Attachment 6 — Burbank City Council, December 5, 2023

City of Burbank
Rancho Providencia Neighborhood
Protection Plan
2023 Update
Final Mitigated Negative Declaration
Prepared For:

City of Burbank
Community Development Department
Transportation Division
150 North Third Street
Burbank, CA 91502
Prepared By:

Willdan Engineering
13191 Crossroads Parkway North
Suite 405
City of Industry, CA 91746
December 2023
ATTACHMENT 6 - 1
ATTACHMENT 6 - 2
City of Burbank Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan December 2023 Final Mitigated Negative Declaration: Introduction and Summary i

Table of Contents

1.0 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................... ii

2.0 Summary of Project .................................................................................................................................. iii

3.0 Summary of Impacts ................................................................................................................................. iv

4.0 Public Review Process ............................................................................................................................... iv

5.0 Comments Received ................................................................................................................................. iv

6.0 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................................. iv

Appendices
A. Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan
B. Initial Study
C. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
D. Comments from Public
E. City Responses to Public Comments

ATTACHMENT 6 - 3
City of Burbank Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan December 2023 Final Mitigated Negative Declaration: Introduction and Summary ii

1.0 Introduction
Purpose
This Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) has been prepared for the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan Update (the Project). The City of Burbank, acting as lead agency, has prepared the MND in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Cal. Pub. Res. Code §§ 21000-21189) and the CEQA Guidelines (Cal. Code of Regulations, Title 14, Div. 6, Ch. 3, §§ 15000-15387 (January 2023).

Prior to approving the Project, the City Council must consider the proposed MND together with any comments received during the public review process. The Council may adopt the proposed MND only if it finds on the basis of the whole record before it that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment and that the MND reflects the lead agency’s independent judgment and analysis (CEQA Guidelines § 15074).

Organization of This Document
This Final MND consists of the following components:
• Summary of the Project (Section 2.0)
• Summary of Impacts and Mitigation (Section 3.0)
• Review Process (Section 4.0)
• Summary of Comments Received (Section 5.0)
• Lead Agency Conclusion (Section 6.0)
• Appendices
A. Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan
B. Initial Study
C. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
D. Comments from Public
E. City Responses to Public Comments
ATTACHMENT 6 - 4
City of Burbank Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan December 2023 Final Mitigated Negative Declaration: Introduction and Summary iii

2.0 Summary of Project

In August 1998, the City Council adopted The Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan to manage traffic flow through the neighborhood. The 1998 Neighborhood Protection Plan implemented improvements in various areas including the installation of gateway median islands, intersection reconfigurations, new street trees, crosswalk treatments, and preferential parking zones. An update in October 2001 included an evaluation of the effectiveness of initial measures implemented in May 2000 (median and crosswalk treatments on Alameda Avenue), and the second phase of measures (completion of treatments at the remaining Alameda Avenue intersections and treatments along Olive Avenue) completed in October 2000. Overall, the traffic count data collected in the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood identified a decrease in traffic volumes between August 1998 and October 2001 on a majority of streets.

The Rancho Providencia NPP 2023 Update addresses changes to the area’s traffic patterns since October 2001 in part resulting from new commercial development along Olive Avenue and media studio development to the south of the neighborhood. The Rancho Providencia NPP 2023 Update outlines the findings from multiple rounds of data collection, analyzes traffic patterns, and recommends improvements to address the issues identified.

The Neighborhood Protection Plan update process occurred in two phases. Phase 1 gathered initial data for the full neighborhood, and two streets were identified for temporary pilot projects. Phase 2 deployed follow-up data collection to assess the effectiveness of the temporary projects and to determine traffic pattern shifts for the whole neighborhood over the course of one year. The analysis of Phase 2 data resulted in a set of recommendations for permanent neighborhood-wide traffic improvements.

Phase I measures included:
• Permit-only preferential parking on Orchard Drive and on Reese Place between Olive Avenue and Oak Street (Staff distributed parking permits to residents by September 26, 2022, and enforcement began on October 17, 2022)
• Speed humps on Reese Place between Olive Avenue and Oak Street (Completed September 21, 2022)
• Temporary closure on Orchard Drive south of Olive Avenue to prohibit the Raising Cane’s drive- through queue from extending into the residential neighborhood (Completed September 23, 2022)
Phase II would maintain the Phase I measures but re-examine the temporary closure on Orchard Drive during a subsequent 12-month period, to determine its effectiveness and whether a permanent closure should be recommended. Phase II also identifies 15 street segments as eligible for resident petitions to install speed humps.

Additional details regarding the project description, data analysis, and recommendations can be found beginning on P. IS-3 in the Initial Study.

ATTACHMENT 6 - 5
City of Burbank Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan December 2023 Final Mitigated Negative Declaration: Introduction and Summary iv

3.0 Summary of Impacts
CEQA requires State and local agencies to identify potential significant environmental impacts of their actions and where possible, to avoid or mitigate those impacts. The City of Burbank, as Lead Agency for the proposed Project, produced an Initial Study (Appendix B) that evaluated the Project’s potential impacts. The analysis contained in the Initial Study identified three potentially significant impacts:
(1) impacts to nesting birds in tree canopies adjacent to noise and vibration-inducing construction activities, such as installation of speed humps; (2) impacts to roosting bats during construction activities; and (3) construction noise impacts on residents. Mitigation Measures BIO-1, BIO-2, NOI-1, and NOI-2 will reduce the respective impacts to less-than-significant levels (see Initial Study Executive Summary, pp. IS- i-v, discussion in the Initial Study, pp. IS-17-19, and pp. IS-28-29).

The Project’s Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program is set forth in Appendix C.

4.0 Public Review Process
The City published and circulated the Initial Study and accompanying Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration from October 4, 2023, through November 3, 2023. Project documents were also uploaded to the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research CEQAnet database for state agency review (https://ceqanet.opr.ca.gov/2023100147). Comments responding to the Initial Study are summarized in Section 5.0 below.

The Project is scheduled to be considered by the Burbank City Council on December 5, 2023. This Final MND will be available for review at the City’s Community Development Department office, 150 N. Third St., Burbank, California 91502, and on the City website at: https://www.burbankca.gov/web/ community-development/ranchoprovidencianpp.

5.0 Comments Received
No comments were received from other public agencies during the posting period. Twelve emails were received from residents. None of the comments addressed the environmental issues discussed in the Initial Study. The commenters focused on the speed hump petition process, as well as traffic safety. One commenter raised concerns about speed hump effects on emergency vehicles. Comments also addressed issues that exist outside the boundaries of the Rancho Providencia NPP Update.

In the judgment of City staff, these comments do not identify new information or effects that were not evaluated in the Initial Study, and do not require additional analysis as part of the CEQA documentation.

However, because these comments are important to be considered by the City Council prior to a decision on the project, they are included in Appendix D of the MND for consideration by the City Council. Appendix E reiterates the comments and provides City staff responses to them.

6.0 Conclusion
This Final MND, together with the Initial Study the comments received, the responses to comments, the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and all documentation incorporated by reference, constitutes the complete environmental review document for the Project. With the proposed mitigation, there is no substantial evidence of a significant effect on the environment.

ATTACHMENT 6 - 6
Appendix A
Rancho Providencia Neighborhood
Protection Plan
2023 Update
ATTACHMENT 6 - 7
ATTACHMENT 6 - 8

City of Burbank
December 2023
Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood
Protection Plan –
2023 Update
ATTACHMENT 6 - 9
ATTACHMENT 6 - 10
Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
Chapter 1 ............................................................................................................ 1 Introduction .............................................................................................. 1 Chapter 2 ............................................................................................................ 4 Initial Data Collection (Winter 2022) ......................................................... 4 Traffic Vehicle Counts ........................................................................... 4 Vehicle Speed Data .............................................................................. 8 Cut-Through Traffic Patterns .............................................................. 12 Parking Demand Data ........................................................................ 15 Chapter 3 .......................................................................................................... 25 Phase 1 Measures and Intermediate Data Collection
(Summer-Fall 2022) ................................................................................. 25 Initial Control Measures ..................................................................... 25 Initial Opening Operations ................................................................. 26 Early Opening................................ ................................ .................... 26 3 – 4 Weeks After Opening ................................ ............................... 28 Phase 1 Measures .............................................................................. 28 Intermediate Data Collection ............................................................. 32 6 Months After Opening: Intermediate Data Collection .................... 32 Traffic Volume Counts ................................ ................................ . 32 Vehicle Speed Data ................................ ................................ ...... 36 Parking Demand Data ................................ ................................ .. 39 Chapter 4 .......................................................................................................... 40 Community Outreach Efforts................................................................... 40 Virtual Webinar.................................................................................. 40 Orchard Drive and Reese Place Survey ............................................... 40 Public Notices ..................................................................................... 41 Public Comment Intake ...................................................................... 41 Chapter 5 .......................................................................................................... 43 Phase 2 Data Collection (January 2023) ................................................... 43 Traffic Vehicle Counts ......................................................................... 43 Vehicle Speed Data ............................................................................ 47 Cut-Through Traffic Patterns .............................................................. 50 Parking Demand Data ........................................................................ 53

CONTENTS
ATTACHMENT 6 - 11
Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
Chapter 6 .......................................................................................................... 54 Data Comparison (2022 – Intermediate – 2023) ...................................... 54 Traffic Vehicle Counts ......................................................................... 54 Vehicle Speed Data ............................................................................ 57 Cut-through Traffic Patterns ............................................................... 59 Chapter 7 .......................................................................................................... 60 2023 Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan Update ........... 60 Next Steps for Phase 1 Measures ........................................................ 60 Recommendation 1: Maintain Speed Humps on Reese Place ........... 60 Recommendation 2: Maintain Permit Parking Program on
Reese Place and Orchard Drive ................................ ......................... 60 Recommendation 3: Maintain Orchard Street
Temporary Closure for One Additional Year ................................ ..... 61 Additional Recommended Improvements ........................................... 61 Recommendation 4: Recommend Speed Locations ........................... 61 Recommendation 5: No Additional Street Closures ........................... 68 ATTACHMENT 6 - 12
Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
Tables
1 24-hour Directional Traffic Counts, January 2022 ...................................... 6 2 85th Percentile Traffic Speed Data, January 2022 .................................... 10 3 Cut-Through Traffic Patterns, January 2022 ............................................ 14 4 Peak Hour Cut-Through Pattern, January 2022 ....................................... 15 5 Parking Demand Data Weekday, January 2022 ....................................... 16 6 Parking Demand Data Weekend, January 2022 ....................................... 19 7 High Parking Demand Street Segments, January 2022 ............................ 23 8 24 -hour Directional Traffic Counts, Intermediate 2022 ........................... 34 9 85 th Percentile Traffic Speed Data, Intermediate 2022 ............................ 37 10 24-hour Directional Traffic Counts, January 2023 ................................... 44 11 85th Percentile Traffic Speed Data, January 2023 .................................... 48 12 Peak Hour Cut-Through Traffic Patterns, January 2023 ........................... 50 13 Cut-Through Pattern, January 2023 ........................................................ 52 14 24-hour Directional Traffic Counts Comparison ...................................... 56 15 85th Percentile Traffic Speed Data Comparison ....................................... 58 16 Peak Cut-through Pattern Comparison 2022 to 2023 .............................. 59 Summary Tables
S-1 Summary of 24 -hour Directional Traffic Counts, January 2022 ............... 4 S-2 Summary of 85th Percentile Traffic Speed Data, January 2022 ................ 9 S-3 High Parking Demand Street Segments, January 2022 ......................... 22 S-4 24 -hour Directional Traffic Counts, Intermediate Data 2022 ................ 32 S-5 Summary of 85th Percentile Traffic Speed Data,
Intermediate Data 2022 ...................................................................... 36 S-6 High Parking Demand Street Segments, Intermediate Data 2022 ......... 39 S-7 Summary of 24 -hour Directional Traffic Counts, January 2023 ............. 44 S-8 Summary of 85 th Percential Traffic Speed Data, January 2023 .............. 47 ATTACHMENT 6 - 13
Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
S-9 High Parking Demand Street Segments, May 2023 .............................. 53 S-10 24-hour Directional Traffic Counts, Comparison 2022-2023 ................. 59 S-11 Recommendations for the Installation of Speed Humps ...................... 68 Exhibits
A Existing Traffic Controls (2022) ................................................................. 3 B 3 Days Average Daily Traffic Volume, January 2022 .................................. 7 C 3 Days Average 85th Percentile Speed, January 2022 ............................... 11 D Cut-through Traffic Patterns, January 2022 ............................................ 13 E High Parking Demand Street Segments, January 2022 ............................ 24 F Temporary Closure Plan .......................................................................... 31 G 5 Days Average Daily Traffic Volume, Intermediate Data 2022 ................ 35 H 5 Days Average 85th Percentile Speed, Intermediate Data 2022 .............. 38 I 3 Days Average Daily Traffic Volume, January 2023 ................................ 46 J 3 Days Average 85th Percentile Speed, January 2023 .............................. 49 K Cut-through Traffic Patterns, January 2023 ............................................ 51 Appendices
A Average Daily Traffic and Speeds, January 2022
B License Plate Entering/Exiting Data, January 2022
C Parking Demand Data, January 2022
D Turning Movement Counts, January 2022
E Community Outreach Meeting Materials
F Average Daily Traffic and Speeds, Intermediate 2022 G Average Daily Traffic and Speeds, January 2023
H License Plate Entry/Exit Data, January 2023
I City of Burbank Speed Hump Policy
ATTACHMENT 6 - 14
1 Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
Introduction
This Study presents an update to the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan. The Rancho Providencia Neighborhood is bounded by Buena Vista Street, Olive Avenue, Victory Boulevard, Main Street, and Alameda Avenue. This area includes approximately 800 homes, Dolores Huerta Middle School, Saint Finbar Parish School and numerous other businesses. There are 15 north-south streets generally bisected by Oak Street. The Burbank2035 General Plan classifies all the streets within the neighborhood as Local Streets except for Oak Street, Verdugo Avenue, and Keystone Street, which are classified as Neighborhood Collector Streets. The streets that serve as a boundary for the Plan area are all Major Arterial Streets except for Buena Vista Street which is a Secondary Arterial Street and Main Street, which is a Neighborhood Collector Street (Complete Streets Plan, Figure 2-37).

The Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan was first adopted in August 1998 and updated in October 2001. The 1998 Neighborhood Protection Plan implemented improvements in various areas including the installation of gateway median islands, intersection reconfigurations, new street trees, crosswalk treatments, and preferential parking zones. The October 2001 update included an evaluation of the effectiveness of initial measures implemented in May 2000 (median and crosswalk treatments on Alameda Avenue), and the second phase of measures (completion of treatments at the remaining Alameda Avenue intersections and treatments along Olive Avenue) was completed in October 2000. Overall, the traffic count data collected in the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood identified a decrease in traffic volumes between August 1998 and October 2001 on a majority of streets.

CHAPTER 1
ATTACHMENT 6 - 15
2 Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
The treatments implemented in 2000 are identified in Exhibit A. The traffic controls in the neighborhoods are also identified in this exhibit.

Looking north at Orchard Dr
and Alameda Av
Landscaped median island
Looking south at Lincoln St
and Olive Av
Crosswalk treatment
Source: Google Maps, July 2022
Source: Google Maps, June 2022
ATTACHMENT 6 - 16
3 Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
EXHIBIT A – Existing Traffic Controls (January 2022)
ATTACHMENT 6 - 17
4 Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
Initial Data Collection (Winter 2022)
The existing traffic conditions of the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood were determined by collecting average daily traffic (ADT), traffic speeds, license plate origin/destination and parking demand data over a 3-day period. The data was collected in January 2022 as the baseline measurement for future assessment of possible traffic calming measures. This section outlines the data and initial findings for the neighborhood.

Appendix A provides the raw data for ADT and traffic speeds. Appendix B provides the raw data for the license plate survey. Appendix C provides the raw data for parking demand.

Traffic Vehicle Counts
Table 1 presents the January 2022 directional 24-hour traffic counts and the total of the average traffic for both directions. Exhibit B graphically identifies streets with an acceptable volume of traffic for Neighborhood Streets (1,000 ADT is considered “little traffic”) 1 and those that have the highest traffic volumes. The highest average traffic counts on the Local and Neighborhood Collector streets are listed on Table S-1. 1 Ben-Joseph, “Residential Street Standards & Neighborhood Traffic Control: A Survey of Cities' Practices and Public Officials' Attitudes,” (1995) https://nacto.org/docs/usdg/residential_street_standards_benjoseph.pdf CHAPTER 2
ATTACHMENT 6 - 18
5 Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
Table S-1
Summary of 24-hour Directional Traffic Counts
January 2022

SEGMENT
#

CLASSIFI-

CATION STREET SEGMENT

AVERAGE
DAILY

TRAFFIC
(vehicles)
14 Local Sparks Street Oak St to Alameda Av 1,017
15 Local Sparks Street Olive Av to Oak St 1,178
20 Local Mariposa
Street Oak St to Alameda Av 1,466
21 Local Mariposa
Street Verdugo Av to Oak St 1,062
26 Neighborhood
Collector Oak Street Beachwood Dr to
Mariposa St 1,380
27 Neighborhood
Collector Oak Street Mariposa St to Main St 1,498
Turning movement counts were gathered at all signalized intersections surrounding the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood. Turning movement counts were also gathered at Olive Avenue/Orchard Drive and Olive Avenue/Reese Place. This data was gathered on 3 weekdays in January 2022. Appendix D provides the summary turning movement counts at all locations.

ATTACHMENT 6 - 19
6 Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
Table 1
24-hour Directional Traffic Counts
January 2022
ATTACHMENT 6 - 20
7 Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
EXHIBIT B – Average Daily Traffic (ADT) January 2022
ATTACHMENT 6 - 21
8 Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
Vehicle Speed Data
Table 2 presents the directional 85th percentile speeds on streets within the study area and the combined 3 days of the 85th percentile speed of both directions. All the streets within the Neighborhood have a posted or prima facie speed limit of 25 miles per hour (mph). Verdugo Avenue and Olive Avenue have posted speed limits of 35 mph. The boundary streets of the Neighborhood also have
posted speed limits of 35 mph. Exhibit C graphically illustrates the combined 85th percentile speeds. Exhibit C identifies 12 street segments experiencing 85th percentile speeds that are 5 miles per hour or more over the speed limit. It is the industry standard that vehicle speeds 5 miles per hour over the speed limit (posted or prima facie) on local streets is acceptable. Any local street with a 25 mph speed limit that experiences speeds above 5 miles per hour is considered to have speeding issues, as noted in the City of Burbank Speed Hump Policy. 2 The boundary streets of the Neighborhood are not included in this analysis since they are Major Arterial Streets, Secondary Arterial Streets or Neighborhood Collector Streets with 35 mph speed limits (except for the school zone speed limits on Olive Avenue near St. Finbar Parish School and on Main Street between Alameda Avenue and Oak Street). Table S-2 identifies Local street segments experiencing speeds of 5 miles per hour (mph) or more over the 25-mph speed limit. 2 City of Burbank Speed Hump Policy:
https://www.burbankca.gov/documents/174714/1212192/Adopted+Speed+Hump+Criteria.pdf/f87911fb -dc57-f216- 35c7-7950886e1c4f?t=1653496470050
ATTACHMENT 6 - 22
5 Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
Table S-1
Summary of 24-hour Directional Traffic Counts
January 2022

SEGMENT
#

CLASSIFI-

CATION STREET SEGMENT

AVERAGE
DAILY

ATTACHMENT 6 - 23
9 Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
Table S-2
Summary of 85th Percentile Traffic Speed Data
January 2022

SEGMENT
#

CLASSIFI-
CATION STREET SEGMENT 85th %
SPEED
1 Local Edison Road Alameda Av to Buena
Vista St 30 mph
3 Local Lincoln Street Oak St to Alameda Av 31 mph
4 Local Myers Street Oak St to Alameda Av 32 mph
6 Local Lamer Street Oak St to Alameda Av 34 mph
7 Local Lamer Street Olive Av to Oak St 30 mph
12 Local Reese Place Oak St to Alameda Av 30 mph
13 Local Reese Place Olive Av to Oak St 33 mph
14 Local Sparks Street Olive Av to Oak St 33 mph
15 Local Sparks Street Oak St to Alameda Av 34 mph
16 Local Beachwood Drive Oak St to Alameda Av 32 mph
19 Local Griffith Park Drive Verdugo Av to Oak St 30 mph 20 Local Mariposa Street Oak St to Alameda Av 30 mph
21 Local Mariposa Street Verdugo Av to Oak St 32 mph
22 Local Virginia Avenue Verdugo Av to Oak St 31 mph
23 Local Lomita Avenue Verdugo Av to Oak St 30 mph
24 Local Glenwood Place Verdugo Av to Oak St 31 mph
mph = miles per hour
ATTACHMENT 6 - 24
10 Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
Table 2
85th Percentile Traffic Speed Data
January 2022
ATTACHMENT 6 - 25
11 Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
EXHIBIT C – 85 Percentile speeds Map January 2022
ATTACHMENT 6 - 26
12 Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
Cut-through Traffic Patterns
A license plate survey methodology was used to determine the cut-through traffic occurring in the neighborhood. The data were collected by stationing experienced staff at 12 entry/exit points to the neighborhood for 3 periods (7:00 – 9:00 AM, 11:00 AM – 1:00 PM, and 4:00 – 6:00 PM) on Tuesday, January 18, 2022. Partial license plate digits (last 3) were gathered and compared for entering and exiting vehicles at the 12 entry/exit points. Vehicles that entered the neighborhood and exited the neighborhood in less than 5 minutes were considered as cut-through traffic. These entry/exit points and corresponding estimated cut-through traffic during the 6 hours studied are depicted in Exhibit D. Table 3 presents a matrix identifying the pattern and number of vehicles from an entry point to an exit point.

ATTACHMENT 6 - 27
13 Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
EXHIBIT D – Cut-thru traffic Map January 2022
ATTACHMENT 6 - 28
14 Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
Table 3
Cut-through Traffic Patterns (# of vehicles in pattern) January 2022
ATTACHMENT 6 - 29
15 Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
The cut-through data indicate that Keystone Street between Olive Avenue (Node #1) and Alameda Avenue (Node #8), and vice versa, carries the most cut-through traffic during the three peak periods studied. Keystone Street is a Neighborhood Collector, and it has signalized crossings at Alameda Avenue, Olive Avenue, and other arterial streets outside of the neighborhood. Table 4 summarizes this pattern.

