Agenda packet, first session — Glendora City Council, December 13, 2022 (part 2 of 5)

From: Valerie Velasquez <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, November 6, 2020 9:25 AM
To: Valerie Velasquez <[email protected]>
Subject: City of Glendora Invite - Housing Element Study Session The City of Glendora invites you to attend a Special Meeting of the Planning Commission.

City of Glendora Planning Commission
Housing Element Study Session
Join us for a Virtual Planning Commission meeting to discuss the City’s Housing Element Update
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 17TH, 2020 at 7:00PM
The Housing Element is part of the City’s General Plan and includes goals, policies, programs, and quantified objectives for adequately housing our future population. The state requires that the Housing Element be updated every eight years. The Housing Element should demonstrate that the City has identified sufficient capacity to accommodate the number of housing units identified in the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA).

The City of Glendora has begun the process of updating the Housing Element for the 2021-2029 Planning Period and wants to hear from you. This is your chance to learn about the Housing Element Update, identify challenges that should be addressed, discuss potential housing sites, and tell us what’s important to you! To Participate via Zoom Video Communications:

Meeting ID: cityofglendora.org/zoom or https://zoom.us/j/9329247224 Meeting can also be watched via live Internet Streaming at www.cityofglendora.org,
through Spectrum cable television Channel 3 and Verizon Channel 31.

For more information, please contact Valerie Velasquez: (626) 914 – 8292 or via email at [email protected]
Item #5. Page 131
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 338
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 A-2
Interested Parties List
The following lists are of local service providers, housing developers, and community groups were contacted to participate in public workshop/hearings. Those listed were contacted directly via email.

For privacy purposes email addresses are not listed, for additional information please contact the Planning Department.

Interested Parties List Notified of the November 17, 2020, Housing Element Workshop:

Fore Property Company
Gangi Development
Hanover Pacific, LLC
Heritage Housing Partners
Hollywood Community Housing Corp.

Hughes Homes Inc.

Hutton Companies
Jamboree
James V. Coane & Associates
KB Home
Lewis Group of Companies
LPC West
MW Investment Group
New Urban West Inc.

Oakmont Senior Living
Olson Homes
Pacific Plaza Premier Development Group
Shaw Investments
Taylor Morrison
Tipping Development
Item #5. Page 132
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 339
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 A-3
Agencies and Organizations
Toledo Homes
Tolkin Group
Tramell Crow Residential
Walton Construction Inc.

Watt Companies
SG Mountains Regional Conservancy
SGV Habitat for Humanity
Pomona Valley Habitat for Humanity
Southland Properties
Global Premier Development
Hawkey Consulting
Telacu
Jan Cicco, Homeless Coordinator, SGV COG

SGV COG
St Lucy's Priory High School
Glendora Chamber of Commerce CEO
Elwood Family Apartments
Crowther Teen and Family
La Fetra Senior Center
Glendora Public Library
Heritage Oaks
Glendora Coordinating Council - President
Glendora Rotary
Glendora Kiwaniannes President
ESGV Coalition for the Homeless
Charter Oak Unified School District - Superintendent
Glendora Unified School District - Superintendent
Catholic Charities of Los Angeles
Citrus Valley Association of Realtors CEO
Citrus Valley Association of Realtors - Gov Affairs
First Christian Church, Pastor
Grace Church of Glendora, Pastor
Foothill Church, Pastor
Glendora Alliance Church, Pastor
Grace Episcopal Church, Reverend
Glendora Community Church, Pastor
Journey Seventh-Day Adventist, Pastor
New Community Four Square, Thrive
Hope Lutheran Church
Saint Dorothy's, Administrator
Cornerstone Bible Church, Pastor
Glen Kirk Presbyterian, Pastor
Joy Christian center
Church of the Brethren
Housing Rights Center, Executive Director
Item #5. Page 133
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 340
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 A-4
Agencies and Organizations
Housing Rights Center
Emanate Health, CEO
Foothill Christian School, Superintendent
Regent Property Management
Deasy Penner Podley
Mark Peterson, ReMax Masters Realty
Century 21 Masters
Landview Properties, Inc.

Ludwick Family Foundation
Inland Valley Hope Partners
Project Sister Family Services, Executive Director
New Beginning Community Ministries, Pastor
Glendora Women's Club, Carolyn Cunningham
Prototypes - Women, Children & Communities in need
Watkins Management
Tri-City Mental Health Center, Executive Director
Making Housing Happen
Avalon Bay
JWDA
San Gabriel Children’s Center
Glendora Lions Club
Independent Living Center of the San Gabriel Valley
Glendora United Methodist, Pastor
Citrus College Foundation
Orfalea Family Children's Center at Citrus College
Nurses for Christ
Salvation Army
Yellow Iron Investments
Interested Parties List Notified of the April 6, 2021, June 3, 2021, and August 2, 2021 Housing Element Workshops and Public Hearing:

Agencies and Organizations
Affirmed Housing
AMCAL Multi-Housing Company
APPA Real Estate
Arteco Partners
Bowden Development
Brandywine Homes
Brookfield Residential
Building Worx, Inc
City Ventures
Clearwater Communities
Clearwater Living
Comstock Homes
Corman Leigh Companies
Item #5. Page 134
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 341
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 A-5
Agencies and Organizations
Crestwood Communities
D.R. Horton
Deli Group Inc.

Fore Property Company
Gangi Development
Hanover Pacific, LLC
Heritage Housing Partners
Hollywood Community Housing Corp.

Hughes Homes Inc.

Hutton Companies
Jamboree
James V. Coane & Associates
KB Home
Lewis Group of Companies
LPC West
MW Investment Group
New Urban West Inc.

Oakmont Senior Living
Olson Homes
Pacific Plaza Premier Development Group
Shaw Investments
Taylor Morrison
Tipping Development
Toledo Homes
Tolkin Group
Tramell Crow Residential
Walton Construction Inc.

Watt Companies
Watt Companies
SG Mountains Regional Conservancy
SGV Habitat for Humanity
Pomona Valley Habitat for Humanity
Southland Properties
Global Premier Development
Hawkey Consulting
Telacu
Jan Cicco, Homeless Coordinator, SGV COG

SGV COG
St Lucy's Priory High School
Glendora Chamber of Commerce CEO
Elwood Family Apartments
Crowther Teen and Family
La Fetra Senior Center
Glendora Public Library
Heritage Oaks
Item #5. Page 135
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 342
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 A-6
Agencies and Organizations
Glendora Coordinating Council - President
Glendora Rotary
Glendora Kiwaniannes President
ESGV Coalition for the Homeless
Charter Oak Unified School District - Superintendent
Glendora Unified School District - Superintendent
Catholic Charities of Los Angeles
Citrus Valley Association of Realtors CEO
Citrus Valley Association of Realtors - Gov Affairs
First Christian Church, Pastor
Grace Church of Glendora, Pastor
Foothill Church, Pastor
Glendora Alliance Church, Pastor
Grace Episcopal Church, Reverend
Glendora Community Church, Pastor
Journey Seventh-Day Adventist, Pastor
New Community Four Square, Thrive
Hope Lutheran Church
Saint Dorothy's, Administrator
Cornerstone Bible Church, Pastor
Glen Kirk Presbyterian, Pastor
Joy Christian center
Church of the Brethren
Housing Rights Center, Executive Director
Housing Rights Center
Emanate Health, CEO
Foothill Christian School, Superintendent
Regent Property Management
Deasy Penner Podley
Mark Peterson, ReMax Masters Realty
Century 21 Masters
Landview Properties, Inc.

Ludwick Family Foundation
Inland Valley Hope Partners
Project Sister Family Services, Executive Director
New Beginning Community Ministries, Pastor
Glendora Women's Club, Carolyn Cunningham
Prototypes - Women, Children & Communities in need
Watkins Management
Tri-City Mental Health Center, Executive Director
Making Housing Happen
Mike West
Brittany Irvin - Province Group
Rachel Forester - League of Women Voters - Mt Baldy
Item #5. Page 136
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 343
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 A-7
Public Workshop and Meeting Notification Materials
Item #5. Page 137
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 344
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 A-8
April 25, Joint Planning Commission and City Council Meeting On April 25, 2022, the City conducted a joint meeting with the Planning Commission and City Council to discuss a series of proposed action items to streamline housing development and mitigate governmental constraints.

Item #5. Page 138
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 345
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 B-1
Appendix B: Residential Sites Inventory
Site Selection Factors:

1. Vacant sites, parking lots, or lots that are used for auto storage that have minimum improvements

2. Nonvacant sites with at least three of the following factors:
a. Existing uses are the similar types of uses being recycled in Glendora and in the San Gabriel Valley. b. Property owner or developer interest.
c. Vacant buildings.
d. Property is located near and similar to properties that have been recently developed. This shows synergy of redevelopment activities and developer interests and market demand in the neighborhood.
e. Building age is at least 30 years (unless there is limited improvement on site) or building is vacated. Building older than 30 years often require significant improvements to update the systems and difficult to meet ADA requirements as warranted with substantial rehabilitation. f. Existing Floor Area Ratio (FAR) that is less than 0.50. This threshold is established because mixed use zones in Glendora generally allow an FAR of between 0.35 and 0.50 PLUS 30 units per acre. If existing commercial uses are developed below this threshold, redevelopment of site can at least gain 30 units per acre.

Furthermore, redevelopment of existing uses in San Gabriel Valley has shown a wide range of existing FARs, including beyond FAR of 1.0. g. Improvement to Land Ratio (ILR) of less than 1.0, indicating the land is worth more than the structures on site. However, exceptions to the rule are sites with large structures such as older shopping centers, office buildings, motels, and warehouses. Often these high improvement values may serve as financial liability to property owners if the uses are not generating adequate revenues but are still subject to high property taxes. These sites are also included due to other factors. h. Property is located withing ¼ mile of Gold Line and therefore conducive to transit-oriented development. i. Property is in obvious conditions of deferred maintenance, The sites inventory, along with photos demonstrating the underutilization of existing uses, is presented on the following pages.

Item #5. Page 139
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 346
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 C-1
Appendix C: Review of Past Accomplishments
General Summary
Under new Housing Element, housing programs must have specific actions, measurable objectives, and specific timelines, and the jurisdiction must take an active role in program implementation. Therefore, some of the programs included in the 2013-2021 Housing Element would be restructured as policy statement. Specifically, routine staff functions and development processes and requirements would be restructured as policy statements instead of as specific Housing Element programs.

Effectiveness of Addressing Special Needs
The City has limited resources to address affordable housing needs. However, the City continues to maintain the Heritage Oaks and Elwood Family Apartments. Heritage Oaks is a senior housing project and Elwood Family Apartments includes units for seniors.

Specifically, the City monitors Elwood Family Apartments for compliance with State HOME and LIHTC requirements, to ensure units are charged the correct level of rents for income-eligible households.

Affordable housing needs in Glendora are also being addressed with Housing Choice Vouchers (HCVs). About 50 households receive assistance under this program, the majority of the HCV holders are seniors, female-headed households, and persons with disabilities.

As part of 2021-2029 Housing Element planning period, the City will expand outreach on HCVs to increase its use in the community.

The San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments (SGVCOG) entered a contract with the County of Los Angeles to administer a Measure H funding allocation to support of the County’s Homeless Initiative (HI) strategies to combat homelessness in the San Gabriel Valley. A portion of the funding was allocated to assist member agencies with the implementation of homeless plans, the development of programs to prevent homelessness, the implementation of pilot programs, and the implementation of a landlord education and incentive program. As part of this funding set aside, the City received $240,000 that could be used for motel vouchers, encampment cleanup activities, and prevention and diversion programs. This funding enabled the City to continue to house homeless individuals in local motels and hotels, conduct a census of homeless individuals (undertaken by City Net), and reimburse the City for some costs related to encampment cleanups. This grant will end in May 2022.

The City applied for and received two Measure H Grants – the Five Cities Grant and the Three Cities Grant. Working alongside the Cities of Azusa, Covina, Duarte, and West Covina, the Five Cities Grant provided each city with access to a housing navigator that conducted direct street-level outreach and would assist the City navigate programs and resources to connect individuals experiencing homelessness to needed services, including housing. The funding enabled each city to have a full-time housing navigator. The City of West Covina administered the $343,000 grant (which required a $33,000 per city cash grant match) and contracted with Union Item #5. Page 140
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 347
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 C-2
Station for this service. This grant ended on December 31, 2021. City staff built an effective working relationship with the housing navigator that has yielded positive results, which recently included securing 11 emergency housing vouchers.

Table C-1: Three and Five Cities Grant Outcomes
for Glendora (March 2020 – December 2021)
Category Number of Individuals
Initiated Contact/Outreach 154
Engaged (Housing Services Plan Completed) 30
Enrolled in Rapid Rehousing 22
Motel Vouchers 19
Referral to Resources 36
Permanent Housing 11
Landlords Engaged 15
The Three Cities Grant was operated alongside the Cities of La Verne and San Dimas. The Three Cities Grant provided each city shared access to a housing navigator, an outreach worker, and provided funding for hotel vouchers and rapid rehousing. Following an assessment, and depending on each person’s need, the assistance typically provided included securing important documents (i.e. identification, Social Security cards), referrals to specified services and housing opportunities, and transportation to appointments, among other supportive services. Glendora administered the $359,200 grant (this includes an additional 53,500 Measure H funds from the county to fund the grant extension), contracting the service with Union Station. This grant ended on December 31, 2021.

Item #5. Page 141
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 348
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 C-3
Table C-2: 2013-2021 Housing Element Accomplishments
Program Type Activity
2013-2021 Housing Element
Objective Progress

1. Code
Enforcement
Enforcement of existing property
maintenance codes by Glendora
Police Department.
• Continue code enforcement
activities and connect households in
needs with City rehabilitation
program.

The City continues its code enforcement
activities. Enforcement activities typically
involve property maintenance and
nuisance issues.

Continued Appropriateness: Pursuant to
new State law, Housing Element
programs should have specific activities,
measurable goals, and timeline. Code
Enforcement is a routine City service and
is restructured in the 2021 Housing
Element as a policy instead of a specific
housing program.

2. Preservation of
Assisted Housing
Developments
Ensure housing projects at risk of
conversion to market-rate housing
remain affordable, specifically
Glendora Gardens.
• Monitor status of existing and future
affordable housing projects,
including Glendora Gardens
• Upon receipt of Notice of Intent to
convert property owners, coordinate
with the Los Angeles County
Housing Authority to connect
tenants of at-risk units to the
Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher
program.

The owners have stated that Glendora
Gardens will remain affordable housing.

In addition to Glendora Gardens, the City
maintains the following affordable housing
projects:
• Heritage Oaks Senior Apartments
• Elwood Family Apartments
• 252 S. San Jose Avenue.

Continued Appropriateness: This program
is updated and included in the 2021
Housing Element.

Item #5. Page 142
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 349
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 C-4
Table C-2: 2013-2021 Housing Element Accomplishments
Program Type Activity
2013-2021 Housing Element
Objective Progress

3. Housing Choice
Vouchers (Section
8)
Provides rent subsidies to
extremely low- and very lowincome households.
• Continue to participate in the
Housing Choice Voucher program
administered by the Housing
Authority of the County of Los
Angeles.
• Advertise program through
brochures, newsletter, and City
website.
• Monitor the use and availability of
vouchers annually, especially
monitor for the opening of the
voucher waiting list for accepting
new applicants.
• Support County efforts to petition
for additional funding from HUD.

The City will assist in the promotion of the
Housing Choice Vouchers (HCV)
administered by the County. As of 2020,
51 Glendora households are receiving
HCV assistance.

Continued Appropriateness: This program
is expanded in the 2021 Housing Element
to include outreach and education on the
new State law on source of income
protection (SB 329), including public
assistance such as HCV.

4. Energy
Conservation
The Green Building Program for
the William Lyon Homes Arboreta
Specific Plan area requires
developers to provide all
components of the green program
as it is written and to educate
homebuyers about the green
building components. The City is
also offering incentives for LEED
Silver certified residential
development projects in the
Grand-Foothill Multi-Family
Residential Overlay Zone and
encouraging mixed-use, compact
development in the Route 66
Corridor Specific Plan area.
• Promote density incentives for
green building to developers.
• Continue to explore additional ways
to promote energy conservation and
sustainability.

The City adopted the 2019 California
Green Building Standards Code that took
effect January 2020. The City also
adopted the 2016 CalGreen Building
Code in 2017.

The City continues to incentivize green
building in certain zones including LEED
Silver certified residential projects in the
Grand-Foothill Multi-Family Overlay Zone.

The City also offers rebate incentives for
energy and water consumption which are
detailed on their website.

Continued Appropriateness: This program
is included in the 2021 Housing Element.

5. Affordable
Housing
Development
Provide affordable housing
through regulatory incentives
funded by non-profit agencies and
other qualified developers.
• Provide information on incentives
available to facilitate affordable
housing development.

The City will continue to offer density
bonuses to affordable housing
developers.

Continued Appropriateness: This program
is included in the 2021 Housing Element.

Item #5. Page 143
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 350
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 C-5
Table C-2: 2013-2021 Housing Element Accomplishments
Program Type Activity
2013-2021 Housing Element
Objective Progress

6. Residential Sites
Inventory
Ensure adequate capacity of the
City’s residential sites inventory to
meet its RHNA.
• Update the inventory of vacant and
underutilized sites annually to
ensure adequate sites are available
to accommodate the remaining
RHNA.
• Provide sites inventory to interested
developers.
• Monitor the development trends in
the City, particularly on the sites
identified in this Housing Element. If
a shortfall in sites is identified due to
development of non-residential or
non-mixed-use development on
these sites, replenish the City’s
residential sites inventory.
• Monitor development trends in the
City to determine if the incentives
offered are adequate to facilitate
mixed use development and lot
consolidation given current market
conditions. Develop additional
incentives as necessary.

The City monitors and updates the sites
inventory as necessary. The City works
with developers to identify sites for future
housing development. The City has
completed the RHNA for upper income
units but 379 moderate, low, and very low
income units remain.

The following development projects are in
progress:
• Carroll Vermont Citrus Crossing:
40 single-family homes
• Gordon Mull/Glendora Ranch: 19
single-family homes
• La Colina: 121 single-family
homes (58 completed)
• Dawson Avenue Community Care
Facility (independent/assisted
living): 150 residents
• Citrus Oak (1235 Bonnie Cove):
31 condominium units
• Silent Rach Subdivision (950 N.

Silent Ranch Drive): 12 singlefamily homes
• 905 E. Arrow Highway: 16
condominium units.

Continued Appropriateness: The City will
continue to provide adequate sites to
accommodate its RHNA. This program is
included in the 2021 Housing Element.

Item #5. Page 144
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 351
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 C-6
Table C-2: 2013-2021 Housing Element Accomplishments
Program Type Activity
2013-2021 Housing Element
Objective Progress

7. Development
Incentives
The City will promote the use of
various development incentives to
facilitate and encourage
residential and mixed-use
development, particularly
affordable housing, throughout
the City:
• State Density Bonus for
Affordable Housing
• Lot consolidation incentives
in the Route 66 Corridor
Specific Plan area
• Mixed use projects within the
BG, GMU, and TCMU zoning
subdistricts of the Route 66
Corridor Specific Plan area
• The Nonconforming Lot
Ordinance
• Environmental Stewardship
and Energy Efficiency
Density Bonus within the
Grand-Foothill Multi-Family
Residential Overlay Zone
• Other various reductions of
site development standards
as development incentives
on a case-by-case basis
• Develop marketing materials
(brochures, City website, etc.) to
promote incentives.
• Make marketing materials available
to interested developers.
• Work with local housing developers
to encourage and facilitate the
development of residential projects
with affordable units.

The City amended its Density Bonus
Ordinance to be consistent with State law
in January 2013. The City continues to
offer incentives for residential
development including the State density
bonus law for affordable and senior
housing.

Continued Appropriateness: This program
will be updated and included in the 2021
Housing Element. Specifically, the
Housing Element includes a program to
update the Zoning Code to reflect the new
State law on density bonus for 100
percent affordable housing projects (AB
1763). As required by State law (AB 671),
the Housing Element also includes the
City’s plan on incentivizing ADUs.

Item #5. Page 145
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 352
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 C-7
Table C-2: 2013-2021 Housing Element Accomplishments
Program Type Activity
2013-2021 Housing Element
Objective Progress

8. Zoning Ordinance Monitor policies, standards, and
regulations to ensure they
facilitate residential development
in the City and guarantee equal
housing access and opportunities
to its residents.
• Continue to monitor the City’s
Zoning Ordinance to ensure
standards do not unduly constrain
residential development.

The City continues to monitor the Zoning
Ordinance as it is applied to development
projects. Adjustments to the Zoning Code
will be made to as necessary to best
facilitate residential development.

Continued Appropriateness: The City will
continue to monitor the Zoning Ordinance
for necessary adjustments. This program
is updated in the 2021 Housing Element
to reflect Zoning Code amendments
necessary to comply with new State laws,
including:
• AB 101 (Low Barrier Navigation
Centers);
• AB 139 (Emergency and
Transitional Housing); and
• AB 2162 (Supportive Housing).

Item #5. Page 146
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 353
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 C-8
Table C-2: 2013-2021 Housing Element Accomplishments
Program Type Activity
2013-2021 Housing Element
Objective Progress

9. Fair Housing Provide fair housing services to all
residents who request counseling,
resource referral, complaint
investigation, and public
education on all forms of housing
discrimination. The City’s Fair
Housing Program is funded by
CDBG and administered by HRC.
• Promote and publicize fair housing
programs and services on City
website and through brochures at
City Hall.
• Continue to contract with a qualified
fair housing service provider to
provide fair housing services to
residents.
• Implement recommendations of the
Analysis of Impediments to Fair
Housing Choice.

The City maintains its contract with HRC
to ensure the use of fair housing
practices. The City also promotes the
services offered on its website. Free
services include:
• Landlord Tenant Counseling
• Discrimination Investigations
• Outreach and Education.

In 2018, the City published an updated
Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing
Choice as required by the CDBG program
for funding.

Continued Appropriateness: The City will
continue to provide fair housing services
to residents. This program is included in
the 2021 Housing Element. Specifically,
new State law (AB 686) requires that the
Housing Element incorporates actions to
address the impediments to fair housing
identified in the City’s Analysis of
Impediments to Fair Housing Choice.

10. RHNA
Objectives
Very Low-Income
Low-Income
Moderate-Income
Upper Income
Total
RHNA Allocation
171 units
100 units
108 units
267 units
646 units
Remaining RHNA
171 units
100 units
108 units
0 units
379 units
Item #5. Page 147
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 354
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 C-9
References:

Glendora, City of. 2020a. Housing Authority/CDBG: Fair Housing. https://www.cityofglendora.org/departments/planning/housing-authority-cdbg.

Accessed July 2020.

Glendora, City of. 2020b. Community Development: Current Projects. https://www.cityofglendora.org/departments-services/planning/current-projects.

Accessed July 2020.

Glendora, City of. 2019. City of Glendora Housing Authority AB 987 Affordable Housing Database. https://www.cityofglendora.org/home/showdocument?id=25411.

Accessed July 2020.

Glendora, City of. 2018. Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice, 2018 Update. https://www.cityofglendora.org/home/showdocument?id=23022.

Accessed July 2020.

Item #5. Page 148
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 355
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 D-1
Appendix D: Assessment of Fair Housing (AFH)
D.1 Introduction and Overview of AB 686
In January 2017, Assembly Bill 686 (AB 686) introduced an obligation to affirmatively further fair housing (AFFH) into California state law. AB 686 defined “affirmatively further fair housing” to mean “taking meaningful actions, in addition to combat discrimination, that overcome patterns of segregation and foster inclusive communities free from barriers that restrict access to opportunity” for persons of color, persons with disabilities, and other protected classes. The Bill added an assessment of fair housing to the Housing Element which includes the following components:
• a summary of fair housing issues and assessment of the City’s fair housing enforcement and outreach capacity;
• an analysis of segregation patterns and disparities in access to opportunities; • an assessment of contributing factors; and
• an identification of fair housing goals and actions.

The AFFH rule was originally a federal requirement applicable to entitlement jurisdictions (with population over 50,000) that can receive HUD Community Planning and Development (CPD) funds directly from HUD. Before the 2016 federal rule was repealed in 2019, entitlement jurisdictions were required to prepare an Assessment of Fair Housing (AFH) or Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice (AI). AB 686 states that jurisdictions can incorporate findings from either report into the Housing Element. This AFH analysis includes information from the City’s 2018 Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice.

D.2 Assessment of Fair Housing Issues
D.2.1 Fair Housing Enforcement and Outreach
The City of Glendora has limited resources for fair housing activities such as enforcement and outreach, but contracts with the Housing Rights Center (HRC) every year. The City provides funding on an annual basis so that the HRC can provide services to residents on behalf of the City.

The Housing Rights Center investigates and resolves discrimination complaints, conducts discrimination auditing and testing, and education and outreach, including the dissemination of fair housing information such as written material, workshops, and seminars. They also provide landlord/tenant counseling, which is another fair housing service that involves informing landlords and tenants of their rights and responsibilities under fair housing law and other consumer protection regulations, as well as mediating disputes between tenants and landlords. The Housing Rights Center has a main office location in downtown Los Angeles. The City of Glendora provides links to all of the Housing Rights Center’s Fair Housing Information on the city web page.

According to the City’s AI, between 2012 and 2017 the HRC served 309 Glendora residents (Table D-1). Out of all the residents served, a majority of the clients identified as being nonHispanic. Also, a majority of the clients were of extremely low income. As well as the HRC, HUD maintains a record of all housing discrimination complaints filed in local jurisdictions. These grievances can be filed on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, disability, religion, familial status and retaliation. From October 1, 2014 to September 30, 2019, 968 fair housing complaints in Los Angeles County were filed with HUD. Around 1 percent (7 cases) were filed by Glendora residents. In the County and the City of Glendora, disability-related discrimination was the most commonly reported making up four of the Glendora cases.

Item #5. Page 149
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 356
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 D-2
Table D-1: Residents in Glendora Served by the HRC
Total Residents 309
Race
Hispanic 36%
Non-Hispanic 64%
Income
Extremely Low 62%
Very Low 19%
Low 8%
Moderate 11%
Source: The Housing Rights Center, FY 2012-2017.

The City of Glendora advertises fair housing services through placement of fair housing service brochures at public counters and provides a link to the HRC and all of the available brochures on the City’s website. Based on Staff input outreach information could be better distributed or provided in more forms of media to reach more of the City’s growing and aging population.

Along with the HRC, the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH) also provides services to residents. The mission of the Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH) is to protect Californians from employment, housing, and public accommodation discrimination, and hate violence. To achieve this mission, DFEH keeps track of and investigates complaints of housing discrimination, as well as complaints in the areas of employment, housing, public accommodations and hate violence. Between 2012 and 2017, four persons from Glendora filed fair housing complaints with DFEH. Four of these cases involved discrimination based on disability; two cases also involved discrimination based on familial status. Other complaints also documented discrimination on the basis of source of income, race, and national origin.

A person can file fair housing complaints on multiple bases and multiple acts of discrimination.

Therefore, the enumeration of complaint bases and acts of discrimination usually exceeds the number of persons filing complaints. A total of six acts of discrimination were recorded during this time period. Denied reasonable accommodation (three instances) and denied rental/lease/sale (2 instances) were the most common discriminatory acts recorded.

Three cases in the City were investigated and dismissed with no basis to proceed and another was found to have no probable cause by DFEH and subsequently closed. Only one case was closed after arriving at a successful settlement.

Investigations begin with the intake of a complaint. Complainants are first interviewed to collect facts about possible discrimination. Interviews are normally conducted by telephone. If the complaint is accepted for investigation, the DFEH drafts a formal complaint that is signed by the complainant and served. If jurisdictional under federal law, the complaint is also filed with the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). As a substantially equivalent agency, DFEH's findings are usually accepted by HUD. The recipient of the complaint (usually a landlord, seller, property manager, seller, or agent) is required to answer and has the opportunity to negotiate resolution with the complainant. If the case is not resolved voluntarily, the DFEH conducts a formal investigation.

If the investigative findings do not show a violation of the law, DFEH will close the case. If investigative findings show a violation of law, the DFEH schedules a formal conciliation conference. During the conciliation conference, the DFEH presents information supporting its belief that there has been a violation and explores options to resolve the complaint. If formal Item #5. Page 150
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 357
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 D-3
conciliation fails, the DFEH Housing Administrator may recommend litigation. If litigation is required, the case may be heard before the Fair Employment and Housing Commission (FEHC) or in civil court. Potential remedies for cases settled by the FEHC include out-of-pocket losses, injunctive relief, access to the housing previously denied, additional damages for emotional distress, and civil penalties up to $10,000 for the first violation. Court remedies are identical to FEHC remedies with one exception; instead of civil penalties, a court may award unlimited punitive damages.

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) maintains a record of all housing discrimination complaints for jurisdictions, including the City of Glendora. According to the HUD website, any person who feels their housing rights have been violated may submit a complaint to HUD via phone, mail or the Internet. These grievances can be filed on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, disability, religion, familial status and retaliation. HUD refers complaints to the California DEFH, which has 30 days to address the complaint. As a substantially equivalent agency, DFEH's findings are usually accepted by HUD. Thereafter, HUD tracks the complaint and its issues and outcomes as a “dually filed” complaint. A person can file fair housing complaints on multiple bases and multiple discriminatory issues. Therefore, the enumeration of complaint bases and acts of discrimination usually exceeds the number of persons filing complaints.

From 2012 to 2017, five fair housing cases from Glendora were filed with HUD. The majority of cases filed included multiple bases of complaints and cases involving discrimination based on disability (45 percent); were the most common although incidences concerning race, familial status, retaliation, and national origin, were also reported.

A total of 14 discriminatory issues were recorded during this time period. Denied rental/sale/lease (three instances), denial of a reasonable accommodation (three instances), and denial of equal terms/conditions (three instances) were the most common discriminatory acts recorded.

All five of the fair housing cases were closed between 2012 and 2016, according to HUD. Three of these cases were found to have no probable cause and subsequently closed. One additional case was withdrawn without resolution and one other case reached a successful conciliation/settlement.

D.2.2 Integration and Segregation
Race and Ethnicity
Ethnic and racial composition of a region is useful in analyzing housing demand and any related fair housing concerns, as it tends to demonstrate a relationship with other characteristics such as household size, locational preferences, and mobility. The City of Glendora, like most communities throughout San Gabriel Valley, has experienced gradual changes in the racial and ethnic composition of its population. From 2010 to 2018, the City’s total population increased by 1,660 persons. Shifts in Glendora’s race and ethnicity profile have continued to occur since 2010. HUD defines Racially or Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Poverty (R/ECAPs) as census tracts with a non-White population over 50 percent and with 40 percent or three times the overall poverty rate.

Currently, there are no R/ECAPs located in the City. Figure D-1 shows racial/ethnic concentrated block groups from in 2010 and Figure D-2 shows them in 2018. Consistent with the increase Citywide, most block groups in Glendora have seen an increase in racial/ethnic minority populations since 2010. Areas directly surrounding the City have grown substantially in racial/ethnic minorities. The City of Azusa and moving west towards Los Angeles City shows high growth in racial/ethnic minorities.

According to the 2014-2018 ACS, in Glendora Whites continue to make up the largest Item #5. Page 151
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 358
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 D-4
racial/ethnic group accounting for 49 percent, followed closely by Hispanics accounting for 34 percent of the population (Table D-2). Asian-Americans account for 10 percent of the population and African Americans account for two percent. The White population in Glendora experienced the most dramatic decrease in Glendora (of about 11 percent) since 2010. The City has become more diverse over the years, with higher percentages of Asian and Hispanic populations, moving closer to the County profile.

Table D-2: Racial/Ethnic Demographics (2010-2018)
2010 2018
Persons Percent Persons Percent
Glendora, CA
White 30,223 60.6% 25,456 49.2%
Black or African American 987 2.0% 983 1.9%
American Indian and Alaska Native 102 0.2% 244 0.5%
Asian 3,472 7.0% 5,389 10.4%
Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific
Islander 0 0.0% 88 0.2%
Some other race 99 0.2% 168 0.3%
Two or more races 946 1.9% 1,881 3.6%
Hispanic/Latino 14,053 28.2% 17,564 33.9%
Total 49,882 100.0% 51,773 100.0%
Los Angeles County
White 2,772,785 28.4% 2,659,052 26.3%
Black or African American 826,481 8.5% 795,505 7.9%
American Indian and Alaska Native 17,423 0.2% 20,307 0.2% Asian 1,324,132 13.6% 1,451,560 14.4%
Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific
Islander 24,351 0.2% 24,821 0.2%
Some other race 29,308 0.3% 29,924 0.3%
Two or more races 164,518 1.7% 223,280 2.2%
Hispanic/Latino 4,599,258 47.1% 4,893,603 48.5%
Total 9,758,256 100.0% 10,098,052 100.0%
Source: 2006-2010 and 2014-2018 ACS.

Item #5. Page 152
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 359
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 D-5
Figure D-1: Racial/Ethnic Minority Concentrations by Block Group (2010) Figure D-2: Racial/Ethnic Minority Concentrations by Block Group (2018) Item #5. Page 153
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 360
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 D-6
HUD tracks racial or ethnic dissimilarity8trends for jurisdictions and regions. Dissimilarity indices show the extent of distribution between two groups, in this case racial/ethnic groups, across census tracts. The following shows how HUD views various levels of the index:
• <40: Low Segregation
• 40-54: Moderate Segregation
• >55: High Segregation
The indices for Glendora and the Los Angeles County region from 1990 to 2020 are shown in Table D-3. Dissimilarity between non-White and White communities in Glendora and throughout the Los Angeles County region has worsened since 1990. In Glendora, dissimilarity between Black/White, Hispanic/White and Asian or Pacific Islander/White communities has worsened. In the County the dissimilarity between Black/White communities has improved. Based on HUD’s index, segregation in Glendora is very low compared to Los Angeles County as a whole.

Although Glendora and the surrounding region have grown more racially diverse there have been studies that show groups become consolidated in enclaves. According to a study published in 2016 for Sociological Science9, Asian growth neighborhoods were often outside of the city of Los Angeles, being more clustered in a few locations like San Gabriel Valley and Cerritos. In metropolitan areas like Los Angeles, White neighborhoods surround Asian growth neighborhoods. This reflects both the expanding geography of Asian segregation and also the slower pace of Asian spatial expansion. Nevertheless, the increases in dissimilarity scores in Glendora are small and remain at levels that are considered low (below 30). Although the index for Black/White has increased to a little over 30, Black residents represent only a small portion of City population.

Table D-3: Racial/Ethnic Dissimilarity Trends
1990 Trend 2000 Trend 2010 Trend Current
Glendora, CA
Non-White/White 15.78 19.02 20.92 22.79
Black/White 26.64 24.23 30.39 33.81
Hispanic/White 17.30 21.58 23.85 24.62
Asian or Pacific Islander/White 10.85 13.89 13.09 18.09 Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, CA Region (County)
Non-White/White 55.32 55.50 54.64 56.94
Black/White 72.75 68.12 65.22 68.85
Hispanic/White 60.12 62.44 62.15 63.49
Asian or Pacific Islander/White 43.46 46.02 45.77 49.78 Source: Decennial Census, 1990-2010. HUD AFFH Data, 2020.

Figure D-3 and Figure D-4 compare the Asian population of Glendora tracts using the 2006-2010 and 2014-2018 ACS. As discussed previously, the Asian population in the City increased from 7 percent to 10.4 percent during the same period. Despite the overall increase in Asian residents 8 Index of dissimilarity is a demographic measure of the evenness with which two groups are distributed across a geographic area. It is the most commonly used and accepted method of measuring segregation. 9 Bader, Michael D. M., and Siri Warkentien. 2016. “The Fragmented Evolution of Racial Integration since the Civil Rights Movement.” Sociological Science 3: 135-166.

Item #5. Page 154
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 361
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 D-7
citywide, Asian communities have become increasingly concentrated in a few tracts in the western corner of the City. In 2010, larger populations of Asian residents are seen in several tracts in the western and southern areas of Glendora. As of 2018, tracts with the largest Asian populations are concentrated in just a few tracts, specifically tracts 4006.04 and 4008. This trend is consistent with the dissimilarity indices described above. The north western corner of the City is the new La Colina subdivision, consisting of 120 single-family homes on 20,000-square-foot lots.

As discussed in the City’s 2018 AI, some residents, especially recent immigrants, choose to live among people of their own race/ethnic group due to comfortability with members of their own race or ethnicity, relatives, friends, or presence of ethnic institutions. Housing affordability and income, discussed in Section D.2.3, Racially and Ethnically Concentrated Areas, and Section D.2.5, Disproportionate Housing Needs, may also affect racial segregation patterns.

Item #5. Page 155
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 362
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 D-8
Figure D-3: Asian Population by Tract (2010)
Source: 2006-2010 ACS (5-Year Estimates).

Figure D-4: Asian Population by Tract (2018)
Source: 2014-2018 ACS (5-Year Estimates).

Item #5. Page 156
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 363
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 D-9
Figure D-5 shows the predominant racial or ethnic population in Glendora by tract. There is only one tract where Whites are not the predominant population, located in the southwestern corner of the City. This tract has characterized by a Hispanic majority population. As discussed above, the southern area of the City tends to have higher concentrations of non-White populations compared to the northern areas. Tracts in the central southern section of the City, mostly along the Foothill Freeway, are comprised of mostly Latino-White communities (Figure D-6), while the remainder of the City has a mix of three racial/ethnic groups, likely White, Hispanic, and Asian, which make up the largest proportion of the City population.

Figure D-5: Predominant Racial/Ethnic Population by Tract (2018) Item #5. Page 157
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 364
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 D-10
Figure D-6: Neighborhood Segregation by Tract (2019)
Most of the City’s block groups have a minority population between 41 and 60 percent (Figure D2). The City identified about 88 percent of its RHNA units in block groups with a 41-60 percent minority concentration, and a larger proportion of each income group’s units in this percentage range. Table D-4 shows that a smaller proportion of the RHNA units are distributed in block groups with a slightly higher minority concentration (61-80 percent) and in the lower minority concentration tracts (21-40 percent). These block groups account for 12 percent of the RHNA.

The distribution of the sites for the inventory can be seen in relation to minority concentration by block group in Figure D-7. The distribution of sites does not exacerbate conditions and provides units of different income levels throughout the City.

Table D-4: RHNA Unit Distribution by Racial/Ethnic Minority Population % Minority Concentration
(Block Group) Low Moderate AM Total Units
<= 20% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
21 - 40% 0.0% 0.0% 10.0% 2.5%
41 - 60% 95.6% 81.1% 76.8% 88.2%
61 - 80% 4.4% 18.9% 13.3% 9.3%
> 81% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Total 1,305 413 581 2,299
Item #5. Page 158
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 365
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 D-11
Figure D-7: Distribution of RHNA Units and Racial/Ethnic Minority Population by Block Group (2018) Persons with Disabilities
According to 2014-2018 ACS data, disabled persons make up approximately 11.5 percent of the population in Glendora. Between 2014 and 2018, 46 percent of the City’s population with disabilities was made up of residents aged 65 and older, 45 percent were aged 18 to 64 and nine percent under the age of 18. Of the residents 65 years and older, ambulatory, hearing and independent living difficulties were prevalent. In Los Angeles County, about 15 percent of the population has a disability. Within Glendora, there is no concentration of persons with disabilities as all tracts within the City have a population with a disability ranging from 10 to 20 percent or lower (Figure D-9).

Item #5. Page 159
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 366
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 D-12
Glendora’s RHNA units are not disproportionately concentrated in areas that have more persons with disabilities as most tracts in the City have 10 to 20 percent of the population being persons with a disability. The distribution of sites does not exacerbate conditions and provides units of different income levels throughout the City.

