MH-426
800 North State College Boulevard
Fullerton, CA 92834-6846
657.278.5395
CCalifornia Historical Resources Information System
Los Angeles, Orange, Ventura and San Bernardino Counties [email protected]
_____________________________________________________________________________
4/26/2023 SCCIC File #: 24662.10806
E l e n i G e t a c h e w
Impact Sciences, Inc.
811 W. 7th Street, Suite 200
Los Angeles, CA 90017
Re: Record Search Results for the Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project
The South Central Coastal Information Center received your records search request for the project area referenced above, located on the Baldwin Park, CA USGS 7.5’ quadrangle(s). The following summary reflects the results of the records search for the project area and a ½-mile radius. The search includes a review of all recorded archaeological and built-environment resources as well as a review of cultural resource reports on file. In addition, the California Points of Historical Interest (SPHI), the California Historical Landmarks (SHL), the California Register of Historical Resources (CAL REG), the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), and the California State Built Environment Resources Directory (BERD) listings were reviewed for the above referenced project site and a ½-mile radius. Due to the sensitive nature of cultural resources, archaeological site locations are not released.
RECORDS SEARCH RESULTS SUMMARY
Archaeological Resources*
(*see Recommendations section)
Within project area: 0
Within project radius: 0
Built-Environment Resources Within project area: 0
Within project radius: 2
Reports and Studies Within project area: 0
Within project radius: 9
OHP Built Environment Resources
Directory (BERD) 2022
Within project area: 0
Within ½-mile radius: 6
California Points of Historical
Interest (SPHI) 2022
Within project area: 0
Within ½-mile radius: 0
California Historical Landmarks
(SHL) 2022
Within project area: 0
Within ½-mile radius: 0
California Register of Historical
Resources (CAL REG) 2022
Within project area: 0
Within ½-mile radius: 1
National Register of Historic Places
(NRHP) 2022
Within project area: 0
Within ½-mile radius: 0
HISTORIC MAP REVIEW - Pomona, CA (1894, 1904) 15’ USGS historic maps indicate that in 1894 there was no visible development within the project area. There were four buildings and four roads visible within the project search radius. The San Gabriel Wash ran along the northwestern edge of the project search radius. In 1904, there was little to no visible change and all previously mentioned features still remained.
RECOMMENDATIONS
*When we report that no archaeological resources are recorded in your project area or within a specified radius around the project area; that does not necessarily mean that nothing is there. It may simply mean that the area has not been studied and/or that no information regarding the archaeological sensitivity of the property has been filed at this office. The reported records search result does not preclude the possibility that surface or buried artifacts might be found during a survey of the property or ground-disturbing activities.
The archaeological sensitivity of the project location is unknown because there are no previous studies for the subject property. Additionally, the natural ground-surface appears to be obscured by urban development; consequently, surface artifacts would not be visible during a survey. While there are currently no recorded archaeological sites within the project area, buried resources could potentially be unearthed during project activities. Therefore, customary caution and a halt-work condition should be in place for all ground-disturbing activities. In the event that any evidence of cultural resources is discovered, all work within the vicinity of the find should stop until a qualified archaeological consultant can assess the find and make recommendations. Moving or extraction of potential cultural resources should not be attempted by anyone other than a qualified cultural resources consultant. It is also recommended that the Native American Heritage Commission be consulted to identify if any additional traditional cultural properties or other sacred sites are known to be in the area. The NAHC may also refer you to local tribes with particular knowledge of potential sensitivity. The NAHC and local tribes may offer additional recommendations to what is provided here and may request an archaeological monitor. Finally, if the built-environment resources on the property are 45 years or older, a qualified architectural historian should be retained to study the property and make recommendations regarding those structures.
For your convenience, you may find a professional consultant**at www.chrisinfo.org. Any resulting reports by the qualified consultant should be submitted to the South Central Coastal Information Center as soon as possible.
**The SCCIC does not endorse any particular consultant and makes no claims about the qualifications of any person listed.
Each consultant on this list self-reports that they meet current professional standards.
If you have any questions regarding the results presented herein, please contact the office at 657.278.5395 Monday through Thursday 9:00 am to 3:30 pm. Should you require any additional information for the above referenced project, reference the SCCIC number listed above when making inquiries. Requests made after initial invoicing will result in the preparation of a separate invoice.
Thank you for using the
California Historical Resources Information System,
Isabela Kott
Assistant Coordinator, GIS Program Specialist
Stacy St.
James
Digitally signed
by Stacy St.
James
Date: 2023.04.26
17:53:43 -07'00'
Enclosures:
(X) Invoice #24662.10806
Due to processing delays and other factors, not all of the historical resource reports and resource records that have been submitted to the Office of Historic Preservation are available via this records search. Additional information may be available through the federal, state, and local agencies that produced or paid for historical resource management work in the search area. Additionally, Native American tribes have historical resource information not in the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) Inventory, and you should contact the California Native American Heritage Commission for information on local/regional tribal contacts.
The California Office of Historic Preservation (OHP) contracts with the California Historical Resources Information System’s (CHRIS) regional Information Centers (ICs) to maintain information in the CHRIS inventory and make it available to local, state, and federal agencies, cultural resource professionals, Native American tribes, researchers, and the public. Recommendations made by IC coordinators or their staff regarding the interpretation and application of this information are advisory only. Such recommendations do not necessarily represent the evaluation or opinion of the State Historic Preservation Officer in carrying out the OHP’s regulatory authority under federal and state law.
Exhibit A1 3l20/25 Resident's
Commission
Public Comments to the Planning
To:The City of Baldwin Park Planning Commission
From: Susan Cole, 144L9 E. California Ave, Baldwin Park:
Subject: CP 23-05 & PR 23-Zt
Submitted via email to Nick Baldwin ([email protected]) 3:30 pm 3/2a/25
Regarding the application CP 23-05 & PR 23-ZL before you for review on March 26,2025, to over-build an lndustrial property located atL44LZ &14424 Ioanbridge St., Baldwin Park, my neighbors and I live right behind the subject properties on residentially zoned properties on California Avenue. We are absolutely opposed to this project. I have attached signed petitions and letters that were signed when this application first went before the Planning Commission before the project was continued to a date uncertain, and we are definitely still opposed to the proposed project. (Exhibit A) l'm sorry this document is so long, but with only 5 minutes to address all the neighborhood concerns at the public hearing, and with the requirement that any decision appeal or legal dispute requires the documentation of disputed facts, I need to be as clear as possible.
The applicant for CP 23-05 & PR 23-Zl is still wanting to build a neq twenty-five foot (25')tall, 14,5L8 square foot, two story concrete structure to wrap around the existing 6,781 square foot building on L4l?Joanbridge St., resulting in a 2I,299 square foot soccer complex. The massive concrete structure is required in order to support four (4) new elevated soccer fields, with the biggest footprint possible and the least amount of on-site parking possible. The existing Q781 square foot industrial building at l4L?Joanbridge St. is currently being used to house one large soccer field (Exhibit B) but the property owner wants to expand the FutblGame Changers business located there to add 4 new boutique, smaller soccer fields to maximize revenue and accommodate more paying customers.
These smaller type soccer fields, such as SOFIVE soccer, located at 699 S. Barranca Street, Covina and LAB 5 Soccer Complex in Facoima and Gardena, have becorne a popular trend to allow what is called "5x5 soccer play", whereby small, usually adult, teams of 5 players each team can train and play intense, competitive soccer. (Exhibit C). The SOFIVE soccer facility in Covina and LAB 5 Soccer Complex locations were referenced in the applicant's nois€ studies, a part of the administrative record, as examples of similar noise generation uses. (Exhibit D) The business description provided by the applicant, not the business owner, states their initial intention is to offer only small group tiaining sessions within the huge 2L,299 sqft. soccer complex facility. However, with the investment costs associated with the purchase of the industrial property, design fees, and the grading/excavationlconstruction costs required for the completion of the soccer complex facility, other more lucrative and intense uses can also be offered and utilized at the completed facility. There are no Conditions included in the draft Conditions of Approval for this project that would limit the use of the soccer facility to just smalltraining groups. This lack of constraints leaves the door open to allow other unexpected uses at the completed soccer complex facility for large functions, Functions such as 5x5 soccer games, multiple-team competitions, multiple-team scrimmages, soccer birthday party rentals, and other noise/trash/ traffic generating use$ would be occurring on 5 soccer fields, simultaneously! The draft Conditions of Approval also don't specifically state hours and days of operations, allowinga24lT day and hour operation.
The object of any business is to be as successful as possible and to grow the business as much as possible. I believe this commercial soccer complex facility would be the $ame, as the property owner would want recoup the millions of dollars invested just the purchase and development of this property. Any and all entitlements granted by the Planning Commission are attached to the property, so the property owner can sellthe rights to construct a soccor facility complex at this location, along with the property, only constrained by what is included in the Conditions of Approval. At this time, having only access to the 12/13/23 draft Conditions of Approval, the project as proposed would allow the construction and use of aZL,299 sqft. structure;25'tall; located within L0'of residential homes; covering 84o/o of the lot in a zone where only 50% lot coverage is allowed; providing insufficient parking; generating noise, light and traffic levels that exceed the required standards of the Baldwin Park General Plan and Baldwin Park Municipal Code; with a use that is inconsistent with the Baldwin Park General Plan.
Per the 3lL7l25 meeting with Nick Saldwin, Baldwin Park City Planner/Acting Community Development Di rector:
The CEQA review for the revised CP 23-05 & PR 23-ZL application was changed from the originally submitted Mitigated Negative Declaration to a Class 32 categorical exemption review. This change favors the applicant because the Class 32 Categorical Exemption requires an even lower lever of project review than did the originalty submitted Mitigated Negative Declaration. The draft Mitigated Negative Declaration clearly showed that the prosed project would have a negative environmental impact, which is probably why the applicant chose to use another, easier and looser type of environmental review.
The Class 32 Categorical Exemption was initially created by the State of California to expedite housing in-fill development. This CEAA exemption can only be used to shield a project from an in-depth environment review if the proposed project can be shown to be consistent with the Baldwin Park General Plan and the Baldwin Park Municipal Code. This project is not consistent with either the Baldwin Park General Plan or the Baldwin Park Municipal Code, as illustrated below.
Therefore, the Class 32 Categorical Exemption cannot be used for CEQA review for this particular soccer complex facility project, An Environmental lmpact Report (ElR) is required.
Per Nick Baldwin, Baldwin Park City Planner/Acting Community Development Director, the Design Review PR 23-2l application, site plan, and elevations have only been revised to remove the original reduced rear yard setback Zoning Variance application, but the proposed L0' rear yard setback now requested still does not meet the requirements of BP Municipal Zoning Code Sections 153.050.030 & 153.050.030.A2, which clearly requires a minimurn 20' rear yard rear setback.
Table 153.050.030 Development Standards for Commercial and lndustrial Zones Develapment Standards NC GC FC t-c I
Develapmenf Sfanda rds far Co m merci al and I nd u strial Zone s Development Standards NC GC FC t-c I Additianal
Reaulatians
Rear yard setback - minimum
lot adjacentta a residentially zoned lot 10ft 10ft 1Aft 10ft 10ft 153.130.W4
{53.050.030 (A) (2} Ullherever a commercially or industriallv zoned lot shares a property line with an exclusively residenffal or a mixed-use zoned lot anv exterior new structure. or addition to an existing strucfure. that exceeds.one stoly in heisht and that ln addition, the original, existing buildings on the proposed project lndustrial site have an existing 40' rear setba ck ll&At}Joanbridge St.) and an existing 50' rear yard setback (14424 Joanbridge St.) as shown on the submitted site plans There is no precedent to approve such a drastically reduced rear yard setback. AZgEiEg Varianc,e is- resuired to be a4dpd !o this revieyy. fqr,lhe currentlv prgqosed tedqped rear Var{sethnc,k.
. The submitted site plan proposes a front set back of 3'; BP Municipal Zoning Code Section 153.050.030 requires a front yard setback of 5'.
A Zgnir:rs Variance for A reduced front,vard setFack is regltired. . The submitted site plan proposes a lot coverage of 84%; BP Municipal Zoning Code Section L53.050.030 only allows a lot coverage of 50%.
A Zonine Vp.tiance for lol covqfase is reguired.
. The submitted site plan proposes a Floor Area ratio of .88 FAR. BP General Plan Land Use LU policy 2.5 only allows a FAR of .75 in the lndustrial land use area. A 4o$ing Varianc,e for an iqcrease in Floor A[eg Ratip is rgquired. r The noise studies submitted by the applicant show that the project will create more noise than the BP Municipal Zoning Code Section L53.140.070 and the General Plan Land Use Policy 1U2.5 will allow. {Exhibit D} The proposed soccer facility would generate
91.8 dbA decibels of noise (day time hours)
7p.3 dbA decibels of noise (evening hours).
These levels are hieher than the Noise Levels Allowed per BP Municipal Zoning Code Table 153.140.070 which are:
55 dbA decibels of noise (day time hours)
5qdbA decibels of noise (evening hours)
. The submified site plan proposes 39 parking spaces. BP MunicipalZoning Code Section 153.150.040 Parking requires L52 parking space$ for a recreation soccer facility use of the proposed size. A,Zoninf, V?,fi3ncq to,thq pafklfrs requirempnts.l$ fgquired.
The proposed project is not consistent with BP MunicipalZoning Code Section 153.I.40.040.F and General Plan Land Use Policy LU 2.5 which both do not allow any light to spill over from the proposed project into the adjacent residential lots. The applicant's photometric light survey (Exhibit E), submitted as part of the administrative record as Schematic Light Plan for CP 23-05, ZV 23-01, PR 23-21 for L44t2 &L4424 Joanbridge St. Baldwin Park, shows the project as generating a maximum light foot candle measurement of 5?.7 -52.2tc/faot candle unit of light, with the maximum foot candle measurement of .1 units of light spilling over to the adiacent properties on all sides. lt clearly shows that the proposed elevated exterior $occer field sports lights will shine onto adjacent residential properties and will have a negative impact on the adjacent residential properties. The proposed exterior soccer field sports flood lighting does not meet the standards of the City and should not be approved.
The proposed project is not consistent with BP General Plan Land Use Policy LU 2.5 and BP Municipal Zoning Code Section 153.210.160 which require that new construction on lndustrial properties that abut residential properties provide visual compatibility with, and preserve the privacy of, the residential homes. The stark urban design of the proposed project is not visually compatible with the existing single-family homes adjacent to the subject property and not compatible with the existing industrial buildings on Joanbridge 5t. ln addition, the location of the 25' tall elevated soccer fields along the shared property line with the residential uses will compromise the expected privacy of the residential rear yards.
The proposed project is not compatible with the City of Baldwin Park General Plan Goal and Policies as follows:
o Land Use Goal 2.0 - Compatible Development Standards. The proposed size of the new 2L,299 square foot soccer facility and the location of the 25' tall, elevated outdoor soccer fields, located within 10' of existing residential properties, is not compatible with existing adja cent si ngle-story, si ngle-fa mi ly residentia I deve lopment di rectly abutting the project site nor is it compatible with the mostly single- story industrial development
o Land Use Policy 2,5 - Land Use lntensity/Density. The proposed size of the new 21,299 square foot soccer facility and the location of the 25' tall, elevated outdoor soccer fields, located within 10' of existing residential properties will cause negative impacts on the adjacent residential and industrial properties regarding noise, inadequate parking, light and glare, privacy, differences in scale and visual incompatibility, as detailed above.
Land Use Policy 7.6 - Lighting on Commercial/lndustrial Properties.
The proposed size of the new 2L,299 square foot soccer facility and the location of the 25' tall, elevated outdoor soccer fields, located within L0' of existing residential properties will cause negative impacts on the adjacent residential properties due to the use of the outdoor soccer sports flood lights for the elevated outdoor soccer fields. The submitted lighting plan (Exhibit E) clearly shows the new soccer fields will generate the prohibited light spillover.
Land Use Policy 7.4*Adequate Parking. The design and proposed size of the new 21,299 square foot soccer facility and the location of the 25' tall, elevated outdoor soccer fields, covering 22,067 square feet of the 26,244 sqft. lot (84% lot coveragelwill not leave enough room for the required number of on-site parking spaces and will not provide adequate on-site parking for customers. lnadequate parking will cause patrons of the new soccer facility to park on private property on Joanbridge St., where street parking is prohibited, and to spillover into the adjacent residential neighborhood streets, where street parking is already severely limited.
Land Use Noise Element NE12 - Based on the applicants submitted Noise Studies (Exhibit D) the proposed project will produce noise levels above the allowed decibels allowed in residential properties. . As of 3/2O|ZS, there were no Design Review Finding of Fact to review. . As of 3/7A/25, there were no revised Findings of Fact for Conditional Use Permit CP 23-05 to review.
a
Exhibit 42 J/z6ni nesidenit pubric comment, to *he prannine Commission
To: planning Commission
Fnorn: Susan fo!e, property owner n4439 E" falifornia Avenue, Ealdwlyr Fark, CA
3/26/2s
Re: Public Comn'Ients on 3/26/25 Flanning Comrnlssion Staff ReBort eF 23-05 & PR 23_2L
Dear Commission: The sr*brmitted Staff Report is treating the proposed 23,,L43 square foot soceer fae i$ity eomplex as if it will be located in the middle of a light industrial business park, sutrrounded by other f ndustrial uses.
l"'lowever, the reality is that the proposed stnucture and the Bnoposed use are being proposed for a uniqr:e location. xhe unlqr,re ;oeatios.r is two srnal! industrial lots on ioanbridge street ln north Baidwin Fark" The applicant proposes to rnerge the two industrial lots, to fsrm one industrial lot which will continue to abut an existing residentia! neighborhood.
Both the Baldwirt Park Senera! Plalr and the Baldwin park Munlcipal ZQ0iflF Code tsxPlieitlv address any new construction and anv new use .on industrial prqpertv that abuts existins residential ptopefiies as being and both
guiding docurnents have specifically applicable policies and particular requirernents that will apply to this projeet.
The specifically applicable General Flan Folicies are: Land &Jse policies Lt f 2"5 a[[owed {Jses, on-site parking, no street parking, lot coverage, adequate setbacks frorn existing residentia! devefopment, no noise over the allowable levels, no spilB-over light and giare, adequate buffen between new industrlal construction and existing residentia! hornes for visua I eoa-npatibil ity"
Tlre partlcr,rXan nequlnements of the Municipal Zoning Code are: Section 1Str.S50.CI3* Eot coverage; Secticn 153"040.070 noise; Section 153"05S.030 !arger setbacks; Section 153.L40"070 noise; Section 353.340"S4fi rio light/glare; Seetiosr X53.i"SS.SLO off-stneet pankrng; Seetior: 153.05S"S20 reeneatiena! soeeer use; Sectior: 153"2nS.160 Brlvaey and visr.ra! e*rxpatibility; Seet$on 1"53.15S"04S on-sEte parkirtg" The GenereX PEam PclieEes and MunieEpai Zoaxng Code requirernents e'egardimg arny rxewd r.n$es amd al! new developrment &n an Emdr.rstnial property ae e not surggestions, they are rnaridates. UntontunateEy, the prepered staff report, rersrylrylendafi*ns and R*s*l*tisns regand these rmandates as optional and oper: to unfounded Enterpretations and ea pe'Eerca",es eha nges.
The residents of the ealifornBa Avenue neighbonhood and hdaine Street holmes nequest that the Planning eornrnisslon deny tlre Proposed development and use, based on the fact that tlris applicaticn, aften being eor:tinued fon fi year En orden tc allow for revislosrs to ti-re app|!eation's site plan/etevations and changes to the operatlon and use, in orden to better mneet the objectlves and Policies of the Ba[dwis"r Fark Gencral Flan as well as the requirenrents of the Baldwin Fark Munieipal Zon[ng eode, has beem ne-subruritted but the proposed project still fails to rneet the objeetives and Folieies of the Baldwin Fark General Plan amd has failed to n'leet the nequirements of the BaldwEn Fark MunleEpal Zoning eode.
8n additioR, the presemted Statt Report as wrltten, !s too fui! of r"r:is- $nforr*ation, contradictions and outright errors for the Ptranning eogmffiission to use it as a tooN to make am informed declsion regandEng thre proposed 2L,L43 sEuare foot elevated soceer fields facrlity eor"npBex.
Thus, the res!demts of the resldentiaE nelghberhood abutting the prspesed, iifl-fitting soeeer faeiBity eompiex eonstrueti*n artd use, request dem$aE of the projeet"
To further support the nequest of denia!, the following facts !l$ustrate tlre deficiencies and !nadequacles of the Planning Staff review and report.
Planning $taff Repont Diseussion section ps.2
The staff report descnib,es the proposed projecr as a request to "alEow a necreational facility withEn an existing cormmercial complex"" The exist!ng buildings along ioanbnidgre Street are ir"ldividual, freestamding industrial buildings. The proposed site is not n'in a commeraial complex," A tr1otr'i-tax generat[mg serviee use is not consistent with the General Flarn Folicies and Municipal ZonEng eode requiren'lents fon the tax-generating Endustria I zone.
The staff report identifies the propCIsed construction as a "parking structure" aRd states that there is a "ggcgndllo.ol above the parking area as having 3 outdoor soceer fieids", The proposed site plan shsws 4 playing fields.
Zoning Se_ct:En p€, ?:
The staff report states that 'The proposed panking area and outdoon soecer fields will measure the same height as the existing building, a total of 25' measured fnor"n finished grade to the highest point of the protective mesh wiring on the seqond floor." The staff neport funthen states, this is "a"naking the Lulldins heieht compliamt with eode standards""
Response: hlowever, the staff report then states that the project, as presented, is in eomp$ianee with the [ot eoverage development standard and doesn't need a zoning variance at all beeause pen the definition of Lot ccverage. "Yhe perce*tage *f the tota* $mt mrew **w*vw* by er"ae$msed strq"**e*res aw*$*r earpor?s, but exa$*x**w6 e*mc*v€r&d st*ps* dr*wswxrys, wxa*ks# *sw&r*d pat**s, t*rn&c&s *srd swr*rxm&rxgry*&€'d*emrcu{ aWWixV ?* t&*s pr*i**- becaexse *the *ubiec* pr*}eat d*es reet prepesc eey w*w wwm&*w*& *cttr****s# ee t*?e flrst ffi*wyuu. ffitxem ?fomrxgh e&e pnwlw*ww* desm,r*fue"d &s & nnp&*x*6skrueture* c*mstrwcted h*?hrs&ffis, Wywewwre€ c*rxcrete *;*xr uwe**s ww* wm w&*wwW* " W* *Wwwk *w *wwwM,
TW* ruz*W$eet prsject [s indeed ryr*pws&*6w shra;,ffis*y* wyz &&te f*rst ffi*wr keea*se r w* *rm;xd*W&&wkW *kwW wwrywW. prw$** ***xr*ffi**r"xs xs qax*ted afu*ve, xhr*ffiw#muwr" &wwffixww w&8& W *&w *ry&&*6*kr:ffixxw* .
Furth*r, the park xw6 *krw*wrw x* x.*wskrzx&** *** erywye?er*$ a$ a rn
ffirry*r{ sh**?en*m g tfu* saxst*reeru$ €&rs. &m *&dsxr**rxu tb* defim*t** m *€ w str*ctrxne arz&W Wwwlux*pw*Xwr-wm6 e*de &S3"Xkffi *s; *,$&M -rymsar*m#-e*effi ffi s$.-w&aq*kspe#kee-*x8#-ee$ses**ry-t&exryffi d pr,m.effi sks#3p-"s-k*#*xm-ps#??snsgrs*-*wre-kffi *K-e*x€*-*ps*$,pe""em WX WWW,&"I ***w*ry r Zk*w Wv *W*se* k& r%,k& %qwey w € **k ** *crete s * a k des*greed 3m ?"*mld the prep*sed ex?*r$*r $&ce&r &e*ds ***straxx?x*w wt*hfu #aewryw*ewg ****r'*kx p*&&;*rx ww& ww&&$u e$ sfu*wvz *v3 WW" &,""k"& {seet$ems} &w w wkwwffiwv*.
Add*t$*rc;x**yr the staff rep*rt d*seribes the *utd**n s&ccer fields *s beEng om "the second floor abowe the parkEng are&" as ar"rd the anehiteetunaE plar"rs, pg" A3..2, [dentEfy the "uppen floon" as EmeBuding the outdoor soecer tEeids," Fage AA,2 gses omto eal! out that area of the seeosxd fio*n abmv* the pankErrg anea as a 3.4,538 square foot eorte nete slab, eovenEmg both the 34432 &thre k$"&Ze Joanbnrdge 5t pnopertEes" Bir adding the rrew 34,538 sqft. parklng stra*eture area with the 6,625 sqft" fBoon area of the nermaining existEng huildlng CIn LqeYZ Joanhridge ttrept ryr:ll set a fntai nf 7t 1&n qdrilarp feef nf lnt rr)\rprepp r)\rpr arLcEsL/ trvM hs* q LvL*n v. 4Er4-r rijuuiL -LUL u_I iuE u'v-s-.-:*b* * - -- 2*,2&& sqqiartr fmot Bct y*hleh equais a &*t e#v€rege cf E3% " Www** *m Z,fu&x **rrw*K aw€*rmwkx*w u WW &w wtwwyryw &w W%% &&w:W &ww w& ww% t*t* reqtx*rem*mt ** *? kit*rx*efip*l Cs**, wh*ck 8r ${156 ****M, *s **rauqn *n Y*ble f^**-W*"{X}& k**rx"
Trbh tf3.B$0.0ito
Develepment Standards far eommerc iat and tndustrial Zones Developmenf Sfandards Afc (5(J FC t-c I Add i ti o * a t Regufa ffoms frevelapment Sfandards f*r Cammercial amd ladustrial Zanes Devetopmenf Sfandards A'G GC FC t-G ,, Additianat
Reg*faffons
Lot area - minimum 5,000
sf,
5,000
sf
4ac 40,000
sf
5,000
sf
Lot depth - minimum 200 ft 200 ft
Lot width - minimum
Standard lot
Comer lot
50ft
5sft
50ft
s5ft
300 ft
300 ft
150 ft
150 ft
50ft
5sft
See Figure
153.0s0.030, 1
Lot coverage - maximum $0% 5*% 5$% 5S96 5ffi*
,ard setback - minimwn
standard lot
comer lot
lot adjacent to a residentially
zoned lot
<f+J -l-L
5ft
5ft
10ft
10ft
15ft
,_:
i _{*1.; l1_}.{il{"i
Same as front yard requirement of
residentially zoned lot
rd setback - minimilm
standatd trot
lot adjacent to a residentially
zoned lot
ron r0ft
10ft
10ft
isft
10ft 10ft
Erd setback - mi:dmtxn
standard Lot
lot adjacent to a residerrtially
zoned lot
10ft 10ft
10ft
10ft
10 fr
10ft 10ft
Buileling height - nnaximum 1< Q+LJ IL a< f+JJ IL A
stories
35fr 25&
3&&.*95*.WW q&b <Xb W&*xw:**y & *,*wwwr*xx{,by er Msltxras x WV*WW ?*suw wu**b ww wx*&ux. xrxx*y ww&&m&x& wv x mnixxd***** xwrua* *st, *nXSX&e,*gf w--WgM**p,lx3#M**-&xs3sm&-**se€***$"ffi -ffi -*s
kp,tek$md'&.e$..keee"-e"ryyffi*r.#nm$de,&s&i&*eshpri &eee! &agk-&{!qe,-tt}e*res-&.rtred setbag&,
Kkwvgflws*,r.k%mwwxWkx S M-%w
€wwx*:wwL.eM-xewMM&w-ww"M"K{&AekM
*ffi -&s#ffi iw&*&&*:&Mwxwxffi awMw"KWffi grm&Wxms*k:W
*wx&&zw:s=zpww&ffiwm@,sw:MwwM
Anchlteetunal DeEiery Seetloqj p$" ?