Table 4
Peak Hour Cut-through Pattern (# of vehicles)
January 2022
STREET PATTERN 7:00 to
9:00 AM
11:00 AM
to 1:00
PM
4:00 to
6:00 PM
Keystone St
Olive Av to
Alameda Av 18 8 13
Alameda Av to
Olive Av
17 27 10
Parking Demand Data
Parking demand data were collected for the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood on Parish Street, Orchard Drive, and Reese Place from Olive Avenue to Oak Street. These three streets were considered the most likely to have impacted parking due to the impending opening of the Raising Cane’s restaurant. Each block was separated at approximately the center of the street segment. For consistency, morning (7:00 – 9:00 AM), mid-day (11:00 AM – 1:00 PM), and evening (4:00 – 6:00 PM) data collection periods were used. Data were collected on a weekday, Thursday, March 3, 2022, and on a weekend, Sunday, March 6, 2022. Tables 5 and 6 provide the parking demand data for a weekday and weekend.

ATTACHMENT 6 - 30
16 Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
Table 5
Parking Demand Data (Weekday
Morning) March 2022
ATTACHMENT 6 - 31
17 Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
Table 5 Continued
Parking Demand Data (Weekday Mid-Day)
March 2022
ATTACHMENT 6 - 32
18 Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
Table 5 Continued
Parking Demand Data (Weekday Evening)
March 2022
ATTACHMENT 6 - 33
19 Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
Table 6
Parking Demand Data (Weekend Morning)
March 2022
ATTACHMENT 6 - 34
20 Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
Table 6 Continued
Parking Demand Data (Weekend Mid-Day)
March 2022
ATTACHMENT 6 - 35
21 Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
Table 6 Continued
Parking Demand Data (Weekend Evening)
March 2022
ATTACHMENT 6 - 36
22 Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
The threshold for high parking demand was set at 75 percent and indicated that 7 street segments reached or exceeded this demand on the weekday and/or weekend during at least one of the peak periods observed. These high parking demand segments are summarized in Table 7 and Exhibit E.

The 7 street segments identified as having high parking demand are found in Table S-3.

Table S-3
High Parking Demand Street Segments
March 2022
SEGMENT # STREET
SIDE
OF
SREET

PARKING

RESTRICTIONS SEGMENT
11 (North) Orchard Drive East No Parking Monday
8 am - 10 am
220 Orchard Dr
to Olive Av
11 (North) Orchard Drive West No Parking Friday
8 am - 10 am
Olive Av to 213
Orchard Dr
11 (South) Orchard Drive East No Parking Monday
8 am - 10 am
Oak St to 220
Orchard Dr
13 (North) Reese Place East No Parking Friday
8 am - 10 am
118 Reese Pl
to Olive Av
13 (North) Reese Place West
No Parking Monday 8
am - 10 am
2 Hr Parking 8 am - 6
pm, Mon - Fri Except by
Permit
Olive Av to 213
Reese Pl
9 (North) Parish Place West
2 spaces s/o Olive Av.

No Parking Monday 8
am-10 am
Olive Av to 135
Parish Pl
9 (North) Parish Place West 20 min Loading Zone 8
am - 6 pm
Olive Av to 135
Parish Pl
ATTACHMENT 6 - 37
23 Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
Table 7
High Parking Demand Segments
March 2022
ATTACHMENT 6 - 38
24 Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
EXHIBIT E – Map of High parking demand segments
ATTACHMENT 6 - 39
25 Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
Phase 1 Measures and Intermediate Data Collection
(Summer-Fall 2022)
During the development of the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan, a Raising Cane’s restaurant opened on the southeast corner of Orchard Drive and Olive Avenue. As a result, initial traffic calming measures directly around the Raising Cane’s restaurant were addressed as Phase 1 of the overall Plan update to study the effect of such measures and determine whether they should be incorporated or modified within the final Plan update effort.

Initial Control Measures
Ahead of the June 7, 2022, opening date, the Community Development Department, Public Works Department, Burbank Police Department (BPD), and restaurant management collaborated to develop a temporary traffic control plan to address high numbers of customers expected to frequent the new restaurant. The initial plan included:
• Positioning BPD Officers at the intersections on Olive Avenue to keep them clear, control traffic, monitor safety, and maintain the order of the drive-through line. The cost of traffic enforcement was paid for by Raising Cane’s;
• Installing parking restrictions along the south side of Olive Avenue eastbound parking lane to ensure an orderly drive-through queue;
• Implementing turn restrictions and signage to ensure the safe and orderly movement of traffic and reduce impacts to the local streets;
• Performing consistent monitoring and communication by City Staff and Raising Cane’s personnel; and
• Placing a periodic short-term closure on Orchard Drive during the opening weeks.

In addition to City-implemented measures, Staff worked directly with Raising Cane’s on the restaurant’s implementation of additional measures, including:
• Deploying private security officers to manage on-site restaurant traffic circulation and discourage vehicle queuing in public streets outside of the designated Olive Avenue queuing area;
• Providing signage at adjacent driveways and intersections encouraging vehicles to keep space clear for vehicle entry and exit;
CHAPTER 3
ATTACHMENT 6 - 40
26 Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
• Working with local businesses and Burbank Unified School District to secure off-site parking spaces for Raising Cane’s employees in lots with excess off-street parking; • Providing financial assistance, property improvements, and security presence for adjacent businesses;
• Closing at 10:00 p.m.; and
• Eliminating the use of the drive-through speaker and outdoor amplified music.

Initial Opening Operations
Early Opening
The grand opening impacted travel on Olive Avenue, Orchard Drive, and other neighboring streets intermittently. Field observations and video surveillance were conducted during the initial opening period of the restaurant.

Traffic queues on Olive Avenue extended back to Lamer Street at peak restaurant times. This impeded access to Lamer Street, Parish Street and Orchard Drive.

ATTACHMENT 6 - 41
27 Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
During the initial opening, BPD directed traffic at Orchard Drive to keep access open for residents and control traffic entering and exiting the Raising Cane’s driveway on Olive Avenue.

No access was permitted from the Orchard Drive driveway. All customers (drive through, pick-up, and eat-in) were directed to enter and exit the site from the Olive Avenue driveway.

Residential parking on Orchard Drive and Reese Place and private parking lots nearby were impacted by restaurant customers. In addition, the temporary removal of the Olive Avenue on-street parking impacted customer parking for several commercial businesses immediately west ATTACHMENT 6 - 42
28 Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
of the restaurant. Many restaurant patrons parked on the residential side streets and walked to the restaurant.
3 – 4 Weeks After Opening
Approximately one month after the restaurant opening, two elements of the traffic control plan were removed:
i. The commercial/business permit parking restriction along the south side of Olive Avenue from South Orchard Drive to South Parish Place expired and was not renewed, and; ii. Active BPD traffic management was discontinued.

The other elements of the traffic control plan continued to be used to manage traffic and congestion. In addition, while not providing traffic control, BPD began deploying strict enforcement of moving violations in the area surrounding Raising Cane’s, notably drivers who queued in a travel lane. The private security guards hired by Raising Cane’s began excluding drivers from entering the site when the drive-through queues extended into City streets.

Phase 1 Measures
Following approval by the City Council on August 23, 2022, and informed by data collection in July and August (detailed in Intermediate Data Collection section below), the following measures were installed:
i. Permit-only preferential parking was installed on South Orchard Drive and on South Reese Place between Olive Avenue and Oak Street. Staff began distributing parking permits to residents on Orchard Drive and Reese Place on September 26, 2022, a nd allowed time for all residents to apply and receive their permits before beginning enforcement on October 17, 2022.
ii. City Staff installed speed humps on South Reese Place between Olive Avenue and Oak Street on September 21, 2022.
iii. A temporary closure on South Orchard Drive south of Olive Avenue was established on September 23, 2022.

The City procured a consultant to develop the temporary closure measures; worked with the Burbank Police Department, Burbank Fire Department, and Department of Public Works to ensure compliance and address any concerns; and engaged the neighboring community in the process. The temporary closure served the purpose of blocking the drive-through queue from ATTACHMENT 6 - 43
29 Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
forming into the residential neighborhood. It also enabled drive-through guests to exclusively use the entrance on Orchard Drive, allowing Raising Cane’s to double the queue capacity of the restaurant on-site and reduce the likelihood of backups onto Olive Avenue. Walk-up/Pick-up guests were allowed to access the restaurant from Olive Avenue. Exhibit F provides the temporary closure plans
implemented on Orchard Drive south of Olive Avenue.

The initial grand opening traffic volumes subsided from Summer 2022 to Fall 2022, and the traffic calming measures introduced new means to limit the effects of restaurant traffic on the surrounding neighborhood. Raising Cane’s traffic settled into a pattern of intermittent queuing during peak hours (12:00 – 2:00 pm, 7:00 – 9:00 pm), but the vehicle queue rarely reached Olive Avenue after the installation of the traffic calming measures. Raising Cane’s security guards continued to direct guests accessing the restaurant (drive-through on Orchard Drive and walk-up on Olive Avenue).

Traffic volumes have decreased from the opening period, and speeds on Reese Place have decreased since the installation of speed humps.

While these temporary closure measures limited some of the effects of the restaurant’s operations, some issues persisted. Although implementation of parking permits reduced the ATTACHMENT 6 - 44
30 Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
number of restaurant patrons parking in the neighborhood and walking to the restaurant, some patrons continued to do so, often leading to ancillary issues like idling and littering. Before Raising Cane’s opened, several businesses along Olive Avenue relied upon side streets for overflow patron and employee parking. Now, parking for those businesses is limited to street parking near Orchard Drive or utilization of a set number of parking permits distributed by the City. While that number of permits is dictated by the Burbank Municipal Code, several businesses have expressed concern that the number of permits distributed does not satisfy their needs.

ATTACHMENT 6 - 45
31 Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
EXHIBIT F – Temporary Closure Plan
ATTACHMENT 6 - 46
32 Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
Intermediate Data Collection
6 Months After Opening: Intermediate Data Collection
To determine the traffic-related effects of the Phase 1 Measures, a comparison of the intermediate data on Parish Place, Orchard Drive, Reese Place, and Sparks Street was conducted. Data was collected in July 2022 and August 2022 (only on Orchard Drive and Reese Place) to establish traffic conditions after Raising Cane’s opened but before installation of Phase 1 Measures. Follow-up data were collected in November 2022 to observe change in traffic patterns after the installation of Phase 1 Measures. Appendix F provides the raw Intermediate Data for ADT, traffic speeds, and parking demand data.

Traffic Volume Counts
Table 8 presents the directional 24-hour traffic counts for the intermediate data collection.

Exhibit G graphically identifies the intermediate traffic volumes on the four streets analyzed. A summary of the 5-day combined vehicle traffic counts are presented in Table S-4 .

Table S-4
24-hour Directional Traffic Counts
Intermediate Data 2022
Average (Weekday)
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC - 2022
SEGMENT # CLASSIFI-
CATION STREET JAN JUL* AUG* NOV
9 Local Parish Place 618 1,178
11 Local Orchard Drive 502 1,241 840 551
13 Local Reese Place 418 1,180 718 818
15 Local Sparks Street 1,195 1,433
* - Data provided by City of Burbank
The vehicle traffic volumes on Orchard Drive and Reese Place did decline. After the opening of the restaurant. There was a 56 percent decrease in traffic on Orchard Drive (1,241 ADT to 551 ADT) after the Phase 1 Measures were implemented. Reese Place experienced a 31 percent decrease (1,180 ADT to 818 ADT) during this same time period. The comparison ATTACHMENT 6 - 47
33 Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
of traffic volumes between August 2022 and November 2022 identified mixed results:

Orchard Drive decreased by 34 percent (840 ADT to 551 ADT), Reese Place increased by 14 percent (718 ADT to 818 ADT).

ATTACHMENT 6 - 48
34 Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
Table 8
24-Hour Traffic Counts
Intermediate Data 2022
ATTACHMENT 6 - 49
35 Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
EXHIBIT G – ADT Intermediate Volume Map, Intermediate Data 2022 ATTACHMENT 6 - 50
36 Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
Vehicle Speed Data
Table 9 presents the directional 85th percentile speeds on streets within the limited study area.

Exhibit H graphically illustrates the combined 85th percentile speeds. A summary of the average speeds is identified in Table S-5.

Table S-5
Summary of 85th Percentile Traffic Speed Data
Intermediate Data 2022
AVG 85th % SPEEDS* - 2022

SEGMENT
#

CLASSIFI-

CATION STREET JANUARY JULY AUGUST NOVEMBER

NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB
9 Local Parish Street 30 29 28 29
11 Local Orchard Drive 28 26 24 29 28 25 26 27
13 Local Reese Place 33 32 26 27 31 24 24 25
15 Local Sparks Street 35 34 32 32
* = miles per hour
Comparing the July to November speeds, Orchard Drive and Reese Place increased in the northbound while decreasing slightly in the southbound direction.

Comparing the August to November speeds, Orchard Drive decreased in the northbound direction from 28 to 26 mph and increased in the southbound direction from 25 to 27 mph; Reese Place decreased in the northbound direction from 31 to 24 mph and increased in the southbound direction from 24 to 25 mph. The installation of speed humps on South Reese Place took place in September 2022 and may have contributed to the 7-mph reduction in northbound speeds.

Any street closure will divert traffic to other adjacent streets, specially within a grid system roadway network. While the increase in traffic volumes and speeds is noticeable, they are still within the acceptable residential street traffic levels. The exception to this is the average speed identified on Sparks Street at 32 mph (7 mph higher than the posted speed limit). This speed is slightly lower than January 2022 that showed an average speed of 34 mph.

ATTACHMENT 6 - 51
37 Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
Table 9
85th-Percentile Speed Data
Intermediate Data 2022
ATTACHMENT 6 - 52
38 Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
EXHIBIT H – 85th Percentile Speed Intermediate Data map ATTACHMENT 6 - 53
39 Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
Parking Demand Data
As part of the Phase 1 Measures, preferential parking was implemented on Orchard Drive and on Reese Place south of Olive Avenue. The parking demand/utilization comparison from August 2022 (before the preferential parking was installed) to November 2022 identified a reduced on- street parking demand on both Orchard Drive and Reese Place (see Table S-6). Parking utilization on the residential portion of Orchard Drive decreased from 64.4 percent to 43.1 percent during the evening peak hours of 7:00 PM to 9:00 PM. Reese Place also decreased from 50.9 percent to

43.9 percent during the evening peak hours. From before Raising Cane’s opened in March 2022 to after permit parking was established, parking demand in the problematic evening hours declined on Orchard Drive from 55.9 percent to 43.1 percent and remained steady on Reese Place.

Table S-6
High Parking Demand Street Segments (Weekday, Residential Zones)

SEGMENT
#

CLASSIFI-

CATION STREET
MARCH 2022 AUGUST
2022

NOVEMBER
20221
MID-
DAY
EVEN-
ING
MID-
DAY
EVEN-
ING
MID-
DAY
EVEN-
ING
11 Local Orchard
Drive 69.5% 55.9% 64.4% 64.4% 55.2% 43.1%
13 Local Reese
Place 33.3% 42.1% 42.1% 50.9% 54.4% 43.9%
1 = After installation of permit parking.

ATTACHMENT 6 - 54
40 Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
Community Outreach Efforts
Virtual Webinar
On April 7, 2022, Staff held the first public meeting with the community to present background information on the existing Rancho Providencia NPP, to present the results of initial data collection, to outline the process for implementation, and to receive input on how the community envisions improvements to their streets. In this meeting, Staff presented the phased approach for the NPP update process, with Phase 1 focusing on the streets directly around the Raising Cane’s Restaurant and Phase 2 proposing improvements for the entire neighborhood. After the presentation, attendees were encouraged to verbally ask questions and provide comments to which City staff responded. Attendees also submitted questions and comments in writing utilizing the “Q&A” feature on the digital meeting platform. Questions asked verbally during the meeting, written questions submitted in the Q&A panel during the webinar, and questions submitted via email were then answered by City staff. Comments received by those attending the community meeting included concerns about cut-through traffic, high vehicle speeds, and residentially adjacent commercial uses. A copy of the presentation is provided in Appendix E. The meeting was viewed by 51 attendees.

Orchard Drive and Reese Place Survey
Staff distributed a survey to residents on Orchard Drive and Reese Place by mail on July 15, 2022, to determine overall support for proposed installation permit parking and speed humps. After distributing the mail survey, 78 percent of residents on South Orchard Drive and 79 percent of residents on South Reese Place supporte d implementation of permit-only parking from 8:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. every day.

Sixty percent of residents on South Reese Place who responded to the survey supporte d the installation of speed humps on their street. Although 71 percent of residents on Orchard Drive favored speed humps, Staff did not recommend speed humps on that street because a temporary road closure was recommended instead.

CHAPTER 4
ATTACHMENT 6 - 55
41 Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
In-Person Community Meeting
Staff will hold a Community Meeting on October 19, 2023, to present the draft plan update and collect public comment at the City of Burbank Community Services Building. At the meeting, staff will present the data collected over the course of the plan update development as well as the plan update recommendations. After the presentation, staff will collect public comment and answer questions.

This meeting will serve to both hear feedback on the plan and collect comments on the Environmental Review process, open from October 4 through November 3. Those comments will be incorporated into the final recommendation to City Council.

Public Notices
Staff circulated public notices by mail to ensure that neighborhood residents were aware of and had the opportunity to attend and/or provide comments for planned public meetings. All notices were distributed at least 10 business days before the date of any meeting and included contact information for staff managing the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan.

Public notices were distributed for:
• Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan public meeting – Circulated on March 24, 2022, in advance of April 7, 2022, public meeting. Notice outlined background information on the NPP update and details on how to participate in the virtual meeting. • City Council Meeting for Proposed Traffic Calming Measures on Orchard Drive and Reese Place – Circulated on August 8, 2022, in advance of City Council meeting on August 23, 2022, to discuss proposed traffic calming measures including 1) permit-only parking on these streets, 2) speed humps on Reese Place, and 3) a temporary road closure on Orchard Drive.

Neighbors were invited to provide public comment in advance or in person at the City Council meeting.
• Installation of “No Parking” signage – Circulated September 14, 2022. Provided information on how to apply for parking permit and timing for permit zone enforcement. • City Council Meeting for Update on Traffic Calming Measures – Circulated November 21, 2022, in advance of the December 6, 2023, City Council meeting where Staff provided an update on the effects of these recently-installed measures. Neighbors were invited to provide public comment in advance or in person at the City Council meeting. • Environmental comment period – Posted in Los Angeles Times on September 20, 2023 and uploaded to CEQAnet on October 4, 2023.

ATTACHMENT 6 - 56
42 Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
• City Council meeting – To be circulated on November 17, 2023, in advance of City Council meeting on December 5, 2023.

Public Comment Intake
Staff provided contact information in every public communication or public presentation regarding the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan. Since the first public notice for the plan update, Staff have received and responded to over 250 comments and questions from neighbors in the residential and business areas of the neighborhood. These comments have provided valuable information on how the community’s roadways currently operate and meaningful guidance on how neighbors want to shape the community in the future.

ATTACHMENT 6 - 57
43 Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
Phase 2 Data Collection (January 2023)
In Phase 2 of the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan update Staff collected and analyzed data for the full neighborhood to inform the final update to the Plan. In order to effectively analyze the neighborhood-wide effect of the Phase 1 Measures (i.e., speed humps on Reese Place, closure of Orchard Drive, permit parking on both streets), data were collected in January 2023 in the same locations and using the same methods as Initial data collection in January 2022, including average daily traffic (ADT), traffic speeds, and license plate entering/exiting traffic.

Appendix G provides the raw ADT and traffic speed data from January 2023. Appendix H provides the raw license plate survey data from January 2023.

Traffic Vehicle Counts
Table 10 presents the January 2023 directional 24-hour traffic counts and the total of the average traffic for both directions. Exhibit I graphically identifies streets with an acceptable volume of traffic for neighborhood streets and those that have the highest traffic volumes. The highest average January 2023 traffic counts (Table S-7) on the neighborhood streets were found on the same 6 segments identified with the highest average traffic counts in the January 2022 data.

CHAPTER 5
ATTACHMENT 6 - 58
44 Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection
Plan December 2023
Table S-7
Summary of 24-hour Directional Traffic Counts
January 2023

SEGMENT
#

CLASSIFI-

CATION STREET SEGMENT

AVERAGE
DAILY

TRAFFIC
(vehicles)
14 Local Sparks Street Oak St to Alameda Av 1,189
15 Local Sparks Street Olive Av to Oak St 1,407
20 Local Mariposa
Steet Oak St to Alameda Av 1,483
21 Local Mariposa
Steet Verdugo Av to Oak St 1,174
26 Neighborhoo
d Collector Oak Street Beachwood Dr to
Mariposa St 1,491
27 Neighborhoo
d Collector Oak Street Mariposa St to Main St 1,607
ATTACHMENT 6 - 59
45 Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
Table 10
24-Hour Directional Counts
January 2023
ATTACHMENT 6 - 60
46 Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
EXHIBIT I – ADT January 2023 Map
ATTACHMENT 6 - 61
47 Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
Vehicle Speed Data
Table 11 presents the directional 85th percentile speeds on streets within the study area and the combined 3-day average of the 85th percentile speeds of both directions. Exhibit J graphically illustrates the combined 85th percentile speeds. Table S-8 identifies the street segments experiencing 85th percentile speeds of 5 miles per hour (mph) or more over the 25-mph speed limit.