Table D-5: RHNA Unit Distribution by % Population with Disabilities % Persons with
Disabilities (Tract) Low Moderate Above Moderate Total
< 10% 0.0% 0.0% 9.1% 2.3%
10% - 20% 100.0% 100.0% 90.9% 97.7%
20% - 30% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
30% - 40% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
> 40% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Total Units 1,305 413 581 2,299
The housing needs of disabled persons in Glendora are of particular importance because as a built-out community, about 65 percent of the City’s housing units were more than 50 years old.

Therefore, the majority of the City’s housing stock does not comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act for accessibility. Housing options for persons with disabilities in the community are limited.

Region: Persons with Disability
The 2021 County Health Rankings in Figure D-8 show that in the region surrounding the City, concentrations of persons with disabilities range between 10 and 20 percent or below. Most Cities in the Area have clusters of 10 to 20 percent like Glendora, such as San Dimas, Covina and Monrovia. There is one census tract south of Glendora that has the highest population of persons with disabilities which is the location of the Lanterman Development Facility near Cal Poly Pomona. This facility however is closed now, but still appears on the map analysis as having a high proportion of persons with disabilities.

Item #5. Page 160
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 367
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 D-13
Figure D-8: Regional Population of Persons with Disabilities by Tract (2019) Item #5. Page 161
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 368
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 D-14
Figure D-9: Distribution of RHNA Units and Population of Persons with Disabilities by Tract (2019) Familial Status
Familial status refers to the presence of any children in the household under the age of 18, regardless of whether or not the child is biologically related to the head of household or the martial status of the head of households. According to the HCD AB686/AFFH data tool maps (Figure D10), there are no areas with a concentration of households of adults living alone in the City. Adults living with their spouse are spread evenly throughout the City, with the population of adults living with their spouse at 40 to 60 in all census tracts of the City (Figure D-11).

Families with children may face housing discrimination by landlords who fear that children will cause property damage. Some landlords may have cultural biases against children of the opposite sex sharing a bedroom. Differential treatments such as limiting the number of children in a complex or confining children to a specific location are also fair housing concerns. Single parent households are also protected by fair housing law. As shown in Table D-6, 23 percent of Glendora Item #5. Page 162
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 369
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 D-15
households are families with children. The City’s share of families with children is slightly lower than the County overall. According to the HCD AFFH map in Figure D-12, children in married households are very spread out through the City. The percent of households with children in most tracts is above 80 percent or between 60 and 80 percent, probably due to the housing types available. The majority of the City’s RHNA units are located in census tracts with more than 60 to 80 percent of the population being households with children in married-couple households (Table D-7).

Table D-6: Household Characteristics
Jurisdiction % Families % Families with Children % Female-Headed Households with Children
Glendora 78% 23% 15%
Los Angeles County 67% 28% 6%
Source: 2014-2018 ACS.

Female-headed households with children require special consideration and assistance because of their greater need for affordable housing and accessible day care, health care, and other supportive services. In Glendora, female headed households with children are only slightly concentrated in one census tract that has 20 to 40 percent of its households being female-headed households with children (Figure D-13). An estimated 18 percent of Glendora households were headed by single persons, with or without children, in 2018. The large majority of the single parent households were headed by females (71 percent). According to the 2014-2018 ACS, 12 percent of the female-headed households with children had incomes below the poverty level. The City’s RHNA sites are almost all located in the census tracts with less than 20 percent of children in female-headed households (Table D-8). The distribution of sites does not exacerbate conditions and provides units of different income levels throughout the City.

Table D-8: RHNA Unit Distribution by % Children in Female-Headed Households % Children in FemaleHeaded HH (Tract) Lower Moderate AM Total Units < 20% 99.3% 100.0% 97.2% 98.9%
20% - 40% 0.7% 0.0% 2.8% 1.1%
40% - 60% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
60% - 80% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
> 80% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Total Units 1,305 413 581 2,299
Table D-7: RHNA Unit Distribution by % Children in Married-Couple Households % Children in MarriedCouple HH (Tract) Lower Moderate AM Total Units < 20% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
20% - 40% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
40% - 60% 0.7% 0.0% 0.0% 0.4%
60% - 80% 81.8% 82.3% 47.2% 73.2%
> 80% 17.5% 17.7% 52.8% 26.4%
Total Units 1,305 413 581 2,299
Item #5. Page 163
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 370
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 D-16
Figure D-10: Percent of Adults Living Alone by Tract (2019) Figure D-11: Percent of Adults Living with Spouse by Tract (2019) Item #5. Page 164
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 371
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 D-17
Figure D-12: Distribution of RHNA Units and Percent of Children in Married Couple HHs by Tract (2019) Item #5. Page 165
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 372
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 D-18
Figure D-13: Distribution of RHNA Units and Percent of Children in Female-Headed HHs by Tract (2019) Income Level
Household incomes in Glendora tend to be substantially higher than many cities in the region as a whole. Median household income in the City was $92,674 according to the 2014-2018 ACS, as compared to the Los Angeles County median household income of $64,251. The Cities of Azusa ($60,227), LA Verne ($85,769), and San Dimas ($84,749) all have lower median household incomes.

Identifying low or moderate income (LMI) geographies and individuals is important to overcome patterns of segregation. Figure D-14 shows the Lower and Moderate Income (LMI) areas in the Item #5. Page 166
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 373
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 D-19
surrounding region by Census block group. HUD defines a LMI area as a Census tract or block group where over 51 percent of the population is LMI (based on HUD income definition of up to 80 percent of the AMI). There are some areas of Glendora considered LMI with the highest concentration of LMI population being 50 to 75 percent in two block groups (Figure D-15). This area of the City is also where Asian populations are most concentrated (see Figure D-4) The City’s RHNA is mainly located in Census tracts with 25 to 50 percent LMI households (Table D9) which is the percentage range most prevalent in the City. The distribution of sites does not exacerbate conditions and provides units of different income levels throughout the City.

Table D-9: RHNA Unit Distribution by % LMI Households in Census Tract % LMI HH (Tract) Lower Moderate AM Total Units
< 25% 0.0% 0.0% 2.8% 0.7%
25% - 50% 100.0% 100.0% 93.3% 98.3%
50% - 75% 0.0% 0.0% 4.0% 1.0%
75% - 100% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Total Units 1,305 413 581 2,299
Region: Income Level
In the surrounding region LMI areas are concentrated in Azusa and to the west towards Arcadia and to the south west towards downtown Los Angeles. There are also clusters of LMI areas in Pomona. Most of these areas also have high environmental scores, high minority populations and the R/ECAPs closest to the City of Glendora (Figure D-14).

Figure D-14: Regional Low and Moderate Income (LMI) Areas by Tract Item #5. Page 167
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 374
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 D-20
Figure D-15: Distribution of RHNA Units and LMI Areas by Tract Item #5. Page 168
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 375
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 D-21
D.2.3 Racially and Ethnically Concentrated Areas
Racially/Ethnically Concentrated Areas of Poverty
In an effort to identify racially/ethnically-concentrated areas of poverty (R/ECAPs), HUD has identified census tracts with a majority non-White population (greater than 50 percent) and has a poverty rate that exceeds 40 percent or is three times the average tract poverty rate for the metro/micro area, whichever threshold is lower. In Los Angeles County, there are R/ECAPs scattered in areas of downtown Los Angeles. Near Glendora, there is one R/ECAP in El Monte and three near Pomona (Figure D-16). One R/ECAP on the west side of Pomona does not have low to moderate income population but that census tract is mostly consisting of the Lanterman Development Facility. There are no R/ECAPs in Glendora.

Figure D-16: Racially Concentrated Areas of Poverty (R/ECAPs) in the Region Figure D-17 shows poverty status in Glendora by tract using the 2015-2019 ACS. There are some tracts, located mostly in the southern and western areas of the City, where more than 10 percent of the population is below the federal poverty level. This area of the City also contains block groups with higher concentrations of racial/ethnic minority populations (see Figure D-2). Poverty status by race and ethnicity is presented in Table D-10. Approximately 9 percent of the population in Glendora is below the federal poverty level. All racial/ethnic groups other than non-Hispanic Whites and Asians experience poverty at a rate exceeding the citywide average. American Indian and Alaska Native residents have the highest poverty rate of 17.4 percent, followed by the population of persons of two or more races (13.7 percent), and the Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander population (12.5 percent).

Item #5. Page 169
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 376
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 D-22
The Hispanic/Latino population, the second largest racial/ethnic group in the City, experiences poverty at a rate of 11.3 percent. As shown in Figure D-6, previously, many of the tracts with higher rates of persons below the poverty level are also tracts with White-Latinx majority populations.

Table D-10: Poverty Status by Race/Ethnicity (2018)
Race/Ethnicity Total Population % Below Poverty
Level
White alone, not Hispanic or Latino 25,098 7.3%
Black or African American 918 9.7%
American Indian and Alaska Native 298 17.4%
Asian 5,491 6.9%
Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander 88 12.5%
Some other race 4,543 10.8%
Two or more races 3,434 13.7%
Hispanic or Latino origin (of any race) 17,366 11.3%
Population for whom poverty status is
determined 51,016 8.9%
Source: 2014-2018 ACS.

Figure D-17: Poverty Status by Tract (2019)
Item #5. Page 170
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 377
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 D-23
Racially Concentrated Areas of Affluence
While racially concentrated areas of poverty and segregation (R/ECAPs) have long been the focus of fair housing policies, racially concentrated areas of affluence (RCAAs) must also be analyzed to ensure housing is integrated, a key to fair housing choice. According to a policy paper published by HUD, RCAA is defined as affluent, White communities.10 According to HUD's policy paper, Whites are the most racially segregated group in the United States and in the same way neighborhood disadvantage is associated with concentrated poverty and high concentrations of people of color, conversely, distinct advantages are associated with residence in affluent, White communities.”
RCAAs have not been studied extensively nor has a standard definition been published by HCD or HUD, this fair housing assessment uses the percent White population and median household income as proxies to identify potential areas of affluence. As shown in Figure D-5, above, most areas of the City have White predominant populations. Figure D-18 shows racial/ethnic minority populations and median income by block group. Five block groups in the northern section of the City and one block group along the southern City boundary have median incomes exceeding $125,000. However, there are no block groups in the City with non-White populations below 20 percent; therefore, there are no RCAAs in Glendora.

As Table D-11 shows, White households also tend to have higher median incomes than all households as seen in the County as a whole, except for Glendora. In Glendora however, White households and all households in the City have higher median incomes than Azusa, San Dimas, and the County. Glendora also has a very high proportion of white only residents compared to the neighboring Cities, especially Azusa.

Table D-11: White Household Income and Percent Population Glendora Azusa San Dimas Los Angeles County
Median HH Income
All Households $92,674 $60,227 $84,749 $68,044
White alone $90,839 $68,429 $86,650 $88,038
White Population 59% 23% 55% 26%
Source: 2014-2018 ACS.
10 Goetz, Edward G., Damiano, A., & Williams, R. A. (2019) Racially Concentrated Areas of Affluence: A Preliminary Investigation.’ Published by the Office of Policy Development and Research (PD&R) of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development in Cityscape:

A Journal of Policy Development and Research (21,1, 99-123).

Item #5. Page 171
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 378
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 D-24
Figure D-18: Racial/Ethnic Minority Population and Median Income by Block Group (2018, 2019) Item #5. Page 172
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 379
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 D-25
D.2.4 Access to Opportunities
HUD developed an index for assessing fair housing by informing communities about disparities in access to opportunity based on race/ethnicity and poverty status. Table D-12 shows index scores for the following opportunity indicator indices (values range from 0 to 100):
• Low Poverty Index: The higher the score, the less exposure to poverty in a neighborhood. • School Proficiency Index: The higher the score, the higher the school system quality is in a neighborhood.
• Labor Market Engagement Index: The higher the score, the higher the labor force participation and human capital in a neighborhood.
• Transit Trips Index: The higher the trips transit index, the more likely residents in that neighborhood utilize public transit.
• Low Transportation Cost Index: The higher the index, the lower the cost of transportation in that neighborhood.
• Jobs Proximity Index: The higher the index value, the better access to employment opportunities for residents in a neighborhood.
• Environmental Health Index: The higher the value, the better environmental quality of a neighborhood.

In Glendora, most residents regardless of race/ethnicity have low poverty rates, great schools, access to transportation and low cost transportation (Table D-12). The environmental scores for the City however are low.

Glendora residents, regardless of race or ethnicity, had better school, poverty and environmental index scores compared to the County. The County did have better transit and transportation cost scores.

Item #5. Page 173
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 380
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 D-26
Table D-12: Opportunity Indicators by Race/Ethnicity
Low
Poverty
Index
School
Proficiency
Index
Labor
Market
Index
Transit
Index
Low
Transportation
Cost Index
Jobs
Proximity
Index
Environmental
Health Index
Glendora
Total Population
White, Non-Hispanic 69.03 74.11 52.88 73.90 62.90 37.11 29.57 Black, Non-Hispanic 59.03 62.11 42.57 77.27 66.66 33.26 25.60 Hispanic 61.61 65.73 44.99 76.41 65.53 34.14 26.27
Asian or Pacific Islander, NonHispanic66.00 69.61 48.92 75.20 63.93 36.60 27.49 Native American, Non-Hispanic 60.35 68.32 46.12 76.61 66.89 35.67 27.68 Population below federal poverty line
White, Non-Hispanic 61.76 69.20 48.01 76.41 66.53 35.74 28.17 Black, Non-Hispanic 64.90 71.99 62.55 75.70 66.11 39.09 27.92 Hispanic 62.67 68.23 40.21 75.44 65.98 37.06 26.54
Asian or Pacific Islander, NonHispanic56.84 67.59 45.30 78.12 68.35 35.24 28.01 Native American, Non-Hispanic 84.00 90.05 51.00 69.00 61.00 49.13 37.00 Los Angeles County
Total Population
White, Non-Hispanic 65.19 68.03 67.43 77.63 73.13 54.59 21.35 Black, Non-Hispanic 36.07 33.82 35.34 87.25 79.02 40.72 11.92 Hispanic 35.53 39.72 35.73 86.48 77.78 43.70 12.36
Asian or Pacific Islander, NonHispanic 55.03 61.94 57.64 85.13 75.98 51.11 13.13 Native American, Non-Hispanic 48.40 50.70 48.58 81.04 75.36 45.88 17.68 Population below federal poverty line
White, Non-Hispanic 53.66 60.62 59.62 83.19 78.51 56.98 18.46 Black, Non-Hispanic 24.12 28.03 26.41 88.34 81.07 36.90 11.74 Hispanic 25.05 33.70 29.50 89.09 80.94 44.63 10.63
Asian or Pacific Islander, NonHispanic 45.45 57.59 51.41 88.58 80.61 52.88 11.05 Native American, Non-Hispanic 33.63 39.10 36.05 84.43 78.22 47.65 16.22 Source: Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) Data and Mapping Tool (AFFH-T), 2020.

To assist in this analysis, the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) and the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee (TCAC) convened in the California Fair Housing Task Force (Task Force) to “provide research, evidence-based policy recommendations, and other strategic recommendations to HCD and other related state agencies/departments to further the fair housing goals (as defined by HCD).” The Task force has created Opportunity Maps to identify resources levels across the state “to accompany new policies aimed at increasing access to high opportunity areas for families with children in housing financed with 9% Low Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTCs)”. These opportunity maps are made from composite scores of three different domains made up of a set of indicators. Higher composite scores mean higher Item #5. Page 174
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 381
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 D-27
resources. Table D-13 shows the full list of indicators that go into the calculation of the index scores.

Table D-13: Domains and List of Indicators for Opportunity Maps Domain Indicator
Economic Poverty
Adult education
Employment
Job proximity
Median home value
Environmental CalEnviroScreen 4.0 pollution Indicators and values Education Math proficiency
Reading proficiency
High School graduation rates
Student poverty rates
Source: California Fair Housing Task Force, Methodology for the 2020 TCAC/HCD Opportunity Maps, December 2020.

The following opportunity map scores are for the census tracts that make up Glendora (Table D14). Consistent with the HUD’s R/ECAP database, there are no areas of high segregation and poverty in the City. All of the City’s census tracts are of high (60 percent) or highest resource (40 percent) so all of the City’s RHNA units are also in these areas with access to opportunities, but the majority is within high resource areas (Table D-15). The distribution of sites does not exacerbate conditions and provides units of different income levels throughout the City.

Opportunity map scores by Census tract and RHNA unit distribution are presented in Figure D19. Economic, environmental, and education scores for the City are further detailed below.

Item #5. Page 175
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 382
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 D-28
Table D-14: Domains and Index Scores Census Tracts
Census
Tract
Economic
Domain Score
Environmental
Domain Score
Education
Domain Score
Composite
Index Score Final Category
6037400604 0.56 0.87 0.53 0.09 High Resource
6037400800 0.35 0.8 0.64 0.07 High Resource
6037400900 0.5 0.78 0.76 0.26 High Resource
6037401101 0.26 0.64 0.91 0.33 High Resource
6037401102 0.53 0.84 0.86 0.42 High Resource
6037401202 0.43 0.47 0.78 0.18 High Resource
6037401203 0.5 0.67 0.79 0.26 High Resource
6037403902 0.38 0.57 0.73 0.12 High Resource
6037403901 0.37 0.51 0.72 0.08 High Resource
6037400402 0.58 0.82 0.93 0.58 Highest Resource
6037400404 0.73 0.96 0.95 0.79 Highest Resource
6037400501 0.73 0.94 0.91 0.68 Highest Resource
6037401001 0.67 0.92 0.91 0.63 Highest Resource
6037401002 0.59 0.92 0.91 0.58 Highest Resource
6037401201 0.48 0.54 0.93 0.46 Highest Resource
Source: California Fair Housing Task Force, TCAC/HCD Opportunity Maps, 2021 Statewide Summary Table. December 2020.

Table D-15: RHNA Unit Distribution by Opportunity Score Opportunity Category (Tract) Low Moderate Above
Moderate Total
High Resource 100.0% 100.0% 85.4% 96.3%
Highest Resource 0.0% 0.0% 14.6% 3.7%
Total Units 1,305 413 581 2,299
Item #5. Page 176
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 383
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 D-29
Figure D-19: Distribution of RHNA Units and TCAC Opportunity Score by Tract (2021) Item #5. Page 177
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 384
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 D-30
Education
Two schools in Glendora are designated as a Title 1 school. These schools coordinate and integrate resources and services from federal, state, and local sources. To be considered for Title 1 school funds, at least 40 percent of the students must be considered low-income. Kidsdata.org, a program of the Lucile Packard Foundation for Children's Health, estimated that only 7.2 percent of children aged 0-17 in Glendora were living in low-income working families between 2012 and 2016.11 Kidsdata.org also reported that in 2019, 17 percent of students are considered high-need (i.e. those who are eligible for free or reduced price school meals, are English Learners, or are foster youth—as reported in the Unduplicated Pupil Count) compared to 71.2 percent of students in the County.

As described above, the Fair Housing Task Force determines education scores based on math and reading proficiency, high school graduation rates, and student poverty rates. Figure D-20 shows the education scores of each census tract in the City. Education scores in the City are all positive.

Figure D-20: TCAC Education Score by Tract (2021)
The Healthy Places Index (HPI) analyzes community conditions and variables related to economic, education, transportation, social, neighborhood, housing, clean environment, and healthcare access to estimate healthy community conditions. Figure D-21 shows the percent of the population with a bachelor’s degree or higher by tract and Figure D-22 shows high school enrollment by tract. The northern half of the City has significantly higher rates of college graduates compared to the southern half. Southern Glendora tracts are also characterized by higher 11 Definition of “low income working family”: children ages 0-17 living in families with incomes below 200 percent of their federal poverty threshold and with at least one resident parent who worked at least 50 weeks in the 12 months prior to the survey.

Item #5. Page 178
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 385
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 D-31
concentrations of non-White populations and persons below the poverty level (see Figure D-2 and Figure D-17).

Most tracts in the City have high school enrollment rates in the highest percentile, with the exception of one tract in the southwestern corner of the City and one tract in central Glendora.

Both tracts have higher concentrations of racial/ethnic minorities (see Figure D-2). The southwestern tract is the only tract in the City with a majority Hispanic population (see Figure D5).

Figure D-21: Healthy Places Index (HPI) – Percent of Population with Bachelor’s Degree or Higher by Tract Source: California Healthy Places Index (HPI), HPI Indicators mapping tool, 2022.

Item #5. Page 179
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 386
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 D-32
Figure D-22: HPI – High School Enrollment by Tract
Source: California Healthy Places Index (HPI), HPI Indicators mapping tool, 2022.

Figure D-23, below, shows the TCAC education scores by tract for the region surrounding Glendora. TCAC education scores in Glendora are generally higher than most other San Gabriel Valley jurisdictions. Cities with TCAC education scores in the highest quartile, like Glendora, include Arcadia, San Gabriel, La Verne, and the east side of Covina and West Covina. Education scores for Glendora tracts are higher than tracts in the adjacent cities of Azusa, Baldwin Park, Irwindale, and Duarte.

Educational enrollment and completion demographics for Glendora and Los Angeles County are presented in Table D-16. A larger population of Glendora residents aged 3 to 4 are enrolled in preschool (66 percent) compared to the county (54.5 percent). High school enrollment for the 15 to 17 year old population in Glendora and the county are comparable. A significantly larger proportion of Glendora residents completed high school or higher (90.1%), including 36.1 percent completing a Bachelor’s degree or higher, compared to Los Angeles County. TCAC education scores, enrollment, and attainment show that access to educational opportunities is generally more favorable in the City than in much of the San Gabriel Valley and the County as a whole.

Item #5. Page 180
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 387
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 D-33
Table D-16: Educational Demographics (2018)
Glendora Los Angeles County
Preschool Enrollment
(Population 3 – 4 year olds enrolled in school)

66.0% 54.5%
High School Enrollment
(Population 15 – 17 year olds enrolled in school) 97.1% 96.9% Completed High School or Higher 90.1% 78.2%
Completed Bachelor Degree or Higher 36.1% 31.2%
Source: SCAG 2021 Local Profiles Dataset, ACS 2015-2019 (5-Year Estimates).

Item #5. Page 181
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 388
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 D-34
Figure D-23: Regional TCAC Education Scores by Tract (2021) Item #5. Page 182
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 389
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 D-35
Economic
As described previously, the Fair Housing Task Force calculates economic scores based on poverty, adult education, employment, job proximity, and median home values. According to the 2021 Task Force maps presented in Figure D-24, the census tracts in the City are of low to moderate economic scores. The most recent unemployment rates published by the California Employment and Development Department (April 2021) show that Glendora’s unemployment rate is 8.3 percent. Los Angeles County’s is at 10.1 percent.

In Glendora, according to the 2014-2018 ACS, three percent of the employed labor force has a disability. These persons with a disability and employed could have been assisted by the San Gabriel/Pomona Regional Center. The San Gabriel/Pomona Regional Center is a communitybased, private nonprofit corporation funded by the State of California to serve people with developmental disabilities, as required by the Lanterman Developmental Disabilities Services Act (aka Lanterman Act). The Lanterman Act is part of California law that sets out the rights and responsibilities of persons with developmental disabilities. San Gabriel/Pomona Regional Center is one of 21 regional centers throughout California and serves individuals and their families who reside within the cities of Glendora, El Monte, Monrovia, and Pomona. The Regional Center provides diagnoses and assessments of eligibility and helps plan, access, coordinate, and monitor the services that are needed by persons with a developmental disability. As of December 2017, the Regional Center had about 520 clients from Glendora.

Figure D-24: TCAC Economic Score by Tract (2021)
According to the 2014-2018 ACS, the unemployment rate for Glendora residents aged 16 and older is 6.8 percent (Table D-17). Of the racial/ethnic groups, American Indian and Alaska Native residents, and the population of persons of two or more races have the highest unemployment rates of 14.2 percent and 10.4 percent, respectively. Residents of a race not listed (“some other race”) and non-Hispanic White residents also have unemployment rates exceeding the citywide average. Residents below the poverty level and persons with disabilities have high unemployment rates of 27.9 percent and 14.1 percent, respectively. As discussed in Section D.2.2, Integration Item #5. Page 183
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 390
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 D-36
and Segregation, above, racial/ethnic minority populations are most concentrated in the southern half of Glendora and LMI households are most concentrated in tracts along the western City boundary (see Figure D-2 and Figure D-15). Tracts with populations of persons with disabilities exceeding 10 percent are distributed throughout the City and are not concentrated in a single area (see Figure D-9).

Figure D-25 and Figure D-26 show the employment and unemployment rates by Glendora tract using 2014-2018 ACS data. Tracts with high unemployment rates are scattered throughout the City, but are generally concentrated on the western side of Glendora.

Table D-17: Employment Status by Race/Ethnicity, Poverty Status, and Disability Status Total
Labor Force
Participation
Rate
Unemployment
Rate
Population 16 years and over 41,593 63.3% 6.8%
Black or African American 879 62.1% 3.5%
American Indian and Alaska Native 250 45.2% 14.2%
Asian 4,468 67.4% 5.1%
Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander 53 50.9% 0.0% Some other race 3,527 67.4% 8.1%
Two or more races 2,070 67.8% 10.4%
Hispanic or Latino origin (of any race) 13,014 67.5% 6.8% White alone, not Hispanic or Latino 21,846 60.2% 7.0%
Below poverty level 2,522 49.1% 27.9%
With any disability 2,551 51.1% 14.1%
Source: 2014-2018 ACS
Item #5. Page 184
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 391
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 D-37
Figure D-25: Percent of Employed Persons in Labor Force by Tract (2018) Source: 2014-2018 ACS (5-Year Estimates).

Figure D-26: Unemployment Rate by Tract (2018)
Source: 2014-2018 ACS (5-Year Estimates).

Item #5. Page 185
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 392
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 D-38
Figure D-27 shows TCAC economic scores by tract for the region surrounding Glendora.

Economic scores in Glendora are generally comparable to nearby jurisdictions, including La Verne, Covina, and West Covina. Cities in the region containing tracts scoring in the highest quartile include parts of La Verne, Arcadia, and San Gabriel. Several cities in the area surrounding Glendora contain tracts with TCAC economic scores in the lowest quartile, including Pomona, Azusa, Irwindale, Baldwin Park, and El Monte. While Glendora tracts received moderate education scores, ranging from 0.25 to 0.75, economic opportunities in the City are generally consistent with neighboring jurisdictions and are superior to scores in cities south of Glendora.

As presented in Table D-18 below, the unemployment rate countywide is the same, 6.8 percent, as in Glendora, but the labor force participation rate is slightly higher. In Los Angeles County, the Black/African American population has the highest poverty rate (11.2 percent), followed by the population of two or more races (9.2 percent), and the Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander population (9 percent). The American Indian and Alaska Native population, population of a race not listed, and Hispanic/Latino population also have unemployment rates exceeding the countywide average. Comparatively, the Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander and Black/African American populations have the lowest unemployment rates in Glendora. The unemployment rate for persons below the poverty level (27.9 percent) and persons with a disability (14.1 percent) is higher than the County (21.3 percent and 13.7 percent, respectively).

TCAC economic scores for Glendora tracts, based on poverty, adult education, employment, job proximity, and median home values, reveal economic opportunities in the City are moderately accessible. However, the labor force participation rate for the American Indian and Alaska Native population in Glendora is significantly lower than other racial or ethnic groups in the City. Further, the population of two or more races in the City has a similar labor force participation rate compared to other racial/ethnic groups, but higher unemployment rate. Based on labor force participation and employment rate data in the City and County, employment opportunities may be less accessible to certain racial/ethnic groups, persons below the poverty level, and persons with a disability in the City.

Table D-18: Employment Status by Race/Ethnicity, Poverty, and Disability Status – Los Angeles County Total Labor Force
Participation Rate
Unemployment
Rate
Population 16 years and over 8,115,158 64.5% 6.8%
Black or African American 679,580 59.9% 11.2%
American Indian and Alaska Native 56,363 64.7% 8.4%
Asian 1,265,999 61.9% 5.0%
Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander 21,714 63.5% 9.0% Some other race 1,598,644 68.4% 7.1%
Two or more races 256,081 67.9% 9.2%
Hispanic or Latino origin (of any race) 3,667,782 66.6% 7.1% White alone, not Hispanic or Latino 2,328,369 63.6% 6.1% Below poverty level 871,418 49.7% 21.3%
With any disability 459,182 41.1% 13.7%
Source: 2014-2018 ACS
Item #5. Page 186
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 393
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 D-39
Figure D-27: Regional TCAC Economic Scores by Tract (2021) Item #5. Page 187
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 394
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 D-40
Transportation
All Transit explores metrics that reveal the social and economic impact of transit, specifically looking at connectivity, access to jobs, and frequency of service. According to the data provided by All Transit, Glendora’s All Transit Performance score of 5.1, illustrating a moderate combination of trips per week and number of jobs accessible that enable a moderate number of people to take transit to work. The County All Transit score is 6.8. Glendora however has a lower proportion of commuters that use transit (3.31 percent) than the County (6.66 percent).

HUD’s Job Proximity Index, described previously, can be used to show transportation need geographically. Block groups with lower jobs proximity indices are located further from employment opportunities and have a higher need for transportation. As shown in Figure D-28, block groups in the City have scores mainly between 20 to 60 showing that there is low to moderate proximity to jobs for most of the City’s residents. The City does have a small area of severe isolation when it comes to job proximity in the southwest corner. South of Glendora has some lower scores towards Covina that has little to no job sectors in relation to the occupied housing units. There is a larger population of racial/ethnic minorities in this area (see Figure D-2).

Unemployment rates are higher in this corner of the City (see Figure D-26).

The jobs proximity index scores are anticipated to improve after the construction of the Metro Gold Line Foothill Extension in 2025 -2026. The fully funded in-progress extension will add 9.1 miles of metro rail with stations being added in Glendora, San Dimas, La Verne, and Pomona with plans to further expand with stations in Claremont and Montclair once additional funding is secured. Once completed, a trip from the extension end in Montclair to downtown Pasadena will take about 40 minutes or 75 minutes to downtown Los Angeles greatly cutting down commute time for many residents in the region.

In Glendora, the tracts with a higher majority of persons with disabilities also coincide with tracts with a lower proximity to jobs. This is also true for Hispanic residents in the southwest corner of the City who are subject to the lowest jobs proximity scores.

Glendora Mini-Bus, Dial-A-Ride service is a shared ride, curb-to-curb, transportation service administered by the City of Glendora, Community Services Department, Transportation Division.

The Dial-A-Ride service is available to Glendora Residents who are 55 years of age or older, as well as residents who are younger than 55 who are unable to independently use the public transportation system due to permanent disability.

Item #5. Page 188
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 395
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 D-41
Figure D-28: HUD Jobs Proximity Index by Block Group
The HPI includes automobile access by tract (Figure D-29). In most areas of the City, tracts scored in the 50th percentile or above for access to an automobile. More than 98 percent of households in tracts on the eastern side of the City have access to a vehicle. There is a small concentration of tracts in the central area of the City scoring below the 50th percentile for automobile access.

This are of the City has a higher concentration of racial/ethnic minorities and persons below the poverty level (see Figure D-2 and Figure D-17).

Most Glendora tracts scored in the lower quartiles for active commuting. Active commuting is considered using transit, walking, or cycling. This indicates that most workers in the City get to work by other means (i.e., car, taxi, carpool) (Figure D-30).

Item #5. Page 189
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 396
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 D-42
Figure D-29: HPI – Percent of Households with Access to an Automobile by Tract Source: California Healthy Places Index (HPI), HPI Indicators mapping tool, 2022.

Figure D-30: HPI – Active Commuting by Tract
Source: California Healthy Places Index (HPI), HPI Indicators mapping tool, 2022.

Item #5. Page 190
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 397
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 D-43
Environmental
Environmental health scores are determined by the Fair Housing Task Force based on CalEnviroScreen 4.0 pollution indicators and values. Figure D-31 shows that there are moderate environmental scores within the City limits. The majority of the City’s RHNA is located in the 51 to 60 and 61 to 70 percent score range (Table D-19). The majority of the City’s lower income RHNA units are in the tracts with a low score of 51 to 60 (47.3 percent).

According to the American Lung Association’s State of the Air report, Los Angeles County received an Ozone score of “F”, which means that the County experienced numerous days of unhealthy air pollution as compared to other counties and regions in the study. Over a three-year period, there were 114 days of unhealthy air that contributed to the Ozone score.

Unfortunately, areas in the southern portion of the City are subject to higher environmental scores and are also areas with a higher proportion of non-white and lower income residents. Residents who are more likely to be below the poverty level are also subject to higher environmental scores.

Census tract 4039.01 that crosses the 210 freeway on the west end of the city has the highest rate of poverty with 13 percent of residents with their income in the last 12 months below the federal poverty level and an environmental score of 55. This may point out that the type of housing available in this area is all that some protected groups can afford subjecting them to higher environmental burdens.

Table D-19: RHNA Unit Distribution by CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Scores % LMI HH Lower Moderate AM Total Units
1 - 10% (Lowest Score) 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
11 - 20% 0.0% 0.0% 2.4% 0.6%
21 - 30% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
31 - 40% 8.5% 0.0% 11.5% 7.7%
41 - 50% 9.7% 17.7% 48.4% 20.9%
51 - 60% 47.3% 18.9% 37.7% 39.8%
61 - 70% 34.6% 63.4% 0.0% 31.0%
71 - 80% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
81 - 90% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
91 - 100% (Highest Score) 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Total Units 1,305 413 581 2,299
Item #5. Page 191
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 398
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 D-44
Figure D-31: Distribution of RHNA Units and CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Score by Tract (2021) Item #5. Page 192
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 399
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 D-45
Facilities and Resources
Location of facilities and resources such as parks and open space, supermarkets, transit stations, and hospitals is a key component in assessing access to opportunities. This analysis uses Healthy Places Index (HPI) and Urban Displacement Project maps to show access to facilities and resources geographically.

The percentile score for population within a tract living within a half-mile of a park, beach, or open space greater than one acre is shown in Figure D-32. The northern half and southeastern corner of the City has the greatest access to parks and open space. More than 90 percent of the population in these tracts live within half a mile of a park, beach, or open space, compared to tracts in the central and southwestern areas of the City where fewer than 85 percent of the population has access to the same resource. This area also has higher concentrations of nonWhites, persons below the poverty level, and higher unemployment rates (see Figure D-2, Figure D-17, and Figure D-26).

Figure D-32: HPI – Park, Beach, or Open Space Access by Tract Source: California Healthy Places Index (HPI), HPI Indicators mapping tool, 2022.

Figure D-33 shows the percentage of the urban population residing less than half a mile from a supermarket or large grocery store, or the percent of the rural population residing less than a mile from a supermarket or large grocery store by tract. Tracts in the northern and southwestern area of the City scored in the lower percentile for supermarket accessibility. As presented above, the southwestern tract also has the least access to parks and open space.

Item #5. Page 193
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 400
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 D-46
Figure D-33: HPI – Supermarket Access by Tract
Source: California Healthy Places Index (HPI), HPI Indicators mapping tool, 2022.

Existing, planned, and proposed transit stations are shown in Figure D-34. This map also includes hospitals in red. There are no transit stations in Glendora. There is a planned transit station in Glendora. Metro L Line under construction and to open for service in 2025. The Glendora station is shown in the map. There are two planned stations located west of the City in Azusa and one existing station south of the City in Covina. With respect to hospitals, where the map shows two facilities, there is only one hospital remaining in the City. The second hospital on Route 66 closed and is converted to a mental health facility. Both facilities are located in the center of the City near Route 66. The tracts containing hospitals also have better access to parks/open space and supermarkets.

Item #5. Page 194
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 401
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 D-47
Figure D-34: Urban Displacement Project – Hospitals and Transit Stations Source: Urban Displacement Project: Los Angeles – Gentrification and Displacement, 2020.

D.2.5 Disproportionate Housing Needs
The AFFH Rule Guidebook defines ‘disproportionate housing needs’ as ‘a condition in which there are significant disparities in the proportion of members of a protected class experiencing a category of housing needs when compared to the proportion of a member of any other relevant groups or the total population experiencing the category of housing need in the applicable geographic area.’ 24 C.F.R. § 5.152” The analysis is completed by assessing cost burden, severe cost burden, overcrowding, and substandard housing.

The Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) developed by the Census for HUD provides detailed information on housing needs by income level for different types of households in Glendora. Housing problems considered by CHAS include:
• Housing cost burden, including utilities, exceeding 30 percent of gross income; • Severe housing cost burden, including utilities, exceeding 50 percent of gross income; • Overcrowded conditions (housing units with more than one person per room); and/or • Units with physical defects (lacking complete kitchen or bathroom) Cost Burden
Measuring the portion of a household’s gross income that is spent for housing is an indicator of the dynamics of demand and supply. This measurement is often expressed in terms of “over payers”: households paying an excessive amount of their income for housing, therefore decreasing the amount of disposable income available for other needs. This indicator is an important measurement of local housing market conditions as it reflects the affordability of housing in the community. Federal and state agencies use overpayment indicators to determine the extent and level of funding and support that should be allocated to a community. State and federal programs typically define over-payers as those lower income households paying over 30% of household income for housing costs. A household is considered experiencing a severe cost burden if it spends more than 50% of its gross income on housing.

Item #5. Page 195
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 402
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 D-48
Table D-20 provides overpayment detail by income group and household type for Glendora between 2013 and 2017. Approximately 64 percent of low income households, 64 percent of very low income households, and 80 percent of extremely low income households were overpaying versus 15 percent of moderate income households. Out of all the households in the City, about 34 percent overpay for housing.

Table D-20: Housing Type and Cost Burden
Household by
Type, Income,
and Housing
Problem
Renters Owners
Total
Elderly HHs Small
Families
Large
Families
Total
Renters Elderly Small Families
Large
Families
Total
Owners
Extremely Low
Income
(0-30% AMI)
280 275 60 875 440 275 60 870 1,745
With cost burden
>30% 78.6% 90.9% 100.0% 80.6% 78.4% 92.7% 83.3% 81.0% 80.8% With cost burden
> 50% 53.6% 87.3% 100.0% 71.4% 71.6% 70.9% 83.3% 70.7% 71.1% Very Low
Income
(31-50% AMI)
155 340 115 770 595 385 60 1,135 1,905
With cost burden
>30% 87.1% 83.8% 100.0% 85.1% 36.1% 71.4% 41.7% 50.2% 64.3% With cost burden
> 50% 51.6% 52.9% 43.5% 50.0% 21.0% 58.4% 41.7% 37.0% 42.3% Low Income
(51-80% AMI) 160 615 85 980 775 475 195 1,595 2,575
With cost burden
>30% 62.5% 77.2% 88.2% 74.0% 37.4% 69.5% 79.5% 57.4% 63.7% With cost burden
> 50% 0.0% 1.6% 11.8% 4.1% 12.3% 29.5% 17.9% 21.3% 14.8% Moderate
Income
(81-100% AMI)
220 1,500 270 2,410 2,105 4,740 980 8,455 10,865
With cost burden
>30% 13.2% 7.7% 7.4% 8.0% 9.0% 18.4% 14.8% 16.4% 14.6%
With cost burden
> 50% 1.8% 0.0% 0.0% 0.2% 1.4% 1.6% 3.6% 2.0% 1.6%
Total
Households 815 2,730 530 5,035 3,915 5,875 1,295 12,055 17,090 With cost burden
>30% 59.4% 41.2% 50.9% 45.3% 26.6% 29.4% 29.0% 29.7% 34.3% % With cost
burden >30% 28.7% 15.8% 22.6% 20.9% 14.4% 10.8% 11.2% 12.8% 15.2% Source: HUD CHAS 2013-2017.