The surbnritted eievations show the front walls of the proposed 23,343 sEulare fcot biock buiiding witflr a 12"5 foet taiB wood fagade with a 3.2.5 foot taEE blaeB< vrire sereening offi tmp.The sxlesh sereen vuire witi be V7% open per tRe su:bmltted plans" The si*es of the huge hrarilding wrli utElize am eN6st6ffig conerete bf,cck watE with 4 feet of ur$re mesh betweem b{eek waEi asrei the bCItte rn of the concreLe siab titat sr.rBp*rts ihe 4 soceer fgelds to inexBer"rsively eage sn the sEdes of the sts'ueture" On the south side of the prcpcsed stp"a-reture, where the soeeer faeiflity w$ii abut the nesidentiai hom'ees, they have added addEtlona! diagona! sheets of the mes$: eagBng uvine. The pnoposed 92.5' foot tatE "deeonatEve wEne r:Iesh sereemEsrg", &s showr: om the subnmitted eB*vati*ns ar*d om pg. i\r?-1.1of the pEams ts, per the appflEeant, to scneea'l the soeeer fietds. Hcweven the rnesh wEne feraee wsE! met sereem aatythietg" Tfr:ey wEEB cxot se reeffi ti"le mutelo*n s*ee€r f6eBd fnom view; n*n wdBE the 77% ffipeffi, bBaek eaging wire se reer'? Esloek any norse, lights on tnash fnCIm exitlng the sseeen fdeBd eonmpBeN prCIpca"ty erffitm the nesEdemteaB pnopertues dEneetly beimw the 25- fo*t taEE, tCIwerimg stnuetune" Emstead they wiEE gEve tilre impnessEom CIf a
32.5' prismrn femee *a't frop cf a 'i'3"S' p;'isor: hEce k muaBE" #a: page 3, the staflf rspust rtates th:at "As a eu:nditlcm of fippr#uaE, the apg:$aeartt ur-yrHE afis* be ree{usned t* 6r"qstaEt ematr-sre E.nees arid 6:Faa"tts tel soften the south elevation and create an additional barrier between the cunrent residential properties abutting the soccer facilities." Response: In fact, the Planning conditions of approval do not eontain this eonditiom. Therefone, if the Plannimg Cornnnissior: \ffere to approve the submltted draft Resolution Fe 23-28, the applicant would mct be nequired to provide anv tvpq sf bufferinLharrier_belure_en the qxis:Elng residential hornes and the proposed, huge poccer faellitv complEx structure, thus making the project inconsistent with the Genera! FNam and nonconforming wltlr the lMunicipal Code.
There is a condition (o) which requires a landscape p!an, br*t it doesn't include the requinernent to install "rnature trees and plants to soften the south elevation" either"
ln addition, the definitisn of mature trees, per the BP Municipal Zorring Code L53.220"Lr$O is: "any tree located in the front yard,.."..rear yard setback and is greater than L8" in diarneter or is greater than 4G feet in height."
The submitted elevations and site plans show on pg.A-X,X. that the 10' wide rear yard setback is completely paved for parking, except for a skinny 2 foot 3 inches of planting area next to the existing 6'tall concnete block retaining wall w8rich runs along tlre nean property Eine, dividing the existing residential hornes fronr the lndustrial properties.
The appllcant is proposing, as shown on pg" A-1.3 {sectlons} to tre-use the exlsting concrete retaining wa!l and attach the wine caging mesh fencing to the top of the wall and conneet the fencing to the noof of the parking strueture, at the base of the soccer field platfornn, caging in the parking area along the southerm property llne.
Obviously, mature ts"ees $^nore that L8" in diarneter and/or 40 feet ta!8 cannot be planted irs the proposed skinny 2'3o planting area/ [et alone "Etlature plants to soften the sout!"rern elevation." ln fact, the existing old bf,ock netaining wai[, which was first ccnstructed in the ].97CI's and was repaired in the 3990's, is placed right on t*re propea'ty line and leaves r:o roCIryt fon tfrte app$ie*ftt to plant anph[ng that eould soften the block wall on hide the wlre rnesh caging fence to be eonstructed on top of tFre wall nsr e reate any additEorra[ bannEetr, as errorxeCIusBy stated in the sta,sf report"
The subrnEtted elevation pg" A t.4 and pg. A-1.3 falsely show rtineteen {19} 3CI foot talE matune trees planted [n the 7'3u rear setback and growing through the wire g"ltesh wire fenci*'lg to soften the rear e8evation, when in reality, this is lrNpossib$e. Seetion 3 on pg,A-X.S shows the same tnees planted in the 3.0' rean yard setback with the ears panked im the drive aisle urhile Seet;on 4 shows the same view with the ears parked on top CIf the same rnature tnees.
To surn up, the staff report pnontises a eonditicn cf approvai tCI ensure this Banriseaping huffer reguirernertt. The conditlor"is of apprcval are mtissimg aaty such cor:dition. dt is an Empossibi$ity fon t*'le aBplieant to eonstruet the project aceording to the subrnitted plans.
Additionally, the Genera8 Pian aEso calls fon a "buffer area between any new constnuctior: om arn Emdustrial property that abuts existing residential propeE'ties", rnnhich has been demonstnated to also he an am'lpossibility with the proposed huge stnucture design.
Thes:efqne, thP e!'qhitectural $esient pnd landseapirrg for tLe Broqoped pnoieqt Is nst consisteryt witFr the tsP General Flan pr:d. does not meel _thq deveBopn:qn,t negr.rinements qf the MuniciBa! eodE" However, the FEammEng staff neport is reeonmmer:ding approi/al of the projeet, amother imstance of rmis-imfsrrnatiCIar, eomtr&dietioms amd outnight ennors in the staff rep*nt wE:leh wilB make it Bmposs6hie for the Flanning ConfimsssEor:
to use it as a tool to nnake an inforrned decision regarding the proposed 21,143 square foot elevated soccer fields facility complex.
Business Operatlons Flan and-l-lours of Operation" Pg" 3 Flanning condition of approvai (a) of the draft ResoEution PC 23-28 document nequines "that the property shall be developed and mainta ined in substantial accordance with the Business:Plen-tNarrFtive, included as Attachment 3 to the Staff Repont, dated Mlareh 26,2025 ar.ld mlnor arnendments to the business operations shall be subject to the dise netion of the eonrmunity Development Eirector." There is nc Attachment 3 enlitled "Business Plan Nanrative" attaqhed to the qtaff repart. T'henefore, there are no legal iimits on boundaries on the tinrres of operation, types of uses allowed, nunrber of pensons allowed at one timre on the second-floor elevated soccer fields. In additEon, nCI prCIposed l-louns of Operation listed. Therefore, the condltion of apprCIva! to enforce the 'nAttachment ff3 Business Flan Narrative" would be unenforeeable, if approved"
Atthoutgh the staff report does not provide the appticant's Business Operations Plan or Business Plan ltrlarrative, it does lnclude a "Training Session" schedule detailing when and how the applicant would want to use the 2L,L43 square foot, 25' tall soccer facillty complex with 4 elevated soccer tields and one fulf-sized indoor sCIccer field for tnaining, sports perforrnances, and recreational uses whlch are:
o for at least 7 hsu!"s every weekday afternoon, evening and night of the year, frorr before 4 pm -to aften 10 prn; o for at least lt hours every Saturday of the year fnonn before 8:CI0 am to after 6 pm;
o fon at teast 7 hours every Sunday of ttre x/ear frorm before E:00 arur to after 2:0CI pm.
o There is a "disclairnen" attached to the "Training Session" docurnent stating "Players g't'!ust register for sessions, ime!i*dimg neeneatimmat q.Ese" All sessions and necreationa! {.,se are hooked 24 hours in advaneed. Booking sessions are rnaxed out ar"rd only the numben of players noted will be permftted into the sessions" ?here are nG walk-ins
Berrnitted only these playens registened fon the sessEon uniBB bc aliowed intc the lab. f,{c ExeeptFCIns." l{owever, this diselaimen only apptles to the training sessions at the soeeer lab.
There are no conditioms En the "Tnaining Sessions" doeurnent or !n the dnaft Resoiution Fe 23-28 that would def$ne or iin'r$t genenaE tlours of openation for the soeeer eCIrnplex faei!ity pertaining to the use of the proposed gyrn, tire proposed 2 rneetEng !'oosTls, and ti:e 4 offiees or any other n?ore lntense uses"
Thene are Re eomditiams im thae "Training SessEons" dsc{.iment that wouEd defir:e, or prohEbit any othen aetEvEties, sueha as pnivate parties, 5x5 soccer garyles, senfn'rrnages, eta" tn additiun to tPre 4 - t0 pnr weekday & E*6 prm Saturday& E- 2 Sundayschedtsles of thetraining sessiorts"
Tltere are &o conditiems En the "T-naining Sessions" documlent thrat wotxld define on lirnit the nurnber of merr:bers, !.e" payEng customers at the faeility at any giwen tiryte, or Eimit any other aetivities" There are *16 esndltfsms in the "T'raining Sessions" dscun'lent that trsnits the applleant/pnoperty ewnenl*rus!ness openaton to on!y thue tn"aEmEng sessier:s, $eavEng tlne doCIr wide open to amy type of additEomaE elses? mrhieh is iat esmfliet wrth tFte reasear fas'the e*nditisrra8 Use Fermit epprovaE proeess.
x0
The "Trainlng Sessions" document estinnates that there will be up to 11 people on eaeh of the 4 soccer playing fields, imeluding the full-sized interior soeeer field, at any given time, not ineluding one or two players *n tftrc 1,643 square fsot practlce sseeer field. This est[mate wou[d equal 44 rnembens of the private sGCCer facility eonrplex, playlng and parking at the complex at any given time. lr: addition, you would need to aceount for the number of staff and additional members who will be using the proposed gynn, the pnoposed 2 nreeting rooms, and the 4 offices. Approximating 2 people irr each of those facllities at any given tirne will ger:erate the need for at Neast L4 rnore parking spaees added to the needed 44 off-site mernber and staff parking spaces needed and the Broposed soceer facility cornplex will require at least 54 parking spaces to be availahle at any given time to avoid negative parklng and traffic innpacts on the adjacent industrial businesses or on the adjacent residential use.
The staff neport erroneousny states tlrat "the required parking for a reereational facility is one parking space for every employee present at the facility and one additional parklng space for every class roCItn" equaling only 13 required parking spaces. The fact Es that, pen lVlunicipal Code per section L53.150.040, that mistakenly stated requinement is for an elementary or secondary school (prlvate), a use which is not even allowed in the lndustrial zone at all.
Actually, the Municipal Code pen section tr 53.L50.040, see below, nequires I spacellS0 square feet of building area for a cornmercia! reereational facilitp which is what the proposed project really is" Therefore, based on the proposed 2L,L43 sguare footage cf the proposed soccer facility application, the required nurnber of parking spaces !s 1"52 spaces, as shown below.
.LL
I#-t$SJtr-A*A-&wseMryffi M.ffi gkrk*ffi -Ws
Number of Resuired Parkins $paces
tand Use Minimum Number of Spaces Required
eommercial Recreation
a. Health/Fitness Club
b. Biliiard / bowling ailey
e. A"rcade/internetcafe
a. 1 spaee/15S sqi;are feet of building
area {t$t speffi ffiXe*k*d}
b'. 3 spaces f"!SS squane feet of buitding
area
6" 1 space/150 square feet of buitding
€ied
Qnhanl
a. Elernentary er seeoneiary {private}
b" High School (private)
6. Speeialized and voeetienal
1 space,'erfipioyee pius i space
claserc*rn {'3 3 sf:*aee rryax*r"ee$}
t space/ernployee, plus 1 spece/2
students in tlth and tZth grades
'l ^^^^^148 f,^^+ 'l^,,^+^J +rl uPaugrJU Squcte tcl}[ LrEYUr.t Lt rv instructionalservices plus 1 space per
elascroom d4&& sma*m reqas&red)
trw.
The applicant Es proposing 39 parking spaces" As previously shouvn ahevq ftased cmthe-ir:formatior"r submFtted as parfof th*app!.*eemtrs "TraBs'ring Session" scheduxBe, w?"len the propCIsed soceer faeilEty ccmplex is uased oniy for training sessions, it wilN generate a meed for at least Slt parking $paces to be availab*e at any given time to avold negative park[ffig and traffie $mpaets on the adjaeent industniaE bus{nesses and 0n the adjaeent residential use"
WwMw,jffij;w.Wkww.xMWrM
WwW-WM&wwwwffi -&.8,&98.W4eww&-wffi RWwffi
,1 ?
Ve*pre*r"remre,S"*mk &q wffi&*n *n#Sd tnrth tlw-prsi€e
*pxltscf*w!" Xkers&g€- t&#.*r*kqt **ip!*s*fi** ts *@
w**g€k"*re*gw -
Frevious faets paint to the abElity CIf the applicant/property owruer to use the facality fer other msre inter:se Lise, as anticipated by the BF MunicipaE Code seetior"r 1"53.3"50.040" Since there are nCI Plarrning conejitiorus of appreval ir"laluded in the attaehed Pf 23-28 draft Resolution that wou*Ed preclude the appiieant/ownen fronr using the facility for more rntensrve uses sueh as 5xS game p!ay, faeility rental fon binthday parties amd spe*al events o! any other use, and there is no Susrmess Aperat{ons Plan or Busimess P/on Narrative docunrent that defines the Be'oposed houns of operation, and there is no separate condit[on of apprcval that address the Brobab[e $nore intensive use of the prop€r'ty, there is no neasCIn to believe that the app!icant lproperty owner /husEness owrxer wil! tinnit the use of the suhjeet eonnrnercEa$ soccer faciiiiy corapiex to only training sessions.
The staff c'epont states that condlti*ns of appreva! I'rane been ineluded in the draft Resolution tCI address "issues that eould have an impaet cn surrournding businesses and residents"" T!"lese impacting issues are:
strueture sctbacks, lot coverage; parking; traffic; noise; light and glare; trash genenatiom; preservation of the privacy of the adjaeent residentia{ propertfres; diffe!erlees in seale and visual ecmpatibility.
Response: Unfontunately, the draft Resolurtion Pe 23-28 does met inelude a eonditEsn of apprcvaE nequiring corrpliance with the BF Mur^rielpal ZonEng code regarding lot coverage"
Draft Resoluticn Fe 23-28 does mot inelude any eondition of appnoval requirinrg eurn6:llar"lee wEth t*ie SF &4unieipaB Zonimg esde regardlmg cfrr lrfrure <af,harircgS3 VVLUE U JLLMUL'1J.
{J
Draft Resolution PC 23-28 does not include any conditlon of appnoval requiring compiiance with the BP Munlcipaf Zoning code regarding the required 152 nurnber of parking spaces,
Draft ResoEutlon Fe 23-28 dees mot include amy eendition of approvai requiring the busirless operator to rmodify the desigc-* and use of the proposed soccer facility complex to definitively show with a revised noise study that the project can rneet requirements of the Bp Mlunieipal Zoning Code regarding noise.
Draft Resolution PC 23-28 does not include a conditicn of approval requiring the business operator to rnodify the design and use of the pnoposed soccer facility conrplex to definitively show with a revised light photometric study that the pro.lect can meet requirements of the compliance with the Bp Municipal Zoning code regarding light and gtare.
Draft Resolution PC 23-28 does not include a condition of approva! requiring consistency with the BP General Ptan regarding pneserrrationr of the privacy of the adjacent residential properties.
Draft Resolution PC 23-28 does not include a condition of appnoval requiring consistency with the BP Genera! Plan requiring adherence with the BP General Flan negarding differences in scale and visual cornpatibility"
ln fact, draft Resolution PC 23-29does not eyeR include a condition of apprcval requiring eompliance with the submitted site plan and elevations for the proiect. So any approval of the dnaft Resolution for Pe 23-28 by the Flanning Comntission would allow the applieant, or whsever next purchased the entitred property, to build without constraints and to use the soceer faeility complex without constraints" L4
Thenefore, the stater:nent in the staff report that "conditions of apprCIval have been included in the draft Resolution to address issues that eould have an in'lpact on sa,rrnoundlng businesses and residents is misieadfng and Fmeonreet.
Traffie aq:d Farking Be" 3
Tire Ftanning staff neport st'ates that, based on the "Training Session" dce urment. "staff does not beliewe that the propased use wtli eause any adverse irnpaets on the sunrounding industrlal atrea"" Based on a 2Q?4 ^-' -'"-^^mental impact ti"affie siud'y which caiculated the calcuiated tripurlvtt {.}8il gemeration associated with a slnnilar soccer facitlty complex, the Faeoima Flt 5 soecer compiex, the tr"affic s.tudy shows sn pg. 4, that 141 trlps were generated on weekdays, between the hours of 4 * 6 prn" After a deductEsn of 56 te"ips fon 'ocredit 'u hecause the proposed proSect is in an industniaE rone, the projeet was *ssigmed a amadlfied trip genenatson of ES tnEps fen 2 hCIuns duning 4-6 pm on a weekday evenlng. ffiesBonse: '['he study did not ir:elude the trips that would be generateei offi a Saturday, wFrEch 6s the longest and husiest day of the week for the proposed soacer facelEty complex, F€il the applicamt "Training Sessions" estisfiation of number of playens. Therefore, the estlrnated number of ES tnips generated daily by the propssed soccen facility complex is lower than woulci be nealEstie " The urr-n'lodified originaE number of 143. tniprgeneratedffi h-epropcsed faci+iffin-Seldwiry panJr*smore nealistic, altlrough stififl under-counteri because it st{ll does not ineEude the busiest Saturday traffic. hlovveven, the nrtsdified number was used to a$low tlte applEcant to avoid additional CESA review beyond the minimal Categorica! Exenrptiorr proposed by staff" The surnounding !ndustriaE area wEIE indeed be negatively irnpacted vvhen the arr[ving ssccer pBayens canRot fEnd onsite parking at the proposed sGCCer faeiBEty eor-mpEex and waE! try t& first park eEose as e$ose to thle faeilfity as 1q
possible, even if it is on Joanbridge Street where there is no street parking allowed and rnost businesses have posted'n'no parking" signs in front of their buildings. {se* Hxtrihit i}
["lnfortunately, the staff Eepont did not even atternpt to calculate the negative impact of the soccer facility conrplex parking space deficit on the adjacent residential properties, as required by the City of Baldwin Park General Plan and Municipal Zoning Code.
The "Training Sessions" document lists the times that training sessions wiff be offered and the estimated number of soccer players p[aying at any given tlme" The Training Session envisions 54 players, aged 5 years old to 17 years sld and I staff participating in training sessions, sport perforrnance and recreational use, for a total af 62 people using the facility during the weeknight hours, from 4 - X.0 pm wherr industrial zone businesses will be concluding their day shift and starting their night shift. 62 people trying to park in parklng facility with only 39 parking spaces. Since the nnajority of students are pnojected to be young tender-age minors and unden driving 0B€, parklng spaces nnust be allocated for the designated driver of each student which factors into the need for much more than 39 parking spaees at any given tirne, each weekday during the hours of operation, not including the inereased nunnben of soecer players attending the trainlng sessions on Saturdays. This does not even include any additional parking demand generated by othen types of unlisted activEties that the soecer faeility complex !s allowed to offer, such gr/m use, meeting room rental, faeility rental..
!f there are no available parking spaces, the drivers will try to park on Joanbridge Street illegally (see Exhibit i). Since there is no street parking on Joanbridge Street, the drivers will try to park on the adjaeent residential neighborhood streets of Mlaine Avenue or ealifornia AvenLte" SBnce both Maine Avenue and ealifornia Avenue have severely restricted on-street parking avai lable, the contin uous parking-seeking traffie on these two residential streets will cause an adverse impaet on amd axmdt*e pnoblems for" tt"le residents on California Avenue and Maine Street. ln addition, ealifornEa Avenue is a very nas"!"ow, dead-end street, with or"i-str"eet parking severeiy I[mited" Panklng-seeking drFvers wilE be forced te dnive down & narrow, single-lane eaiifornia Avenue and then t{,!rn around and e!rive hack, without firtding pari<ing, hut rregatively innpacting the nornnal!y quiet and safe residentiai neighborhood .
The staff repori envisions parents and guardlans, aside from generating the l4L new vehicle trips to the proposed soecer eomplex facility on Joanbridge Stneet, to be dropping thelr children off unsupervised in the lndustniaE area of north Baldwln Pank and leaving thern there for two hours before returning to pick them up again, rather than parking and waitlng at the faeility. Tltis is not a realistic or acceptahle assurnption and has not been shown to be true in the traffic study, which dici not include panking $tatfstlcs.
The staff report states that "a condition of apBro\ral has beer"r added to requlne the appiicant to prepare a cireulation and access plan to prevent queuing and idling on ioanloridge Street."
The draft Hesotutiom PC 23^28 does not include a condition of approva3 requiring the applieant to prepane a elreurlation and aeeess pian to prevent queuing and idling otl joanbridge Street."
The staff'report states that "cond[tions have heen lnaluded [n ti:e Flanning eom:mEssiosr Reso!uteen to addness potentlal paa"kirrg Bssues." The dnaft ResoEutEom Fe 23-28 does not isre[ude amy condit{ons to address potentia! parking issuies"
x7
Therefore, regarding the overwhelming detrirnental traffEc and panking deficiency impact of the proposed soccer facility complex on the surrounding existing industrial and existing residential uses, the project vvill not only require a CESA Environrnental lr"npaet Report, tlre prolect is not consistent with the City of Baldurin Park General Plan nor in compliance with the City of Baldwln Park Municipal Zoning eode and eannot be approve as presented"
frloise pe. 4
The staff report states that that "ln order to assess the Projeet's noise compatibility with the Project area, a noise survey and measurement were conducted at SOFIVE Soccer Center located at 699 S. Brarranca Avenue, in Covina....This location was selected as a representative noise source beeause of its urban location and its operational chanacteristics ane sirnilar to the Froject. This faeility includes ten soccen flelds of similan size as proposed by the projeet. The noise meter was placed near three tields that were being used.".""at approximately L0 feet from the noise meter,... dt approxirnately 30 feet frorn the noise meter and approximately 50 feet from the noise meter." These activities are rep!"esentative of the proposed conditions at the Pnoject Site and also reflect eornparable setback distances from the pnoperties to the south of the Project Site."
Response: This is the third noise study submitted for this proiect. The first two noise studies took place at the commereial, ground level LabFive soccer fields im Pacoima and Gardena and clearly showed that the similar type of soecen fields, proposed for.loanbridge Street would generate a level of nolse that is unacceptable per the Baldwin Park General Plan and Baldwin Park lVlunicipal Zoning C*de {Ex}tibft e} Faeaima & ffiardema fsstse st*dies ! This is wlthout faatsring in the faet that the soccen fields on Joanbridge Street are proposed to be elevated i.2.5 feet above ground ievel which a[iows noise to travei further and without natural barriers.
ivioniloring !-: - i *! n - *: *strl€ru meFrur r
&"wM Wstz* Nlaxirwulrt
Rer;srded Nsise
. ,-,-r r,rr, -lLevil {aoA}
eryreMd
}**fu&e*{M
! -l* E -^--^-LdL' J 5T'LLEI
eomplex facility
a"!*n r*ll*!* r.-^5t€"?lJ l*ilGtH F\Ye
Pa**$ma e&
S:CS pr* {day} sa"e dh& Cfr E JLn[}I,J.J EJIJ.'Li
Lab 5 soccer
cornplex facliity
S74& k*falr &ve
Faa*ima &
7:00 pm {Evenlngi
7C! 1 JLA/d}"J LtLr/-t 60.s dbA
SOFIVE Covina
^^*^l^,,SiJLLVI t-Lr! r !yrE,\
facilfty
6A0 Q El:rrrn-aVJJ J. Uqt i Ul lUU,
eovina, CA
5:39 pm {Evening} 74.4 dbh s9.1dbA
qnFIVF fnvine
soecer connplex
facility
699 S. Barranca,
fnuiina fAvvtr!rs, v. !
R'?f! nrrr {Fvpnino\ 64 q dh^ 56"8 dbA
ln the third noise study, the SOFIVE Covina study perforrned at SOFI\IE in Covina (see Exhibit N for SOF-IVE photos), the noise study once again shows that the soccer field use proposed for Joanbridge Street would generate a level of noise that is unacceptable Ber the Baldwin Fark General Flan and Baldwin Park iVlunicipal Zoning eode. {fixtr$bit N}, see table above.
ln the soFlVE Covina noise survey, the noise meter was placed l0',30, and 50' away from the soccer fields. tn the case of the project site, the noise will be generated a rnere 10' from the residential property line and elevated L7..5'above the ground arrd therefore the noise that will be received on the residential properties abutting the proposed pro.lect will be even louder.
The results of the SOFIVE Covina noise study for thls project still show that the noise that will be generated by the five (5) new outdoor soccer flelds, elevated on the top floor of a new 25'tall structure, is stil! louder than the Balciwin Park General Plan and Baldwln Park Munieipal Zoning Code will allow. See comparison table above.
TABLE r53"140.070 (C)
City of Baldwin Park Noise Standards
Zone Time Allowable Alorbe Level (dbA)
IYoise Sfandards
Zane Time Altowahle i\loise Level (dbA)
Residential 7 a.m. - 7 p.m. {Day) 55
Residential 7 p.m.- 10 p.m. iEvenirrgi 5U
Residential 10 p"m. - 7 a.m. (Nieht) 45
Commercial V a.m. - L0 p.m. (Day and evening) 55
Commercial 7 p.m. -7 a.m. (Nieht) 55
20 lndustrial Anytime 65
As shourn in Table 353.140.CI7$ {C}, above, the ioudest allowable noise leveis to b,e received by and recorded im the residentiai zomed homes amd yards on Caiifornia A.,renue, behlnd the propesed scceer field comBlex is:
55 {$be dscske{s durir:g th* *ay {7 *m * 7 pr"r:}
SS dh$. dec*he{s during the Ever:irtg {7prn - 3# pm}
45 dbA deeibels during the Night (10 pm * 7 am).
Noise Comparisorr
CEty of Balciwin Park tSec.
153"140.070) Attowed noise ievel
SOFIVE eovina Soccer eomplex aetual
noise ievel
Residential
7 an: - 7 pn: {ciav i 55 egB&
U3124 5:39 pm (day)
74.4 dffie rsr*xima**"r
SS.3 d&e aversg€
D^.iaB^^*i-lrlgJt!.JEt !Ltor
7 pm - 1S prn ieveningi Sff d&e
t le izn 8:3G pm ievening)*l "Jl L-
64"$ d&& rs:axirnrsrn
56.8 dB Average
!t should be r:oted that the Ealdwln Park ft4a;nicipal Code hloise Standards are rfieasureei In sts"aight ef eeibe[s, but with t[ryres Cesignations aElowir:g the noise gene!"ated to be compatible with the tinre of<tay. T&:e S&FME eovin-a -rToissstudy forthls proleefrprevi#d the maximue'n (l-nnax) amd n'*Enimum {Lat"rin} noise generated levels, which are straight decibel nreasurerylerxts. The Leq noise Eevels shown En the SOFI\iE fovina report is a weighted and averaged noise rmeasuE"erTleffits.
The staff nepont states "!t Es noteci that the moise mat€r was piaced adjaeer:t t* the mearest field and on6v a ahalm 6ir:k fer:e* \tdas betweem the 21 rneter and the noise sources. Thus, no substantive nolse-attenuating barriers affected the refenenced measurements",,
Response: l".lnfofcunately, this is not eorrect. As you can see from the photos of the SOFM eCIvina photos, Exhfh{t C - *ther $*esen Fxc**fties, the only chain link fencing on the SOFIVE Soccen, eovERa site is around the perimeten of the entire facility. All the individual soccer fields themselves have 4' * 6' ta!! padded wood fences around ttre playing fields, which do act as noise-attenuating barriers. Therefore, the noise measurernent presented in the SOFIVE Soccer Covina report already has the noise-attenuating barrier factored in, !"e. the noise generated by the existing soccer facility will be equivalent to the noise generated by the proposed soccer facility with the proposed 2" thlck, vinyl rernovable padd ing.