Table S-8
Summary of 85th Percentile Traffic Speed Data
January 2023

SEGMENT
#

CLASSIFI-
CATION STREET SEGMENT 85%
SPEED
3 Local Lincoln Street Oak St to Alameda Av 31 mph
4 Local Myers Street Oak St to Alameda Av 32 mph
6 Local Lamer Street Oak St to Alameda Av 31 mph
9 Local Parish Place Olive Av to Oak St 30 mph
11 Local Orchard Drive Olive Av to Oak St 30 mph
14 Local Sparks Street Oak St to Alameda Av 34 mph
15 Local Sparks Street Olive Av to Oak St 35 mph
16 Local Beachwood Drive Oak St to Alameda Av 34 mph
19 Local Griffith Park Drive Olive Av to Oak St 30 mph
20 Local Mariposa Street Oak St to Alameda Av 30 mph
21 Local Mariposa Street Verdugo Av to Oak St 32 mph
22 Local Virginia Avenue Verdugo Av to Oak St 30 mph
23 Local Lomita Avenue Verdugo Av to Oak St 31 mph
24 Local Glenwood Place Verdugo Av to Oak St 33 mph
mph = miles per hour
ATTACHMENT 6 - 62
48 Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
Table 11
85th Percentile Speed
January 2023
ATTACHMENT 6 - 63
49 Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
EXHIBIT J – 85th Percentile Speeds January 2023
ATTACHMENT 6 - 64
50 Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
Cut-through Traffic Patterns
The cut-through traffic occurring in the neighborhood was determined by using a license plate survey method. The same time periods used in the January 2022 Data analysis were used for the January 2023 Data on Thursday, January 19, 2023. Vehicles that entered the neighborhood and exited the neighborhood in less than 5 minutes were considered as cut-through traffic. These entry/exit points and corresponding estimated cut-through traffic are depicted in Exhibit K.

Table 12 presents a matrix identifying the pattern and number of vehicles from an entry point to an exit point. The data indicate that Keystone Street between Olive Avenue (Node #1) and Alameda Avenue (Node #8) and vice versa, remains the highest cut-through traffi c pattern during each periods studied. Table 13 summarizes this After Data pattern.

Table 12
Peak Hour Cut-through Pattern (# of vehicles)
January 2023
STREET PATTERN 7:00 to
9:00 AM
11:00 AM
to 1:00
PM
4:00 to
6:00 PM
Keystone St
Olive Av to
Alameda Av 14 8 10
Alameda Av to
Olive Av
12 29 19
ATTACHMENT 6 - 65
51 Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
EXHIBIT K – Cut-Through Traffic Patterns January 2023
ATTACHMENT 6 - 66
52 Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
Table 13
Cut-Through Traffic Patterns
January 2023
ATTACHMENT 6 - 67
53 Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
Parking Demand Data
Follow-up collection of Parking Demand Data was collected on the two streets that implemented a permit parking program, Orchard Drive, and Reese Place. Follow-up counts took place in November 2022 and May 2023. March 2022 data collection on these streets identified higher demand in the vicinity of the businesses along Olive Avenue, much of which was time- restricted. After Raising Cane’s opened, parking data for the residential portion of each street showed an increase in demand (August 2022). This information and concerns expressed by residents in the vicinity of Raising Cane’s Restaurant resulted in the implementation of permit parking restrictions on Orchard Drive and Reese Place between Olive Avenue and Oak Street.

After implementation, parking demand slightly declined. Data collected in May 2023 showed the continuation of that trend, with parking demand either declining or remaining steady on these streets. With the implementation of automated parking permit enforcement in June 2023, it is expected that non-compliant vehicle parking will further decrease. Staff will consider follow-up parking counts if necessary.

Table S-9
High Parking Demand Street Segments
Highest Demand 15-Minute Period (Weekday), Residential Zones Only

SEGMENT
#

CLASSIFI-

CATION STREET
MARCH 2022 AUGUST
2022

NOVEMBER
20221 May 2023
MID-
DAY
EVEN-
ING
MID-
DAY
EVEN-
ING
MID-
DAY
EVEN-
ING
MID-
DAY
EVEN-
ING
11 Local Orchard
Drive 69.5% 55.9% 64.4% 64.4% 55.2% 43.1% 50.0% 51.8%
13 Local Reese
Place 33.3% 42.1% 42.1% 50.9% 54.4% 43.9% 42.1% 42.1%
1 = After installation of permit parking.

ATTACHMENT 6 - 68
54 Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
Data Comparison (2022 – Intermediate – 2023)
The previous chapters provide details on the data collected for the Rancho Providencia NPP. This chapter will provide the comparison of the 3 data sets. The Intermediate Data set is limited to Parish Street, Orchard Drive, Reese Place and Sparks Street.

Traffic Vehicle Counts
Table 14 summarizes the comparison of ADT traffic count data. Table S-1 0 identifies the highest changes in the ADT data.

Table S-10
24-hour Directional Traffic Counts
Comparison 2022 - Intermediate - 2023

SEGMENT
# STREET SEGMENT JANUARY
2022 ADT
JULY 2022
ADT*
AUGUST
2022 ADT*
NOV
2022
ADT
January
2023 ADT
9 Parish
Place
Olive Av to
Oak St 612 1,175 1,141
11 Orchard
Drive
Olive Av to
Oak St 502 1,241 840 551 427
12 Reese
Place
Oak St to
Alameda Av 207 164
13 Reese
Place
Olive Av to
Oak St 417 1,180 718 818 763
ADT = average daily traffic, vehicles per day
CHAPTER 6
ATTACHMENT 6 - 69
55 Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
Table S-10 Continued
SEGMENT # STREET SEGMENT Difference (JAN
2022 to JAN 2023)
% Change (JAN
2022 to JAN 2023)
9 Parish Place Olive Av to Oak St 529 86.5%
11 Orchard Drive Olive Av to Oak St -75 -14.9%
12 Reese Place Oak St to
Alameda Av -43 -20.9%
13 Reese Place Olive Av to Oak St 345 82.7%
As expected, the temporary closure of Orchard Drive south of Olive Avenue did impact the traffic volumes on neighboring streets. The ADT on Orchard Drive reduced by 14.9 percent while the traffic volumes on Parish Place to the west (86.5 percent) and Reese Place to the east (82.7 percent) increased significantly. However, the ADT on Parish Place (1,141 ADT) and Reese Place (763 ADT) are near the standard level of ADT expected on a residential Local Street.

One explanation could be the introduction of the Raising Cane’s restaurant. Motorists who would travel down South Orchard Drive, whether for Raising Cane’s or residents’ vehicle trips over the course of a normal day, are now diverted down neighboring streets. Due to the orientation of traffic flow on Olive Avenue, South Reese Place is the next available travel option for a motorist after South Orchard Drive. While that also may be a possibility for South Parish Place, the notable increase in traffic volume is less clearly tied to the closure on South Orchard Drive. The intersections of South Parish Place/Olive Avenue and South Keystone Street/Olive Avenue are signalized. These two intersections are on Olive Avenue between Buena Vista Street and Sparks Street (a 0.62-mile distance) a
nd serve travel to Burroughs High School and Walt Disney Studios, which had not yet returned from the COVID-19 Pandemic to full-time in-person work when initial data was collected in January 2023.3 The normalization of school and work schedules may have increased travel through the signal on South Parish Place/Olive Avenue.
3 “Disney employees were required to return to the office 4-days per week starting March 1, 2023, although many had begun to transition back before.” LA Times, https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/business/ story/2023-01-09/disney-return-to-office-four-days-bob-iger ATTACHMENT 6 - 70
56 Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
Table 14
24-Hour Directional Traffic Counts
Comparison: 2022, Intermediate, 2023
ATTACHMENT 6 - 71
57 Rancho Providecnia
Neighborhood P rotection Plan
December 2023
Vehicle Speed Data
Table 15 summarizes the 85 th percentile speeds comparison. The decrease in speeds on Edison Road could be a result of the increased volume as workers continued to return to in-person jobs at Walt Disney Studios and Warner Brothers Studios, following remote work schedules during the COVID-19 Pandemic.4 Edison Road experienced an increase in ADT of 37.7 percent (from 690 to 951 ADT, Table 14), but more vehicles does not necessarily mean higher speeds. The 23 mph recorded speed on Edison Road is lower than the prima facie speed limit of 25 mph. Reese Place saw an 85th percentile speed of 22 mph in January 2023. The data reflect that speeds decreased after the installation of speed humps in September 2 022.

The Orchard Drive speed increase is likely a result of the temporary closure immediately south of Olive Avenue. The majority of vehicles traveling on Orchard Drive are residents. These residents and others using the street (food/package deliveries, gardening/cleaning services, etc.) are now aware of the temporary closure and may be more comfortable traveling faster than recorded in 2022.

The increase in speeds on Oak Street is 3 mph. While this is identified as a high percentage change, the 29 mph speed is still within an acceptable industry standard, within 5 mph over the prima facie speed limit of 25 mph.
4 “Warner Brothers Discovery began requiring employees to work at least 3 days per week in the office starting June 1, 2022.” The Hollywood Reporter, https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/business-news/warner-bros-discovery- return-office-plan-david-zaslav-1235143403/
ATTACHMENT 6 - 72
58 R Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
Table 15
85th Percentile Traffic Speed Data
Comparison: 2022, Intermediate, 2023
ATTACHMENT 6 - 73
59 Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
Cut-through Traffic Patterns
Both sets of data (January 2022 and January 2023) identified the same cut-through pattern in the neighborhood. The pattern that carried the most cut-through traffic was Keystone Street between Olive Avenue (Node #1) and Alameda Avenue (Node #8) and vice versa. Table 17 summarizes the comparison of the cut-through traffic pattern.

Table 16
Peak Cut-through Pattern (# of vehicles)
Comparison: 2022 to 2023

STREET PATTERN
7:00 to 9:00 AM 11:00 to 1:00 PM 4:00 to 6:00 PM
January
2022
January
2023
January
2022
January
2023
January
2022
January
2023
Keystone St
Olive Av to
Alameda Av 18 14 8 8 13 10
Alameda Av
to Olive Av
17 12 27 29 10 19
There was a minor increase in the mid-day pattern from 27 to 29 vehicles, a 7.4 percent increase. The higher increase in cut-through traffic patterns occurred in the PM peak period. This pattern increased from 10 to 19 vehicles.

The January 2023 ADT volume on Keystone Street was 786 ADT. While there was an increase in the cut-through pattern on Keystone Street, these increases (9 vehicles in both the mid-day and evening peak) are not significant to the overall traffic volumes on Keystone Street.

ATTACHMENT 6 - 74
60 Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
2023 Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection
Plan Update
While some streets in the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood experienced increased traffic volume and cut-through traffic around the opening of the Raising Cane’s Restaurant, several streets exhibited issues before that event, and their persistence cannot be solely attributed to the new restaurant.

While Phase 1 Measures sought to address and study the issues in the restaurant’s immediate vicinity, this report seeks to identify the long-term issues in the neighborhood and address them with long-term traffic calming measures which comprise the final Plan update.

Next Steps for Phase 1 Measures
Recommendation 1: Maintain Speed Humps on Reese Place
As noted in the Intermediate Data Collection section, speed humps were effective in reducing the average 85th percentile speed on South Reese Place. This measure has directly addressed the speeding concern and has reduced average speeds to below the posted speed limit. Existing speed humps are recommended to stay in place as currently designed.

Recommendation 2: Maintain the Permit Parking Program on Reese Place and Orchard Drive Since the installation of the parking permit program on Reese Place and Orchard Drive, the instance of patrons parking in residential zones and walking to Raising Cane’s has decreased. Parking utilization on Reese Place, the more accessible of the two streets, has decreased from 50.9 percent in August 2023 (when Raising Cane’s was open but permit parking program was not yet in place) to 42.1 percent (when permit parking program was in place) in the evening. This was similar to parking utilization before Raising Cane’s opened. However, some patrons do continue to utilize the neighborhood to idle in their cars while they eat takeout. Burbank Police Department has recently entered into a contract with a parking enforcement company that is conducting parking permit checks and has the opportunity to improve parking enforcement citywide. These parking control officers have been specifically deployed on Reese Place and Orchard Drive as a focused area of enforcement. City Council approved an amendment to the parking permit hours to 2PM-10PM in order to balance parking needs with neighboring businesses, which, in concert with improved enforcement, can allow more flexibility during the morning and lunch hours while improving enforcement during the more
CHAPTER 7
ATTACHMENT 6 - 75
61 Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
25 problematic evening hours. When current permits expire, staff will contact all neighboring businesses to determine which ones desire permits and then re-allocate proportionally in an aggregate amount not to exceed 30 percent of the available street parking within the Permit Parking
Zones.

Recommendation 3: Maintain the Orchard Street Temporary Closure for One Additional Year The
primary objective of the temporary closure on Orchard Drive is to keep the Raising Cane’s drive-through line from forming into the residential zone. This closure has been effective at doing so. Staff have considered whether to make it permanent with curb and landscaping installations. While queueing from Raising Canes continues to encroach into the Orchard Street and Olive Avenue public right of way in certain times of day, the incidence of this encroachment has decreased over time as the restaurant has become more established.

Further, additional Raising Cane’s Restaurants in Hollywood, North Hollywood, and Northridge have opened or are expected to open within the next year. More restaurant openings could result in reduced demand at the Burbank location resulting in drive-through traffic no longer encroaching into public right of way. If this were to occur, the Orchard Street closure would no longer be necessary, and the City may consider removing it so that its secondary effects on pushing traffic to other nearby streets would also be eliminated. Given that making the closure permanent through permanent curb and drought-tolerant landscaping installations would make its removal more difficult later, and, given the uncertain impact the opening of more Raising Canes locations may have on the Burbank location, the closure should remain in place in its temporary condition for an additional year. During that time, store activity and drive-through activity can be monitored as additional Raising Cane’s Restaurants open nearby. Should drive- through activity continue to spill into the public right of way even after other restaurant locations open, it is recommended that a decision to make the closure permanent be considered at that time.

Additional Recommended Improvements
Recommendation 4: Recommend Speed Humps on Select Local Streets if Supported by Resident Petition
Analysis shows that nearly all local streets without speed humps display average 85 th percentile vehicle speeds above the posted speed limit of 25 mph. Analysis shows that of the six street segments equipped with speed humps for both phases of data collection, 5 of them exhibit average speeds at or below the posted mph speed limit. South Reese Place between ATTACHMENT 6 - 76
62 Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
Olive Avenue and Oak Street had speed humps installed after Phase 1 data collection occurred (installation in September 2022), and they resulted in a reduction in speeds from 33 mph in January 2022 to 22 mph in January 2023. Data from the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood demonstrate that speed humps are effective at reducing overall average speeds on local streets.

The existing City Speed Hump Policy (Appendix I) lists eleven criteria that streets must fulfill in order to qualify for speed hump installation. If a street satisfies each of the criteria, then residents may initiate a petition for speed hump installation. Under the Policy, streets must have average speeds of 5 mph or higher over the 25 mph posted speed limit in order to qualify. They must also have minimum Average Daily Traffic (ADT) of 500 vehicles per day and no more than a maximum of 5,000 vehicles per day. Although 17 local streets within the Plan area exhibit average speeds above the posted speed limit, only 10 would qualify for speed humps under the current Policy. This leaves out segments with speeds just below 30 mph and ADT over 500 (e.g., Lamer Street between Olive Avenue and Oak Street is 29 mph and 634 ADT) and segments with speeds over 30 mph but ADT below 500 (e.g., Lomita Street between Verdugo Avenue and Oaks Street is 31 mph and 445 ADT).Given the demonstrated success of speed humps reducing vehicle speeds in this neighborhood, Staff recommends that local street segments in Table S-11 shall be eligible for speed hump petitions without requiring Step 2 of the standard speed hump installation request process, which is a Preliminary Engineering Field Survey that collects vehicle speed and volume data. The data collected in the process of the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan serves as the Preliminary Engineering Field Survey. Per that data, staff recommend that the streets identified in Table S-11 are pre-qualified to petition for speed humps.

ATTACHMENT 6 - 77
63 Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
Table S-11
Recommendations for the Installation of Speed Humps

SEGMENT
# STREET SEGMENT
January 2023
ADT
85th
Percentile
Speed*
3 Lincoln Street Oak St to Alameda Av 400 31 mph
4 Myers Street Oak St to Alameda Av 554 32 mph
6 Lamer Street Oak St to Alameda Av 703 31 mph
7 Lamer Street Olive Av to Oak St 634 29 mph
9 Parish Place Olive Av to Oak St 1,141 30 mph
14 Sparks Street Olive Av to Oak St 1,189 34 mph
15 Sparks Street Oak St to Alameda Av 1,407 35 mph
16 Beachwood Drive Oak St to Alameda Av 748 34 mph
19 Griffith Park Drive Verdugo Av to Oak St 409 30 mph
20 Mariposa Street Oak St to Alameda Av 1,483 30 mph
21 Mariposa Street Verdugo Av to Oak St 1,174 32 mph
22 Virginia Avenue Verdugo Av to Oak St 625 30 mph
23 Lomita Street Verdugo Av to Oak St 447 31 mph
24 Glenwood Place Verdugo Av to Oak St 565 33 mph
29 Angeleno Avenue Virginia Av to Victory Bl 749 28 mph ADT = average daily traffic, vehicles per day
mph = miles per hour
Although this Plan would provide that these select neighborhood streets now qualify for the addition of speed humps, residents must still present a petition to the City demonstrating that neighbors support the measure. Each street that wishes to install speed humps must complete a petition to demonstrate support in order to certify installation, with at least 80 percent of the total impacted properties on the street contacted and 67 percent of the total impacted properties in support. The full petition criteria can be found on page 3 of the City Speed Hump Policy.

The City of Burbank Speed Hump Policy applies Citywide and is used to evaluate requests for speed humps on streets throughout the City. This Policy identifies criteria for eligibility and requires that eligible streets demonstrate a measured 85 th-percentile speed of 30 mph or ATTACHMENT 6 - 78
64 Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
higher and a minimum of 500 vehicles per day. Staff conducted extensive data collection in the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood, including measuring volumes and speeds on all streets on several different occasions during the evaluation and development of the Plan. This extensive data collection was able to show that the presence of speed humps in this neighborhood has a strong correlation with lower average speeds, and the data demonstrates the effectiveness of speed humps in reducing vehicle speeds to the speed limit or below. Given the amount of data analysis conducted and the conclusion of speed hump effectiveness in this specific neighborhood, Staff recommends that streets in the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood eligible for speed humps demonstrate a measured 85 th-percentile speed of 30 mph or higher or a minimum of 500 vehicles per day. This means that additional streets would be eligible for speed humps that would otherwise not be eligible under the Citywide Speed Hump Policy. Three streets that fulfill the speed requirement but not the volume requirement (Lincoln Street between Oak Street and Alameda Avenue, Griffith Park Drive between Verdugo Avenue and Oak Street, and Lomita Street between Verdugo Avenue and Oak Street) would become eligible. Two streets that fulfill the volume criterion but not speed (Angeleno Avenue from Virginia Avenue to Victory Boulevard, Lamer Street from Olive Avenue to Oak Street) would also become eligible.

Recommendation 4.1: Speed Hump Design
Any speed hump design shall be consistent with City of Burbank design standards for either speed humps or speed cushions, which shall be deployed based on the context of each specific street and in coordination with Burbank Fire Department. To date in Burbank, speed humps have been deployed at individual locations and across larger neighborhoods. Although residents on the street segments identified in Table S-11 still need a petition to demonstrate sufficient community support, there is a possibility for several adjacent street segments to petition in favor of speed humps.

Policy Considerations
Fire Department staff advise that a concentration of speed humps in the neighborhood may slow emergency vehicle response time. Furthermore, the addition of speed humps will lead to increased wear and tear on emergency vehicles and therefore increased maintenance costs. When speed humps are deployed on a single street, as they were on South Reese Place, an emergency vehicle only has to navigate one set of speed humps while traveling to an emergency. However, several consecutive street segments with speed humps may make them unavoidable during an emergency response, which could potentially increase response times and add to overall fleet maintenance needs.

ATTACHMENT 6 - 79
65 Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
While not specific to this neighborhood, staff have received other citizen concerns related to speed humps. Cars traveling over speed humps at speed tend to make noise, and the necessary addition of signage can affect aesthetics of an adjacent residential property. It is also possible that speed humps can cause traffic to disperse to other roadways in the vicinity.

Effect on Vehicle Speed
Speed humps are effective at reducing vehicle speed. A comparison of the speed data collected before and after the installation of speed humps on South Reese Place demonstrated speed reduction occurred on that street. Further, a comparison of vehicle speeds measured on streets with pre-existing speed humps versus streets without them showed a positive correlation between presence of speed humps and slower average vehicle speeds. As a result, crash frequency declines where there are lower speeds. Further, even when collisions occur at low speeds, they tend to be less severe. Speed humps work as a safety measure to reduce vehicular speed.

Slotted Speed Humps Research from Other Cities
One possible solution to balance emergency response times against the vehicular safety benefits of installing speed humps is to ensure that the design of speed humps in the neighborhood include pass-by slots so that emergency vehicles do not have to slow down dramatically or navigate a vertical element in the roadway. This traffic calming element is called a “slotted speed hump” or a “speed cushion.” In this plan update, they shall be referred to as slotted speed humps. Field tests have shown that, while slotted speed humps may not reduce vehicle speed as much as speed humps that span the entire roadway, these measures still reduce vehicle speeds while providing little to no delay to fire vehicles. 5 A Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) study found that in San Diego, fire vehicles can travel over the slotted speed humps at full speed with no delay by navigating through the slots in the middle of the roadway when the center pad was 5.5 feet wide. Similarly, the City of Sacramento found that slotted speed humps cause almost no delay to emergency response time. The city found using slotted speed humps instead of standard speed humps results in a savings of almost 13 seconds per typical roadway segment. In the City of Danville, it was found that no delay
5 “A Comparative Study of Speed Humps, Speed Slots and Speed Cushions ,” LaToya Johnson and A.J. Nedzesky, https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/speedmgt/ref_mats/fhwasa1304/Resources3/26%20 - %20A%20Comparative%20Study%20of%20Speed%20Humps,%20Speed%20Slots%20and%20Speed%20Cushions.pdf ATTACHMENT 6 - 80
66 Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
occurred in response time with slotted speed humps, compared to a 10 to 15 second delay observed with standard speed humps.6
There is no standard dimension in the State of California for a slotted speed hump, and speed measurements taken of different widths of slotted speed hump installations in Burbank suggest that the width of the center pad may determine the speed with which an emergency vehicle can navigate and also influences how well they slow regular vehicles. Design varies depending on the local jurisdiction. Standard Plans for the City of Sacramento and City of San Diego depict three pads across the roadway with a center pad of 5.5 feet straddling each lane, and the City of Stockton specifies a 6.5-foot width. Orange County Fire Authority’s preferred standard is a 6-foot center pad. Ventura County uses two pads in each lane, with the widest being 6.5 feet.