Figure D-35 shows the census tracts in the City and the percent of households in renter-occupied housing units that have a cost burden. The census tracts in the City have a range from 20 to 60 percent of the renter households overpaying for their housing unit. Figure D-36 shows the percent of owner households that have a mortgage or mortgages with monthly owner costs that are 30 Item #5. Page 196
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 403
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 D-49
percent or more of household income. All census tracts in the City have 20 to 40 or 40 to 60 percent of households that pay more than 30 percent of their household income to their monthly housing costs.

Figure D-35 and Figure D-36 also shows the distribution of RHNA units by cost burdened renterand owner-occupied households, respectively. RHNA units are generally spread throughout the City but are most concentrated in the central and western areas of Glendora. As presented in Table D-21, over 90 percent of units selected to meet the RHNA are located in tracts where 40 to 60 percent of renter-occupied households are cost burdened. Only 8.4 percent of RHNA units, including 8.5 percent of lower income units and 13.9 percent of above moderate income units, are in tracts where fewer (20 to 40 percent) renters are cost burdened. Conversely, more units selected to meet the City’s RHNA are in tracts where fewer owner-occupied households are cost burdened (Table D-22). Over 70 percent of units are in tracts where less than 40 percent of owners overpay for housing, while only 28.8 percent of units are in tracts where 40 to 60 percent of owners are cost burdened. There are no tracts in the City where more than 60 percent of renters or owners overpay for housing. Glendora’s RHNA strategy does not disproportionately place lower income units in tracts where cost burden is more prevalent. While a larger proportion of RHNA units are located in tracts with a higher concentration of cost burdened renters, this is a reflection of the overall composition of the buildable area in the City. Glendora’s RHNA strategy does not exacerbate any existing fair housing issues.

Table D-21: RHNA Unit Distribution by % Cost Burdened Renters Cost Burdened Renter
Households (Tract) Low Moderate Above Moderate Total
<20% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
20-40% 8.5% 0.0% 13.9% 8.4%
40-60% 91.5% 100.0% 86.1% 91.6%
60-80% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
>80% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Total 1,305 413 581 2,299
Table D-22: RHNA Unit Distribution by % Cost Burdened Owners Cost Burdened Owner
Households (Tract) Low Moderate Above Moderate Total
<20% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
20-40% 65.3% 100.0% 64.0% 71.2%
40-60% 34.7% 0.0% 36.0% 28.8%
60-80% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
>80% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Total 1,305 413 581 2,299
Item #5. Page 197
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 404
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 D-50
Figure D-35: Distribution of RHNA Units and Overpaying Renter Households by Tract (2019) Item #5. Page 198
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 405
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 D-51
Figure D-36: Distribution of RHNA Units Overpaying Owner Households by Tract (2019) Item #5. Page 199
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 406
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 D-52
Overcrowding
Overcrowding is defined as housing units with more than one person per room (including dining and living rooms but excluding bathrooms and kitchen). The 2011-2015 ACS reported that about 2 percent of Glendora households lived in overcrowded conditions (Table D-23). Overcrowding disproportionately affected renters (98 percent of renters versus just two percent of owners); indicating overcrowding may be the result of an inadequate supply of larger sized rental units.

The 2014-2018 ACS reported that overcrowding increased to almost four percent of all households. Similarly, renter-households were more prone to overcrowding (54 percent) compared to owner-households (45 percent), but not to the extent of 2011.

Table D-23: Overcrowded Housing Units
Category 2011-2015 2014-2018
Number % Number %
Occupied Housing Units 16,568 100.0% 16,984 100.0%
Overcrowded Units 403 2.4% 665 3.9%
Owner-occupied 8 2.0% 303 45.6%
Renter-occupied 395 98.0% 362 54.4%
Units with 1.01-1.50 persons/room 337 83.6% 482 72.5%
Units with 1.51-2.00 persons/room 43 10.7% 108 16.2%
Units with 2.01 or more persons/room 23 5.7% 75 11.3%
Source: 2011-2015 and 2014-2018 ACS.

Table D-24 and Figure D-37 show the distribution of RHNA units by overcrowded households at the tract-level. As discussed previously there are no tracts in the City where more than 8.2 percent, the Statewide average, of households are overcrowded. Therefore, the City’s RHNA strategy does not disproportionately place units in areas where overcrowding is an issue.

Glendora’s RHNA strategy does not contribute to any existing fair housing issues related to overcrowding.

Table D-24: RHNA Unit Distribution by % Overcrowded Households Overcrowded
Households (Tract) Low Moderate Above Moderate Total
<=8.2% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

8.3%-12% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

12.1%-15% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

15.1%-20% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
>20% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Total 1,305 413 581 2,299
Item #5. Page 200
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 407
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 D-53
Figure D-37: Distribution of RHNA Units and Overcrowded Households by Tract (2020) Item #5. Page 201
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 408
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 D-54
Substandard Conditions
The City estimates that about two to three percent of housing units in Glendora are in substandard condition. The City’s Code Enforcement Staff estimates complaints concerning dilapidated structures and dwelling units in need of substantial rehabilitation are filed at a rate of approximately 120 per month. The City’s Code Enforcement Staff notes current trends concerning substandard housing conditions are not serious structural deficiency issues.

Housing age is frequently used as an indicator of housing condition. In general, residential structures over 30 years of age require minor repairs and modernization improvements, while units over 50 years of age are likely to require major rehabilitation such as roofing, plumbing, and electrical system repairs. Over 65 percent of housing is over 50 years old in the City according the 2014-2018 ACS.

Homelessness
Homelessness is a regional (and national) problem, and in a major metropolitan region, individual municipal governments lack the resources to implement solutions to eliminate homelessness.

While the exact number of homeless people in the City on any given night is unknown, a relatively small share of the region’s homeless population is found in Glendora. The 2020 Greater Los Angeles Homeless Count, completed by the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority (LAHSA), estimated that there were 145 homeless people in Glendora.

LAHSA estimates there were 66,436 persons experiencing homelessness in Los Angeles County, based on the 2020 Greater Los Angeles Homeless Point-in-Time (PIT) Count. Figure D-38 shows the Los Angeles County homeless populations from 2015 to 2020. Approximately 72 percent of the homeless population is unsheltered and 28 percent is sheltered. The homeless population has increased by nearly 50 percent since 2015, and 12.7 percent since 2019. According to Department of Finance (DOF) estimates, the entire Los Angeles County population grew by only

0.5 percent between 2015 and 2020.

Figure D-38: Los Angeles County Homeless Population Trend (2015-2020) Source: LAHSA, 2020 LA CoC Homeless PIT Counts.

Item #5. Page 202
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 409
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 D-55
The following data refers to the Los Angeles Continuum of Care (CoC) region, covering all Los Angeles County jurisdictions except for the cities of Long Beach, Pasadena, and Glendale.

Special needs groups are considered elderly or disabled (including developmental disabilities), female-headed households, large families, farmworkers, and people experiencing homelessness.

Nearly 20 percent of the homeless population are members of families with one or more child under the age of 18, 9.9 percent are elderly persons aged 62 and older, 17 percent have a physical disability, and 8.3 percent have a developmental disability. Only 32 percent of homeless persons with a developmental disability, 17.3 percent with a physical disability, and 21.5 percent of homeless seniors are sheltered. However, most families (76.3 percent) are sheltered (Table D25).

Table D-25: Homeless Populations and Special Needs Groups Special Needs Group Sheltered Unsheltered Total
Developmental Disability 32.1% 67.9% 5,292
Physical Disability 17.3% 82.7% 10,833
Family Members 76.3% 23.7% 12,416
62+ 21.5% 78.5% 6,290
Source: LAHSA, 2020 LA CoC Homeless Counts.

Figure D-39 shows the Los Angeles CoC homeless population by race and ethnicity. The Hispanic/Latino, Black/African American, and White populations make up the largest proportions of the homeless population. The Black/African American population is the most overrepresented in the Los Angeles CoC region. Nearly 34 percent of homeless persons are Black or African American, compared to only 7.8 percent of the population countywide. The American Indian and Alaska Native population is also overrepresented, making up only 0.2 percent of the County population, but 1.1 percent of the homeless population.

Item #5. Page 203
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 410
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 D-56
Figure D-39: Los Angeles County CoC Homeless Population by Race/Ethnicity Race/Ethnicity Homeless Population % LA County
Persons Percent Population
American Indian/Alaska Native 686 1.1% 0.2%
Asian 774 1.2% 14.4%
Black/African American 21,509 33.8% 7.8%
Hispanic/Latino 23,005 36.1% 48.5%
Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander 205 0.3% 0.2%
White 16,208 25.4% 26.2%
Multi-Racial/Other 1,319 2.1% 2.6%
Source: LAHSA, 2020 LA CoC Homeless Counts; 2015-2019 ACS (5-Year Estimates).

Figure D-40 shows the distribution of homeless persons in the Los Angeles CoC region by age.

Adults aged 25 to 54 make up most of the homeless population, followed by adults aged 55 to 61, and children under 18. Children account for 11.8 percent of the homeless population and seniors (age 62+) account for 9.9 percent of the population; 6.6 percent of the homeless population is transitional aged youths between the ages of 18 and 24.

Item #5. Page 204
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 411
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 D-57
Figure D-40: Los Angeles CoC Homeless Population by Age Age Homeless Population % LA County
Persons Percent Population
Under 18 7,491 11.8% 22.0%
18-24 4,181 6.6% 9.7%
25-54 37,138 58.3% 43.2%
55-61 8,606 13.5% 8.7%
62+ 6,290 9.9% 16.4%
Source: LAHSA, 2020 LA CoC Homeless Counts; 2015-2019 ACS (5-Year Estimates).

Figure D-41 shows the point-in-time (PIT) count trends in Glendora in 2020. In 2016, there were 206 sheltered individuals and 65 unsheltered individuals experiencing homelessness in the City.

As of 2020, there are no sheltered persons in the City and the number of unsheltered individuals has increased to 145. The overall homeless population has decreased 46.5 percent since 2016, but the unsheltered homeless population has increased 123.1 percent during the same period. In 2020, most persons (32.4 percent) were on the street, followed by makeshift shelters (25.8 percent), and tends (16.8 percent).

As shown in Figure D-41, most persons experiencing homelessness during the 2020 PIT count were in tracts in the central southern and southwestern areas of the City. There were 43 individuals counted in 401101, shown in blue, accounting for nearly 30 percent of the overall homeless population. Homeless counts by Glendora tract are shown in Table D-26. There were no persons experiencing homelessness counted in tracts not listed. Tract 401002, located north of West Foothill Boulevard between North Grand Avenue and North Cullen Avenue, and tract 401102, located south of West Foothill Boulevard along South Cullen Avenue, also have larger populations of persons experiencing homelessness (20 individuals and 18 individuals, respectively). Tract 41101 has a higher concentration of racial/ethnic minorities, persons below the poverty level, and overpaying renters (see Figure D-2, Figure D-17, and Figure D-35). The Item #5. Page 205
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 412
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 D-58
unemployment rate in this tract is also higher than most of the remainder of the City (see Figure D-26).

Table D-26: Homeless Count by Tract
Tract Persons Percent of Total
400402a 4 2.7%
400404b 3 2.1%
400800a 7 4.8%
401002c 20 13.7%
401101a 3 2.1%
401101b 43 29.5%
401102a 18 12.3%
401102b 5 3.4%
401202b 8 5.5%
402203b 5 3.4%
403901b 14 9.6%
403902a 7 4.8%
403902b 9 6.2%
Note: LAHSA does not recommend aggregating census tract-level data to calculate numbers for other geographic levels. Due to rounding, census tractlevel data may not add up to the total for Los Angeles City Council District, Supervisorial District, Service Planning Area, or the Los Angeles CoC.

Source: LAHSA, 2020 LA CoC Homeless Counts Data Dashboard.

Item #5. Page 206
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 413
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 D-59
Figure D-41: Glendora Point-in-Time (PIT) Count Trends (2020) Source: LAHSA 2020 Homeless Count by Community/City – Glendora.

Item #5. Page 207
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 414
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 D-60
The Los Angeles County Coordinated Entry System (LA County CES) assesses individuals to match them with available housing resources and programs. From July to September 2021, 44 individuals in Glendora were assessed through CES, including two families, one veteran, and seven persons aged 62 or older. Glendora is a part of Service Planning Area (SPA) 3, serving San Gabriel Valley jurisdictions. Glendora and SPA 3 CES assessments and services are presented in Table D-27.

Table D-27: Cumulative CES Statistics – Glendora (July 2021-September 2021) Glendora SPA 3 City Share of SPA 3
CES Assessment
Total Persons 44 2,081 2%
Individuals 42 1,596 3%
Youth - 192 0%
Families 2 302 1%
Veterans 1 103 1%
Persons Aged 62+ 7 267 3%
Types of Services Provided to Those Assisted
Interim Housing 17 688 2%
Rapid Re-Housing 16 462 3%
Street Outreach (Contacts) 8 447 2%
Street Outreach (Engagements) 7 335 2%
Other (Non-Permanent) 10 823 1%
Places into Permanent Housing* 4 231 2%
* Includes persons that have moved into permanent housing during the reporting period (through either rapid rehousing, permanent supportive housing, or other permanent destinations).

Note: For households with more than one person (including families), the assessment of the head of household is applied to all members.

Source: LAHSA Homelessness Statistics by City (July 1, 2021 – September 30, 2021), November 2021.

In response to changes in the State Housing Element law, the City amended the Zoning Code in 2011 to specifically identify emergency shelters as a permitted use at two locations in the City.

The two locations include twelve parcels, with a total area of 122,416 square feet (2.81 acres).

No emergency shelters and transitional housing facilities are located in Glendora. However, several regional facilities serve the homeless in the Eastern San Gabriel Valley.

In addition, City Council approved a Glendora Homelessness Plan in 2018. There are two staff members from the Human Services Division in the Community Services Department assigned to the implementation of the City’s Homelessness Plan. The City received grant funds or services for the City’s homeless population through the County of Los Angeles, Measure H Homeless Initiative, and the San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments (SGVCOG). The City also partners with Union Station Homeless Services in Pasadena and contracts with Union Station for Housing Navigators. City staff and Housing Navigators conduct outreach and assess the homeless in Glendora for resources that can be provided to them, such as: motel vouchers, shelter housing, bridge housing, permanent supportive housing, medical needs, mental health services, apply for benefits such as Calfresh, SSI, Identification card through DMV. The City website also provides a Homeless Resource Guide that includes referrals for basic needs, food pantries, shelters and services. City staff also works with Los Angeles County and Los Angeles Homeless Service Authority for Homelessness (LAHSA).

Item #5. Page 208
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 415
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 D-61
Displacement Risk
Cost of housing within the City has become high and unattainable for a lot of residents. In 2020 the median sales price for a single-family home in Glendora was $689,000 and increasing 22.9 percent to $847,000 in 2021. Even though the City has a higher median income than most of the County, the average home sale prices could lead to residents moving out of the City because of the economic pressures of home ownership.

HCD defines sensitive communities as “communities [that] currently have populations vulnerable to displacement in the event of increased development or drastic shifts in housing cost.” The following characteristics define a vulnerable community:
• The share of very low income residents is above 20%; and • The tract meets two of the following criteria:
o Share of renters is above 40%,
o Share of people of color is above 50%,
o Share of very low-income households (50% AMI or below) that are severely rent burdened households is above the county median,
o They or areas in close proximity have been experiencing displacement pressures (percent change in rent above County median for rent increases), or o Difference between tract median rent and median rent for surrounding tracts above median for all tracts in county (rent gap).

Figure D-43 identifies that there are two census tracts that are considered to be vulnerable to urban displacement in the City. These communities are areas that have a higher concentration of low- and moderate-income persons. According to the Urban Displacement Project by UCLA the City of Glendora has only one policy measure in place to discourage displacement, Mobilehome Park Rent Stabilization. Examples of measures that help to discourage displacement include a Just Cause Eviction Ordinance or Apartment Rent Control. The City also has tracts that are the following according to the gentrification and displacement mapping tool (Figure D-43):
• At Risk of Becoming Exclusive: Moderate, mixed income, or high income tract in 2018.

Housing affordable to middle and high income households in 2018. Increase in housing costs.
• Becoming Exclusive: Moderate, mixed income or high income tract in 2018. Housing affordable to middle and high income households in 2018. Rapid increase in housing costs. Absolute loss of low income households, 2000-2018. Declining low income and inmigration rate, 2012-2018. Median income increase since 2000. • Stable/Advanced Exclusive: High income tract in 2000 and 2018. Affordable to high or mixed income households in 2018. Marginal change, increase, or rapid increase in housing costs.

The areas identified as being at risk for displacement are also shown to be at risk of becoming exclusive neighborhoods. Increasing housing costs, particularly rents, and the presence of LMI households in these areas (Figure D-15) makes these communities vulnerable to displacement.

These census tracts also have the majority of the City’s mobilehome parks. The lack of more protections on top of the Mobilehome Park Rent Stabilization for mobilehome park residents in the City could be a factor in the displacement of long time residents.

Item #5. Page 209
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 416
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 D-62
Figure D-42: Sensitive Communities At Risk of Displacement Figure D-43: Urban Displacement Project – Displacement Typology Source: Urban Displacement Project: Displacement Typology, 2020.

Item #5. Page 210
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 417
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 D-63
D.2.6 Summary of Fair Housing Issues from the AI and Analysis • The Housing Rights Center (HRC) is currently the City’s fair housing service provider.

HRC consistently assists approximately 60 Glendora residents regarding a variety of fair housing issues. Persons with disabilities continue to represent a significant proportion of HRC clients. Also, Black residents represent a disproportionate share of HRC’s client profile. Continued outreach and education, as well as fair housing investigation and enforcement services are needed. Multi-lingual fair housing education and outreach is also a need in Glendora. Language barriers can be an impediment to fair housing.

Linguistic isolation appears to be slightly more severe among Asian than Hispanic residents. While approximately 14 percent of Glendora residents speak “Spanish or Spanish Creole” at home, six percent speak “Asian and Pacific Islander languages.” However, among “Spanish or Spanish Creole” speaking households approximately 25 percent spoke English “less than very well,” compared to nearly one-half (47 percent) of Asian speaking households.
• Fair housing complaints based on disabilities continue to represent the majority of the complaints filed. HRC cites the continued need to educate landlords on reasonable accommodation.
• As part of the AI, for-sale and for-rent listings were reviewed for discriminatory languages.

Both types of listings show strong preferences for families. • As part of the 2018 AI development, an extensive analysis of lending patterns in Glendora was conducted. The following are some of the key findings:
o Between 2012 and 2016, the total number of applications decreased 12 percent. o Over 16 percent of all loan applications were withdrawn or deemed incomplete, indicating a potential lack of understanding in the homebuying and lending processes.
o Asian applicants were noticeably overrepresented in the loan applicant pool during 2016, while Hispanics and Whites were underrepresented in the homebuying market.
o The number of loans (frequency) with a reported spread (subprime lending) increased between 2012 and 2016, particularly among Hispanic and Asian applicants. The frequency of spread for both groups more than doubled.

Furthermore, the average spread (discrepancies in interest rates) for Hispanic applicants also increased significantly while that for other groups decreased. o There were major discrepancies in approval rates among various lending institutions, ranging from a low approval rate of 23.9 percent for Loandepot.com to an exceptionally high rate approval at 84.5 percent for Flagstar Bank. • Census tracts in one portion of the City, in addition to having a high concentration of minority population and LMI households, have had low changes in median income and high changes in gross rents over the last decade, which could be an indicator of potential urban displacement.

Item #5. Page 211
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 418
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 D-64
D.3 Identification and Prioritization of Contributing Factors The following are contributing factors that affect fair housing choice in Glendora.

D.3.1 Insufficient and Inaccessible Outreach and Enforcement Although the City is improving on the variety of media it uses for outreach, there are limitations to what the City is able to accomplish. Outreaching to all populations in the City is challenging especially with being able to provide community meetings at different times during the day. The City also has limited funds that it can provide to support fair housing enforcement and or to help combat discrimination towards persons with disabilities.

Contributing Factors:
▪ Lack of a variety of inputs media (e.g., meetings, surveys, interviews) ▪ Lack of marketing community meetings
▪ Lack of meetings at various times
▪ Lack of local public fair housing enforcement
▪ Lack of resources for fair housing agencies and organizations D.3.2 Segregation and Integration
Racial and ethnic minority populations tend to be concentrated in the southern areas of the City.

The southern half of Glendora also has slightly lower concentrations of children living in married couple households. In many of these tracts, there is a larger population of persons below the poverty level and lower median incomes below the State average. Persons living in this part of the City tend to have less access to economic and transportation opportunities. The southern Glendora tracts also have a higher concentration of cost burdened renters compared to the northern tracts.

The analysis found that the cost of home ownership within the City could be unattainable for many residents and which may cause economic pressure, especially for low and moderate income households. Also, within communities finding and accessing affordable rental housing can be difficult. The AI also found that there were instances of loan discrepancies among Hispanic and Asian applicants and Hispanics were underrepresented in the market.

Contributing Factors:
▪ Lack of private investments in specific neighborhoods ▪ Location and type of affordable housing
▪ Lending discrimination
▪ Land use and zoning laws
▪ Lack of affordable housing
D.3.3 Disproportionate Housing Needs, Including Displacement Risks The areas identified as being at risk of displacement are also shown to be at risk of becoming exclusive neighborhoods. Increasing housing costs, particularly rents, and the presence of LMI Item #5. Page 212
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 419
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
October 2022 D-65
households in these areas makes these communities vulnerable to displacement. These census tracts also have the majority of the City’s mobilehome parks. The lack of protection for mobilehome park residents in the City could be a factor in the displacement of long time residents, notwithstanding the Mobile home Rent Stabilization Ordinance. This area Glendora also has higher concentrations of persons experiencing homelessness. Displacement risk and housing needs disproportionately affect non-White and LMI populations, as areas with higher cost burden and displacement risk also have higher concentrations of racial/ethnic minorities and persons below the poverty level. The City does not have additional policies in place that could discourage the displacement of residents throughout the City.

Contributing Factors:
▪ The availability of affordable units in a range of sizes ▪ Displacement of residents due to economic pressures
▪ Lack of renter protections
▪ Lack of protections for mobilehome park residents
▪ Location and type of affordable housing
▪ Lack of affordable housing
Item #5. Page 213
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 420
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
July 2022
E-1
Appendix E: Housing Element Glossary
Acre: a unit of land measure equal to 43,560 square feet.

Acreage, Net: The portion of a site exclusive of existing or planned public or private road rightsof-way.

Affordability Covenant: A property title agreement which places resale or rental restrictions on a housing unit.

Affordable Housing: Under State and federal statutes, housing which costs no more than 30 percent of gross household income. Housing costs include rent or mortgage payments, utilities, taxes, insurance, homeowner association fees, and other costs.

Annexation: The incorporation of land area into the jurisdiction of an existing city with a resulting change in the boundaries of that city.

Assisted Housing: Housing that has been subsidized by federal, state, or local housing programs.

At-Risk Housing: Multiple-family rental housing that is at risk of losing its status as housing affordable for low and moderate income tenants due to the expiration of federal, state or local agreements.

California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD): The State Department responsible for administering State-sponsored housing programs and for reviewing housing elements to determine compliance with State housing law.

Census: The official United States decennial enumeration of the population conducted by the federal government.

Community Development Block Grant (CDBG): A grant program administered by the U.S.

Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). This grant allots money to cities and counties for housing rehabilitation and community development activities, including public facilities and economic development.

Condominium: A building or group of buildings in which units are owned individually, but the structure, common areas and facilities are owned by all owners on a proportional, undivided basis.

Density: The number of dwelling units per unit of land. Density usually is expressed per acre," e.g., a development with 100 units located on 20 acres has density of 5.0 units per acre.

Density Bonus: The allowance of additional residential units beyond the maximum for which the parcel is otherwise permitted usually in exchange for the provision or preservation of affordable housing units at the same site or at another location.

Development Impact Fees: A fee or charge imposed on developers to pay for a jurisdiction's costs of providing services to new development.

Development Right: The right granted to a land owner or other authorized party to improve a property. Such right is usually expressed in terms of a use and intensity allowed under existing Item #5. Page 214
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 421
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
July 2022
E-2
zoning regulation. For example, a development right may specify the maximum number of residential dwelling units permitted per acre of land.

Dwelling, Multiple-family: A building containing two or more dwelling units for the use of individual households; an apartment or condominium building is an example of this dwelling unit type.

Dwelling, Single-family Attached: A one-family dwelling attached to one or more other onefamily dwellings by a common vertical wall. Row houses and town homes are examples of this dwelling unit type.

Dwelling, Single-family Detached: A dwelling, not attached to any other dwelling, which is designed for and occupied by not more than one family and surrounded by open space or yards.

Dwelling Unit: One or more rooms, designed, occupied or intended for occupancy as separate living quarters, with cooking, sleeping and sanitary facilities provided within the unit for the exclusive use of a household.

Elderly Household: As defined by HUD, elderly households are one- or two- member (family or non-family) households in which the head or spouse is age 62 or older.

Element: A division or chapter of the General Plan.

Emergency Shelter: An emergency shelter is a facility that provides shelter to homeless families and/or homeless individuals on a limited short-term basis.

Entitlement City: A city, which based on its population, is entitled to receive funding directly from HUD. Examples of entitlement programs include CDBG and HOME.

Fair Market Rent (FMR): Fair Market Rents (FMRs) are freely set rental rates defined by HUD as the median gross rents charged for available standard units in a county or Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area (SMSA). Fair Market Rents are used for the Section 8 Rental Program and many other HUD programs and are published annually by HUD.

First-Time Home Buyer: Defined by HUD as an individual or family who has not owned a home during the three-year period preceding the HUD-assisted purchase of a home. Jurisdictions may adopt local definitions for first-time homebuyer programs which differ from non-federally funded programs.

Floor Area Ratio (FAR): The gross floor area of all buildings on a lot divided by the lot area; usually expressed as a numerical value (e.g., a building having 10,000 square feet of gross floor area located on a lot of 5,000 square feet in area has a FAR of 2:1).

General Plan: The General Plan is a legal document, adopted by the legislative body of a City or County, setting forth policies regarding long-term development. California law requires the preparation of seven elements or chapters in the General Plan: Land Use, Housing, Circulation, Conservation, Open Space, Noise, and Safety. Additional elements are permitted, such as Economic Development, Urban Design and similar local concerns.

Group Quarters: A facility which houses unrelated persons not living in households (U.S. Census definition). Examples of group quarters include institutions, dormitories, shelters, military quarters, Item #5. Page 215
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 422
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
July 2022
E-3
assisted living facilities and other quarters, including single-room occupancy housing, where 10 or more unrelated individuals are housed.

Growth Management: Techniques used by a government to regulate the rate, amount, location and type of development,
Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA): The Home Mortgage Disclosure Act requires larger lending institutions making home mortgage loans to publicly disclose the location and disposition of home purchase, refinance and improvement loans. Institutions subject to HMDA must also disclose the gender, race, and income of loan applicants.

HOME Program: The HOME Investment Partnership Act, Title II of the National Affordable Housing Act of 1990. HOME is a federal program administered by HUD which provides formula grants to States and localities to fund activities that build, buy, and/or rehabilitate affordable housing for rent or home ownership or provide direct rental assistance to low-income people.

Homeless: Families and individuals whose primary nighttime residence is a public or private place not designed for, or ordinarily used as, a regular sleeping accommodation (e.g., the street, sidewalks, cars, vacant and abandoned buildings). Sheltered homeless are families and persons whose primary nighttime residence is a supervised publicly or privately operated shelter (e.g., emergency, transitional, battered women, and homeless youth shelters; and commercial hotels or motels used to house the homeless).

Household: The Census Bureau defines a household as all persons living in a housing unit whether or not they are related. A single person living in an apartment as well as a family living in a house is considered a household. Household does not include individuals living in dormitories, prisons, convalescent homes, or other group quarters. Pursuant to HUD, households are defined as follows: small-- two to four non-elderly persons; large- with 5 or more members; or senior - over age 62.

Household Income: The total income of all the persons living in a household. A household income is often described as very low, low, moderate, and upper incomes based upon household size and income, relative to the regional median income.

Housing Problems: Defined by HUD as a household which: (1) occupies a unit with physical defects (lacks complete kitchen or bathroom); (2) meets the definition of overcrowded; or (3) spends more than 30 percent of income on housing cost.

Housing Subsidy: Housing subsidies refer to government assistance aimed at reducing housing sales or rent prices to more affordable levels. Two general types of housing subsidy exist. Where a housing subsidy is linked to a particular house or apartment, housing subsidy is "project" or "unit" based. In Section 8 rental assistance programs the subsidy is linked to the family and assistance provided to any number of families accepted by willing private landlords. This type of subsidy is said to be "tenant based."
Housing Unit: A room or group of rooms used by one or more individuals living separately from others in the structure, with direct access to the outside or to a public hall.

Income Category: Five categories are used to classify a household according to income based on the median income for the county. Under state housing statutes, these categories are defined as follows: Extremely Low (0-30 percent Area Median Income or AMI); Very Low (31-50 percent Item #5. Page 216
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 423
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
July 2022
E-4
AMI); Low (51-80 percent AMI); Moderate (81-120 percent AMI); and Above Moderate (over 120 percent AMI).

Manufactured Housing: Housing constructed of manufactured components, assembled partly at the site rather than totally at the site. Also referred to as modular housing.

Market-Rate Housing: Housing available on the open market without any subsidy of which the price is determined by the market forces of supply and demand.

Median Income: The annual income for each household size within a region which is defined annually by HUD. Half of the households in the region have incomes above the median and half have incomes below the median.

Mobile Home: A structure, transportable in one or more sections, which is at least 8 feet in width and 32 feet in length, is built on a permanent chassis and designed to be used as a dwelling unit when connected to the required utilities, either with or without a permanent foundation.

Overcrowding: A household with more than one person per room, excluding bathrooms, kitchens, hallways, and porches. Severe overcrowding is defined as households with more than

1.50 persons per room.

Overpayment: The extent to which gross housing costs, including utility costs, exceed 30 percent of gross household income. Severe overpayment exists if gross housing costs exceed 50 percent of gross income.

Parcel: The basic unit of land entitlement. A designated area of land established by plat, subdivision, or otherwise legally defined and permitted to be used, or built upon.

Physical Defects: A housing unit lacking complete kitchen or bathroom facilities. Jurisdictions may expand the Census definition in defining units with physical defects.

Project-Based Rental Assistance: Rental assistance provided for a project, not for a specific tenant. A tenant receiving project-based rental assistance gives up the right to that assistance upon moving from the project.

Public Housing: A project-based low-rent housing program operated by independent local public housing authorities. A very low income family applies to the local public housing authority in the area in which they want to live.

Redevelopment Agency: California Law formerly provided authority to establish a Redevelopment Agency with the scope and financing mechanisms necessary to remedy blight and provide stimulus to eliminate deteriorated conditions. The law provided for the planning, development, redesign, clearance, reconstruction, or rehabilitation, or any combination of these, and the provision of public and private improvements as may be appropriate or necessary in the interest of the general welfare by the Agency. Redevelopment law required an Agency to set aside 20 percent of all tax increment dollars generated from each redevelopment project area for the purpose of increasing and improving the community's supply of housing for low and moderate income households. Current law eliminated local redevelopment agencies and the authority to establish one.

Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA): The Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) is based on projections of population growth and housing unit demand and assigns a Item #5. Page 217
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 424
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
July 2022
E-5
share of the region's future housing need to each jurisdiction within the SCAG (Southern California Association of Governments) region. These housing need numbers serve as the basis for the update of the Housing Element.

Rehabilitation: The upgrading of a building previously in a dilapidated or substandard condition for human habitation or use.

Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program: A tenant-based rental assistance program that subsidizes a family's rent in a privately owned house or apartment. The program is administered by local public housing authorities. Assistance payments are based on 30 percent of household annual income. Households with incomes of 50 percent or below the area median income are eligible to participate in the program.

Service Needs: The particular services required by special populations, typically including needs such as transportation, personal care, housekeeping, counseling, meals, case management, personal emergency response, and other services preventing premature institutionalization and assisting individuals to continue living independently.

Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG): The Southern California Association of Governments is a regional planning agency which encompasses six counties:

Imperial, Riverside, San Bernardino, Orange, Los Angeles, and Ventura. SCAG is responsible for preparing the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA).

Special Needs Groups: Segments of the population which have a more difficult time finding decent affordable housing due to special circumstances. Under California Housing Element statutes, special needs groups consist of the elderly, disabled, large households, female-headed households, fameworkers, and the homeless. A jurisdiction may also consider additional special needs, such as students, military households, etc.

Subdivision: The division of a lot, tract or parcel of land in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act (California Government Code Section 66410 et seq.).

Substandard Housing: Housing which does not meet the minimum standards contained in the State Housing Code (i.e. does not provide shelter, endangers the health, safety or well-being of occupants). Jurisdictions may adopt more stringent local definitions of substandard housing.

Supportive Housing: Housing with a supporting environment, such as group homes or Single Room Occupancy (SRO) housing and other housing that includes a supportive service component such as those defined below.

Supportive Services: Services provided to residents of supportive housing for the purpose of facilitating the independence of residents. Some examples are case management, medical or psychological counseling and supervision, child care, transportation, and job training.

Tenant-Based Rental Assistance: A form of rental assistance in which the assisted tenant may move from a dwelling unit with a right to continued assistance. The assistance is provided for the tenant, not for the project.

Transitional Housing: Transitional housing is temporary (often six months to two years) housing for a homeless individual or family who is transitioning to permanent housing. Transitional housing often includes a supportive services component (e.g. job skills training, rehabilitation counseling, etc.) to allow individuals to gain necessary life skills in support of independent living.

Item #5. Page 218
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 425
City of Glendora | 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
July 2022
E-6
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD): The cabinet level department of the federal government responsible for housing, housing assistance, and urban development at the national level. Housing programs administered through HUD include Community Development Block Grant, HOME and Section 8, among others.

Zoning: A land use regulatory measure enacted by local government. Zoning district regulations governing lot size, building bulk, placement, and other development standards vary from district to district, but must be uniform within the same district. Each city and county adopts a zoning ordinance specifying these regulations.

Item #5. Page 219
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 426

Page 1 ends

SITE 1
≈ Location Address AIN General Plan Zoning Rezone
Needed Existing Use Σ Acres Acres Improvement : Land Ratio FAR Year Built In
Last
HE
Income
Category DU/Acre 100% DU/Acre
Σ DU
100%
Min
DU
80%
Σ
DU
80%
Site
Selection
Factor
Route 66 and
Barranca Ave 825 W Route 66 8634010022 Route 66 Specific Plan RTE66-BG Y Used Car Lot 2.31 2.31 2.2 0.19 1964 Y Above
Moderate 30 69 69 55 55 2a, e, f, g, i
Site Analysis/Notes: Site located within 1 mi. of new Metro light rail (L-Line/Gold Line) transit station being constructed (planned opening 2025). Underutilized used car lot. Buildings are nearly 60 years old. Lack of any recent investment.

Staff has met with property brokers and owner is discussing possible redevelopment of site.

Item #5. Page 220
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 427

Page 2 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 221
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 428

Page 3 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 222
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 429

Page 4 ends

SITE 2
≈ Location Address AIN General Plan Zoning Rezone
Needed Existing Use Σ Acres Acres Improvement : Land Ratio FAR Year Built In
Last
HE
Income
Category DU/Acre 100% DU/Acre
Σ DU
100%
Min
DU
80%
Σ
DU
80%
Site
Selection
Factor
Southwest Corner
of Route 66 and
Forrestdale Ave
727 W Route 66 8634010015
Route 66 Specific
Plan
RTE66-
BG
Y
Auto,
Recreation/Construction
EQPT Sales and Services

2.15 0.56 0.26 0.05 1959 Y
Above
Moderate 30 17
65 13
52 2a, e, f, g,
i
731 W Route 66 8634010018 Y
Auto,
Recreation/Construction
EQPT Sales and Services

0.28 0.18 0.11 1961 Y
Above
Moderate 30 8 7
2a, e, f, g,
i
735 W Route 66 8634010019 Y
Restaurants, Cocktail
Lounges

0.28 0.92 0.13 1986 Y
Above
Moderate 30 8 7
2a, e, f, g,
i
707 W Route 66 8634010034 Y Stores 0.7 0.33 0.3 1964 Y
Above
Moderate 30 21 17 2a, e, f, g, i
535 Forestdale
Ave 8634010035 Y Office building 0.33 1.09 0.29 1981 Y
Above
Moderate 30 10 8 2a, e, f, i
Site Analysis/Notes: Site located within 1 mi. of new Metro light rail (L-Line/Gold Line) transit station being constructed (planned opening 2025). Buildings are 40 to 60 years old. Properties are underutilized with small buildings, a bar, auto repair, lack of maintenance. 731 W. Route 66 is currently on the market.

Item #5. Page 223
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 430

Page 5 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 224
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 431

Page 6 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 225
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 432

Page 7 ends

SITE 3
≈ Location Address AIN General Plan Zoning Rezone
Needed Existing Use Σ Acres Acres Improvement : Land Ratio FAR Year Built In
Last
HE
Income
Category DU/Acre 100% DU/Acre
Σ DU
100%
Min
DU
80%
Σ
DU
80%
Site
Selection
Factor
600 Block W Route
66 619 W Route
66 8634018020 Route 66 Specific
Plan
RTE66-
BG Y Hotel/Motel

1.58 0.86 0.45 0.17 1947 Y
Above
Moderate 30 26
47 21
38 2a, e, f, g
625 W Route
66 8634018021 RTE66-BG Y Light Manufacturing 0.72 0.3 0.4 1955 Y Above
Moderate 30 22 17 2a, e, f, g
Site Analysis/Notes: Site located within ½ mi. of new Metro light rail (L-Line/Gold Line) transit station being constructed (planned opening 2025). Motel and furniture store. Buildings are 70+ years old. Housing Element update will increase allowed density from 20 to 30 du/acre. Height will increase from 2 to 3 stories. Increased density will make the property more valuable to potential investors. Adjacent to an existing 3-story mixed-use development.

Item #5. Page 226
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 433

Page 8 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 227
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 434

Page 9 ends

SITE 4
≈ Location Address AIN General Plan Zoning Rezone
Needed Existing Use Σ Acres Acres Improvement : Land Ratio FAR Year Built In
Last
HE
Income
Category DU/Acre 100% DU/Acre
Σ DU
100%
Min
DU
80%
Σ
DU
80%
Site
Selection
Factor
400 Block W Route
66 363 W Route
66 8639020003
Route 66 Specific
Plan
RTE66-
TCMU N
Restaurants, Cocktail
Lounges

9.12 0.74 0.24 0.24 1917 Y
Moderate
Income 30 22
274
18 219
2a, e, f, g
347 W Route
66 8639020004 RTE66-TCMU N Mobile Home Parks 0.57 0.83 0.21 1905 Y Moderate
Income 30 17 14 2a, e, f
423 W Route
66 8639020015 RTE66-TCMU N Mortuaries 2.44 0.13 0.06 1956 Y Moderate
Income 30 73 59 2a, d, e, f, g
337 W Route
66 8639020017 RTE66-TCMU N Stores 5.07 1.07 0.02 1948 Y Moderate
Income 30 152 122 2a, e, f, g
507 W Route
66 8639027001 RTE66-TCMU N Mobile Home Parks 0.3 0.91 0.08 1968 Y Moderate
Income 30 9 7 2a, e, f, g
Site Analysis/Notes: Site located within ¼ mi. of new Metro light rail (L-Line/Gold Line) transit station being constructed (planned opening 2025). Project 4 site is separated by vacant L-shaped lot which was recently entitled for 3-story mixed-Use project that includes 8 residential units and one commercial office building. This recent development may entice additional development to this location. Site includes a vacant mortuary building that was approved for demolition in the past which has been abandoned for 20+ years. Site contains 2 separate mobile home parks. Site contains a drive thru restaurant, built in 1968.