The staff report states that "all off-site properties, includlng the residential uses to the south of the Project site, would be shielded by a' 6-foot-highpadded, would be shielded from soccer activities by a padded wall proposed for the entire per-lnneter of the second level soccer fields." Response: Through a discussion with the applicant archltect sn February 5,2a24, and through research per the attached osHA regulatory status data{see exhibit R}, the "Rockwool" insulation is designed for insulation of industrlal piping, roofs and walls. The listed adverse physiochernical hazands are listed as eye, skin and upper respiratory irritation. The attached data also shows that the suggested "Rockwool" insulation is not errrrently being manufaetured into viny! padding for sports venues.
Fer pg" A-L.3 'sections', of the submitted elevation plans, the LZ.S' tall upper level of the 25' tall structure wil! be wrapped in open nneta! fencing. The bottorn 6' section of r,lpper-level fences will be lined with nemovable, 6'tallvinyl sports fence padding, attached to the CIpen metal 22 fencing with grornrnets, see Pg. IVt-l.L Material Specifications. While any padding rnay somewhat deflect the noise generated by the proposed elevated soecer fields, the subnritted noise measurerment from SOFIVE eovlna, whicti is the no[se f,]'reasurement presenteei in the SOFiVE Soecer eov!na report, already has the noise-attenuating barrien faetsred iR, i.e. the noise generated by the existing soeeer faeitity vr'rittr 4' - 5' viny!- covered wood perieneter barriers, iroill be equivalent to the noise generateri by the proposed soeeer faeElity with the proposed ?" thiek, vinyl removable paddEng.
The 6' top $:alf of the n:eta!-screened soccer fietds will have ns nCIlse- attenuating material to impede sound from going through the top halves of the epen perimeter fenclng and into the adiacent nesidential arrd !ndustnial properties" En addition, a hypothetical, unproven solution to the existing noise problern is not a rnitigation measure and cannot be used as a pending condition of approvai.
Resolution PC 23-28 Flanning eonditiofi {h} "states : that the business shail be subjeet to the nsise flimits defined in the BaEdwin Park &rlunicipal Code. Muslc and rnicrophone use shal! be used indoors only; whistles and trorns are prohibited"" tt has been elearly shown that the project cannot meet the sroise lirnits defined in the Code. This condition shou$d be rnodified to Beave only the nestrietion regarding whistles, hCIrns, r'nicrophones and nnusic.
Et has heen demonstrated that the predicted noise generation cf the proposed soccer facility complex, which has been measured at Za-S dbA maxiryr{fr, {dav}. and 64.9 $laxirnqm dBA {evening}, will exceed the allowyable leveB fon nslse to be received by the existing nesEdential homes, direetly sor.:th of tlre soccer flelds, whlch ls, per Table
3.53.14CI.S70.e of the City cf Ealdwin Fark i\rXunic$pal ZonEng Code: 55 dbA {darr} amd $CI- dbA {engniFe},
Yherefmre, s*nce the ncise #en*reted hy the pr*p*sed s**c*n *omp*ex faeillty *x$*l exeeed tfre alfowah&e *aise teve*s to be rece*ved bV x resident*afi pr*perty ir* a r*s$dent&a$ asn€ *neated adlaeent ts am *mdxstr*a* x*neu tke praleet ** r*et ecnslsant wlth tks {:tty *f Bxndwin P*rk Gerrefiel FI** nar in compli*nee tf;*itlr th€ C*ry *f B*I*x*irl P*r* Munidpal ra*ing cad* and carrnot Le irpsr#re i*$ prg$.ent*d- UehI a$d.6lafe pe.S
3k etqfkg*sft stet*E3hat: *the app**exnt Fr*s prarrided a ph*t*nr**tr*e plan """that is eonnpliant wit?* the &**dwi* P*rk ?*tun*c*p*l frode *$ght and gt*ne stxndards*.
&espo*ss: Lfnfmrku;tately, thls Bs **t tru*" Yhe *ppl*eant lras pr*v]d*d * prh*t*metr*e ptan which shows the project as generatlng a maximum f ight foot candle measurement of 52.7 - 52.2 fc/foot candle units of light, with the nraxinnum foot eandle rneasLtrement of .1 units of light spilling over to the adjacent properties CIn all sides. Unfortunateiy, the appiicant has rrot included a colored photometric survey for the revised rear yard setback. lt is much easier to see with the colored diagram.
Ffowever, if you expand the photonretric survey as presented digitally with the 3126/25 staff report, you ean see that the spillover iighting into the residential and industrial adjacent properties is stili there This spillover is also reflected in the accornpanying $txtlstim txk*a hoth fuund on p9.35 {Fhcton*etr*c study} *f th* staff rep** and [* Xx]**&*t k Aeeord**g t* the $t*t*st$es tebfe, s* Pt-*.-3 $*e*ttr? {t*re s*{"}*h pr*pe*y resld*nt*** x*ne pr*pe*y) th**r* Is st**$ * ?t*lax**r*urm *eve* *f .L fu *f l*gtrt spii**m6 *ver ?he rexr pr*pertg t**eu e\r*ffi w*th tke $r'lcrea**e& 3*' rear yerd sethack.
*r* *ddlt**n, *t sh*uld he nated that t**e &' tx8* fabn*e pedd*ng. pr*p*sed to $*n* t*'*e }*wer ha*f af the $*ce&r meta$ n*esh f**clmg thxt surr*nxr*ds &hte e&ewxted $&efrer f*e*ds, wt&* sn&V s&w&e" the b*esrn kaK af the s€e* thr*ax6h mtetx& feme&rx6. ?he t*p, &-5* t*p kaK *f the s*e*thr*axgh mneta* fene$n6 w$** he epe* amd x***& **,K prwwemt arry g*arm fr*m kfua *zlltd,*wr speryts €&*M &*6ht*mg fr*re fue*m6 s&e*"
Funther, the submitted photornetric lighting plan also shows that the iight generated by the proposed flood tights for the interisr of the Farking stnueture rvil! atrso spill over the rear property line, as showtt Gn the lighting schematic for the ground floor lights. The existing, 5' eoncrete mason!"V wa!N may deflect ttre headlights of vehlcles, but the tlood llghts are posltioned higher than the wall inside the narking stnucture and the Night fnon-l threse fixtures will spilE CIver the top cf the wall for a generation of .l foot eandies.
EP Municipal Zoning Code Section 153"140.040.F and General Plan l-and Use Foliey l-t, 2"5 both prohifo*t clny lig;ht to spilt sver front the proposed projeet rnto the adjacent residentra! or industrial lots" eontrary to what is stated in the staff report, the draft Reseiution Pe 23-28 does not include any condition to require the projeet appiicant to dernonstrate that the proposed lighting conditions would not result in excessive spiilage. However, a eondition to require the project appllcant to demonstrate that the proposed lighting conditions wsuld not result in excessive spitlage is nct nefessary as the applicant has a!ready shown that the proposed design will clearly result !n liht spiBloven.
!t has also been clearly shown that the proposed pro.lect eannot v:neet the requirements of the EF GeneraE Plan or the BP Munleipa$ Code.
T*"serefore, the proposed project is mot eonsistent vsith BP fVlunicipa! Vwxttrzg ecde $eetiora L53"L&&"W&W.W ar'*d ffieneraE Flare Lamd Use Foliey X-U 2"5. Ttre applicant's photonnetric light survey clearly shoqrus that the propCIsed e$evated exterior soceer field sports f ights wE$& sh$me onto adjacent nesidential and lndustrial properties and will have a negatlve ir"npact on the adjacent residential properties. The proposed exterior soccer field sports flood lighting does not meet the Light and Glare standards of the eity and tlrerefore the soeeer faeility complex eanrxot be approved.
Commpnitv Benefit pg.5
The staff report states that the proposed project wiil l'rave a community benefit because it's a recreational facility conveniently located in Baldwin Park.
Response: The part of the Baldwin Park Community that lives on the north side of Baldwin Park disagrees. The benefits of an expensive, rnember's only soccer facility complex will not outweigh the negative impacts generated by the frsm the proposed 25' tar[; z3,,zgg sqft., oversized soccer tacility complex" lmpacts such as, increased traffic, noise and light glare in the north part of the city" Any community rnennber who needs to drive through the already congested intersection of Maine Avenue and Arrow Highway wit! fee! the negative impact of increased traffic there. The comrnunity mennbers who live on California Avenue, Maine Avenue and Baldwin Auenue will be greatly inconvenienced by the parking-seeking traffic on their narrow, parking- poor streets.
Lot Coverage pg.6
The staff report in this sectisn states that the project is in compliance with the l-ot Coverage development standard and doesn't require a zoning variance because what the staff report pneviously laheled a "parking structure on the first floor with soccer fields on the second floor" (pgZ staff report) is not really a structure at al!. Therefore, the definition of Lot eoverage, !.e" "Thw pereentmge of the t*tatr *s? *rea *ffic*wered stcgxs, dr*:*e'wsazg*, wa,|tks, c*v*ned pa?{*s, *#rr&e*s and swawmt*6 p****'* **,r*s,raux eWW&Vr *x*aq*xx *Y*w subje*t pn*j*et d*e* nmt Wy{*W*s* &{zW {xww en*:&*sed *krw**;xxr*& wy3 the f}rs& ffi*wr" &*xp*mx*: Tfuss *KeY:e,rykwm* ?s z***ry'e,e3.,.
&x prxwz*z*wXy dls*a*sse*, Z*e* xzx*3wffi;'pr*g*xt *s sm*s** pr*ry**1*6 x **rz**kwr* ** ** f*rst €***r beexaxs*, , ww **x*:r*W& *w Vbw skwffi xxry* :rrri*r:i rl*srr-irrtiarrs *revi*iuslv rJisr:rig.$erl, the fifst fl*or struetur* trillr,'*"I* k (zvur.7 az3r14_-.114:tu-J_4i rr &w *:fuw *pwvk*wg *rl,**wv#" Surther, the parking structure is c*ns*ruexed xne* *p,*r':xk*$ es & "earport' shciiering the elist*ffile*"s e&r$. ,* a**xh:l*rz" t** defrnit*** *€ x s.Zr***twrq* x* WW t*unie ip*i Zanrng iode 93*.2X:* rs;*$k*ffim* &?X3&mm.s*:_ry&&$:W ffg"gfgqtq**W*q{?Lf€,AL,irqg ek#"fr&.{*fe"*exi*eegkee&&$eq}*e_ffi&gxr#g*ff" e I *a r I y, t h e p ro p a s ed 2&,%k& $w{.*.&rffi f**t esffifrr*q* rs*r*W d**r6rg** y* '*pl**** Zfu* r,rf/w**** ex?*t"t*r **frfr#r €*x*** q**strq:,r$:z** rw*tfu sr*pp*rt1rr6 **r**r*€# pt**wrx ;*rz& trrsii$. ,*s sh*w$ #* p&"h-",".? {secti*r,s} is a strueture. &**xts*w**\v, t*w staff repcrt descs"ifues o'tlle seeCIr:d floor above t&:e panking a{ea" as the outdoor soecer'fields and the architectural plans, pg. A1"2, identify tl'le "upper fiocn" as including the outdoor sCIccer fleids and eail out that area of the_seeond floon abeve the parking area as a 3"4,53.8 square fcot concnete siab, eoverla'lg both the L%LLZ &the L447"& ioag"lbridge St propenties. By adding tl-ee mew Y4,5L8 sqft. parkir"lg struetune &s"ea wEth the 6,625 sqft. fEoor area of the remnaEs-lErlg exEsting buiEding on 14412 "loanbnldge Street, you get a total af 2L,143 square feet of |ot covenage CIver a 26,2&& sq{,,Eare foot lct whlch equais a Eot eoverage of &L%" Wwx*.* **. t*.r* fiffirr*fl **{r*rmwta*'*,Zh* **X e*verxg* ?s *'TYrrrw*t** e{&p,,s rz*Z rw***t ?fu* r*qz**rxm*w?. *€ ffiW W*rz*t"zpx? {,ry&w, w*z** i* Ti{W, e***wx*, &fi *?:zrsw* srz3'w%&<* k%,3.*.ru*"*ru* ***v*" rxw* *r *s w?ka
?_"v
mot kn,lkrlg#gd"W*t[] t[x* *n*i*gt *,m*g&p"&*r€fffiS. t}le *fqt"** XndBW&Ak ****nn#eq*"*rd cggmqr bgileffiW#.,
xkry*q.
"
tkgxmkr k_ wpr *a*em*nlta*qs "wkh the .Ls?_ktretlus
ry*r*mqgt pd ?qsryirEs e xwM*vq*$ryq r* *w#",rulLkk h3* ffilpf ,Xprd gqtMk ps 6; Yhe staff r€peffi states: *a*?h*a*gh &pMe se*ti*x 15S.*5$"ffiSteX*! neqtx*r*s &r* *nere*se* rear +yard setback wher* & c&mm*rcially *r *ndustr*x**y x*ned *st shares * prepenty **ne *rltl"l a nes*dent*a* asne arc* a prepesed hu**d*ng exee*ds *ne stmry, the *pen*aln f*elds ahorxe the park*mg p*etf*rrn ds xc q*al*fy as a bu*{d*ng *n str$cture hecause they hatre n* rcef xnd ds nst enelass speee" Theref*re, tk*e requlnennent ts dea*bte the naar yerd setb*ek f*r a tw*- stsry bu**ding does not apply.*
8q$renEe; se*t*c* f;.s3.*ss.&3& {A} {e}: wherever a comn*erc$xliy *r industnta**y a*n*d I*t sh*res e pr&perty t*rre wlth an exclusiv*ly residenti*f *r a rn*xed**$* z*ned trct, $ny s*rtefief f}e$r stn*Suffi, *r addtt*an t* an exlstEng str**cture, t*rQt"*X$pg$ts*@t q*E[ [h*t Sc$s-*ny ffiBg-g{-s*de *qt t?qe sl'ratrl be set back rwice rhe required setback.
The *rge*ment th*t the seeeer fre*ds *r* m** * stm.let*:r* *s not &$uef" Yhe defin?t*an sf a straxet*re *n &P *k?rxn***pa* X*n*ng e*de 153.238 ts:
sr ath
kpvg*f q.ftxed *pe*tiq*,qn theerpq**"i e*ear[Y- rhe & pr*pesed exter*cr s&ecer f?eids and the req**red 33"y t**l wlre nmesh f,e*ce, te ke *reet*d *round the p*r*nmeter ef tke 2*r59&ft equare f*e* p*rk*n6 struffiure wxh&e** has q_&ed [qfqt**ryqn,L?rggfgppd- *s shaw* &ffi pg. &.-1.8 {secti*m$} 3.s *r* ext*r**r ne$r *tructer*. Srk pa6ffi k *$tke staff rep*rt t&'z* s*ce*r f*e*d ftreils are deeeribed as "the second floor above the parking area" as the outdoor soccer fields and the architectural plans, ?he
28 -rh
pg" 41.2, identify the "upper fiosr" as ineiuding the outdoor soccer fi**ds er?* &s a* ex?*n*mr ru*w stn*cta*r&.
-l"h* architectural plar:s, pg. 43..2 ? wy*w*g* w kx."%r z***, ***,,s,*te* $eefl*r t{*Z**, mww ***Y***rsiif?*n6 &t*&s x** raxw w&wzx*Y*r Z* b* xr**w* *W*€3. ?:he first st*ny *f thm p*rkz*6stnu*{unm. ?hmrc?ryre, th* t*t** X5- fueigltt re€ t** **tire {x*w s*ec*r $**r**xg ffirw*Kzsr:* wz&* ?*z*?q*&* tfux kT"%r ffir*?. s**ru p*rkir,g *.Tr'"zet,*v.* x** z?zw z*".fi' ****rz* €***r ***ua*xx* $*rc*r tix*ds, **w **s?***r xzffi**6 er*&$ *rz* rsw:*e xix:**K** S*raee thm sma*n*t €$**r e*nstnue x*** wx*4 *w*xed *he b**g*z *f the x.,*g&* xtr*:zg pxrk"z*g q*r"i"rctasre , t,h* *m?*rx www wr*w*fte.* a***.*r €**z?izy r.**ww**w wx**$ exr*m* *ne st*ry z* ?z*u@ht. Yhere€*r*, y** pr*p*s*d new s*f;f*r txxttity **t*,p**x *x "r*q*xlrm:* t* rywrlX X*z*,, r*ryxs*r*w*r*?.* *€ *? ?a&*x***tp** Z***rzg f,*e*e $ert?*n ?s*.ffis.#.*3* {,&3 tX..* r*ry**:'r?rz6 t}t* pr*s*s** rz*w stra*rtxre t* have iwiee the requined rear setbaek i.e. a twentv fsat i2S'3 setba& *sw&*m w&XWXbw rwxr
q** x* r*{n8"ffi-*Mxw,q*r*p a&MpeKwprya**lp pqs$*ed, t#llirh.hes *wx**x* &r*sz"Ybxrefcre. tke
6?e.*sffi*g:r#g*x
,,#:eMthatKW*pr*p*se*25,ta$8,Zx,Z9g5qft"s0eeer
faeiiity carnplex is eonsistent with tarrd Use Goal 1".0 fon balanced deveioprnent.
Response: Negatively Empaeting tft:e existing nesEdemtEa! developrnent by fn"tsenting a ffiew, mort-e*ryrpatFble recneatFoffi use adjaeea:t tc that exEstimg residesltlai deveEopmer:t is s^lot balanced" 6t only benefBts the pB.Oper'tlr S\nrfieE- b$, il.:es-easil'ig ti:e ruaiue *f i.ris p" oper"ti, at ti:e €:xp:s1-15s of the exBstEneg resrdegtteaE proBenty cwnen. A Eieearsed, experiesieed and $mdepemdemt Eand assess#r has testBfucd that tl:e apprmvaH of t&le proposed soccer facility complex, abutting the existing homes wi!! devalue the residentia! properties by approximately lAa/o. Discussions with the LA County Assesson's Office aiso support this clairn"{Exhfbltffi} Therefore, the proposed pnoject is not consistent with w Land L.lse Goai
1.0 for ba!anced developnnent
Xhe St#_rqp*S,s_tateg that the pr*pcsed 25' tall, 23.,299 sqft" ssccer facility complex is consistent with Land Use Policy 1".4 to create loca! and regional retail and senvice uses.
Resppnse: Unfortunately, the proposed soccer facility connplex will not create local and regional retail and service uses. The project site is currently being operated as a non-profit business soccer training school use, which does not generate any retail revenue and there has been no indication that the business model will change (Exhibit B) *n contrastn the prCIpssed 25' tall,2L,299 sqft" ssccer facil$ty cornptex is not consistent with the City of Baldwin Park General Plan Goal and Folicies as follows:
. Land Use Goa! 2.0 - ComBatible Development Standards. The proposed size of the new 2X,299 square foot soccer facility and the location .of the 25' tall, elevated outdoor soccer flelds, located within 10' of existing residential properties, !s not compatible with existing adjacent single-story, single-family residentlal development dinectly abutting the project site nor is it cornpatible with the rnostly single-story !ndustrla! development in the su rrounding I ndustrial zone.
o l-and Use Folicv 2.5 - Land Use lntensitv/De{rsitv" The proposed - size of the new 2L,299 square foot soccer facility and the location of the 25' tall, elevated outdoor soccer fields, located within L0' of existing residential propenties wili cause negative impacts on the adjacent resider-ltial and industr!a! properties regarding noise, inadequate parking, iight anci glare, privacy, differenees in scale and visual incompatibility, as detailed above.
Land Use FoBicv 2"6 - Lighting on Commgrcial/inciustrial Froperties" The proposed size of the new 2n,299 square foot soeeer facility and tf:e location st tf,re 25' taii, elevated outdoor sCIecer tields, loeated within 10' of exlsting residentia! properties will eause negative impaets om the aei.flaeent resieientEaE propenties due to the use of the outdoon sCIecer sports flood fights for the elevated outdoon soccer fieids. The subr*itted ligi:ting plan tExh{hit Ei cieariy shotrvs the neur soccer fie$ds wil{ generate t!'re pnohibited ligtrtt spillover" Land Use Pclicv 7.4 - Adequate Fei:king. The design and proposed size of the mew 27,299 square foot sCIccer faeility and the location of the 25' tal!, elevated outdoon soccer fields, covering 22,06V square feet +f the 26,244 sqft. lot {8a% lot eoverage} will not leave enough room fon the requir"ed numben cf on-site parking spaces and w$lt not provide adequate on-site parking fon customers" Enadequate parking will cause patrans of the riew soccer faeility to park on private property on.ioanbridge 5t., where street parking is prohibited, {Exhibit J} and to spill over into the adjacent residential neighborlrood streets, uvhere stneet parking is alneady severely EEnrited"
Lasrd Use Noise Elernent NE12 - Based on the applieants subrnitted f,{oise Studies {Exhibit D} the prepCIsed pro.lect will pnoduce noise levels above tlre allowed decibe|s allowed in residential propenties.
Findines of Fact - eonditional t.lse Ferrylit. pg"7
W*w&f;mgw##w*K 3" - es*tdit3cmally permltted: Yhe axse is csnd*t*ona*By perm&ttmd w*th*n the s*hleek xryree ww& *wwp{c**x wlth the imtent *f *** xpp&*xa;b&e pr*v$s**ns *f tk*s *&wpkwr"
5I
Yhe staff repsrt *ates;**?he *se *s **nditlmr*a*ly pernn*tted w*th*n the suhject z&Re a*'*d a*nr*plies w*th t**e *ntent of *lt appl$enbls pncv*stans *f Mur*ie*pa* e*de. k*tl*m 153.&$*"*e& of the *dtun*elpa* f;*de wlttt en apprevatr by the e?Vs F*ar*n*ng e*r*m*ss**rx. Yhe pr*je* conrplles wlth thx* *ntent cf ?he *ndustria* usne bee*use *t w*tf prcv*de service-arlestted use$ th*t $&are &*ca[ resldents and bamiytesses, e*nsister*t w*lth Seet*sn 35*.&S* "*Z& ef the Mrxnicip** e*de.* Respsnse; Tk* pr*p**d Ws,*at k met trt mm$irul** w*tlx tkx e*S *f 8**d*rln k?k Mu**cip* Ma M*sm*S*.*S*-$3S ***lt*nt **d Fa*rpa*e The project does not comply with the intent of the lndustrial zone - !ntent and Purpose. Per Municipal Code Section 153.050.010 INTE|VT AND PUftPOSE, there ane ftve e&mmere*xt *nd industria* x*nes *rr &aldwin P*nk* establtslted to meet the e*mnruerce *nd service vreeds *f the resident x nd bxsiness c*nft m****ties y*h*gsrlpq.t*tls e*ypft#*&3*igx vqit?l adiaqqnt ***d.usrfg* The xort€s *r* designed ts asc*rr?nffiodate different types amd *ntenslttes *f connmer*l** and industrial develcpFmemt. Yhe *nd*str*** x&&e *r'l parti*ular pr*vides &reas fmr the developr*ent *f *ndustr*es errgaged *n ge*er*l ass*mhly, manufaet*r*ng and pro**ss*ng- *nd supprt, c*trrm*rc*al uses-* Yhe *ndustniai u**e [s n*t can*patlb*e taa*th the c**struet**n **d apr*t**n *f an [*dscr /***t*swr s*cc&r c*nrp*ex fxci*[,ty *s prepesed, *n that tt is nst a genena$ assennh*y, rnanu&etwr$ng and pn*cess *rxgo *r *upBort fsr c*nnr*erela* *ses"
*n add*tien* th*s 6*wd*m6 ** Fw* *pptias t* ecrnpt*xr*ee of tke pr*p*sed ssec€r e*rnptex us* w*th ahe Mls}l{gi*"Pe&X**i*S"fr#*e
Shq$er"&ffi not jrxst $ec*tsft 353.&5* "&** {Use &egutxt**ns}" ?h*s me*ns thxt there are r€qw*rements *n the X*w**g e*d* ehxpt*r that th*s *pp**cat*om fur & $*ceer eemp**x fae***ty *s requir*d t* x"r*eet" 32 &4sw*ever* th*s par?8*u&ar' *ppi*eat&sm d*es &et rsleet ssryr€ af these n*q**r*x.*erets and it *nt*ne*y t6n*r*s *t*xer reqax*ren*e*ts" Ykes* axnaddres*ed r*qx**rer**nts pert**e t* t?** &-amd *Jses $tartdards and ffiewe**prcenta* $ta*dands* s*,xc& *s: Pa nk* m6 rrya;;*remen?s* &*e*se $etbxrk &equ *reffirertt$.
The pr**e&t* *$ prepesed* dwes m*€ **mp*cg w**kfuw W&*;*x*n W*rk &**unie*pa* emde reg*d**g P*r*e$rug neqer*rerc€mt$u M*tse &astr*ct*&F*sa 1i6fuffi*are rffitr*et$*mu *-at cmn*re&* r*skr**&**ns amd S* haek ffiequBrements"
* fr*t**W: Ww W Wmimx.W re;k*m @w*w*t?*
th€ C*t!# **M*Mm Fx* W*xutffiW*W$eckiex
t^53" 3*,.m9,* W***ry *lnmmf*vw fm;vdd#:W* L*me Fxrrm&
fffiEEX *€#W&www&Wtwx**
Yhe "Training Sessionso' doeument ineiuded im the pr"ajeet appfieation, estimates that there will be up to 11 people sm each of the 4 soccer playir:g fieids, including the fuli-sizeei interior soeeer field, at any given time, not including one or two players on the 1,643 squane foot pnactice soccer fieid. This estimate would equal 44 rnembens of the private soccer tacility eornplex, playing and parking at the cornplex at any given tlrne. ln addition, you would need to account for the numben of staff amd additionaN members who r*rill be using the proposed gym, the proposed 2 meeting rooms, and the 4 offices. Approximating 2 people in each of those facilities at any given time will generate the need for at [east 14 r"nore parking spaces added to the needed tt4 off-site member and staff parking spaces needed and the pg"CIpCIsed soccer facility eompiex wiii requEre at least 54 par3<f;mg spaees to be availabie at any given time to avold negative parking and tnaffEc impacts on the adjacent industrial businesses CIr om the adjaeent nesidemtnaB use" 33 The staff report erroneously states that "the required parking for a recreational facility is one parking space for every employee pnesent at the facility and one additional parking space for every class roorn" equaiing only X3 required panklng spaces. The faet [s that, per Munlcipal Code per section 153.150.040, that mistakenly stated requirement is for an eiementary or secondary school (private), a use which is not allowed in the lndustrial zone.
Actually, the frAunicipal Code per section 153.150.040, see below, requlres 1 space/150 square feet of huilding area for a cornrnereiai recreational facility, which is what the proposed project really is.
Therefore, based on the proposed 2L,L43 square footage of the proposed soccer facility application, the required number of parking spaces is 152 spaces, as shown below
r*h T$*Js&04* B
The applicant is proposing 39 parking spaces. As previously shown above, based on the information submitted as part of the applicant's "Training Session" schedule, when the proposed soccer facility cornplex is used as only fon training sessions, it will generate a need for at least Number of Reouired Parkins Spaces
Land Use lVrlinimum Number of Spaces Reguired
Commercial Recreation
d. Health/Fitness Club
e. Billiard f bowling alley
f. Arcade/internetcafe
d. 1 space/150 square feet of building
area {{52 speffi rWs*r#}
e. 3 spaces 1100 square feet of building
area
f. 1 spaeei15O square feet of buitding
area
School
-,ltl.
A
f.
Elementary or secondary (Private)
High School (private)
Specialized and voc,ational
C
t.