Fire Response Time Versus Vehicular Speed Assessment
The City of Burbank Standard Plans includes a speed hump design standard without slots as well as slotted speed humps. Most speed humps in Burbank are the standard design, however, some streets have slotted speed humps including a segment of South Beachwood Drive in the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood as well as locations outside of the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood, including North Bel Aire Drive and North Beachwood Drive between Clark Avenue and Magnolia Boulevard.

The City’s standard slotted speed hump design features a 7-foot standard pad, although an older installation on South Beachwood Drive features a center pad width of 5 feet. Staff took speed measurements of streets with slotted speed humps and found that streets with the 7-foot center pad design reduced exhibited average speeds at or below the speed limit, while the street with a 5- foot center pad design exhibited average speeds above the speed limit. This is most likely due to motorists utilizing the narrower pad to bypass the speed hump, because the narrower slot more closely matches the wheelbase of standard vehicles. This is a dangerous and illegal maneuver due to the vehicle crossing the center line. Based on this data, Staff believes that the center pad is more effective in reducing vehicle speeds when it is 7 feet wide. A separate study of speed hump design 7 also concluded that slotted speed humps reduce vehicle speed when they are at least 7 feet wide. 6 “Traffic Calming ePrimer,” FHWA, https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/speedmgt/ePrimer_modules/module5.cfm 7 Chang and Nolan, “An Evaluation of Speed Cushions on Neighborhood Streets: Balancing Emergency Vehicle Mobility with Traffic Calming Needs,” (2007) https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/speedmgt/ref_mats/fhwasa1304/Resources3/21%20- %20An%20Evaluation%20of%20Speed%20Cushions%20on%20Neighborhood%20Streets%20Balancing%20Emergency%20 Vehicle%20Mobility%20with%20Traffic%20Calming%20Needs.pdf ATTACHMENT 6 - 81
67 Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
Burbank Fire Department has identified that the width of its dual-tire fire vehicles cannot currently navigate through the 7-foot slotted speed hump design without a high likelihood of impacting the speed of the vehicle. Fire vehicles can navigate through the narrower 5-foot-wide slotted speed hump design, but those slotted speed humps do not slow regular vehicles compared to the 7-foot slotted speed hump design. Thus, a 5-foot-wide slotted speed hump design would more closely support maintaining existing emergency vehicle response times, but would not be as effective as 7 foot wide slotted speed humps in reducing overall vehicle speeds.

This plan identifies speed humps as the preferred method to reduce vehicle speeds and improve roadway safety in the neighborhood, but also notes the issues raised by the Fire Department that installing more speed humps within the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood may prolong emergency response times. While slotted speed humps with a center pad width of 7 feet were shown to reduce vehicle speeds while maintaining adequate fire response times in other California cities, Burbank Fire Department highlights that installation of speed humps of any kind in the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood will affect the City’s existing excellent emergency response times in this area.

Based on this analysis, Staff is recommending:

1. Streets listed in Table S-11 will be eligible for the installation of slotted speed humps with a supporting petition per the guidelines in the Speed Hump Policy.

2. For streets that have met the petition requirements, slotted speed humps shall be installed to reduce the impacts to emergency response while also reducing vehicle speeds, as approved by the Public Works Director and Fire Chief.

ATTACHMENT 6 - 82
68 Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
Recommendation 5: No Additional Street Closures Recommended Staff does not recommend any additional street closures in the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood. City Council approved the closure on South Orchard Drive in order to separate the residential properties from the traffic accessing the Raising Cane’s drive-through. This closure has addressed the immediate concern of queuing on Orchard Drive in front of residential properties. Further, it is recommended that this closure remain a temporary closure so that future restaurant activity and the opening of other nearby Raising Cane’s locations can be evaluated to determine if the closure remains warranted. There is no other location in the neighborhood where drive-through queuing spills out into the residential neighborhood, which is the justification for the ongoing Orchard Street closure. While the data show that additional trips from the Orchard Street closure likely have been diverted to nearby streets, vehicle volumes on those streets do not exceed levels that are to be expected on any other typical residential street. Therefore, it is not recommended that additional street closures be implemented as part of this plan.

ATTACHMENT 6 - 83
Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
Appendix A
Average Daily Traffic and Speeds
January 2022
ATTACHMENT 6 - 84
Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
Appendix B
License Plate Entering/Exiting Data
January 2022
ATTACHMENT 6 - 85
Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
Appendix C
Parking Demand Data
January 2022
ATTACHMENT 6 - 86
Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
Appendix D
Turning Movement Counts
January 2022
ATTACHMENT 6 - 87
Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
Appendix E
Community Meeting Materials
ATTACHMENT 6 - 88
Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
Appendix F
Average Daily Traffic and Speeds
Intermediate Data 2022
ATTACHMENT 6 - 89
Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
Appendix G
Average Daily Traffic and Speeds
January 2023
ATTACHMENT 6 - 90
Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
Appendix H
License Plate Enty/Exit Data
January 2023
ATTACHMENT 6 - 91
Rancho Providencia
Neighborhood Protection Plan
December 2023
Appendix I
City of Burbank Speed Hump Policy
ATTACHMENT 6 - 92
ATTACHMENT 6 - 93

Appendix B
Initial Study

ATTACHMENT 6 - 94
ATTACHMENT 6 - 95
City of Burbank
Rancho Providencia Neighborhood
Protection Plan
2023 Update

Initial Study

Prepared For:

City of Burbank
Community Development Department
Transportation Division
150 North Third Street
Burbank, CA 91502

Prepared By:

Willdan Engineering
13191 Crossroads Parkway North
Suite 405
City of Industry, CA 91746

October 2023

ATTACHMENT 6 - 96
ATTACHMENT 6 - 97
City of Burbank Initial Study for the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan December 2023 Page IS-i

Executive Summary
Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND)
Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Division 13, Public Resources Code

City of Burbank
150 N Third Street
Burbank, CA 91502
818-238-5290

Project Description
The Rancho Providencia Neighborhood is bounded by Buena Vista Street, Olive Avenue, Victory Boulevard, Main Street and Alameda Avenue. This area includes approximately 800 homes, Dolores Huerta Middle School, Saint Finbar Parish School, and numerous other businesses. There are 15 north-south streets generally bisected by Oak Street.

Additional details on description, data analysis, and recommendations can be found in the Initial Study.

Determination
A Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) is proposed by the City of Burbank for the project. The Initial Study and supporting documents have been prepared to determine if the project would result in potentially significant or significant impacts to the environment. The mitigation measures that have been identified are listed in Table 1 below. The public review period occurred from October 4, 2023, to November 3, 2023. Twelve comment letters were received during the public review period. On the basis of the Initial Study and the whole of the record, it ATTACHMENT 6 - 98
City of Burbank Initial Study for the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan December 2023 Page IS-ii
has been determined that the proposed action, with the incorporation of the mitigation measures described below, would not have a significant effect on the environment. The Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan 2023 Update and its supporting technical information that constitute the record of proceedings upon which this determination is made are available for public review on the City of Burbank Community Development Department Website at www.burbankca.gov/ranchoprovidencia.

Summary of Mitigation Measures
Environmental
Factor Mitigation Measures
Level of
Environmental
Impact
Biological
Resources
BIO-1: Migratory Birds/MBTA Compliance – Migratory Birds/MBTA Compliance. All construction activities shall comply with the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 (MBTA) and California Fish and Game Code Sections 3503, 3511 and 3513. The MBTA governs the taking and killing of migratory birds, their eggs, parts, and nests and prohibits the take of any migratory bird, their eggs, parts, and nests.

Compliance with the MBTA shall be accomplished by completing the following:

A. If construction activities near tree canopy will take place inside the peak nesting season (between January 1 and
September 15), the City shall engage a qualified biologist to (1) perform a pre-construction survey to identify any active nesting locations within 7 days before construction
activities begin and (2) to monitor construction activities if nests are discovered.

B. If the biologist does not find any active nests during the pre-construction survey, construction work may proceed, and no monitoring shall be required. The biologist
conducting the survey shall document a negative survey (no nests observed) with a report indicating that no impacts to active avian nests will occur .

C. If the biologist finds an active nest within the pre- construction survey area, the biologist shall map its location on an aerial photograph and shall determine whether the nest may be impacted. If so, the biologist shall delineate an appropriate buffer zone around the nest on the map and in the field. The size of the buffer shall be determined by the biologist and shall be based on the nesting species, its sensitivity to disturbance, expected types of disturbance, and location in relation to the construction activities. These buffers are typically 300 feet from the nests of non-listed species and 500 feet from the nests of raptors and listed species and are subject to CDFW discretion.

Less than significant
with mitigation
measures
ATTACHMENT 6 - 99
City of Burbank Initial Study for the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan December 2023 Page IS-iii
Summary of Mitigation Measures
Environmental
Factor Mitigation Measures
Level of
Environmental
Impact
D. Only construction activities that have been approved by the monitoring biologist, if any, shall take place within the buffer zone until the nest is vacated. The monitoring
biologist shall supervise construction activities near active nests to ensure that no inadvertent impacts on these nests occur.

E. Results of the pre-construction survey and any subsequent monitoring reports shall be provided to the City. The
monitoring report shall summarize the results of the nest monitoring, describe construction restrictions currently in place, and confirm that construction activities can proceed within the buffer area without jeopardizing the survival of young birds.

Biological
Resources
BIO-2: Bat Nesting Compliance – Bats are considered non-game mammals and are afforded protection by State law from take and/or harassment (Fish & G. Code, § 4150; Cal. Code of Regs, § 251.1). Additionally, several bat species are considered Species of Special Concern and meet the CEQA definition of rare, threatened, or endangered species (CEQA Guidelines, § 15380). Compliance with the preceding laws shall be accomplished by completing the following:

A. If construction activities near tree canopy will take place during maternity roost season (March 1 to September 30) the City shall engage a qualified bat specialist to (1) perform a pre-construction survey to identify any potential habitat that could provide daytime and/or nighttime roost sites, and any active nesting locations within 7 days before
construction activities begin and (2) monitor construction activities if nests are discovered.

B. If the bat specialist does not find any active nests during the pre-construction survey, construction work may proceed, and no monitoring shall be required. The bat specialist conducting the survey shall document a negative survey (no nests observed) with a report indicating that no impacts to active avian nests will occur .

Less than significant
with mitigation
measures
ATTACHMENT 6 - 100
City of Burbank Initial Study for the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan December 2023 Page IS-iv
Summary of Mitigation Measures
Environmental
Factor Mitigation Measures
Level of
Environmental
Impact
C. If the bat specialist finds an active nest within the pre- construction survey area, the bat specialist shall map its location on an aerial photograph and shall determine
whether the nest may be impacted. If so, the bat specialist shall delineate an appropriate buffer zone around the nest on the map and in the field. Work shall not occur within 100 feet of or directly under or adjacent to an active roost and work shall not occur between 30 minutes before sunset and 30 minutes after sunrise until the end of the maternity season.

D. Results of the pre-construction survey and any subsequent monitoring reports shall be provided to the City. The
monitoring report shall summarize the results of the roost monitoring, describe construction restrictions currently in place, and confirm that construction activities can proceed within the buffer area without jeopardizing maternity roost activity.

Noise NOI-1 Construction Noise Suppression. Construction bids and contracts shall specify that construction equipment shall be outfitted with noise-suppression mechanisms, subject to the approval of the City Building Official. Building inspectors shall periodically and randomly inspect equipment in the field and shall order work to stop if noise suppression equipment is not suitably used or is not functioning properly. Work may resume when noise suppression equipment is demonstrated to be functioning according to the manufacturer's specifications.

NOI-2 Construction Hours. Construction implementing the RPNPP 2023 shall be limited to daylight hours between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. No construction shall occur on weekends, federal, state, or local holidays. Construction bids and contracts shall acknowledge these work hours and account for them in project scheduling.

Less than significant
with mitigation
measures

ATTACHMENT 6 - 101
City of Burbank Initial Study for the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan December 2023 Page IS-v

Table of Contents
PROJECT INFORMATION .........................................................................................................................................1

1. Project Title: ...............................................................................................................................................1

2. State Clearinghouse Number: ....................................................................................................................1

3. Lead Agency Name and Address: ...............................................................................................................1

4. Project Location: .........................................................................................................................................1

5. Property Owner: .........................................................................................................................................1

6. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: .......................................................................................................1

7. General Plan Designation: ..........................................................................................................................1

8. Zoning: ........................................................................................................................................................1

9. Project Description: ....................................................................................................................................3

10. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: ..........................................................................................................7

11. Purpose and Authority ...............................................................................................................................8

12. Incorporation by Reference ..................................................................................................................... 10

13. Technical Studies ..................................................................................................................................... 10

14. Intended Uses of This Document ............................................................................................................ 10 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: ....................................................................................... 12 DETERMINATION ................................................................................................................................................. 12 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ..................................................................................................... 13 I. AESTHETICS ............................................................................................................................................... 14 Impact Discussion: ................................................................................................................................... 14 II. AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES. ........................................................................................... 14 Impact Discussion: ................................................................................................................................... 15 III. AIR QUALITY ............................................................................................................................................ 15 Impact Discussion: ................................................................................................................................... 16 ATTACHMENT 6 - 102
City of Burbank Initial Study for the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan December 2023 Page IS-vi
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. ....................................................................................................................... 17 Impact Discussion: ................................................................................................................................... 17 Mitigation Measure ................................................................................................................................. 18 V. CULTURAL RESOURCES ............................................................................................................................ 19 Impact Discussion: ................................................................................................................................... 19 VI. ENERGY ................................................................................................................................................... 20 Impact Discussion: ................................................................................................................................... 20 VII. GEOLOGY AND SOILS ............................................................................................................................. 21 Impact Discussion: ................................................................................................................................... 21 VIII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ............................................................................................................. 22 Impact Discussion: ................................................................................................................................... 22 IX. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ............................................................................................... 23 Impact Discussion: ................................................................................................................................... 23 X. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY ........................................................................................................ 25 Impact Discussion: ................................................................................................................................... 26 XI. LAND USE AND PLANNING ..................................................................................................................... 27 Impact Discussion: ................................................................................................................................... 27 XII. MINERAL RESOURCES ............................................................................................................................ 27 Impact Discussion: ................................................................................................................................... 27 XIII. NOISE .................................................................................................................................................... 28 Impact Discussion: ................................................................................................................................... 28 Mitigation Measures ............................................................................................................................... 29 XIV. POPULATION AND HOUSING................................................................................................................ 30 Impact Discussion: ................................................................................................................................... 30 XV. PUBLIC SERVICES ................................................................................................................................... 30 Impact Discussion: ................................................................................................................................... 30 ATTACHMENT 6 - 103
City of Burbank Initial Study for the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan December 2023 Page IS-vii
XVI. RECREATION ......................................................................................................................................... 31 Impact Discussion: ................................................................................................................................... 31 XVII. TRANSPORTATION ............................................................................................................................... 31 Impact Discussion: ................................................................................................................................... 31 XVIII. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES .......................................................................................................... 33 Impact Discussion: ................................................................................................................................... 33 XIX. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS ......................................................................................................... 33 Impact Discussion: ................................................................................................................................... 34 XX. WILDFIRE ............................................................................................................................................... 35 Impact Discussion: ................................................................................................................................... 35 XXI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE .......................................................................................... 36 Discussion: ............................................................................................................................................... 36 List of Preparers ................................................................................................................................................... 37

Table of Figures
Figure PD - 1 Regional Vicinity Map .....................................................................................................................2 Figure PD - 2 Project Location ..............................................................................................................................2 Figure PD - 3 Speed Hump Example, Alameda North Neighborhood ..................................................................6 Figure PD - 4 Google StreetView™ Image of Speed Hump, Alameda North Neighborhood ...............................6 Figure PD - 5 Aerial View of Rancho Providencia Neighborhood ........................................................................8 Figure Haz - 1 California DTSC Envirostor Search Results (no sites) ................................................................... 24 Appendices
A. Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan
B. Initial Study
C. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
D. Comments from Public
E. City Responses to Public Comments
ATTACHMENT 6 - 104
City of Burbank Initial Study for the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan December 2023 Page IS-viii

THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY BLANK

ATTACHMENT 6 - 105
City of Burbank Initial Study for the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan June 2023 Page IS-1

CITY OF BURBANK

ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM AND INITIAL STUDY FOR A

MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION

PROJECT INFORMATION

1. Project Title:

Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan – 2023 Update

2. State Clearinghouse Number:
2023100147

3. Lead Agency Name and Address:

City of Burbank
150 N. Third St., 2nd Floor
Burbank, CA 91502
https://www.burbankca.gov/web/community-development/transportation Contact:

Chris Buonomo
Senior Transportation Planner
(818) 238-5290
[email protected]

4. Project Location:

Rancho Providencia neighborhood – see project location map, Fig. PD-2 below.

5. Property Owner:

Name: City of Burbank
Physical Address: 150 N. Third St., 2nd Floor
Mailing Address: 150 N. Third St., 2nd Floor
Email: [email protected]
URL: https://www.burbankca.gov

6. Project Sponsor's Name and Address:

Name: Same as Property Owner
Physical Address:

Mailing Address:

Email:

URL:

7. General Plan Designation:

Multiple designations

8. Zoning:

Multiple designations
ATTACHMENT 6 - 106
City of Burbank Initial Study for the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan December 2023 Page IS-2

Figure PD - 1 Regional Vicinity Map
Figure PD - 2 Project Location
ATTACHMENT 6 - 107
City of Burbank Initial Study for the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan December 2023 Page IS-3

9. Project Description:

The proposed Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan 2023 Update (RPNPP 2023), attached as Exhibit A, is an update to the October 2001 Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan (RPNPP 2001) that will address changes to the area’s traffic patterns in part resulting from new commercial development along Olive Avenue and media studio development to the south of the neighborhood. The Rancho Providencia Neighborhood is bounded by Buena Vista Street, Olive Avenue, Victory Boulevard, Main Street and Alameda Avenue. This area includes approximately 800 homes, Dolores Huerta Middle School, Saint Finbar Parish School, and numerous other businesses. The neighborhood encompasses 15 northwest- southeast-oriented streets generally bisected by Oak Street. The Burbank2035 General Plan classifies all the streets within the neighborhood as local streets except for Keystone Street, Oak Street, and Verdugo Avenue which are classified as collector streets (Burbank2035 General Plan Mobility Element Exhibit M-2).

The Burbank2035 General Plan recommends adopting Neighborhood Protection Plans to protect neighborhoods and preserve quality of life by managing traffic patterns in a specific geographic area (Noise Element Policy 3.5, Mobility Element Policy 6.3). The purpose of an NPP is to protect residential neighborhoods from impacts caused by cut-through vehicle traffic, i.e., traffic that uses local streets to travel through a neighborhood as a shortcut from one business district to another.

They are often established in response to several factors, including:
• Existing or anticipated regional traffic caused by land uses near a neighborhood; • Traffic bypassing congestion on an arterial roadway; and • Characteristics of a neighborhood street (traffic volumes and speeds) that do not match the designation and purpose of that street.

The RPNPP was first adopted in August 1998 as a response to traffic, speeding, and parking impacts from neighboring studios and commercial development, and it was implemented by October 2001. The 1998 RPNPP introduced improvements in various areas including the installation of gateway median islands, intersection reconfigurations, new street trees, crosswalk treatments, and preferential parking zones. The October 2001 report to City Council included an evaluation of the effectiveness of initial measures (medians and crosswalks treatments on Alameda Avenue) implemented in May 2000 and the second phase of measures (completion of treatments at the remaining Alameda Avenue intersections and treatments along Olive Avenue) completed in October 2000. Overall, the traffic count data collected in the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood identified a decrease in traffic volumes over the 18-month period on a majority of the streets.

Over the next 20 years, the Rancho Providencia neighborhood continued to experience cut-through vehicle traffic, excessive vehicle speeds, and parked vehicles associated with businesses along Olive Avenue. As a result, on June 22, 2021, the City Council directed staff to update the 1998 RPNPP. The update to the RPNPP also coincided with new development on Olive Avenue, particularly a Raising Cane’s restaurant, which opened on June 7, 2022.

Ahead of the drive-through restaurant’s opening date, City staff worked with Raising Cane’s management to develop multiple traffic operational controls to reduce neighborhood impacts during the restaurant’s early operations, including:
• Positioning Burbank Police Department (BPD) Officers at the intersections on Olive Avenue to keep them clear, control traffic, maintain safety, and maintain the order of the drive-through line. The cost of traffic enforcement was paid for by Raising Cane’s; • Installing parking restrictions along the Olive Avenue eastbound parking lane to ensure an orderly drive-through queue;
ATTACHMENT 6 - 108
City of Burbank Initial Study for the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan December 2023 Page IS-4
• Implementing turn restrictions and signage to ensure the safe and orderly movement of traffic and reduce impacts to the local streets;
• Performing consistent monitoring and communication by Staff and Raising Cane’s personnel; and • Placing a periodic short-term closure on Orchard Drive during the opening weeks.

The restaurant management implemented additional operational measures:
• Deploying private security officers to manage on-site restaurant traffic circulation and discourage vehicle queuing in public streets outside of the designated Olive Avenue queuing area; • Providing signage at adjacent driveways and intersections encouraging vehicles to keep space clear for vehicle entry and exit;
• Working with local businesses and Burbank Unified School District to secure offsite parking spaces for Raising Cane’s employees in lots with excess off-street parking; • Providing financial assistance, property improvements, and security presence for adjacent businesses;
• Agreeing to close at 10:00 p.m.; and
• Eliminating the use of the drive-through speaker and outdoor amplified music.