Item #5. Page 228
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 435

Page 10 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 229
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 436

Page 11 ends

SITE 5
≈ Location Address AIN General Plan Zoning Rezone
Needed Existing Use Σ Acres Acres Improvement : Land Ratio FAR Year Built In
Last
HE
Income
Category DU/Acre 100% DU/Acre
Σ DU
100%
Min
DU
80%
Σ
DU
80%
Site
Selection
Factor
700 Block E Route
66 740 E Route
66 8644017033
Route 66 Specific
Plan
RT66-
CRR N Light Manufacturing

4.17 0.58 0.25 0.34 1953 Y
Moderate
Income 30 17
125
14 100
2a, e, f, g
732 E Route
66 8644017034 RT66-CRR N Mobile Home Parks 2.33 0.09 N/A 1949 Y Moderate
Income 30 70 56 2a, e, f, g
712 E Route
66 8644017036 RT66-CRR N
Auto,
Recreation/Construction
EQPT Sales and Services

0.31 0.52 0.98 1962 Y
Moderate
Income 30 9 7 2a, e, f, g
718 E Route
66 8644017037 RT66-CRR N Office building 0.31 0.55 0.12 1948 Y Moderate
Income 30 9 7 2a, e, f, g
726 E Route
66 8644017038 RT66-CRR N
Auto,
Recreation/Construction
EQPT Sales and Services

0.64 0.18 0.05 1912 Y
Moderate
Income 30 19 15 1, 2a, e, f, g
Site Analysis/Notes: Underutilized, used car lot, mobile home/trailer park and marginal commercial. Buildings range from 60-100 years old. 718 E. Rte. 66 currently on the market for sale. Other sites have had inquiries about potential development.

Item #5. Page 230
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 437

Page 12 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 231
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 438

Page 13 ends

SITE 6
≈ Location Address AIN General Plan Zoning Rezone
Needed Existing Use Σ Acres Acres Improvement : Land Ratio FAR Year Built In
Last
HE
Income
Category DU/Acre 100% DU/Acre
Σ DU
100%
Min
DU
80%
Σ
DU
80%
Site
Selection
Factor
800 Block E Route
66 818 E Route
66 8644017043
Route 66 Specific
Plan
RT66-
CRR N 5+ Units

3.23 0.85 0.43 0.16 1946 Y
Moderate
Income 30 26
97 20
78 2a, b, e, f,
g, i
808 E route
66 8644017044 RT66-CRR N 5+ Units 0.37 0.22 0.07 1915 Y Moderate
Income 30 11 9
2a, b, e, f,
g, i
826 E Route
66 8644017045 RT66-CRR N Mobile Home Parks 2.01 0.11 0.04 1946 Y Moderate
Income 30 60 48 2a, b, e, f, g, i
Site Analysis/Notes: Converted motel and older trailer park. Uses/Buildings established in 1940s. Very poor condition. City has been recently contacted by a broker representing the owner to sell the property. Likely that the property will be redeveloped with low income housing and/or existing trailer park improved. Adjacent to a 3-story, 87-unit, 100% affordable housing project and 2-story apartment building.

Item #5. Page 232
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 439

Page 14 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 233
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 440

Page 15 ends

SITE 7
≈ Location Address AIN General Plan Zoning Rezone
Needed Existing Use Σ Acres Acres Improvement : Land Ratio FAR Year Built In
Last
HE
Income
Category DU/Acre 100% DU/Acre
Σ DU
100%
Min
DU
80%
Σ
DU
80%
Site
Selection
Factor
100 Block E Foothill
Blvd
129 S Glendora
Ave 8638026010
Route 66 Specific
Plan
RT66-
TCMU N Single Family

4.11 0.13 0.53 0.23 1929 Y
Moderate
Income 30 4
123
3 99
2a, e, f, g
120 W Foothill
Blvd 8638026026 RT66-TCMU N Single Family 2.36 0 0.31 1968 Y Moderate
Income 30 71 57 2a, e, f, g
151 S Glendora
Ave 8638026028 RT66-TCMU N Two Units 0.94 1.24 0.15 1905 Y Moderate
Income 30 28 23 2a, e, f, g
140 S Vermont
Ave 8638026027 CCAP-T5
N
Neighborhood
Shopping 0.21 0.44 0.21 1895 Y
Moderate
Income 30 6 5 2a, e, f, g
150 S Vermont
Ave 8638026025 CCAP-T5
N Three Units 0.2 0.49 0.15 1910 Y
Moderate
Income 30 6 5 2a, e, f, g
154 S Vermont
Ave 8638026019 CCAP-T5
N Church 0.14 0.6 0.15 1910 Y
Moderate
Income 30 4 3 2a, e, f
119 W Carroll
Ave 8638026020 CCAP-T5
N Single Family 0.13 0.53 0.34 1910 Y
Moderate
Income 30 4 3
2a, e, f, g,
h
Site Analysis/Notes: Site located within ¼ mi. of new Metro light rail (L-Line/Gold Line) transit station being constructed (planned opening 2025). Great mixed-use opportunity. Site is part of the area analyzed by the Cal Poly SLO study. Great TOD site due to location within downtown Glendora, 50+ year old buildings, City is planning first-last mile improvements (which are funded) to be completed in the immediate area. First last mile improvements to be completed before the opening of the Gold Line Station in 2025.

Item #5. Page 234
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 441

Page 16 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 235
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 442

Page 17 ends

SITE 8
≈ Location Address AIN General Plan Zoning Rezone
Needed Existing Use Σ Acres Acres Improvement : Land Ratio FAR Year Built In
Last
HE
Income
Category DU/Acre 100% DU/Acre
Σ DU
100%
Min
DU
80%
Σ
DU
80%
Site
Selection
Factor
700 Block W Route
66 750 W Route
66 8633017023 Route 66 Specific Plan
RT66-
BG Y Stores 3.06 0.7 0.26 1983 Y
Moderate
Income 30 92 92 73 73 2a, e, f, g
Site Analysis/Notes: 40 year old strip commercial. Housing Element update will increase allowed density from 20 to 30 du/acre. Height will increase from 2 to 3 stories. Increased density will make the property more valuable to potential investors.

Item #5. Page 236
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 443

Page 18 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 237
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 444

Page 19 ends

SITE 9
≈ Location Address AIN General Plan Zoning Rezone
Needed Existing Use Σ Acres Acres
Improvement
: Land Ratio FAR
Year
Built
In
Last
HE
Income
Category DU/Acre 100% DU/Acre
Σ DU
100%
Min
DU
80%
Σ
DU
80%
Site
Selection
Factor
Southeast corner of
Route 66 and
Vermont Ave
155 W Route
66 8639017021
Route 66 Specific
Plan
RT66-
TCMU N
Parking lots (Commercial
Use)

1.61 0.11 0.1 N/A 1961 Y
Moderate
Income 30 3
48 3
39 1, 2a, e, f,
g, h
213 W Route
66 8639017022 RT66-
TCMU
N
Restaurants, Cocktail
Lounges

0.26 0.91 0.11 1959 Y
Moderate
Income
30 8 6 2a, e, f, g
213 W Route
66 8639017023 RT66-
TCMU
N
Auto,
Recreation/Construction
EQPT Sales and Services

1.24 3.42 0.15 1964 Y
Moderate
Income
30 37 30 2a, e, f
Site Analysis/Notes: Site located within ¼ mi. of new Metro light rail (L-Line/Gold Line) transit station being constructed (planned opening 2025). Large residential developments located within 1-block vicinity. 60-year-old buildings. Poorly maintained carwash and auto repair on sites.

Item #5. Page 238
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 445

Page 20 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 239
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 446

Page 21 ends

SITE 10
≈ Location Address AIN General Plan Zoning Rezone
Needed Existing Use Σ Acres Acres
Improvement :

Land Ratio FAR
Year
Built
In
Last
HE
Income
Category DU/Acre 100% DU/Acre
Σ DU
100%
Min
DU
80%
Σ
DU
80%
Site
Selection
Factor
Northeast corner of
Route 66 and Lemar
Park Dr.
622 E Route
66 8644010048
Route 66 Specific
Plan
RT66-
CRR N Vacant

0.69 0.28 N/A N/A N/A Y Low Income 30 8
21 7
17 1, 2a, e, f,
g, i
610 E Route
66 8644010049 RT66-CRR N Commercial 0.41 0.29 0.26 1949 Y Low Income 30 12 10 1, 2a, c, e, f, g, i Site Analysis/Notes: 70+ year old buildings. Half of property used for used car lot and has minimal improvements. Site includes underutilized vacant land.

Item #5. Page 240
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 447

Page 22 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 241
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 448

Page 23 ends

SITE 11
≈ Location Address AIN General Plan Zoning Rezone
Needed Existing Use Σ Acres Acres Improvement :Land Ratio FAR Year Built In
Last
HE
Income
Category DU/Acre 100% DU/Acre
Σ DU
100%
Min
DU
80%
Σ
DU
80%
Site
Selection
Factor
Leadora Ave and
Grand Ave
Vacant
Lot 8635002011 Low Density Residential E-6 N Vacant 3.11 3.11 0 0 N/A Y Above
Moderate 3 9 9 7 7 1
Site Analysis/Notes: Site located within 1 mi. of new Metro light rail (L-Line./Gold Line) transit station being constructed (planned opening 2025). Vacant land owned by a church. Church has contacted staff regarding exploring ideas to develop as residential.

Item #5. Page 242
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 449

Page 24 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 243
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 450

Page 25 ends

SITE 12
≈ Location Address AIN General Plan Zoning Rezone
Needed Existing Use Σ Acres Acres Improvement : Land Ratio FAR Year Built In
Last
HE
Income
Category DU/Acre 100% DU/Acre
Σ DU
100%
Min
DU
80%
Σ
DU
80%
Site
Selection
Factor
200 Block S San Jose
Dr
Vacant
Lot 8655007900
Low Medium
Residential
E-3 N Vacant government

5.79 2.49 0 0 N/A Y
Above
Moderate 3 7
26 6
21 1
Vacant
Lot 8655007901 E-4 N Vacant government 0.22 0 0 N/A Y
Above
Moderate 3 1 1 1
Vacant
Lot 8655007902 E-4 N Vacant government 0.22 0 0 N/A Y
Above
Moderate 3 1 1 1
Vacant
Lot 8655021900 R-1 N Vacant government 2.86 0 0 N/A Y
Above
Moderate 6 17 14 1
Site Analysis/Notes: City owned vacant land as a portion of corporate yard. Not yet designated surplus. City is currently considering surplusing the property based on facilities needs.

Item #5. Page 244
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 451

Page 26 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 245
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 452

Page 27 ends

SITE 13
≈ Location Address AIN General Plan Zoning Rezone
Needed Existing Use Σ Acres Acres Improvement : Land Ratio FAR Year Built In
Last
HE
Income
Category DU/Acre 100% DU/Acre
Σ DU
100%
Min
DU
80%
Σ
DU
80%
Site
Selection
Factor
Southwest corner of
Bennett Ave and
Glendora Ave
Vacant
Lot 8638005004 Village Mixed
Use
CCAPT-5
N Vacant

0.28 0.12 0 0 N/A Y
Above
Moderate 30 4
8 3
7 1
Vacant
Lot 8638005005
CCAPT-5
N Vacant 0.16 0 0 N/A Y
Above
Moderate 30 5 4 1
Site Analysis/Notes: Site located within 1 mi. of new Metro light rail (L-Line./Gold Line) transit station being constructed (planned opening 2025). Vacant land located within prominent downtown location. Same ownership as adjacent Site 41 parcels.

Item #5. Page 246
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 453

Page 28 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 247
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 454

Page 29 ends

SITE 14
≈ Location Address AIN General Plan Zoning Rezone
Needed Existing Use Σ Acres Acres Improvement : Land Ratio FAR Year Built In
Last
HE
Income
Category DU/Acre 100% DU/Acre
Σ DU
100%
Min
DU
80%
Σ
DU
80%
Site
Selection
Factor
Northeast corner
of Arrow Highway
and Glendora Ave
109 E Arrow
Hwy 8643037001
Arrow Highway Specific
Plan
AHSP
MU-T
Y
Auto,
Recreation/Construction
EQPT Sales and Services

2.69 1.11 0.45 0.21 1956 N
Above
Moderate 30 33
81 27
65 2a, e, f,
g, i
123 E Arrow
Hwy 8643037002 AHSP MU-T
Y
Restaurants, Cocktail
Lounges 0.61 1.14 0.23 1963 N
Above
Moderate 30 18 15 2a, e, f, g, i
131 E Arrow
Hwy 8643037003 AHSP MU-T
Y Service stations 0.32 0.46 0.16 1948 N
Above
Moderate 30 10 8
2a, e, f,
g, i
129 E Arrow
Hwy 8643037004 AHSP MU-T
Y
Auto,
Recreation/Construction
EQPT Sales and Services

0.19 0.85 0.15 1958 N
Above
Moderate 30 6 5 2a, e, f, i
141 E Arrow
Hwy 8643037005 AHSP MU-T
Y
Auto,
Recreation/Construction
EQPT Sales and Services

0.46 2.27 0.27 1974 N
Above
Moderate 30 14 11 2a, e, f, i
Site Analysis/Notes: 50-70 year old commercial buildings. Lack of maintenance. Various auto intensive uses and bar. Housing Element update will increase allowed density from 20 to 30 du/acre. Height will increase from 2 to 3 stories. Increased density will make the property more valuable to potential investors.

Item #5. Page 248
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 455

Page 30 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 249
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 456

Page 31 ends

SITE 15
≈ Location Address AIN General Plan Zoning Rezone
Needed Existing Use Σ Acres Acres Improvement : Land Ratio FAR Year Built In
Last
HE
Income
Category DU/Acre 100% DU/Acre
Σ DU
100%
Min
DU
80%
Σ
DU
80%
Site
Selection
Factor
100 Block E Arrow
Hwy
151 E Arrow
Hwy 8643037012 Arrow Highway Specific
Plan
AHSP
MU-T
Y
Auto, Repair and
Collision Services 1.32

0.56 2.72 0.19 1959 N Low Income 30 17
40 13
32 2a, e, f, g,
i
163 E Arrow
Hwy 8643037008 AHSP MU-T
Y 0.76 0.86 0.46 1974 N Low Income 30 23 18 2a, e, f, g Site Analysis/Notes: Auto, repair, and collision service. Housing Element update will increase allowed density from 20 to 30 du/acre. Height will increase from 2 to 3 stories. Increased density will make the property more valuable to potential investors.

Item #5. Page 250
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 457

Page 32 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 251
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 458

Page 33 ends

SITE 16
≈ Location Address AIN General Plan Zoning Rezone
Needed Existing Use Σ Acres Acres Improvement : Land Ratio FAR Year Built In
Last
HE
Income
Category DU/Acre 100% DU/Acre
Σ DU
100%
Min
DU
80%
Σ
DU
80%
Site
Selection
Factor
Northeast corner
of Arrow Highway
and Bonnie Cove
Ave
8653008048
Arrow Highway Specific
Plan
AHSP

MU-CC Y
Parking lots (Commercial
Use)

1.39 0.23 0.01 0 1974 N
Low
Income 30 7
42 6
33 1
509 E Arrow
Hwy 8653008012 AHSP MU-CC Y
Auto,
Recreation/Construction
EQPT Sales and Services

0.56 3.7 0.49 1962 N
Low
Income 30 17 13 2a, e, f, g, i
515 E Arrow
Hwy 8653008015 AHSP MU-CC Y Professional building 0.3 2.36 0.49 1991 N Low
Income 30 9 7 2a, e, f, i
521 E Arrow
Hwy 8653008014 AHSP MU-CC Y Warehouse 0.3 0.31 0.21 1965 N Low
Income 30 9 7 2a, e, f, i
Site Analysis/Notes: 60 year old office building. No recent investment. Uses include office and building material supplies. Housing Element update will increase allowed density from 20 to 30 du/acre. Height will increase from 2 to 3 stories. Increased density will make the property more valuable to potential investors.

Item #5. Page 252
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 459

Page 34 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 253
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 460

Page 35 ends

SITE 17
≈ Location Address AIN General Plan Zoning Rezone
Needed Existing Use Σ Acres Acres Improvement : Land Ratio FAR Year Built In
Last
HE
Income
Category DU/Acre 100% DU/Acre
Σ DU
100%
Min
DU
80%
Σ
DU
80%
Site
Selection
Factor
600 Block E Arrow
Hwy
605 E Arrow
Hwy 8653009017 Arrow Highway Specific Plan
AHSP
MU-CC Y Office building 0.81 0.81 0.18 0.05 1988 N
Above
Moderate 30 24 24 19 19 2a, e, f, g
Site Analysis/Notes: Auto repair uses. Housing Element update will increase allowed density from 20 to 30 du/acre. Height will increase from 2 to 3 stories. Increased density will make the property more valuable to potential investors.

Item #5. Page 254
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 461

Page 36 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 255
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 462

Page 37 ends

SITE 18
≈ Location Address AIN General Plan Zoning Rezone
Needed Existing Use Σ Acres Acres Improvement : Land Ratio FAR Year Built In
Last
HE
Income
Category DU/Acre 100% DU/Acre
Σ DU
100%
Min
DU
80%
Σ
DU
80%
Site
Selection
Factor
600 Block E Arrow
Hwy
625 E Arrow
Hwy 8653009016 Arrow Highway Specific Plan
AHSP

MU-CC Y
Professional
building 0.81 0.81 3.83 0.27 1962 N
Above
Moderate 30 24 24 19 19 2a, e, f
Site Analysis/Notes: Office use. Housing Element update will increase allowed density from 20 to 30 du/acre. Height will increase from 2 to 3 stories. Increased density will make the property more valuable to potential investors.

Item #5. Page 256
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 463

Page 38 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 257
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 464

Page 39 ends

SITE 19
≈ Location Address AIN General Plan Zoning Rezone
Needed Existing Use Σ Acres Acres Improvement : Land Ratio FAR Year Built In
Last
HE
Income
Category DU/Acre 100% DU/Acre
Σ DU
100%
Min
DU
80%
Σ
DU
80%
Site
Selection
Factor
600 Block E Arrow
Hwy
631 E Arrow
Hwy 8653009030 Arrow Highway Specific
Plan
AHSP
MU-CC Y Stores

1.9 0.95 0.98 0.24 1977 N Low Income 30 29
57 23
46 2a, e, f, g
657 E Arrow
Hwy 8653009031 AHSP MU-CC Y Stores 0.95 0.98 0.23 1979 N Low Income 30 29 23 2a, e, f, g Site Analysis/Notes: Retail stores. HE update will increase allowed density from 20 to 30 du/acre. Height will increase from 2 to 3 stories. Increased density will make the property more valuable to potential investors.

Item #5. Page 258
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 465

Page 40 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 259
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 466

Page 41 ends

SITE 20
≈ Location Address AIN General Plan Zoning Rezone
Needed Existing Use Σ Acres
Acres Improvement
: Land Ratio FAR Year Built
In
Last
HE
Income
Category
DU/Acre 100%
DU/Acre
Σ DU
100%
Min
DU
80%
Σ
DU
80%
Site
Selection
Factor
700 Block E Arrow
Hwy
715 E Arrow
Hwy
8653009032 Arrow Highway Specific
Plan
AHSP MUNC
Y Auto Service 1.13 1.13 0.35 0.34 1987 N Low Income 30 34 34 27 27 2a, e, f, g Site Analysis/Notes: 35 year old auto repair. Housing Element update will increase allowed density from 20 to 30 du/acre. Height will increase from 2 to 3 stories. Increased density will make the property more valuable to potential investors.

Item #5. Page 260
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 467

Page 42 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 261
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 468

Page 43 ends

SITE 21
≈ Location Address AIN General Plan Zoning Rezone
Needed Existing Use Σ Acres Acres Improvement : Land Ratio FAR Year Built In
Last
HE
Income
Category DU/Acre 100% DU/Acre
Σ DU
100%
Min
DU
80%
Σ
DU
80%
Site
Selection
Factor
700 Block E Arrow
Hwy
731 E Arrow
Hwy 8653009026 Arrow Highway Specific Plan
AHSP MUNC Y Office 0.77 0.77 1.12 0.31 1990 N Low Income 30 23 23 18 18 2a, e, f, g Site Analysis/Notes: Office building. Housing Element update will increase allowed density from 20 to 30 du/acre. Height will increase from 2 to 3 stories. Increased density will make the property more valuable to potential investors.

Item #5. Page 262
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 469

Page 44 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 263
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 470

Page 45 ends

SITE 22
≈ Location Address AIN General Plan Zoning Rezone
Needed Existing Use Σ Acres Acres Improvement : Land Ratio FAR Year Built In
Last
HE
Income
Category DU/Acre 100% DU/Acre
Σ DU
100%
Min
DU
80%
Σ
DU
80%
Site
Selection
Factor
700 Block E Arrow
Hwy
757 E Arrow
Hwy 8653009043 Arrow Highway Specific Plan
AHSP MUNC Y Stores 1.63 1.63 1.38 0.3 1980 N Low Income 30 49 49 39 39 2a, e, f, g Site Analysis/Notes: 40+ year old buildings for retail stores. Housing Element update will increase allowed density from 20 to 30 du/acre. Height will increase from 2 to 3 stories. Increased density will make the property more valuable to potential investors.

Item #5. Page 264
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 471

Page 46 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 265
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 472

Page 47 ends

SITE 23
≈ Location Address AIN General Plan Zoning Rezone
Needed Existing Use Σ Acres Acres Improvement : Land Ratio FAR Year Built In
Last
HE
Income
Category DU/Acre 100% DU/Acre
Σ DU
100%
Min
DU
80%
Σ
DU
80%
Site
Selection
Factor
Northeast corner
of Arrow Hwy and
Greer
815 E Arrow
Hwy 8653011049
Arrow Highway Specific
Plan
AHSP

MU-NC Y
Fast food
restaurant

1.92 0.29 0.65 0.14 1974 N Low Income 30 9
58 7
46 1
825 E Arrow
Hwy 8653011014 AHSP MU-NC Y Warehouse 1.29 2.52 1.33 1989 N Low Income 30 39 31 2a, e, f, g 825 E Arrow
Hwy 8653011050 AHSP MU-NC Y Warehouse 0.34 0 N/A 1989 N Low Income 30 10 8 2a, e, f Site Analysis/Notes: Property used for storage (self-storage) and take-out restaurant. Housing Element update will increase allowed density from 20 to 30 du/acre. Height will increase from 2 to 3 stories. Increased density will make the property more valuable to potential investors. Site is being explored for potential development for residential use.

Item #5. Page 266
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 473

Page 48 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 267
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 474

Page 49 ends

SITE 24
≈ Location Address AIN General Plan Zoning Rezone
Needed Existing Use Σ Acres Acres Improvement : Land Ratio FAR Year Built In
Last
HE
Income
Category DU/Acre 100% DU/Acre
Σ DU
100%
Min
DU
80%
Σ
DU
80%
Site
Selection
Factor
Northwest corner
of Arrow Hwy and
Sunflower Ave
857 E Arrow
Hwy 8653011036
Arrow Highway Specific
Plan
AHSP

MU-NC Y
Parking lots
(Commercial Use)

1.58 0.41 0.28 0.08 1965 N Low Income 30 12
47 10
38 1
843 E Arrow
Hwy 8653011042 AHSP MU-NC Y Service stations 0.64 0.47 0.27 1969 N Low Income 30 19 15 2a, e, f, g 843 E Arrow
Hwy 8653011041 AHSP MU-NC Y Banks 0.53 0.01 0 1981 N Low Income 30 16 13 2a, e, f, g Site Analysis/Notes: Old service station. Bank with large parking lot. Housing Element update will increase allowed density from 20 to 30 du/acre. Height will increase from 2 to 3 stories. Increased density will make the property more valuable to potential investors.

Item #5. Page 268
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 475

Page 50 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 269
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 476

Page 51 ends

SITE 25
≈ Location Address AIN General Plan Zoning Rezone
Needed Existing Use Σ Acres Acres Improvement : Land Ratio FAR Year Built In
Last
HE
Income
Category DU/Acre 100% DU/Acre
Σ DU
100%
Min
DU
80%
Σ
DU
80%
Site
Selection
Factor
1000 Block E Arrow
Hwy
1021 E Arrow
Hwy
8653026049 Arrow Highway Specific
Plan
AHSP
MU-NC Y Vacant

1.49 1.25 0.25 0.01 1993 N Low Income 30 38
45 30
36 1
8653026048 AHSP
MU-NC Y Open Storage 0.24 0 0 N/A N Low Income 30 7 6 1 Site Analysis/Notes: No buildings on the property. Used for vehicle storage. Staff has received various inquiries regarding redeveloping the property. Housing Element update will increase allowed density from 20 to 30 du/acre. Height will increase from 2 to 3 stories. Increased density will make the property more valuable to potential investors.

Item #5. Page 270
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 477

Page 52 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 271
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 478

Page 53 ends

SITE 26
≈ Location Address AIN General Plan Zoning Rezone
Needed Existing Use Σ Acres Acres Improvement : Land Ratio FAR Year Built In
Last
HE
Income
Category DU/Acre 100% DU/Acre
Σ DU
100%
Min
DU
80%
Σ
DU
80%
Site
Selection
Factor
1000 Block E
Arrow Hwy
1061 E Arrow
Hwy 8653026008 Arrow Highway Specific Plan
AHSP
C-HR Y
Auto,
Recreation/Construction
EQPT Sales and Services

0.96 0.96 1.22 0.31 1988 N
Above
Moderate 30 29 29 23 23 2a, d, e, f
Site Analysis/Notes: Auto repair. Currently processing a housing development application for residential apartments on property one lot east of the site. Housing Element update will increase allowed density from 20 to 30 du/acre. Height will increase from 2 to 3 stories. Increased density will make the property more valuable to potential investors.

Item #5. Page 272
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 479

Page 54 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 273
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 480

Page 55 ends

SITE 27
≈ Location Address AIN General Plan Zoning Rezone
Needed Existing Use Σ Acres Acres Improvement : Land Ratio FAR Year Built In
Last
HE
Income
Category DU/Acre 100% DU/Acre
Σ DU
100%
Min
DU
80%
Σ
DU
80%
Site
Selection
Factor
1100 Block E Arrow
Hwy
1129 E Arrow
Hwy 8653027013 Arrow Highway Specific Plan
AHSP
C-HR Y Single Family 0.3 0.3 0.08 0.09 1930 N
Above
Moderate 30 9 9 7 7
2a, e, f, g,
i
Site Analysis/Notes: 80-year-old residential structure. Maintenance issues. Underdeveloped. Currently processing a 3-story housing development application for apartments on property one lot west of the site. Housing Element update will increase allowed density from 25 to 30 du/acre.

Increased density will make the property more valuable to potential investors.

Item #5. Page 274
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 481

Page 56 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 275
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 482

Page 57 ends

SITE 28
≈ Location Address AIN General Plan Zoning Rezone
Needed Existing Use Σ Acres Acres Improvement : Land Ratio FAR Year Built In
Last
HE
Income
Category DU/Acre 100% DU/Acre
Σ DU
100%
Min
DU
80%
Σ
DU
80%
Site
Selection
Factor
1100 Block E Arrow
Hwy
1157 E Arrow
Hwy 8653027022 Arrow Highway Specific
Plan
AHSP
C-CR Y Office building

0.85 0.53 0.75 0.32 1977 N Low Income 30 16
26 13
20 2a, e, f, g
1157 E Arrow
Hwy 8653027021 AHSP C-CR Y Office building 0.32 0.32 0.54 1977 N Low Income 30 10 8 2a, e, f, g Site Analysis/Notes: 45-year-old building. Services, such as pest control and hair salon, with large parking. Housing Element update will increase density. Increased density (25 to 30 du/acre) will make the property more valuable to potential investors.

Item #5. Page 276
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 483

Page 58 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 277
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 484

Page 59 ends

SITE 29
≈ Location Address AIN General Plan Zoning Rezone
Needed Existing Use Σ Acres Acres Improvement :Land Ratio FAR Year Built In
Last
HE
Income
Category DU/Acre 100% DU/Acre
Σ DU
100%
Min
DU
80%
Σ
DU
80%
Site
Selection
Factor
1200 Block E Arrow
Hwy
1201 E Arrow
Hwy 8653028016
Arrow Highway Specific
Plan
AHSP
C-CR Y Single Family

1.94 0.76 0.23 0.04 1951 N Low Income 30 23
58 18
47 2a, e, f, g
8653028017 AHSP
C-CR Y Vacant 0.19 0 0 N/A N Low Income 30 6 5 2a, e, f, g 1215 E Arrow
Hwy 8653028018
AHSP
C-CR Y Single Family 0.76 0.12 0.02 1952 N Low Income 30 23 18 1 8653028019 AHSP
C-CR Y Vacant 0.23 0 0 N/A N Low Income 30 7 6 1
Site Analysis/Notes: Small number of 70-year-old structures. Derelict site conditions. Majority of property is vacant. Housing Element update will increase allowed density from 25 to 30 du/acre. Increased density will make the property more valuable to potential investors. Site is currently being explored for potential development for residential use by developer for 3-story project.

Item #5. Page 278
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 485

Page 60 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 279
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 486

Page 61 ends

SITE 30
≈ Location Address AIN General Plan Zoning Rezone
Needed Existing Use Σ Acres Acres Improvement : Land Ratio FAR Year Built In
Last
HE
Income
Category DU/Acre 100% DU/Acre
Σ DU
100%
Min
DU
80%
Σ
DU
80%
Site
Selection
Factor
Northwest corner
of Arrow Hwy and
Valley Center Ave
1255 E Arrow Hwy 8653028027 Arrow Highway Specific
Plan
AHSP
C-CR Y Office building

0.63 0.39 0.51 0.23 1979 N Low Income 30 12
19 9
15 2a, e, f, g
1749 S Valley Center
Ave 8653028031 AHSP C-CR Y Office building 0.24 0.35 0.23 1967 N Low Income 30 7 6 2a, e, f, g Site Analysis/Notes: Retail and service uses (dental, and kitchen flooring materials) with large parking lots. HE update will increase allowed density from 20 to 30 du/acre. Height will increase from 2 to 3 stories. Increased density will make the property more valuable too potential investors.

Site is being explored by developers for potential development for residential use.

Item #5. Page 280
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 487

Page 62 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 281
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 488

Page 63 ends

SITE 31
≈ Location Address AIN General Plan Zoning Rezone
Needed Existing Use Σ Acres Acres Improvement : Land Ratio FAR Year Built In
Last
HE
Income
Category DU/Acre 100% DU/Acre
Σ DU
100%
Min
DU
80%
Σ
DU
80%
Site
Selection
Factor
Southeast corner of
Route 66 and
Vecino Dr
640 W Route
66 8633005029 Route 66 Specific
Plan
RTE 66-
BG Y Auto Service

1.61 1.36 0.28 0.07 1960 N Low Income 30 41
48 33
39 2a, e, f, g
610 S Vecino
Dr 8633005011 RTE 66-BG Y Restaurant 0.25 0.67 0.17 1964 N Low Income 30 8 6 2a, e, f, g Site Analysis/Notes: Approximately 60-year-old buildings. Restaurant, auto services, and partially vacant lot. Housing Element update will increase allowed density from 20 to 30 du/acre. Height will increase from 2 to 3 stories. Increased density will make the property more valuable to potential investors. Site is being explored by developers for potential development for residential use. Developers have contacted staff exploring potential development of site.

Item #5. Page 282
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 489

Page 64 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 283
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 490

Page 65 ends

SITE 32
≈ Location Address AIN General Plan Zoning Rezone
Needed Existing Use Σ Acres Acres Improvement : Land Ratio FAR Year Built In
Last
HE
Income
Category DU/Acre 100% DU/Acre
Σ DU
100%
Min
DU
80%
Σ
DU
80%
Site
Selection
Factor
North Route 66 in
between Vermont
Ave and Glendora
Ave
434 S Vermont
Ave 8639016013
Route 66 Specific
Plan
RTE 66-
TCMU N Light Manufacturing

14.17 0.87 0.68 0.21 1978 N
Low
Income 30 26
425
21 340
2a, e, f, g
500 S Vermont
Ave 8639017015 RTE 66-TCMU N
Auto,
Recreation/Construction
EQPT Sales and Services

0.21 1.59 0.24 1981 N
Low
Income 30 6 5 2a, e, f, g
517 S Glendora
Ave 8639017037 RTE 66-TCMU N
Auto,
Recreation/Construction
EQPT Sales and Services

2.95 0.62 0.31 1957 N
Low
Income 30 89 71 2a, e, f
524 S Vermont
Ave 8639017020 RTE 66-TCMU N Office building 0.82 0.45 0.36 1978 N Low
Income 30 25 20 2a, e, f
531 S Glendora
Ave 8639017036 RTE 66-TCMU N Stores 1.82 0.41 1.49 1962 N Low Income 30 55 44 133 W Route 66 8639017035 RTE 66-
TCMU N Light Manufacturing 5.84 1.02 0.23 1960 N
Low
Income 30 175 140 2a, e, f, g
121 W Route 66 8639017034 RTE 66-
TCMU N
Parking lots (Commercial
Use) 0.9 1.2 0.24 2002 N
Low
Income 30 27 22 1
541 S Glendora
Ave 8639017024 RTE 66-TCMU N Stores 0.24 1.04 0.46 1955 N Moderate
Income 30 7 6 2a, e, f
103 W Route 66 8639017025 RTE 66-
TCMU N Stores 0.52 2.07 0.32 1992 N
Moderate
Income 30 16 12 2a, e, f
Site Analysis/Notes: Site located adjacent to new Metro light rail (L-Line/Gold Line) transit station being constructed (planned opening 2025). Older industrial and retail properties. Albertson's could be redeveloped or reconfigured with housing for a mixed use site. Cal Poly study analyzed site and shows major potential. Momentum created by the future light rail station nearby is expected to attract investment in the area with assembly of adjacent properties. Gold Line Construction Authority is acquiring 517 S Vermont Ave property on behalf of LA County Metro for parking plus additional property. Additional property acquired by Metro is intended to create residential developer interest within this site area. Several older buildings. Major employer occupying all of 524 S Vermont Ave. is schedule to be vacating the property.

Item #5. Page 284
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 491

Page 66 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 285
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 492

Page 67 ends

SITE 33
≈ Location Address AIN General Plan Zoning Rezone
Needed Existing Use Σ Acres Acres Improvement : Land Ratio FAR Year Built In
Last
HE
Income
Category DU/Acre 100% DU/Acre
Σ DU
100%
Min
DU
80%
Σ
DU
80%
Site
Selection
Factor
Northwest corner
of Ada Ave and
Vermont Ave
218 W Ada Ave 8639021009
Route 66 Specific
Plan
RTE 66-
TCMU N Vacant

1.7 0.07 0 0 N/A N Low Income 30 2
51 2
41 1, 2h
216 W Ada Ave 8639021010 RTE 66-
TCMU N Single Family 0.06 0 0.29 1946 N Low Income 30 2 1 2a, e, f, g 303 S Vermont
Ave 8639021011 RTE 66-TCMU N Single Family 0.13 0 0.13 1946 N Low Income 30 4 3 2a, e, f, g 308 S Vermont
Ave 8639021026 RTE 66-TCMU N Light Manufacturing 0.76 2.19 0.41 1977 N Low Income 30 23 18 2a, e, f 321 S Vermont
Ave 8639021005 RTE 66-TCMU N Light Manufacturing 0.25 1.35 0.35 1961 N Low Income 30 8 6 2a, e, f 331 S Vermont
Ave 8639021004 RTE 66-TCMU N Light Manufacturing 0.25 1.35 0.28 1950 N Low Income 30 8 6 2a, e, f 401 S Vermont
Ave 8639021003 RTE 66-TCMU N Single Family 0.18 0.25 0.09 1939 N Low Income 30 5 4 2a, e, f, g Site Analysis/Notes: Site located physically across the street from new Metro light rail (L-Line/Gold Line) transit station being constructed (planned opening 2025). Older industrial/commercial property with two single family units and a vacant lot. Site is being explored by developers for potential development for residential use. 218 W Ada, 216 W Ada and 303 S Vermont were recently on the market and explored for potential future redevelopment.

Item #5. Page 286
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 493

Page 68 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 287
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 494

Page 69 ends

SITE 34
≈ Location Address AIN General Plan Zoning Rezone
Needed Existing Use Σ Acres Acres Improvement : Land Ratio FAR Year Built In
Last
HE
Income
Category DU/Acre 100% DU/Acre
Σ DU
100%
Min
DU
80%
Σ
DU
80%
Site
Selection
Factor
400 Block S
Vermont Ave
401 S Vermont
Ave 8639021025 Route 66 Specific
Plan
RTE 66-
TCMU N Light Manufacturing

1.78 0.75 0.99 0.47 1954 N Low Income 30 23
53 18
43 2a, e, f
505 S Vermont
Ave 8639021013 RTE 66-TCMU N Light Manufacturing 1.03 1.04 0.37 1954 N Low Income 30 31 25 2a, e, f, g Site Analysis/Notes: Site located immediately across from new Metro light rail (L-Line/Gold Line) transit station being constructed (planned opening 2025). Old light manufacturing use in almost 70 year old building. Site is being explored by developers for potential development for residential use.

Item #5. Page 288
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 495

Page 70 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 289
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 496

Page 71 ends

SITE 35
≈ Location Address AIN General Plan Zoning Rezone
Needed Existing Use Σ Acres Acres Improvement : Land Ratio FAR Year Built In
Last
HE
Income
Category DU/Acre 100% DU/Acre
Σ DU
100%
Min
DU
80%
Σ
DU
80%
Site
Selection
Factor
Northwest corner
of Route 66 and
Vermont Ave
515 S Vermont
Ave 8639020013
Route 66 Specific
Plan
RTE 66-
TCMU N Light Manufacturing

2.35 0.42 1.4 0.48 1956 N
Low
Income 30 13
71 10
56 2a, e, f
555 S Vermont
Ave 8639020022
RTE 66-
TCMU N Light Manufacturing 1.43 2.45 0.45 1955 N
Low
Income 30 43 34 2a, e, f
305 W Route 66 8639020021
RTE 66-
TCMU N
Auto,
Recreation/Construction
EQPT Sales and Services

0.5 6.04 0.3 1989 N
Low
Income 30 15 12 2a, e, f
Site Analysis/Notes: Site located within half a block of new Metro light rail (L-Line/Gold Line) transit station being constructed (planned opening 2025). Old light manufacturing use and tire shop. Site is being explored by developers for potential development for residential use.

Item #5. Page 290
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 497

Page 72 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 291
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 498

Page 73 ends

SITE 36
≈ Location Address AIN General Plan Zoning Rezone
Needed Existing Use Σ Acres
Acres Improvement :

Land Ratio FAR Year Built
In
Last
HE
Income
Category
DU/Acre 100%
DU/Acre
Σ DU
100%
Min
DU
80%
Σ
DU
80%
Site
Selection
Factor
100 Block N
Valencia Ave
134 N Valencia
Ave 8635011014
High Density
Residential R-3 N Vehicle tow yard 0.78 0.78 0.25 0.17 1946 Y Above
Moderate 30 23 23 19 19 2a, e, f, g
Site Analysis/Notes: Site located within 1 mi. of new Metro light rail (L-Line/Gold Line) transit station being constructed (planned opening 2025). Site use is currently a vehicle tow yard. 75-year-old buildings. Area now zoned residential.