1 space/employee plus 1 space
classncor* {?3 spam rWa**red}
1 spaee/employee, $us 1 sPacef2
students in 11th and 12th grades
t spacel35 square feet devoted to
instructional services plus 1 space per
classroorn f4ffi seaffi re*{,}M}
A
54 parking spaces to be available at any given time to avoid negative parking and traffic Impacts on the adjacent industrial businesses and cn the adjacent residential use"
Fnevicus facts point to the ability of the applieantlpneperty swner to ulse the faeility for other more intense use,{Exhibit E} as antieipated by the BF Municipal Code section L53.3.50"040. Since there are no Flanning conditlcns of approval included in the attached Pe 23-28 draft Resolution that would preclude the applicantlownen frorn using the facillty for more intensive uses sueh as 5x5 garyle play, faeility renta! for blrthday parties and special ever"rts or any other use, and there is nc Susiness fiperatians Plan or Eusiness Plan Narrative eioeunrent that defines the proposed hours of operatlon, and there is no separate eondition of approval that address the probable rnore intensive use of the property, there is no reason to believe that the applicant /property owner /business owner wili lil^nit the use of the subjeet connnnere ial sCIeeer faeility eomplex to oniy training sessions, anci wiln require the fuii conrp[irnent of required par.king".
Lk *ryts$sp rw* *ssqnrld.i*xlffi w??k t*rgff S&rne*ip*[&]$riw"e* Pp.ff*nf rySu*rgmqw} I53. LSS.$I*S *bwr&l** e*xxd*t*ex** *,.**a F*rm*? ffixx**ry*# ff** & exmm*t W*u**&w"
& ffi**** rxxtr*et**mctWw€W*Ww&w"*x m*? tn
c*mptr&x w &k Xbw W w# W*d*xd;xt sw;sk *&*xx*k*p* *&
k**a* &f&X"&W"WW&W#g;*k
The staff report states that that "ln onder tc assess the Project's noise cormpatibiBity rrulth the Pnojeet anea, a noise sl,rvey and r:reasunem:ent were eondueted at SOFIVE Soecer Centen located at 699 S. Branranca Avenue, im eovina..""This Iocation was selected as a repneser:tative noise source because of its urban loeatEon and its operaticnal chanacterlstics are similan to thre Pro.iect. This faciBity includes ten soccen fEeflds of 35 sinnilan size as proposed by the project. ?h*e nsise *meter was placed s?ear three fie*ds fhat wetre beimg *ised"....&t apprCIxim*tely LS feet from the noise rneter,""" at approxinnately 3& feet fromn the noise rmeter ar*d appnoxim'latelV 5& feet *v*m tl-*e molse nneter"" These activities are !"epresentative of the pnoposed conditions at the Frojeet Site and also refEeet eomparab8e setbae$t distanees from the properties tc the south of the Pro.fiect Site."
This is the third noise study submitted for this Bnojeet. Ttre first two *-:-- ^r".^!i^^ r-.--!. ..!--^ -a rLn -_^-mm_4r-!n! -.o,,^-.X lo."^l I a[.rEiren a^FFArrtut5E sLur=!!ub tuuK Pa€iLe dL rtitr turl}[{ieicEai, gi-uurifi ;i-\/Et tdrii-ivE suLtu[ fields in Pacoima and Gardena amd cleanfy showed that the sinnilan nuntber af soccer fietds proposed for Joanbridge Street would generate a ieve! of noise that is unaeeeptable per the Baldwin Park General Plan and Baldurin Park MunieFpa! Zon6rrg f*de {ffxh}blt ffi F*e*i*na & S*rde*a {S*ise studiss } This is withcult faetnning in the fact that the s*ccer fieids on Joanbridge Street are prsposed t* be e[evated 12.5 feet abcve ground leve[ whieh allows noise to trave! further and witheu:t naturaB barriers.
Mlonitori ng Field Report
ewffi#w Yime M*ximls,m
ffe*srd*d N**se
Lewe{ {dbe}
&xWwW
iro*rc LglEa,i {dlrd.
r ^L r ^---^-8-dlJ J }{"JLi-et
complex facility
*?&&TwW*r &u*w
W**&wza *&
6:** pia: {day} ws"e *be Cn C. rlh^e
Lab 5 soceer
connplex fac[iity
WZe* k{fa*r &we
Wwg;wi*ryla-*&r
7:00 pm {Evening} 78"3 dbA 60.s dbA
35 SOFIVE Covina
soccer complex
facility
699 5. Barranca,
Covina, C,&
5:39 pm (Day) 74.4 dbA 59"r. dbA
SOFIVE Covina
soccer complex
facility
699 S. Barranca,
Covina, CA
8:30 pm (Evenlng) 64.9 dbA s5.8 dbA
ln the third noise SOFIVE Covina study, performed at SOFIVE in Covina (see Exhibit N fon soFlvE photos), the noise study once again shows that the elevated soccer fields proposed for Joanbridge Street would generate a level of noise that is unacceptable per the Baldwin Park General Pian and Baldwin Fark Municipal Zoning Code. {Exhihit ftl} ln the SoFlvE Covina noise sun/ey, the noise rneter was placed 10', 30' and 5O' a$ray frorn the soccer fields" ln the ease of the pnoject site, the noise will be generated a mere L0'from the residential property line and elevated L2.5' above the gnound and therefore the noise that will be received on the residential properties abutting the proposed project will be even louden"
The results of the SOFIVE eovina noise study fon this project still show that the noise that will be generated by the five {5} new outdoon soccer fields, elevated on the top floor of a new 25' tall structure, is still louder than the Baldwin Park General Flan and Baldwin Pank Munlcipal Zoning Code will allow" See comparison table above"
TABLE {53.140.070 {C}
City of Eatdwin Fark frIoise Sfandards
Zone Time Allowable Jllorbe Level {dbA}
37 IVorse Standards
Zone Tima Allowable fUofse l*evel (dbA)
Residential 7 a.m. - 7 p.m. (Day) 55
Residential 7 p.m.- 10 p.m. (Evening) 50
Residential 10 p.nr. ^7 a.m- (Night) 45
Commercial 7 a.m. - 10 p.m. {Day and evening} 65
Commercial 7 p.m. -7 a.m. {Night) 55
lndustrial Anytime 65
As shown in Table 153.140.070 (C), above, the loudest allowable noise levels to be recelved by and recorded in the residential zoned homes and yards cn California Avenue, behind the proposed soccer field complex is:
55 dbA decibels during the Day (7 am - 7 pm)
50 dbA decibels during the Evening (7pm - 10 pm)
45 dbA decibels during the Night (10 prn - 7 am).
Noise Comparison
City of Baldwin Park (Sec.
153.140.070) Allowed noise level
SOFIVE Covina Soccer Complex actual
noise level
Residential
V pm - 6 prn {day } 55 dBA
il3/24 5:39 pm (day)
74.4 dgA maximum
59.1dBA average
Residential
7 pm - 10 pm {evening) 50 dBA
L/3124 8:30 pm (evening)
64.9 dBA maximLtrn
56.8 dB Average
It should be noted that The Baldwin Park Municipal Code Nslse standards are measured in stnaight decibels, but with times designations allowing the noise generated to be compatible with the tin-re of day" The SOFiVE eovlna noise study for t]rls projeet pnovided the nnaxinnurn {Lmax} and minimum (Lrnin} noise generated levels, whieh are straight decibe! measurements. The Leq noise levels shown !n the SOFIVE eovina report is a weighted and averaged noise measuremeRts.
The staff report states "trt is noted that the noise meten was placed adjacent to thre neanest field and onfiy a ehain lf nk fence \Mas between the rgteter and the noise sCIurees" Thus, no substantEve noise-attenuating barriers affected the nefeneneed measureffiients." Unfortunately, this is not eorrect. As you can see fg'om the photos of the SOFIVE fovina ptrotos, Exhibit C - Other Soeeer Facilities, the only chain [[nk feneing on the SOFIVE Soecer, fovina site is around the perimeten of the entire fae ility. All the Individual soeeer fields themselves have 4' * 6'talf padded wood fences around the playing fields, virhich do act as noise-attenuating barriers" Tlrerefore, the noise rmeasurernent presented En the SOFiVE Soccer Covina repoe"t already iras the noise-attenuating barier factoned Iffi, i.e" the noise generated by the existing soecer iaeiiity wiflE be equivalent ts the noise generated by the proposed soccer facility with the preposed 2" theck, vinyl rernovable padding.
The staff report states that "all off-site pnoperties, including the residentia! uses to the south of the Projeet site by a 6-foot-highpadded, would be shielded frorn soccer activities by a padded wall propCIsed for the entire perirneter of the seeorrd levef soceer fields"" ftespqnsE: Througfr a discussion with the applicant anchitect on Fehruary 5,2fr24, and through researeh {*ee *xk*b&t &}, Fen the attached OSh{A negu}atony status data, the "RcckwcsB" lnsulaticn is designed for lrisulation of industrial piping, roofs and walls" -["he listed adv*r's* physimeh*miaal hazards are Iist*# as *y*, skin amd upp*r respiratory irritation. The attaehed data also shows that the suggested 39 "Rockwool" insulation is not currently being manufactured into vinyl padding for sports venues.
Per pg. A-1"3 'SectiCIns', sf the subrnitted elevation plans, the L2.5' tall upper EeveE of the 25' tall stnucture rryil! be wrapped in open nretai fencing. The bottom 6'section of upper-level fenees will be lined with nernovable, 6'tall vinyl sports fence padding, attached to the open metal fencing with grommets, see Pg. M-L"L Material Specifications. While any padding may somewhat deflect the noise generated by the proposed elevated soccer fields, the submitted noise measurement from SOFIVE Covina the nolse measunernent presented in tlre SCIFlVE Soccer Covina report already has the noise-attenuating barrier factored in, i.e. the noise generated by the existing soceer facility will be equivalent to the nolse generated by the proposed soccer facility with the proposed 2" thick, viny! rermovable padding,
The 5' top half of the metal-screened soccer fields will have no noise- attenuating material to impede sound frorn going through the top halves of the open perimeter fencing and into the adjacent residential and Industria$ propertles. ln addition, a hypothetical, unproven solution to the existing noise problem is not a rnitigation rneasu!'e.
Resolution Pe 23-28 Planning condition (h) "states : that the business shall be subject to the noise limits defined in the Baldwin Fark Municipal Code. Music and microphone use shall be used indoors only; whistles and horns are prohibited." !t has been clearly shown that the project cannot rneet the noise limits defined in the Code. This condition shsuld be nnodified to leave only the restriction regarding whistles, horns, rnicrophones and music should be retained" It has been denronstnated that the predicted noise generation of the proposed soecer facility complex, which has been measured at Z{M dbA maximum (davl" and 64.9 maximum dBA( eveningl will exceed the allowable levei for noise to be received by the existing residentiat F:cmes, direetEy south of t*:e soeeer flelds, whieh is, per Table
3.53.140"CI7CI"e of the eity of Baldwln Fark &*urnicipa! Zoning Code: $5 dbA durimg tke dav arad S.ffi_dh& duer{mgr thc_ewemirtg.
Y?uwrw€*r*, thc *r*&se g*we.r'ahe,d *V t** pr*p*sed $#ee&r a*rcp&*x €w*z&a@ r,rel7wrZv im * re*idential u,Jn€. {*rmted adjace*t K* erx **.*z*xhr*w*, z***. xmts"ffin.yk*93*seffiffi*& ffi*weke ?"K*wM.W
ffiS*&S&e3*.ffigige3"*&*r*8wxw **w&*k*wwwY Wxa W*rw** W*r,*xx6 w* *xw k xwww*.Lb& w&*@*
& efgffi[ffiMx V&w prCIpsssd pralx&*s N*ffi*w xxwg|r*xr*x* wit*r x*e *XW *$ Wx*M*wWwrWW m&**ww* **&* $eet*srx
X%3 .X&*.W -sl€Ui*6bk $ &&ww r*$
l"he staff repcrt s**t*s *b.wt":'rz*q wryp&rx.w** *.*s pr*vx*** pfur*Y*ruz,*trv*. pZ**,.."that *s ecrnp$ia*X w*xX*Yhw Ww{**wxw Wmrk W*rztx*p*& **de *rg*X w** 6*are *r^***a.r**" . U*f*rtaewx*m*y, *s m*"Kr**^ Tfu* wpry***aqtt has pn*vi*ed a ph*t*metr&e p&wm wfu$** x*w*r&ry s&wwps the pr*j*ct as gerienating a smaximur-n light foot candle rrleasurement af 52"7 * 52"2 te/feot cand[e units of trEght, witBT the nraxirmum: foot ear:dle ryleasurem:emt of "3 units cf light spiEEing GVer to the ad.iaeent propertEes om c!! sides. ThEs is reflected en the photonretrie diagram aa,d lra the Statls?ic * ta**&*r **?:* €*wm* *rz pg.'&%, {Wfu*Y*mffirxx *Y**Vb *€ Y.*w xKxffi r*p*rL" &"***srdsng t* the Stat*st**s t*fu*e, *rz WV-"L;$- xw*X* \E*,w s*tsx* gr *p*rtg *zrux w*,*rx Y:?z* ?**zes3.raw?, x*rsw ***$** W{*WeyY:V *bz*Xs k** ***zs*z*g r*.*x***.Yxw& x.*n* ryr*p*rkvp Z?:*r* *s, skz&Z x* Wwwxwz*m &*w*& # .3 €* *€ ?*6*t xpr&&*r*6 *wwy **w rq*wr ryr*pr*rYy {;rz*, *N*rb *wv*?z Y:** ?rz*r*as*# 2*' . ,"& 3r yarfr EethACk.
4:C"
n* additl**ru *t shs**d be nmted th*a* the # ta*l &br*e p*dd*n6; pr*p*sed the e*evated s*ceer fialds, r*ry*** *wW s*ver the bm*k*w*a*$ mf the se€* k*r*wg;& rxetx* feme*mg" Yhe t*S &"W t*p ha&f *& AWg* see**hraaxg?: meta* f*m**n6 w*II be *Wwrr" *nd vril* **t prewer*t amy g*xr* €x*ux the *utd**r sp*rts fIe*d llgh*tng the see*threuglr"
Further, the submitted photometric lighting plan also shows that the light generated' by the proposed flood lights for the interior of the Farking structure will also spilN over the rear property Iine, as shown orl the lighting schematic for the ground floor lights. The exlsting, 5' concrete masonry wall may deflect the headlights of vehictres, but the flood lights are positioned higher than the wall inside the parking structure and the light from these fixtures will spill over the top of the wall for a generation of .1foot candles"
BP Municipal Zoning Code Section 153.L40.040.F and General Plan Land Use Policy LU 2.5 both prohibit any light to spill over from the proposed project into the adjacent residential on indurstrial lots.
Contrary to what is stated in the staff report, the draft Resolution PC 23-28 does not include any condition to require the project applicant to denronstrate that the proposed lighting conditions would not result in excessive spillage. lt has already been clearly shown that the proposed project cannot meet the requirernents of the BP General Plan or the BF Municipal Code.
The proposed project Is not consistent with BP Municipal Zoning eode Seetion 153"1.40.040"F and General Flan Land Use Policy.LU 2.5. The applicant's photometrlc light survey clearly shows that the proposed elevated exterior soccer field sports lights will shine onto adjacent residential and lndustrial properties and will have a negative inrpact on the adjacent residential properties"
42 Xep-msslssffie#*g$e.e*rwrite-ess-ffi-&k ryffieq rel S &Wffiffi &{&WWffi*Xmk&Wxx€*rx**w*W**wxl"**wWxxw*****w**w6 w$ Wwffi k xwwmwkWr* ffiw*w"^
& WWffiWa YWw ryx*ry& pvw$x**s w&*w x*wp**xwxx
wWW XWw **@ wK W&Mw Wxwk Wwwfl*p& **&w %*&*ww
X%* "WW "WWWW $*wk *w,ww*w6w$
il-i:r- cf,=S-# r.f!n{arf rn tl+ic re.ntinr.t c*=,i. s th=* *ha itrninn{- ic in *-r-rrt+mEia*rreI lEt- J!'eiil t{;fJu6 { trr t-8r{r }ELLlLrii rq,dLU} i;ECii LitE p!L}jCLi- i} ;il i.-U;;i$.}l;'*iEUU \tuitir the i-ot fovenage deveiopment standard and doesrn't e"equire a aoning variane* *:ecause wliat the staff repo!"t previousiy iabeieel a "parklng struetaire on the flrst fEoor with soeeer tlelds CIr'l the seeone{ 'fB#or" {pgZ staff report} !s itot real$y a stnucture at all. Therefore, the def*niticm of tot e*verage, i.e" r'Tfu* p*r**m?w6* *€ the t*ta{ **t xrea **vx*r*& *V **"*****& s*ru"**z*r*:*. wyz*/q*r xwrp*rts, *e*t, *xe*axdir:g L3trvt.w&red stcps , *r:*t**wwryry ww*kx, **wwywd pati*s" t*trr&effis and sw*mwzm&W**is" dqiesn't a#W*Vr kesmrxse *Y*w s*,xbj*et pr*.ieet d**s n*t W{*W***-&{zg **w ***&**** ffiww*wxx& ** t*:m first ff**r. ?*xi* x*x**uwwwk &w &w.**ry**.?"
ffiesparexe: &s pr*vr*ws*ry *zxxw****rT%* xwbiect pr*jeet is indeed pr*ry*xxwg ;* shrxaxk:.x{w *m kbw €*rxt €&**r besa*".*se, *r d*sfir*hsd &m fk* wkw€K rxryxk. prrywxK *wsxr*ffi'r,rzs a*s q**Kx* w**w* r **xw Wvffi $&wwx ffir*ffiwv* w&W b* *.Ww *pwrk*w s%.rwffiwww* . Fr*rh,**r,Xk* pa*rk*rzg *Krtx&t*r* zw ****Xx***& ;*w& *pxrahms &ff &*e&{WwrYu sk*&ter*n 6bbzx *z*st*r**n'$ frars. 2*" **.*tZs**, Z** *w€*rxeYx*rz *€ w x?;rz;;r ;*rr*. t* &? W*erzxx$pw3 X**tre6. *r*&* k%&,X"** ayi: "
snffi s5ffi &wksmsesxlns;q*e-f"ffi ffi ##e,{Wft effims.esswry*pnffi #Kp$kd3*. n-**.Wt,*w"x,gkx1a:vxffiw-*xvxwa-*:ym#.'Srxw*xwSf-ry,."ww&-* {"2**r\g, Y** Wr*W**** Z&,%3.W".sq,-rarfl fryq}t **rzqr*t*. x*w* **x:*6r,x* Z* **$* t,*x pr*p*s,m* *,xtxr\**' &*{{ryr ti*.!d* i:ffffistg"uetfpn truittr s*Wy*r*x*ffi na
ee&cr€te p**iars amd tr*x**s, as sh*wm w*, W&. &-9.3 {se*i*rxs} k * $tr*rettlr*.
&ddtt*mma*ly, ttte staff report describes the secsnd flseir absve th* park!ng area" as the outdoor soccer fields and the architectural plans, pg" A1.2, identify the "upper flosr" as including the sutdoor soccer fields and call out that area of the_second floor above the parking area as a 1.4,5L8 square foot eoncrete slab, covering both the 144L2 &the L4424 Joanbridge St properties. By adding the new 14,518 sqft" panking stnucture area with the 6,525 sqft. floor area of the rernaining existing building an L44L2 Joanbridge Street, you get a total of 2L,L43 square feet of lot eoverage over a 26,244 square foot lot whiclr equals a lot coverage of 81%. tsas*d on th*s e*mect inf*rm*ticn, the **t c*verage is &Z% $r?**eh does rrot meet the requireryrent *f &F &#un*cip** e*d*, wh*eh Es 5S% al*owed, as shswn *n ?*ble 353"&5S"*3& *k*ve"
rhprekre,Sh* rrql**jg-Wt **g-$s!rydl*#W* !frdtk L?re *P a***SSiSat X*r**qek*q *SS"QSrffi*"{&r*t f;oWm*f*} th*refcre C*nd*t&rml x,,*sa Pe*m3t S**dlr** *f S*ct I. e*mx*t * w****-
. SS$*"qk: Th* prep*d W*$sct k rW *n mrt*ffi*ftte wlth
tht ffi, *f **l**r*v*Y**hlttxn*e*pxi-*** k€t**.m
3.S3.*S**WW {Setfu**r}
Lhe.XSa# rgk&,{t r3effi : *e*tkt*t"tg*t &Fh&e seet**xt 3,53 "*5S.SS*{,&XX } neqr**res am *r:*reased r&&r yxnd setbaek wbarq* & e#*ylnn*rc*xt&y *r *ndustrla*ty xe**d iot shxre$ * prepeffiy *&n* w**t&t * residenti** zarte *vtd * prep*sed b**td*ng *xee*d$ &n* st*ry tke *pezz*w*r f*e*ds ab*ve ttte pxrking plxtf*rnr d* yx* Www*rffV as * ha***d*mg *r straxeture becxtxre theXr h***6 *s r**f w** ** nct eme**$e $pe*e . Yherelff*re, t*:e req*"riremestt t* d*uh*e the rear y*rd se*hack f*r * har**s?o** bwi****n6 de*s rxffi" wBp*tg-* 44 -ffigrcr Smctlwst eS&"*S&"*&* te* €X*: WWw*wEw{ & ffiwmere*a&*y *r z*&q*xzr*w&*ry x*rz<** 4*k sfuwrxw e W{€}r;wyV &t*.w wxt"fu *w xx *z*m*vm*y res*des??xw& *r x. w*x*&-*s* asr?&* **K,&ffiK#X$Sr**n, ffiL_&KK€[Utg, or w**ttsr,w ** ww *xes#;zrug ruKr*xffiwre*3kA€.*XggMg_q*e_*AM"A_&gg&k&"*M *xkkcqs.affiKes#n arsi*s3*k &ffi€, sh + ! Lbe eet h-e qk twtce t h e re q ry x re d qqthagk.
YW* wrgx*mrxnf- tha? t*te s*re*r f*e*ds *rw ** x* xtr:ts**x*** rs ruffif:w*zxw&.
Yh* **{e-wxYz*m *€ w *xr,*&*rw *w &W Wax*x**p;**Zwrz**g***z* k&&"k&* *x:
*' $r*s,$Lqffi;-&ffiKki&K" .
flas} 3"4fi
- s ry-!-rt q I is ug:d q f . i $_ "q"ff-a$h ef, . r#_s eu:l{ifeM h*v i*e-aJiss,{,kgf,gs*" e*Jftes{ssffi
***a-rvyr Z*z* & propssed exteri*n $*cc*v' f*e$ds *ru* X*zw r*qxxxr*& kk"%' **rt wsr* mesh fe***u x* W *xw**& xr*la** x:Ww We{l*me&er *t x?z* Y&r%Z& W" sq u # re t* ot B a rk**g st ru*tu re zs,sb*xb h *s g_f"3Xp* l*effiA**_ee &&"q gffi"g*S, wx s**wrz *m *&" e&|& {s*m?$*res$ &w wx* *w*xwwx y*ww *Kxw&xxrx. *m pe#e 2 *f 'ths staff r*ry**?*'x* sqpeswr ffiq*t* *{wes are dese r*bw& &s "the seeund floar above the parking area" as the outdosr soceer fields and the arehiteetuxral plans, pg" h.L"Z, ielentity the "rxpper fEoor" as inef uding the *utdoor ssceer fields wrz* ww *m *xh*r**r m*w *yw*Kzlrw. ?hry arehrEteeturatr plams, pg" 43"2 , wy*W*%:** kk"%r *w&*, r***wwzg** $#freffir *****s, '*ww *wt***r *,*hku*6"&{*&% *rx* *wwx **wp***r *rw ** ** *r*xk** *r*zg*Z *€ Zfu* entir* vzww s&*tr&r €w*i**Xry *kru*ffi*r* w**& :*rz**tx&* y:Y** Lk.%r turst sY*ry ryr*rking structi*r* a** x.*x kX."%' ****m* €&**r *&*:*w%*& *****{ €ge$*x, {zw.w *a*t***r ru*KK**6 &{*&e w** *ww q*&,xzxwt*r" %***w t** swx*** t*r**r ****Y^r**kz*m wz&* *w*.*w* X*x ***6*K *€ Yfu* ***6l,r, s:kwry pwrkxrzT *tra;,*kz"xr*, Yfuw mro?9re yvww W{*W*ffw* **xxr,r €w*x*x@ **mry*wx^w**3 w**x*w* *ra* *Y*ry xw fu*ary;ht.. T**-r*€*rw, tfu* wy*w*&** rz*w ffiffi*q&y €;*x*$,*zg **mry\*w, fu* r:*ry*,xrw.*$ ?* ryv**kt*w r*qu*srr:ry2*w.Ys # WW Wr,a*vxxryw* X.*rz:arzw lltr,
esde Seet**n 353"*S*"S3S {&rb {,kb nequ*ring the prspe$*d r*etpx strue?ure t* have twice the requirqd reaf setback i.e" a twentv fqpt {ZS,} sethach, &s ' ffi.Qffi {&th*ck*} tker*f*re C*xu**t**n *C &*w W:rw** **M*xry ** F** 3 **nnct k* nn*da"
*X sbw.*f t*rl*,shqqt*Lr#Ans! k egr im *ttsLrk*s F*nd*r:*gw* F*sr aBptr$es t* c*mpt*anee *f the prsp*sed e*ceer ecmp**x *se l&,r*tk the &h*#rer. LS,*" n*t ja*st s*etior*
353"05s-0'2w tuse ftegulations)" Th*s mne&Rs th*t thens *re req*ir**tent* En tke X*n*n6 esde ehxpter that tlr$s appl*eat$an f*r a sse,eer e*rmplex faci**ty *s r*qr**red to nrxeet. $'**v*ever, this partlcaxlar app**eatisn d*es not rneet som'te *f tfres* requ*rer*€*t$ *nd {t ent}re}y *grt*res *t*ter requ*r*r*er*ts. Yhes* umaddressed requtrement$ pert*i* t* tl*e La*d Us*s $t*md*r*s xnd *ev*X*pnnent** $tamd*nds, sueh as:
F*nk*rtg r*g*.*irerxent$* f{m*se ftestr*ct***$# L$Ch#gkre restr*ct**n, [-*t csver*ge r*$tr$qt**ns xrtd $etbacir ft*q**reffreftts. Yh* pr*per*d pr*jeffi d*es n*k **rwrly xr*th the &.xldv**n Pxrk Mwn*e*B** fi*de r*gxrdlrrg Farking r*qu*r*r*erlt$, h&cise ftestr*rtts&$, L*ghtlg*are rmstriet**rxu tr-ct csvarege r*strlet**ns * nd ktb*ek &eq u$ re*vr*nts"
.f*fffi*mf g"fpx z " Xwq-.i#ffifn$srcL**ry&x: ?&rc **e w**t r**t ]mpx*r th* *nt*grity *nd chsr*cter sf the tr*** **wh**h *t *s tw be **eat*d. ?*re staff r*p*rt stetes; %he a*se wr**t n*t &rxpa*r the lxw**gr$vg a*m& ch*raeter *f tke x&me $r* w*l*eh *t *s t* be **catsd. ?*?e prrlpxrty xx *sex*ed rx**th*m th* *mdustr*al Xwrtwwh*e** a***ws far xses th*? pr*w$de a bncad rea#* *f retxi*" *f*ice, *n* senr*ee**r*er*?x* **wnrx*re**l Li$*s des*gmed t* m*et tlee ne*ds nf bruth* the **ea,* mw* res*dent*a& xyrd bqxs*rxess *&ry?t?*&*ffi*t$es" Swrthermer€* t&e use wi{& oeaupy eft ex*stlng *ar6e Wwi*|x*z*6t* fue re a*ned as pxrt af the *perxt**ns tkat is eurremtly wm*ant ww& w*x&& *wwl*wry th* adjaemmt pxrce* ws pxrk**r& *w tke firs? fi**r * *r'***r *f the a*m&.