City staff monitored the measures’ effectiveness for two months and discontinued certain measures that were no longer needed, including the permit restricting parking along the south side of Olive Avenue from South Orchard Drive to South Parish Place and active Burbank Police Department traffic management. At City Council’s direction, Staff also implemented Phase 1 measures, which included:
• Permit-only preferential parking on Orchard Drive and on Reese Place between Olive Avenue and Oak Street (Staff distributed parking permits to residents by September 26, 2022, and enforcement began on October 17, 2022)
• Speed humps on Reese Place between Olive Avenue and Oak Street (Completed September 21, 2022)
• Temporary closure on Orchard Drive south of Olive Avenue to prohibit the Raising Cane’s drive- through queue from extending into the residential neighborhood (Completed September 23, 2022) Traffic data were collected for the entire neighborhood in January 2022 and in January 2023 after the initial Phase 1 measures were implemented (RPNPP 2023, pp. 4-15, 43-52. Interim data were collected on streets directly affected by Phase 1 measures (pp. 32-38). The data showed that Phase 1 measures contributed to notably fewer vehicle trips on Orchard Drive and Reese Place (RPNPP 2023, p. 32), and that overall vehicle speed on Reese Place decreased slightly from 32 mph to 24 mph (RPNPP 2023, p. 36). Temporarily closing Orchard Drive greatly reduced traffic on neighboring streets; however, overall vehicle speed slightly increased on Orchard after the temporary closure (RPNPP 2023, p. 58), likely due to less congestion on that street. Speed data also showed that vehicle speeds on Myers Street, Sparks Street, Beachwood Drive, Mariposa Street, and Glenwood place typically exceeded the posted 25-mph speed limit by approximately six mph.

Additionally, cut-through traffic increased marginally on Keystone Street, likely due to an increase in vehicles seeking a signalized crossing to Burroughs High School and the media studios to the south of the neighborhood as in-person attendance continued to normalize following the Covid-19 Pandemic (RPNPP 2023, pp.55-60).

RPNPP 2023 would maintain the following measures installed as interim measures during the Phase 1 development of RPNPP 2023 in September 2022: permit-parking on Orchard Drive and Reese Place, and speed humps on Reese Place. The temporary street closure installed on Orchard Drive would keep the existing closure in place for an additional 12 months to further analyze its effectiveness. Should it still be ATTACHMENT 6 - 109
City of Burbank Initial Study for the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan December 2023 Page IS-5
deemed necessary at that time, staff recommend installing a permanent closure in its place with curb, gutter, and landscaping work. In addition, RPNPP 2023 would deem that 15 street segments have fulfilled the initial engineering field study and are eligible for resident petition requests regarding speed humps, using a design as designated for the neighborhood. Table PD-1 below shows the street segments that would be eligible to proceed with the speed hump petition process. Figures PD-3 and PD-4 show images of existing speed humps in the Rancho Providencia neighborhood. All of these physical elements will be referred to as “Recommendations.”

Table PD - 1 Proposed Street Segments Eligible for Speed Hump Petitions Segment No.
(see RPNPP 2023, Table S-11) Street Segment
3 Lincoln South of Alley
4 Myers South of Oak*
6 Lamer Between Olive and Oak
7 Lamer Between Oak and Alameda
9 Parish Between Olive and Oak
14 Sparks Between Olive and Oak
15 Sparks Between Oak and Alameda
16 Beachwood Between Oak and Alameda
19 Griffith Park Between Verdugo and Oak
20 Mariposa Between Verdugo and Oak
21 Mariposa Between Oak and Alameda
22 Virginia Between Verdugo and Oak
23 Lomita Between Verdugo and Oak
24 Glenwood Between Verdugo and Oak
29 Angeleno Between Glenwood and Victory

ATTACHMENT 6 - 110
City of Burbank Initial Study for the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan December 2023 Page IS-6

Figure PD - 3 Speed Hump Example, South Brighton Street Figure PD - 4 Google StreetView™ Image of Speed Hump, South Brighton Street ATTACHMENT 6 - 111
City of Burbank Initial Study for the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan December 2023 Page IS-7

10. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting:

The Rancho Providencia neighborhood is characterized primarily by single-family residential uses that are arranged on a grid pattern of local streets, bounded by the commercial corridors of S. Buena Vista Street on the west, W. Olive Avenue on the northwest, Victory Boulevard, and S. Main Street on the northeast, and W.

Alameda Avenue on the south. The Disney Studios, the Providence St. Joseph Medical Center, and the Burbank Studios are located adjacent to the southwest corner of the neighborhood on Alameda Avenue; various service, medical providers, and institutional uses lie along W. Alameda Avenue and S. Main Street. W. Olive Avenue is populated by a mix of multi-family/senior apartment uses, chain restaurants, services, and other office uses. S.

Buena Vista Street supports medical offices, a parking structure, and multi-family residences. The Dolores Huerta Middle School lies in the southeast corner of the neighborhood, bounded by W. Oak Street on the north and S. Mariposa Street on the west. Figure PD-5 below shows an aerial view.

As noted above, local streets within the Rancho Providencia neighborhood are arranged in a northwest/southwest-oriented grid pattern, with lateral streets running along east-northeast lines. Streets internal to the neighborhood, from west to east, include S. Edison Road, S. Brighton Street, S. Lincoln Street, S.

Myers Street, Keystone Street, S. Lamer Street, S. Parish Place, S. Orchard Drive, S. Reese Place, S. Sparks St., S.

Beachwood Drive, S. Griffith Park Drive, S. Mariposa Street, S. Shelton Street, S. Virginia Avenue, S. Lomita Street, and S. Glenwood Place. Oak Street bisects the neighborhood in an east-northeast/west-southwest direction, connecting W. Olive Avenue and Main Street.

ATTACHMENT 6 - 112
City of Burbank Initial Study for the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan December 2023 Page IS-8

11. Purpose and Authority
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that all State and local agencies consider the environmental consequences of projects over which they have discretionary authority. The Initial Study (IS) is the first step in determining whether a lead agency must prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) or may prepare a Negative Declaration (or Mitigated Negative Declaration) for the project. The IS provides decision- makers and the public with information concerning the environmental effects of a proposed project, possible ways to reduce or avoid the possible environmental damage, and in the case of an EIR, identify alternatives to the project.

CEQA Guidelines §15063(a-d) describes the Initial Study’s scope as follows:
(a) Following preliminary review, the Lead Agency shall conduct an Initial Study to determine if the project may have a significant effect on the environment. If the Lead Agency can determine that an EIR will clearly be required for the project, an Initial Study is not required but may still be desirable.

1. All phases of project planning, implementation, and operation must be considered in the Initial Study of the project.

2. To meet the requirements of this section, the lead agency may use an environmental assessment, or a similar analysis prepared pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act.

Figure PD - 5 Aerial View of Rancho Providencia Neighborhood ATTACHMENT 6 - 113
City of Burbank Initial Study for the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan December 2023 Page IS-9

3. An initial study may rely upon expert opinion supported by facts, technical studies, or other substantial evidence to document its findings. However, an initial study is neither intended nor required to include the level of detail included in an EIR.

4. The lead agency may use any of the arrangements or combination of arrangements described in Section 15084(d) to prepare an initial study. The initial study sent out for public review must reflect the independent judgment of the Lead Agency.
(b) Results.

1. If the agency determines that there is substantial evidence that any aspect of the project, either individually or cumulatively, may cause a significant effect on the environment, regardless of whether the overall effect of the project is adverse or beneficial, the Lead Agency shall do one of the following:

A. Prepare an EIR, or
B. Use a previously prepared EIR which the Lead Agency determines would adequately analyze the project at hand, or
C. Determine, pursuant to a program EIR, tiering, or another appropriate process, which of a project’s effects were adequately examined by an earlier EIR or negative declaration.

Another appropriate process may include, for example, a master EIR, a master environmental assessment, approval of housing and neighborhood commercial facilities in urban areas, approval of residential projects pursuant to a specific plan described in section 15182, approval of residential projects consistent with a community plan, general plan or zoning as described in section 15183, or an environmental document prepared under a State certified regulatory program. The lead agency shall then ascertain which effects, if any, should be analyzed in a later EIR or negative declaration.

2. The Lead Agency shall prepare a Negative Declaration if there is no substantial evidence that the project or any of its aspects may cause a significant effect on the environment. (c) Purposes. The purposes of an Initial Study are to:

1. Provide the Lead Agency with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an EIR or a Negative Declaration.

2. Enable an applicant or Lead Agency to modify a project, mitigating adverse impacts before an EIR is prepared, thereby enabling the project to qualify for a Negative Declaration.

3. Assist in the preparation of an EIR, if one is required, by:

A. Focusing the EIR on the effects determined to be significant, B. Identifying the effects determined not to be significant, C. Explaining the reasons for determining that potentially significant effects would not be significant, and
D. Identifying whether a program EIR, tiering, or another appropriate process can be used for analysis of the project’s environmental effects.

4. Facilitate environmental assessment early in the design of a project;

5. Provide documentation of the factual basis for the finding in a Negative Declaration that a project will not have a significant effect on the environment;

6. Eliminate unnecessary EIRs;
ATTACHMENT 6 - 114
City of Burbank Initial Study for the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan December 2023 Page IS-10

7. Determine whether a previously prepared EIR could be used with the project. (d) Contents. An Initial Study shall contain in brief form:

1. A description of the project including the location of the project;

2. An identification of the environmental setting;

3. An identification of environmental effects by use of a checklist, matrix, or other method, provided that entries on a checklist or other form are briefly explained to indicate that there is some evidence to support the entries. The brief explanation may be either through a narrative or a reference to another information source such as an attached map, photographs, or an earlier EIR or negative declaration. A reference to another document should include, where appropriate, a citation to the page or pages where the information is found.

4. A discussion of the ways to mitigate the significant effects identified, if any;

5. An examination of whether the project would be consistent with existing zoning, plans, and other applicable land use controls;

6. The name of the person or persons who prepared or participated in the Initial Study.

The City of Burbank has accordingly prepared this Initial Study and based on the analysis contained herein, anticipates adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration. The following Initial Study/Environmental Checklist Form evaluates the project’s environmental impacts and applies mitigation measures as required.

12. Incorporation by Reference
This analysis incorporates by reference the Burbank 2035 General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report (GPFEIR) (SCH #2010021004) and Appendices, the Burbank 2035 General Plan, the 2035 General Plan Update Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations (Resolution No. 28,592, February 19, 2013), the Noise Analysis Technical Report/Alameda North Neighborhood Protection Plan – Phase 2 (Meridian Consultants, July 2016), and all technical studies prepared for the analysis of the proposed project as listed below. The GPFEIR, General Plan, accompanying staff reports, and the cited Noise Analysis are available for public review at the City of Burbank, Community Development Department, Planning and Transportation Division, 150 N. Third St., Burbank, CA 91502, and on the City’s website at https://www.burbankca.gov/web/community- development/document-library.

13. Technical Studies
• Willdan, Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan 2023 supporting technical reports • Meridian Consultants, Noise Analysis Technical Report/Alameda North Neighborhood Protection Plan – Phase 2 (July 2016)

14. Intended Uses of This Document
The City of Burbank, as the Lead Agency for this project, will use this Initial Study in considering whether to approve the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan 2023 Update. This Initial Study will also provide environmental information to other agencies affected by the project, or which are likely to have an interest in the project. Various State and Federal agencies exercise control over certain aspects of the study area. The various public, private, and political agencies and jurisdictions with a particular interest in the proposed project, may include but are not limited to the following:
• California Air Resources Board (CARB)
• California Department of Toxic Substances Control
• California Department of Transportation (Caltrans)
ATTACHMENT 6 - 115
City of Burbank Initial Study for the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan December 2023 Page IS-11
• California Emergency Management Agency
• California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA)
• California Office of Emergency Services
• California Regional Water Quality Control Board (CRWQB) • Los Angeles County Department of Public Works
• Los Angeles County Fire Department
• Los Angeles County Health Department
• Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transit Authority
• Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts
• Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department
• South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD)
• Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) • The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD) • U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

ATTACHMENT 6 - 116
City of Burbank Initial Study for the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan December 2023 Page IS-12
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/Forestry
Resources ☐ Air Quality
☒ Biological Resources ☐ Cultural Resources ☐ Energy
☐ Geology/Soils ☐ Greenhouse Gas Emissions ☐ Hazards and Hazardous Materials
☐ Hydrology/Water Quality ☐ Land Use/Planning ☐ Mineral Resources ☒ Noise ☐ Population/Housing ☐ Public Services
☐ Recreation ☐ Transportation ☐ Tribal Cultural Resources ☐ Utilities/Service Systems ☐ Wildfire ☒ Mandatory Findings of Significance

DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
☐ I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
☒ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ☐ I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
☐ I find that the proposed project MAY have a “potentially significant impact” or “potentially significant unless mitigated” impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. ☐ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.

Signature Date

ATTACHMENT 6 - 117
City of Burbank Initial Study for the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan December 2023 Page IS-13

EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

1. A brief explanation is required for all answers except “No Impact” answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A “No Impact” answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A “No Impact” answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors, as well as general standards (e.g., the project would not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis).

2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as onsite, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts.

3. Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. “Potentially Significant Impact” is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more “Potentially Significant Impact” entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required.

4. “Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated” applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from “Potentially Significant Impact” to a “Less Than Significant Impact.” The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level.

5. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following:
a) Earlier Analyses Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are “Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated,” describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project.

6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated.

7. Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used, or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion.

8. This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project’s environmental effects in whatever format is selected.

9. The explanation of each issue should identify:
a) The significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significant.

ATTACHMENT 6 - 118
City of Burbank Initial Study for the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan December 2023 Page IS-14
I. AESTHETICS
Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section 21099(d) (which prohibits a significance determination regarding aesthetics impacts for transit-oriented infill projects within transit priority areas), Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
c) 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 publicly accessible vantage points.) If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with
applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ Impact Discussion:
a) No Impact. The proposed project would not affect any scenic vistas, simply because the Recommendations affect street surfaces or maintain signage and do not create a visual barrier interfering with views or vistas.
b) No Impact. The proposed project would not damage scenic resources, in part because there are no recognized scenic resources in the project area, but principally because as shown by Figures PD-3 and PD-4, installing the Recommendations on existing streets results in only minor changes to the street surfaces, and would not affect natural resources or structures. c) No Impact. The project is in an urbanized area and is not anticipated to conflict with scenic-quality protections because all work is limited to the street surface and would cause only minor changes to the streets’ appearance on the roadway or with standard accompanying signage (see Figures PD-3, 4 above). d) No Impact. The Recommendations would not add light or glare to the surroundings, because speed humps and curb and gutter work do not inherently produce artificial light. Black asphalt, new street striping, and concrete curbs do not substantially reflect ambient light or glare.

II. AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES.

In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state’s inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board.

ATTACHMENT 6 - 119
City of Burbank Initial Study for the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan December 2023 Page IS-15
Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps
prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and
Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code Section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code Section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code Section 51104(g))?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of farmland to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Impact Discussion:
a-e) No Impact. The proposed Recommendations and resulting physical changes to the streets and signage within the project area would not affect farmland or timber-producing land, because there are no farmland/timberland resources in the project area or in the City generally, which is fully developed at an urban scale (City of Burbank, Burbank2035 General Plan, Environmental Impact Report (February 19, 2013).

III. AIR QUALITY
Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management district or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations.

Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non- attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
ATTACHMENT 6 - 120
City of Burbank Initial Study for the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan December 2023 Page IS-16
Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ Impact Discussion:
a) Less Than Significant. The project site is located within the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB) and in the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) which prepares and implements an Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP), which is updated every five years (see South Coast AQMD, Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP), available at http://www.aqmd.gov/home/air- quality/clean-air-plans/air-quality-mgt-plan (accessed May 24, 2023). The AQMP’s primary purpose is to set forth measures that will bring the SCAB into attainment with state and federal Clean Air Act standards – the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) – for major air pollutants. The current plan, adopted in 2022, focuses on bringing the region into compliance with standards for ozone (O3) and particulate matter (PM). Generally, projects that are consistent with regional population, housing and employment forecasts are considered to be consistent with the AQMP. The proposed RPNPP 2023 would not change population, housing or employment in the City or region, because it is limited to re- directing existing vehicle traffic and installing measures to slow vehicle speeds (speed humps). Impacts associated with inconsistency with the 2022 AQMP are thus expected to be less than significant. b) Less Than Significant. The project would involve possible street improvements on street segments that may re-direct existing traffic flows. Construction associated with installing the Recommendations would use equipment that must comply with SCAQMD permits and emissions rules, and construction time is anticipated to be minimal. Emissions associated with construction equipment are thus not anticipated to be cumulatively considerable.
c) Less Than Significant. The project would involve construction equipment that would emit pollutants in the vicinity of single- and multiple-family residences. However, as noted in (b) above, such equipment is regulated by AQMD rules and permit requirements. Compliance with these rules is anticipated to minimize emissions, reducing the exposure of sensitive receptors to less-than-significant levels. AQMD Rules may be found at http://www.aqmd.gov/home/rules-compliance/rules (accessed May 24, 2023). d) Less Than Significant. The project would involve construction that is likely to produce temporary objectional odors (diesel exhaust, asphalt off-gas emissions and odors) in the immediate vicinity of the street segments where road work would be conducted. However, these effects would be short-term, would cease after construction is complete, and would affect only a small number of residences.

Additionally, construction equipment and practices must comply with AQMD rules for minimizing emissions/odors (Rule 402, Nuisance) and with equipment permit requirements. Impacts are accordingly anticipated to be less than significant.

ATTACHMENT 6 - 121
City of Burbank Initial Study for the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan December 2023 Page IS-17
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES.

Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a
candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with
established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede native wildlife nursery sites?
☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat
conservation plan?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Impact Discussion:
a) No Impact. The proposed project would not affect listed or candidate species, or their habitat, because there will be no tree or vegetation removal, and there plan area does not include suitable species- specific habitat. The project area is fully developed at an urban scale, characterized by residential and commercial uses and ornamental landscaping. There are no prominent natural features in the project area. The project includes only minor alterations to street surfaces and would not affect existing ornamental vegetation.
b) No Impact. The proposed project would not affect riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community, because there are no riparian systems or undeveloped natural habitat within or adjacent to the project area. As noted in IV(a) above, the project area is fully developed at an urban scale, and the project construction is limited to minor alterations of street surfaces. c) No Impact. The proposed project would not affect wetlands, because there are no riparian systems or undeveloped natural habitat within or adjacent to the project area. As noted in IV(a) above, the project area is fully developed at an urban scale, and the project construction is limited to minor alterations of street surfaces.

ATTACHMENT 6 - 122
City of Burbank Initial Study for the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan December 2023 Page IS-18
d) Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated. The project would not affect fish, because there are no water bodies in the project area that support fish habitat. However, project construction noise could presumably affect nesting birds protected under the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 (16 U.S.C. 703-712) (available at https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-2020-title16/pdf/USCODE- 2020-title16-chap7-subchapII-sec703.pdf, accessed May 26, 2023). The list of protected birds is comprehensive and includes many commonly-observed species, such as house finches and scrub jays, which nest and raise their young in urban settings. Three specific protected species identified in the Burbank Housing Element EIR as migrating through or inhabiting the City are least Bell’s vireo, monarch butterfly, and various types of bats. Mitigation Measure Bio-1 requires a pre-construction nest survey of street trees and other ornamental trees in front yards to rule out the presence of nesting birds if construction is scheduled during the principal nesting season, February 15-August 31. This survey shall include the least Bell’s vireo. A similar pre-construction nest survey shall be conducted by a bat specialist in order to confirm that no nesting bats are in nearby street trees. No trees will be removed, thereby limiting the possible affects to migrating Monarch butterflies. Noise-inducing construction shall be delayed until after nestlings have fledged and the nest has been abandoned. With this mitigation in place, impacts to nesting birds and their young are expected to be less than significant. e) No Impact. The proposed project would not conflict with local policies or ordinances protecting trees or other biological resources, because no tree removals are anticipated. The City classifies certain trees within its boundaries as landmark trees, trees of outstanding size and beauty, and dedicated trees (BMC Section 7-4-108). However, construction is limited to street surfaces and would not affect trees or their root systems. Accordingly, no impacts or conflicts with the BMC provisions are anticipated. f) No Impact. The proposed project would not conflict with any habitat conservation plans, because the project area does not contain and is not adjacent to any natural areas where such conservation plans apply.

Mitigation Measure
BIO-1: Migratory Birds/MBTA Compliance. All construction activities shall comply with the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 (MBTA) and California Fish and Game Code Sections 3503, 3511 and 3513. The MBTA governs the taking and killing of migratory birds, their eggs, parts, and nests and prohibits the take of any migratory bird, their eggs, parts, and nests. Compliance with the MBTA shall be accomplished by completing the following:

E. If construction activities near tree canopy will take place inside the peak nesting season (between January 1 and September 15), the City shall engage a qualified biologist to (1) perform a pre-construction survey to identify any active nesting locations within 7 days before construction activities begin and (2) to monitor construction activities if nests are discovered.

F. If the biologist does not find any active nests during the pre-construction survey, construction work may proceed, and no monitoring shall be required. The biologist conducting the survey shall document a negative survey (no nests observed) with a report indicating that no impacts to active avian nests will occur.

G. If the biologist finds an active nest within the pre-construction survey area, the biologist shall map its location on an aerial photograph and shall determine whether the nest may be impacted. If so, the biologist shall delineate an appropriate buffer zone around the nest on the map and in the field. The size of the buffer shall be determined by the biologist and shall be based on the nesting species, its sensitivity to disturbance, expected types of disturbance, and location in relation to the construction activities. These buffers are typically 300 feet from the nests of non- listed species and 500 feet from the nests of raptors and listed species and are subject to CDFW discretion.

H. Only construction activities that have been approved by the monitoring biologist, if any, shall take place within the buffer zone until the nest is vacated. The monitoring biologist shall supervise construction activities near active nests to ensure that no inadvertent impacts on these nests occur.

ATTACHMENT 6 - 123
City of Burbank Initial Study for the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan December 2023 Page IS-19
I. Results of the pre-construction survey and any subsequent monitoring reports shall be provided to the City. The monitoring report shall summarize the results of the nest monitoring, describe construction restrictions currently in place, and confirm that construction activities can proceed within the buffer area without jeopardizing the survival of young birds.

BIO-2: Bats are considered non-game mammals and are afforded protection by State law from take and/or harassment (Fish & G. Code, § 4150; Cal. Code of Regs, § 251.1). Additionally, several bat species are considered Species of Special Concern and meet the CEQA definition of rare, threatened, or endangered species (CEQA Guidelines, § 15380). Compliance with the preceding laws shall be accomplished by completing the following:

J. If construction activities near tree canopy will take place during maternity roost season (March 1 to September 30) the City shall engage a qualified bat specialist to (1) perform a pre-construction survey to identify any potential habitat that could provide daytime and/or nighttime roost sites, and any active nesting locations within 7 days before construction activities begin and (2) monitor construction activities if nests are discovered.