Item #5. Page 292
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 499

Page 74 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 293
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 500

Page 75 ends

SITE 37
≈ Location Address AIN General Plan Zoning Rezone
Needed Existing Use Σ Acres Acres Improvement : Land Ratio FAR Year Built In
Last
HE
Income
Category DU/Acre 100% DU/Acre
Σ DU
100%
Min
DU
80%
Σ
DU
80%
Site
Selection
Factor
100 Block N
Valencia Ave
161 N Valencia
Ave 8635013901
High Density
Residential
R-3 with
Overlay N
County
maintenance yard 2.78 2.78 0 0 N/A Y
Above
Moderate 30 83 83 67 67 1
Site Analysis/Notes: Site located within 1 mi. of new Metro light rail (L-Line/Gold Line) transit station being constructed (planned opening 2025). Site use is currently LA County equipment yard. Underutilized. Site development at current use.

Item #5. Page 294
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 501

Page 76 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 295
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 502

Page 77 ends

SITE 38
≈ Location Address AIN General Plan Zoning Rezone
Needed Existing Use Σ Acres Acres Improvement : Land Ratio FAR Year Built In
Last
HE
Income
Category DU/Acre 100% DU/Acre
Σ DU
100%
Min
DU
80%
Σ
DU
80%
Site
Selection
Factor
Southeast corner of
Compromise Line Rd
and Sellers St
452
Sellers St 8660014012 Medium High Density Residential
R2/PD N Nursing Home 1.2 1.2 0.54 0.14 1959 NAbove
Moderate 15 18 18 14 14 1
Site Analysis/Notes: Currently used as a nursing home. This site is currently zoned for residential. Has been on the market for sale.

Item #5. Page 296
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 503

Page 78 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 297
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 504

Page 79 ends

SITE 39
≈ Location Address AIN General Plan Zoning Rezone
Needed Existing Use Σ Acres Acres Improvement : Land Ratio FAR Year Built In
Last
HE
Income
Category DU/Acre 100% DU/Acre
Σ DU
100%
Min
DU
80%
Σ
DU
80%
Site
Selection
Factor
100 Block N
Pennsylvania Ave
121 N Pennsylvania
Ave 8638020042 High Density Residential R-3 N
Approximately 12
units 0.95 0.95 0.33 0.18 1954 N
Above
Moderate 25 24 24 19 19 2a, e, f, g
Site Analysis/Notes: Site located within ½ mi. of new Metro light rail (L-Line/Gold Line) transit station being constructed (planned opening 2025). Land is partially developed with existing residential units. Western portion on site is vacant. Developers have had interest in this site.

Item #5. Page 298
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 505

Page 80 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 299
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 506

Page 81 ends

SITE 40
≈ Location Address AIN General Plan Zoning Rezone
Needed Existing Use Σ Acres
Acres Improvement
: Land Ratio FAR Year Built
In
Last
HE
Income
Category
DU/Acre 100%
DU/Acre
Σ DU
100%
Min
DU
80%
Σ
DU
80%
Site
Selection
Factor
Northeast corner
of Foothill Blvd and
Grand Ave
517 W Foothill
Blvd 8635011020 High Density Residential
R-3 with
Overlay N Vacant Building

0.56 0.31 0.91 0.3 1956 Y
Above
Moderate 25 8
14 6
11 2a, c, e, f,
g
507 W Foothill
Blvd 8635011019 High Density Residential
R-3 with
Overlay N Auto 0.25 0.17 0.31 1940 Y
Above
Moderate 25 6 5
2a, c, e, f,
g
Site Analysis/Notes: Site located within ½ mi. of new Metro light rail (L-Line/Gold Line) transit station being constructed (planned opening 2025). Western property is an autobody shop. Eastern property is an abandoned commercial/industrial building that has been vacant for nearly a decade. Eastern Lot property owner is exploring redevelopment of the site with the city. Site is adjacent to an existing 3-story large residential development.

Item #5. Page 300
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 507

Page 82 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 301
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 508

Page 83 ends

SITE 41
≈ Location Address AIN General Plan Zoning Rezone
Needed Existing Use Σ Acres Acres Improvement : Land Ratio FAR Year Built In
Last
HE
Income
Category DU/Acre 100% DU/Acre
Σ DU
100%
Min
DU
80%
Σ
DU
80%
Site
Selection
Factor
100 Block W
Bennett Ave
118 W Bennett
Ave 8638005007 Village Mixed Use
CCAPT-5
N Single Family

0.32 0.16 0.69 0.15 1924 N
Above
Moderate 25 4
8 3
6 2a, e, f, g
112 W Bennett
Ave 8638005006 Village Mixed Use
CCAPT-5
N Office building 0.16 0.39 0.44 1959 N
Above
Moderate 25 4 3 2a, e, f, g
Site Analysis/Notes: Site located within 1 mi. of new Metro light rail (L-Line/Gold Line) transit station being constructed (planned opening 2025). 60-100 year old buildings with residential unit on west and commercial office on east. These two parcels are under the same ownership as adjacent Site 13 parcels. Site is located within downtown Glendora village.

Item #5. Page 302
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 509

Page 84 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 303
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 510

Page 85 ends

SITE 42
≈ Location Address AIN General Plan Zoning Rezone
Needed Existing Use Σ Acres Acres Improvement : Land Ratio FAR Year Built In
Last
HE
Income
Category DU/Acre 100% DU/Acre
Σ DU
100%
Min
DU
80%
Σ
DU
80%
Site
Selection
Factor
200 Block E Arrow
Hwy
201 E Arrow
Hwy 8643037010
Arrow Highway Specific
Plan
AHSP
C-HR Y
Mobile Home
Parks

8.03 5.37 0.2 N/A 1962 N Low Income 30 161
241
129
193
2a, e, f, g
201 E Arrow
Hwy 8643037011 AHSP C-HR Y
Mobile Home
Parks 0.4 0.05 N/A 1964 N Low Income 30 12 10 2a, e, f, g 201 E Arrow
Hwy 8643037009 AHSP C-HR Y
Mobile Home
Parks 2.26 0.25 0.06 1962 N Low Income 30 68 54 2a, e, f, g Site Analysis/Notes: Mobile home park. Housing Element update will increase allowed density from 20 to 30 du/acre. Height will increase from 2 to 3 stories. Increased density will make the property more valuable to potential investors.

Item #5. Page 304
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 511

Page 86 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 305
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 512

Page 87 ends

SITE 43
≈ Location Address AIN General Plan Zoning Rezone
Needed Existing Use Σ Acres Acres Improvement : Land Ratio FAR Year Built In
Last
HE
Income
Category DU/Acre 100% DU/Acre
Σ DU
100%
Min
DU
80%
Σ
DU
80%
Site
Selection
Factor
Northeast corner of
Arrow Hwy and
Glendora Ave
1700 S Glendora
Ave 8643015031 Arrow Highway Specific Plan
AHSP
C-BR Y
Mobile Home
Parks 3.66 3.66 0.45 N/A 1960 N Low Income 30 110 110 88 88 2a, e, f, g Site Analysis/Notes: 60+ year old mobile home park. Housing Element update will increase allowed density from 20 to 30 du/acre. Height will increase from 2 to 3 stories. Increased density will make the property more valuable to potential investors.

Item #5. Page 306
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 513

Page 88 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 307
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 514

Page 89 ends

SITE 44
≈ Location Address AIN General Plan Zoning Rezone
Needed Existing Use Σ Acres Acres Improvement : Land Ratio FAR Year Built In
Last
HE
Income
Category DU/Acre 100% DU/Acre
Σ DU
100%
Min
DU
80%
Σ
DU
80%
Site
Selection
Factor
700 Block W Route
66 765 W Route
66 8634010033 Route 66 Specific Plan
RTE 66-
BG Y Retail & Service 1.5 1.5 1.48 0.25 1979 N Low Income 30 45 45 36 36 2a, e, f, g Site Analysis/Notes: Retail and banquet use. Housing Element update will increase allowed density from 20 to 30 du/acre. Height will increase from 2 to 3 stories. Increased density will make the property more valuable to potential investors.

Item #5. Page 308
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 515

Page 90 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 309
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 516

Page 91 ends

SITE 45
≈ Location Address AIN General Plan Zoning Rezone
Needed Existing Use Σ Acres Acres Improvement : Land Ratio FAR Year Built In
Last
HE
Income
Category DU/Acre 100% DU/Acre
Σ DU
100%
Min
DU
80%
Σ
DU
80%
Site
Selection
Factor
700 Block W Route
66 753 W Route
66 8634010036 Route 66 Specific Plan
RTE
66-BG Y
Auto,
Recreation/Construction
EQPT Sales and Services

1.13 1.13 0.37 0.29 1985 N
Low
Income 30 34 34 27 27 2a, e, f, g
Site Analysis/Notes: Existing auto use. Housing Element update will increase allowed density from 20 to 30 du/acre. Height will increase from 2 to 3 stories. Increased density will make the property more valuable to potential investors.

Item #5. Page 310
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 517

Page 92 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 311
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 518

Page 93 ends

SITE 46
≈ Location Address AIN General Plan Zoning Rezone
Needed Existing Use Σ Acres Acres
Improvement :

Land Ratio FAR
Year
Built
In
Last
HE
Income
Category DU/Acre 100% DU/Acre
Σ DU
100%
Min
DU
80%
Σ
DU
80%
Site
Selection
Factor
600 Block W Route
66 608 W Route
66 8633005017 Route 66 Specific
Plan
RTE 66-
BG
Y Hotel/Motel 0.73 0.73 2.7 0.39 1980 N Low Income 30 22 22 18 18 2a, e, f Site Analysis/Notes: Site located within ½ mi. of new Metro light rail (L-Line/Gold Line) transit station being constructed (planned opening 2025). Current uses are motel and liquor store. Housing Element update will increase allowed density from 20 to 30 du/acre. Height will increase from 2 to 3 stories. Increased density will make the property more valuable to potential investors.

Item #5. Page 312
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 519

Page 94 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 313
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 520

Page 95 ends

SITE 47
≈ Location Address AIN General Plan Zoning Rezone
Needed Existing Use Σ Acres Acres Improvement : Land Ratio FAR Year Built In
Last
HE
Income
Category DU/Acre 100% DU/Acre
Σ DU
100%
Min
DU
80%
Σ
DU
80%
Site
Selection
Factor
700 Block E Route
66 700 E Route
66 8644017035 Route 66 Specific Plan
RT66-
CRR N Warehouse 1.83 1.83 0.78 0.24 1972 N Low Income 30 55 55 44 44 2a, e, f, g Site Analysis/Notes: Existing mini storage. Site in less than fair maintenance conditions.

Item #5. Page 314
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 521

Page 96 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 315
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 522

Page 97 ends

SITE 48
≈ Location Address AIN General Plan Zoning Rezone
Needed Existing Use Σ Acres
Acres Improvement :

Land Ratio FAR Year Built
In
Last
HE
Income
Category
DU/Acre 100%
DU/Acre
Σ DU
100%
Min
DU
80%
Σ
DU
80%
Site
Selection
Factor
Southern Route 66
between Glendora
Ave and Pasadena
Ave
116 E Route
66 8644001051
Route 66 Specific
Plan
RTE 66-
RSC Y
Fast Food w/ Drive
Thru

3.67 0.41 0.3 0.11 2013 N Low Income 30 12
95 10
66 2a, e, f, g
128 E Route
66 8644001013 RTE 66-
RSC
Y Single Family 0.21 0.48 0.15 1926 Y Low Income 30 6 5 2a, e, f 200 E Route
66 8644004030 RTE 66-RSC Y Auto Repair 0.54 0.45 0.09 1955 Y Low Income 30 16 13 2a, e, f, g 210 E Route
66 8644004029
RTE 66-
RSC Y Four units 0.2 1.18 0.23 1954 Y Low Income 6 1 1 2a, e, f 214 E Route
66 8644004028 RTE 66-
RSC
Y Four units 0.2 1.18 0.23 1954 Y Low Income 6 1 1 2a, e, f 218 E Route
66 8644004027 RTE 66-RSC Y
Dental Office and
Residential 0.4 1.18 0.12 1954 Y Low Income 30 12 10 2a, e, f, g 222 E Route
66 8644004026 RTE 66-RSC Y Service shops 0.23 1.89 0.3 1955 Y Low Income 6 1 1 2a, e, f 230 E Route
66 8644004025
RTE 66-
RSC Y Retail and Services 0.45 3.7 0.31 1978 Y Low Income 30 14 11 2a, e, f 240 E Route
66 8644004024 RTE 66-
RSC
Y Cocktail lounge 0.16 0.57 0.19 1959 N Low Income 30 5 4 2a, e, f, g 300 E Route
66 8644004023 RTE 66-RSC Y Retail 0.16 0.9 0.44 1964 N Low Income 30 5 4 2a, e, f, g 330 E Route
66 8644004022
RTE 66-
RSC Y Retail 0.31 0.87 0.44 1962 N Low Income 30 9 7 2a, e, f, g 340 E Route
66 8644004021 RTE 66-
RSC
Y Retail 0.4 0.94 0.44 1962 N Low Income 30 12 10 2a, e, f, g Site Analysis/Notes: Site located within ½ mi. of new Metro light rail (L-Line/Gold Line) transit station being constructed (planned opening 2025). Older commercial and residential. Opportunities for lot consolidation for housing or mixed use. Less than fair maintenance conditions. Housing Element update will allow residential at a 30 du/acre density with proposed rezone at a previously commercial site.

Item #5. Page 316
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 523

Page 98 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 317
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 524

Page 99 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 318
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 525

Page 100 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 319
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 526

Page 101 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 320
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 527

Page 102 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 321
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 528

Page 103 ends

SITE 49
≈ Location Address AIN General Plan Zoning Rezone
Needed Existing Use Σ Acres Acres Improvement : Land Ratio FAR Year Built In
Last
HE
Income
Category DU/Acre 100% DU/Acre
Σ DU
100%
Min
DU
80%
Σ
DU
80%
Site
Selection
Factor
Southern west
corner of Galatea St
and Barranca Ave
1134 S
Barranca 8632001900 Civic Institutional R-1 N
Former elementary
school, partially used
as an education center
9 9 0 0 N/A N
Above
Moderate 6 54 54 43 43 1
Site Analysis/Notes: Azusa Unified School site. Vacant and unused for several years, partially used as an education center. School District evaluating disposition. Potential General Plan Amendment and rezone might be needed for a specific housing proposal for this site.

Item #5. Page 322
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 529

Page 104 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 323
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 530

Page 105 ends

SITE 50
≈ Location Address AIN General Plan Zoning Rezone
Needed Existing Use Σ Acres Acres
Improvement :

Land Ratio FAR
Year
Built
In
Last
HE
Income
Category DU/Acre 100% DU/Acre
Σ DU
100%
Min
DU
80%
Σ
DU
80%
Site
Selection
Factor
1300 Block Bonnie
Cove Ave
Vacant
Lot 8641014005 Medium Density* PD N Vacant

4.1 2.5 0 0 N/A N Above Moderate 3 8
12 6
10 1
Vacant
Lot 8641014006
Medium
Density* PD N Vacant 1.37 0 0 N/A N Above Moderate 3 4 3 1 Vacant
Lot
8641014039 Medium
Density* PD N Vacant 0.23 0 0 N/A N Above Moderate 3 1 1 1,2b Site Analysis/Notes: Vacant residential land.

Item #5. Page 324
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 531

Page 106 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 325
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 532

Page 107 ends

SITE 51
≈ Location Address AIN General Plan Zoning Rezone
Needed Existing Use Σ Acres Acres Improvement : Land Ratio FAR Year Built In
Last
HE
Income
Category DU/Acre 100% DU/Acre
Σ DU
100%
Min
DU
80%
Σ
DU
80%
Site
Selection
Factor
Intersection of Route
66 and Compromise
Line Rd
1706 E Route
66 8654001038 Low Medium
Density R-1 N Residential Units

3.72 2.12 0.17 0.03 1922 N
Above
Moderate 6 13
22 10
18 1
1675 Inola St 8654001037 Low Medium
Density R-1 N Residential Units 1.42 0.43 0.05 1950 N
Above
Moderate 6 9 7 1
8654001036
Low Medium
Density R-1 N Vacant 0.18 0 0 N/A N
Above
Moderate 6 1 1 2a,e,f,g
Site Analysis/Notes: Mostly vacant residential land with at least 2 existing residential structures that are over 70+ years old. Currently listed for sale. Potential General Plan amendment and rezone might be needed for a specific housing proposal for the site. Recently housing developer presented a conceptual project to the Planning Commission which would involve a General Plan/Zone change, subdivision, and development plans for a residential condominium project. Current site conditions poorly maintained mostly vacant with many abandoned vehicles and other items.

Item #5. Page 326
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 533

Page 108 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 327
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 534

Page 109 ends

SITE 52
≈ Location Address AIN General Plan Zoning Rezone
Needed Existing Use Σ Acres Acres Improvement : Land Ratio FAR Year Built In
Last
HE
Income
Category DU/Acre 100% DU/Acre
Σ DU
100%
Min
DU
80%
Σ
DU
80%
Site
Selection
Factor
Near intersection of
Zara St E and west
side of Sellers St
between 405 and 451
Sellers St
Vacant
Lot 8660015037 Low Medium Density R-1 N Vacant

1.08 0.28 0 0 N/A N
Above
Moderate 6 2
6 1
5 1
Vacant
Lot 8660015031 Low Medium Density R-1 N Vacant 0.28 0 0 N/A N Above
Moderate 6 2 1 1
Vacant
Lot 8660015027 Low Medium Density R-1 N Vacant 0.52 0 0 N/A N Above
Moderate
6 3 2 1
Site Analysis/Notes: Vacant residential land. Church owned properties. Potential for single- or multi-family developments. Adjacent to mobile home park with apartments across the street.

Item #5. Page 328
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 535

Page 110 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 329
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 536

Page 111 ends

SITE 53
≈ Location Address AIN General Plan Zoning Rezone
Needed Existing Use Σ Acres Acres Improvement : Land Ratio FAR Year Built In
Last
HE
Income
Category DU/Acre 100% DU/Acre
Σ DU
100%
Min
DU
80%
Σ
DU
80%
Site
Selection
Factor
Northwest side of
Foothill Blvd and
Valley Center Ave
135 N Valley Center
Ave 8656008027 Low Density Residential E-5 N
Fraternal
Organization/Club 2.27 2.27 5.7 0.13 1963 N
Above
Moderate 3 7 7 5 5 2a,c,e,f
Site Analysis/Notes: Masonic lodge building. Rarely used and poorly maintained. 3 new houses recently constructed adjacent (South) of site.

Item #5. Page 330
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 537

Page 112 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 331
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 538

Page 113 ends

SITE 54
≈ Location Address AIN General Plan Zoning Rezone
Needed Existing Use Σ Acres Acres Improvement : Land Ratio FAR Year Built In
Last
HE
Income
Category DU/Acre 100% DU/Acre
Σ DU
100%
Min
DU
80%
Σ
DU
80%
Site
Selection
Factor
Northeast corner of
Foothill Blvd and
Citrus Ave
1155 W Foothill
Blvd 8625022903 Medium High Density GA N Church 1.93 1.93 0 0.06 1963 N Above
Moderate 15 29 29 23 23 2a,c,e,f,g
Site Analysis/Notes: Existing church site owner by Citrus College. Mostly vacant and poorly maintained. Located adjacent to Metro Gold light rail APU/Citrus Station. Great potential TOD site due to proximity to Metro and adjacent colleges.

Item #5. Page 332
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 539

Page 114 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 333
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 540

Page 115 ends

SITE 55
≈ Location Address AIN General Plan Zoning Rezone
Needed Existing Use Σ Acres Acres Improvement : Land Ratio FAR Year Built In
Last
HE
Income
Category DU/Acre 100% DU/Acre
Σ DU
100%
Min
DU
80%
Σ
DU
80%
Site
Selection
Factor
Northeast corner of
Bennett Ave and
Underhill Dr
1449 E Bennett
Ave
8656037013 Low Density
Residential E-5 N Vacant

3.82 1.25
0 0 N/A N
Above
Moderate 3 4
11 3
9 1
8656007050 Low Density
Residential E-5 N Two Units 2.57 2.87 0.04 1941 N
Above
Moderate 3 8 6 2a,e,f,g
Site Analysis/Notes: Existing residential equestrian use of land. Property is mostly vacant. Property is currently for sale. Being explored by developers for residential subdivision.

Item #5. Page 334
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 541

Page 116 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 335
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 542

Page 117 ends

SITE 56
≈ Location Address AIN General Plan Zoning Rezone
Needed Existing Use Σ Acres Acres
Improvement :

Land Ratio FAR
Year
Built
In
Last
HE
Income
Category DU/Acre 100% DU/Acre
Σ DU
100%
Min
DU
80%
Σ
DU
80%
Site
Selection
Factor
Glendora Ave in
between Route 66
and Colorado Ave
100 W Route 66 8640005047
Route 66 Specific
Plan
RTE66-
GLG
Y Retail

3.95 0.52 1.51 0.31 1976 N Low Income 30 16
119
12 95
1, 2h
623 S Glendora
Ave
8640005038 RTE66-
GLG
Y Residential 0.18 1.11 0.21 1930 N Low Income 30 5 4
2a, e, f, g,
h
641 S Glendora
Ave 8640005050 RTE66-GLG Y Parking Lot 0.57 0.02 N/A 1970 N Low Income 30 17 14 2a, e, f, g, h 649 S Glendora
Ave 8640005040
RTE66-
GLG Y Single Family 0.15 0.32 0.25 1977 N Low Income 30 5 4 2a, e, f, g,
h
653 S Glendora
Ave
8640005041 RTE66-
GLG
Y Single Family 0.15 0.23 0.14 1947 N Low Income 30 5 4 2a, e, f, g,
h
657 S Glendora
Ave 8640005042 RTE66-GLG Y Single Family 0.15 0.69 0.15 1916 N Low Income 30 5 4 2a, e, f, g,
h
665 S Glendora
Ave 8640005052
RTE66-
GLG Y Single Family 0.22 0.25 0.15 1913 N Low Income 30 7 5 2a, e, f, g,
h
106 E Route 66 8644001046
RTE66-
GLG Y Service Station 0.35 0.2 0.1 1963 N Low Income 30 11 8 2a, e, f, g,
h
614 S Glendora
Ave
8644001049 RTE66-
GLG
Y Professional Office 0.36 2.14 0.38 2001 N Low Income 30 11 9 2a, e, f, g,
h
620 S Glendora
Ave 8644001045 RTE66-GLG Y Professional Office 0.25 1.78 0.26 1986 N Low Income 30 8 6 2a, e, f, h 638 S Glendora
Ave 8644001022
RTE66-
GLG Y Professional Office 0.38 1.69 0.34 1964 N Low Income 30 11 9 2a, e, f, g,
h
650 S Glendora
Ave
8644001023 RTE66-
GLG
Y Single Family 0.19 0.91 0.12 1930 N Low Income 30 6 5 2a, e, f, h 654 S Glendora
Ave 8644001024 RTE66-GLG Y Single Family 0.16 0.49 0.14 1946 N Low Income 30 5 4 2a, e, f, h 662 S Glendora
Ave 8644001025
RTE66-
GLG Y Single Family 0.16 0.16 0.16 1902 N Low Income 30 5 4 2a, e, f, h 670 S Glendora
Ave
8664001050 RTE66-
GLG
Y Single Family 0.16 0.16 0.16 1902 N Low Income 30 5 4 2a, e, f, h Site Analysis/Notes: Site located within ½ mi. of new Metro light rail (L-Line/Gold Line) transit stop being constructed (planned opening 2025). Older commercial and residential. Opportunities for lot consolidation for housing or mixed use, Less than fair maintenance conditions. HE update will allow residential at a 30 du/acre density with proposed rezone at a previously commercial and residential site.

Item #5. Page 336
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 543

Page 118 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 337
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 544

Page 119 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 338
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 545

Page 120 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 339
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 546

Page 121 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 340
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 547

Page 122 ends

SITE 57
≈ Location Address AIN General Plan Zoning Rezone
Needed Existing Use Σ Acres Acres Improvement : Land Ratio FAR Year Built In
Last
HE
Income
Category DU/Acre 100% DU/Acre
Σ DU
100%
Min
DU
80%
Σ
DU
80%
Site
Selection
Factor
500 Block E Lemon
Ave
539 E Lemon
Ave 8646021004 Medium High Density R-2 N Single Family

0.51 0.17 0.3 0.13 1956 N
Above
Moderate 15 3
8 2
6 2a, e, f
535 E Lemon
Ave 8646021005 Medium High Density R-2 N Single Family 0.34 0.07 0.08 1921 N Above
Moderate 15 5 4 2a, b, e, f
Site Analysis/Notes: Site located within ½ mi. of new Metro light rail (L-Line/Gold Line) transit station being constructed (planned opening 2025). Neighborhood has been transitioning to multi-family with several small developments over the past decade. Units are currently unoccupied, and site is being cleaned up for potential redevelopment. Lot consolidation may be necessary.

Item #5. Page 341
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 548

Page 123 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 342
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 549

Page 124 ends

SITE 58
≈ Location Address AIN General Plan Zoning Rezone
Needed Existing Use Σ Acres Acres Improvement : Land Ratio FAR Year Built In
Last
HE
Income
Category DU/Acre 100% DU/Acre
Σ DU
100%
Min
DU
80%
Σ
DU
80%
Site
Selection
Factor
600 Block E Lemon
Ave
605 E Lemon
Ave 8646022025 Medium High Density R-2 N Single Family 0.3 0.3 0.39 0.11 1937 N Above
Moderate 15 5 5 4 4 2a, e, f, g
Site Analysis/Notes: Site located within 1 mi. of new Metro light rail (L-Line/Gold Line) transit station being constructed (planned opening 2025). Neighborhood has been transitioning to multi-family with several small developments over the past decade. Site is over 80 years old.

Item #5. Page 343
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 550

Page 125 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 344
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 551

Page 126 ends

SITE 59
≈ Location Address AIN General Plan Zoning Rezone
Needed Existing Use Σ Acres Acres Improvement : Land Ratio FAR Year Built In
Last
HE
Income
Category DU/Acre 100% DU/Acre
Σ DU
100%
Min
DU
80%
Σ
DU
80%
Site
Selection
Factor
600 Block E Lemon
Ave
629 E Lemon
Ave 8646023012 Medium High Density R-2 N Two Units

0.68 0.17 1.07 0.21 1957 N
Above
Moderate 15 3
10 2
8 2a, e, f
635 E Lemon
Ave 8646023011 Medium High Density R-2 N Two Units 0.17 1.65 0.21 1957 N Above
Moderate 15 3 2 2a, e, f
639 E Lemon
Ave 8646023010 Medium High Density R-2 N Two Units 0.17 1.64 0.21 1957 N Above
Moderate 15 3 2 2a, e, f
645 E Lemon
Ave 8646023009 Medium High Density R-2 N Two Units 0.17 1.07 0.25 1957 N Above
Moderate 15 3 2 2a, e, f
Site Analysis/Notes: Site located within 1 mi. of new Metro light rail (L-Line/Gold Line) transit station being constructed (planned opening 2025). Neighborhood has been transitioning to multi-family with several small developments over the past decade. Site in less than fair condition with structures all 65+ years old.

Item #5. Page 345
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 552

Page 127 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 346
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 553

Page 128 ends

SITE 60
≈ Location Address AIN General Plan Zoning Rezone
Needed Existing Use Σ Acres Acres Improvement : Land Ratio FAR Year Built In
Last
HE
Income
Category DU/Acre 100% DU/Acre
Σ DU
100%
Min
DU
80%
Σ
DU
80%
Site
Selection
Factor
Northeast corner of
Bonita Ave and Dale
Rd
1762 Dale
Rd 8631013023 Arrow Highway Specific Plan
AHSP
C-BR N
Homes for aged or
others 2.17 2.17 0.27 0.16 1913 N
Above
Moderate 20 43 43 35 35 2a, e, f, g, i
Site Analysis/Notes: Existing convalescent facility zoned for residential. Some onsite buildings upwards of 100 years old. Multiple structures on poorly maintained site currently being marketed for sale for potential new residential development.

Item #5. Page 347
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 554

Page 129 ends

SITE PHOTOS
Item #5. Page 348
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 555

Page 130 ends

LEGEND:
¼ MI.
½ MI.
1 MI. HOUSING ELEMENTS SITE RADIUS MAP NEW GLENDORA METRO L-LINE (GOLD) TRANSIT STATION

TRANSIT STATION LOCATION
Item #5. Page 349
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 556
City of Glendora
2021-2029 Housing Element
Initial Study/Negative
Declaration
November 2021
Community Development Department
116 East Foothill Boulevard
Glendora, CA 91741
Item #5. Page 350
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 557

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
i
I. INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................. I-1 A. INTRODUCTION AND REGULATORY GUIDANCE.................................................................... I-1 B. LEAD AGENCY ........................................................................................................................ I-1 C. PURPOSE AND DOCUMENT ORGANIZATION ........................................................................ I-1 II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST ................................................................................................ II-1 A. PROJECT DESCRIPTION.........................................................................................................II-1 B. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED.........................................................II-9 C. DETERMINATION..................................................................................................................II-9 D. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS....................................................................II-10

1. Aesthetics ...................................................................................................................II-11

2. Agriculture and Forestry Resources............................................................................II-14

3. Air Quality ...................................................................................................................II-16

4. Biological Resources...................................................................................................II-23

5. Cultural Resources......................................................................................................II-27

6. Energy .........................................................................................................................II-29

7. Geology and Soils........................................................................................................II-31

8. Greenhouse Gas Emissions.........................................................................................II-36

9. Hazards and Hazardous Materials..............................................................................II-43

10. Hydrology and Water Quality .....................................................................................II-47

11. Land Use and Planning................................................................................................II-52

12. Mineral Resources......................................................................................................II-54

13. Noise ...........................................................................................................................II-55

14. Population and Housing..............................................................................................II-58

15. Public Services ............................................................................................................II-60

16. Recreation...................................................................................................................II-64

17. Transportation............................................................................................................II-65

18. Tribal Cultural Resources............................................................................................II-67

19. Utilities and Service Systems......................................................................................II-69

20. Wildfire .......................................................................................................................II-72

21. Mandatory Findings of Significance............................................................................II-74 Item #5. Page 351
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 558

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
ii

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1, Regional Location Map................................................................................................................II-2 Figure 2, Location of Sites Inventory .........................................................................................................II-8

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1, Glendora Housing Needs For 2021-2029 Housing Element.........................................................II-4 Table 2, Credits and Remaining RHNA.......................................................................................................II-6 Table 3, Proposed Densities.......................................................................................................................II-6 Table 4, South Coast Air Basin Attainment Status...................................................................................II-17 Table 5, Air Quality Monitoring Data.......................................................................................................II-18 Table 6, Consistency with CARB Scoping Plan Policies and Measures.....................................................II-38 Item #5. Page 352
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 559
I. INTRODUCTION
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
I-1
A. INTRODUCTION AND REGULATORY GUIDANCE
An Initial Study (IS) is conducted by a lead agency to determine if a project may have a significant effect on the environment (CEQA Guidelines Section 15063[a]). If there is substantial evidence that a project may have a significant effect on the environment, an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) must be prepared, in accordance with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15064(a). However, if the lead agency determines the impacts are, or can be reduced to, less than significant, a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) or Negative Declaration (ND) may be prepared instead of an EIR (CEQA Guidelines Section 15070[b]). Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15070, a MND or ND is appropriate when the project’s Initial Study identifies potentially significant effects, but:
a. Revisions to the project plan were made that would avoid or reduce the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur; and
b. There is no substantial evidence that the project, as revised, may have a significant effect on the environment.

This IS prepared by the City of Glendora (including an attached Environmental Checklist form) determined that the proposed project will not have a significant environmental effect, and the preparation of an EIR is not required. No mitigation measures are required; therefore, an ND can be prepared. This IS/ND has been prepared in accordance with Section 15070 of the State California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.

B. LEAD AGENCY
The lead agency is the public agency with primary responsibility over a proposed project. In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15051(b)(1), “the lead agency will normally be the agency with general governmental powers.” The project would be approved and carried out by the City of Glendora. Therefore, based on the criteria described above, the City of Glendora, Community Development Department is the lead agency for the proposed project.

C. PURPOSE AND DOCUMENT OGRANIZATION
The City is proposing to implement the Housing Element 2021-2029 Update (project). The purpose of this IS/ND is to evaluate the potential environmental effects and the document is divided into the following sections:

I. INTRODUCTION
This section provides an introduction and describes the purpose and organization of this document.

Item #5. Page 353
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 560
I. INTRODUCTION
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
I-2
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
This section includes the project background and a detailed description of the project. This section describes the environmental setting for each of the environmental subject areas; evaluates a range of impacts classified as “no impact,” “less than significant impact,” “less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated,” or “potentially significant impact” in response to the environmental checklist and provides an environmental determination for the project.

III. REFERENCES
This section identifies resources used in the preparation of the IS/ND.

Item #5. Page 354
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 561
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-1
A. PROJECT DESCRIPTION

1. Project Title:

City of Glendora Housing Element 2021-2029

2. Lead Agency Name and Address:

City of Glendora
Community Development Department
116 East Foothill Boulevard
Glendora, CA 91741

3. Lead Agency Contact Person and Phone Number:

Jeff Kugel
Community Development Director
[email protected]
(626) 914-8215

4. Project Location:

Glendora, California
County of Los Angeles
The City of Glendora Housing Element 2021-2029 would apply to the entire geographic area located within the boundaries of the City of Glendora (City), located at the base of the San Gabriel Mountains in the eastern San Gabriel Valley, within Los Angeles County. Figure 1, Regional Location Map shows the boundaries of the City within the region.

5. Applicant’s Name and Address:

City of Glendora
Community Development Department
116 East Foothill Boulevard
Glendora, CA 91741

6. General Plan Land Use Designation:

Various, Citywide
The Glendora General Plan provides for a range of land use designations/zones in the City that can accommodate residential units. Multiple residential and specific plan General Plan land use designations within the City provide opportunities for development of housing projects, including:

Hillside Very Low Residential, Low Density Residential, Low/Medium Density Residential. Medium Density Residential, Medium/High Density Residential, High Density Residential, Village Mixed Use, Route 66 Corridor Specific Plan (Town Center Mixed Use, Barranca Gateway, Route 66 Residential Land Use Sub-Districts), Civic Center Area Plan, and Arrow Highway Specific Plan. The Housing Element 2021-2029 Update does not propose to change any particular parcel’s General Plan land use designation.

Item #5. Page 355
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 562
Figure 1
Regional Location Map
Source: Google Maps, 2021
Sierra Madre Ave
Foothill Blvd
Historic Rt 66
Gladstone St
Arrow Hwy
Juanita Ave
Grand Ave
Glendora Ave
Lone Hill Ave
Amelia Ave
BarrancaAve
Citrus Ave
Valley Center Ave
Scale (Miles)
0 1 2 City of Glendora Boundary
Item #5. Page 356
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 563
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-3

7. Zoning Designation:

Various, Citywide
Multiple residential and specific plan land use designations within the City provide opportunities for development of housing projects at various densities. Residential uses are permitted in the following zones: R-1 (Single Family Residential); RHR (Rural Hillside Residential); E-3 through -7(Single Family Estate); R-2 (Restricted Multiple-Family Residential); R-3 (Multiple-Family Residential); LGA (Limited Garden Apartment); GA (Garden Apartment); PR (Planned Redevelopment); and Grand-Foothill multifamily residential overlay zone.

Residential uses are allowed in the Route 66 Specific Plan in the Town Center Mixed Use (TCMU), Barranca Gateway (BG), and Route 66 Residential (CRR) zoning designations. Residential uses are allowed in the Civic Center Area Plan T-4 Village Edge, T-5 Village Core, and T-5A Village Transition zoning designations. Residential uses are also allowed in the Arrow Highway Specific Plan in the Arrow Highway Specific Plan AHSP C-HR Corridor High Density Residential, AHSP CR-3 Corridor Medium High Density Residential, AHSP CR-BR Corridor Buffer Residential, AHSP C-R2 Corridor Medium High Density, AHSP MU-T Transition Mixed-Use, AHSP MU-CC Commercial Core Mixed Use, and AHSP MUNC Neighborhood Commercial Mixed-Use zoning designations. Lastly, residential uses are allowed in the Arboreta Specific Plan, Civic Center Area Plan, Monrovia Nursery Specific Plan, and Village on the Green Specific Plan.

The Housing Element 2021-2029 proposes restoring the permitted density in the BG Zoning District of the Route 66 Specific Plan from 20 dwelling units per acre and two stories, to 30 dwelling units per acre and increasing the height limit to three stories. In addition, the City would increase allowable density in the Arrow Highway Specific Plan from 25 dwelling units per acre and 2-3 stories, to 30 dwelling units per acre and three stories.

8. Description of Project:

The project is the adoption and implementation of the Glendora Housing Element 2021-2029 (project). The Glendora Housing Element consists of the following major components:
• Introduction: An overview of the purpose and contents of the Housing Element (Section 1); • Housing Needs Assessment: An analysis of the demographic and housing characteristics and trends (Section 2);
• Housing Constraints: A review of potential market, governmental, and environmental constraints to meeting the identified housing needs (Section 3); • Housing Resources: An evaluation of resources available to address housing goals (Section 4); • Housing Plan: A statement of the Housing Plan to address the identified housing needs, including housing goals, policies and programs (Section 5).

Background
The City of Glendora completed an update of its General Plan (called the Glendora Community Plan 2025) in 2006. The City's adopted General Plan is currently comprised of the following seven required elements: (1) Land Use Element; (2) Circulation Element; (3) Conservation Element; (4) Open Space/Recreation Element; (5) Safety Element; (6) Noise Element; and (7) Housing Element.

Item #5. Page 357
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 564
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-4
The Housing Element is concerned with specifically identifying ways in which the housing needs of the existing and future resident population can be met. This Housing Element covers the planning period of October 15, 2021 through October 15, 2029, and identifies strategies and programs that focus on:
• Conserving and improving existing affordable housing; • Providing adequate housing sites;
• Assisting in the development of affordable housing;
• Removing governmental and other constraints to housing development; and • Promoting equal housing opportunities.

Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA)
State Housing Element law requires that a local jurisdiction accommodate a share of the region’s projected housing needs for the planning period. This share, called the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA), is important because State law mandates that jurisdictions provide sufficient land to accommodate a variety of housing opportunities for all economic segments of the community.

Compliance with this requirement is measured by the jurisdiction’s ability in providing adequate land to accommodate the RHNA. The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), as the regional planning agency, is responsible for allocating the RHNA to individual jurisdictions within the region.

The RHNA is distributed by income category. For the 2021 Housing Element update, the City of Glendora is allocated a RHNA of 2,276 units. These units are distributed by income category as shown Table 1, Glendora Housing Needs for 2021-2029 Housing Element. The RHNA includes a fair share adjustment which allocates future (construction) need by each income category in a way that meets the State mandate to reduce the over-concentration of lower income households in one community or areas within the region.

Table 1
Glendora Housing Needs for 2021-2029 Housing Element
Income Category (% of County AMI) Number of Units Percent Extremely Low (30% or less) 1 368 16%
Very Low (31 to 50%) 1 367 16%
Low (51 to 80%) 368 17%
Moderate (81 to 120%) 388 17%
Above Moderate (Over 120%) 767 34%
Total 2,276 100% 1 The Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) does not include the extremely low income category.

However, State law requires that the jurisdiction project the housing needs for extremely low income households. Two approaches for estimating that future need are offered under State law – an even split of the very low income RHNA into extremely low and very low incomes; or a proportional split based on data on income distribution in the City.

Source: City of Glendora, 2021-2029 Housing Element, July 2021.

This income distribution includes an “impaction correction” factor to allocate a higher proportion of lower income households to Glendora than the regional average to balance the income distribution across the region. The City must ensure the availability of residential sites at adequate densities and appropriate development standards to accommodate these units.