S"psps_mre; &a,ffiryS*mX-gf Fffi&*mxxgE-k*ry megk eke* vtu xxw M*$ w***mry*x &a integrtty amd m*r*rxeter &*h* x**** *xr rx&kk & ** e ka &wmked *p tlxat- per S.4u*icipal Cod* Sectisn 353"S5*.S1G, there ar* f*we e*mffi&!'ci,a& **& *mdr"rstr*x* xmr*es ixr &*{dw&m P*r& *stab*&sked try meet the e*mffi?erce amd sery*ee meeds *f tke res*dent **td bus8ness c&ry! ffi?u r* it*es Wh:*e€**M,Wj?h g$fker*E ***$l q,ses- yf?e x&*?*$ are des*gned t* ee**rern*date dtfferent types amd *nter*sit*es a *srrlr**re*a* a*d ir*dwstrta& dewe**8rc*nt- Y&***&laffirie& N*rE€$ *n *rh**h rh* pr*jeet is prep*sed k* be **cxted* &m px&*e w**r prcv**e* xrecs f*r t?te deve**prce*t mf i*dr*s&r&es eergaged *rx gen*rwi asserurb*y, manufacturimg and pr*eess&m6 and suppmrt e*r&xy&&r**a* a*s*s" ?h* mf am *md**r /*utd*cr $&frcer e*nrp*ex fac***tv e$ prepesed. yhe prepe$€d use *s m*t e ffiee*re* xssmnrh*rgr wz*rz*;,factaxr*ng er pr*e*ss**6 ws#" $& a*s* *s n*t w *x**pry* xwwwwr*xay& wx€ sxx*k xs a Fed€x e*py St*n* *r #ff*ce &ep*? w*tlch* wre**d *€*wr * c&rffirylerc*a* seryia*. F*r wxwxwp|*x. cust*rmex"s mf e*:e adj*cemt ?*mbst*ft# ry&&ffiufxet*r*ng and sa*** x**** nc€ bm *r*pryl*wpt* xse *ke *m*rxbers *v$ s*fe*r fue***t*es **mp*ex" ?*te s*etr&r e*rr"rp*ex fa****tr6 wwx*&& n*t sen**ee tke **c** &redx,*str**& baxstmesses* &axt vw*ax*d he m *est*ma***re p**nt *r**y f*r s*ecen p*ay*1s"
&&s*, Kke pr*ryxed smeeen fae***ty x*mp|x*w,w*wwix** r**6xtBvexg &xwry#. xbc *wxw6ri*W *rzd ehxra*er. *f the *rx*wxkrlx** xane thn*x6&* **rcr*ased 4V
pwrk*rxgfpr the ex*st*rt6 *mde*stria|' *.x** *w*ry, ?hmrw *s n* *n*stneet pwr*"Qwgw&*ww** **.3*wrzbr**g* Street end mx iw*\ pwrWx*6x* pr*zsz*3** **r *xqfu syzdq-\**dwa* *ndustri'p,* bx:;**rzmss mre$y- T*:*re &{w uom* par***g" anc* rr*mpfi*ywe onfy p*rkxng" s[6ns pe$ted at a*m*st ev*ry bq.xs*ness *m 3**r*brxd6* stre*t. tffxfutbki? rh€ preps$ed sseeer' **mg***xw*x*** generxte a ?ar.6e *mf*s.*x *{ *xrs ar:* pw*p*e seara*,*rz6f*r an*s*t* p*rku'*g and s$nee Ik is n*Y pn*v**** *n*sfte, y:fu* **rzarx& €*r *n-stneex W*r*irzg w*$& mwenwhe*m thc very few *re-stre,wt p*rkrngatr€&s, x*$rxztrrxLrrag awai$*bf* p*nk*ng $*r tW* ex**??ng *redustn*** rxses xmd t*ryeir enxpi*yees and ewst&e?ars.
The *xtst*ng [ndrxstr&at busine$$es witrl a*sc be subjeet t* *nerexsed street trast'* f;eft by ttur- p*t:r*ns CIf the s*eeer esmplex {f;xh[bk e], *s wel* as *ner*ased m*ise *nd *nercased traffie generated by the prmp*sed s&cc&r e*mp*ex"
&*$ *€ thmse r"*egat*ve *mpaets sr*pp*r?,the fact th*t ??"Ya& the *se wi$$ *rxpwn th* inteFr;.ty *.rxd *ha,r,*eten pf the xene *rz wfun*fu *t *s tm he &*eated"
Yheref*x,e, the F*nding ryf F*ct X.: 3h* tssx wiil xz*t {wvpwir **zx irzt*grity xm* *?v*rw*t*r *$ *8t* x*w* ir* wki**u r* is f* be l*e***d" ?z&s *ra* been and *artno* be made.
fi'*n***m,g.f.f&glF*3 - Site Switabilitv: The si:bject site is p$:ysicaiEy suitable fon the type of land use being proposed"
?"he staff repr,rt states; 'Yhe sn*bject s*te is p?zysz****y x**rXaW*e f*r the Kype *€ *xnd u*se he*nW.rirr,W*sed. ?he *r'a*slte e*rery*xtiry* p*x* has been r*v$ew*d **& eqqrwwwd bV f;he *-*s #u*g***x *waxwKq F*r* **W*r{rcerut, x*vz€&,rrwiftS *s*yip*[anee wt*h w*€*Zry wrx* **,**ss*b**ity stxnd*rds" & q*;*&r€u** ?.r*ffs*" eng*ne*r a6s* wru*bugx** slte ae**ss am* rirx;uiaticri in th* {w3*6mrs*w& *xwruzqt:**m Wwryrr*, and c*r'*e*xded K?**r* w*xsi** ** n* sr6rzx*x*a *X tr w{$x* $wpw&. Y&* pr ry**K pr *w* d es SS * n- s*te pwr*l;r*g %,We{** - *xceed**6 the yw*wxw*w r*ry**rw*. WW tba Wax**xzpw* C*de * w**** €r.xrY*^wr sa*pp*rhs the s*t*us g;e"e*V.q**s&eZry €*r tbw ryr*p*sw* n*eneat{*roa{ use,"
W*xpwwxffi Xkg=ffi *&wsw*wwxxbgWxW***
pfurys*:xw*@ r*w.Wwbln* $wx &w" WW *: * w* *xww W*w*g grwry**w&.
T"** {affi xhe* tf:e *n-s{t* eireulatl*n plan has be*n r*vsxw*** w** ry*preirtr* *V Zfux *** &ng*ims **wrury F*re *e*reyxffierty" *.*w**rrws*g **mp\Z*ryee w*th saf*ty *** *x***xxful*1uxvry **a**ar*s d*es **Z rzwke the sit* sa*iqxb{e €*r th*. **w*&*pm**t *€ w XX,X%* *q,**wr* {**t.*****r ffa**?**xy a*wp&*x ssl "B Z&,2&& $qe..Eere f**6 &wK, -t*w,
Wr*1,w*s^wt** e*resist mf a
14,518 squa!'e foot eoncrete slab, eovering both the 3.441"2 & the L4424 -icanbg"icige Street Broperties, in additicn to ineorporating the existing 6,625 sqft. foetprint ef the rermaining existing building si'i L$LXZ ieanbs"ldge Sti"eet" This equais c lCIt e*verage *f E3%. The CIti, sg ffiaEdwin Park ivlunieipal zanEng eode seetion i50.ssG.030 l'ras eieterntinied t[rat SSy; iot covenage 6s suitabEe for an in"rdustniai s[te.
Therefone, the ovensEzed soecer facility eornplex !s not physical!y su{table for the proposed projeet slte"
**x,*g*x* wst* xd*,t4xxwte *ro-s*te *sr**&wts*,r2. Yfu* r,r*fu*x.mWrxw **** f:*r*.** t* us* *ru*y *ykw*wev kr*?fsr" *wr:z,e*wt**rtr'w*z*fu is *.**€ts*.x*6 **,* *a.rz6*r*q*s. ??r* s*te iru s* xmw*& Y*w:*.y** wpp**xax'rtxfueisT x**rt*d t* **x*Y\rzgz.7z* rr*qx*sr*q3 Y*r* *e:pwrkwrrr?, &**.*w* r*ryZw w*& pr*rk*rzg r*rxe *zrw**y *rz t** *xxt. *wwz*"Y*xs **ng* w*&* &*w* Z* **ry€s:;s**ut w** *&**k** r*z.aY*s *€ *-wzK {*r wwg*m* *,w z** *l*tw *rz ** e&$# *€ aw *wwyg,emx4- &"?r;r*,u\* xxsb.$e,c? r$€e e* rzr*Z pfurgxxxex*&g s***Y **&* €*r *** pr*p*s** #**,**{ {*q.i$llry **rvzw&r*x l*r:# r;st he*a ra*w w*z&*'t?zw *xzsY:xm6$rz**r,tr**1?*z*e**x*6r, src the s**hjeet pr*perty werffi b**tt.w*:*tfu a 4&- f**t amd * S& f**t ''e&r War* se*baek tm prmteat thc a*]-w**rzZ resldecttian h*rxtes fr*rw detr*menta* hea*r:* *wd xa€el*ry n*sks pe:r Wx**ieipxl X**xrzge*dry seet**r':
x5&"*%*"*effiqeb{Xb x** ?ah$e 3"53"#5*"*3#, ?,** pr*ry*s** szrze*, ,zsr* wiZZ l*rge ertaugh ts build the *utsized prsp*s*d s*eeer *-**':ptex withaut it. ?his x*ning cade dev*at**rztr*w th* reqaxired 2&f**t minimur'*t i*iustnxte* w?zy tbxN pr*ry*sa* *s nct tr*hys*eai*y sr*itable f*r the sixfu$ext pr*per*ry.
Yhe pr*p*se[ to e*nstruet the 3S-?*m&*ta*$, Xk,Zgg d*sq*are f*cxt elewated s*eeer eomplex fae*l*@ w**?z 4 *utd**r sscfi&r p**ry*lzgfie*ds rq*av*n& fields *n the see*r*d t***r, t* r*rlth*n ,1&Jgqt *f the it*mes *f ?h*r*fur*r *hw 8*r***s*6 w€ F*x* *t Yfu*. subieet sit* is phys**w&*y su*tabie f*r the xv:r,* sf ia*d a*se be$m g *y*w*s*d" has not b*erx and cxnmpt b* wad&,
fr tr inx" gf frXS3_ *; ffiXm&* nX "Cp.mr,mp-qffi LtfX: Th e u se * s **wpa*xh I e w i{ h any iand uses present{y *ffi the saxbjeet prmperty"
The staff r*p**. states: '?he **se *s **r"*pat{btrm w*t*r any *end #s*$ px**xmt*V *{u the subi*a& pr*ptrrty" Y&te b*x*$**utgs *m ?he sxb}ee* s*te an* eurrentlty varant" Neighb*nir*g {,*sa$ tne[ude a he*dst&r]e ffin&ne*fiaet*rer, *r,;k*b*dy' shoBs, and an r,irnrafi' px*x man*fae&Lrtr€ru m*st *stwsfui*h *pe*:ate **win6 we*kdmys and ?yp*eaF bus{r:ess hsrxt s" ?he pr*p***& recreatEe*ma* fa#itty &s *nt***pat** z* irave peak usffi &n evmn*ngx and wree*qer*ds, rxirtlra,"x'rzp*rzg ***€&xffi***& ensxxrircg x*rvepa*t*fux1x*Xy *rt€fu t&tese exist$n6 inc*xs?n*a* *p*ra?l*tr?$."
&*xpwrz*e : 3&'g_flLg}([&&_M" fX f3" &.*9" f*& "&Se*".ffi#*e Xtuwt. th* 6xr ryect *.* $#, a %*****,*r €**** $&fieer €**r*tbtg x*rvzp*.*N pr*j**K, wl*t* & *&*zx*y.wd *x*K&**r 50 s&€fr&r fie*ds x*d *ne *ns*de s&€e*r f*a*d, *s e*mpatBb*e w*tk any l**d #s* pre$*wkIxry *s? the s*hjeet pr*pwffi:y" fltxnemkWr *rl* cf Ahe *ndustr*a* hax**d*n6s is be*&g axsed es & s&&cer tnx*m*mryr*xhww|"r w**&*x;t x tlty *f Ww*&wsm Pwrk ba*s*ness $*mense" V*w€i*m&x*g *x& r*s& *&sesxss tk&s *wwd. w** ryrw*wm*&W ee t?te s*bie,r$., pr*peffi" Yhe f*nd*ng d&seussed tke *dlaesrt& pr*p*@ ex$€. &w ***&el***, t*r* *pp*&exn**x pr*rysi*rz6** r**rxse the w*kh *Xs *r$g*w***5r d*stgxel& l*m*z;;*krr-x& rxs*.
&**we.x*r* regmn*&m6 tke sksff rep*rt fi*s?tffi*ffi&s k?aat the pncp*sed x-e*x"e at & * mw$ l*xz**wr $ * a****& r sstr&e x * ;***@ **w*W&*x prwr*i;*,ws w x*wp&*uwe*?*ry sarv&*e tm aust*ry*ers tk*t are w*s&tr*xzgh*x *xist*r*6 &rz*qlxtr',w* *re*; & $&€effin **uwp*ww &e&&{@ hxs r**th$xxg k* *ff*r th* msis?*rxlers *f t*re adlaeent t*mhs&*&e ry?&u?{,ifxeturer fs**wx hrxs*resss en the west s*de ww& *W**wgi;rz **wwww wxkfu ?&c adja**xt? *nd ex*st*mg aaxt* W*&y n*px*r aw* *xg*k w****w&z;;ri*uzg baxs*messes &*r the east s**e" Y*x pr*p*s*s* $&*c&r **rv*p*ex €ex**&&ry w*&& *w&g ??e&e.rr?*e*y affe*t the sunrmund*ng bus$n*ss&$ wr*t&t the &nene*ruxdhrwffic* *r**se, tigf?t&*ar* *md an*sh 6e**rwte* fuW Zfu* pr*p*s*d *s*.
**rrs&den*rx6fu*w memq wther *ees*:*w**s wx&* be *m kfuw ryw er ffi**??r?ffi Yw*ffi&- Yh*s wr'*zx|x* g*nerate at *e*s* *rz **k*w*X*& Wvx***X*mk*XW* s*te, w&* x*wpwkt*r*6€*r kfuw wzi*w*wwl*&Y* p*rki;*6$peffi*s €**e app*&ea*t *s pa,rk*m6 sffiec#$.
51 ?lrer*fo rx r *kw #***d*r*g ** # *x* $epx Y** a-rsry ?s c* rn pxt{b *m'xr*th x ny Sa n d ilses prmsent*y *fi the subleet pn*pe*,ty" bxr wwt b*exzwux& *wrsw**bw w**&-
ffgn meq.f .ff*gt_&:f#$Xfg kre.ffi*.lKfikx=T** ts** wxi-* bx **wpahxb&* with ex*sting an<* fr*ture Sand *s*s w*Z*xrz the u*ne and t*"ee genenai &re& in wh*e.h th* pr*p*sed r*se is t* be **eatcd.
Yhe stxff r*pot't states: "The use wri** be **rxpxt*hie w*th ex*xtir:g xnd fa*taxre ***d *ses withtn the x*ne and th* g*nena* #r'ffi& *vt whle h ?ht* prepss*d *,*se *s t* he I*ea*ed" -Ihc use *f t** pr*pa{ty &$ a r€cr:*at**rra{ *vtdustr-ia$ x**re and the g*ner** &r*:& ivr wh*eh the pr*p*sed axse is tm be $sexted" ffiesxuse tl.ve rsereatiar:a* use pn*x"nartly *cfie*r$ de*n*ng fl?&r'!- btxslness hoa"rns, *t wiil not g*nerate rx**se *r'*raf?*e {nc*xrpa?ib*e with exlstin6 mr f*xture lnd*stnial *perxt$*fts" Frxture L*$&s w-XYz p*te*tia* imparts typiealirir requ*re appro\ra* ef a {,*w*iHi*na{ t"}s* ?*rratt a*d ?herefsre wm*ld he before the ?€*w*x-zge*mm*ss$cn f*n eansEderat**n *f the e*xmula?ive impaets f*r' the are*""
Resp*nse; th* Finding of F*et has n*t beeqs n:xde thx? th* usse w*lt be ecr:npatibfe wi?h existing ane* future ?and $$*$ writhin the zmmm *xsrd rks ger,,*r*{ #{** }n wrhirh th* pn*pcs*d a*se is t* be fry**ted" Yhe pr*pmsed $&fieer **mplex fx***ity q.$se *s s?*t **r& p*Xx*** wqY* ?fu* *xist{ng *x'rdrxs?n*** us*s in the [a"*dixstr*a& x*mx bee**"*se *f {kze ir.raneased nega*iwe mm$se amd parkx*g*mpa,ets as pr*zz***xx?y disa*ssed a*rcd*r F*nd*ngs mf Faet 3
f\& * re x mpwrZwuzt*y, ?fuw pr *p*sed **ryzrw*.r *xwt W**r *rit** rz s*{ e*r cmmp*ex *s .p[ AqmSp#.i'klq *zxrr*mh*vg wxKfu the ex*s?uu6 wrz* t**Lwrx &am* t,*sft$ *r"* the g*romna* &y*& because hc Xgffig{Sl*ry,fffie,gpg_*ffi**g,qgp_gxi.$$i*ffi # & rye *h"cssKeft fr p i
" h,ffi #s "
52 ?&e megat*ve *rcpaets sS the m**s& *l;pfug,$ g*ane, trash *nd tnaffidpark*mg pn*b&*ms xss*c*ated wtt?t the pr*p*sed s*e*er fa*8&3@ eamplex u*i$i be ffiwert vy*wy* detr&menta* t* tke *djxxr;** res*der*tia& &wr*es" Fx.xrtheFm&tr** ffi&w€r be e*ms*dered **xwpat*fo{e w*th the res&der:?*** x&&e 6*rtex'** &trffi&F &v,er'E
.xxz
zfu* frxture* hased ** the fac8 XWek * ficrnmereial Recr*at**m** wxhbe*e:;t a frsndit}*n** &*** Ferrx?*Zr W*z tk* fi*ey *$ *w&*w*m S*rk ffiexerx* F*sn arrd ftltu*i*ipx* X*n*r*6 S*de Y&&L€ 353.*4* "*XWr &t**x**ab** &es*dent*a* Us*s
Yk*r*f*reu tk* F*rld*r6 **#** {S}x %ke us* wi** be crurvxpxt$b}e w!t?t exlst&rtg and fe.tture *xnd u$e$ w*tfo*m the aane xnd &he 6enera* area **t t*sh*e*.t tke pr*p**ed axse *s 3* he **cxted h*s r**t kx*n wxxdx x*rd c*mxat hg xtr*d*-
F*x#mr *,f f*eS: a&*&k* eqd kmrqe.s. &d*quate pr*v*s&mns tur w&teru sewrer an* ry*b**e utB*&t*es and serrr*ees are *v*i&ak*m t* erusaxr* that the *xse xr*** *st b* &*kr*we*?te* tm pixk**c ke**&h xnd sx{et:y. ?he xtaff repwrt states; *&,**ql'*ake praw*s*sms fur wxter* sevxer amd pwb**e a*t*&*t[es and serw**e$ &re ava&**h*e try emsure th*t tk* use v**$* n*t he detn*memta* t* pub*** hes*th amd s*fcmy" ?*rc exlnt*mg *md*str*x* ku*3d*n6 pr*vldes a*$ e*t***t*es a*d sery*ees ccnrxeeted *md therefmre th* prepe$e& rq*r;rwa;t**n** fact**W w*** m*q ke detrlnaemta*t* pa*h&** ke**tfr amd s*f*ty.*
&esp*mse: Yhe F*nd*rxg *f Fxet hxs at*& be*m mwd,* *hat xdeqaxate arxd saf*ty.
53 The suhjeet pn*pertlr *>€ Ykz* pr&pesed sse*en x*mp**x is biseete.* *zg mx*t*ple $wr6w pswer **nes w*th Xra,*st*{iy}e?.$ as w*ef* *s *th*r ;"*t}&}ty ***tes" Yhese *&i&ity straxe&*xre$ &rffi &peated dlreetly where t*:* app**e*rtt *s pr*pwx**g?* x**str,**t.X** *&*w*t** ****rek* strr**Yx*re *$ # €*t*rz**tixrt for the f*wr {ep *utd**n, raised $ese€*" e*mp*ex faei{ity f**lds. ?hene are is rt* diseussicrt i* ?he staff r*p*r?. th*t ?h* xpplicant h*s ffingine*nirtg *epartment regardlng the {easlb*e rel*eeti*n and urrdengr**rrding as psr *ai*ws*, WarkWw***xpa{ e*de
k53"ke*.&$* {*} {llrdergr"*wxzd x*ti*i*i,*s"'?o pr*tmch parb{ie saf*ty xr:d be requlned t* install all ele*triqa* d*str*butlcn *Bnes *f 3.6 k*l*volts *n eust*n'ler serviees undergr*urrd"* Yhere &re r** sp*e*fic fi*nditisns *f &,ppr*va* in*luded within e*r:d*timna& L.Ise Permit &esp*uti*n whiel'l *tave hea.r'x saxbrylltt*d regarding t?"ee rei*aatEwm *r reqa;*rerj u*'xdergr**nding mf th*ses ex*s?in6 utilittes"
** a*dit*mn- the pe,rblic sarviees ffi Yh* P*[*ee **partrx*ent, Fire *epartrveent and the e*de Enf*rear*mett *epartmem? xxi** he negat*ve*y' impar?e d *V the *perxti*n ryf tfte pr*pesmd s*ee*r. e*mpiex fa*i{{ty" *rrereased servia* ea$*s t* the P**$ee w** *w* ar"ld C*de fiatfmncervtent *epartrx&nt$ fr*rw t*'*e pr*:p*see* $&ecer c*mp*eN w*u** **'r*r**se t*'re re$psns* time mf these **6*$s*ry Wxa']ltt* x*d safety serviee*" T'hmre are r?& speaifie f;*mdit**ws.& &ppr*v** subm&tt**W {ke P*&xee esrytffi&&t *r"l the prmp*swd $sefr**1a*mplex fae***ty" T?axr*fwre, these ent*ties have rrmt hee* ab*e t* s*s*w*t x*rz&th*mms *t wpprmwa* t* *ft$txr# 54 tkat the prmp*sed $&cfler ecmp&ex r*r$** m*? be detnimental t* pubt*e health *nd safety.
Yheref*reu the F*nd*m6 ryf F*ffi S: *&deqexxt* pr*vis**ns f*r water, $er*rer ww* prrl,fulglxr. wt**itles amd serw**#$ &rc wusei***W&x t* ercsure ahet the *se w*8$ m*t &e detr*rffieffite& t* paxb**e kea*tk amd safeff hax ns? ba*rx snd eanrx*t he mxde"
&cses$ ane awai&ab*e tm serw the exse"
The staff repart states: "'Adequate pravisions f*r public aceess are at*x**a&&e t* senre th* r*s*. Yke s*te kas d*rec* ve?'xica*xr and pedestr*an &eeess t* 3sa*bridge Street, whieh *s a **ea* r**&n fuwt *s a&s* pr*x*nnate t* Mx*m &wen*e wh*ek *s des*6nat*d *s ex? m**e*mr stneet &n the e*y's pr*v$d* WwVb pedestr*an* amd p€ree*s w*kfu d*sab***t*es w*th e*rtw*n*ent &*fless ts €&* s*te and pr*wid* a€€ess for reeet*r ve?"*$r*es" The s*te*s ffifr*es$ *m stre*tp a;wd* &llg*zw*Vs *re **eq*xa€* ew wl**Zfu mred p*trereemt t:*W*kw x**rw the qtxxmtltry *f Zrwffixg*nenate*br1 th* prmp*ses r*arm*t**ma* f*ei **ty" *
ffi*sp*r*se: ?*xe Yrmd;*rz6$ p.w# &as r*st beerc ww&*&hat the pr*jeet w*t;,|,& prwwd,* adequa?e pexk&*c &cc&ss *wr Zfuw rrywryw#wd S s*aeen f*s$d s&frs€r r*mpi*x prmj*ffi, w*tk & mtewatmd **?d*mr s**tr#r ffi*i1**s amd *me tns*de s&&e&r f*e*d.
?he pr*pcs** $&&s*r cwr*p&ex **x*&*@ d**s ffiwK wewwz*h* reqax*rements *f t&te &x**yq*rt Pa&M_*r&**WA{&wde &g*.*"$&#-S t*x&**?t *s r* *8&51*18 t&et **& &*rzd u$es $n the c*@ pr*w&de adeqw*&e *ff*street park*r*g *arud **es r**t mdvers*&V &mt*r'fer* w&Vfut** xl*r*x*&wt*sm *m paxb**c r*ghts- *ss*es; arxd that sexrr**ndlng uses are {*st-*&at*d t**rrv r"l*ise and traffia *mpeets assseiated wikh *ff-s?reet w*rkxn& aa:d *sad**:g metiv*t*ms"" Th* app&*eant xx p.r*p*sln6 t* r"xse x sir"xg*e **6ness *r*:** *is*e *rtd w sing*e *xit *rxve a*sle, sxe,*K* *n$y ffi*ry-way ?rxffie cirextra*i*rz, v*,sfuxx* xs **rz€t*s*ng xr*d *arvffisrsL*s" Th* pr*p*sed pt*b&** &ce&ss *r:gness am* *grwss &re $nadeqaaate end damgenmusiy deslgned, dqie t* th* smal'* s*x.* *'f the subject pr*pe*y ayrd due ?* tlr* faet that Y*e Wr*Sect is pr*pes*ng &* rmduc*r"rg the reqw srel& Xwwn?y-f*mt {X*', r&&r n;ar* setbxck try a ten-f**t naar yend setback and t*te pr*ject *s pr*pas**gt* e*ver *e% *f the industria* *nstead *f being b,e?aw the neq***red 5*% **t e*vene&#" ?h{s wriff *ead t* the oven*deqr***pmwwf of the ex*sting lndustrixl paree* by th* proposed soccer compiex fxei*ity"
En *dditi*R, ag**n due ?* t$:e srnalf [*t sixe and prop*sed sver* developmeRt, the *ppl*sant *s praposing t* plaee the neqa,**r*d F*re *eBartment pxrking lane and *eeess route dlneetly within the exit *ane" T!'r[s w*w&d *e*d t* great x*rs{x*s***. ;*m* h**eked r*axtes *f exit f*r *nyeee sn the site in the aase *f an ernergefiey"
?he app*ie*tion €*r ?fux Brsp&sed 5 soccen fie{d ssfl#*r e*mp{ex pr*i*et- with & elevated *utd**r $sceen fi*f*s and *ne inside $#c{*r f*e*d hxs not been su*hm*tted t* ?hm €ng*neening *ep*rtrvle.r.*.€*r ?*re*r rcview mr approv*["
Yhm *m*u*t *f pr-sp#s*d park*nffi spe{s$ d*es **t rmeet the *w**wsxr* Park W**x**p**X*m*wg**d* neqa,x*r*ments t*r w fr*mmmre{a* Rec neat * *rz** {",*se perl&& &"tr-&&&3M ffi U f*kp {: *t prep*s.ed n*w, s*€fler c*mp&*x, h*wev*r k%k pwrkxrsg $pefitr$ er* nequ*red pen e*dm"
56 fl*ns{der*nffi t*"xe **w wxx**x*Z ** ryn*s*te rywrWz 6 prepe$s* *y Z*** wryp*x**mt, *&* sffiecffi*: **mp*ex €w*x&*Yy *w*k*w*rw *w*:ki**g parkinffi $pee*$ wt"t?zw ffir*pssffi* **w $#6frer **Nv*ry&*ww*z*&* xpl*|*& **t:* 3*w**r*dg* $t" *red the *$mxe'wk r*s$dent w* skywxh* ry€ W.a;iwq* &taqgxzx** w*& {**zf*rr]*,,a kwwmux* seeking n***ex*s*emt s*neeN ry*N:x*6, *w.zss:**g*rw€$&*fu&*x* g* ** Wwzrz* &,2**w**r ** 3*a*%n$*g* $€. artd *w*s$*r*xw &,w*mqe*u *** r***l,xzrzg puhlie #nsss,t tm the resicien"e es *** x'*&ze*xr*gW***&x* &fifr*$s t* t?:e i"l"re *driitiur:ai high traffie v*iuinc gen*rai*d by tne pr*Bc'secj ssceei' &wm*.s *reh* 3*;*rrybr**ge St. a'w* *w&x€wrmxw &wwwt*w fn*m Wwsw*,&v&nue, wwd ?**. night { *ett tz*rm $ames €r*ry* &*wxz*r**6e S?reet, fia**f*rrxix &rrenexe ;**z* *ww':' &a**z*rnrz &xswwir,*u **** W**x* &w*rz***
T'h* r-esidentiai er**$ *r* *&a$rt*. &w**wxr *w&.*€*r**w W***** *** W*x*werz &wwrzwe w*u*d be *spe*x**&y ru*glate*x*&zg :'wpg,rs.**" T**.fa*t that **d z* *** trwffic e*ngms?{*& mrt* e*n€x****w &$ sefr**r. p*xyers and ** '***.xx*r.trzr uxz t**tr Tra*w*rug $ess**** *wxsam**x, K*q* wpplu**;*ml zs pr*p*strxgx* *p*rate {W X-fu*wr **wsy;elx ry*r *wy, %r]t'/&yk \Vb *wvx m w*ek- p*xyxrx, w** & staff w*m*wr% Wwy' *wy " &&**, Z*w ru**xwr €\r";&*s wrw *ws*6*** **r %zt% **q{.w{ W*aV **r m wwwwrwz*w M k* *xx****sfk:wwrc ry:mw**r$ #n mms&t ffiw',* w*Z?z wrz **skr*ffi*rfr&wrry,w"T*wk w**xs\* ** *m w**s*x*ww$ %% p**,p*w w*r ffie,1** w*wrz prw**w*k*& wfu*m ry*w *** *rz- ***W,*r'*, €wrm**V w*.w.fuwr* ww* Y w*x z**wxtx*W€*r tk*xl*r Kxryz* *rz Zbw €:***& x* this arn* *amY ry€ pwr*m'&lr** mttmndee * K* tfu* wy*w*&w* *w*x*r fme llity *wmry&*:< V*\e *ww** 6*z mw*fu m*{* Z*** Kfu* wss**.**rz* *€. W*W&* aZ Z** €-**,z*ztV t"*zwr: r"*&xx*&'*t** *V Y** wpp&.y***K, w&* Xrryirzg?* pw. W". ** Z** [:.;
prepss€t* 39 parkir"xg spe6es" Yft*s *t*ge am*ur*t *f sxrs/s&frcer p*r*ywr* seekixtg pwrk,,wg &s cmnfa*s*w6 wwd- *w.xugwrr*rxs ?* eny*me wh* w****** want t* park at"Zhx $sec€r ammp$ex €r,r;t**ty *md, w*xld *"edx*e * pw*t** eeeess tm Yhe trcff*e generated by a s[rxltar type *f soee*r emmpiex fae*lity in e*vina [s the S*F*VE e&r"u?rxerc*at s*eeer e*mp*ex Io*ate* at 69S S. &*Er*nqa &v*na*e, **v$*x {.wwsdpwqqwne- qffi} $s a e*ear r*w*vvzpln* *€ the neg*t*ve *ffeets a $*€e*r cmmptex witf have *r* exist*arg bexs*n*ss.€s and res*dev*tla* &y*&*" ffix*st*rng ba*s*messes and reelderetl,a." rzwxt.t* khe h*eek*n6 thelr ras*dent$at strmets w** *l*ck*ng the$r e*mrxrerc*a* hu**ness p*rkir*g **t esttnar?*&s w**kfu *n* S*FtrVE s*eeer p*r$ein#r ****rdex. t* p*'eserve t?"re$r ww* res*dentia& a*d esrylmer{ia* p*rklnffi spece$. e*mpta*nts t* ??*e e*v*na P**ice and Code *rtforeerxent *'*awe **cr**sed at tlt*s e*lytma **c*t*srt.