K. If the bat specialist does not find any active nests during the pre-construction survey, construction work may proceed, and no monitoring shall be required. The bat specialist conducting the survey shall document a negative survey (no nests observed) with a report indicating that no impacts to active avian nests will occur.

L. If the bat specialist finds an active nest within the pre-construction survey area, the bat specialist shall map its location on an aerial photograph and shall determine whether the nest may be impacted. If so, the bat specialist shall delineate an appropriate buffer zone around the nest on the map and in the field. Work shall not occur within 100 feet of or directly under or adjacent to an active roost and work shall not occur between 30 minutes before sunset and 30 minutes after sunrise until the end of the maternity season.

M. Results of the pre-construction survey and any subsequent monitoring reports shall be provided to the City. The monitoring report shall summarize the results of the roost monitoring, describe construction restrictions currently in place, and confirm that construction activities can proceed within the buffer area without jeopardizing maternity roost activity.

V. CULTURAL RESOURCES
Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to § 15064.5? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred
outside of dedicated cemeteries? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Impact Discussion:
a) No Impact. The proposed project would not affect historical resources because it is limited to construction on street surfaces and would not involve vibration-causing construction methods such as pile-driving. Accordingly, no impacts to structures are anticipated. b) No Impact. The proposed project is not anticipated to affect archeological resources because all construction work is limited to street surfaces, and no substantial excavation would take place. Sub- surface resources, should they exist, would not be affected.

ATTACHMENT 6 - 124
City of Burbank Initial Study for the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan December 2023 Page IS-20
c) No Impact (Statutory Measures apply). The proposed project is not anticipated to disturb previously- undiscovered human remains, because no substantial excavation would take place. However, in the event that remains are discovered, California Health and Safety Code §§ 7050.5-7055, requires that if human remains are encountered during project construction, work shall stop in the vicinity of the find.

The City shall immediately notify the County Coroner who will determine whether the remains are of recent human origin or of older Native American lineage. If the latter, the City shall notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) to report the discovery and shall subsequently notify the most likely descendant (MLD) as directed by the NAHC. The MLD is required to make recommendations for disposition of the remains within 24 hours of his or her notification by the NAHC. These recommendations may include scientific removal and nondestructive analysis of human remains and items associated with Native American burials, on- or off-site burial, and ritual ceremonies on- or off- site. Because compliance with this statutory process is intended to protect human remains comprehensively, no additional mitigation measures are required.

VI. ENERGY
Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or
operation?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Impact Discussion:
a) Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project would not be expected to result in significant environmental impacts associated with wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, simply because it would not be in the construction contractor’s interest to use – and pay for – excessive energy resources (e.g., motor fuels, electricity, natural gas, etc.). “Wasteful” energy consumption implies that the energy used to construct and operate a project greatly exceeds that required to do so. It would be unreasonable, and economically inefficient, to use substantially greater amounts of energy resources than needed to construct the proposed speed humps. Project “operation” would not consume energy, because speed humps are static elements of the roadway surfaces, without moving parts that require energy to function.
b) Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project would not be expected to conflict with or obstruct renewable energy or energy efficiency plans, largely because project construction equipment engines must comply with California Air Resources Board permitting requirements for on- and off-road diesel equipment (see California Air Resources Board, In-Use Off-Road Diesel-Fueled Fleets Regulation (Off- Road Regulation), available at https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/offroadzone/landing/ offroad.html (accessed May 26, 2023).

ATTACHMENT 6 - 125
City of Burbank Initial Study for the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan December 2023 Page IS-21
VII. GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated
on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault
Zoning Map, issued by the State Geologist for the area
or based on other substantial evidence of a known
fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special
Publication 42.
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
ii. Strong seismic ground shaking? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ iv. Landslides? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐ c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and
potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial
direct or indirect risks to life or property?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of
wastewater?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Impact Discussion:
a)
i.-iv No Impact. The proposed RPNPP 2023 Recommendations would not cause adverse effects to people from earthquake fault rupture or other seismic phenomena, because they would not change the existing exposure to fault risk that residents and visitors already experience. The RPNPP 2023 is limited to measures that are designed to moderate vehicle traffic in the RP neighborhood, and construction is limited to roadway surfaces. It would not build habitable structures or change development intensity or density in the area.
b) Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed RPNPP 2023 Recommendations would not cause substantial erosion, because construction of speed humps on existing paved streets, altering curbs and gutters, and/or installing a raised medians for road closures would not require substantial soil disturbance and would only require minimal “keying” or grinding of the asphalt surface to provide an anchor for applying the asphalt-concrete hump material. Conventional erosion-control measures would be used, such as straw rolls around catch basins, to capture asphalt particles.

ATTACHMENT 6 - 126
City of Burbank Initial Study for the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan December 2023 Page IS-22
c) No Impact. The proposed RPNPP 2023 Recommendations would not change underlying geology, and would not contribute to landslides, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse, because the speed humps would be installed over existing pavement on existing streets. Although the neighborhood lies on an identified liquefaction zone (Burbank2035 General Plan, Exhibit S-4, Liquefaction Zones), no structures susceptible to damage from liquefaction are proposed. No excavation or soil disturbance is required.
d) Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed RPNPP 2023 Recommendations would not contribute to risks to life or property associated with expansive soils, because the recommended speed humps would be constructed on existing street pavement and would not change the underlying soil structure.

Moreover, the project does not propose constructing habitable structures on expansive soils, and consequently would not place structures at risk of failure due to soil expansion. e) No Impact. The proposed RPNPP 2023 Update is not a land use that would produce wastewater, and thus would not require wastewater disposal.
f) No Impact. The proposed RPNPP 2023 Recommendations would not affect either unique paleontological resources or geologic features, because the speed humps would be installed over existing pavement on existing streets that lack such features, and no excavation is required for speed hump construction.

VIII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the
environment?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of
greenhouse gases?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Impact Discussion:
a) Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed RPNPP 2023 Recommendations would not generate substantial volumes of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, because heavy equipment (with associated high emissions) is not required for construction, and construction periods would likely not exceed one day per speed hump. Additionally, the RPNPP 2023 would not appreciably change the local vehicle miles traveled – vehicles may re-route to avoid streets with speed humps or a closure, but the minor incremental difference in distance traveled is not anticipated to affect greenhouse gas emissions from individual vehicles.
b) No Impact. The proposed RPNPP 2023 is intended to moderate traffic speeds and to reduce cut-through traffic within the Rancho Providencia neighborhood. As such, it is consistent with City and regional plans to reduce internal-combustion engine GHG emissions, which are typically lower with slower speeds. As stated in VIII(a) above, the incremental difference in VMT resulting from the Orchard Street segment closure and re-routed traffic is not anticipated to change GHG emissions substantially, because the segment is part of a grid street network, and there are numerous options for through-travel. Attempting to predict individual choices in this context would be speculative and would not produce reliable information; moreover, CEQA does not require analysis of speculative impacts (CEQA Guidelines § 15145). No conflicts with applicable plans, policies or regulations are anticipated.

ATTACHMENT 6 - 127
City of Burbank Initial Study for the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan December 2023 Page IS-23
IX. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and
accident conditions involving the release of hazardous
materials into the environment?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-
quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code §
65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
g) Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Impact Discussion:
a) Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed Recommendations would not require hazardous materials and would not involve their transport or disposal. “Hazardous” waste materials are (1) those which are specifically listed in California regulations, such as manufacturing and industrial waste products, solvents, mercury-containing switches or light bulbs; (2) those which are hazardous because of their characteristics – ignitability, corrosivity, reactivity, and toxicity; (3) used oil; (4) mixtures resulting from industrial processing or mining; (5) hazardous materials contained in soil, groundwater, or surface water that render the soil or water volumes hazardous (see California Department of Toxic Substances Control, Defining Hazardous Waste, available at https://dtsc.ca.gov/defining-hazardous-waste/ (accessed May 26, 2023). The types and amounts of materials used to construct speed humps or a road closure would be typical of those used in roadway constructions. Additionally, project construction contractors are required to comply with applicable federal, state, and local regulations regarding asphalt transport and application.
b) No Impact. The Recommendations are not anticipated to cause accidental release of hazardous materials directly or indirectly, because no hazardous materials would be used. Asphalt and associated materials are not considered “hazardous” by the State of California.

ATTACHMENT 6 - 128
City of Burbank Initial Study for the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan December 2023 Page IS-24
c) Less Than Significant Impact. If all Recommendations are constructed, diesel emissions would be generated as well as asphalt and paint odors during construction in the vicinity of the Dolores Huerta Middle School, located at 420 S. Mariposa Street within the Rancho Providencia neighborhood.

Residents can petition for speed humps on Beachwood Drive, Mariposa Street, Virginia Avenue, Lomita Street, and Glenwood Place, all of which are streets in the immediate vicinity of Dolores Huerta Middle School. However, construction activities are expected to comply with applicable federal, state, and local regulations that would reduce potential hazards during construction activities, and air quality rules promulgated by the SCAQMD (see III(c) above) regulate commercial construction equipment to reduce diesel particulate emissions. Finally, construction duration of speed humps on nearby streets is not anticipated to exceed one day per speed hump. The project is thus not anticipated to expose students and staff at the Dolores Huerta Middle School to significant hazards from emissions and odors. d) No Impact. The California DTSC Envirostor database indicates that the Rancho Providencia neighborhood does not contain hazardous material sites (Figure Haz-1 below). No impacts associated with such sites are anticipated.

Figure Haz - 1 California DTSC Envirostor Search Results (no sites) Source: California Department of Toxic Substances Control, Envirostor search, available at https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/map/?myaddress=City+of+Burbank (accessed May 26, 2023).

PROJECT AREA
ATTACHMENT 6 - 129
City of Burbank Initial Study for the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan December 2023 Page IS-25
e) No impact. The Rancho Providencia neighborhood is located between three and 3.5 miles southeast of the Bob Hope (Hollywood-Burbank) Airport, and the airport does not have a Master Plan (see Los Angeles County Airport Land Use Plan, p. 4, available at https://planning.lacounty.gov/long-range- planning/los-angeles-county-airport-land-use-plan/ (accessed May 26, 2023)). f) Less Than Significant Impact. Implementing the Recommendations is not anticipated to conflict with an emergency response or evacuation plan, because the primary evacuation routes serving the neighborhood (W. Olive Ave., Victory Blvd., SR 134) identified in the Burbank2035 General Plan would not be affected (Burbank2035 General Plan, Exhibit S-2, Evacuation Routes). Speed hump construction would not require street closures for prolonged periods. Should the temporary closure at Orchard Drive be made permanent, it will not impede an emergency evacuation plan. The neighborhood streets are laid in a grid pattern, which offers numerous alternative routes for evacuation or emergency vehicle access. Still, any speed hump installation design and installation will include consultation with the Burbank Fire Department in order to ensure that emergency vehicle travel and response times will not be materially adversely affected.
g) No Impact. Implementing the RPNPP 2023, including speed hump construction, would not expose people or structures to wildfire risk greater than now exists in the City, because it does not propose new housing or commercial development. The Rancho Providencia neighborhood is developed at an urban scale, and is not within a wildfire zone (Burbank2035 General Plan, Safety Element, Exhibit S-1 (available at https://www.burbankca.gov/documents/173607/0/Burbank2035+General+Plan.pdf/139656b0-80e9- 3b11-dc6d-751642c85b38?t=1612301807431 (accessed May 26, 2023)).

X. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the
project may impede sustainable groundwater management
of the basin?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious
surfaces, in a manner which would:

i. Result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off- site? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
ii. Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on-
or off-site?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
iii. Create or contribute runoff water which would
exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater
drainage systems or provide substantial additional
sources of polluted runoff; or
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
ATTACHMENT 6 - 130
City of Burbank Initial Study for the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan December 2023 Page IS-26
Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
iv. Impede or redirect flood flows? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management
plan?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Impact Discussion:
a) Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed Recommendations would not be expected to violate water quality standards, waste discharge requirements, or degrade surface or groundwater quality because construction activities must comply with regulatory measures that minimize runoff from construction sites. Burbank Municipal Code (BMC) § 9-3-407, Best Management Practices (BMPs) describes requirements for sediment and erosion control BMPs and stormwater pollution prevention plans. With compliance, impacts to surface and groundwater quality would be less than significant. b) No Impact. The proposed Recommendations contained in the RPNPP 2023 would not affect groundwater supplies or recharge, because (1) groundwater extraction is not required for the project, and (2) no new impermeable surfaces would be added to the area, impeding recharge. c) (i-iv) Less Than Significant Impact. The Recommendations would not be expected to result in substantial erosion or siltation, because as noted above, BMC BMPs would be incorporated into project construction, minimizing erosion and siltation. The installation would not generate runoff water or impede or redirect flood flows, because the speed hump engineering design and physical placement would consider the street drainage patterns so as to avoid blocking or channeling flood flows. Speed humps or a permanent closure would not be installed within gutter flow lines, so would not block flood flows into catch basins and the storm drain system.
d) Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed RPNPP 2023 speed hump installation would not release pollutants such as liquid chemicals if any portion of the project area was inundated by flood flows. There is a mapped flood zone along the eastern boundary of the Rancho Providencia neighborhood (Burbank2035 General Plan, Exhibit 5-6, FEMA Flood Zone Areas), but even if flooding occurred, no pollutants would be released from the project because the speed humps would be constructed of asphalt-concrete material, which, when cured, remains solid when exposed to water. Also, a permanent closure would be constructed of concrete and/or pavers, and the same conditions apply as speed humps. If landscaping were to be installed within the closure, it will be native and drought tolerant plants that do not require liquid chemicals or fertilizers. Additionally, the project area is inland, and there are no bodies of water near the project area that would generate tsunami or seiche flows. e) No Impact. The proposed RPNPP 2023 speed hump installation would not affect implementation of water quality control plans or sustainable groundwater management plans for the reasons described in X(a-c) above. Moreover, the proposed median landscape plantings used to close a street segment would require minimal irrigation, with negligible effects on regional groundwater management.

ATTACHMENT 6 - 131
City of Burbank Initial Study for the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan December 2023 Page IS-27
XI. LAND USE AND PLANNING
Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Physically divide an established community? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental
effect?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Impact Discussion:
a) No Impact. The proposed recommendations would not physically divide an established neighborhood.

Speed humps would not result in physical barriers within the neighborhood, and although a road closure would divert traffic flows to neighboring streets, neighborhood streets are laid in a grid pattern, which offers numerous alternative routes for evacuation or emergency vehicle access. Further, pedestrians and bicyclists still retain full access around the closure. b) No Impact. The proposed RPNPP 2023 is consistent with the Burbank2035 General Plan Mobility Element’s Neighborhood Protection Programs (Burbank2035 General Plan, Mobility Element, p. 4-22), which encourage NPPs to discourage cut-through traffic, reduce vehicle speed, and limit overflow parking on residential streets. The various measures in the RPNPP 2023, including speed humps, parking permit programs, and cooperation with restaurants such as Raising Cane’s, are among those suggested in the Mobility Element.

XII. MINERAL RESOURCES
Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be a value to the region and the
residents of the state?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local
general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Impact Discussion:
a) No Impact. The proposed RPNPP 2023 would not affect known mineral resources simply because the Rancho Providencia neighborhood is fully developed and mining for such resources would result in destroying homes and businesses. The entire City of Burbank is within a state-designated area recognized for mineral resource potential (General Plan 2035, Open Space and Conservation Element, Exhibit OSC-2); however, the accompanying discussion notes that the progressive urbanization of the City has effectively precluded mineral recovery/mining (Id., p. 6-13). b) No Impact. The proposed RPNPP 2023 would not affect any mineral resource recovery sites because, as stated in XII(a), the City is fully-developed with urban land uses; moreover, the General Plan does not identify important mineral recovery sites within the City (Id., Exhibit OSC-2)).

ATTACHMENT 6 - 132
City of Burbank Initial Study for the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan December 2023 Page IS-28
XIII. NOISE
Would the project result in:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent
increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
b) Generation of excessive ground-borne vibration or ground- borne noise levels?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Impact Discussion:1
a) Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. As further explained below, construction associated with the proposed RPNPP 2023 could generate substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels exceeding City standards; however, with the application of Mitigation Measure NOI-1, construction would be permitted per the City’s Building Code only between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. from Monday through Friday, and 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays, and construction equipment would be outfitted with noise-suppression mechanisms. Also as explained below, operational traffic noise levels would likely be the same as or reduced from present conditions.

Construction Noise. The RPNPP 2023 could result in installation of speed humps at multiple locations on Myers Street, Sparks Street, Beachwood Drive, Mariposa Street, and Glenwood Place. Speed hump construction may involve surface grinding of an approximately rectangular area at each speed hump location, followed by placing a mound of asphalt and forming/compacting it into a 3” to 3-1/2” tall mass.

The equipment used for these operations (loaders, hand-guided vibrating compactors, etc.) produces both noise and vibration; however, “heavy” equipment, such as jackhammers, trenchers, or excavators, would not be used.

The Burbank Municipal Code (BMC) Section 9-3-201 sets forth the City’s policy for noise control: “It is the policy of the City to prohibit unnecessary, excessive and annoying sounds which at certain levels and frequencies are detrimental to the health and welfare of the City’s inhabitants and in the public interest must be systematically proscribed;” Section 9-3-222, Octave Band Sound Frequency Level Limits, sets threshold levels for noise exceeding ambient (average) levels. Noise produced above these thresholds is generally prohibited, and there are special regulations for machinery (BMC 9-3-208) and leaf blowers (BMC 9-3-214).

1 This discussion relies upon the 2016 Noise Analysis Technical Report conducted for the Alameda North Neighborhood Protection Plan Phase 2 (Meridian 2016), incorporated into this document as Appendix A. Alameda North is a similarly- situated neighborhood bounded by W. Verdugo Avenue on the north, W. Olive Avenue on the south, S. Buena Vista Street on the east, and N. Hollywood Way on the west. The City determined that the analysis for that project could be used for the Rancho Providencia NPP because (1) the analysis was based on noise modeling from vehicle traffic data, rather than field measurements, so would translate to similar neighborhoods with similar traffic volumes; and (2) the North Alameda NPP included similar components, such as speed humps, as are set forth in the Rancho Providencia NPP.

ATTACHMENT 6 - 133
City of Burbank Initial Study for the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan December 2023 Page IS-29
Construction noise could intermittently exceed allowable thresholds. However, construction activities and associated noise would be temporary and would cease when construction is complete. Mitigation Measure NOI-1 requires all construction equipment that would likely generate noise above the applicable levels to be fitted with sound-suppressing mufflers, and Mitigation Measure NOI-2 limits construction to between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. from Mondays through Fridays. The City would manage the construction contractors’ operations to ensure compliance. These measures are anticipated to reduce construction noise impacts to less than significant levels.

Operational Noise. Implementation of the RPNPP 2023 would intentionally alter traffic distribution within the project area to reduce cut-through traffic and to re-orient that traffic to arterial streets. The noise analysis performed in 2016 for the nearby Alameda North Neighborhood (adjacent to the Rancho Providencia neighborhood on the west) indicated that changes in traffic noise caused by similar re- routes would be within the allowable range for urban street noise exposure (Meridian, pp. 26-27).

Because the Rancho Providencia neighborhood has similar characteristics to the Alameda North neighborhood, and shares the same arterial streets (Alameda Ave., Olive Ave., Buena Vista St.), a reasonable assumption can be made that traffic noise following RPNPP 2023 implementation would also be within acceptable levels. Further, Policy 3.5 of the Burbank2035 General Plan Noise notes that reducing noise levels around sensitive land uses can be achieved through the implementation of neighborhood protection plans. Neighborhood protection plans that serve to reduce vehicle speed, as RPNPP 2023 does, also reduce ambient traffic noise.
b) Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project would not be anticipated to cause excessive ground- borne vibration or noise levels, because construction would not require heavy equipment that produces substantial ground-borne vibration or noise, such as large bulldozers, trenchers, jackhammers, pile- drivers, etc. Hand-driven plate compactors or tampers would generate some vibration, but this vibration would not be expected to exceed acceptable levels on adjacent residential or school properties.

Mitigation Measures
NOI-1 Construction Noise Suppression. Construction bids and contracts shall specify that construction equipment shall be outfitted with noise-suppression mechanisms, subject to the approval of the City Building Official. Building inspectors shall periodically and randomly inspect equipment in the field and shall order work to stop if noise suppression equipment is not suitably used or is not functioning properly. Work may resume when noise suppression equipment is demonstrated to be functioning according to the manufacturer's specifications.

NOI-2 Construction Hours. Construction implementing the RPNPP 2023 shall be limited to hours between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays. No construction shall occur on Sundays, federal, state, or local holidays, as outlined in the City’s Building Code. Construction bids and contracts shall acknowledge these work hours and account for them in project scheduling.

ATTACHMENT 6 - 134
City of Burbank Initial Study for the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan December 2023 Page IS-30
XIV. POPULATION AND HOUSING
Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) 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)?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Impact Discussion:
a) No Impact. The proposed RPNPP 2023 would not introduce substantial unplanned population growth, because the project is limited to traffic controls within the Rancho Providencia neighborhood, and would not construct housing, unplanned or otherwise, and would not extend infrastructure to unpopulated areas.
b) No Impact. The proposed RPNPP 2023 would not affect existing housing and would not displace people because the project is limited to traffic controls within the Rancho Providencia neighborhood.

XV. PUBLIC SERVICES
Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) 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? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
ii. Police protection? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
iii. Schools? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
iv. Parks? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
v. Other public facilities? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Impact Discussion:
a) (i-v) No Impact. The proposed RPNPP 2023 would not result in unaccounted physical impacts associated with new construction of government facilities, because the project is limited to minor street improvements – installation of speed humps, striping, new and/or maintained signage on local streets and one possible street closure – and traffic control to reduce neighborhood cut-through traffic. Traffic volumes in the vicinity are not anticipated to change markedly, and the project would not introduce new land uses, creating a demand for new public services that could, in turn, necessitate construction of new ATTACHMENT 6 - 135
City of Burbank Initial Study for the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan December 2023 Page IS-31
public facilities. Impacts associated with the public facilities that are the subject of the RPNPP 2023 are otherwise addressed throughout this document.