Item #5. Page 358
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 565
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-5
It is important to note that local government are not required to build housing or financially subsidize the development of new housing. However, cities are responsible to ensure that adequate sites are available during the planning period that are adequate to accommodate housing at the designated affordability levels.

Anticipated Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs)
New State laws passed since 2017 have substantially relaxed the development standards and procedures for the construction of Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs). As a result, the City has seen an increase in ADU activities in the community, increasing from 8 units in 2018, 15 units in 2019, and 27 units permitted in 2020. Based on this upward trend, the City has permitted 18 ADUs in 2021 as of July 2021. In 2020, the City updated its Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) Ordinance, resulting in significantly increased ADU interests. This Housing Element also includes a program to facilitate the development ADUs. For the purpose of RHNA credits, the City assumes 20 ADUs annually for a total of 160 ADUs over the eight-year planning period of the Housing Element. This Housing Element also includes a program to facilitate and monitor the development of ADUs to ensure the City is meeting its anticipated goal.

Following the SCAG Regional Accessory Dwelling Unit Affordability Analysis, the City assumed the following affordability distribution for ADUs:
• 108 Lower Income
• 3 Moderate Income
• 49 Above Moderate
Pending Projects
The City currently has 84 units that either have been approved or are in the entitlement process.

These units are credited towards the City’s above moderate income RHNA. The following projects have been identified:
• 531 and 555 E. Arrow Highway – Currently in review for entitlement and will provide 33 above moderate income units
• 905 E. Arrow Highway – Approved project with 16 above moderate income units • 1121 and 1123 E. Arrow Highway – Currently in review for entitlement and will provide 19 above moderate income units
• 501 Route 66 – Approved with 8 above moderate residential townhomes • 1620 South Glendora Blvd – Approved with 8 above moderate multi-family rental units Credits and Remaining RHNA
For 6th cycle Housing Element update, the City of Glendora is allocated a RHNA of 2,276 units. The City will credit anticipated ADUs and pending projects towards the overall RHNA number. As shown in Table 2, Credits and Remaining RHNA, the City has a remaining RHNA as follows: 1,013 low income units, 385 moderate income units, and 634 above moderate income units.

Item #5. Page 359
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 566
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-6
Table 2
Credits and Remaining RHNA
Lower Moderate Above
Moderate Total
RHNA 1,121 388 767 2,276
Credits 108 3 133 244
ADU 108 3 49 160
Pending Projects 0 0 84 84
Remaining RHNA 1,013 385 634 2,032
Proposed Density Increases
In order to meet the RHNA, the City utilized sites in the Route 66 Corridor Specific Plan, specifically the Town Center Mixed-Use (TCMU), Central Route 66 Residential (CRR), and Barranca Gateway (BG) zoning districts, Arrow Highway Specific Plan (AHSP), Civic Center Area Plan (CCAP) and other scattered sites throughout the City.

To foster additional residential growth and maintain the buffer for the lower income RHNA, the City would restore the permitted density in the BG Zoning District of the Route 66 Specific Plan from 20 dwelling units per acre and two stories, to 30 dwelling units per acre and increase the height limit to three stories. In addition, the City would increase allowable density in the Arrow Highway Specific Plan from 25 dwelling units per acre and 2-3 stories, to 30 dwelling units per acre and three stories.

Table 3, Proposed Densities presents the current densities that the City would be implementing within three years of the Housing Element statutory deadline. Figure 2, Location of Sites Inventory shows the location of the sites inventory.

Table 3
Proposed Densities
Route 66 - TCMU Route 66 – CRR Route 66 - BG Arrow Highway Current
Units per Acre 30 30 20 25
Stories Max 3 3 2 2 and 3
Proposed Changes
Units per Acre 30 30 30 30
Stories Max 3 3 3 3
Source: City of Glendora, 2021-2029 Housing Element, July 2021.

Rezoned Sites
On top of restoring/increasing permitted densities, the City is proposing to rezone two sites identified by staff as being feasible for redevelopment based on local knowledge and discussions with owners/developers. Both of these sites are within a ½ mile of the future light rail stop and prior to 2017, both areas permitted housing and mixed-use development. These sites would be rezoned Item #5. Page 360
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 567
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-7
within the three years of the Housing Element statutory deadline. The two sites and their proposed rezoning are as follows:

Route 66/Glendora Site. This 3.67-acre site comprised of 12 parcels is currently in the Glendora Avenue Gateway subdistrict (GLG) of the Route 66 Specific Plan. Based on the location of this site and its original zoning in the Route 66 Specific Plan that allowed residential development, the City is proposing to rezone this site to Route 66 TCMU to permit 30 units per acre consistent with its previous zoning and the adjacent zoning. This site can potentially yield 71 net units for lower income RHNA, conservatively assuming development at 80 percent of the allowable density. This site also has opportunities for lot consolidation for housing or mixed-use. Additionally, this site is within ½ mile of the future Gold Line station.
100 W. Route 66. This almost four-acre property is comprised of 15 parcels and is an underutilized commercial property currently zoned as Route 66 Service Commercial (RSC). This site was chosen as having potential for redevelopment and its location being within a half mile of the future Gold line Station will encourage and facilitate development of housing. The City is proposing to rezone the site to Route 66 TCMU to permit 30 units per acre consistent with surrounding zones. This site has the potential to yield 87 net units for low income RHNA, conservatively assuming development at 80 percent of the allowable density.

Route 66 Corridor Specific Plan Sites
Within the Route 66 Specific Plan there are 21 sites (64 acres) that have been identified as being feasible for development based on staff knowledge of redevelopment potential, developer interest, or site owner interest for selling/redevelopment or being considered for rezoning. The sites have the potential to yield 140 above moderate income units, 402 moderate income units, and 741 lower income units based on net potential and a conservative assumption of development at 80 percent of the allowable density.

Arrow High Specific Plan Sites
Within the Arrow Highway Specific Plan there are 20 sites (36 acres) that have been identified for this sites inventory based on Staff knowledge of redevelopment potential, developer interest, or site owner interest for selling/redevelopment. All of these sites within the Arrow Highway Specific Plan are proposed to increase the allowable density to 30 units per acre. The sites have a potential to yield 101 above moderate income units and 533 lower income units based on net potential and a conservative assumption of development at 80 percent of the allowable density.

Other Vacant and Underutilized Sites
There are also sites identified in the residential sites inventory that are located on vacant and underutilized parcels outside of the Route 66 Corridor Specific Plan and the Arrow Highway Specific Plan areas. These 20 sites (44 acres) were selected based on staff knowledge of redevelopment potential, developer interest, or site owner interest for selling/redevelopment. Collectively, these sites have the potential to accommodate 289 housing units, the vast majority of which (278 units) can be counted towards the City’s above moderate income RHNA based on the allowable density of the parcels. A total of 11 units on one site can be counted towards the moderate income RHNA. All unit calculations were based on existing zoning and a conservative assumption of development at 80 percent of the allowable density.

Item #5. Page 361
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 568
Scale (Miles)
0 1 2
City of Glendora Boundary
Sites Inventory Boundaries
Figure 2
Location of Sites Inventory
Item #5. Page 362
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 569
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-9

9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting:

Various, Citywide
The sites are surrounded by residential (Low, Low/Medium, Medium, Medium/High, and High Density) and specific plan land uses including Route 66 Corridor Specific Plan, Arrow Highway Specific Plan (AHSP), and Civic Center Area Plan (CCAP) land uses.

10. Other Public Agencies Whose Approval Is Required:

The California Department of Housing and Community Development reviews and determines whether the Housing Element Update complies with State of California law. No other approvals by outside public agencies are required.

11. Have California Native American Tribes Traditionally and Culturally Affiliated with the Project Area Requested Consultation Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080.3.1:

The City of Glendora initiated consultation with the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians - Kizh Nation, Gabrieleno/Tongva San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians, Gabrieleno/Tongva Nation, Gabrielino Tongva Indians of California Tribal Council, Gabrielino Tongva Tribe, San Manuel Band of Mission Indians, Santa Rosa Band of Cahuilla Indians, and Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians and their designated tribal representative for their participation in the Housing Element update and requested information regarding tribal cultural resources within the City on July 2, 2021.

B. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED
The environmental factors that would be potentially affected by this project and are mitigated to a less than significant impact are indicated below.
☐ Aesthetics ☐ Agriculture and Forestry Resources ☐ Air Quality ☐ Biological Resources ☐ Cultural Resources ☐ Energy
☐ Geology/Soils ☐ Greenhouse Gas Emissions ☐ Hazards & Hazardous Materials ☐ Hydrology/Water Quality ☐ Land Use/Planning ☐ Mineral Resources ☐ Noise ☐ Population/Housing ☐ Public Services
☐ Recreation ☐ Transportation/Traffic ☐ Tribal Cultural Resources ☐ Utilities/Service Systems ☐ Wildfire ☐ Mandatory Findings of Significance
C. 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 of the incorporated mitigation measures and Item #5. Page 363
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 570
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-10
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
Printed Name Title
D. 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 cited. 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. 2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3) A “Less Than Significant Impact” applies when the proposed project would not result in a substantial and adverse change in the environment. This impact level does not require mitigation measures.
4) “Potentially Significant Impact” is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significant. If there are one or more “Potentially Significant Impact” entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required.
5) “Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated” applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from “Potentially Significant Impact” to a “Less Than Significant Impact.” The initial study must describe the mitigation measures and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level.

Item #5. Page 364
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 571
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-11
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

1. AESTHETICS. Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section 21099 would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including,
but not limited to, trees, rock outcrops, 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 point.) If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning
and other regulations governing scenic quality?
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare
which would adversely affect day or nighttime views
in the area?
Environmental Setting
Scenic Vistas and Scenic Resources
The City’s General Plan does not define any designated scenic vistas or resources in the City. The General Plan includes a Conservation Open Space designation applied to areas that are publicly owned, undeveloped, and that will remain in a natural state. Future improvements or development activities in these areas will be limited to those activities that support the preservation of passive recreational activities, such as soft trails and other facilities supporting passive recreational uses. This designation is intended to protect areas with high scenic value, environmental and habitat sensitivity, sensitive habitats and/or passive recreational facilities. A large portion of this designation exists in the Angeles National Forest within the foothills. The General Plan also includes an Open Space land use designation that includes both private and public lands in the foothills and South Hills.

The General Plan Land Use Element states that the preservation of neighborhood character is a primary means of preserving the character of the community as a whole. The City’s existing neighborhoods are well-established and provide a character and quality that reflect the stability of the community’s residents.

Visual Character
The City of Glendora is an urbanized city with a majority of available flat land developed. Most of the existing residential uses are single-family homes developed in the 1960s through the 1980s when Los Angeles County was experiencing the most residential building permit activity.

Item #5. Page 365
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 572
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-12
Light and Glare
Much of the planning area is developed with established existing sources of light and glare, such as street lights and parking lights, walkway lights, lighted recreational facilities, and light emitted from residential and nonresidential buildings. Open space surrounds the City to the north in the Angeles National Forest. Other areas of the City are adjacent to active urban areas to the west, south, and east. While the City’s single-family residential neighborhoods are generally not subject to substantial night lighting, many commercial areas do experience greater lighting effects.

Regulatory Setting
Regulations exist at state and local levels that guide development and influence the physical form and aesthetic character of the City and include:
• California Scenic Highway Program
• Glendora General Plan
• Glendora Zoning Ordinance, Title 21 Zoning, Appendix 21.B Design Guidelines Checklist Discussion
a) & c) No Impact.

The 2021-2029 Housing Element Update in and of itself does not propose or authorize any projects or development plan. The Housing Element sets forth the City’s policies and detailed programs for meeting existing and future housing needs as determined by the RHNA process, for conserving and enhancing affordable housing, providing adequate housing sites, and for increasing affordable housing opportunities for extremely low, very-low, low and moderate income persons and households. The Housing Element was prepared for consistency with the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance.

Future development will be required to adhere to all city design guidelines and standards including the Zoning Ordinance, General Plan policies, and any additional specific development guidelines for a particular area. The City’s Zoning Ordinance contains development standards for each zoning district, consistent with the land use designations of the General Plan, to ensure quality development in the community.

No sites are proposed in Conservation Open Space or Open Space designated areas. All future projects would be developed on sites that are zoned for residential or mixed-use and commercial areas. No areas currently designated as open space would be converted to urban uses and no development would be permitted to encroach on open space.

All future projects would be treated as individual projects and may be subject to specific environmental analysis. Nevertheless, there are no policies in the Housing Element which either permit or promote development in areas that aren’t currently developed with existing uses. There are no policies or programs in the Housing Element that would directly affect scenic vistas nor any that would degrade the visual character of the City. The project would therefore have no impact.

Item #5. Page 366
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 573
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-13
b) No Impact.

The only scenic highway in the vicinity of Glendora is SR-39, approximately 1 mile west in the City of Azusa.

Therefore, there would be no impact.
d) No Impact.

As previously stated, the 2021-2029 Housing Element Update in itself does not propose or authorize any projects or development plan. Future development would occur in areas that are currently urbanized and commonly experience the impacts of existing light sources. Future development would likely replace existing development and would therefore not introduce additional light and glare impacts. Future development in the City would be required to be designed and constructed in accordance with the Glendora Zoning Ordinance to prevent spillover light effects or the use of materials that would create new glare. Therefore, the Housing Element 2021-2029 Update would have no impact on light and glare.

Mitigation Measures
None required.

Item #5. Page 367
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 574
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-14
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

2. AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or
Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as
shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the
California Resources Agency, to nonagricultural use?
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract?
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forestland (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 forestland or conversion of
forestland 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 nonagricultural use or
conversion of forestland to non-forest use?
Environmental Setting
The City of Glendora is an urban environment designated for residential and commercial use and is essentially built out. There is no land within the City of Glendora designated or zoned for agricultural use, farmland, forest, or timber production nor are there any existing agricultural, farmland, forest or timber production uses. Pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program, the City is designated as Urban and Built Up Land and Non-Agricultural or Natural Vegetation (California Department of Conservation 2018).

Checklist Discussion
a), b), c), d), e) No Impact.

The Housing Element update does not propose or authorize any development. The project would not convert any Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance to a non-agricultural use. No land within the City of Glendora is subject to the Williamson Act contract. As mentioned above, the City of Glendora does not have any land that is designated or zoned for forest use or timber production. Additionally, there are no nearby agricultural sites that would be affected by development within Glendora. The project would have no impact on agricultural or forest resources.

Item #5. Page 368
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 575
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-15
Mitigation Measures
None required.

Item #5. Page 369
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 576
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-16
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

3. AIR QUALITY. Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan?
b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is
nonattainment under an applicable federal or state
ambient air quality standard?
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to
odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of
people?
Environmental Setting
Both the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and the California Air Resources Board (CARB) have established ambient air quality standards for common pollutants. Ambient air quality standards are set to protect public health and are levels of pollutants which represent safe levels that avoid specific adverse health effects. The ambient air quality standards cover what are called “criteria” pollutants because the health and other effects of each pollutant are described in criteria documents. The major criteria pollutants are ozone, carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, and particulate matter. Both federal and state ambient air quality standards apply, as established by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and state air quality agencies (CALEPA for California). California air quality standards are generally more stringent that federal standards.

The City of Glendora is located in the South Coast Air Basin (basin). In Los Angeles County, the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) is the agency responsible for protecting the public health and welfare through the administration of federal and state air quality laws and policies. This regional agency regulates air quality through its permit authority over most types of stationary emission sources and through its planning and review process.

Attainment Designations
Specific geographic areas that do not meet federal air quality standards (National Ambient Air Quality Standards [NAASQS]) or state air quality standards (California Ambient Air Quality Standards [CAAQS]) for a particular air quality pollutant are considered to be “nonattainment” areas for the pollutant. The current federal and state attainment status for the basin is provided in Table 4, Federal and State Air Quality Designations in the South Coast Air Basin.

Item #5. Page 370
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 577
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-17
Table 4
South Coast Air Basin Attainment Status
Pollutant Standard1 Averaging Time Designation2 Attainment Date3 1-Hour
Ozone
NAAQS 1979 1-Hour
(0.12 ppm) Nonattainment (Extreme) 2/6/2023
(not attained)4
CAAQS 1-Hour
(0.09 p pm)
1-Hour
Ozone
NAAQS 1997 8-Hour
(0.08 ppm) Nonattainment (Extreme) 6/15/2024
NAAQS 2008 8-Hour
(0.075 ppm) Nonattainment (Extreme) 7/20/2032
NAAQS 2015 8-Hour
(0.070 ppm) Nonattainment (Extreme) 8/3/2038
CAAQS 8-Hour
(0.070 ppm) Nonattainment Beyond 2032
CO NAAQS 1-Hour (35 ppm) Attainment (Maintenance) 6/11/2007 (attained) CAAQS 8-Hour (9 ppm) Attainment 6/11/2007 (attained)
NO2 6
NAAQS 1-Hour (0.1 ppm) Unclassifiable/Attainment N/A (attained) NAAQS Annual (0.053 ppm) Attainment (Maintenance) 9/22/1998 (attained) CAAQS 1-hour (0.18 ppm)
Annual (0.030 ppm) Attainment -
SO2 7
NAAQS 1-Hour (75 ppb) Designations Pending
(expect Uncl./Attainment) N/A (attained)
NAAQS 24-Hour (0.14 ppm)
Annual (0.03 ppm) Unclassifiable/Attainment 3/19/1979 (attained) PM10
NAAQS 1987 24-Hour
(150 µg/m3) Attainment (Maintenance)8 7/26/2013 (attained) CAAQS 24-Hour (50 µg/m3
)
Annual (20 µg/m3) Nonattainment N/A
PM2.59
NAAQS 2006 24-Hour
(35 µg/m3) Nonattainment (Serious) 12/31/2019
NAAQS 1997 Annual
(15.0 µg/m3) Attainment 8/24/2016
NAAQS 2021 Annual
(12.0 µg/m3) Nonattainment (Serious) N/A
CAAQS Annual
(12.0 µg/m3) Nonattainment 12/31/2015
Lead NAAQS 3-Month Rolling
(0.15 µg/m3)
Nonattainment
(Partial)10 12/31/2015
Notes:

Source: http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/clean-air-plans/air-quality-management-plans/naaqs-caaqs-feb2016.pdf 1 NAAQS = National Ambient Air Quality Standards, CAAQS = California Ambient Air Quality Standards 2 U.S. EPA often only declares Nonattainment areas; everywhere else is listed as Unclassifiable/Attainment or Unclassifiable.
3 A design value below the NAAQS for data through the full year or smog season prior to the attainment date is typically required for attainment demonstration. 4 1-hour O3 standard (0.12 ppm) was revoked, effective June 15, 2005 ; however, the Basin has not attained this standard based on 2008-2010 data and is still subject to anti-backsliding requirements. 5 1997 8-hour O3 standard (0.08 ppm) was reduced (0.075 ppm), effective May 27, 2008; the revoked 1997 O3 standard is still subject to anti-backsliding requirements. 6 New NO2 1-hour standard, effective August 2, 2010; attainment designations January 20, 2012; annual NO2 standard retained.

Item #5. Page 371
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 578
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-18
Table 4
South Coast Air Basin Attainment Status 7 The 1971 annual and 24-hour SO2 standards were revoked, effective August 23, 2010; however, these 1971 standards will remain in effect until one year after U.S. EPA promulgates area designations for the 2010 SO2 1-hour standard. Area designations are still pending, with Basin expected to be designated Unclassifiable /Attainment. 8 Annual PM10 standard was revoked, effective December 18, 2006; 24-hour PM10 NAAQS deadline was 12/31/2006; SCAQMD request for attainment redesignation and PM10 maintenance plan was approved by U.S. EPA on June 26, 2013, effective July 26, 2013.
9 Attainment deadline for the 2006 24-Hour PM2.5 NAAQS (designation effective December 14, 2009) is December 31, 2019 (end of the 10th calendar year after effective date of designations for Serious nonattainment areas). Annual PM2.5 standard was revised on January 15, 2013, effective March 18, 2013, from 15 to 12 µg/m3. Designations effective April 15, 2015, so Serious area attainment deadline is December 31, 2025. 10 Partial Nonattainment designation – Los Angeles County portion of Basin only for near-source monitors. Expect redesignation to attainment based on current monitoring data.

Monitored Air Quality
Included in the SCAQMD’s tasks are the monitoring of air pollution, which it does through operation of a network of ambient air monitoring stations throughout the South Coast region. The purpose of the monitoring stations is to measure ambient concentrations of criteria air pollutants and determine whether the ambient air quality meets state and federal standards, pursuant to the CAAQS and the NAAQS.

The nearest air monitoring station to the project site is the Glendora - Laurel Station (Glendora Station).

The Glendora Station is located at 840 E. Laurel Avenue; however, this location does not provide all ambient weather data. Therefore, additional data was pulled from the SCAQMD historical data for the East San Gabriel Valley (Source Receptor Area 9) for both sulfur dioxide and carbon monoxide to provide the existing levels. Table 5, Air Quality Monitoring Data presents the monitored pollutant levels within the vicinity. However, it should be noted that due to the air monitoring station distance from the project sites, recorded air pollution levels at the air monitoring station reflect with varying degrees of accuracy, local air quality conditions at the project sites.

Table 5
Air Quality Monitoring Data.

Pollutant (Standard)2
Year
2018 2019 2020
Ozone:

Maximum 1-Hour Concentration (ppm) 0.140 0.130 0.173
Days > CAAQS (0.09 ppm) 32 46 76
Maximum 8-Hour Concentration (ppm) 0.104 0.102 0.138
Days > CAAQS/NAAQS (0.070 ppm) 46 58 97
Carbon Monoxide:

Maximum 1-Hour Concentration (ppm) 1.4 1.6 2.4
Days > NAAQS (20 ppm) 0 0 0
Maximum 8-Hour Concentration (ppm) 1.0 1.1 2.0
Days > NAAQS (9 ppm) 0 0 0
Nitrogen Dioxide:

Maximum 1-Hour Concentration (ppm) 0.0552 0.0529 0.0504 Days > NAAQS (0.25 ppm) 0 0 0
Sulfur Dioxide:

Item #5. Page 372
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 579
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-19
Table 5
Air Quality Monitoring Data.

Pollutant (Standard)2
Year
2018 2019 2020
Maximum 1-Hour Concentration (ppm) * * *
Days > CAAQS (0.25 ppm) 0 0 0
Inhalable Particulates (PM10):

Maximum 24-Hour Concentration (µg/m3) 101.7 97.9 227.2
Days > NAAQS (150 µg/m3) 0 0 2
Days > CAAQS (50 µg/m3) * * *
Annual Average ( µg/m3) 28.6 21.8 28.0
Annual > NAAQS (50 µg/m3) Yes Yes Yes
Annual > CAAQS (20 µg/m3) Yes Yes Yes
Ultra-Fine Particulates (PM2.5):

Maximum 24-Hour Concentration ( µg/m3) 84.8 75.1 148.1
Days > NAAQS (35 µg/m3) * * *
Annual Average ( µg/m3) * 11.8 14.9
Annual > NAAQS (15 µg/m3) * * No
Annual > CAAQS (12 µg/m3) * * Yes 1. Source: obtained from https://www.aqmd.gov/home/air-quality/air-quality-data-studies/historical-data-by-year and /or https://www.arb.ca.gov/adam/topfour/topfour1.php
2 CAAQS = California Ambient Air Quality Standard; NAAQS = National Ambient Air Quality Standard; ppm = parts per million 3 * = No data available.

The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a discussion of any inconsistencies between a proposed project and applicable General Plans and Regional Plans (CEQA Guidelines Section 15125). The regional plan that applies to the proposed project includes the SCAQMD Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP). The SCAQMD CEQA Handbook states that "New or amended General Plan Elements (including land use zoning and density amendments), Specific Plans, and significant projects must be analyzed for consistency with the AQMP." Strict consistency with all aspects of the plan is usually not required. A proposed project should be considered to be consistent with the AQMP if it furthers one or more policies and does not obstruct other policies.

Every three (3) years the SCAQMD prepares a new AQMP, updating the previous plan and having a 20- year horizon. On March 23, 2017 CARB approved the 2016 AQMP. The 2016 AQMP is a regional blueprint for achieving the federal air quality standards and healthful air. The 2016 AQMP includes both stationary and mobile source strategies to ensure that rapidly approaching attainment deadlines are met, that public health is protected to the maximum extent feasible, and that the region is not faced with burdensome sanctions if the Plan is not approved or if the NAAQS are not met on time.

Sensitive Receptors
CARB and the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) have identified the following groups of individuals as the most likely to be affected by air pollution: the elderly over 65, children under 14, infants (including in utero in the third trimester of pregnancy), and persons with cardiovascular and chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma, emphysema, and bronchitis. Some land uses are considered more sensitive to air pollution than others due to the types of population groups or activities involved and Item #5. Page 373
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 580
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-20
are referred to as sensitive receptors. Examples of these sensitive receptors are residences, schools, hospitals, and daycare centers.

Regulatory Setting
Regulations exist at federal, state, and local levels with regard to air quality and include:
• Federal Clean Air Act
• California Clean Air Act
• State Implementation Plan
• California Energy Code
• Regional Air Quality Strategy
• South Coast Air Quality Management District Rules and Regulations Checklist Discussion
a) Less Than Significant Impact.

The proposed project is an update to the City of Glendora Housing Element. To meet the RHNA, the Housing Element proposes rezoning two sites and increasing density on two other sites. The Route 66/Glendora site and 100 W. Route 66 sites would be rezoned from GLG of the Route 66 Specific Plan Route 66 TCMU to permit 30 units per acre consistent with its previous zoning and the adjacent zoning.

Additionally, the City would restore the permitted density in the BG Zoning District of the Route 66 Specific Plan from 20 dwelling units per acre and two stories, to 30 dwelling units per acre and increase the height limit to three stories. In addition, the City would increase allowable density in the Arrow Highway Specific Plan from 25 dwelling units per acre and 2-3 stories, to 30 dwelling units per acre and three stories.

As the Housing Element necessitates zoning and density changes on these sites it also requires changes to the City’s Zoning Code and Zoning Map. The increased density of residential units accommodated under the Housing Element is in response to SCAG developing a Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) for the City of Glendora for the City’s 2021-2029 Housing Element planning period. The City’s total RHNA for the 2021-2029 planning period is 2,276 units. To meet the RHNA requirements, the City identified possible housing sites to address Glendora’s RHNA obligation. These identified sites constitute the future development identified in the Housing Element.

As the Housing Element includes zoning amendments and increased residential density at these sites, the estimated population for these sites would be higher than the population forecasted for these sites in the General Plan. Although the Housing Element would result in slightly higher population than those estimated in the General Plan, the increased residential density of the future development of the Housing Element is in response to SCAG forecasts in relation to the City’s RHNA and SCAG’s Regional Council recently approved and fully adopted the Connect SoCal (2020–2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS)). Although the 2016 AQMP does not include the emissions of the additional population growth associated with the Housing Element, as the AQMP is based on population, employment, and VMT in the South Coast Air Basin region as projected by SCAG and operation of the new land uses associated with the Housing Element would not cumulatively contribute to the nonattainment designations of the South Coast Air Basin, the Housing Element is considered to be consistent with the AQMP.

Item #5. Page 374
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 581
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-21
Therefore, the project would have a less than significant impact on implementation of the applicable air quality plan.
b), c) Less Than Significant Impact.

Short-Term (Construction) Emissions
Future development consistent with the General Plan could result in an increase in criteria pollutants during construction activities, such as excavation and grading, exhaust emissions of construction equipment, and the use of typical construction materials such as asphalt and other construction materials that tend to volatilize into the atmosphere.

Information regarding each specific development project accommodated under the Housing Element (such as construction timeline, earthworks information, amount and type of construction equipment etc.) would be needed in order to quantify the level of impact associated with construction activity.

Construction activities associated with the buildout of the future development of the Housing Element are anticipated to occur sporadically over an approximately 9-year period (i.e., 2021-2029) or longer.

Future development would be comprised of multiple smaller development projects, each having its own construction timeline and activities. The individual construction projects would be subject to regulatory measures including Rule 403 for fugitive dust control, Rule 1113 for architectural coatings, and other applicable SCAQMD regulatory measures as well as applicable policies and implementation measures of the General Plan Update. In addition, potential mitigation could be imposed at the project level including extension of construction schedules and/or use of special equipment etc. In addition to compliance with SCAQMD rules, the construction activity associated with each individual project would also be subject to all applicable policies and implementation measures contained in the General Plan Update. Adherence to applicable regulations and policies would contribute to minimizing construction-related criteria air pollutant emission. Additionally, any future project resulting from adoption and implementation of the Housing Element would be required to comply with SCAQMD’s and Glendora’s regulations, which include implementation of dust control measures.

Long-Term (Operational) Emissions
Future residential development would potentially increase population in the City and add sensitive receptors that could be exposed to pollutant concentrations. The potential operational air quality impacts of future residential projects largely would be associated with motor vehicle trips generated by the proposed developments. Since most of the anticipated development sites would result in the replacement of existing development with new housing and mixed-use projects, the increase in the number of vehicle trips is not expected to be significant. The majority of the expected development sites are located along major transportation corridors with existing transit stops. This placement of development sites is intended to encourage transit use and reduce auto dependency. Any minor increase in vehicle trips generated would only marginally increase daily emissions of ozone precursors and particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5) and will likely be below SCAQMD established thresholds for consideration of a significant impact.

Conclusion
The project is the adoption of the City of Glendora Housing Element 2021-2029 Update. Any individual development project would be subject to environmental review pursuant to CEQA and the City’s local procedures to determine if any long-term air quality impacts would occur from the operation of a specific Item #5. Page 375
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 582
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-22
new development. As such, the project would not result in a cumulatively net increase of any criteria pollutant in which the project region is in nonattainment under the federal and state ambient air quality standard. Therefore, the project would have a less than significant impact in the region’s nonattainment criteria pollutants and exposure to sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. d) Less Than Significant Impact.

Short-Term (Construction) Emissions
Future residential development construction activities could result in minor amounts of odor compounds associated with diesel heavy equipment exhaust and architectural coatings. These compounds would be emitted in various amounts at various locations during construction and potentially effect nearby sensitive receptors. However, odors are highest near the source and would quickly dissipate away from the source.

Such odors are temporary and generally occur at magnitudes that would not affect a substantial number of people. Therefore, impacts related to construction-generated odors would be less than significant.

Long-Term (Operational) Emissions
Typical long-term operational characteristics of residential development are not associated with the creation of odors nor anticipated to generate odors affecting a substantial number of people.

Implementation of the Housing Element 2021-2029 would result in possible construction of additional residential units. The Housing Element 2021-2029 would not create uses that, in the long-term operation, would be typically associated with the creation of such odors, nor are they anticipated to generate odors affecting a substantial number of people. Therefore, impacts related to odors generated from residential operations as a result of the Housing Element 2021-2029 would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
None required.

Item #5. Page 376
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 583
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-23
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies, or
regulations, or by the California Department of Fish
and Wildlife or US 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 US Fish and Wildlife Service?
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or
federally protected wetlands a (including, but not
limited to marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through
direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or
other means?
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any
native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species
or with established native resident or migratory
wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native
wildlife nursery sites?
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted habitat
conservation plan, natural community conservation
plan, or other approved local, regional, or state
habitat conservation plan?
Environmental Setting
Glendora can be described by its physical characteristics: the valley and hillside areas. The valley is generally located south of Sierra Madre Avenue, excluding the South Hills. It is characterized by gentle sloping land, which is largely developed. The majority of vegetation in the City is introduced, with some native vegetation consisting of coastal sage scrub and chaparral. Relatively few wildlife species are found in the developed valley areas.

The hillside areas consist of terrain generally exceeding 10 percent average slope and are generally located north of Sierra Madre Avenue, excluding the South Hills. Four vegetative types broadly classified as woodlands, chaparral, coastal sage scrub and freshwater marsh may be found in the hillsides. These areas are composed of native and non-native plant species.

Item #5. Page 377
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 584
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-24
Woodland is present along major drainage courses and on mesic (moist) sites such as canyons and north facing slopes. The composition of the woodland varies depending on elevation, soil, aspect, moisture availability and other factors. Along major drainages, such as in Dalton Canyon, dominant trees include white alder, California sycamore, coast live oak and willows. In many areas, riparian woodland forms a closed-canopy stand with an open understory. Intermittent streams that convey water, primarily only after major storm events, and other mesic sites such as canyons and north facing slopes support woodland dominated by coast live oak, scattered willows and California sycamores and at lower elevations, California black walnut. Understory vegetation is typically dense and often comprised of woody shrubs from the surrounding or nearby chaparral community.

Chaparral occupies hillsides and ridge tops in the higher elevations of the area where slightly more moderate conditions such as deeper soils and more available moisture are present. The slopes above the oak woodlands support mixed chaparral stands. In many locations there is considerable blending of the woodland and shrub communities. In the smaller drier canyons, chaparral shrubs occupy the canyon bottoms, which have no woodland overstory. The chaparral vegetation is dominated by chamise and hoaryleaf ceanothus. Other common shrubs are toyon, holley-leafed cherry, scrub oak, various rhus, and California coffeeberry.

Coastal sage scrub occupies drier slopes and ridges. This plant community is dominated by half shrubs, herbaceous perennials, and annual weeds and grasses. It is lower growing and typically has a more open canopy in comparison to chaparral. Dominant shrubs of the community are typically winter active, avoiding summer drought by shedding their larger leaves. The dominant shrubs are California sagebrush, black sage and white sage. In areas of disturbance by man or fire, large weeds and grasses predominate over the shrubs. Similar to chaparral, coastal sage scrub is subject to fire and has evolved with adaptations to periodic burning.

Open Water/Freshwater Marsh areas occur where dams and debris basins provide artificial conditions for a freshwater marsh environment. The Big Dalton Debris Basin has freshwater marsh habitat. This debris basin typically has water year-round and there is a natural spring north of the basin.

All development in the City is located within the urbanized area. As such little natural vegetation is present in the urbanized area.

Significant wildlife habitats do not typically occur within the urbanized portions of the City. However, the foothills area exists as an extension of the larger habitat area of the San Gabriel Mountains. The South Hills area consists of approximately 400 acres of essentially isolated habitat where no wildlife corridor exists to connect it with other natural areas. However, populations of deer and other wildlife continue, which is evidence that pathways for migration do exist. The San Dimas Canyon/San Antonio Wash and San Gabriel Canyon Significant Environmental Areas (SEA), as mapped by Los Angeles County, are located north and to the east and west in the foothills.

Regulatory Setting
Regulations exist at federal, state, and local levels with regard to biological resources and include:
• Federal Endangered Species Act
• Federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act
• Federal Clean Water Act
Item #5. Page 378
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 585
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-25
• California Endangered Species Act
• California Fish and Game Code
• Natural Community Conservation Planning Act
• Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act
• City of Glendora General Plan
• City of Glendora Zoning Code Title 16, Chapter 16.12
• City of Glendora Urban Forestry Manual
Checklist Discussion
a) b) c) d) Less Than Significant Impact.

Inasmuch as the Housing Element Update could indirectly result in residential development and improvement, the project could result in increased density in residential and mixed-use areas of the City.

However, the City is largely built-out and the City’s General Plan Land Use Element and zoning code focuses residential growth into urbanized portions of the City. Because the areas where potential development may occur have already been disturbed through urban development, no significant changes are anticipated in the diversity or number of species of plants or animals, or in the deterioration of existing wildlife habitat. No riparian habitat, wetlands, wildlife corridors or nurseries would be impacted.

Existing applicable federal, state, and/or local policies would prevent development in areas that support sensitive or special status species, federally protected wetlands, or migration corridors.

Accordingly, adoption of the Housing Element 2021-2029 would have a less than significant impact on biological resources, including candidate, sensitive, or special-status species; riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community; federally protected wetlands a (including, but not limited to marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.); or native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species, corridors, or nurseries. e) Less Than Significant Impact.

The project is the adoption of the City of Glendora Housing Element 2021-2029. The General Plan Housing Element is a policy document that addresses the housing need in the City; no actual development of land is proposed as part of the Housing Element Update. The City does not have a tree preservation ordinance for trees on private property. However, the City does have an Urban Forestry Manual that includes policies and requirements for mitigating the impact of tree removal associated with development projects.

Additionally, Title 16 of the Zoning Code applies to all city-owned property, city right-of-way, city easements, and street parkways. Should any tree trimming or removal be required as a result of projects undertaken from the Housing Element, those projects would be required to comply with the City ordinance related to trees on City property. Therefore, the project would not conflict with tree preservation policies or ordinances and impacts would be less than significant.

Item #5. Page 379
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 586
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-26
f) No Impact.

The City does not have a Habitat Conservation Plan nor Natural Community Conservation Plan. The General Plan Housing Element is a policy document that addresses the housing need in the City; no actual development or rezoning/redesignation of land is proposed as part of the Housing Element As discussed above, the project would not result in the approval of any physical improvements and does not propose any changes non-urbanized areas. The areas of the City identified for potential development sites are located within fully developed, urban settings surrounded by office, commercial, and residential land uses void of native plant or animal life and limited cover and foraging habitat and the project would not significantly impact biological resources. There are no Habitat Conservation Plans or Natural Community Conservation Plans applicable to these areas. Therefore, the project would not conflict with the provisions of an adopted habitat conservation plan, natural community conservation plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan and no impacts would occur.

Mitigation Measures
None required.

Item #5. Page 380
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 587
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-27
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

5. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource pursuant to
Section 15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource pursuant
to Section 15064.5?
c) Disturb any human remains, including those
interred outside of formal cemeteries?
Environmental Setting
The Gabrielino Indians were the first permanent settlement in the area. Artifacts have been found dating back to 6,000 B.C. Glendora as part of a Mexican land grant make to Henry Dalton, a British merchant.

With the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, this land grant became part of the lands of California, ceded to the United States government. Homesteading of the area began in the 1860s and the area was a major agricultural area that produced a variety of fruits, vegetables, and hay. Agriculture evolved in the area to become predominately citrus groves. The City of Glendora was incorporated in 1911. Since the City’s incorporation in 1911, Glendora has evolved from a small community of citrus growers to an urban municipality of over 50,000 residents. A survey conducted in 1992 by the City’s Historic Preservation Committee identified approximately 300 potential historic resources at that time.

The Glendora Historic Landmark and Historic Resource Designations list (Updated 10/29/2018) lists 36 historic landmarks, and one historic resource. The City of Glendora has one designated Historic District covering a residential neighborhood in the vicinity of the Glendora Village. Homes and other structures in the district have been documented pursuant to an historic resource survey conducted in 1995. Alterations to buildings in this area are reviewed by the Planning Commission pursuant to a “Certificate of Appropriateness.”
Regulatory Setting
Regulations exist at federal, state, and local levels with regard to cultural resources and include:
• National Historic Preservation
• National Register of Historic Places
• Federal Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act • California Register of Historic Resources
• CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5
• California Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act • California Public Resources Code Section 5097
• Assembly Bill 52
• Senate Bill 18
Item #5. Page 381
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 588
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-28
• Glendora General Plan Historic Preservation Element
• Glendora Zoning Code Title 21 Zoning, Chapter 21.03.050 Historic Preservation Checklist Discussion
a), b) Less Than Significant Impact.

The Housing Element is a General Plan policy document that addresses housing need in the City. The Housing Element Update does not propose or authorize any specific development and would not result in physical alterations or improvements. Future development would occur in urban areas that are currently developed. It is unknown if or when any development would occur on the sites. Therefore, buildings that are not considered historic resources at this time, would need to be evaluated to determine if any are historic resources. It is unknown if there are any archaeological resources on the sites, which are located on previously developed and disturbed areas. In the unlikely event that future development does disturb archaeological resources, compliance with state regulations pertaining to discovery of archaeological resources would ensure that impacts are avoided. The project would result in a less than significant impact. c) Less Than Significant Impact.