Theref*re, the **md*m6sf Fx* {v}: *&d*qxate pr*vlsl*ns f*r px'xh&{e aesess r*r* *w*-t*b*e te serve the ussu' has n*t been and e*mn*t he made-
Yhe axse *s **nr*s?*ret w*KW
the &er'*e*'at Flan.
Yhe st*ff *tzp*r[" stat*s: 'Yhe *se *s e*ns*ste**w*t* tfoe &errerx& P&wn" ***& *se &ox*?"& *a*avx*** *ev*f*pr*en? t* ****w*r: *ark" &*{a*nta** a ba*anced mlx and d*str*butiq*n *f *wxx* r,r$&$ thr**6*r*a*? *a**w:xrx ?ar*t^. **w& Us* P*&**ry k^&, er*ate *ppw*z*r**t*es. f*r Yw* **€t*r*rx* *w**** # e**?mer**at deweB*prw*nt; {*"} c*rxm*nc*a* *xs€& that rzteet th* retx}t and 58 rag**rxet*serw&ng retmt* fr&ffi r&&re&a* b*sines$e$ thrat eaBture revenues fnmryr a hraader pwp*x&wt&*m hase.*
&*sp*nse: 3?*e staff rep*vt s ats* ?hat th* pr*p*s*d 25' tal[, 23.,299 sqft. sCIceer faciNity eormplex is consistent with Land tise Goal 1.0 fon ba !a nced development. Negatively irrrpacting the existing residential deveiopment by inserting a new, non-compatible recreation use adjacent to t[:at exlsting residentlal developnrent is not balanced. lt only benefits the property owner by increasing the value of his property at the expense of the existing resldEntia! property s*n*r. A [lcensed, experienced arrd independent land assessor has testified that the approva! of the proposed soceer faeitity eomplex, abutting the existing homes will devalue the nesidential properties by approximately LAa/o.
DiscussEons with the LA County Assesson's Office also support this claim.{Exhiblt H} Therefore, the pnoposed project ls not eonsistent r,vith Land Use Goal 1"S fol' balanced developmer:t
T*te staf$ nepurt states ehas tke pr*p*sed 25'teiE, 23.,2S* sqit" ssccer facillty complex is consistent with tand [,tse Policy i"4 to ereate local and negiona! retai[ and service uses. Limfortunately, the proposed soeeer facility eornplex wlll not ereate local and regional retail and seruice uses. The projeet site is current|y being operated as a non- profit husiness soccer training school which does not generate any retaif; re\renue and there has been no indieation that the business rnodel will change"
*r* e*ntras& the prop*s*d 25' tall, 23",23S sqft. sCIccer faciiity eomplex rs not eonsistent with the City of Baldwin Fank General Plan Goal and Folicies as follows:
Land [-lse Goal 2"0 - eormpatibie Development Standards. The proposed size of the new 23,,2gg square foot ssccer facility and the location sf the 25' ta!!, eHevated outdoor soeeer fieHds, located withEn 10' of exlsting 59 residential properties, is not compatible with existing adjacent single- story, single-farnity residential development directly abutting the project site nor is it compatible with the mostly single-story industrial developn'lent
Land lJse Folicy 2.5 - Land Use lntensity/Density" The proposed size of the new 2L,299 square foot soccer facility and the location sf the 25'tall, elevated outdoor soccer fields, located within L0' of existing residential properties will cause negative impacts on the adjacent nesidential and industrial properties regardlng noise, inadequate parking, llght and glare, pnivacy, differences in scale and visual incompatibility, as detailed above. l-and Use Policy 2"6 - Lighting on CommerciaUlndustrial Properties. The proposed size of the new 2L,299 square foot soceer facility and the location of the 25' tall, elevated outdoor soccer fields, located within L0' of existing residential properties will cause negative impacts on the adjacent residential properties due to the use of the outdoor soccer sports flood lights for the elevated outdosr soccer fields" The submitted lighting plan (Exhibit E) clearly shows the new soccer fields will generate the prohibited light spillover"
Land Use Policy 7"4 - Adequate Parking. The design and proposed size of the new 2L,299 square foot soccer facility and the location of the 25' tall, elevated outdoor soccer fields, covering 22,A67 square feet of the 26,244 sqft. lot (84% Iot coverage) will not leave enough room for the required number of on-site parking spaces and will not provide adequate on-site parking for customers" lnadequate parking will cause patrons of the new soccer facility to park on private property on Joanbridge St", where street parking is prohihited, and to spill over into the adjaeent residential neighborhood streets, where street parking is already severely limited.
60 Land Use l\oise Eiement hiE12 - Based on the applicants submitted Noise Studies {Exhibit E} the proposed pnojeet wil! produee noise levels above the allowed decibels allowed 6n residentiat properties.
Shene$mrwu Xfur" Wxm**m6 *€ swrP". ffi: %"he *se *s e*xrys*sterxt w&?h tke &ener** W&*w fuarxe m*t kee* w*u* mrxrl*e.M madm.
ff r *S Wg_e{&.*-S *,$ekry*e"*&}&A$Ary Y W q* wsw w x** *& ** **krtim* r'} qe * t* th* pub*** *nteresk* *wwlx%fur sw€*@r c*rtqrcrt*cffice #r we*f*re.
Yh* stxff repmrt statesr "Th€ use w!l$ nct be detrir*emtafl to the publlc Enterest, l:eaith, safety eonvenienee CIr weiiare irr that the reereaiiona! faeility {inrdoor/outdoor soccer fieid} wiii be deve[oped in accordanee with ali the development standards of the zone and will operate in substantial eonfornnanfe to all eondrtions of approva! as identified in the nesolution of approval" The aetive reereational use promotes healti:y lEfestyles for the eEty's youth, which ls support of their generaE *^r^!{o*o /fvvEttei E.
ffimsp**se: The Flnd$ng *ff W*ffi s*rsn*t fue rcade t*sat the axse wi*t n*t bm detr*memta$ t* t&e pwh**c {mtenmss"rfuww1*Yk- safety, c*mvsrx*ene& *r wxe*f*re"
?he pr*p*s*d s#efr*r €*xrr,x@ es presffimted w*** Xg[ t* meet e** *f the deve**pr&&&t standmds *f thw x*ww w*r wx** &? me*t **$ *f the mperet*mreat stercdards *f ?ke x*w&* wx xfu*wm *w Kfuw Y*b*e M**w. & Yhm &ewe&mprw*mt Wwrt*wrd*ffwr Kfue yw&{ ywr& se?bamk *w w k*-€wY setback; k*z* wpp**e**t w*mts t* Wq;,r,*& * b*-€wffi setk*ck" & ?he &*ve,*pw*:vzb$,Xa,sx*w*& v*€*r * %W w*w*ws*m|**tcev€re&*; Xk* wpp***m*t wax'xts ** c*ver WeW *€ t&e &*Kw*X* th* pr*p*s*d deveicprnent.
@ Yhe aryxwwxvY *€ pwrV,xxzg r<*ql";,r;re:& *rg K*x **:*r*&*pww*Y.%Y*xv&*r** xs k%Z pwrktwp *pa,xes; th* wpryf,x*wmk *w pr*p*n**6&* prark*effi $pffiffie$" 61 & There *s ** **':*str*eX park*rug *wwziu*Wlw *n Jrym*:bridffie $tr**t. ltr:y ar&& b**ween the nm&*ed caxrh *n "f*anhridg* S?*"*et *rv* t?t* exlst*ng indq,estria1t bwit****gs be**rt g Y* {** t z*x:*l'*zsxlr pr*p*r3.i*x *rz* arr' mat ava**afu** $*r pxs?x*** parW:*mg"
Yhe pr*p*sed s*frf;er tx*s{i,kV *$ ffires*rxtee* w*8* *rffi {m meet *&& *€ t** Spe*"*ti*na$ Selref*Bment Standards *€ ?he x*ree:
* The Sperati*n*{ $?andar* t*r ****w*& arty $tl*}s* *rz * res*den?ia$ z*n€ is that it rx"sr*pt bm rneaswr** in dBA at the pr*penty E$ne of tite receptor property a*":d where a b**,**dary *r wa|'* ex*sts, the rme&$urernem? s?zw|** be rx'xad* sn th* reeeptcr prsp*rty " *rz X*Es fla$e, the reeept*r pr*pert*&s ere tltcse res*d*nt*a* p*'mpeffiles **eated directly s*rxth *f t?'*e prepe$ed pr*jeet s*te's re&r pr*'prl*y *ine" The a*lowe.* deeibe* *ryi*unt fmr x r*siderct*** x*ne *s 5$ *We d*y and 5* d&& ev*n*ng; the prsp*se,d s*ee*r e*rnp*ex pr*jeet *v*qx*d produee SA"8 *med,aug ***7&"& dB& even*n6"
& Ybe pr*p*sed $s(eer e*rnpiex fxe$*i?y dc,es nst meet the *"equlremer:ts *f the *w?*wiry **rk &*axn*e*pa* e*de 953"35* " Y* \Mhieh *ne *m pn*vid* a*mqx*tm *ff-str*e? pank{ng f*aitities, ?*ad$mg &re&s xnd vehia*e m*vement *r*&s; th*t thm axxe *{ $and d**s rt*t advense*y *ntedere wit*r the nircxtati*n *n pexbtia n{6hts-c>f-way" EF ft*q*irad **w***prwww*
$tandxr*
? x*p***d $**c*r **x:x pt*x
Setbaeks _ _ 2* f*. near Wfd,
i*tS* e-age atB#w*d 5*%_ __
F*rk*ng rxqt;'xred 2%2. pwrWwvg
<N1zr.3(glsvukr
N* $trae Wrrbarvry w:***&**&*
@YQf=-rrryrsq$
r*W**** L*K x,*w*r*Wx }eY._
Wr*p*x*d F*rklng; $p*e*s &W
,-*--*d Str--? P*tki-g --t
w**r*sse,*
WW **qwi;vw& * pwrwZ*www*
*&mw*ar**
%% *we€**Vk
ffiW *ee{mve**
:X&"& &We {evex*x#}
W"W *&&{*wsr**
{*gfu;& wm& ffiZwrw ffi*ffiw *Z&*wM W*ffi*wffi{e* r&*x&V sk*ws *.k$d:
&rzxr wxxx* W* r * { Wr wwx*xx fr x * $s
w*Y. w&*r*sxe,*
---l l
lnrree<*rd Drrriirp {**iie nnf
w**r*ssa*
lr: addition, the staff report states in the fEnding of facts above, the ree neatle nal faeility {indo*r /outdoos'soeeer tield! wEll operate in substantial confCIrmanee to all eonditions of approval as ldentified in the resolution of approval" F{owever, regardiffig the Condit[aris of AporCI.,,6p!, Conditions of Approvai Fe 23-28 is woefui!y incornplete.
There are multiple instaffiees il!usti'ated the prevlous r"eport seetions, "*o'Etene the staff i'epcrt has said that a speelfEe eonditicn of approvaE is Esl the ccnditions of apBa"eva[, bnt t["re ccneliti*m was $eft out.
Furthen, if the proposal wilE "operate in substantial confonmance to aEl eonditions of approval as identified in the resolution of apprCIval", as stated in the staff report above, then beeause of the ambiguous and rm[srir.rtai numben of Conditions of ApprovaB in Resolution Pe 23-28 the findir:g eannot be made that the xse w*&* **zW* *el?;rxme,mLr;&x*th* FF-1F*-*-*'- S*Ai*;
63 /.
/ t. i
i ,-ll?
7U
Exhibit R
Rockwool Acoustic Material Research
EnocKuroor
Version No: 2. t
lssued: 1An5/2022
Su persedes: 1 A / 05/ 2A?2
Safe Use lnstruction Sheet
This Safe Use lnstruction Sheet (5U15) is provided vcluntarily for manufactured articlet, which are neither regulated by OSHA Hazard Cornrnunication Standard, 29 CFR 1910.1200 northe Canada Hazardous Products Regulation 5OR12015-17 WHMIS 20151. ROCKWOOL provides this SUIS to communicate safe handling and use instruetions-
Frsduct hlafine
SynonSrnt*
fflane*faeturer
Addresses
Fhcme frlumber
Emnaii
eonrpanyWebsite
Resin-bonded stone wool insulation
Mineralwool insulation, mineral fiber insulation, stone wool insulation
ROCKWOCL
8024 Esquesing Line Milton, ON LgT 6W3, Canada
4594 Cayce Rd Byhalia, MS 38611, USA
1-877-*?3-9790 {B:30am to 5:00prn ET}
techservice@rockwool. cr:m
www. rackwool.com/north-america/
AFBB evo
,AFB@, Comfortbatt@. Flus MBT1 ROXUL Safeo,
Sa{e'n'Sound@, Cavityrock@, Co mfortboard@,
Curtainrock@, Rcckboard@, FrontrockrM
Cavityrock@ Black, Curtai n reick@ RFF,
Rocktroard@ RFF
M*noboard@, Tcprocks DD
Toprock6 DD Plus, MultifixlM
Confoek@, Fahrockrs, MSB 85
ProRox@ NA, SeaRox@ N,&
8024 €squesinq Line, Milton, Cntario, L9T 6W3
1 - I 7 7-&'7 3 -9 7 I 0 I terh ",r-"rvi r:p(@ror:k',trnnl rc,m 1 vuwra; ro c kwr,n I Formaldehyde-free unfaced interior
insulati.on batt
Un{aced insulation batts and boards
Faced interior and exterior insulation
boards
Unfaced roofi ng ins{.ilation boards
Faced roo{ing insu}ation boards
Un{aced batts and lcoards for OEM
appl,ications
Unfaced industrial piping and
equipment insulation
tlil.
llr.
lv.
vt.
vl1.
rn ftl
Fage f o{ 7
Ens€r(sffi€s
$Sffi& Regufiatory
Steturs
WFf;MgS Regulatory
$tatnls
Adu{erse
Fhysieeherm[eaE,
f{urman Hbafth
Amd Emwirsnmenta$
F*arards
This prociuct is considered an article as per OSHA 2? Cf R 1910.1 200. 2? CFR 191Al2A* {c) defines an article as follows: "Art;cle" means a manufactured item other than a fluid or p+rticle: (i) which is formed tr: a specific shape or design during manufacture; (ii) which has end use function(s) dependent in whole or in part upon its shape or design during end trse; and (iii) which under norrnal conditions of use does nct releas* more than very smail quantities, e.9., minute or trace amounts of a hazardous chemical (as determined under paragraph (d) aboverrrenticned section), and does not pose a physical hazard or heatth risk to employees. Afticles rneeting the above definition are not regulated by OSHA 29 CFR 1910.1200 and are exernpt from SDS and Iabel requirenrents.
This product is considered an article per the Canadian Hazardous Products Reguiation 5OR/2015-17. Manu{astured articies that meet the definiticn of the Canadian Hazardous Products Act {any article that is formed to a specific shape or design during manufacture, the intended use of which when in that {orm is dependerrt in who}e cr in part on its shape or design, and that, when teing installed, if the intended use of the article requires it to be instalteeJ, and under normal csrnditions of use, will not release oe" ctherwise cause an individuai to be exposed to a hazardous prr:duct) are not regulatecl by the Canadian Hazardous Products Regulation 5CR/2015-17 and are exernpt {rorn SDS and lahel i'equirements.
This product rnay cause temporary irritation to the eyes and skin, and to the upper respiratorytract(scratchythroat, coughing, congestion), resulting from expo$ure to dusts and fibers in excess o{ applicable exposure limits, or{rorn release of binder components and binder decomposition products in high concentrations, when heated to approximately 150-200 "C for the first time.
Pre-existing chronic eye, skin and respiratory conditions may tempcrarity worsen clue to exposLlre. See secticn I for safe hanclling insirr rrtions IV
VI
\/ ri
98-9C%
96-99a/o
92-97%
94-q64/"
87 -950/"
96-9?",4
'l ,-'i
- na/\4 /O
<3?;
\a /c
<5"/"
<4%,
15"/"
s1olo
<1Y"
<1%
-10!1l/o
-4d/1t/o
.,\ "1,
802.1 Esquesrrrr; Line, itliiton, Oi-rtaric, L?l 6Wj
1 8, ll-i17-..a-r,79il 1ie,:i'rsL:rvrce@i'oikv,rcrf i.con-r itir.,,r,r,nr ror:i<wo':i.r-oilr [:',:r;i: 2 ,:'f 7
To: City of Baldwin Park City Council for May 7, 2023 Public Hearing From: Residents and Property Owners of Baldwin Park California Avenue Neighborhood Community (Synopsis of attached Residents' Public Hearing comments)
4l2el2o25
We respectfully request that, based on the attached information found in the following Residents' Comment to the Baldwin Park City Council public hearing 517125 document and attached Exhibits A1; A2; B; C; D; E; H; K; M; N, that the Baldwin Park City Council
A. Deny the Project based on the facts that:
1. The Baldwin Park families living next to the proposed project will be harmed by dangerous errant soccer balls flying into their yards, increased noise, new light/glare, loss of privacy, and reduced property values.
2. There is no Community Benefit from this project.
3. There is a Negative Fiscal lmpact on the City from this project.
4. The required legal Finding of Fact for the proposed project CEQA determination and the Conditional Use Permit cannot be met or made.
Or
B. Approve Conditional Use Permit CP 23-05 for the indoor ioccer-field facility use only and deny the Design Review PR 23-21 to build the large parking structure with outdoor elevated soccer fields on top. The operational problems caused by the construction i.e., physical danger from errant soccer balls kicked into the yards and homes, Ioss of privacy, too much noise, too much light/glare, unsightly structure, loss of residential property value, are all a result of the physical building location and design.
Or
C. Approve the proposed Conditional Use for the indoor and outdoor soccer-field complex facility and the Design Review for the large parking structure w/elevated outdoor soccer fields on top with added conditions of approval in order to Protect the California Avenue neighborhood and the families and children who live there.
iffiq *
r+
I
l
I
I
I
&0Jk.qo 4J
c+- E
'(f, L- !dJ o ';-i
H&EEf d xi
L- u, e
Glr*Co- -' k, o
=Ao osY1u)U=
(U';L."=u all
FUUC;OJLJqJv
r0qJHrhnwf#urP!.= O c
ets*8
=ctso,5 X o- -6'
.;1r n
ul,-qoJq o or*
= or E.L+E E O
x $.8E!ooorq, .C .C
Er'-rb: p:E>.=_c-Gh '1, .gp 5
i=eE#aEeC;=-C.lJ.G .U ,q, O*flrc+r
=lriFcij X q,l.q
io a+r qrr E SpLVV
.Cu+.t.lJ.tU
UL
o H -^s
EDY A)
c,Y=00lJ) Ar\L
5 = oJ \.
€.snEufrgrou.;rtv L
u-o:'frc1 qtlo
a 6= b_
;3.U P
€ hE u!
.:gar;.=tn € 1] ()
luJ- !i- L J
F. G B6.N
atllulx.Fo
B
$zx.olr-
J
(J
O)r.rf\f
t-
Z.g
l--TJ
trlaau)(}g.(J
SNtl Al-U3dOUd
3Nll .^-LU3doud
I
I
I
I
g.
JIt
ozN
,,0 -,6
o30ovd N3d0NSdO
t-_' u0-,9
pl
9ur
i<l]J I-L
zU.<=o-a
:EOo=
Eg
,,0 -,9
,,0-,L,0-,9
I
i!F" I Bt"+
is
I
P E : i:.:
l- :- ,i::
Fi^Zl
;it3{o;;-o E
.= ; F:qJ vi =cuq!- t*) l-
oqJtiFsEx}fiE E
I c.r 3E?i$s a0J -= ,X -l-t-v-aB! r- ro
.c c ofi ui'Ga!{c=
(J
*Egt HgJ tr1 o o
= srE H dg!: 8? 3
.rr t E -g $cQ.*.'ul- (J at
€:;o 6
.q oEg du! $ aJ il.'(Ue.Irt !
EEEE i
+ E E E PrlE.I-C()61 Ut{- ? uJ
P J-' -t-rF=,Js,
o'6 uo€
7, '-! I
, S E E
=rJ_r.:-(rc(Ux.L-rv
E8E,T
.gEgE'=Ln-wtam
-q]6Ec!
Hi,,rdiEAr\cHe;+JEGtrrr:o-C.=LrAPXcrr,q a cl P*
f HE BfFooo(E(o
r$
)Ztu
<(
sZ
P
=
C)
Sl
\t!tr
N3dO lG=CCVdi NSdO
I
,,0',9 r.,0 -
,,0 -,6
"0-,9 ,,0 - ,9 ,0-,/
,,0 - ,61.
"0 - .82
-----a
i
I
I
I
r*l
9ur
j<uJ|!ZX.<3(Lg)
-Ea=un>.4
t"
1 II
I
I
I
I
brlil ,)Z,Arz
lrJ -
E*
!r*! H
4-,
ro
3Faovo- 0J
c'oI* (U
6bogc
J
vto
ar L)
E, PJ
eg
m15
.-c
r+- {-'
(o3L,) ornHqrxsf^
\t. ;r-t t€hoacF-v
XG,
o,=EEL- fi'(EII
ux-. a,
6o-t)g
th l-
.1. o(U {l
A0 r-co'ag(uc)
+,
in G,
qP tn.L (\
s 6dafa9
tL
!aoo
(.J-
u'#=l*\f, v
-ll ar tr
cr 3->-Cc:-n
.;gEg
-go{)
J-?L
i-Eo-
*Ju-
Zc!
3hfil ALU3dOUd
l
I
/
I
l
Fr
9,rr-ai<rrt LL
;tr?=o-(o
:EOa=Lxo-> an
3Nr'IAt-HSdOUd
a
UJ
t$uFo
5 z.d()
LL
_I
()
(ontrlr-rf
F
z.(}tr(J
UIg)
o
CN
ox"(.}
N3d0
,0' ,6
NSdO 03ocvd
,,0 - ,9
.0 - ,61
,,0 -,L
r'____
{*i s
r; s
r3
..3.F,-t
tlJ
Z.x.olr
J
L}
CA
c\.+$
T(,
=og.
IF
z.otr(J
tlja
?orEf o-U6J- ho --*r4.= fO
bE3AE E
.slh
E xEv
EE HMV
ryauso9&Flul-
6Ec;xiqJ.c c..-=
E fr: H.I.LJ
-U iE rghi+J,o
L
rouYLIC;i
rsiHn Latv--
A 6 ! U
-
{l L
PPIr
I,;EU
9EF8-:tsxutrt
u*
o .ax'6r'L!-
OOE O E
=.8fiI
rEX>h,.hoa6v aJ o
I-FL
EsJE
o o)= F
T EeIEr/)sUO *-t15L.
u E ;€;'i u.) .r- 5-- ftl .tf, -o
# AE E
8 C; C
gEEE
0)0 0so_xo_t"oF.o
th !- L-
"-o-Xa-.9o6-o
-l- ? l-
FIJ-+,
IJJ
z-trj
zM
tL
=()
$t.$
I.L I-
vzuJ=lcsJZ
gL
'9,',9
Hv
au)
uo
fi
aofoa
t-ozj
ru
z
o-
I
{J}
IIJ
=
,0-,6
cfcovd
t{3do
,,a-,t
SI: H
a, *
tvl s
+in
a
LU
IJ.I
tFo
=rz,
N.
otI
=()
F."ct.(r.ir
F
Z.gF()
ru{)a
CN
og.
t)
*-,r(}.-L $ho
.UE
Ar *-
6uooa15crol* l-
L LI'
qE
=atI/' LJ
oJCap
(,,9
OJ 'U
trrg
N.H
t- rt
cJ -"-"
DL*X
(r#
t* f-
e6.i lJ
drba0u
$6
9rs,*. #EOt.J t?-
ps
E3to 16 TiffY a)
-qK5ft, :". .EULCqOq)
*9FEo 83€ 5IFUJ
.? a.r .9
#f EFOO.
{s *}
.oa
G'f,LJfif-H
t*S$EF{ "!