XVI. RECREATION

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Would the project increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational
facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the
environment?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Impact Discussion:
a) No Impact. The proposed RPNPP 2023 is not anticipated to increase park or recreational facilities’ use because the project is limited to traffic control and minor surface changes to existing streets. The traffic control measures, such as permitted parking, signage, and speed humps, would not change access to existing parks (i.e., it would not enable substantial numbers of new park visitors to access existing facilities, accelerating their deterioration), and would not introduce new population to the area. b) No Impact. The proposed RPNPP 2023 does not include recreational facilities, nor would it require new facility construction that would result in environmental impacts. The proposed project is limited to traffic control and would not introduce new demands on recreational facility capacity.

XVII. TRANSPORTATION
Note: Except as provided in CEQA Guidelines § 15064.3(b)(2) (regarding roadway capacity projects), a project's effect on automobile delay shall not constitute a significant environmental impact. See 14 CCR § 15064.3.

Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy
addressing the circulation system, including transit,
roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines § 15064.3, subdivision (b) (Criteria for Analyzing Transportation
Impacts)?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
d) Result in inadequate emergency access? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Impact Discussion:
a) No Impact. The proposed RPNPP 2023 would not conflict with City circulation system plans; rather, the project is consistent with the Burbank 2035 General Plan Mobility Element. As stated in Section XI(b) ATTACHMENT 6 - 136
City of Burbank Initial Study for the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan December 2023 Page IS-32
above, the Mobility Element’s Neighborhood Protection Programs (Burbank2035 General Plan, Mobility Element, p. 4-22, and Mobility Element Policy 6-3)) encourage NPPs to discourage cut-through traffic, reduce vehicle speed, and limit overflow parking on residential streets. The various measures in the RPNPP 2023, including speed humps, parking permit programs, and cooperation with restaurants such as Raising Cane’s, are among those suggested in the Mobility Element. b) No Impact. CEQA Guidelines § 15064.3, subdivision (b) instructs local agencies to evaluate traffic impacts based on a project’s likelihood to increase passenger and commercial vehicle miles traveled either directly or by “inducing” vehicle trips by introducing a land use that attracts individual vehicle trips in lieu of trips made by alternative means, such as transit, cycling, walking, etc.

The proposed RPNPP 2023 would not appreciably change vehicle miles traveled in the project area. The RPNPP 2023 is designed to slow vehicles that use local streets by enabling residents on 15 street segments to petition for speed hump installation., and to reduce congestion on Orchard Street that would otherwise result from queued vehicles at the Raising Cane’s drive-through window. The RPNPP 2023 would not add land uses to the area and would thus not add or induce vehicle trips. One street closure would not result in significant changes in vehicle miles traveled. As noted in XVII(a) above, the improvements proposed by the RPNPP 2023 are expressly consistent with the Burbank2035 General Plan Mobility Element. As stated in VIII(a) above, the incremental difference in VMT resulting from the Orchard Street segment closure and re-routed traffic is not anticipated to change GHG emissions substantially, because the segment is part of a grid street network, and there are numerous options for through-travel. Attempting to predict individual choices in this context would be speculative and would not produce reliable information; moreover, CEQA does not require analysis of speculative impacts (CEQA Guidelines § 15145). Accordingly, the RPNPP would not conflict with CEQA Guidelines § 15064.3, subdivision (b).
c) Less Than Significant Impact. The RPNPP 2023 would not introduce features that would increase hazards or incompatible uses. Construction within the RP neighborhood would be limited to speed humps or one closure, all of which would be compatible with American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) and Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) design standards. The proposed speed humps are conventional features used safely throughout the City, and typically reduce vehicle speeds on the street segments where they are installed. Street closures also have been installed safely in nearby neighborhoods. Although the speed humps and possible street closure would result in street-surface irregularity, the City would also add striping and labels to warn drivers of the upcoming features. Accordingly, impacts associated with hazardous street features and construction are anticipated to be less than significant. d) Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed RPNPP 2023 is not anticipated to result in inadequate emergency access, because program implementation would not close streets or substantially alter street geometry. While the possible speed humps and permanent closure of Orchard Drive would alter some travel routes and could increase emergency response times on certain trips, overall emergency access to all locations within the Project area would be maintained. Any speed hump installation design and installation will include consultation with the Burbank Fire Department in order to ensure that emergency vehicle travel and response times will not be materially adversely affected. The closure would also be designed so that emergency vehicles can drive over or through the feature if necessary.

Further, recommendations are limited to local streets and would not be installed on arterial streets or designated emergency routes. Emergency access is therefore anticipated to remain adequate.

ATTACHMENT 6 - 137
City of Burbank Initial Study for the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan December 2023 Page IS-33
XVIII. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code § 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native
American tribe, and that is:

i. Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section
5020.1(k), or
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
ii. A resource determined by the lead agency, in its
discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to
be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code § 5024.1. In
applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of
Public Resource Code § 5024.1, the lead agency shall
consider the significance of the resource to a
California Native American tribe.
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Impact Discussion:
a) i-ii No Impact. The proposed RPNPP 2023 would not affect Tribal cultural resources, primarily because project construction is limited to minor grinding and installation of speed humps and a road closure on existing street surfaces in a developed urban area, and even if such resources were present, they would not be disturbed. No excavation would occur. There are no identified resources on the specific streets where speed hump petitions are cleared to move forward and where speed humps may be constructed.

Accordingly, the project would not be anticipated to affect resources that are listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources or a local register, or other potential significant historical resource with connection to the local Tribal community.

XIX. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water
drainage, electric power, natural gas, or
telecommunications facilities, the construction or
relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development
during normal, dry, and multiple dry years?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
ATTACHMENT 6 - 138
City of Burbank Initial Study for the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan December 2023 Page IS-34
Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
c) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
d) Generate solid waste in excess of state or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
e) Comply with federal, state, and local management
reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ Impact Discussion:
a, c-e) No Impact. The proposed RPNPP 2023 would not require relocation or construction of new utility systems, would not generate wastewater or solid waste, and would not foreseeably conflict with solid waste statutes and regulations, because construction associated with the RPNPP 2023 is limited to installation of speed humps, which are inert linear asphalt mounds placed at 90° to the direction of vehicle travel on street surfaces, and to the installation of a raised landscaped median to close Orchard Street to through -traffic. The City would manage project construction so that solid waste reduction goals are met. The remaining components of the RPNPP 2023 are operational in nature, and as such, would not affect utility or waste-management systems.
b) Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed raised median will include minor landscaping comprised of drought-tolerant, xeriscape plant materials that would require minimal supplemental dry- season drip irrigation. The irrigation system would be connected to the City’s existing street-tree irrigation water supply. Water consumption is not expected to exceed available supply, or to require expanded or new water treatment facilities.

ATTACHMENT 6 - 139
City of Burbank Initial Study for the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan December 2023 Page IS-35
XX. WILDFIRE
If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors,
exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project
occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
c) Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
d) Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a
result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Impact Discussion:
a-d) No Impact. The proposed RPNPP 2023 is located within the City of Burbank, and is not within or near a state responsibility area (CalFire, State Responsibility Area Fire Hazard Severity Zones, available at https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/media/cuxnqmcw/fhsz_county_sra_11x17_2022_losangeles_ada.pdf (accessed May 26, 2023)). The RP neighborhood is also not mapped within a local fire zone in the City (City of Burbank, Burbank 2035 General Plan, Safety Element, p. 7-9, Exhibit S-1, Fire Zones).

ATTACHMENT 6 - 140
City of Burbank Initial Study for the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan December 2023 Page IS-36
XXI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially
reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community,
substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or
prehistory?
☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively
considerable” means that the incremental effects of a
project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
Discussion:
a) Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated. The proposed RPNPP 2023 would not substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce fish or wildlife habitat or population, affect plant or animal communities, or affect examples of California history or prehistory, because as explained throughout the document, the RPNPP 2023’s physical changes to the environment are limited to constructing speed humps on existing street surfaces. Mitigation Measure BIO-1 and BIO-2 would guard against harm to nesting birds and their young as well as bats, and reduce potential impacts to less than significant levels. No further impacts are anticipated. b) Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed RPNPP 2023 would not contribute to cumulative impacts, because its potential impacts would be temporary and would cease after construction is completed.

Mitigation Measure BIO-1 would reduce impacts to migratory birds and roosting bats to less than significant levels, and Mitigation Measures NOI-1 and NOI-2 would reduce construction noise impacts to less than significant levels. As discussed throughout this document, any other impacts would be less than significant without additional mitigation.
c) Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated. The proposed RPNPP 2023 would not be expected to cause direct or indirect adverse effects on human beings, because as discussed throughout this document, such effects to human beings would not be expected, except those caused by construction noise, which would cease when speed hump or street closure installation is accomplished. With Mitigation Measures NOI-1 and NOI-2, any adverse effects would be mitigated to less than significant levels.

ATTACHMENT 6 - 141
City of Burbank Initial Study for the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan December 2023 Page IS-37
List of Preparers

Lead Agency
City of Burbank
Community Development Department
Transportation Division
150 North Third Street
Burbank, CA 91502

CEQA Consultant
Willdan Engineering
Christine Kudija, Principal Planner
Farhad Iranitalab, Principal Project Manager
Nicolle Span, Senior Engineer
Joanne Itagaki, Project Manager
ATTACHMENT 6 - 142
ATTACHMENT 6 - 143
Appendix C
Mitigation Monitoring
and
Reporting Plan
ATTACHMENT 6 - 144
ATTACHMENT 6 - 145

City of Burbank
Rancho Providencia Neighborhood
Protection Plan
2023 Update
SCH No. 2023100147

MITIGATION MONITORING AND

REPORTING PROGRAM

Prepared For:

City of Burbank
Community Development Department
Transportation Division
150 North Third Street
Burbank, CA 91502

Prepared by:

Willdan Engineering
13191 Crossroads Parkway North
Suite 405
Industry, CA 91746

December 2023

ATTACHMENT 6 - 146

ATTACHMENT 6 - 147

City of Burbank
Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan 2023 Update Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 1

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan 2023 Update This Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) has been prepared for the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan 2023 Update in compliance with Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code and Section 15097 of the CEQA Guidelines, which is required for all projects where an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) or Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) has been prepared. Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code states: “…the [lead] agency shall adopt a reporting or monitoring program from the changes made to the project or conditions of project approval, adopted in order to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment… [and the program] shall be designed to ensure compliance during project implementation.” The primary purpose of this MMRP is to ensure that the mitigation measures identified in the MND are implemented, thereby minimizing identified environmental effects. The City of Burbank is the Lead Agency for the proposed project.

The MMRP for the proposed project will be in place through all phases of project implementation. The Public Works Department shall be responsible for managing and assigning the MMRP activities to its staff, other City departments, consultants, and/or contractors. The Public Works Department will also ensure that mitigation monitoring is documented through reports and that deficiencies are promptly corrected. The designated environmental monitor (e.g., Public Works Director, building inspector, project contractor, certified professionals, etc., depending on the provisions specified below) will track and document compliance with mitigation measures, note any problems that may result, and take appropriate action to remedy problems. The MMRP lists mitigation measures according to the same numbering system contained in the MND sections. Each mitigation measure is categorized by topic, with an accompanying notation of the following:
• The implementation phase of the project during which the mitigation measure should be monitored (i.e., Operation, Construction, or Pre-construction activities); • The responsible enforcement authority for monitoring implementation of mitigation measure(s) (i.e., Public Works Director, City building inspector, certified professional, etc.); and
• The reporting procedure used to verify compliance (i.e., issuance of permit, report on monitoring activities, etc.).

ATTACHMENT 6 - 148

City of Burbank
Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan 2023 Update Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 2

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan 2023 Update Mitigation Measure Implementation
Period
Implementation
and Monitoring
Responsibility
Reporting Procedure Comments
BIO-1: Migratory Birds/MBTA Compliance – Migratory Birds/MBTA Compliance. All construction activities shall comply with the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 (MBTA) and California Fish and Game Code Sections 3503, 3511 and 3513. The MBTA governs the taking and killing of migratory birds, their eggs, parts, and nests and prohibits the take of any migratory bird, their eggs, parts, and nests.

Compliance with the MBTA shall be accomplished by completing the following:

A. If construction activities near tree canopy will take place inside the peak nesting season (between January 1 and September 15), the City shall engage a qualified biologist to (1) perform a pre-construction survey to identify any active nesting locations within 7 days before construction activities begin and (2) to monitor construction activities if nests are discovered.

B. If the biologist does not find any active nests during the pre-construction survey, construction work may proceed, and no monitoring shall be required. The biologist conducting the survey shall document a negative survey (no nests observed) with a report indicating that no impacts to active avian nests will occur.

C. If the biologist finds an active nest within the pre-construction survey area, the biologist shall map its location on an aerial photograph and shall determine whether the nest may be impacted. If so, the biologist shall delineate an appropriate buffer zone around the nest on the map and in the field. The size of the buffer shall be determined by the biologist and shall be based on the nesting species, its sensitivity to disturbance, expected types of disturbance, and location in relation to the construction activities. These buffers are typically 300 feet from the nests of non-listed species and 500 feet from the nests of raptors and listed species, and are subject to CDFW discretion.

D. Only construction activities that have been approved by the monitoring biologist, if any, shall take place within the buffer zone until the nest is vacated. The monitoring biologist shall supervise construction activities near active nests to ensure that no inadvertent impacts on these nests occur.

Pre-construction,
if construction is
scheduled to
begin within peak
nesting season
(January 1-
September 15).

Burbank
Department of
Public Works
The designated biologist
shall submit a pre-
construction survey
report to the Public
Works Director within
14 days of construction
start date.

Measures BIO-1 B-E
explain additional
reporting procedures.

ATTACHMENT 6 - 149

City of Burbank
Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan 2023 Update Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 3

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan 2023 Update Mitigation Measure Implementation
Period
Implementation
and Monitoring
Responsibility
Reporting Procedure Comments
E. Results of the pre-construction survey and any subsequent monitoring reports shall be provided to the City. The monitoring report shall summarize the results of the nest monitoring, describe construction restrictions currently in place, and confirm that construction activities can proceed within the buffer area without jeopardizing the survival of young birds.

BIO-2: Bat Nesting Compliance – Bats are considered nongame mammals and are afforded protection by State law from take and/or harassment (Fish & G. Code, § 4150; Cal. Code of Regs, § 251.1). Additionally, several bat species are considered Species of Special Concern and meet the CEQA definition of rare, threatened, or endangered species (CEQA Guidelines, § 15380). Compliance with the preceding laws shall be accomplished by completing the following:

A. If construction activities near tree canopy will take place during maternity roost season (March 1 to September 30) the City shall engage a qualified bat specialist to (1) perform a pre-construction survey to identify any potential habitat that could provide daytime and/or nighttime roost sites, and any active nesting locations within 7 days before construction activities begin and (2) monitor construction activities if nests are discovered.

B. If the bat specialist does not find any active nests during the pre- construction survey, construction work may proceed, and no monitoring shall be required. The bat specialist conducting the survey shall document a negative survey (no nests observed) with a report indicating that no impacts to active avian nests will occur.

C. If the bat specialist finds an active nest within the pre-construction survey area, the bat specialist shall map its location on an aerial photograph and shall determine whether the nest may be impacted. If so, the bat specialist shall delineate an appropriate buffer zone around the nest on the map and in the field. Work shall not occur within 100 feet of or directly under or adjacent to an active roost and work shall not occur between 30 minutes before sunset and 30 minutes after sunrise until the end of the maternity season.

Pre-construction
if construction set
to take place
between March 1
and September

30. Burbank
Department of
Public Works
The designated biologist
shall submit indicated
reports to the Public
Works Director as
specified in the
mitigation measure.

ATTACHMENT 6 - 150

City of Burbank
Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan 2023 Update Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 4

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan 2023 Update Mitigation Measure Implementation
Period
Implementation
and Monitoring
Responsibility
Reporting Procedure Comments
D. Results of the pre-construction survey and any subsequent monitoring reports shall be provided to the City. The monitoring report shall summarize the results of the roost monitoring, describe construction restrictions currently in place, and confirm that construction activities can proceed within the buffer area without jeopardizing maternity roost activity.

NOI-1: Construction Noise Suppression – Construction bids and contracts shall specify that construction equipment shall be outfitted with noise-suppression mechanisms, subject to the approval of the City Building Official. Building inspectors shall periodically and randomly inspect equipment in the field and shall order work to stop if noise suppression equipment is not suitably used or is not functioning properly. Work may resume when noise suppression equipment is demonstrated to be functioning according to the manufacturer's specifications.

NOI-2: Construction Hours – Construction implementing the RPNPP 2023 shall be limited to daylight hours between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m., Monday through Friday.

No construction shall occur on weekends, federal, state, or local holidays.

Construction bids and contracts shall acknowledge these work hours and account for them in project scheduling.

Pre-construction;
construction
Burbank
Department of
Public Works
Satisfactory inspection
from Public Works
Inspector

ATTACHMENT 6 - 151
Appendix D
Public
Comments
ATTACHMENT 6 - 152
ATTACHMENT 6 - 153
From: Karen Ross
To: Buonomo, Christopher; Kriske, David
Subject: Re: Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan (NPP) Update – Environmental Review Now Live Date: Wednesday, October 4, 2023 9:55:51 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Hi Chris & David
How is the conversation with Reese Street neighbors been? Is there any issue up for discussion that I should be aware of or have things settled ?
Please advise to g anything I should be aware of in regards to the neighbors. Thank you so much.

Karen Ross

Tallyrand
Sent from my iPhone
On Oct 4, 2023, at 5:12 PM, Buonomo, Christopher
<[email protected]> wrote:

This notice is to inform you that the environmental review process for the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan (NPP) update is now live. The update is subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and the City plans to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Rancho Providencia NPP Update. You are receiving this email because you previously provided comment via email regarding the project.

You can review the documents on the City web page here:
www.burbankca.gov/ranchoprovidencia

The 30-day review period begins on October 4 and ends on November 3.

There are several ways to provide comment on the documents:

Email or phone: Send project planner Chris Buonomo your comments by email at [email protected] or call at 818-238-5290.

Transportation Commission: Staff will present at Transportation Commission on Monday, October 16, 2023, from 5:00 pm to 7:00 pm at the City of Burbank Community Services Building (150 N. Third St, Burbank, CA 91502). Residents can provide public comment in-person or virtually by accessing the following link on the day of the meeting: https://www.burbankca.gov/web/city-clerks- office/meeting-agendas-and-minutes
Community Meeting: Staff will present the plan update and receive comment at the meeting on October 19, 2023, from 6:00 pm to 8:00 pm at the City of Burbank Community Services Building Room 104 (150 N. Third St, Burbank, CA 91502).

City Council: Staff are scheduled to present to City Council on Tuesday, Dec. 5, 2023, at 6:00 p.m. at City Council chambers (275 E. Olive Ave., Burbank, CA ATTACHMENT 6 - 154
91502), pending the completion of the environmental review process. Residents can provide comment in-person and via video/telephone conference.

Instructions on how to view the meeting and submit comments during the meeting will be posted online prior to the meeting date here:
https://www.burbankca.gov/web/city-clerks-office/meeting-agendas-and- minutes

ATTACHMENT 6 - 155
From: David Brandt
To: Buonomo, Christopher
Subject: Re: Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan (NPP) Update – Environmental Review Now Live Date: Friday, October 6, 2023 1:54:26 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Thank you for sending. I however think that what hasn't been looked at are few things.

1. The disruption of our neighborhood. We cannot get to Olive from our street anymore because Cain's was allowed to be there.

2. The part of Orchard Dr. between Oak and Olive is a pig stye. There are Cains wrappers and bags and food all over. it's a pit.

And lastly the car traffic, speed and congestion on our street is at least twice what it was before Cain's coming. Our street has more cars on it than it ever has and I've observed the people coming out of those parked cars as having Cains uniforms on and others coming back
to their parked cars on my street are carrying Cains bags of food.

The speed of traffic has increased and is not safe for the smaller children that live here.

Your studies and impact statements in my perspective too little too late. You let the horse out of the barn before you looked at the real situation. Cains has affected a wide swath of our neighborhood NEGATIVELY! And it's all because you, the city, wanted tax revenue and didn't care about the people that live in the community.

So all these studies that you made are BS. You've already ruined our community, our property values, and our safety. Whatever you do now to mitigate these problems will not help the situation. The only thing that will help is to relocate Cains to a proper place for a fast food joint, not a
residential neighborhood.

Again, thank you for sending out the notice, even though it doesn't really mean anything.

Best, David Brandt
On 10/4/23 5:12 PM, Buonomo, Christopher wrote:

You can review the documents on the City web page here:
www.burbankca.gov/ranchoprovidencia
ATTACHMENT 6 - 156

The 30-day review period begins on October 4 and ends on November 3.

There are several ways to provide comment on the documents:

Email or phone: Send project planner Chris Buonomo your comments by email at [email protected] or call at 818-238-5290.

ATTACHMENT 6 - 157
ATTACHMENT 6 - 158
From: Vil Sologub
To: Buonomo, Christopher
Subject: Re: Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan (NPP) Update – Environmental Review Now Live Date: Saturday, October 21, 2023 9:15:35 AM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Hello,
Is there a recording or any notes/agenda available regarding the October 19th Community Meeting?
Thank you,
-Vil
On Wed, Oct 4, 2023 at 5:12 PM Buonomo, Christopher <[email protected]> wrote:

You can review the documents on the City web page here:
www.burbankca.gov/ranchoprovidencia

The 30-day review period begins on October 4 and ends on November 3.

There are several ways to provide comment on the documents:

Email or phone: Send project planner Chris Buonomo your comments by email at [email protected]
or call at 818-238-5290.

Transportation Commission: Staff will present at Transportation Commission on Monday, October 16, 2023, from 5:00 pm to 7:00 pm at the City of Burbank Community Services Building (150 N. Third St, Burbank, CA 91502). Residents can provide public comment in-person or virtually by accessing the following link on the day of the meeting: https://www.burbankca.gov/web/city-clerks-office/meeting- agendas-and-minutes
Community Meeting: Staff will present the plan update and receive comment at the ATTACHMENT 6 - 159
meeting on October 19, 2023, from 6:00 pm to 8:00 pm at the City of Burbank Community Services Building Room 104 (150 N. Third St, Burbank, CA 91502).