The 2021-2029 Housing Element is a policy document and does not propose, permit, nor authorize any development. Future residential uses to meet the RHNA demand would be located in areas that are entirely urbanized and have experienced past grading or excavation. There are no specific development projects proposed for the project that would include excavation or grading. In the unlikely event that future development does disturb human remains, compliance with state regulations pertaining to discovery of human remains would ensue. The project would result in a less than significant impact.

Mitigation Measures
None required.

Item #5. Page 382
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 589
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-29
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

6. ENERGY. Would the project:
a) Result in potentially significant environmental
impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary
consumption of energy resources, during project
construction or operation?
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for
renewable energy or energy efficiency?
Environmental Setting
Electricity
Electricity is provided to the City by Southern California Edison (SCE). SCE provides electric power to more than 15 million persons, within a service area encompassing approximately 50,000 square miles. SCE derives electricity from varied energy resources including: fossil fuels, hydroelectric generators, nuclear power plants, geothermal power plants, solar power generation, and wind farms. SCE also purchases from independent power producers and utilities, including out‐of‐state suppliers.

Natural Gas
Natural gas is provided to the City by Southern California Gas (SoCalGas).

Regulatory Setting
Regulations exist at federal, state, and regional levels with regard to energy and include:
• Federal Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) Standards • Federal Energy Independence and Security Act
• California Building Energy Efficiency Standards (Title 24, Part 6) • California Green Building Standards (Title 24, Part 11) • California’s Renewable Portfolio Standard
• Senate Bill 350
• Senate Bill 100
• Assembly Bill 32 (California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006) and Senate Bill 32 • Assembly Bill 1493 (Pavley I)
• Executive Order S-1-07 (California Low Carbon Fuel Standard) • California Air Resources Board:
• Advanced Clean Car Regulation
• Airborne Toxic Control Measure to Limit Diesel-Fueled Commercial Motor Vehicle Idling • Regulation to Reduce Emissions of Diesel Particulate Matter, Oxides of Nitrogen, and other Criteria Pollutants from In-Use Heavy-Duty Diesel-Fueled Vehicles • Sustainable Communities Strategy (SB 375)
Item #5. Page 383
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 590
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-30
• Assembly Bill 758
• Senate Bill 1389
• California Environmental Quality Act
Checklist Discussion
a), b) Less Than Significant Impact.

The project is the adoption of the City of Glendora Housing Element 2021-2029 Update. The General Plan Housing Element is a policy document that addresses the housing need in the City; no actual development is proposed as part of the Housing Element. The project would not directly result in the approval of any physical improvements. Therefore, no direct consumption of energy will occur. Inasmuch as Housing Element could indirectly result in residential development and improvement, such development would be infill development on sites that currently consume energy. In general, infill and redevelopment results in more efficient consumption of electrical and natural gas energy as new structures would be constructed in accordance with current energy regulations, such as Title 24 standards and applicable CALGreen requirements which are stricter than previous, earlier regulations.

The City adopted a Green Building Code that took effect on January 1, 2020, which introduces sustainable construction practices in planning, design, energy, resource and water efficiency, material conservation and environmental quality. Furthermore, the City allows mixed-use development in commercial zones and within residential zones with the various mixed use districts. Policies and programs of this Housing Element would encourage and facilitate the redevelopment of underutilized residential and commercial sites within the City, including along primary transit corridors. Mixed-use residential development that is both pedestrian- and transit-oriented conserves energy by reducing the number of vehicular trips and efficient use of land and construction materials.

Furthermore, in accordance with state, regional, and local plans and polices, infill development sites including those located in close proximity to transit, would reduce vehicle miles traveled resulting in a reduction in the consumption of petroleum-based fuels. Therefore, future development would not be expected to consume energy in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary way. As such, adoption of the Housing Element 2021-2029 would not conflict with or obstruct plans for renewable energy or energy efficiency.

Accordingly, impacts would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
None required.

Item #5. Page 384
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 591
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-31
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

7. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project:
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning map, issued by the
State Geologist for the area or based on other
substantial evidence of a known fault?
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?
Environmental Setting
Faulting and Seismicity
One major fault zone is located within the City of Glendora. This zone is known as the Sierra Madre Fault Zone, which runs along the southern margin of the San Gabriel Mountains and is related to the Cucamonga Fault to the east and San Fernando Fault Zone to the west. In addition, to these faults, several other faults are located within the region that could have an impact on the City. The San Andreas Fault is Item #5. Page 385
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 592
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-32
approximately 20 miles northeast of the City, and is considered the most seismically active fault in the southern California region.

Earthquakes that could affect the City would most likely originate from the Sierra Madre, Cucamonga, or San Andreas Fault Zones. These faults are close enough in proximity or expected to generate strong enough shaking that could affect the City. Geologic conditions within the foothill portions of the City could be impacted more severely due to the steep topography within this portion of the City and the relative instability of some of the geologic units in this portion of the City. The level of seismicity in Glendora, both as to maximum credible earthquake intensity and likely earthquake occurrences, is considered to be approximately the same as for the Los Angeles Basin.

Terrain and Soil Conditions
Two predominant terrain types are located within Glendora: alluvial fan and foothill. The alluvial fan portion of the City is characterized by gently to moderately sloping areas within the City where a vast majority of urban development has already occurred. The foothill portion of the City is characterized by moderate to very steep hillsides predominantly located along the northern boundary adjacent to the Angeles National Forest. In addition, a small area known as “South Hills” located in the southern portion of the City is also characterized by foothill terrain.

Several landslides have been mapped within the hillsides located in severely faulted and broken up. These landslides are located within bedrock units that have been severely faulted and broken up. Areas susceptible to earthquake induced landslides are located predominately in the foothill areas and South Hills.

Available data indicates that groundwater levels beneath the City range between 100 to 150 feet deep.

However, certain locations however have shallow groundwater conditions and could be susceptible to liquefaction. These areas are located near Big and Little Dalton Canyons, near the western border of the City (near Citrus Avenue and the Metro Line), and near the intersection of I-210 and SR-57.

Regulatory Setting
Regulations exist at state and local levels with regard to geology and soils and include:
• California Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act • California Seismic Hazards Mapping Act
• California Building Code
• Glendora Building Code
• Glendora General Plan Safety Element
Checklist Discussion
a.i-ii) Less Than Significant Impact.

Item #5. Page 386
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 593
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-33
Indirect impacts could occur through potential future development. The Housing Element includes an inventory of sites that are adequate to accommodate the City’s assigned share of regional housing need, but it does not propose development projects. As the areas of the City zoned for residential or commercial land use are essentially built-out, all future development will be infill and/or replacement of existing uses.

As southern California is seismically active, potential impacts associated with seismic hazards, including rupture of a fault, strong seismic shaking and seismic-related ground failure currently exist. Earthquakes that could affect the City would most likely originate from the Sierra Madre, Cucamonga, or San Andreas Fault Zones. These faults are close enough in proximity or expected to generate strong enough shaking that could affect the City. As future development would only occur on sites currently or previously developed, impacts resulting from potential construction would be the same as under current conditions.

The General Plan addresses geology and soils in the Safety Element, and the City has adopted the California Building Code that includes provisions for construction in seismically active areas, and on different types of soils. The level of seismicity in Glendora, both as to maximum credible earthquake intensity and likely earthquake occurrences, is considered to be approximately the same as for the Los Angeles Basin. Adherence to regulatory codes, such as Uniform Building Code (UBC) and California Building Code (CBC), would ensure that all new development would be built to adequately withstand strong seismic ground shaking through proper engineering and design. Depending on location and scope, may be required to prepare geologic reports to address potential geologic impacts associated with the development of the site. The City ensures compliance with development requirements at the time of building permits are issued.

Neither adoption of the Housing Element update nor any future development within the urban/developed core would result in potential impacts associated with seismic hazards that don’t currently exist.

Therefore, impacts related to geology and soil, such as faulting, groundshaking, and soil instability would be less than significant.
a.iii) Less than Significant Impact.

Strong seismic ground shaking could result in liquefaction of poorly consolidated and saturated soils.

Liquefaction occurs when water-saturated sediments are subjected to extended periods of shaking. The Safety Element of the Glendora General Plan states that groundwater levels beneath the City range between 100 to 150 feet deep and have historically gotten lower as more ground water is pumped.

Although the Housing Element itself does not propose, permit nor authorize any development, meeting the required housing needs would require future development. Adherence to regulatory codes, such as UBC and CBC, would ensure new structures be built to adequately withstand liquefaction or ground failure associated with strong seismic ground shaking through proper engineering and design. This would limit the potential impact to less than significant.
a.iv) No Impact.

The project will not result in the approval of any physical improvements. The opportunity sites are all located in areas that are predominately flat. Therefore, the potential for seismically-induced landslides to occur is low. Though landslides in the urban area are unlikely, future development in the City would be required to adhere to all applicable UBC and CBC standards therefore, therefore there would be no impact.

Item #5. Page 387
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 594
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-34
b) Less than Significant Impact.

The proposed project is the adoption of the Housing Element update which in and of itself does not authorize any future development. Moreover, soil erosion or loss of topsoil would generally not occur as the City is primarily built out. No specific development is proposed, and no changes to policies resulting in increased erosion would occur. Continued adherence to the standards of the existing CBC and compliance with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit and Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) requirements, as well as implementation of best management practices, would limit impacts related to soil erosion. Additionally, all future development will be required to implement Best Management Practices (BMPs) for construction activities as specified by the California Storm Water Best Management Practices Handbook and/or the City’s Storm Water BMP Manual. The BMPs include measures guiding the management and operation of construction sites to control and minimize the volume of surface runoff. These measures address procedures for controlling erosion and sedimentation and managing all aspects of the construction process. All development projects must comply with all City, state, and federal standards pertaining to stormwater run-off and erosion. As such, impacts would be less than significant related to erosion. c), d) Less than Significant Impact.

It is unlikely that a new structure on a previously or currently occupied site designated for urban use would experience unstable conditions that were not previously encountered. Future risks would be similar those that currently exist.

The Safety Element Policy S-1 states that no development should proceed until geo-technical investigations and recommendations are completed concerning potential soils, geologic, seismic and/or flood hazards and to determine which land uses (if any) are appropriate for the site, and to determine what measures could be undertaken to reduce risks to life and property. Proper engineering and adherence to required building standards, such as the UBC and CBC should ensure that impacts would be less than significant.
e) No Impact.

The opportunity sites identified for potential future development supported by the Housing Element are all located within urban sites within the City. The City, including the opportunity sites are served by existing sewer infrastructure. No septic tanks would be required and no impact would occur. f) Less than Significant Impact.

As previously stated, the General Plan Housing Element is a policy document that addresses housing need in the City; no actual development is proposed as part of the Housing Element. Therefore, its adoption would not, in itself, impact paleontological resources. Future development would be constructed on infill sites or other sites that are currently occupied with structures and have previously been graded. Although future development would not likely disturb paleontological resources, geotechnical evaluations should be Item #5. Page 388
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 595
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-35
conducted if redevelopment or construction would require deeper excavation than current conditions. As such, impacts would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
None required.

Item #5. Page 389
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 596
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-36
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

8. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. Would the project:
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either
directly or indirectly, that may have a significant
impact on the environment?
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions
of greenhouse gases?
Environmental Setting
Global temperatures are moderated by naturally occurring atmospheric gases. These gases are commonly referred to as greenhouse gases (GHGs) because they function like a greenhouse, allowing solar radiation (sunlight) into the Earth’s atmosphere but prevent heat from escaping, thus warming the Earth’s atmosphere. GHGs, as defined under California’s Assembly Bill (AB) 32, include carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6). GHGs are emitted by natural processes and human (anthropogenic) activities.

Anthropogenic GHG emissions are primarily associated with (1) the burning of fossil fuels during motorized transport, electricity generation, natural gas consumption, industrial activity, manufacturing, and other activities; (2) deforestation; (3) agricultural activity; and (4) solid waste decomposition. GHG emissions from human activities are the most significant driver of observed climate change since the mid20th century.1 Global climate change refers to changes in average climatic conditions over the entire Earth, including temperature, wind patterns, precipitation, and storms.

Regulatory Setting
Regulations exist at federal, state, regional, and local levels with regard to GHGs and include:
• Federal Clean Air Act
• Light Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emissions Standards and Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards
• California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 6
• California Green Building Standards Code
• Executive Order S-3-05
• Assembly Bill 32 – Global Warming Solution Act of 2006 • Senate Bill 375
• Senate Bill 743
• Senate Bill 97
1 United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis, Working Group I Contribution to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2013.

Item #5. Page 390
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 597
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-37
• Executive Order B-30-15
• Senate Bill 32 and Assembly Bill 197
• Assembly Bill 1493 – Vehicular Emissions of Greenhouse Gases • Assembly Bill 341
• Executive Order S-01-07
• Senate Bill 350
• Senate Bill 100
• California Air Resources Board: Scoping Plan
Checklist Discussion
a) Less Than Significant Impact.

The project is the adoption of the City of Glendora Housing Element 2021-2029 Update. The General Plan Housing Element is a policy document that addresses the housing need in the City; no actual development is proposed as part of the Housing Element. The project would not result in the approval of any physical improvements. The Housing Element includes an inventory of sites that are adequate to accommodate the City’s assigned share of regional housing need, but it does not propose development projects. Inasmuch as Housing Element could indirectly result in residential development and improvement, the project could result in GHG emissions from construction activities, increased vehicle use, energy consumption, natural gas combustion, water usage (i.e., water transport energy consumption), and other building sources. Such emissions would incrementally contribute to the global GHG levels.

However, since the project would not directly result in the approval of any physical improvements, no direct generation of greenhouse gases would occur. Inasmuch as Housing Element could indirectly result in residential development and improvement, such development would be infill development on sites that currently generate greenhouse gases. In general, infill and redevelopment results in fewer greenhouse gases as new structures would be constructed in accordance with current energy regulations, such as Title 24 standards and applicable CALGreen requirements which are stricter than previous, earlier regulations.

Furthermore, the City allows mixed-use development in commercial zones and within residential zones with the various mixed use districts. Policies and programs of this Housing Element would encourage and facilitate the redevelopment of underutilized residential and commercial sites within the City, including along primary transit corridors. Mixed-use residential development that is both pedestrian- and transitoriented conserves energy and reduces greenhouse gases by reducing the number of vehicular trips and efficient use of land and construction materials.

Accordingly, future residential development supported by the Housing Element Update will be required to implement policies and programs that reduce GHG emissions through more energy efficient residential buildings sited proximate to transit opportunities. Therefore, the project will not generate significant greenhouse gas emissions or conflict with greenhouse gas plans and impacts would be less than significant.

Item #5. Page 391
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 598
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-38
b) Less Than Significant Impact.

The Housing Element would have the potential to conflict with any applicable plan, policy or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs. The Housing Element’s consistency with applicable plans is discussed below.

CARB Scoping Plan Consistency
In November 2017, CARB released the 2017 Scoping Plan. This Scoping Plan incorporates, coordinates, and leverages many existing and ongoing efforts and identifies new policies and actions to accomplish the State’s climate goals, and includes a description of a suite of specific actions to meet the State’s 2030 GHG limit. In addition, Chapter 4 provides a broader description of the many actions and proposals being explored across the sectors, including the natural resources sector, to achieve the State’s mid and longterm climate goals.

Guided by legislative direction, the actions identified in the 2017 Scoping Plan reduce overall GHG emissions in California and deliver policy signals that will continue to drive investment and certainty in a low carbon economy. The 2017 Scoping Plan builds upon the successful framework established by the Initial Scoping Plan and First Update, while identifying new, technologically feasible, and cost-effective strategies to ensure that California meets its GHG reduction targets in a way that promotes and rewards innovation, continues to foster economic growth, and delivers improvements to the environment and public health, including in disadvantaged communities. The Plan includes policies to require direct GHG reductions at some of the State’s largest stationary sources and mobile sources. These policies include the use of lower GHG fuels, efficiency regulations, and the Cap-and Trade Program, which constrains and reduces emissions at covered sources.

As the latest, 2017 Scoping Plan builds upon previous versions, project consistency with applicable strategies of both the 2008 and 2017 Plan are assessed in Table 6. As shown in Table 6, the future development accommodated in the Housing Element is consistent with the applicable strategies of the CARB Scoping Plan and would result in a less than significant impact.

Table 6
Consistency with CARB Scoping Plan Policies and Measures 2008 Scoping Plan Measures to Reduce Greenhouse
Gas Emissions Project Compliance with Measure
California Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas
Standards – Implement adopted standards and
planned second phase of the program. Align zeroemission vehicle, alternative and renewable fuel and vehicle technology programs with long-term climate
change goals.

Consistent. These are CARB enforced standards;
vehicles that access the future development sites of
the Housing Element that are required to comply with
the standards will comply with the strategy.

Energy Efficiency – Maximize energy efficiency
building and appliance standards; pursue additional
efficiency including new technologies, policy, and
implementation mechanisms. Pursue comparable
investment in energy efficiency from all retail
providers of electricity in California.

Consistent. The future development projects
accommodated under the Housing Element will be
required to comply with the current Title 24
standards.

Low Carbon Fuel Standard – Develop and adopt the
Low Carbon Fuel Standard.

Consistent. These are CARB enforced standards;
vehicles that access the future development sites of
Item #5. Page 392
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 599
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-39
Table 6
Consistency with CARB Scoping Plan Policies and Measures 2008 Scoping Plan Measures to Reduce Greenhouse
Gas Emissions Project Compliance with Measure
the Housing Element that are required to comply with
the standards will comply with the strategy.

Vehicle Efficiency Measures – Implement light-duty
vehicle efficiency measures.

Consistent. These are CARB enforced standards;
vehicles that access the future development sites of
the Housing Element that are required to comply with
the standards will comply with the strategy.

Medium/Heavy-Duty Vehicles – Adopt medium and
heavy-duty vehicle efficiency measures.

Consistent. These are CARB enforced standards;
vehicles that access the future development sites of
the Housing Element that are required to comply with
the standards will comply with the strategy.

Green Building Strategy – Expand the use of green
building practices to reduce the carbon footprint of
California’s new and existing inventory of buildings.

Consistent. The California Green Building Standards
Code (proposed Part 11, Title 24) was adopted as part
of the California Building Standards Code in the CCR.

Part 11 establishes voluntary standards, that are
mandatory in the 2019 edition of the Code, on
planning and design for sustainable site development,
energy efficiency (in excess of the California Energy
Code requirements), water conservation, material
conservation, and internal air contaminants. The
future development accommodated in the Housing
Element will be subject to these mandatory standards.

High Global Warming Potential Gases – Adopt
measures to reduce high global warming potential
gases.

Consistent. CARB identified five measures that reduce
HFC emissions from vehicular and commercial
refrigeration systems; vehicles that access the future
development sites of the Housing Element that are
required to comply with the measures will comply
with the strategy.

Recycling and Waste – Reduce methane emissions at
landfills. Increase waste diversion, composting, and
commercial recycling. Move toward zero-waste.

Consistent. The state is currently developing a
regulation to reduce methane emissions from
municipal solid waste landfills. The future
development of the Housing Element will be required
to comply with City programs and regulations related
to solid waste, which comply, with the 75 percent
reduction required by 2020 per AB 341.

Water – Continue efficiency programs and use
cleaner energy sources to move and treat water.

Consistent. The future development projects
accommodated under the Housing Element will be
required to comply with all applicable City ordinances
and CAL Green requirements.
2017 Scoping Plan Recommended Actions to Reduce
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Project Compliance with Recommended Action
Implement Mobile Source Strategy: Further increase
GHG stringency on all light-duty vehicles beyond
existing Advanced Clean Car regulations.

Consistent. These are CARB enforced standards;
vehicles that access the future development sites of
the Housing Element that are required to comply with
the standards will comply with the strategy.

Implement Mobile Source Strategy: At least 1.5
million zero emission and plug-in hybrid light-duty
electric vehicles by 2025 and at least 4.2 million zero Consistent. These are CARB enforced standards;
vehicles that access the future development sites of
Item #5. Page 393
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 600
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-40
Table 6
Consistency with CARB Scoping Plan Policies and Measures 2008 Scoping Plan Measures to Reduce Greenhouse
Gas Emissions Project Compliance with Measure
emission and plug-in hybrid light-duty electric
vehicles by 2030.
the Housing Element that are required to comply with
the standards will comply with the strategy.

Implement Mobile Source Strategy: Innovative Clean
Transit: Transition to a suite of to-be-determined
innovative clean transit options. Assumed 20 percent
of new urban buses purchased beginning in 2018 will
be zero emission buses with the penetration of zeroemission technology ramped up to 100 percent of new sales in 2030. Also, new natural gas buses,
starting in 2018, and diesel buses, starting in 2020,
meet the optional heavy-duty low-NOX standard.

Consistent. These are CARB enforced standards;
vehicles that access the future development sites of
the Housing Element that are required to comply with
the standards will comply with the strategy.

Implement Mobile Source Strategy: Last Mile
Delivery: New regulation that would result in the use
of low NOX or cleaner engines and the deployment of
increasing numbers of zero-emission trucks primarily
for class 3-7 last mile delivery trucks in California. This measure assumes ZEVs comprise 2.5 percent of new
Class 3–7 truck sales in local fleets starting in 2020, increasing to 10 percent in 2025 and remaining flat
through 2030.

Consistent. These are CARB enforced standards;
vehicles that access the future development sites of
the Housing Element that are required to comply with
the standards will comply with the strategy.

Implement SB 350 by 2030: Establish annual targets
for statewide energy efficiency savings and demand
reduction that will achieve a cumulative doubling of
statewide energy efficiency savings in electricity and
natural gas end uses by 2030.

Consistent. The future development projects
accommodated under the Housing Element will be
required to comply with the current Title 24
standards.

By 2019, develop regulations and programs to
support organic waste landfill reduction goals in the
SLCP and SB 1383.

Consistent. The future development of the Housing
Element will be required to comply with City programs
and regulations related to solid waste, which comply,
with the 75 percent reduction required by 2020 per
AB 341.

Notes:
1 Source: CARB Scoping Plan (2008 and 2017)
Executive Orders S-03-05 and B-30-15
The future development accommodated under the Housing Element is consistent with the State’s Executive Orders S-3-05 and B-30-15, which are orders from the State’s Executive Branch for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions. These strategies call for developing more efficient land-use patterns to match population increases, workforce, and socioeconomic needs for the full spectrum of the population. The project includes elements of smart land use as it is the re-zoning and re-designation of sites within the City of Glendora in order to match forecasted population growth within the City. Furthermore, the sites identified for future development within the Housing Element are well-served by transportation infrastructure.

Although the emissions levels of the future development accommodated under the Housing Element in 2050 cannot be reliably quantified, statewide efforts are underway to facilitate the State’s achievement Item #5. Page 394
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 601
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-41
of that goal and it is reasonable to expect the emissions profile of the proposed uses would only decline as the regulatory initiatives identified by ARB in the First Update are implemented, and other technological innovations occur. As such, given the reasonably anticipated decline in emissions once fully constructed and operational, the future development accommodated under the Housing Element is consistent with the Executive Order’s horizon-year goal.

Many of the emission reduction strategies recommended by ARB would serve to reduce the project’s emissions level to the extent applicable by law and help lay the foundation “…for establishing a broad framework for continued emission reductions beyond 2020, on the path to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050,” as called for in ARB’s First Update to the AB 32 Scoping Plan. As such, the project’s emissions trajectory is expected to follow a declining trend, consistent with the 2030 and 2050 targets and Executive Order S-3-05 and B-30-15.

SCAG’s RTP/SCS
SCAG’s Regional Council approved and fully adopted the Connect SoCal (2020–2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy) and the addendum to the Connect SoCal Program Environmental Impact Report in September 2020. Connect SoCal is a long-range visioning plan that builds upon and expands land use and transportation strategies established over several planning cycles to increase mobility options and achieve a more sustainable growth pattern. Connect SoCal is supported by a combination of transportation and land use strategies that help the region achieve state greenhouse gas emission reduction goals and federal Clean Air Act requirements, preserve open space areas, improve public health and roadway safety, support our vital goods movement industry and utilize resources more efficiently. By integrating the Forecasted Development Pattern with a suite of financially constrained transportation investments, Connect SoCal can reach the regional target of reducing greenhouse gases, or GHGs, from autos and light-duty trucks by 8 percent per capita by 2020, and 19 percent by 2035 (compared to 2005 levels).

The proposed project is that of the City of Glendora Housing Element and requires amending the City’s zoning designations and density on some proposed Housing Element opportunity sites, which requires changes to the City’s Zoning Code and Zoning Map. The increased density of residential units accommodated under the Housing Element is in response to SCAG developing a Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) for the City of Glendora for the City’s 2021-2029 Housing Element planning period. As the City of Glendora does not currently have an adequate number of sites with zoning in place to meet the RHNA requirements, the City identified possible housing sites to address Glendora’s RHNA obligation.

These identified sites are the future development analyzed in this report and identified in the Housing Element.

The future sites for rezoning identified in the Housing Element are all located in developed areas with existing roadway networks and near existing transit stops. Furthermore, the sites are located in close proximity to other surrounding existing residential, commercial, and institutional uses. Therefore, as the increased residential density of the future development of the Housing Element is in response to SCAG forecasts and the future development is located in developed areas in close proximity to existing transportation networks, the Housing Element is considered to be consistent with the measures identified in the SCAG RTP/SCS.

Therefore, the Housing Element would not conflict with any applicable plan, policy or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases. Furthermore, the future Item #5. Page 395
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 602
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-42
development accommodated in the Housing Element will be required to comply with applicable Green Building Standards and City of Glendora’s policies regarding sustainability (as dictated by the City's General Plan). Impacts are considered to be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
None required.

Item #5. Page 396
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 603
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-43
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

9. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonable foreseeable upset
and accident conditions involving the release of
hazardous materials into the environment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste
within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed
school?
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result,
would it create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment?
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within
2 miles or 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?
Environmental Setting
Hazardous Materials
Hazardous materials encompass a wide range of substances, some of which are naturally occurring and some of which are man-made. Examples of hazardous materials include pesticides, herbicides, petroleum products, metals (e.g., lead, mercury, arsenic), asbestos, and chemical compounds used in manufacturing.

Hazardous materials are used for a variety of purposes, including service industries, various small businesses, medical uses, schools, and households. Many chemicals used in household cleaning, construction, dry cleaning, film processing, landscaping, and automotive maintenance and repair are considered hazardous. Small-quantity hazardous waste generators include facilities such as automotive Item #5. Page 397
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 604
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-44
repair, dry cleaners, and medical offices. Hazardous materials could pose a substantial present or future hazard to human health or the environment when improperly handled, disposed, or otherwise managed.

Other Hazards
According to the CAL FIRE Hazard Severity Zones Map for the City of Glendora, portions of the City are located in a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone. These areas are located in the northern portion of the City near the Angeles National Forest and also along the City’s eastern border.

Regulatory Setting
Regulations exist at federal, state, and local levels with regard to hazards and hazardous materials and include:
• Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act • Resources Conservation and Recovery Act
• Hazardous Materials Transportation Act
• Federal Aviation Regulations Part 77
• California Code of Regulations
• Hazardous Materials Release Response Plans and inventory Act • Emergency Response to Hazardous Materials Incidents
• California Government Code Section 65962.5
• Emergency Response to Hazardous Materials Incidents
• Los Angeles County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan • City of Glendora Zoning Code, Title 11 Emergency Preparedness, Title 18 Fire, and Title 19, Chapter 19.06 Fire Hazard Severity Zone
Checklist Discussion
a), b), c), d) Less Than Significant Impact.

The project is the adoption of the City of Glendora Housing Element 2021-2029. The Housing Element is a policy-level document that encourages the provision of a range of housing types and affordability levels and does not include specific development proposals or development entitlements. However, future development of residential units constructed consistent with the General Plan could create a significant hazard to future residents through the exposure to the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials into the environment; through the exposure to reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment; through the exposure of handling or emission of hazardous materials, or by locating residential development on a site included on a list pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5.

The project would not result in the approval of any physical improvements. The Housing Element Update includes an inventory of sites that are adequate to accommodate the City’s assigned share of regional housing need, but it does not propose development projects. Inasmuch as the Housing Element Update could indirectly result in residential development and improvement, each potential development site would be evaluated at the time of development proposal in accordance with the requirements of CEQA.

Due to the fact that hazardous substances have properties that, above certain thresholds, are toxic to humans and/or the ecosystem, multiple regulatory programs in place are designed to minimize the chance Item #5. Page 398
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 605
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-45
for unintended releases and/or exposures to occur. The City of Glendora and other state and local agencies, such as the Department of Toxic Substances Control and San Diego County Environmental Health and Quality Department (Hazardous Materials Division), regulate hazardous materials in coordination with one another. The County enforces Title 26, Division 6, California Highway Patrol, of the California Code of Regulations (CCR) to reduce impacts associated with accidental release from the transportation of hazardous materials on roads in Los Angeles County, and the potential for an increased demand for incident emergency response.

Other programs establish remediation requirements for sites where contamination has occurred. If development sites are determined to contain contaminants, proper remediation will be required in accordance with these regulatory programs. Furthermore, the types of hazardous materials used, stored, and generated by residential uses consist of typical household cleaners, solvents, and fuel waste oils, etc., which are well regulated by federal and state laws. Therefore, adoption of the Housing Element 2021- 2029 would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment with regard to the handling, use, storage, release, or emissions of hazardous materials, including in proximity to schools. Accordingly, impacts related to hazardous materials would be less than significant. e) Less Than Significant Impact.

Bracket Field Airport is located approximately 2.9 miles from the closest Housing Element site. Therefore, impacts related to airport safety hazards and excessive noise potentially resulting from future development supported by the Housing Element would be less than significant. f) Less than Significant Impact.

The City currently has an Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan and Multi-Hazard Functional Plan. Safety Element Figure SAF-1 shows two evacuation routes: Foothill Boulevard and Grand Avenue. Future construction and development activities that may indirectly occur as a result of the project, would be performed consistent with City engineering and fire safety standards, and are not expected to physically interfere with the Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan and Multi-Hazard Functional Plan. Therefore, there would be no impact.

Potential future residential and/or mixed-use development supported by the Housing Element would not interfere with adopted emergency response or evacuation plan because such projects are not anticipated to alter street locations or access. All new development in the city is required to comply with existing fire codes and ordinances regarding emergency access, such as widths, surfaces, vertical clearance, brush clearance, and allowable grades. None of the projects would result in such an increase in population on the site that traffic would impede evacuation routes. Therefore, adoption of the Housing Element 2021- 2029 Update would not impede or conflict with any adopted emergency response or evacuation plans and the project would have a less than significant impact on emergency response or evacuation plans. g) Less than Significant Impact.

According to the CAL FIRE Hazard Severity Zones Map for the City of Glendora, portions of the City are located in a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone. These areas are located in the northern portion of the City near the Angeles National Forest and also along the City’s eastern border. However, none of the Housing Element sites are located within the Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone. The Housing Element Item #5. Page 399
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 606
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-46
sites would not be subject to any more risk than other development in the City not located within a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant related to wildfire.

Mitigation Measures
None required.

Item #5. Page 400
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 607
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-47
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

10. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements or otherwise substantially
degrade surface or groundwater quality?
b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater recharge
such that the project may impede sustainable
groundwater management of the basin?
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of
the course of a stream or river or through the
addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which
would:
i) result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or offsite? ii) substantially increase the rate or amount of
surface runoff in a manner which would result in
flooding on- or 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?
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?
Environmental Setting
Groundwater
The City is located within the Main San Gabriel Groundwater Basin which covers 167 square miles which is estimated to hold about 2.8 trillion gallons of water. Water enters the Basin from countless natural and man-made locations and is extracted by local water producers like Glendora. The City’s primary source of water supply is groundwater, which is delivered to the system by eight active wells; Wells 5-E, 8-E, 9-E, and 12-E are located within the Upper San Gabriel Canyon Sub-basin and Wells 2-E, 10-E, 11-E and 13-E are located within the Glendora Sub-basin of the Main San Gabriel Basin (Main Basin). The City has 9,393 AF of adjudicated water rights from the Main Basin.

Item #5. Page 401
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 608
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-48
Surface Water
No naturally occurring permanent surface water features exist within the City of Glendora. However, Open Water/Freshwater March areas occur where dams and debris basins provide artificial conditions for a freshwater march environment. Debris basins, check dams and storm drains transport water during wet weather events.

Flooding
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is mandated by the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 and the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973 to evaluate flood hazards and provide Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) for local and regional planners to promote sound land use and floodplain development. Further, the Flood Disaster Protection Act requires owners of all structures in identified Special Flood Hazard Areas to purchase and maintain flood insurance as a condition of receiving Federal or federally related financial assistance, such as mortgage loans from federally insured lending institutions. The National Flood Insurance Reform Act of 1994 further strengthened the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) by providing a grant program for State and community flood mitigation projects.

The act also established a system (Community Rating System - CRS) for crediting communities that implement measures to protect the natural and beneficial functions of their floodplains, as well as managing the erosion hazard.

Glendora does not currently participate in the NFIP since the City is located within Zone X, as identified on the FIRM. Zone X is areas of moderate or minimal hazard from the principal source of flood in the area.

Regulatory Setting
Regulations exist at federal, state, regional, and local levels with regard to hydrology and water quality and include:
• Clean Water Act/National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Requirements • National Flood Insurance Program
• NPDES Construction General Permit
• NPDES Groundwater Permit
• NPDES Municipal Permit
• Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act
• Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin
• Los Angeles County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan • City of Glendora Zoning Code, Title 11 Emergency Preparedness and Title 15 Sewers • City of Glendora Standard Grading Notes
• City of Glendora 2020 Urban Water Management Plan
Checklist Discussion
a) Less Than Significant Impact.

The General Plan Housing Element is a policy document that addresses the housing need in the City; no actual development or rezoning/redesignation of land is proposed as part of the Housing Element. The Item #5. Page 402
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 609
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-49
Housing Element includes an inventory of sites that are adequate to accommodate the City’s assigned share of regional housing need, but it does not propose development projects.

Future residential development would either be through replacement, infill or upgrade, no undeveloped areas would be developed. The federal Clean Water Act and California’s Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act are the primary laws related to water quality. Regulations set forth by the U.S. EPA and the State Water Resources Control Board have been developed to fulfill the requirements of this legislation.

U.S. EPA’s regulations include the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program, which controls sources that discharge pollutants into waters of the United States (e.g., streams, lakes, bays, etc.). These regulations are implemented at the regional level by water quality control boards, which for the Glendora area is the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB).

Proposed projects are required to comply with the City’s NPDES permit and local policies and ordinances regarding urban runoff and water quality. In practical terms, the requirements seek to reduce water pollution by both reducing the volume of stormwater runoff and the amount of pollutants that are contained within the runoff. The methods used to achieve these objectives vary from site to site, but can include measures such as a reduction in impervious surfaces, onsite detention facilities, biofiltration swales, settlement/debris basins, etc. Therefore, future development supported by the Housing Element would not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality. As such, impacts would be less than significant. b) Less Than Significant Impact.

The City is located within the Main San Gabriel Groundwater Basin which covers 167 square miles which is estimated to hold about 2.8 trillion gallons of water. Water enters the Basin from countless natural and man-made locations and is extracted by local water producers like Glendora. The City’s primary source of water supply is groundwater, which is delivered to the system by eight active wells; Wells 5-E, 8-E, 9-E, and 12-E are located within the Upper San Gabriel Canyon Sub-basin and Wells 2-E, 10-E, 11-E and 13-E are located within the Glendora Sub-basin of the Main San Gabriel Basin (Main Basin). The City has 9,393 AF of adjudicated water rights from the Main Basin.

The Main Basin (which is included as a subbasin of the San Gabriel Valley Basin, Basin Number 4-13 pursuant to DWR Bulletin 118) has been identified by DWR as a very low-priority groundwater basin partially due to the fact it is adjudicated. In that regard, the Main Basin is actively managed by the Main Basin Watermaster. As stated in the City of Glendora 2020 Urban Water Management Plan, recognizing potential impacts to local hydrology resulting from climate change and the resultant impacts to the groundwater supplies, the Main Basin Watermaster has taken (and may reinstate as needed) proactive actions to anticipate and circumvent the potential impacts of climate change., including judgment amendments, authorizing storm water capture projects, reducing operating safe yield, cyclic storage, conservation, recycling water, and stormwater augmentation. These actions would enable the City to rely on the Main Basin as a reliable source of supply.

Additionally, as the City is largely build-out, future residential development would not be expected to increase impervious surface area overall, and substantial changes to groundwater infiltration would not occur. Any future site plans would be reviewed by the City to include site-specific design measures that would allow for infiltration as part of erosion and runoff prevention. Future development projects would not contribute to the depletion of groundwater supplies and would not substantially interfere with groundwater recharge. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.

Item #5. Page 403
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 610
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-50
c) i), ii), iii), iv)Less Than Significant Impact.

The Housing Element Update includes an inventory of sites that are adequate to accommodate the City’s assigned share of regional housing need, but it does not propose development projects. As all of the sites would be infill or replacement, it is not likely that any future grading and vegetation removal could expose soil to erosion during construction activities.

All future development would be required to comply with codes that address stormwater runoff control.

New housing projects would be required to adhere to water quality and runoff regulations including those set forth by the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Construction General Permit and the City’s Standard Grading Notes. As such, development projects are required to implement Best Management Practices (BMPs) for construction activities as specified by the California Storm Water Best Management Practices Handbook, and/or the City’s Minimum Best Management Practices and Storm Water BMP Manual. The BMPs include measures guiding the management and operation of construction sites to control and minimize the potential contribution of pollutants to storm runoff from these areas.

These measures address procedures for controlling erosion and sedimentation and managing all aspects of the construction process to ensure control of potential water pollution sources. All development projects must comply with all City, state, and federal standards pertaining to stormwater run-off and erosion.

In addition, given that the City is primarily build-out, future residential development would not be expected to result in increased in impervious surface area, substantial changes to drainage patterns, or changes to groundwater infiltration. Accordingly, impacts related to the alteration of drainage patterns would be less than significant.
d) Less than Significant Impact.

The City is located inland and is not located near the Pacific Ocean or near any bodies of water than could create tsunami or seiche. The City is located within Zone X, as identified on the FIRM. Zone X is areas of moderate or minimal hazard from the principal source of flood in the area. Therefore, the City would only be subject to moderate or minimal risk from flooding. Furthermore, the Project is a policy document and does not propose any development nor changes to any existing land use designations. Accordingly, impacts related to the risk from flooding would be less than significant. e) Less Than Significant Impact.

The project is the adoption of the City of Glendora Housing Element 2021-2029. The project would not result in the approval of any physical improvements. The Housing Element includes an inventory of sites that are adequate to accommodate the City’s assigned share of regional housing need, but it does not propose development projects. Inasmuch as Housing Element Update could indirectly result in residential development and improvement, such development would be subject to regulations and policies specifically designed to prevent surface and groundwater water quality and hydrology effects as well as prevent flooding. Therefore, future development supported by the Housing Element would not conflict with water quality or groundwater management plans and impacts related to hydrology and water quality would be less than significant.

Item #5. Page 404
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 611
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-51
Mitigation Measures
None required.

Item #5. Page 405
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 612
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-52
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

11. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community?
b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to a
conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation
adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect?
Environmental Setting
The City of Glendora is approximately 20 square miles, located in the eastern San Gabriel Valley. I-210 runs through the central portion of the city as does the Historic Route 66. Arrow Highway bounds the southern edge of the City of Glendora, between Barranca Avenue to the west, and Valley Center Avenue to the east.