"0 -.6
"0 -,9
1 j
I
]
I
I
tr.l
o
ll-u:)a
cl
=o
U)
3Nr-1
F
juz
o-
I(n
ill
=
rNl-t Alu;ld0ud
,,0 -,9 :,,0' ,0
To: Baldwin Park City Council
RE: Resident's Comments to the City Council regarding CP 23-05 & PR 23'21 L44tZ &t$4}[Joanbridge Street Proposed Soccer Complex Facility April 29,2A25
Dear Honorable Mayor and City Council:
We the residents of California Avenue respectfully request that the City of Baldwin Park City Council take appropriate action to Protect the California Avenue neighborhood in the City of Baldwin Park and respectfully request that the City Council Protect the right to privacy, safety and tranquility enjoyed by residents of Baldwin Park in our own homes and yards, which is threatened by the construction and use of the proposed2L,L43 square foot soccer facility which includes a 14,518 square foot parking structure to physically support four (4) exterior, elevated soccer fields on the top level, to be constructed at L44tZ & L4414Joanbridge Street, directly behind and sharing a rear property line with the homes located atL44t9 California Avenue, L4423 California Avenue &L4427 California Avenue.
We request that the Baldwin Park City Council consider the legal reasons why you can deny the proposed project:
. The findings of fact cannot be made that the project is categorically exempt from CEQA review and the Class 32 exemption applies in this case, because the project is not an infill project. lt is bounded by 2 different zones, lndustrial and residential. As such, it cannot be considered an infill project, because an infill project must be located in one particular zone and completely surrounded by that same zone and use only. An Environmental tmpact Report (ElR) is required. See pg. 3 Exhibit AL3l2A/25 Resident's Public Comments to the Planning Commission for further discussion. The project is not consistent with the City of Baldwin Park General Plan, see pg. 29, Exhibit A3126125 Resident's Public Comments to the Planning Commission.
i Findings of Fact cannot be made for the proposed Conditional Use Permit, see pg. 3L, Exhibit AZ 3/26/25 Resident's Public Comments to the Planning Commission. The proposed project, as shown in the noise and lighting studies submitted by the applicant, will exceed the maximum levels of noise and light/glare generation allowed by the City of Baldwin Park MunicipalZoning Code, as further discussed in the attached Exhibit D- lncreased Neighborhood Noise and attached Exhibit E * lncreased Neighborhood Light Pollution.
ln addition to these legal reasons why you can deny the project, there are numerous reasons why you should not approve the project, as discussed in Alternative A; Alternative B; and Alternative C as follows.
Alternative A - Deny the Project based on the following facts:
1. The Baldwin Park families living next to the proposed project will be harmed by dangerous errant soccer balls flying into their yards, increased noise (see Exhibit D), new light/glare (see Exhibit E), loss of privacy, and reduced property values(see Exhibit H).
2. There is frg Community Be-nefit from this project. The 3126126 Planning Commission staff report, p9.6, stated that the "Community Benefif' of this project is that the proposed commercial soccer-field business would allow the children of Baldwin Park to pay 568.00+ an hour to "play and learn sports" at a commercial pay-to-play soccer-field facility in a north Baldwin Park lndustrial zone. Since AYSO soccer is available in Baldwin Park for $1eS for the entire year, with hardship scholarships avaitable and local practices and games at neighborhood schoolyards, and organizations such as lnter Soccer League provides soccer training at local community schools like Olive and Jones Jr High, the proposed soccer-field complex facility would not be less expensive nor conveniently located for the Baldwin Park Community kids. The soccer ffaining that is currently being held at the Joanbridge Street location is focused on older female soccer players refining their skills, not neighborhood kids. There is no Baldwin Park Community benefit.
There is, however, a very large and measurable detriment to the Baldwin Park Community members who live on California Avenue. ln addition to - the aforementioned negative financial, noise, and light/glare impacts to those residents whose home are directly behind the proposed Joanbridge location, everyone on Maine Avenue and California Avenue willfeelthe negative impact of increased traffic, increased noise generation above the allowed decibel level per the BP Municipal Zoning Code (see Exhibit D) and light/elare spill-over into adjacent homes and yards until 10:00 pm at night (see Exhibit E.)
3. ln addition, there is a Negative Fiscal lrnppqt on the City from this project.
Approval of the proposed recreational soccer-field complex facility use at 1,4412 & 14424 Joanbridge Street will remove two, sales-tax-generating, lndustrial-use properties from the City's revenue stream to be replaced by a non-tax generating service-use, without any retailto generate sales tax revenue. This will decrease the Citfs S,ples ]ax revenue, which comprises t2.83% of the entire Baldwin Park annual revenue budget. ln addition, the applicant is registered for tax purposes as a non-profit soccer club 501(cX3) charitable corporation and as such any property owned and operated by the 501(cX3) is exempt from property taxes. Approval of the project will remove two, property-tax-generating lndustrial properties from the LA county tax rolls, feCr+ginF the Citv's-primarv.fevenqe st!'eam, which comprises?Z.$o/oof the City's annual budget.
At the same time, approval of the proposed recreational soccer field complex facility and the recreational nature of the proposed soccer-field complex facility will increase calls for Police, Fire and Code Enforcement involvement, which will in turn increase the City's annual expenses as well as increase already criticalfire and safety response times. ln addition, and of primary importance to the community, any physical injuries sustained by the residents or any property damage incurred due to errant kicked soccer balls would, of course, become a legal liability shared by the City with the applicant.
Further, approval of the proposed recreational soccer-field complex facility and the recreational nature of the soccer-fields, with the accompanying negative environmental impacts of physical risk of injury from projectile soccer balls, increased noise, increased exterior lighting /glare, and lack of- privacy will, according to recent property accessor and real estate reportsr rgduce the valu$ qf thF rqsidgnlial propefiieq that share the rear property line with the proposed new construction and use, see attached Exhibit H property assessor's report and realtor's report.
We are respectfulty requesting that the City of Baldwin Park City Council consider alternative solutions.
Alternative B. Approve Conditional Use Permit CP 23-05 for an indoor soccer- field facility use only, and deny the De$ign Review PR 23.21for construction of the new huge, structure. See Exhibit K illustrations of indoor facilities. Based on public information and social media accounts, the applicant is currently operating an unlicensed indoor soccer training facility, FUTBLGameChangers without a BP Business License at this time, (Exhibit B), without generating any public complaints. Operation of the indoor-only soccer-field complex could be approved according to limits listed in the applicants Business Narrative (Exhibit C) application cover letter dated October 24,2023.
Deny the Design Review PR 23-21to build the large parking structure with outdoor elevated soccer fields on top. The operational problems caused by the new construction of the elevated outdoor soccer fields, i.e., physical danger from errant soccer balls kicked into the yards and homes, loss of privacy, too much noise Exhibit D, too much lightlglare Exhibit E, unsi8htly structure, loss of residential property value Exhibit H, are all a result of the physical building location and design. The proposed 25 foot-tall parking structure with the four (a) exterior elevated outdoor soccer fields building is to be located 15 feet from the nearest home, covering 8t% of the lndustrial lot, and extending along the entire width of the project rear property line, from the east side property line to the west side property line. This is the property line that is shared with the residential lots.
ln addition, the Design Review should be denied because the lot coverage (81% proposed /S}ortallowed), rear yard setback (L0' proposed /20' required) and proposed parking (39 spaces propose dILSL parking spaces required) all do not meet the standards of the Baldwin Park Municipal Zoning Code, see pg' 4, pg. 5 & pg.t2, Exhibit A23126125 Resident's Public Comments to the Planning Commission.
Or, respectfully, the City of Baldwin Park City Council may consider:
Alternative C. Approve the proposed Conditional Use for tlTe indoor and outdoor soccer-field complex facility and the Design Review for the large parking structure w/elevated outdoor soccer fields on top with added conditions to Protect the California Avenue neighborhood and the families and children who live there. a. Revise the approved site plan and elevations to show security netting attached to the top of the elevated outdoor soccer fields fencing to entirely enclose the elevated soccer fields in order to protect any residents from soccer balls exiting the subject property and entering the neighboring residential yards while causing injury to people and harm to property in the adjacent residential and industrial properties, see Exhibit N.
b. Construct a solid wall across the entlre first and second floor on the south side of parking structure 1 soccer fields where it abuts the existing residential neighborhoods to prgtect the residents from harmful excessive noise and intrusive light/glare that the parking lot and elevated soccer fields will produce.
c. All exterior parking lot and elevated soccer field lights off by 8:30 pm weekdays. This is consistent with the hours of operation allowed to the surrounding industrial uses
d. The final landscape design plan shall be submitted during plan check and shall include the planting of the entire 10' rear yard setback with mature trees and mature vegetation, (as stated on page 3 in the Planning Commission staff report and as requested by Planning Commissioner Miranda-Dzib at the 3126125 Planning Commission meeting), per the City of Baldwin Park Municipal Zoning Code, section 153.220.140 -M Definitions, (Exhibit M), in order to protect the safety and privacy of the existing residential neighborhood and provide the buffering required by the General Plan and required by the Zoning Code.
e. Prior to Certificate of Occupancy for the structure, the applicant shall provide a noise study by an independent professional acoustical engineer, conducted at the elevated soccer fields, the project rear parking lot and in the rear yards of the residential properties abutting the subject industrial property to guarantee that that the conditional use will not produce noise greater 55 decibels (day), or 50 decibels (evening) to be received by the residential properties, as per the noise requirements of the City of Baldwin Park Municipal Zoning Code Section 163.140.070 (C) and pg. 20 of resident's comments Exhibit A2 Public comments to the Pc,3126125. f. Prior to Certificate of Occupancy for the strufiure, the applicant shall provide a photometric suruey lighting study by an independent photometric engineer showing that the completed parking garage and elevated soccer fields structure will not produce light spill-over across the property lines as required by the City of Baldwin Park Municipal Zoning Code Section 153.140,040 {Exhibit,A2 Public Comments to the PC,3/26175, Pg.24l.
g. Limit the hours of operation to hours similar to the surrounding lndustrial uses in order to protect the adjacent residential neighborhood as reguired by the required General Plan and required by the Zoning Code (Exhibit A2 Public Comments to the PC,3/26125, ps. 1).
. Outdoor use of the elevated soccer fields limited to:
Weekdays 4 pm until 8:00 pm
Saturday 8 am-5 pm
Sunday 10:00 am - 2:00 pm
. lndoor use (large soccer field/gym/offices/meeting rooms) limited to:
Weekdays 4 pm - 10 pm;
SaturdaySam-6pm
Sunday 10am-2 pm
We, the residents of California Avenue Community are aware that the Baldwin Park City Council has multiple responsibilities regarding the well-being of the City.
However, we again respectfully request that you Protect and Safeguard our Safety, Privacy, and financial stability, Thank you.
elN 85-3618345 - Futbl Game Changer, Baldwin Park, Calif(l. 5:36 PM Exhibit B FUTBLGameChanger in Baldwin Park
Futbl Game Changer in Baldwin Park, California
Home (//eintaxid.com/) i Companies with'P (/leintaxid.comlcompanieslf/) -" FutblGame Changer Organization Prrofile
Futbl Game Changer is a tax'exempt organization located in Beldwin Park, California. The Employer ldentification Nurmber {ElN) for Futbl Game Changer is 8536193{5. EIN
is also referred to as FEIN (Federal Employer ldentification Number) or FTIN (FedernlTax ldentification Number)'
The organization type for Futbl Game Changer is
Cgrpgffiign and its contribution deductibility status is Contfjhu,tions are {eductihle. FutblGame Changer is
exempted by IRS under the category of charitable
Organization, The organization is an independent
organization or an independent auxiliary. The latest return for the tax period was filed in Decemher,20?2.
Basic Profile
Q8anization Hame FutblGame Changer
EIN (faxpayar ld) 85-3619345
CortactAddrcss:
Addre$s Une
city
$tate
ztp
14424 Joanbridge St
Baldwin Park
California
91706-1746
fan Hamption DstpJIs f,gr Fu&l Oamp Chaqger
Posts About
6Bs e ffi@
atllaarrl
sEfiE[m
FUTBL GameChangers
37 followers . 0 following
fi Message Gl Follow Q, Search
Mentions Reviews Reels Photos More ,r
lntro
Mentoring youth female soccer athletes to become confident and skillful. Head Coach Sheima Berenji
& Page . Nonprofit organization
# Baldwin Park, CA, United States, California
ffi [email protected]
ffi futblgamechanger.org
& Not vet rated (o Reviews) ffi
FT]IELT EE
$OEEEH
Our Development
Our Sessions Our Clinics
Our Consults FGC Progrom
Our Lob Our Stoff
Our Testimoniols
J*Iru *h* W*i{iist
.:ilif,-:i1,tlu;lji::f
,,.;,--:
,ffi1,.
Shooting Clinic
Concellotion Policy: No Refunds for concellotions mode ofter the discrefion of Cooch.
-=;'i:l-::r.:=ir .i :i, tl ' :.1
,:-. -.ij
48 hour requirement Molreup ot
Low ottendonce clinics moy be rescheduled or concelled.
FUTBTT;BE
SOEEER
Friday, March 28th, 2025
ft00 PM
C0ilDIII0illt{SlSIRtilGIH AilD flilHHl}tG Ctl}|rc xith Sheima - Berenii 3 sPotsleft
t hour 15 minutes @ $60.00
Ihis clinic style session will include eircuit rotatisn for conditioning, and fitness exercises for the first and conclude with finishing exenises.
Agu Born 2011 and older
Level : lntermediate/Aduanced
Our Development
Our Sessions Our Clinics
Our Consults FGC Progrom .;l.-iii.,1 ii:tl ;:'rr;iriii,*! Our Lob Our Stoff
Our Testimoniols
t.ru!!9 t rr*!L*.. ff
TEXI UEEI(
t-tgpg:lrttas )
CHTGK GOBT BA].AII8E
Powered by
acuiry: scheduling
FUTEffiEE
SOEEER
Our Development
Our Sessions Our Clinics
Our Consults FGC Progrom
Our Lob Our Stoff
Our Testimoniols
j {}I f,i i.l-; + r,r,,rr: tf:i i t *
Send us o messoge ond we witl be touch with pricing ond ovoilobility. lnterested in renting the focility?
NOme {required)
First Nome
EmOif (required)
L0st Nome
!
l
i
I
I
I
{
City of Baldwin Park, CA
C) NextRequest
BE Request 25-gT El
,
,,, t-:i I fl,:.it r ,'
Dates
Received
March 31, 2025 via web
Requester
oc3 Susan Cole
Fl [email protected]
ofr aza-t7s-3aes
lnvoices
No invoices due
Staff assigned
Departments
No departments ovailable
Request Visibility: & Unpublished
,f:,,: i
Request
Please provide any business licenses 2019-
2A25 inclusive for the property located at
1 4424 Jaanbridge Street, Baldwin Park,
including
1. License Number
2. lssued Date
3. Detailed Description of the Business
7. Application Date
Timeline Documents
E! Request cld$€ff;iqith accesstothis request
The City of Baldwin Park is in receipt of
your California Public Records Act ("CPRA")
request (Government Code 5$ 7920. et
seq.) dated 3131125. This email csnfirms
that the City will produce all responsive,
non-privileged records subject to disclo-
sure under the CPRA.
Flrm
Ftrn {Sdd'l}
Strqet
Clry
Lecati*t!
ltait {Add'lt
lllall Addr
i/tall Gity
Ers. nite
Orrmrrhig
J. R *u$tqrn Cablnet
14444 Joafibridge
Baldwin Fatk. CA 917fi6
ln$ide
1c424 JoanbriCge
&aid*i* Park. CA 8t706
MaEirfEcluring
F+rtnership
0sil3llol t hus
Loe. Typc lndilslrial
8*s" StatEi
Llc. Status
Acst lilo
Licentp
Phone
Alt PIaila
$lart Date
gle6c $ats
BIE Rnle
Irip" Stitrrs
Clcseoxt
C,oseout
s9$7S7
990787
t$?€) 814-4454
$j?a/zs00
s3alr2010
30sri As*essment
La3t Rec
BID &rea
Ggo Area
Insp. Ar*i
Firm J, R, Custcm Cabinet
Account # gg0?87
Additional lnformation
F6x +t$!l*&€r {S26} &14-2252 E-!i*il rrG}cita
Stata Liq Ho TYPg E (Fir.s
NAlc csr€ 00SS$0 - Undeffnsd
st8 code 3S93S0l - Manulactuting lndu$lries. f'iot Slse!'!ie.e C,assifed Bur Tsrpo MClC0 - MANLJFACTURII{G
Lie Ps.crlpt
lmporuExpgrt Nofle
Aptrt FElt'l - xtbtA No
BEA$ SElltI - Speclal Cr:nditlo:re NO
Ourner lnformation
Sl^tner Raygaaa, Jc*e
StrEet
City
Start Brte
End Sate
Orfincr Siat{s Aclive
Ilgia of Bllh
EHsOwflBr Y
Pros $urn€r I't
TIll6
orivE Lic.
ssx
Fhsne
Phor6 2
'ft, ,/b +l^c 4 P,',L nua'frul!"* &4;^'t A q"1"" /v/'b
Swaer I Jcse RaYg*aa
$ummary $creen
Titl& $wner Fb$ne f
Lioense l*sl*d 03103/2S10 Appticatlan R*newal
Ltccnse fxptfc: 0?/28/?01 1 fi*fi$rgsl Annual (end of 13 msflths) ilAlo Codc 0000*0 - Undefined
stc 6od€ 3999001 - Manufacluring fndustries. Ntt Eisev;Iere Cla$tifled Bps rype MCIC0 - MANUFACTI}ftING
APN Fctlt ' e{ I t fi, No
BEnn sEtil - SFecial Cqndltlilas No
Exhibit C Applicant's Business Narrative
TRI}TI CAISFBELL H & BUILDING
Plare - Los Califurnia
Te[ 32] S60-4&4SI Cel[ 3?3497-9$6t
Contrrcbt's Lieense *721 765
o,c*&€r24&,?:823
$ity of Bakn*in FErk
Planning divisiofi
{4403 E. Pacifio Ave.
Baldwln Part, $A,S1TSB
RE: Fit 7 Spads Lab
6$r66y cimpisx atl4p1t11^14,414Joanbridge $t. Ba6*in Pariq CA.91'7Sfi wE arr ree*e*ting s use changs fcr a cfn*ge of t,se fom lrdustrtal eofie to Commerciat zone on tftE 2 properlie nre*diond *ove'
Our intsrtisn is to buid E soo@ cornpt*x on ffi| Ist$ 14472 g 14#4 Joanbridge Sl The $$e of a ssrcer comptarfor Eal$sdn Park wor.rld bs ef StEf,t benef,fifor "llth?
Young
noys i1+gii*s af the commrmlty ad srrmurding m**ftbetroode" $d.r,tt startin$ €E 5 Gt {}tdk the 1616y
-"p
to r? yeas oH are u;ghdme' 1l\14 a$ knorr the hemfitE sf irai*rq in ryrts rru{rr.ie*id$ t6ernt6 be rrynsibb dr.dts and.aditrepar$cipdtl$ in thdr cgmmunitio*.
BeHrnin Par,t mould harrefit enonneucly by fiavlrtg this so**r corrUfex s*1ry ttele ie none *o*e by. The mrfirllunity. herr*g ffiainly !'atiq wouH qtl Q in hor of givirg heir "hifdtr. * opportunry to him mmr wflhh ls. fie ilational sFort in, all the tefin Am*rica* countie.
The onty viable lot* in Baldwin Park rrenettme ttito, in an lrdUe&tal rytE: Bf iainlqpe tl"o fnt{, thh eite bc@{}Iffi eititable for qr prnpcs{ b} confont}ing b Ute Frl$rq raquiffierfs on the grouod ff&r ard heving 4 so@r fiEf{Ls".on tlPalsvsfed *lab sf the nlst ttoor ahsm firs ia*fng, T'tse i* aho in esdirq hriHlns wttlr *fMe, r+strsorne, mee*irrg roorn end en s:ffa irrdoorf;etd"
$inca tr€ secoer corrybx oprfftec tu* * pnr tiH 10 w during st 1est 1td.9n $attrrdaSe end sundelF, ffiorfi Saftt lo fipm, ftere wryH be rlo disturbancB t0 thc fnAu**if rpn6 thst opfuee from 7am-io 4Hn, twgegr6 only. The ryrnnetibflny nef1rmn the hflo is Fd6. Tfie firture cunpalibili$ $teuld nd dtatryB due tc the*r differerf houre CIf opehttan. Thore' w{ll nst he any toumarner*r at the siEe" TRINIT}AD CAMPBELL DE$IGN & EUTLDINg
------=g2g Ronda Vista Place - Los Angeles, Califonnia S0027 Tel 323- SC&4&401GeH: S23'497-gSSg
Csrtractot's Lic*nse #721 765
The $occer complex would not be detrimenial to the sunounding propertiee eince we would make sure that tighting would *tay within the fietde and not outside of the praperty. We wauld indude nsi.* attenuation elemer*s bo mlnimize any noise. ln the g:P!T|r_[3 ball uere to fly out, we will contider it a lots.
We ele also requesting exemption from the requiremenis tor the side and rear yards.
On th* I{orth side rrru have an existiilg building, On the South side we have an existing 6' block wall, parkirq and a cer.rant slab at 12 fr. high for the socesr fields. At the rear we are prcposing 5' rer yard fully landsca@ as a bu$er zone for the neighbers ediacent to the sccer fields. Our fields ars already quite smallerthan regular size and wE cannot afford to keep sh{inkifig thern if rve arc to ptay on proportionately reduced standard sizes of fietds.
Having the FitT Sports Lab is beneficial to all the chitdrcn in your csmrnunity and sunoundings. tt wiitt enhance their skills both in tports and in hurnan erdeavors, and they will be better: prepared for thsir future lives .
$lncerely,
3829 Ronda Msta Fl,
Las AngeleE, CA- 90027
323.497.s969
wwutcdasig n-build. net
tu} t'* ,t,Y
J
Trinidad Campbell
Trinidad Campbell Besign & Building
Exhibit D lncreased Neighborhood Noise
The noise studies the applicant was required to provide show that the new soccer-field use will produce noise louder than the City of Baldwin Park allows in a residential neighborhood. The proposed new 4 exterior and elevated soccer fields cannot be constructed and operated because they will create a "dangerguq nqisq", "Sdygfg'gly affgct the surr.ounding areqs" and cause harm to the adjacent residents in the California Avenue Baldwin Park Community.
Noise Comparison Chart
Amount of noise
allowed in Residential
neighborhoods (BP
Municipal Code Sec.
1s3.140.070)
Noise levels from
SOFIVE Soccer Facility
Covina CA
Noise levels from
Lab 5 Soccer Facility
Facoima CA
7 am- 7 pm (day )
55 dbA decibels
5:39 pm (day)
74.4 dbF. decibles maximum
59.1dBA average
6:10 pm (day)
91.8 dbA decibles maximum
64.2 dbA average
7pm10pm
(evening)
50 dbA decibels
8:30 pm (evening)
M.9 dbA decibles maximum
56.8 dbA decibles Average
7:00 pm (evening)
78.3 dbA maximum
60.5 dbA decibles average
As shotrrrn on the submitted architecturat plans, pg M-1.3 material speclficatlons, the appllcant is proposlngto hang removable standard vinyl $psrts padding on the rnetal fence arsund the bottom half of the soceer fietds to protect the players, They state that this wltl redutce the noise levels. Howevetr, both thetest noise lecations at SSFIVE Soccer In Cavina and at Lab 5 Soccer in Pacoima, have slmilarvinYlor solid wood baniers areund their flelds r.rrhere the noise tevels were registeredr see reference $ection photos.
The subrnitted plans dc not inctude the type of acoustie spo*s paddlng that the appllcant is suggesting they nnay be able to use to reduce nois€, and research shows that the product they are imagining does not currently exi*. Therefsre, the project, as describbd tn the *rehitectural plans daes not rneet Baldwln Fark standards" $ee reference section for further detaits and photas.
ln addition, since the noise generated by the proposed soccer complex facility will exceed the allowable noise levels to be received by a residential property in a residential zone located adjacent to an lndustrial zone, the project is not consistent With the CitY.of Aald},vin Par:k Ge,neral Plan nor in F,omplianqe with the.Citv of Baldwin Park MuniciQFl Zonins Code. Therefore,
Conditional Use Permit Findings of Fact #l and *8 {the proposed proiect is consistent ruith General Plan & Municipal Zoning codel cannot he made- Conditional Use Permit Finding of Fact f5 {the proposed proiect is consistent with existing and future land uses in the general area) cannot be made.
CEqA Finding of Fact #2 (the proposed project is consistent with General Plan & Municipal Zoning code) cannot be made.
d'*t t\
lii
\- -\\J
'{i*, -'
rq**5€ M*elTffiffiie{# paHts ffiilp&&T
Sit* MXap
el;.*rt 4*.2q. i ' ' !&f,-e; te* 3s e;€*{:re*t Fr*j*et
J {-'r %.rx&#eb*r: I
1.r'S...*SdrB; &y ,S-q*r' e &*gfl *e,
":1g?,;...1-.t-l s:ea l.re, <-, a * >*-*?l 1
',;&kwr.**,srZyw*Ti*a--
{, {r.t F." *
- Y;x, $@,ge::ext *r.rre: 1$ m*n,
\:w ,,3&.x{ eddei: Larson Eavis $eundryask [-xT ea{ibrxtiem: S4.0 {dBA} !i*l{t*. 5€ii rg: &-Vleighted Saund Leve} i$LOW}
iesr :*, = 'e \Emer !" '" '-' Lxe p*j\"3o6s
" ' :,i'! t..clse Soure€s: -
, ,=-, Lr,.{ - l}ou'n ' fue'az #a&"*/&y' , ta*m diln*'n''n^o , €sa*&nv_--**- &ta $urmmar*y ffithen &eise Scurs*g &lr{ng Sdoaritorlng f : !ii:e
Soise [evel
{dsei
u rY, i
L*ro 'Ae u
e
Ltnln 5*q.F
1. 3
$.
&.
Time;
Time:
Tlmc:
Yirne:
&dditional Hstes:
{'*
{,ulx
f Mp&d:rsu at 6 rv t
/*^e €8 84 {."*}*Y dra s.9" *,'
$fi$ffiffiffitr$ 0^
V
u, u; $*n a*a*/.*,-E
.{su&;e *4,,4 1l!
fiN
#ro,*r
Dats Summary
N*ise
Scale
Ncise Level
tdBAl
Lq {2.8
tt* bE.?
Lmh fs. z
roO$E MOru.lTCIRlSI€ FIGI.D NEF$RT
1. ?"
3. 4.
5. Sitr Map
Proiecl tlame Fit 7 Sports l"ab Developmsnt pmject
HffiU':t*,#**a';t? &\
Date: ltrrLri sit€ Humber: e
Measured By: Annalie Sarrieddine
Measurement StartTinng f, 3 o t*
lvlearurernent €nd llrne: t, q 5-e -
Tctal Measurerne*t T;me: 15 mln.
Noise Meter Model; Larson Davis Soundtrack LxT Calibrationr 94'0 {dSA) Meter Settirrg: A-Weighted Sound Level {SLOW}
Sessian File Name: {- *r* tZ*** B ri i
Primary Noise Sources, l/*rt* fr4;;4 t ftr.4rFr tt*/r< - y I /6* a-t' l' / t Olther llsirr Sourcer Ouring Monitoring
fime:
Timel
Time:
Time:
Time:
/n'b''l,a+4"t'.-
IMPAET
/ol
$firrN$E$
d$
IVOISE MONITORING FITLD REPCIRT
Site l\rl'ap {Lab'Five $otcer FscBhy - Facsitna}
project Name: Fit 7 Sports Lab Development Project
Monitoring Location: S'oec--r TL"l tl [ql
Datei 1tjtf f *az?'
Measured By; Annalie Sarrieddine
MeasurementStartTime: 6 : t A ? t'1
Measurement End rimel { : t s- ffi
Iotal Measurement Time: 15 min.