City Council: Staff are scheduled to present to City Council on Tuesday, Dec. 5, 2023, at 6:00 p.m. at City Council chambers (275 E. Olive Ave., Burbank, CA 91502), pending the completion of the environmental review process. Residents can provide comment in-person and via video/telephone conference. Instructions on how to view the meeting and submit comments during the meeting will be posted online prior to the meeting date here:
https://www.burbankca.gov/web/city-clerks-office/meeting-agendas-and-minutes

ATTACHMENT 6 - 160
From: Davtian, Vikki
To: Buonomo, Christopher; Kriske, David
Cc: Jeffrey, Daliza
Subject: FW: Speed Hump Petition
Date: Monday, October 23, 2023 8:55:16 AM
Hi Chris and David,
This question came in regarding speed hump petition for Sparks and he made references to the Ranch Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan Update.

Is this something you guys are working
on?
If so, can you please respond back to the resident?
Thank you.

Best Regards,

VIKKI DAVTIAN, P.E.,T.E.

Principal Engineer-Traffic
(818)238-3915 office | (818)238-3922 direct
[email protected]

From: Arthur G. >
Sent: Saturday, October 21, 2023 2:18 PM
To: City of Burbank, Traffic <[email protected]>
Subject: Speed Hump Petition

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Hello,

I own , Burbank, CA 91506 which is a corner house at the intersection. I reviewed the Ranch Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan Update. I see that segment 14 (Sparks - Olive to Oak) and 15 (Sparks - Oak to Alameda) qualifies for speed humps. Has a petition
been filed for these segments? If so, where is it in the process? Thanks!

Cheers,
Arthur
ATTACHMENT 6 - 161
From: Judi Tamasi
To: Buonomo, Christopher; Transportation
Subject: Rancho Providencia Plan
Date: Sunday, October 22, 2023 10:10:44 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Hello Chris Buonomo:

I live within the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan area. I found out about the October 19 community meeting the day after the meeting. I don't believe that I received a notice of the IS/MND or of the community meeting. I spoke with two neighbors (two different residences) and they were not aware of the public documents for review or of the Nov. 3 deadline to comment. I also don't think I received any notices for the meetings in 2022. Could you please make sure that I am included or added to the mailing and email lists for notices for updates to the plan, community meetings, and public review documents? I respectfully suggest that you mail out notices to all residents within the area of the Rancho Providencia Plan.

I am interested in the speed humps issue. I'll take a look at the documents and see if I have any other comments.

Thank you.
-Judi Tamasi
Burbank, CA 91506
ATTACHMENT 6 - 162
From: Vil Sologub
To: Buonomo, Christopher
Subject: Re: Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan (NPP) Update – Environmental Review Now Live Date: Tuesday, October 31, 2023 10:29:38 AM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Hi Chris,
Thank you for sharing the presentation.

Specific to Raising Canes, do you know where I can find information about their operating and delivery hours? And are those hours planning to change as part of the RP NPP.

Thank you,
Vil
On Tue, Oct 24, 2023 at 10:40 AM Buonomo, Christopher <[email protected] >
wrote:

Hi Vil,

We did not record the meeting, but I have provided a copy of the presentation in the attached PDF. Thanks.

Chris

From: Vil Sologub <
Sent: Saturday, October 21, 2023 9:15 AM
To: Buonomo, Christopher <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan (NPP) Update – Environmental Review Now Live

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

ATTACHMENT 6 - 163
Hello,

Is there a recording or any notes/agenda available regarding the October 19th Community Meeting?

Thank you,
-Vil

On Wed, Oct 4, 2023 at 5:12 PM Buonomo, Christopher <[email protected]> wrote:

You can review the documents on the City web page here:
www.burbankca.gov/ranchoprovidencia

The 30-day review period begins on October 4 and ends on November 3.

There are several ways to provide comment on the documents:

Email or phone: Send project planner Chris Buonomo your comments by email at [email protected]
or call at 818-238-5290.

Transportation Commission: Staff will present at Transportation Commission on Monday, October 16, 2023, from 5:00 pm to 7:00 pm at the City of Burbank Community Services Building (150 N. Third St, Burbank, CA 91502). Residents can provide public comment in-person or virtually by accessing the following link on the day of the meeting: https://www.burbankca.gov/web/city-clerks- ATTACHMENT 6 - 164
office/meeting-agendas-and-minutes
Community Meeting: Staff will present the plan update and receive comment at the meeting on October 19, 2023, from 6:00 pm to 8:00 pm at the City of Burbank Community Services Building Room 104 (150 N. Third St, Burbank, CA 91502).

ATTACHMENT 6 - 165
From: Judi Tamasi
To: Buonomo, Christopher
Cc: Transportation
Subject: Rancho Providencia Protection Plan Update
Date: Friday, November 3, 2023 5:49:34 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

To Chris Buonomo:

Please consider the following comments on the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan
Update (NPP) and Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND). I have lived on Lamer Street, between Alameda Avenue and Oak Street, for over seven years. There are traffic safety issues on Lamer St., specifically between Alameda and Oak. The NPP indicates that Lamer St. (between Alameda and Oak) satisfies the criteria (average speeds and average daily trips) for one step towards installation of speed humps. I support the recommendation to install speed humps on this stretch of Lamer St. (between Alameda and Oak). I also strongly recommend that any traffic control measures minimize impacts to emergency vehicle response operations and times. I support the statement in the IS/MND (p. IS-32) that states: “Any speed hump installation design and installation will include consultation with the Burbank Fire Department in order to ensure that emergency vehicle travel and response times will not be materially adversely affected.”

I appreciate the City’s traffic studies on this stretch of Lamer St. that will satisfy the requirement for a Preliminary Engineering Field Study as one step towards the installation of speed humps per the City of Burbank’s Speed Hump Policy. I would like to add my observations. This is a family-centric residential street, with traffic safety issues. We see young kids playing in their front yards, teenagers playing hoops/basketball, and many people taking walks, young and old, including dog walkers. Honestly it can be unnerving to get into and out of my car after parking on the street or to attempt to walk across the street with a dog due to the excessive speed of many cars. Several pets have been killed by vehicles, likely due to excessive speeds of the vehicles. There are speed humps on the roads parallel to Lamer St. on either side. I get the sense that there is additional traffic on Lamer St. since drivers prefer to drive on Lamer St., which currently does not have speed humps. At the corner of Lamer and Alameda there is a gas station and car repair establishment; I think this establishment also likely generates additional trips on Lamer (compared with other residential streets in the area).

I have seen the aftermath of two separate accidents on Lamer St. between Alameda and Oak. In one accident, my neighbor woke up in the morning to find that a vehicle crashed into and totaled their parked car with such force that it pushed and moved their car approximately a car’s length. That was a hit and run. In the other accident, the driver had turned from Alameda onto Lamer St. and was able to reach such an excessive speed after only 4-5 houses such that the driver lost control and flipped the car. The car slid to the opposite side of the street and was stopped by a tree in the grass between the street and the sidewalk. I wonder how fast the person was driving ATTACHMENT 6 - 166
to be able to flip upside down like that.

I understand there can be a possible delayed emergency response time because of installation of speed humps. Could you please provide more detail regarding how the installation of speed humps of any kind will affect the emergency response times? Is there more information regarding specific impacts of slotted speed humps versus non-slotted speed humps on emergency response time and operations? Are the other opportunities to consider to slow vehicle speeds on Lamer St., perhaps with or without new speed humps. Some options might include painting lines on the street and/or painting parking areas to give drivers visual cues of where to drive, adding raised dots in the street, and/or installing bendable plastic signs/posts in the middle of the street (that might deter speeders, but over which emergency vehicles could drive).

Per the City’s Speed Hump Policy, the installation of speed humps may reduce the frequency of accidents caused by speeding. This is a substantial benefit of speed humps. Are there studies showing that when the speeds are reduced due to installation of speed humps, there are fewer emergency calls? I understand there is
some risk of affecting emergency response
times if speed humps are installed, but
there may be a substantial everyday improvement in safety associated with decreased vehicle speeds on Lamer St.

I am also concerned with the safety issues on Alameda. It saddened me to see the
two separate temporary memorials set up on Alameda (one block in either direction from Lamer) and to hear of a bicycle rider getting killed in an automobile accident.

Also, once while walking in the crosswalk, I had to run to the end of the crosswalk to avoid being hit by a car turning left on to Alameda from Keystone, while the driver was not looking where she was driving. There are bike lanes on Alameda and safety for bike riders, and pedestrians, must be improved on Alameda. What safety measures is the City studying and will the City implement to reduce vehicle speeds and fatalities on Alameda? Please add me to any mailing/email lists for planning documents for Alameda.

Regarding Exhibit A (p. 3) showing existing traffic controls, please update Lamer St.

The exhibit shows orange lines indicating 2-hour parking along all of Lamer St. between Alameda and Oak. These restrictions are only adjacent to the first few houses on Lamer starting at Alameda.

Thank you for your consideration.

Judi Tamasi, resident on Lamer St.

ATTACHMENT 6 - 167
From: Buonomo, Christopher
To: April Connella
Subject: Re: Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan Update Community Meeting Date: Monday, November 6, 2023 8:18:18 AM
Attachments: image.png
Hi April,
Your home is not in the plan area. The boundaries are: West Olive Avenue, Victory Boulevard, South Main Street, West Alameda Avenue and North Buena Vista Street.

The Neighborhood Protection Plan web page can be found below for more information. https://www.burbankca.gov/web/community-development/ranchoprovidencianpp From: April Connella
Sent: Monday, November 6, 2023 7:38 AM
To: Buonomo, Christopher <[email protected]>
Subject: Fwd: Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan Update Community Meeting

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Hello We are at I cannot locate a legible map to see if we are ATTACHMENT 6 - 168
ATTACHMENT 6 - 169
ATTACHMENT 6 - 170
ATTACHMENT 6 - 171
Appendix D
City Response to Comments

ATTACHMENT 6 - 172
ATTACHMENT 6 - 173
City of Burbank
Rancho Providencia Neighborhood
Protection Plan 2023 Update
Mitigated Negative Declaration

SCH No. 2023100147

RESPONSES TO COMMENTS

Prepared For:

City of Burbank
Community Development Department
Transportation Division
150 North Third Street
Burbank, CA 91502

Prepared by:

Willdan Engineering
13191 Crossroads Parkway North
Suite 405
Industry, CA 91746

December 2023

ATTACHMENT 6 - 174
ATTACHMENT 6 - 175
City of Burbank
Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan 2023 Update Mitigated Negative Declaration Public Review Period Public Comment 1 Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan 2023 Update Mitigated Negative Declaration
The Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan Update was available for public review and comment for a 30-day period from October 4, 2023, to November 3, 2023.

The following comments were received (selected personal information has been redacted):

No. Date Type Name Comment Contact MND Response
1 10/4/2023 Email Karen
Ross
Hi Chris & David
How is the conversation with Reese Street neighbors been? Is there any issue up for discussion that I should be aware of or have things settled?
Please advise to anything I should be aware of in regards to the neighbors. Thank you so much.

Karen Ross Tallyrand
Comment noted but does not address environmental issues. 2 10/6/2023 Email David
Brandt
Thank you for sending. I however think that what hasn't been looked at are few things.

1. The disruption of our neighborhood. We cannot get to Olive from our street anymore because Cain's was allowed to be there.

2. The part of Orchard Dr. between Oak and Olive is a pig stye. There are Cains wrappers and bags and food all over. it's a pit.

And lastly the car traffic, speed and congestion on our street is at least twice what it was before Cain's coming. Our street has more cars on it than it ever has and I've observed the people coming out of those parked cars as having Cains
uniforms on and others coming back to their parked cars on my street are carrying Cains bags of food.

The speed of traffic has increased and is not safe for the smaller children that live here.

Comments noted.

ATTACHMENT 6 - 176
City of Burbank
Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan 2023 Update Mitigated Negative Declaration Public Review Period Public Comment 2 No. Date Type Name Comment Contact MND Response
Your studies and impact statements in my perspective too little too late. You let the horse out of the barn before you looked at the real situation. Cains has affected a wide swath of our neighborhood NEGATIVELY! And it's all because you, the city, wanted tax revenue and didn't care about the
people that live in the community.

So all these studies that you made are BS. You've already ruined our community, our property values, and our safety.

Whatever you do now to mitigate these problems will not help the situation. The only thing that will help is to relocate Cains to a proper place for a fast food joint, not a residential neighborhood.

Again, thank you for sending out the notice, even though it doesn't really mean anything.

Best, David Brandt
3 10/13/2023 Phone Laverne
Thomas
Asked about timing for public engagement Comment noted but does not address environmental issues. 4 10/19/2023 In-
Person
at
Meeting
Steve
Storozum

1. Has the impact of the NoHo-Pasadena BRT line that will run down Olive Avenue been considered? If so, what was the outcome? (I did not see if referenced in the plan)

2. Page IS-16 has a typo under the air quality section

3. Izay Park will be renovated at some point. Was the impact of this renovation taken into account?

4. Reese Place at Alameda needs better signage indicating a dead end.

N/A 1. While the NoHo to Pasadena BRT line along Olive had initially proposed reducing Olive Avenue to one lane, City Council supported a mixed flow BRT line that maintains both the travel and parking alignment that currently exists. This bus line will not travel within the boundaries of the neighborhood, will not displace parking, and will not alter the current travel pattern on Olive Avenue. Therefore, its possible future presence is not expected to negatively impact traffic in the neighborhood.

2. Noted and edited.

3. The Izay Park renovation has been discussed but is not in an active planning stage yet. When it moves forward into planning, the Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan will be shared with planners for consideration.

4. This does not have an impact on traffic circulation and there are multiple dead end signs currently present at this location.

ATTACHMENT 6 - 177
City of Burbank
Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan 2023 Update Mitigated Negative Declaration Public Review Period Public Comment 3 No. Date Type Name Comment Contact MND Response
5 10/21/2023 Email Vil
Sologub
Hello,
Is there a recording or any notes/agenda available regarding the October 19th Community Meeting?
Thank you,
-Vil
Comment noted but does not address environmental issues. 6 10/21/2023 Email Arthur Hello,
I own Burbank, CA 91506 which is a corner
house at the intersection. I reviewed the Ranch
Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan Update. I see that segment 14 (Sparks - Olive to Oak) and 15 (Sparks - Oak to Alameda) qualifies for speed humps. Has a petition been filed for these segments? If so, where is it in the process? Thanks!
Cheers,
Arthur
The draft plan simply identifies which streets meet the underlying conditions for speed humps in the future, but does not designate where speed humps would be installed. Residents/property owners must initiate the process by filing a petition.

Should the City Council approve the plan, City staff will circulate a notice to property owners along the eligible streets to inform them about petitioning for speed humps. 7 10/22/2023 Email Judi
Tamasi
Hello Chris Buonomo:

I also don't think I received any notices for the meetings in 2022. Could you please make sure that I am included or
added to the mailing and email lists for notices for updates to the plan, community meetings, and public review
documents? I respectfully suggest that you mail out notices to all residents within the area of the Rancho Providencia

Comment noted but does not address environmental issues.

ATTACHMENT 6 - 178
City of Burbank
Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan 2023 Update Mitigated Negative Declaration Public Review Period Public Comment 4 No. Date Type Name Comment Contact MND Response
Plan.I am interested in the speed humps issue. I'll take a look at the documents and see if I have any other comments.

Thank you.-
Judi Tamasi
.Burbank, CA 91506
8 10/24/2023 Phone Laverne
Thomas

1. What is the process for the speed humps?

2. I see people crossing mid-block between the CVS parking lot and Raising Cane's all the time. That is illegal and something should be done there.

3. Why didn't you look at the Olive/Sparks/Verdugo
intersection reconfiguration as part of this?
Olive/Sparks/Verdugo project is still in the conceptual phase, and the latest version reviewed by City Council in 2018 does not propose any street closures. If and when this project is re-initiated, any effects to the NPP will be evaluated with that project. 9 10/25/2023 Phone Laverne
Thomas
On the existing conditions Exhibit A, the south half of Keystone should have permit only parking
Noted and edited.
10 10/31/2023 Email Vil
Sologub
Hi Chris,
Thank you for sharing the presentation.

Specific to Raising Canes, do you know where I can find information about their operating and delivery hours? And are those hours planning to change as part of the RP NPP.

Thank you,
Vil
Comment noted but does not address environmental issues. 11 11/3/2023 Email Judi
Tamasi
To Chris Buonomo:

The NPP indicates that Lamer St. (between Alameda and
Oak) satisfies the criteria (average speeds and average daily

Could you please provide more detail regarding how the installation of speed humps of any kind will affect the emergency response times?
Field tests have shown that, while slotted speed humps may not reduce vehicle speed as much as speed humps that span the entire roadway, these measures still reduce vehicle speeds while providing little to no delay to fire vehicles.“A Comparative Study of Speed Humps, Speed Slots and Speed Cushions,” LaToya Johnson and A.J. Nedzesky,
https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/speedmgt/ref mats/ fhwasa1304/Resources3/26%20- %20A%20Comparative%20Study%20of%20Speed%20Humps,%20Speed%20Slots%20and%20Spee d%20Cushions.pdf.

ATTACHMENT 6 - 179
City of Burbank
Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan 2023 Update Mitigated Negative Declaration Public Review Period Public Comment 5 No. Date Type Name Comment Contact MND Response
trips) for one step towards installation of speed humps. I support the recommendation to install speed humps on this stretch of Lamer St. (between Alameda and Oak).

I also strongly recommend that any traffic control measures minimize impacts to emergency vehicle response operations and times. I support the statement in the IS/MND (p. IS-32) that states: “Any speed hump installation design and
installation will include consultation with the Burbank Fire Department in order to ensure that emergency vehicle travel and response times will not be materially adversely
affected.”

Honestly it can be unnerving to get into and out of my car after parking on the street or to attempt to walk across the street with a dog due to the excessive speed of many cars.

Several pets have been killed by vehicles, likely due to excessive speeds of the vehicles. There are speed humps on the roads parallel to Lamer St. on either side. I get the sense that there is additional traffic on Lamer St. since drivers prefer to drive on Lamer St., which currently does not have speed humps. At the corner of Lamer and Alameda there is a gas station and car repair establishment; I think this
establishment also likely generates additional trips on Lamer (compared with other residential streets in the area).

A Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) study found that in San Diego, fire vehicles can travel over the slotted speed humps at full speed with no delay by navigating through the slots in the middle of theroadway when the center pad was 5.5 feet wide. Similarly, the City of Sacramento found that slotted speed humps cause almost no delay to emergency response time. The city found using slotted speed humps instead of standard speed humps results in a savings of almost 13 seconds per typical roadway segment.

In the City of Danville, it was found that no delay occurred in response time with slotted speed humps, compared to a 10 to 15 second delay observed with standard speed humps.“Traffic Calming ePrimer,” FHWA,
https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/speedmgt/ePrimer modules/module 5.cfm.

Based on these studies, it can be assumed that in general speed humps pose the possibility for a slight delay in emergency vehicle response times and slotted speed humps may reduce that possible delay. However, possible delay time varies by location based on local context.

Is there more information regarding specific impacts of slotted speed humps versus non-slotted speed humps on emergency response time and operations?
Same response as above.

Are the other opportunities to consider to slow vehicle speeds on Lamer St., perhaps with or without new speed humps. Some options might include painting lines on the street and/or painting parking areas to give drivers visual cues of where to drive, adding raised dots in the street, and/or installing bendable plastic signs/posts in the middle of the street (that might deter speeders, but over which emergency vehicles could drive).

In recent years there has been an increase of signage for “slow streets” in other cities, often positioned in the center double yellow striping at the entrance to a neighborhood street. Staff is not able to find evidence that this type of signage reduces vehicle speeding without other traffic calming measures present. While this type of signage or vehicle striping may present visual cues to drivers, the traffic speed data from this study only shows a relationship between speed humps and speed reduction.

Are there studies showing that when the speeds are reduced due to installation of speed humps, there are fewer emergency calls?
Staff is not aware of the correlation between speed humps and a reduction in emergency calls.

ATTACHMENT 6 - 180
City of Burbank
Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan 2023 Update Mitigated Negative Declaration Public Review Period Public Comment 6 No. Date Type Name Comment Contact MND Response
I have seen the aftermath of two separate accidents on
Lamer St. between Alameda and Oak. In one accident, my
neighbor woke up in the morning to find that a vehicle
crashed into and totaled their parked car with such force that it pushed and moved their car approximately a car’s length. That was a hit and run.

In the other accident, the driver had turned from Alameda onto Lamer St. and was able to reach such an excessive
speed after only 4-5 houses such that the driver lost control and flipped the car. The car slid to the opposite side of the street and was stopped by a tree in the grass between the street and the sidewalk. I wonder how fast the person was driving to be able to flip upside down like that. I understand there can be a possible delayed emergency response time because of installation of speed humps.

Could you please provide more detail regarding how the
installation of speed humps of any kind will affect the emergency response times? Is there more information
regarding specific impacts of slotted speed humps versus non-slotted speed humps on emergency response time and
operations? Are the other opportunities to consider to slow vehicle speeds on Lamer St., perhaps with or without new speed humps.

Some options might include painting lines on the street and/or painting parking areas to give drivers visual cues of where to drive, adding raised dots in the street, and/or installing bendable plastic signs/posts in the middle of the street (that might deter speeders, but over which emergency vehicles could drive).

Per the City’s Speed Hump Policy, the installation of speed humps may reduce the frequency of accidents caused by
speeding. This is a substantial benefit of speed humps. Are there studies showing that when the speeds are reduced
due to installation of speed humps, there are fewer
emergency calls? I understand there is some risk of affecting emergency response times if speed humps are installed, but

What safety measures is the City studying and will the City implement to reduce vehicle speeds and fatalities on Alameda?
The Rancho Providencia Neighborhood Protection Plan specifically focuses on the local and neighborhood collector streets within the neighborhood. Alameda Avenue is one of the boundaries of the plan area and an arterial street, therefore it is not part of the plan update.

Regarding Exhibit A (p. 3) showing existing traffic controls, please update Lamer St.

The exhibit shows orange lines indicating 2-hour parking along all of Lamer St. between Alameda and Oak. These restrictions are only adjacent to the first few houses on Lamer starting at Alameda.Noted and updated.

ATTACHMENT 6 - 181
ATTACHMENT 6 - 182

Burbank City CouncilDecember 5, 2023

Burbank City Council
December 5, 2023