Glendora is a largely residential community, with local serving commercial areas, light industrial uses, offices, local and regional parks, and open space. Most of the existing residential uses are single-family homes developed in the 1960s through the 1980s when Los Angeles County was experiencing the most residential building permit activity.

Regulatory Setting
Regulations exist at state and local levels with regard to land use and include:
• California Planning and Zoning Law, Government Code Sections 65000 et seq. • Southern California Association of Governments Connect SoCal Plan • City of Glendora General Plan
• City of Glendora Zoning Ordinance
Checklist Discussion
a) No Impact.

Projects with the potential to divide a community include highways, railways, and large building or infrastructure projects that change the street grid. The project is the adoption of the City of Glendora Housing Element 2021-2029. The project would not result in the approval of any physical improvements or development projects. The Housing Element policies guide housing, emphasizing provision of affordable housing and a range of housing types and locations. The Housing Element includes an inventory of sites that are adequate to accommodate the City’s assigned share of regional housing need, but it does not propose development projects. Future residential development would be primarily infill both through redevelopment of an existing site or the development of higher density mixed use projects. As such, adoption of the Housing Element 2021-2029 would not physically divide an established community and no impact would occur.

Item #5. Page 406
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 613
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-53
b) Less Than Significant Impact.

The project is the adoption of the City of Glendora Housing Element 2021-2029. The project would not result in the approval of any physical improvements and does not propose any changes to the General Plan Land Use Element. As the Housing Element is a mandatory element of the General Plan, it must be consistent with it. The Housing Element includes an inventory of sites that are adequate to accommodate the City’s assigned share of regional housing need, but it does not propose development projects.

In order to meet the RHNA, the City would restore the permitted density in the BG Zoning District of the Route 66 Specific Plan from 20 dwelling units per acre and two stories, to 30 dwelling units per acre and increase the height limit to three stories. In addition, the City would increase allowable density in the Arrow Highway Specific Plan from 25 dwelling units per acre and 2-3 stories, to 30 dwelling units per acre and three stories. Therefore, the Housing Element could indirectly result in residential development and improvement, the project would result in increased density in residential and mixed-use areas of the City in an effort to meet their RHNA allotment. However, increasing the density on the Route 66 – BG and Arrow Highway sites would only restore these sites to their original density and no General Plan amendments would be required.

On top of restoring/increasing permitted densities, the City is proposing to rezone two sites: the Route 66/Glendora Site, which would be rezoned to Route 66 TCMU to permit 30 units per acre consistent with its previous zoning and the adjacent zoning and the 100 W. Route 66 site, which would be rezoned to Route 66 TCMU to permit 30 units per acre consistent with surrounding zones. The rezoning of these sites would not require any General Plan Amendments.

The zoning established for these areas provides development standards intended to provide for new development to have similar characteristics (such as mass, bulk, height, and density) as the surrounding areas. Future development would occur on sites already zoned for housing and would follow the City’s standard procedures for review, including public notice, environmental review, and consideration of design and neighborhood context. The identified opportunity sites could be developed in the future with or without the Housing Element. New residential development would be required to comply with all applicable plans and regulations including the General Plan and the City’s Municipal Code. All development projects are subject to environmental review as appropriate in compliance with CEQA prior to approval. Project and site-specific concerns would be evaluated and addressed as development projects for specific sites are proposed. As such, impacts related to conflicts with land use plans, policies, and regulations would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
None required.

Item #5. Page 407
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 614
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-54
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

12. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
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?
Regulations and responsible agencies exist at the state level with regard to mineral resources and include:
• Surface Mining and Reclamation Act of 1975
• Division of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources
• Division of Mines and Geology
Checklist Discussion
a), b) No Impact.

No portion of the City is delineated as a mineral resource or mineral resource recovery site in the City’s General Plan. Portions of Glenora are shown as a Mineral Resource Zone in Figure 9.6 of the Conservation Element of the Los Angeles County General Plan. However, there are no active mines or mineral resource extraction occurring in the City and all of the Housing Element sites are currently developed with land uses that are not related to mining or mineral extraction. Due to limited resources available and the urban nature of the City, no impact would occur.

Mitigation Measures
None required.

Item #5. Page 408
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 615
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-55
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

13. NOISE. Would the project result in:
a) Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent
increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable
standards of other agencies?
b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or
groundborne noise levels?
c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a
plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public
airport or public use airport, expose people residing
or working in the project area to excessive noise
levels?
Noise Fundamentals
Sound is described in terms of amplitude (i.e., loudness) and frequency (i.e., pitch). The standard unit of sound amplitude measurement is the decibel (dB). The dB scale is a logarithmic scale that describes the physical intensity of the pressure vibrations that make up any sound. The pitch of the sound is related to the frequency of the pressure vibration. Since the human ear is not equally sensitive to a given sound level at all frequencies, a special frequency-dependent rating scale has been devised to relate noise to human sensitivity. The A-weighted dB scale (dBA) provides this compensation by emphasizing frequencies in a manner approximating the sensitivity of the human ear.

Noise, on the other hand, is typically defined as unwanted sound audible at such a level that the sound becomes an undesirable by-product of society’s normal day-to-day activities. Sound becomes unwanted when it interferes with normal activities, causes actual physical harm, or results in adverse health effects.

The effects of noise on people can be placed into four general categories:
• Subjective effects (e.g., dissatisfaction, annoyance); • Interference effects (e.g., communication, sleep, and learning interference); • Physiological effects (e.g., startle response); and
• Physical effects (e.g., hearing loss).

The definition of noise as unwanted sound implies that it has an adverse effect, or causes a substantial annoyance, to people and their environment. However, not every unwanted audible sound interferes with normal activities, causes harm, or has adverse health effects. For unwanted audible sound (i.e., noise) to be considered adverse, it must occur with sufficient frequency and at such a level that these adverse impacts are reasonably likely to occur.

Item #5. Page 409
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 616
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-56
Vibration Fundamentals
Vibration can result from a source (e.g., train operations, motor vehicles, machinery equipment, etc.) causing the adjacent ground to move and creating vibration waves that propagate through the soil to the foundations of nearby buildings. This effect is referred to as groundborne vibration. The peak particle velocity (PPV) or the root mean square (RMS) velocity is usually used to describe vibration levels. PPV is defined as the maximum instantaneous peak of the vibration level, while RMS is defined as the square root of the average of the squared amplitude of the vibration level. PPV is typically used for evaluating potential building damage, while RMS velocity in decibels (VdB) is typically more suitable for evaluating human response.

Environmental Setting
Noise in Glendora comes from transportation sources, including freeways, arterials, and roadways and non-transportation sources, such as commercial/industrial activities, construction equipment and various community activities. The noise environment in Glendora is dominated by vehicular traffic including vehicular generated noise along Interstate 210 (I-210) and primary and secondary arterials. In addition, a number of other sources contribute to the total noise environment. These noise sources include construction activities, power tools and gardening equipment, loudspeakers, auto repair, radios, children playing and dogs barking.

Regulatory Setting
Various private and public agencies have established noise guidelines and standards to protect citizens from potential hearing damage and other adverse physiological and social effects associated with noise.

Federal, state, regional, and local guidelines include the following:
• Federal Transit Administration and Federal Railroad Administration Standards • Federal Aviation Administration Standards
• California Noise Control Act
• California Code of Regulations
• City of Glendora General Plan
• City of Glendora Municipal Code
Checklist Discussion
a), b) Less Than Significant Impact.

The project is the adoption of the City of Glendora Housing Element 2021-2029. The project would not result in the approval of any physical improvements and does not propose any changes to the General Plan Land Use Element. The Housing Element includes an inventory of sites that are adequate to accommodate the City’s assigned share of regional housing need, but it does not propose development projects. As no specific development projects are proposed by the project, no specific noise and vibration impacts can be evaluated. Indirect construction activity associated with future potential development could possibly result in temporary increases in noise levels. All construction activities would continue to be required to comply with the City’s noise ordinance and undergo project-level CEQA review to analyze impacts related to noise when more specific project details are known. Such compliance would reduce noise levels associated with construction activities.

Item #5. Page 410
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 617
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-57
Noise sources associated with potential future development would include those typical of suburban areas (e.g., mechanical equipment, dogs/pets, landscaping activities, weekly garbage collection, cars parking). These noise sources are typically intermittent and short in duration, and would be comparable to existing sources of noise experienced at surrounding residential uses. As most of the identified opportunity sites are located in established residential and mixed-use commercial/residential districts with existing noise sources, potential increases would be below established thresholds for consideration of a significant impact.

Temporary construction activities as a result of future development could result in excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise. The exact nature of potential future construction that could occur is not known at this time; thus, construction noise levels cannot be estimated. However, all construction activities would be required to comply with the City’s noise ordinance and discretionary projects would undergo project-level CEQA review to analyze impacts related to noise when more specific project details are known. Such compliance would reduce noise groundborne vibration and noise levels associated with construction activities. Impacts would be less than significant. c) No Impact.

Bracket Field Airport is located approximately 2.9 miles from the closest Housing Element site. Therefore, the Housing Element sites would not be exposed to airport noise that is any greater than the rest of Glendora. There would be no impact related to exposure to excessive noise potentially resulting from future development supported by the Housing Element.

Mitigation Measures.

None required.

Item #5. Page 411
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 618
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-58
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact with the
Incorporated
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

14. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project:
a) Induce substantial unplanned population growth in
an area, either directly (for example, by proposing
new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for
example, through extension of roads or other
infrastructure)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or
housing, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?
Environmental Setting
Since incorporation in 1911, the City has grown from a small citrus-producing community of 2,000 persons to 51,773 persons by 2018. Historically, much of the City's population growth has been due to annexation of surrounding unincorporated land. From 1980 to 1990, annexations increased the City's population by about 10,000 people.

The City’s population was 51,773 persons in 2018, an increase of 1,471 persons from 2010 to 2018. This increase represents an approximately three-percent increase from the 2010 Census figure of 50,073. This growth is consistent with the previous period from 2000 to 2010, which had an approximate one-percent population increase of 49,415 to 50,073 respectively.

The City experienced rapid housing growth in the 1980s, the majority of which was due to annexation of adjacent unincorporated land. Since 1990, however, residential housing development has slowed significantly due primarily to the scarcity of vacant land and a reduction in demand. Between 1990 and 2000, the number of housing units in the City increased by 1.6 percent, from 16,876 units to 17,145 units. By 2010, the number of housing units in Glendora grew to 17,778, an increase of 3.7 percent since 2000. According to the California Department of Finance Population and Housing Estimates 2020, Glendora has a total of 18,488 housing units, representing a 4 percent increase since 2010. The most prevalent housing type in Glendora is single-family detached with 13,306 units.

Regulatory Setting
Regulations and plans exist at state, regional, and local levels with regard to populations and housing and include:
• California Government Code Section 65583 and 655849(a)(1) • Senate Bill 375
• Southern California Association of Governments Connect SoCal • Regional Housing Needs Assessment
Item #5. Page 412
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 619
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-59
Checklist Discussion
a) No Impact.

The project is the adoption of the City of Glendora Housing Element 2021-2029. The General Plan Housing Element is a policy document that addresses the housing need in the City; no actual development is proposed as part of the Housing Element. The Housing Element contains housing goals intended to encourage housing to meet the City’s housing needs. The expectation is that as growth occurs consistent with the existing General Plan, housing would be provided to serve all income levels of the city, including both moderate- and low-income residents. The project would not result in the approval of any physical improvements and does not propose any changes to the General Plan Land Use Element. Although the project does not propose development projects itself, it identifies opportunity sites that are adequate to accommodate up to 2,276 new housing units.

Based on the persons per household rate of 2.9 used by SCAG in the 2016-2040 RTP/SCS Final Growth Forecast, the development of 2,276 housing units would generate 6,601 new residents for a total of 58,374 residents. The City’s population in 2020 was 51,773 and SCAG 2016-2040 RTP/SCS Final Growth Forecast by jurisdiction estimates the City to increase to 53,400 by 2035 and 54,300 by 2040. Although the Housing Element would result in slightly higher population than those estimated by SCAG, the increased residential density of the future development of the Housing Element is in response to SCAG RHNA housing numbers distributed for the City. State housing law requires that the RHNA be consistent with the development pattern of the SCS (Connect SoCal) but does not specify any other requirements between the two plans.

Therefore, the Housing Element Update demonstrates that the state-mandated share of housing for the City can be accommodated and is consistent with development levels anticipated by regional and local planning documents. The Housing Element, as a policy document accommodates rather than inducing population growth and no impact would occur.
b) No Impact.

The project is the adoption of the City of Glendora Housing Element 2021-2029. The General Plan Housing Element is a policy document that addresses the housing needs in the City. No actual development is proposed as part of the Housing Element Update. The purpose of Government Code Section 65863 (No Net Loss Law), is to ensure development opportunities remain available throughout the planning period to accommodate a jurisdiction’s regional housing need allocation (RHNA), especially for lower- and moderate- income households. Implementing the Housing Element would not result in any displacement.

Therefore, no impacts would occur.

Mitigation Measures
None required.

Item #5. Page 413
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 620
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-60
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

15. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the public services:
a) Fire protection?
b) Police protection?
c) Schools?
d) Parks?
e) Other public facilities?
Environmental Setting
Fire Protection
The City of Glendora became a member of the Los Angeles County Fire Protection District in 1969. The Los Angeles County Fire Department provides the City of Glendora with fire suppression and emergency medical services. The District receives funding from the City for this service from the base property tax paid by property owners.

The Los Angeles County Fire Department provides its services from three (3) Fire Stations strategically located within the City boundaries. In addition, the Los Angeles County Fire Department provides for the public’s safety by deploying and staffing a variety of emergency response vehicles Air and Wildland, Emergency Medical Services, Fire Prevention, Rescue, Forestry, Health Hazardous Material and Emergency Operations.

Police Protection
The Glendora Police Department provides Patrol, Community Preservation, Investigations, Traffic, Jail, as well as the K-9 Program, and Emergency Services. Various Department programs include Child Safety Seat Inspections, Citizen's Academy, Volunteer Auxiliary, Glendora Safe Schools and the Glendora Safe Driving Pledge, and the Explorer Program.

The Police Department is divided into two Divisions consisting of various Bureaus. The Administrative Division includes the Community Relations Bureau, Community Preservation/Code Enforcement Bureau and Records Bureau. The Operations Division includes the Patrol Bureau, Investigations Bureau, Traffic Bureau, Jail Bureau, and Emergency Services.

The Patrol Bureau’s primary mission is to enhance the safety and security of the community by providing professional frontline law enforcement services. There are 56 employees assigned to the Patrol Bureau, comprised of four (4) Lieutenants, seven (7) Sergeants, four (4) Corporals, twenty-one (21) sworn Officers, eight (8) Police Service Representatives (dispatchers), five (5) Jailers, five (5) Reserve Police Officers, and two (2) Community Services Officers (CSO). These employees provide 24/7 public safety through field Item #5. Page 414
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 621
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-61
units, the communication center, and jail operations. Patrol Officers are assigned to one of four Police Service Districts (geographic areas) and are supported by Motorcycle Traffic Officers, Reserve Police Officers, a K-9 Unit, and Community Services Officers.

Schools
Glendora is served by three school districts: the Glendora Unified School District, the Charter Oak Unified School District, and the Azusa Unified School District. The Districts provide preschool, elementary, middle, high schools and adult education. Glendora Unified School District boundaries are the portions of the City located north of I-210. Charter Oak Unified School District boundaries are located south of I-210. The Azusa School District serves the neighborhood that is south of I-210 and west of Grand Avenue.

State Assembly Bill (AB) 2926 authorized school districts to assess all new development a fee to offset. impacts proposed projects might have on the school facilities. Whenever possible, the Districts have requested that developers provide full impact mitigation on development. The establishment of special tax districts, full cost recovery agreements or the provision of relocatable classrooms in lieu of fees are just a few examples of such mitigation measures.

Parks
The City has eight parks that provide a variety of recreation opportunities, including passive and active recreational spaces. Active parks include Finkbiner Park, Gladstone Park, Gladstone Skate Park, Louie Pompei Memorial Sports Park, Ole Hammer Park, Sandburg Middle School Park, South Hills Park and Willow Springs Park. Passive Parks include Big Tree Park, South Hills Wilderness Area and Big Dalton Wilderness Park. Both South Hills and Big Dalton provide primarily riding and hiking opportunities.

The City has three special use parks: the Glen Oaks Municipal Golf Course, Carlyel E. Linder Equestrian Park, and the Centennial Heritage Park. The City of Glendora includes roughly 19 miles of hiking, equestrian and multi-use trails within city limits with access to 32 trails. These trails are primarily divided among two different wilderness areas: Big Dalton Wilderness Area and the South Hills Wilderness Area.

Big Dalton Wilderness Area is comprised of approximately 690 acres and contains 14 hiking and multi-use trails varying from easy to very strenuous in difficulty. South Hills Wilderness Area is comprised of approximately 2200 acres and contains 15 hiking and multi-use trails varying from easy to strenuous in difficulty.

Other Public Facilities
The City has one public library located at 140 S. Glendora Avenue. The Library has a collection of approximately 138,000 items in a variety of formats, such as books, electronic books (e-books), audio books on compact disk (CD), tape and digital Playaway, music CDs, software programs, educational and classic movies on DVD and Blu-ray, magazine subscriptions, newspaper subscriptions and pieces of microform.

The Library’s website was created and is maintained by Library staff. It is available from home, school or work 24 hours a day, seven days a week effectively creating an internet branch library. It hosts 16 information databases, one interactive homework tutor service, 24/7 web-based reference service, two electronic book (downloadable) subscription databases, one children’s ebook database, a Weblinks Item #5. Page 415
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 622
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-62
collections for subject access to the internet and specialized website links for children and teens. The public can access their library accounts, renew materials, place holds.

The Library’s 11 full-time and 19 part-time staff members are cross-trained and share responsibilities for backstage and front-line service maximizing the Library’s ability to respond to the everchanging needs of our community of users.

Regulatory Setting
Regulations and policies exist the state and local level with regard to public services and include:
• California Mutual Aid Plan
• Senate Bill 50
• Quimby Act and Assembly Bill 1359
• City of Glendora General Plan
Checklist Discussion
a) Less Than Significant Impact.

The Housing Element is a policy document that does not authorize specific development projects.

However, implementation of the programs contained in the Housing Element could result in new housing that addresses the City’s RHNA allocation and the City’s policies addressing a range of housing needs including affordable housing. While the Housing Element update would not directly introduce new structures, future infill development and redevelopment could continue to occur to accommodate future demands.

The City estimates fire protection needs based on growth as projected in the City’s General Plan and Housing Element. It is anticipated that as new development and service levels would be consistent with existing projections. Additionally, as part of the planning and development review process, new residential development projects would be evaluated by the Glendora Fire Department to determine the level of and demand for fire protection services that would be generated by each project. Therefore, impacts to fire protection services will be less than significant. b) Less Than Significant Impact.

The General Plan Housing Element is a policy document that addresses housing need in the City and does not include any specific development of land. Therefore, adoption would not, in itself, create increased demand for City of Glendora Police Department services. The possible increase in population that may occur as a result of adoption of the Housing Element would not increase the demand for law enforcement protection service to the extent that new law enforcement protection facilities would be required. The demand for law enforcement services in Glendora is determined not only by the needs of residents but also by visitors to the City. Future residential development projects, consistent with the City’s housing needs would be evaluated by the Glendora Police Department to determine the level of and demand for police protection services that would be generated by each project. Therefore, impacts to fire protection services will be less than significant.
c) Less Than Significant Impact.

Implementation of the programs contained in the Housing Element should result in new housing that addresses the City’s RHNA allocation and the City’s policies addressing a range of housing needs including Item #5. Page 416
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 623
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-63
affordable housing. Planning for future school facilities is the responsibility of the school districts. The environmental effects of expansion, construction, and operation of additional school facilities would be evaluated by the Glendora Unified School District and the Charter Oak Unified School District. In accordance with state law pursuant to Government Code Section 65996 and SB 50, California legislation holds that an acceptable method of offsetting a project’s effect on the adequacy of school facilities is payment of a school impact fee prior to issuance of a building permit. Once paid, the school impact fees would serve as mitigation for any project-related impacts to school facilities. As such, the City is legally prohibited from imposing any additional mitigation related to school facilities, as payment of the school impact fees constitutes full and complete mitigation. Therefore, future development at identified opportunity sites would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered school facilities. Impacts related to schools would be less than significant. d) Less Than Significant Impact.

The General Plan Housing Element is a policy document that addresses housing need in the City and does not include any specific development of land. Future development to meet projected population would be infill in established neighborhoods. According to the General Plan, the City will continue to expand and enhance its recreational programs and services to serve the City’s population by employing cooperative agreements with the school districts to provide additional recreational resources and by continuing to coordinate with various civic and private groups to provide an overall recreation program that is well coordinated and responsive to the needs of the community. Additionally, the City has identified vacant parcels for use in meeting future park and recreation needs. The City, at its discretion, may require dedication of land and/or payment of fees for the purpose of providing and preserving open space and recreational facilities and improvements in developing areas, as provided for in Chapter 20.38 of the Municipal Code. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. e) Less Than Significant Impact.

The General Plan Housing Element is a policy document that addresses housing need in the City and does not include any specific development of land. Library services are provided by the City. The library is funded by the City with fiscal assistance provided by the Glendora Public Library Friends Foundation. The GPL Friends Foundation provides volunteer and financial support for the life changing programs and services of the Glendora Public Library. Each year during the City’s budget cycle, the Library Board of Trustees together with Library staff identifies projects, materials, services and/or programs which meet Glendora’s need for quality services. The City would continue to fund the Glendora Library from taxes collected in the City, along with funding provided by the Glendora Public Library Friends Foundation.

Impacts from potential future development on the library will be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
None required.

Item #5. Page 417
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 624
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-64
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

16. RECREATION. Would the project:
a) 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) Include recreational facilities or require the
construction or expansion of recreational facilities,
which might have an adverse physical effect on the
environment?
Environmental Setting
Please refer to Environmental Setting above Section 15 – Parks.

Checklist Discussion
a), b) Less Than Significant Impact.

Please refer to discussion above Section 15.d – Parks.

Mitigation Measures
None required.

Item #5. Page 418
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 625
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-65
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

17. TRANSPORTATION. Would the project:
a) Conflict with a program plan, ordinance or policy
addressing the circulation system, including transit
roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities?
b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines
section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric
design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)?
d) Result in inadequate emergency access?
Environmental Setting
The City of Glendora shares borders with the City of San Dimas on the east, southeast, and south, City of Covina on the southwest, and the City of Azusa on the west. The Angeles National Forest and Glendora Wilderness Park form the City’s northern border.

Many of the arterial roadways through the City of Glendora extend beyond the city boundaries into neighboring cities. Circulation issues and travel patterns, likewise, extend beyond the Glendora city limits.

The land use decisions and traffic patterns in these other jurisdictions have the potential to affect the quality of traffic flow and mobility in the City of Glendora, and conversely, traffic conditions and decisions made by the City of Glendora can affect its neighbors.

Regulatory Setting
Regulations and policies exist at the state, regional, and local levels as follows:
• Senate Bill 743
• SCAG Connect SoCal
• City of Glendora General Plan
Checklist Discussion
a), b) Less Than Significant Impact.

The project is the adoption of the City of Glendora Housing Element 2021-2029. The project does not propose any specific development projects as the Housing Element only identifies opportunity sites that are feasible for development. These sites are located on developed lots and would not change the existing street grid if developed.

Item #5. Page 419
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 626
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-66
The majority of the sites are located proximate to transit on Arrow Highway, Gladstone Street, Historic Route 66, and Foothill Boulevard. Several of the sites would be located within ¼ to ½ mile of the future Metro Gold Line. These locations would be consistent with SCAG Connect SoCal policies that support increasing residential concentrations in areas served by transit and implementation of smart growth designed to strengthen the integration of land use and transportation.

Inasmuch as Housing Element Update could indirectly result in residential development and improvement, the development would occur in residential and mixed-use areas of the City already designated in the General Plan for housing. Therefore, development within these sites and their associated transportation impacts have already been accounted for in association with the adopted land use plan and Circulation Element. In addition, any future development projects supported by the Housing Element Update would be evaluated at the project proposal stage and subject to the state, regional, and local plans, and the policies therein. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. c) Less Than Significant Impact.

Future development supported by the Housing Element would result in typical types of traffic associated with residential and mixed-use development (i.e., residents, visitors, and employee commutes). The Housing Element 2021-2029 does not propose any uses that would generate traffic from incompatible uses such as farm equipment. No specific plans for any development projects are proposed at this time; however, the design of roadway improvements, access roads, intersections, and driveways of any future project would be required to adhere to City of Glendora design guidelines and standards and the final design must be approved by the City prior to the issuance of development permits. Accordingly, impacts related to design hazards potentially resulting from future development supported by the Housing Element would be less than significant.
d) Less Than Significant Impact.

As discussed previously, the Housing Element does not include specific development projects, and instead, only provides a framework for the City’s anticipated future residential growth and housing demand.

Potential future residential and/or mixed-use development supported by the Housing Element would not interfere with emergency access because such projects are not anticipated to alter street locations or access. All new development in the city is required to comply with existing fire codes and ordinances regarding emergency access, such as widths, surfaces, vertical clearance, brush clearance, and allowable grades. Future access and roadways would be reviewed for consistency with City of Glendora design guidelines and standards and the final design must be approved by the City. Therefore, impacts to emergency access resulting from future development supported by the Housing Element would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
None required.

Item #5. Page 420
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 627
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-67
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

18. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES. Consultation with a California Native American tribe that has requested such consultation may assist a lead agency in determining whether the project may adversely affect tribal cultural resources, and if so, how such effects may be avoided or mitigated. Whether or not consultation has been requested, would the project cause a substantial adverse change in a site, feature, place, cultural landscape, sacred place, or object, with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, which is any of the following:
a. Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a
California Native American tribe, and that is:
i) Listed or eligible for listing in the California
Register of Historical Resources, or in a local
register of historical resources as defined in Public
Resources Code section 5020.1(k), 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 Section
5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code Section
5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the
significance of the resource to a California Native
American tribe.

Environmental Setting
Assembly Bill 52 (AB 52, Gatto. Native Americans: California Environmental Quality Act) and CEQA Public Resources Code Section 21080.31, subdivisions (b), (d)), requires a lead agency to consult with any California Native American tribe that requests consultation and is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of a proposed project.

California Government Code Section 65352.3 (adopted pursuant to the requirements of Senate Bill (SB) 18) requires local governments to contact, refer plans to, and consult with tribal organizations prior to making a decision to adopt or amend a general or specific plan, or to designate open space that includes Native American Cultural Places. The tribal organizations eligible to consult have traditional lands in a local government’s jurisdiction, and are identified, upon request, by the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC). As noted in the California Office of Planning and Research’s Tribal Consultation Guidelines (2005), “the intent of SB 18 is to provide California Native American tribes an opportunity to participate in local land use decisions at an early planning stage, for the purpose of protecting, or mitigating impacts to cultural places.”
Item #5. Page 421
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 628
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-68
Regulatory Setting
The regulation that guides the consideration and treatment of tribal cultural resources is:
• Assembly Bill 52
• Senate Bill 18
Checklist Discussion
a) i), ii) No Impact.

The Housing Element is a policy document consistent with the General Plan. The project is the adoption of the City of Glendora Housing Element 2021-2029. The project would not result in the approval of any physical improvements and does not propose any changes to the General Plan Land Use Element, to a base designation, or to any physical development standards. The Housing Element will not, in and of itself, result in impacts to tribal cultural resources. Therefore, no impact would occur.

Pursuant to Assembly Bill 52, California tribes now have the ability to establish, through a formal notice letter, a standing request to consult with a lead agency regarding any proposed project subject to CEQA in the geographic area with which the tribe is traditionally and culturally affiliated. The Native American Heritage Commission has authority to verify the tribes’ cultural affiliation. A lead agency must provide written notification to requesting tribes on its notice list within 14 days of a decision to undertake a project or a determination that a project application is complete. Notice to the tribes must include a brief project description, the project location, and the lead agency’s contact information. A tribe then has 30 days to request consultation. If the tribe does not respond in that period or writes to decline consultation, the lead agency has no further obligation. The City of Glendora initiated consultation with the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians - Kizh Nation, Gabrieleno/Tongva San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians, Gabrieleno/Tongva Nation, Gabrielino Tongva Indians of California Tribal Council, Gabrielino Tongva Tribe, San Manuel Band of Mission Indians, Santa Rosa Band of Cahuilla Indians, and Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians and their designated tribal representative for their participation in the Housing Element update and requested information regarding tribal cultural resources within the City on July 2, 2021. The City of Glendora did not receive any responses within the 30-day period.

Mitigation Measures
None required.

Item #5. Page 422
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 629
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-69

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

19. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project:
a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or
storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas,
or telecommunications facilities, the construction
or relocation of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future
development during normal, dry and multiple dry
years?
c) Result in a determination by the wastewater
treatment provider which serves or may serve the
project that it has adequate capacity to serve the
project’s projected demand in addition to the
provider’s existing commitments?
d) Generate solid waste in excess of State or local
standards, or in excess of the capacity of local
infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment
of solid waste reduction goals?
e) Comply with federal, state, and local management
and reduction statutes and regulations related to
solid waste?
Environmental Setting
Water
Water in Glendora is supplied by the City. The City is classified as an urban water supplier because it serves more than 3,000 customers (i.e. individual metered accounts) and it supplies more than 3,000 acre-feet of water annually to its customers for municipal purposes. The City is a sub-agency of Three Valleys Municipal Water District, a wholesale water agency.

The City adopted the 2020 Urban Water Management Plan in June 2021. The City’s 2020 Plan was prepared in coordination with planning agencies including the City of Glendora’s Planning Division, the Los Angeles County Department of Regional Planning, and the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). The UWMP anticipates adequate water supply to meet projected future demand through 2045 under single and multiple dry year scenarios. Therefore, adequate water supply is available to accommodate the RHNA during the Housing Element planning period.

Senate Bill 1087 (enacted 2006) requires that water providers develop written policies that grant priority to proposed development that includes housing affordable to lower-income households. The legislation Item #5. Page 423
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 630
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-70
also prohibits water providers from denying or conditioning the approval of development that includes housing affordable to lower income households unless specific written findings are made. The City will provide a copy of the adopted Housing Element to the California American Water Company within 30 days of adoption. The City will continue to coordinate with the California American Water Company to ensure priority service provision to affordable housing developments.

Wastewater
The Public Works Department is responsible for manages the City’s sanitary sewer collection system, which serves a population of approximately 50,000 residents and consists of about 142 miles of gravity sewer lines. The City's local sewers discharge into the Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County facilities for conveyance, treatment, and disposal. The field operation and maintenance services are fulfilled by utilizing the services provided by the Consolidated Sewer Maintenance District (CSMD), which is managed by the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works (LACDPW).

The City adopted a Sewer System Management Plan in 2015. The Sewer System Management Plan is intended to meet the objectives outline in the State Water Resources Control Board related to preventing and managing sewer overflows. The Sewer System Management Plan outlines operation and maintenance programs, overflow emergency response plans, and a system evaluation and capacity assurance plan.

Senate Bill 1087 also mandates priority sewage collection and treatment service to housing developments providing units affordable to lower-income households.

Solid Waste
Athens Services has provided solid waste services in the City since 1992, through a series of fixed term agreements. These services include trash pickup, recycling, bulky item pickup and bin service, and green waste collection. In 2011, AB 341 was adopted establishing a policy goal that 75% of statewide solid waste should be reduced, recycled, or composted by 2020. This is an expansion of previous state goals to divert 50% of community-wide waste. This measure is in compliance with state goals of waste reduction.

Checklist Discussion
a), b), c), d), e) Less Than Significant Impact.

The Housing Element itself does not propose specific developments nor does it conflict with any other element of the General Plan. Given the built-out character of Glendora, most residential areas are already served with infrastructure. Existing water delivery, wastewater collection infrastructure and solid waste disposal is available to all properties located in the residential sites inventory. Moreover, the City has adequate water and wastewater capacity to accommodate the RHNA of 2,276 units identified in the Housing Element. Any new development in the City would continue to comply with all provisions of the NPDES program as well as federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste. The City has established specific standards for potential improvements and facilities required to serve new development, including curb/gutter and drainage facilities, sidewalks, paved streets, landscaping, undergrounding utilities, and water and sewer service. Such improvements are required as a condition of the subdivision map, or if there is no required map, improvements are required as part of the building permit process. Therefore, implementation of the Housing Element would have a less than significant impact.

Item #5. Page 424
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 631
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-71
Mitigation Measures
None required.

Item #5. Page 425
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 632
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-72
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

20. WILDFIRE: If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project:
a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response
plan or emergency evacuation plan?
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors,
exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project
occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a
wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
c) Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency
water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary
or ongoing impacts to the environment?
d) Expose people or structures to significant risks,
including downslope or downstream flooding or
landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope
instability, or drainage changes?
Environmental Setting
According to the CAL FIRE Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones mapping, the City of Glendora has areas located within Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones both under local and state responsibility. These areas are in the northern areas of the City adjacent to and south of the open space areas of Angeles National Forest.

Checklist Discussion
a) Less Than Significant Impact.

The City currently has a Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan and Multi-Hazard Functional Plan. The MHFP addresses the City’s planned response to emergencies associated with natural disasters and technological incidents. It provides an overview of operational concepts, identifies components of the City’s emergency management organization within the SEMS and describes the overall responsibilities of Federal, State and county entities and the City for protecting life and property and assuring the overall wellbeing of the population.

Safety Element Figure SAF-1 shows two evacuation routes: Foothill Boulevard and Grand Avenue.

Potential future residential and/or mixed-use development supported by the Housing Element would not interfere with adopted emergency response or evacuation plan because such projects are not anticipated to alter street locations or access. All new development in the city is required to comply with existing fire codes and ordinances regarding emergency access, such as widths, surfaces, vertical clearance, brush clearance, and allowable grades. None of the projects would result in such an increase in population on Item #5. Page 426
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 633
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-73
the site that traffic would impede evacuation routes. Therefore, adoption of the Housing Element 2021- 2029 would not impede or conflict with any adopted emergency response or evacuation plans and the project would have a less than significant impact on emergency response or evacuation plans. b) Less Than Significant Impact.

Wildfires represent a significant threat to parts of the City due to the City’s adjacency to open space areas of the Angeles National Forest. None of the Housing Element sites are located in the area of the City that is mapped as a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone. Therefore, potential future projects would not exacerbate risks from wildland fires. The Safety Element, Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan, and MultiHazard Functional Plan include policies and actions related to wildfire hazards to reduce risk and increase community resiliency and adaptive capability. Any future development on the sites would be subject to City policies as outlined in the Safety Element, Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan, and Multi-Hazard Functional Plan. Although all parts of the City could be subject to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire, the Housing Element sites would not be subject to these pollutants at a level that is any different than other areas of the City. Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur. c) Less Than Significant Impact.

The Housing Element is a policy document that does not propose specific development. Potential future development would occur as infill, replacement or mixed use within the existing urbanized core. Thus, it would not be anticipated that any future development projects would 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. Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur. d) No Impact.

None of the Housing Element sites are located in the area of the City that are subject to landslides.

Therefore, potential future projects would not 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, Thus, there would be no impact.

Mitigation Measures
None required.

Item #5. Page 427
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 634
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-74
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact

21. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. Would the project:
a) 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) 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) Have environmental effects which will cause
substantial adverse effects on human beings, either
directly or indirectly?
Checklist Discussion
a) No Impact.

The Housing Element is a General Plan policy document that addresses housing need in the City; no actual development of land is proposed as part of the Housing Element. The Housing Element does not authorize any development. Therefore, its adoption would not significantly degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of major periods of California history or prehistory. Therefore, no impact would occur. b) Less Than Significant Impact.

The proposed project involves the adoption of the City’s General Plan Housing Element, which guides future housing. No specific development projects would occur as a result of the Housing Element; and no redesignation/rezoning of land is proposed. Therefore, adoption of the Housing Element, in itself, would not result in cumulative impacts.

Furthermore, cumulative impacts associated with future housing development have been evaluated at a program level in the General Plan CEQA document. The Housing Element in large measure does not propose changes to the City’s adopted housing related policies and programs including those set forth in Item #5. Page 428
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 635
II. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
Housing Element 2021-2029 City of Glendora
Initial Study/Negative Declaration November 2021
II-75
the General Plan (Land Use Element) and the 2013-2021 Housing Element. Since the Housing Element is consistent with the General Plan, adopting the Housing Element would not create new cumulative impacts or increase the significance of cumulative impacts identified in the General Plan CEQA document.

Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
c) Less Than Significant Impact.

Future development supported by the Housing Element would be required to comply with numerous required measures related to human safety and the quality of the environment, as described throughout this document. Therefore, adoption of the Housing Element 2021-2029 would result in no environmental effects that would cause substantial direct or indirect adverse effects on human beings and impacts would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
None required.

Item #5. Page 429
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 636
State of California – Natural Resources Agency GAVIN NEWSOM, Governor DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE CHARLTON H. BONHAM, Director South Coast Region
3883 Ruffin Road
San Diego, CA 92123
(858) 467-4201
www.wildlife.ca.gov

SENT BY EMAIL ONLY
December 27, 2021
Mr. Jeff Kugel
City of Glendora
116 East Foothill Boulevard
Glendora, CA 91741
[email protected]
Subject: City of Glendora Housing Element Update – 6
th Regional Housing Needs
Assessment Cycle – 2021-2029, Negative Declaration, SCH #2021120003, City of Glendora, Los Angeles County
Dear Mr. Kugel:

The California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) has reviewed the Negative Declaration (ND) from the City of Glendora (City; Lead Agency) for the Housing Element Update – 6 th
Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) Cycle – 2021 - 2029 (Project). The Project is proposed by the City of Glendora (Project Applicant). Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments and recommendations regarding those activities involved in the Project that may affect California fish and wildlife. Likewise, we appreciate the opportunity to provide comments regarding those aspects of the Project that CDFW, by law, may be required to carry out or approve through the exercise of its own regulatory authority under the Fish and Game Code.

CDFW’s Role
CDFW is California’s Trustee Agency for fish and wildlife resources and holds those resources in trust by statute for all the people of the State [Fish & G. Code, §§ 711.7, subdivision (a) & 1802; Pub. Resources Code, § 21070; California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, § 15386, subdivision (a)]. CDFW, in its trustee capacity, has jurisdiction over the conservation, protection, and management of fish, wildlife, native plants, and habitat necessary for biologically sustainable populations of those species (Id., § 1802). Similarly, for purposes of CEQA, CDFW is charged by law to provide, as available, biological expertise during public agency environmental review efforts, focusing specifically on projects and related activities that have the potential to adversely affect State fish and wildlife resources.

CDFW is also submitting comments as a Responsible Agency under CEQA (Pub. Resources Code, § 21069; CEQA Guidelines, § 15381). CDFW expects that it may need to exercise regulatory authority as provided by the Fish and Game Code, including lake and streambed alteration regulatory authority (Fish & G. Code, § 1600 et seq.). Likewise, to the extent implementation of the Project as proposed may result in “take”, as defined by State law, of any species protected under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA) (Fish & G. Code, § 2050 et seq.), or CESA-listed rare plant pursuant to the Native Plant Protection Act (NPPA; Fish DocuSign Envelope ID: 5A6AA5DF-8719-4A38-8509-0FF1C22DEA97 Item #5. Page 430
Meeting Date: 12/13/2022 / Packet Page #: 637
Mr. Jeff Kugel
City of Glendora
December 27, 2021

Page 2 of 16 ends

Glendora City CouncilDecember 13, 2022

Glendora City Council
December 13, 2022