Noise Meter Model: Larson Davis Soundtrack LxT Calibration: 94.0 (dBA) Meter Setting: A-Weighted Sound Level (SLOW)
Session File Name: Lx L - D*l". ?o&
Site Number; 3 ( o-y+, ^)
PrimaryNoisesources, fork;^, {,k /Srt,r.p , G, f-}o,ns, ilos)' , Other Noise Sources During Monitoring
t. G'.-(o ^ *'a
" -.'...---_.-- Time:
2. 3.
4. 5.
Additional Notes:
Qan. t ,Jste- ac l; ,* ln I
Sor.o, f,- t"'t
hl:": tr) ,
t: r{
Data Summary
Noise
Scale
Noise Level
(dBA)
l*o a q.L
L*n ffie
L*,n 4 t,1
Time:
Time:
Time:
Time:
ft r+)' o {) te c\'^'':
IMPAOTre
sctENcE$
NOISE MON$ORING FIELB REFONT
Froject Narne: Fit 7 Sports Lab Dsveloprnent ProJect
Monitoring Location: Soo"*. C.. \, l-a
o.tu**ffi site Number:,,^ly)
MeasurEd By: Anr+*lie Sardeddine
Measu rernent Start Ti r@:.%fi ,,#
"ffi
Mea$rrem€nt €nd Time: %a,,ffiWqlo
Total Measurernent Time: 15 min.
Noise Meter Model: Larson Davis Soundtrack LxT
Meter Setting: A-Weighted Sound Leyel tSLoW)
SessionFileName: , , i-\ , ioQurf - l/) c-/\q_ E r
Calibratiqn: 94.0 idBA)
t. fr,.^uLn-
,.C* e )_..-
Additinnalftes:
Site Map (Lab Five tuccer Facility. 6
PrimaryNoiseSources: 7*h^A L. y fir.trr,L1 , f\*:rc- , ?.*qr* O.*-r:...1 J.Js
Data Summary Other Noise Sources Ouring MonitoringData Summary Noise
Scale
Noise Level
{dBA}
L.o (o. s-
-ff;ffirr&ij
Ilmifl
'{6 .q
xme:-?:.? tJ .
time:- -ts: O $
Time:2
4. 5.
Time;
Time:
t, #n, 7 /r?
IMPACT re
$CIEI'ICE$
4.4:04 PM
fi g&{t{$Psll00Uc L$'ss0r$"c0t'{4 sPs[@
PUft Ctr.AsE (lllTPsll$ot 6 [+es-5P0ftIs-c0MlPll8clt,4$E] IEHL{HIrPSl'S0U6L*S-SP0RIS.[$lt{l]lEllJS] agglll{H$Ps JlD0 U6l.As-Sp0e$"c0}i/Ae0u1 $0HIACT {r{ITrslla0uGtAl-$P0!Ts"c0MJC0}{TAe4 Outdoor Protective Wall Paddtrrg Doug}nco Gustom Sewn Pedding with Grommets
2'Thick
2" Thick
Sewn Paddin
tre*rip*cn Additionalinftmlation
Description
Frotect your players with durable, chain tink l€nce paddlhg. This outdoor padding is perirneter sewn whh Itornmets making it e6Sy tO insbll and take back down to sfore. Custom sewn pads are easy- to'ofder and even easier to install.
Quality Materials
padding panels are custom fabrlcated with 2", 3" or 4" thick polyurethane high-impact foam wrapped in durable 18 oz vinyl.
This UV resistant long-lasting vinyl is made fOr alf locations and vfeather conditions. Choose from standard colcrs dark grsen, black, royal blue, navy blue and red- Additionol colors are available by reguest i lrqOUt*e {HTlP5:/TDCUG[AS'SPORTS-COlrrCOllTACT?PRO
i puncrasE llPusc{asE} ;
SKUi ?9218
Douglas@ Cuslom Eewn Padding with Grommets ' Dolglas Str SS$8$HTrP.SII00U cles-sP0nF. cPtilJIlEAtERs)
Exhibit E lncreased Neighborhood Light Pollution
The City of Baldwin General Plan and Municipal Zoning Code both require external lighting of commercial and lndustrial properties be confined to the site to avoid light spill-over and glare. See following Light Pollution reference section. The Photometric Light Study, which the applicant was required to provide, shows that the project sports flood lights rrulll be Iscated abeve the removable vinyl padding hanging on fence around the etevated outdocr soccer flelds. The survey Statistics table below and the red ink numbers on the photometric illustration, beth show rarhere the sports flcod lights will spitl-over 0.1 foot-candte (fc) acrss$ atl of the property lines of the project {shown as PL tines on the lltrr*stration) of tFre projest site" The ad,|acent residentlat homes are tocated on the south praperty llne FLl-3 Seuth.
See reference sectlon for further details and phates.
In additien, since the light and glare generated hy the proposed soccer camplex facility witt spill-over the property lines, exceedi*g the allorxahle light levels to be recelved hy a residenrtiat property ln a residential zsne lacated adJacent te an Industrial eane, the project is not consistent with thq City of Baldu{in Park General Plpn por,i,n cofnpliance with the Citv of Baldwin Park Municipal Zqniqs Code. Therefore, Conditional Use Fermit Findi*gs of Fact *1and *8 (the prupored prolect ls eonsistent krith General Plan & Htuntrdpat Sonlng mdel eannot be made.
Conditlonal Use Permit Flndlng ef Fa$ *5 tthe Fmpoeed prciek is consietent with exlsting and future tand uses in the general arcal cannot he m*de.
CEQA Finding of Fect f2 (the prepo$ed prolect is con$stent urith General PIan & Municlpel loning eede! cannot he made.
Statistics
Descriptton Sv*rbol AVg" Max Min Max/Min AwlMin
SOCCER T.-I + 22.8 rC 52.7fc 12.3 k 4.3:1 1.9:1
SOCCER4 + ?3.7 fc 52"2 ft 5.1fc 10"2:L 4,6:1
FLt-3 East + 0.1. ft o.1k &.G ft N/A NIA
P11.3
South
+ 0.0 & 0.1ft s.0 ft N/A NIA
FL4 North + s"r ft 0.lft 0.0 ft NIA NIA
FL4 West + 0.0 k 0.1ft S.0 tc NIA NIA
(l io
+ z z z z
q oi
o z z Z z.
o
N
o
q
o
(f
d
iio5
,ti
qo
,g
o
ci a
N
Nh
a.l
N6 ffi
o
o
o
oq
NN
o
N
fra{ e
o
oo o
O
o og
+ + * + * + +
s
du<)UoU)
I
ri-
&
(,
a
Fa{
ur
o
J&
diEr5
t?a,g
3o
J&
tsd
oz
5r
Fthu
=sL
{
\.N
-}.t
u,\A
\
\s
qSmwbnfio 5{,
h0lvr,uoc<uco
EeH xo Eioo+r +F.8E:€ E E e E i E .
flEp ;E;s=
ts E = * ifl fr 8E-E f Eg
,:tg Ei;Es6Po-
*Ee ,; EEg;;e
,--o-;E tre€Erte E et E F F;e fr
+)O=L,
;{EI EEEEHi;;sE E=EEfi#E E P # fi A E f; E P
E r h E Eg g sEif EHE T5E.E#H
,
$$
d
.HCE
Z,
5[Lq)
e.F
t"rJ
E()t-o:r{L
Joan brdSe rt'
tta-cb
cclt-clflclI-rElGl(lF
rEl-{l -EttOFlq lE qEr
L9_
L&'id'
F Clit
r tlrI ep;rEt-
icitl?rrclr
l+ ''!rt6:
idrirBri Elr* Cii"
LE:
ral
i'E t
i.+:
i.B:raf:) Cbl
iciti cl.r
I Ctrb Eb'
L d.:
i,+:L&';6i'!qlrllrFQ,rC!,r Elr!
icitt ErrtGlr
: qr;
r&;icirt clrr
I El!
;6ilt "TlrCll
! Irtr(l .
icit
!TlrClt
;d!
iciti -!ltElr
idtI rllrEllpQr
i&'
[&;rElt*tl
el
&&It.?
ct
EI
trlrar€tqr
a
GIi
q
s*CI
ri1?
a*iqr
G
F8.cirJ
t
r{s
f*
*
tq.
g
4 rGl
(rI
q+et
&r
?,
cF
qi
(D
E
o
ES.
t
4+t
fit
a!
El
Eltffl
q
f{
EAAEqEE
Req'Nwli cLl *o rwv'o
Palicy ?,4 Prohibit furure flag lot
fr*ily infill projects
neighborhood serting.
subdivisions, and strive to achieve singte-
which complernent tlie surrounding
PoHcy L5
Policy 2,6
Policy 2.7
Policy 2.8
Bevitalization ot
Delerioratins U$e$
aftd Prop8rliBs
Boal8.0
Policy 3.1
Figure LU-S
Flag Lot SubdMsion
Require that multi-family, commercial and industrial development provide adequate buffers (such as decorative walls and landscaped setbacls) at the designated boundaries with adjaceat u$€s toprevest impacts on residences due to noise, traffic, parkiag, light and glare, and differences in scale; to ensure pnvacy; and to provide visual compatibility.
Require that the external lightiag of commercial and industrial properties be confired to the site to avoid adverse impacrs on adjacent landuses due to light spillover or glare.
Require that automobile and truck access to commercial and ir:du*riel properties adjacent rc residential parcels be located the maximum practic*Idistance from the residential parcel.
Establish standards in the Zouing Code to ensure that dl functionai, no,ise, and other impacts associated with the development of residential uaits oa an upper flaor af afly c$fii.mcrcial structure be mitigated.
Provide for the revitalization of deteriorating l*nd uses and properties.
Encourage and continue use of redevelopment activities, including provision of inceatives lor private developrcent, joint public-private partnerships, *nd pubiic improyemerts) in designated
Redevelopment Project Areas.
-flit rI tr n
tr
tf
rytf
rto
Lo
G
6i
fl t
;l ouitding Footprint
Mep{n Panh SOACI General Ftan LU-8 Land Llse Elernent
Exhibit H L44Lg California Property Appraisal Report & Real Estate Evaluation
Uniform Residentiai Appraisal Report
: tl.4.eqE& !s.._!qg]01 . .P4s9 f - 0! 2?
Ere# 080101
valges_[qye]e!C!!-!y_q!om relative slaqllibL,,._.
mortgege-finance transacdon, estate purposes, ar p*vate mrtqaqgllEuEncelgmqyaL_quqeg! of tg!&telslgpc sl Wo&, purpose of the SpDrqisar reportnq lacujrem?nls,fgilhic.anamisaljeaeslsffft-aqdlhecdd$s! {maaEualue. !flrd ygi,rets Sygli!?g_Slt&&la_Lplgpe&_yeue.$EtClpilqt tblggqhgqllbe_Clg3-lCnq value is rhe lqlggr p!,I!!e! ef_pEpertt1dCqliEgghq,jl__ Uq-dtr------_
Mv comparable search:fi4y s_earch parameters were limited to_t s orle_rcdius, and cLA ditrerencjs -_Ale!ql_d l Lqogsiblq cprnps were ccnsidered" This w-3s n6nou,ed down to the six that \ryers used in the eporaigal. -Ile-Le_werc co3gdelqllhggqgl reliabie clcsell_Le_U1ilg- ,_,_._- eld.!-c!rns. EAle__s_._I[e_L!qs1j9lee1lhe._lqqesls]rue rya3el-yel!€. _ All iltilities mainr syslems nheckpd and in urorking oil'Jer S[hicrt is ournqr me!_lplell NOTE:The $u_biqqt:s_ln€I8qlinq iime is betuveen 3{-5! days t}ased on value at ihe time ol aooraisal.
Elpssllcjn]e_E rqllnreis4la !e s0 daF
NOTE:Smoke deteciors in place, oarbon monoxide alarms in-place-!!g!:er bglter strapped- -rll-e-$t.bi-e-,cl is 4EB-$!U9!ilq-p-r9{ tur-qEB-edv.LE-s$reftLv-euli-llcl9$t-ilq !e$ {xis.E rs:t tt-egaitv permaslu b!e-_ Afurercrely&q!]lle4uelu13ly_ ptoludtye.
fjafE Aq_psle|Ae sspggi5gl_qgrlspliance:Thiq is an apg-arq{Lepp4-_ Ibi! 3prcfsalg?q plggeied in acrordancqwith th ons Refor-n, Recovery and Enforcement Act-of 1989, as amended (12 U.S.C. 331 et seq) and any implemenlinq.IqqglAlie6_ Tiesll&ria uliltzed in th* searct-:jqt:q,-ry1!{?&lqD,'operties was -einiilai neirjhbo&osd, livintr area, ziF code, cofldition, qqslltq and proxl$}iv.
The corona virus thlqqt may be impacilnq markei cor,diiians. itowever !n mast markeis it is not yel clear tc wh.t eytenr !i .nv fr2rLei .nnditinne r atfected, Complicaiing factors inclu e f uctuatiofls in emplovment and changes in inierest rates. Market analvsis includes_qbservino ma*ei -,,rctions which this tralvsis bemmes more cgmplicated when ma&et participants themselves are facinq unceGaiqiy:
a:uug@-!9cdy&11rya6 qgstsnsied qfedaml dls.ster area- -ller concessions are typfcgl-'n the cu{e]1lnrg.ke!,SplqeCdAl-}q are @ !TE:l appraised the subiect Droceltij ofl BGIO3I2O23 for $5OA 0{lo Thi! :.isql incll nled e !i"l*!!an ?rli, litrfft thar !dfl-*-i +A- backinq to@lher@ lndusirial dovskrpmefi. -fhis proposal iBcludes 2 _ levels of construct'oll-itrdldllsftsseerleldc'Ilcqlls rooms, a syq.,belhpsEs.-alleg!-qlqlgsste-cld 39--pe*irc,c!gi]s.Alxo-ihele-lcllLlelsqq liqhis aru! so_ccer fleld netting. Proposed hours cf use are 4pm io 1 opm weekdavs; gam to 6pm Saturciav and gam to 2pm Sundav_ This proposal__ lyill cause,ql3{e-rnai deirimsi ia ttr€ $bi$e{s Aq{ket]!!€-fne jdd{!S$!e agd r!o,* ,r! ",}t3t
1 m
edSyne6d_ihe subiect propertv muc
qlact dollar amount is not calsuqbie withoui much more intense scrutinv. This prooosal will affecl the subieot wifh noise n6lir rrion tinhr nnl,r dian UgEqpollutldn, es well as mqgf mo-Ie trash and debns. Uue to external detriments increasinq drasiically, the subiecfs value wiiJ Qc iff."t o -lggatively- This is all bpsqlqLlbegltraordinary assurn CoST APPfOAeli Tg VALUE iror c{uked b{ Sedk *aej
l'As-is'Value ol Site lmprovemeflts
:----
Ittimreliu*;ntnsEcmor'iriufruOanuvamn1i 30 ;;;ii1Drca4DvAwe evcosTAppBoAcr =s * o^^ NC0ME AFPBoAiii J-t VaLilE (not r€luired by Fannie Mae) isrinr,.aMonrhlyl/tr[etne;t$ 0 - - ierosinmlluttprier--"'- -- --- -'-=t-- t@{:'r:irylf::195r.1ry1ry1rg;;raenimrenrr,rr --* -- 0
-l ltirrt ut
Are lhe commofl elements leased t0 0r by the H0meosrners, Assocjation? Descilbe conrmon tslements and recreationa{ facilities. lYs
ll0 lf N0, de$ribe thBsiatus 0i comple'don.
I I!0 1l Yes descrjbe ihe ref,tal tems and 0pt10ns
Fs&r
Fair Values
Patrick Fair
215 13th St
Seal Beach. CA 9074&6502
Teleshweiluil6e( (714) 351-1440 Farl*wbsr
rlruoreE
t&
Cole Estat+
E**:
Tolr$lMe l&ehr
Akflde Iumk:
l[wcExul.3rB
060101
DI]BS
lmi*Datei 0610912023
D$sars frAASl2023
BEFEBE'{CE
htemal&der#: 060101
kr&r Seie #:
Cliff{Filr #t
iflA]YACasf:
Hiifr rfl! # on fq{n: 060101
00H file # on fom:
lNd6S TEr ID:
EDFlols Si
OESCRIPTU}N
Lerdex Cole Estate
gliet*:
P!reh€ser/lontw: Cole Estatg
prope.tyAddl*s: 144 j9 Califomia Ave
Ciijc Baldwin park
tosn?: Los Angeles Slale: CA IP: 91706
LegdBqigtion: Lot 4 Licensed Surveyors Map As Per Bk 18 Pq 30 of L S fEES Ai{o}r{T
SFR addendum on exlernal detriment *
PAYIIEiITS AMOUI{I
emd{#:
Ch6k#:
Checi #:
Dat€:
06te:
oile:
0effi-di{x;
0wi$iqr
oes{riBlon;
SUBTOTAL 0
TOTAL UJE I $
e
She'll Find A lVoy
April28,2025
Mn & Mrs. Charles Cole
Re: Qpinion of Value for property bcated at 1441$ Calitornia Ave, Baldwin Park, 9'1706 Dear Charles and $usan:
The purpose of this evaluation is to determine the current mark*t value for 14419 Cali{ornia Ave, Baldwin Park, 9170S. I arn a licensed Flealtor and this i* my professional opinion ol value, not an appraisal. I have no conflict of interest with the parties.
The subiect property is locatad in thts City ol Baldwin Park in a neighborhood of conforming homes that vary in size. As per public record the property was built in 1926 and is 848 square feet, with 2 bedrooms and 1 bath, and the lot is S,987 square feet. There is a 1 car garege.
The house has many upgrades including a rernodeled kitchen and bath, new plumbing and electrical, new roof, new wood floor and carpet, new windows and doors, newer paintinside and out and a new HVAC syslem was installed. I did not measure the square footage of the house or the lot. The property is in excellent condition and the grounds are kept up. t OiO not notice any deficiencies.
1. 4S31 Bogart Ave, Baldwin Fark: *old on 1ZI1AZAA4 for g620,000. The prope&/ was built in 1951 and has 2, bedrooms, 1 bath, and has a 1 car garage. The home is 8Eg squaie feet with a lot size at 7 ,410 eguare feet. The home needed repairs throughout. lt was sold in its current "a$-is'n candition without repairs.
3. .1S16_lnniston Ave, Baldwin Park: sold on 12117t2}24for $630,000. The property was built 1952 and has 3 bedrooms, 1 bath, ductless AC system, and has a 1 car gara$e. The home is 958 square feet with a lot size o15,106 square feet. The home featured an upgiaded bathroom and kitchen flooring.
3. 15424Sandstone St, Baldwin Park: sold on 4t25t2025 for $670,000. The property was built 1951 and has 3 bedrooms, 1 bath, HVAC, and a 2 car garage. The home is 846 square faet with a lot size of S,177. The property was recently remodeled.
4. 4441La frica Ave, Ealdrruin Fark sold on BIABiA0AS for 9255,000- The property was built't937 and has 2 hedrooms, 2 baths, ductless AC system, and a 2 car garaga" The home is gg3 sq.uare feet with a lot $ize of 7,899. The property was recently remadeled throughout.
After taking into consideration the size, amenities, location *nd condition of the subjeet property in comparisan to the recent sales it is my opinion the the current rnarket value oi l++lg Callfornia Ave, Baldwin Park is $690,0S0.
The propoeed parldng €tructrre wih elevated eoccer fietds at 74424 Joanbridge & 14412 Joanbridge Slreet, Baldwin Park are located behind the eubiec't property. your plans of selling your propefi within the next 12lo 24 months it is my opinion this prolect will result in loss ol value of your home. If the parking sfructure and elevated are approved and completd you and potential new homeowners vrill looso &e and peacelul enJoyment of the home and yard. Addltionally there might be light and nohe Eoccer balls that could potentially cause tniury to occupants. This proiect will property less desirable for fu&re buyers.
Attached please findthe eomparable sales for fie subiect property. with any questions or concems at 626-4{17.3004 or via E.mail Kay,4fe4eStqte @ gmail..com.
Kay Eckert
Llons & Assodates Realtor
DRE#01186139
and enant
oontact me
Exhibit K lndoor Soccer Facilities
,ffi
Exhibit N Exterior Sports Ball Nets
'ri. a;
i'l'i-
i.:: "::l-
'::
-i
.i
\'.i
' .1'.-.
},i
Exhibit M Mature Trees condition of Approval
Cmv or Baloww Panx- CrupreR 153: Zotrtttrtc Coos
Definitions 153.220
S 153.220.l40- M Definitions
MANUFACTURED HOUSING. Both mobile homes and factory-built housing.
MANUFACTURING. A use engaged in the manufacture, predominantly form previously prepared materials, of finished products or parts, including processing fabrication, assembly, treatment and packaging of such products and incidental processing of extracted or raw materials.
MASSAGE ESTABLISHMENTISERVICES. An establishment where massage services are provided. Massages are defined as the application of a system of structured touch, pressure, movement, and holding to the soft tissues of the human body with the intent to enhance or restore the health and well-being of the client.
MATURE TREE. Any tree located in the front yard, front yard setback area, rear yard, rear yard setback area, side yard or side yard setback area and (1) rp-geater than lE lnches in d r when measured 54 inches from the ground or is greater than 40 feet or (2) is a tree of historic value due to the tree's (or stand of trees') age or prominence as a local identifying feature.
MEDICAL MARIIUANA DISPENSARY. A facility where marijuana is made available for medical purposes in accordance with Health and Safety Code $ 1L362.5, and any establishments from whidr marijuana is delivered to patients who cannot obtain it from a dispensary due to physical or mental disability, for medical purposes in compliance with Health and Safety Code s 11362.5.
MEDICAL USE. Any use involving the care of persons' general health by licensed practitioners.
Includes hospitals, urgent care clinics, out-patient facilities, doctor and dental offices, chiropractic and podiakic facilities, and similar practices of the medical arts and directly related laboratory services.
MOBILE HOME. A transportable structure that is built on a perrnanent chassis and designed to function as a dwelling when connected to the required utilities, induding plumbing, heating, air conditioning and eleckical systems (pursuant to Califomia Health and Safety Code SS 18007 and 18008). Consistent with the Califomia Health and Safety Code definitions, a mobile home is included in the definition of manufactured home.
MOBILE HOME PARK. Any area or tract of land where 2 or more lots are rented or leased, held out (or were formerly held out) for rent or lease to accommodate manufacfured homes or mobile homes used for human habitation (pursuant to California Health and Safety Code L53.220 Definitions
-rB
gE*E
H;
':s=iE
$
N
tss
$Qil
3 N-f-
N
_s
z.E.
C)tL
J
()
o)rs$
F
z.
IFotlla(t)
U)
oE.o
[u,z
UJ
sz
uolL
J
O
O)
rf
$
!i-'', ^ri=ffi.
t
*
Rx
dN
$*
Sa
s
Y
tx
+
- '-.rf gf,r!.-..
* :,..- L.. ; i"t:': -*.: :l*
I
nJ
LL
olzlNI
NSdO
"0 -,9 "0-.9
l-r
9ru10
i< ,0-,6i<ul tL-ztt=(L(a
IOu) :lgB
"0 -,9 "0 -
From: Sheima Berenji <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2025 12:57 PM
To: Nick Baldwin <[email protected]>
Cc: Marco Ornelas Lopez <[email protected]> Subject: Introduction: Sheima Berenji and FIT7 Project
CAUTION - EXTERNAL
SENDER.
To The Honorable Mayor and Fellow Councilmembers,
My name is Sheima Berenji, and I’m the applicant for the soccer training facility being proposed at 14424 Joanbridge, which was recently approved by the City of Baldwin Park’s Planning Commission. I understand that an appeal has been filed to the City Council, challenging the Planning Commission’s approval of the project, and that the appellant has been reaching out separately to members of this Council. While we will provide a detailed response to the appellant’s claims/arguments at the hearing on the appeal, I wanted to briefly introduce myself and my project at this time, and to highlight the benefit that I think the project could bring to the City, and to make myself available if the City should have any questions.
By way of brief background, our proposed project is a unique soccer training facility that will serve the youth in the City and surrounding areas. I, myself, have a long history with soccer, having played collegiate soccer at San Diego State University, and now coaching women’s soccer as an as Assistant Coach at Loyola Marymount University, and have now been training young athletes for years now. Additionally, I have a strong commitment to the San Gabriel Valley, and even earned my Master’s degree in Sports Psychology with an emphasis on Integrated Leadership at Azusa Pacific University. In continuing with my history, throughout this project, I will be one of the primary coaches, and it is my goal to lean on my experience and feed my passion to help my community and its youth. Further, the hope is that we will be able to provide this service to Baldwin Park and the surrounding communities, which unfortunately does not have many of these types of resources.
In regards to the project itself, the design of the project is markedly better than what currently exists at the site, and I believe would improve the overall quality of the neighborhood. Further, throughout the application process we have revised the project from the original submittal in response to comments from the community (including the appellant herself). For example, we have modified the project’s setbacks, walls, drive lanes and other improvements to hopefully address the appellant’s concerns. Additionally, while a more general recreational use is authorized through the City’s regulations, it is important to note that the proposed use of the project is both unique and relatively narrow, as it is focused on small-scale soccer training activities rather than a full-sized soccer fields/stadiums, and as such does not come with the same types of impacts that would result from something like a recreational soccer field. Further, as City staff will explain, the Planning Commission has also recognized that the project qualifies for the in-fill exemption under CEQA, which means that that City staff have determined that the project is consistent with the City’s zoning regulations, and would not result in any significant traffic, air quality, noise, or water quality impacts.
I look forward to presenting this project to the City Council, and to bring this great project to the City of Baldwin Park. If the City should have any questions with any of the foregoing or the project in general, please let me know and I would be happy to make myself available.
Thank you for your time.
Travis Van Ligten
Direct Dial: (714) 641-3435
E-mail: [email protected]
April 30, 2025
Rutan & Tucker, LLP | 18575 Jamboree Road , 9 th Floor Irvine , CA 92612 | 714- 641- 5100 | Fax 714 - 546 -9035 Orange County | Palo Alto | San Francisco | Scottsdale | www.rutan.com 3084/038710-0001
22163636.2 a04/30/25
VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL
Honorable Mayor Avila and Councilmembers
Damian, Ayala, Estrada, and Lozano
c/o Shirley Quinones
Deputy City Clerk
City of Baldwin Park
14403 East Pacific Avenue
Baldwin Park, CA 91706
[email protected]
Re: Applicant’s Letter in Opposition to Appeal of Resolution PC 23-28 Approving CP 23-05 and PR 23-21, and in Support of Project
Dear Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council:
This office represents the applicant (“Applicant”) for the proposed Fit7 Soccer Facility located at 14412 & 14424 Joanbridge Street (the “Project”) in the City of Baldwin Park (“City”).
On March 26, 2025, the Planning Commission approved a conditional use permit ( “CUP”) and found the Project was categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to the Class 32 infill exemption . On April 3, 2025, Ms. Susan Cole (“Appellant”) filed an appeal challenging the Planning Commission’s approval of the Project, and the findings that the commission had made in support of the Project. This letter is being provided to the City in respectful opposition to Ms. Susan Cole ’s appeal of the Planning Commission’ s March 26, 2025 approval of the Project, and in continued support of the Project.
As discussed in detail below, the Planning Commission’ s findings were supported by substantial evidence, including multiple technical studies and detailed factual findings, and thus correctly found that the Project was consistent with the City ’s zoning regulations, and was otherwise exempt from CEQA under the Class 32 infill exemption. Further, in addition to complying with the City’s General Plan and zoning ordinances, the Project will provide a unique soccer training facility that will greatly enhance the character of the neighborhood and serve the youth in the City and surrounding areas.
Conversely, the Appellant has not presented the City with any professional or technical study refuting the Applicant ’s submissions or the Planning Commission’ s (and City staff ’s) findings. Appellant has not demonstrated that she has any specialized expertise or qualifications to substantiate her allegations. As such, Appellant’s comments are entirely speculative and cannot constitute substantial evidence to support denial of the Project.
Honorable Mayor Avila and
Councilmembers Damian, Ayala, Estrada,
and Lozano
April 30, 2025